Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Rolfe]

To intimidate women. Or just to claim territory, like a tom-cat pissing on a tree stump.

This is worth a read. From a man who is an autogynaephile himself.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1860851996628017533

 

[Rolfe]

This also. It's not so much that these are two opposing viewpoints about the same phenomenon, but that two distinct phenomena are being described, which are (among others) conflated into the misleading term "transwoman".

https://twitter.com/x/status/1861352959583387857

 

[d4m10n]

God only knows what's behind that particular sticker, but I don't imagine whoever stuck it there was actually female.

Oh, I don't think it's very hard to guess the motive.

I know this is sort of pointless to argue about (inasmuch as we'll never really know) but the motive cannot logically be to allow transwomen into "woman only spaces" if the sticker-maker sincerely believes TWAW, since the shibboleth necessarily implies that the act of mixing cis and trans women together results in a space solely composed of women, that is, a woman-only space. This is why I've leapt to the conclusion that the sticker must be for and about NBs & GQs.

 

[Lithrael]

I know this is sort of pointless to argue about (inasmuch as we'll never really know) but the motive cannot logically be to allow transwomen into "woman only spaces" if the sticker-maker sincerely believes TWAW, since the shibboleth necessarily implies that the act of mixing cis and trans women together results in a space solely composed of women, that is, a woman-only space. This is why I've leapt to the conclusion that the sticker must be for and about NBs & GQs.

ETA wait I'm an idiot.

What the sticker (which reads 'no such thing as a woman only space') actually means to the sticker-maker is that nobody is ONLY a woman, they also have other identities besides that. It's not even a particularly enby sticker; I'm pretty sure it's intended to promote intersectionality.

It definitely isn't intended as a threat about anything being denied to or taken away from anyone.

 

[theprestige]

ETA wait I'm an idiot. What the sticker actually means to the sticker-maker is that nobody is ONLY a woman, they also have other identities besides that. It's not even a particularly enby sticker; it's intended to promote intersectionality.

It definitely isn't intended as a threat about anything being denied to or taken away from anyone.

Whereas I read it as a confused attempt to assert transwomen's entitlement to women's spaces. I wouldn't be surprised if even the person who put the sticker up isn't quite clear in their own head what it's trying to say.

Personally I tend towards a punctuation interpretation with an implied subtext: "There is no such thing as a woman, only space [for a man to occupy]."

On a related note, I'm beginning to think the inherent misogyny of the trans rights movement amounts to a Gender Identity Exclusion Principle: A male and a female cannot occupy the same gender in the same space at the same time.

Anyway, that sticker truly is all things to all people.

 

[Matthew Best]

Supreme Court hearing case on definition of a woman

Judges will consider a legal challenge which could affect how women and trans people are treated.

www.bbc.co.uk

The UK Supreme Court is in the process of deciding what sex and gender actually mean, and what "a woman" is. Apparently, it's incredibly complicated.

 

[theprestige]

Supreme Court hearing case on definition of a woman

Judges will consider a legal challenge which could affect how women and trans people are treated.

www.bbc.co.uk

The UK Supreme Court is in the process of deciding what sex and gender actually mean, and what "a woman" is. Apparently, it's incredibly complicated.

Well it kind of is incredibly complicated. Even TRAs can't tell you what a woman is, in non-circular terms. And policymakers are in the difficult position of wanting to admit fiat self-ID and also admit important biological differences that justify sex segregation in every scenario that matters to TRAs.

Further, policymakers also have to solve the riddle of how to allow "approved" transwomen into women's spaces, without allowing fiat self-ID *and* without resorting to "papers please".

That's the riddle I came to this thread hoping to find a solution for. As far as I can tell, the TRAs have no solution, other than fiat self-ID across the board. Now that fiat self-ID and associated nonsense are losing momentum in western societies, things have become very complicated indeed for policymakers.

For some of us, the solution is as simple as cutting the Gordian knot: Return to the status quo ante. A woman is an adult human female. Men have no legal right to enter women's spaces. A man that is allowed to enter does so entirely on the sufferance of the women there, and has no legal recourse if those women decide to evict him. Indeed, if the police are summoned they will by law and policy side with the women. Biological essentialism prevails in sports and prisons.

Not complicated at all - for me. But very contentious and unpopular. I'd have a difficult row to hoe, if I were a policymaker hoping to keep my job and my standing in the party.

 

[Lithrael]

For real though - and I know it's annoying as I've asked this before over the years - but why aren't women already allowed to have other women ejected from such spaces for having a sketchy vibe anyways? Why is it apparantly "sorry maam, we can't eject this weirdly leering woman from the ladies' room, she belongs in here, our hands are tied"

Like if someone reports there's a woman in there with a knife waving it at everybody, we don't go 'sheesh what a busybody, mind your own business' so why is 'don't question their gender' treated like a 'get away with everything' card? Did we always need to normalise ejecting women from restrooms for being too sketchy? Can we start now?

 

[d4m10n]

What the sticker (which reads 'no such thing as a woman only space') actually means to the sticker-maker is that nobody is ONLY a woman, they also have other identities besides that. It's not even a particularly enby sticker; I'm pretty sure it's intended to promote intersectionality.

OMG it could also mean that not only is gender a spectrum, but literally everyone is on that spectrum (i.e. some masculine and some feminine traits) and thus no one is "woman only" in any space.

 

[Lithrael]

OMG it could also mean that not only is gender a spectrum, but literally everyone is on that spectrum (i.e. some masculine and some feminine traits) and thus no one is "woman only" in any space.

That was my initial take but that's one of the race-and-orientation inclusive flags so whoever made the sticker either meant to include a variety of minority identities, or was confused. There are nonbinary and genderfluid flags and they didn't use them.

 

[smartcooky]

I suppose this will be dismissed as a fake picture too. Or else we'll be told it's absolutely right and anti-discriminatory. Sometimes it's hard to keep up.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1861303633322647653

Anyway, today's the day when a court convenes in Scotland to determine the question implicit in the thread title. The Scottish government says a woman is an adult human female and any adult human male who has paid them a fiver for a certificate. A bunch of furious women beg leave to differ.

Oh, I don't think it's very hard to guess the motive.

I know this is sort of pointless to argue about (inasmuch as we'll never really know) but the motive cannot logically be to allow transwomen into "woman only spaces" if the sticker-maker sincerely believes TWAW, since the shibboleth necessarily implies that the act of mixing cis and trans women together results in a space solely composed of women, that is, a woman-only space. This is why I've leapt to the conclusion that the sticker must be for and about NBs & GQs.

ETA wait I'm an idiot.

What the sticker (which reads 'no such thing as a woman only space') actually means to the sticker-maker is that nobody is ONLY a woman, they also have other identities besides that. It's not even a particularly enby sticker; I'm pretty sure it's intended to promote intersectionality.

It definitely isn't intended as a threat about anything being denied to or taken away from anyone.

Y'all are making a big assumption about that sticker. You're assuming that the person who made it and/or stuck it there is intelligent enough to realise the implications of what it says. Remember, these are people with mental health issues. Reasoning is not their strong suit.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

I'm not sure what the point is in posting pictures of rapists and people who have committed other sexual offences who also happen to be/claim to be transsexuals.

I remember sitting next to Rolfe in the audience watching Tim Minchin perform "Cont" in Edinburgh.

 

[theprestige]

I'm not sure what the point is in posting pictures of rapists and people who have committed other sexual offences who also happen to be/claim to be transsexuals.

I remember sitting next to Rolfe in the audience watching Tim Minchin perform "Cont" in Edinburgh.

Fiat self-ID is the point. Fiat self-ID as public policy gives the rapists and sex pests legal protection to invade and poison women's spaces. Just the fact of these legal protections has a chilling effect that eliminates the sense of comfort and safety women should feel in these spaces. We've been over this repeatedly. Every time we get to this stage of the conversation, you withdraw, and then return with a fringe reset.

Sooner or later you'll need to come up with a rational argument for why a man should have access to women's spaces simply because he says he wants it. Or, if you think that access should be granted on some other basis, argue for that basis. All your doing right now is conceding the point, while trying to maintain the illusion that you're still in the debate.

 

[smartcooky]

I'm not sure what the point is in posting pictures of rapists and people who have committed other sexual offences who also happen to be/claim to be transsexuals.

You demand evidence that attacks on women by transwomen are actually happening.
You disgustingly dismiss Pixel42's concerns as being her own porn fantasy and inability to distinguish it from reality.

And then, when people post evidence of actual reality, you shut your eyes, stick your fingers in your ears and shout "La La La La La - I can't hear you"

IMO, I don't think you're genuinely interested in honest debate, you're either playing devil's advocate, or doing something else that I won't accuse you of (because there can be consequences on this forum for telling the truth).

 

[smartcooky]

Sooner or later you'll need to come up with a rational argument for why a man should have access to women's spaces simply because he says he wants it. Or, if you think that access should be granted on some other basis, argue for that basis. All your doing right now is conceding the point, while trying to maintain the illusion that you're still in the debate.

You're kidding right?

 

[theprestige]

You're kidding right?

I'm completely serious. This is a serious social issue. It has serious implications for our society. I firmly believe that Ivor thinks he's taking the issue seriously, and that he wants to be taken seriously on this issue. I am making a good-faith effort to communicate to him what he would need to do, to be taken seriously. I don't want to further poison the well by starting from an uncharitable place - as tempting as that sometimes is.

Ivor, please. Help us understand. What is your justification for granting men access to women's spaces, for no other reason than because they say they want that access?

 

[Lithrael]

Y'all are making a big assumption about that sticker. You're assuming that the person who made it and/or stuck it there is intelligent enough to realise the implications of what it says. Remember, these are people with mental health issues. Reasoning is not their strong suit.

Sure but I mean. You'd think even if they were stupid, they'd use a trans flag sticker and not a flag that just includes trans colors along with racial and orientation minorities, if they meant to stick it to trans-distrusting women.

 

[smartcooky]

Sure but I mean. You'd think even if they were stupid, they'd use a trans flag sticker and not a flag that just includes trans colors along with racial and orientation minorities, if they meant to stick it to trans-distrusting women.

Yeah, but...

 

[Rolfe]

I'm not sure what the point is in posting pictures of rapists and people who have committed other sexual offences who also happen to be/claim to be transsexuals.

I remember sitting next to Rolfe in the audience watching Tim Minchin perform "Cont" in Edinburgh.

Gosh. I hadn't remembered you were in that party. 17 years ago, I think.

The point of posting pictures of trans-identifying male rapists is to try to bring home to you and other trans-allies just what the men who are demanding access to women's private spaces are actually like. And you may say, Not All Men, but how do you propose to exclude these particular ones? Also to counter your continual inference that trans-identifying men are poor shy flowers and the most oppressed demographic on the planet.

And once more, these are trans people. They're just as trans as any other man who claims to be trans. And they commit sexual offences at five times the rate of other men. These are the men you want to have the legal right to be in women's private spaces, with the women unable to voice any objections.

 

[theprestige]

Sure but I mean. You'd think even if they were stupid, they'd use a trans flag sticker and not a flag that just includes trans colors along with racial and orientation minorities, if they meant to stick it to trans-distrusting women.

It's all the same flag, really. Sexuality = gender identity = race = neurodivergence = obesity. Whichever version of the flag you fly, you're signalilng the same thing: Membership in the Rebel Alliance against the Imperial Patriarchy. It's not that they're stupid, it's that they see trans rights as of a piece with all the other queer and minority issues they wear on their sleeves. Could have been a Palestinian flag, and the message would have been the same.