• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

TERFs crash London Pride

Rolfe said:
I'm really not concerned with US politics. Trans people where I live have no legal rights denied to them that are granted to non-trans people. It's illegal to harrass, assault, murder, sack, refuse to employ, refuse to serve or indeed to discriminate against anyone in any way on the grounds that they're trans. So let's not pretend that there are legal rights being sought here that aren't already granted.
Click to expand...

I know you're only concerned with the UK, but here in the US, doing all of the highlighted is perfectly legal, because "religious freedom", supposedly.
 
Well, you know, this thread was originally about something that happened in London. I'm only concerned with the situation in Britain and specifically in Scotland. If there are different problems in the US then I wish people would stop projecting them on to me. Nobody can point to any right in this country that trans people are denied but everybody else has. Everybody has the right not to be murdered or assaulted or harrassed etc. etc.

And we know that in Britain the number of murders committed by trans people (all MtF) is higher than the number of trans murder victims (also all MtF). We know that being trans in this country is actually surprisingly safe and that trans people are murder victims at a per capita rate much lower than women are.

We also don't have right-wing religious agitators fulminating that trans people are evil, either. What we have is a lot of left-wing women who are reacting against their own party's determination to open up women's protected spaces to any man who simply declares he's a woman.

As I said, if there are different problems in the USA then perhaps they need a different approach but that's not my concern.
 
luchog said:
Call me odd, but to me it would seem that finding one's position on an issue in full agreement with the position held by some of the most oppressive, most bigoted, most inhumane, and most generally awful people in world culture would be sufficient motivation to re-examine one's position, not to double-down on it.
Click to expand...

I look forward to you re-examining your position that the world is round because Hitler (Hitler! Gasp!) also held that position.

The fact that the weight of rigorous, replicable, and verifiable evidence and reportage is also against one's position should similarly provide impetus to rethink rather than entrench.
Click to expand...

Nonsense, there is not one shred of evidence for magic gender essences that get stuck in the "wrong" bodies and make male animals female or vice versa.
 
Mycroft said:
It seems the fundamental disagreement here is whether transwomen should be considered women or men. Your continued mis-gendering of transwomen as men assumes at least one fact where the rest of us don't agree with you.
Click to expand...

luchog said:
And does, in fact, provide ample evidence of an attitude that shines through brightly despite mealy-mouthed denials of its existence.
Click to expand...

I once identified as Napoleon and I couldn't get others to address me as Monsieur L'Empereur and dress up in French coats to invade Russia on my behalf, and it was the worst oppression that anyone in the whole wide world has ever experienced. Repeat after me: Trans-Napoleons are Napoleon!
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
Which shouldn't be an issue for you because genitalia don't confer any magical right to a protected space.

Or is that, somehow, different?
Click to expand...

It's about legal rights, not magical rights. Legal rights are the only type of rights which exist in objective reality.
 
kellyb said:
It's about legal rights, not magical rights. Legal rights are the only type of rights which exist in objective reality.
Click to expand...

And legal rights are conferred by society presumably for legitimate reasons.

Its pure double standards to insist that transwomen don't need further protection because they have a legal right not be harassed or murdered and in the next breath that ciswomen are losing out on their protected spaces when they are covered by the very same rights not to be harassed or murdered.

If legal rights are all that matter then protected spaces are a red herring, if protected spaces matter then solely focusing on legal rights is a red herring.

Can't have it both ways.
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
Its pure double standards to insist that transwomen don't need further protection
Click to expand...

I haven't seen anyone argue that. Re: things like prison and sports, everyone seems to agree that transwomen do need protection from cismen, but that need not be at the expense of the safety of ciswomen. Those are areas where segregating by biological sex and trans status might be the least bad option.

eta:
If legal rights are all that matter then protected spaces are a red herring, if protected spaces matter then solely focusing on legal rights is a red herring.
Click to expand...
Actual protected spaces are legally protected spaces. No idea why you can't grasp that and thus see it as a "red herring".
 
Last edited:
kellyb said:
I haven't seen anyone argue that. Re: things like prison and sports, everyone seems to agree that transwomen do need protection from cismen, but that need not be at the expense of the safety of ciswomen. Those are areas where segregating by biological sex and trans status might be the least bad option.
Click to expand...

Exactly, "either with the men or with the women" is a false dichotomy. If transwomen can't be put in the men's prison then it doesn't mean they should be put in the women's prison, there's nothing stopping the building of a separate prison for transwomen.

The entire reasoning is also quite misogynistic, some men harass other men for not complying to patriarchal gender norms so who is held responsible for that? Women, especially feminists. Nobody notice that it is feminist women ("TERFs") who are being held responsible for the actions of men who harass transwomen, not those men themselves?
 
kellyb said:
I haven't seen anyone argue that. Re: things like prison and sports, everyone seems to agree that transwomen do need protection from cismen, but that need not be at the expense of the safety of ciswomen. Those are areas where segregating by biological sex and trans status might be the least bad option.
Click to expand...

Did you miss when someone said that they are only interested in legal rights?

Actual protected spaces are legally protected spaces. No idea why you can't grasp that and thus see it as a "red herring".
Click to expand...

And that legal right can change. Simply stating what the status quo is does not justify it. If women need access to special places to stop them being harassed or murdered or whatever then it's disingenuous to suggest that others don't require that.
 
caveman1917 said:
Exactly, "either with the men or with the women" is a false dichotomy. If transwomen can't be put in the men's prison then it doesn't mean they should be put in the women's prison, there's nothing stopping the building of a separate prison for transwomen.
Click to expand...

Great. Are any of the people opposing trans rights making that happen or even supportive of it? Or is this just another bluster to justify prejudices?

Of course separate but equal is a great solution isn't it? Can't think why we never tried that before

The entire reasoning is also quite misogynistic, some men harass other men for not complying to patriarchal gender norms so who is held responsible for that? Women, especially feminists. Nobody notice that it is feminist women ("TERFs") who are being held responsible for the actions of men who harass transwomen, not those men themselves?
Click to expand...

Well no the women aren't being held responsible for the harassment. They are being held responsible for not supporting the victims. Blame the captain of the ship for running it into an iceberg sure, but people kicking others off the lifeboats are responsible for their own actions.

And just for the record. Transwomen aren't men.
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
Great. Are any of the people opposing trans rights making that happen or even supportive of it? Or is this just another bluster to justify prejudices?
Click to expand...

I see, so if a group of men want special accommodations then it is the women who are required to make it happen? Yeah it's almost like these women don't know their place in society, if a man wants a sandwich then it's the woman's task to make it happen, if a man wants special accommodations then it's the women's task to make it happen.

Well no the women aren't being held responsible for the harassment. They are being held responsible for not supporting the victims. Blame the captain of the ship for running it into an iceberg sure, but people kicking others off the lifeboats are responsible for their own actions.
Click to expand...

Sure they are being held responsible for the harassment, just a quick look at the use of the term "TERF" will show that. Men who harass other men because they don't conform to patriarchal gender norms? Obviously the fault of feminist women who are opposed to patriarchal gender norms...that makes perfect sense!

And just for the record. Transwomen aren't men.
Click to expand...

Of course they are, we've been through this already.
 
Regarding the claim that transwomen are women. We must define the term women. By Munchhausen's trilemma we have 3 options: infinite regress, circular, or axiomatic.

We can immediately reject infinite regress since there are only a finite number of words and concepts in the English language.

Circular would be definitions of the form "A woman is anyone who identifies as a woman" or variations thereupon. Circular can also be rejected as being meaningless.

Which leaves us with axiomatic, a definition in terms of more fundamental concepts. We have two such relevant concepts available, sex and gender. Which gives us:

1. A woman is anyone who is female. This is the standard dictionary definition.

2. A woman is anyone who is feminine. From this follows the statements:

2.1. Women must be submissive.
2.2. Women must be emotional.
2.3. Women can not be rational.
2.4. Women can not have short hair.
2.5. Women must wear makeup.
2.6. etc etc

Unless someone wants to claim these statements to be true, we can reject "a woman is anyone who is feminine" leaving us with "a woman is anyone who is female" and, likewise, "a man is anyone who is male." Transwomen are male, therefor transwomen are men. QED.
 
Last edited:
3point14 said:
Extract:



Are we allowed to talk about 'typically female behaviour'?
Click to expand...

Of course, in a gendered society both sexes are socialized into gender norms. Typical male behaviour would be, for example, the use of violence whereas typical female behaviour would be, for example, not standing up for themselves when a man speaks over them. Neither of these is of course innate male/female behaviour but it is typical male/female behaviour given a society which socializes males and females into those norms.
 
Rolfe said:
Gender is a feeling in someone's head. It doesn't confer any particular rights.
Click to expand...


So is homosexuality, so I guess by your standards, that doesn't confer any particular rights as well. All those "erased" lesbians should just shut up about their so-called rights, I guess, per your standards.
 
Rolfe said:
Well, you know, this thread was originally about something that happened in London. I'm only concerned with the situation in Britain and specifically in Scotland.
Click to expand...


Yes, that's obvious. Except of course when you cite sources from US organizations and American anti-trans crusaders that support your anti-trans bigotry and conspiracy theorizing. Then you're quite happy to be concerned with goings out outside Scotland.

And we know that in Britain the number of murders committed by trans people (all MtF) is higher than the number of trans murder victims (also all MtF). We know that being trans in this country is actually surprisingly safe and that trans people are murder victims at a per capita rate much lower than women are.
Click to expand...


Do we? I don't. Care to provide evidence to back up this claim?

We also don't have right-wing religious agitators fulminating that trans people are evil, either. What we have is a lot of left-wing women who are reacting against their own party's determination to open up women's protected spaces to any man who simply declares he's a woman.
Click to expand...


You really need to open your eyes a bit wider and take off those blinkers.

Maybe not "religious" fanatics, but you have plenty of right-wing agitators fulminating against those evil transpeople.

https://www.ukipdaily.com/the-transgender-agenda/

And as I recall, they have people currently serving in elected office. Guess it isn't just your far-left boogeymen who share your aversion to transpeople.

You're, again, also grossly mischaracterizing the politics involved, but you've been doing that the entire thread, and I have no interest in going back and debunking this all again.

As I said, if there are different problems in the USA then perhaps they need a different approach but that's not my concern.
Click to expand...


Clearly not, your attitude toward anyone outside your narrow little provincial circle is quite obvious.
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
Well no the women aren't being held responsible for the harassment. They are being held responsible for not supporting the victims. Blame the captain of the ship for running it into an iceberg sure, but people kicking others off the lifeboats are responsible for their own actions.
Click to expand...


And a great deal of harassment of transpeople comes from women, not just men, as evidenced in the OP, and about half of the sources Rolfe has posted to justify her own anti-trans bigotry.
 
luchog said:
And a great deal of harassment of transpeople comes from women, not just men, as evidenced in the OP, and about half of the sources Rolfe has posted to justify her own anti-trans bigotry.
Click to expand...

Disagreeing with a belief is not harassment. Refusing to reflect someone's desired self-image back at them is not harassment. There is in fact already a term for this notion that the mere refusal of someone to reflect your desired self-image back at you is harassment/violence/... and that term is narcissism.

So...

luchog said:
And meanwhile, murders of transpeople continue to rise; along with a precipitous rise in hate crimes in general. Up 17% nationwide, and up 50% in my city.

https://www.hrc.org/resources/a-national-epidemic-fatal-anti-transgender-violence-in-america-in-2018
Click to expand...

how many of these crimes were committed by feminist women? Prove your case rather than this obvious misogynistic deflecting of blame for gendered violence from patriarchal men to feminist women.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom