Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[smartcooky]

I'm new in this thread, of course, so take with a pinch of salt, but this reminds me how many people find the cult's assertions so absolutely insane they can't grok it, and instead think we've somehow misunderstood some nuance. It took me a while to accept some people believe they're literally born in the wrong body.

For the longest time, the general public had no actual idea what a "transwoman" actually is. If you asked the proverbial "man in the street" what a transwoman is, the vast majority of them would have told you that it is a woman who is transgender. When you corrected them, telling them that is in fact a transgender male who thinks he is a woman, they would express considerable surprise - a common response to this correction was words to the effect "...aren't those people called transvestites?"

This misunderstanding of the facts is very likely a key reason why "transwomen" had such a high level of public support - the general public literally did not know what and who they were supporting. However, as the issue has been thrown into more prominence, and public awareness of the facts has become more widespread, TRA support has tanked. We have passed "peak trans" and the tide of insantity and stupidity is well and truly on the way out.

Some time ago, I made an animated graphic which drew on two YouGov polls analysing where the British public stood on transgender rights - one in 2020 and the other in 2025. Below is a link to the 2025 poll, but I can no longer find the 2020 poll data.

I have posted this graphic a couple of times before, but as you are new to this thread you may not have seen it. The graphic shows the dramatic fall off in support for all the major aspects of transgenderism...

Where does the British public stand on transgender rights in 2024/25?

Scepticism towards transgender rights has grown across the board since 2022

yougov.co.uk

 

[Rolfe]

Hard to know what's real and what isn't these days, but he seems nice.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2010399805198270615

 

[John Freestone]

If the people in power didn't accept the core ideas of gender ideology a decade or two ago, it's worth asking how they were persuaded to do so—or at least pretend to do so.

I asked myself that, and others. I researched the possible reasons. I now know the answer. I shared it here. Others have too.

(I suspect the answer will have to do with other ideas which they already accept, such as the validity of critical theories in general.)

I think, rather than accepting those other ideas already, the whole clown car rolled up together. Transgender ideology came as part of a package that I loosely describe as identity politics, postmodernism, queer theory or, in its derogatory sense, woke.

Much of this springs from a good, but dangerously naive, intention (for the recipients, that is; there are also immoral instigators). It is progressivism turned cancerous, transmitted by playing on our instinct for equality and harmony.

The desire for equality was corrupted into 'equity', where categories of people coarsely and irrationally identified as underprivileged or marginalized were given special privileges while those considered already over-privileged were sidelined, shamed, and punished.

Our instincts for diversity and inclusion (or our considered wish to be welcoming of difference) was similarly exaggerated to unhealthy extremes, giving the green light to anyone with an unhealthy sense of entitlement to demand inclusion of any kind of difference, while the most respectful, accommodating, embracing their new EDI political correctness, caved.

Not only was this bad because of its communistic overreach (children reporting their parents to authorities, courts punishing people for stating biological facts, mobs deciding which statues were to be ripped off their foundations and which people were ok to speak in public, etc.) but it is also at least partly - maybe mainly - responsible for empowering the monstrous far-right backlash, and quite likely gaining Trump his second term as POTUS, with consequences I hardly dare think about.

 

[p0lka]

I just told you: the claim that changing labels from "women" to "female" will do anything to fix the problem or even improve the situation.

Ignoring political power doesn't work. It's got nothing to do with whether or not their claims are correct. Being wrong, even demonstrably wrong, has never actually been an impediment to political power.

The TRA's have a seat at the table not because anything they say makes sense, not because their concept of gender as separate from sex is in any way useful, not because "woman" refers to gender and not sex, but because they have political power. Pull your head out of your ass and accept that reality.

Making gender separate from sex solves almost all the problems that you and other posters are complaining about.

 

[p0lka]

You've said that if people make the claim that sex is a spectrum, just laugh, they can't argue it, and now you're suggesting we ignore it. Unfortunately, that has been causing dreadful damage, so no can do, sorry.

You also seem to be reacting strongly against the idea that gender ideology infiltrated deeply into a significant number of institutions in 'Western' culture (not "everything", of course). But it has infiltrated into a lot of important ones: universities, schools, governments, businesses, NGOs, media outlets, and these are some of the most influential organisations in society. This is why they have power: they took it. We have documentary evidence that they devised underhanded methods to sneak it in, disguised as gay-rights-2.0, avoiding publicity, but funding university chairs, inventing gender studies courses pushing it, and funding NGOs to provide cash-strapped schools with outsourced sex and social education - where they indoctrinated children with the idea they must introspect on what gender they are, and that it might be different from the "boy" or "girl" they thought they were.

They infiltrated every left-leaning party in Britain, and are still rife there. I can't vote for Labour or the Liberal Democrats or the Green Party, because all three are transgender activist parties, and even the Conservatives were all in with it for quite a number of years! And this is freaking Terf Island! The National Health Service is plastered with rainbows - on hospitals, on staff badges - and they were hard at it rewriting all their patient information leaflets with gendered terms, like "birthing parent" and "chestfeeding" and "people with prostates" and "people with cervixes," and staff were being trained to ask for preferred pronouns. There were papers written about the need for "transmen" to continue on testosterone, despite the well documented danger to the unborn child, so that these pregnant women didn't suffer a return of their "gender dysphoria". Until the madness was bad enough that we started reviewing and reining it back in (but it's still rife now).

I'm wondering where on earth you live that you didn't notice any of the immense pressure on every member of society to toe the line, such that Parliamentary Ministers made ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ of themselves equivocating on what a woman was and if some had penises, and supposedly being relieved when the Supreme Court clarified it for everyone.

Separating gender from sex solves that.

 

[Ziggurat]

Making gender separate from sex solves almost all the problems that you and other posters are complaining about.

No. We have already made gender separate from sex. That hasn't solved any problems, it created all the problems we're currently having regarding trans identity.

Everything you think you know about this issue is wrong.

 

[Ron Obvious]

Separating gender from sex solves that.

Like others here, I don't see how it would solve anything whatsoever.

 

[p0lka]

It is. You really have no idea!

Strawman

When mainstream media reports crimes committed by transgender identified males as having been committed by "women," (with no mention that these "women" are in fact biological males) then you know that the mainstream media has drunk the trans kool ade!

When those transgender identified males are charged as women, and the court demands they be referred to by their female pronouns (on penalty of contempt of court) then you know that the justice system has also drunk the trans kool aid!

When/if those transgender identified males are found guilty, demand to be incarcerated in a Women's prison, and prison authorities meekly comply, then you know that corrections is another one that has drunk from the trans kool aid tap!

When women at universities and establishments of higher learning are harangued, persecuted, hounded out of their jobs, and have to suffer the onslaught of social media poutrage mobs, and their friends, family and themselves subjected to threats of violence and death, and all because they are gender critical - i.e. they recognize the obvious, observable scientific reality that there are only two sexes, then you know that academia has stocked up on the trans cool aid for the staff and students!

When women are punished by hospitals for referring to transgender identified male rapists as "he", or lose their job for daring to complain about a transgender identified male in their changing rooms, then you know that the health system drinks trans kool aid by the gallon!

When the government passes laws that enshrine the rights of transgender identified males to enter women's bathrooms, women's changing rooms, women's refuges and women's hospital wards, and allows them to compete in women's sports, then you know that the government has its very own trans cool aid factory


Then you're not looking hard enough.

Eggs and water balloons thrown as protesters face off at Women Will Speak rally in Melbourne

Victoria police said 20 protesters were outnumbered by 150 from another group, which hurled ‘water balloons at the speakers’

www.theguardian.com

One year since women's voices were shut down at the Albert Park Riot

“A year ago we were traumatised by the violence we experienced. But we stood up and fought back. We are here to stay.”

womensrightsparty.nz

Once again, separating gender from sex solves that. The 'feelings of gender being distinct' issue has got big enough and been absorbed by enough people that it's becoming noticeable that our society has used gender terms whereas they should have been using sex terms. Female prison/male prison instead of man/woman etc.

 

[p0lka]

No. We have already made gender separate from sex. That hasn't solved any problems, it created all the problems we're currently having regarding trans identity.

Everything you think you know about this issue is wrong.

Gender is mixed up with sex all the time. If women prisons had been called female prisons I think transwomen wouldn't have been able to legally argue their way in there in the first place. That's one problem solved. Instead my government has made it vague by not splitting sex from gender.

 

[Ziggurat]

Gender is mixed up with sex all the time.

And always will be. Because sex is important. Gender without sex is meaningless. Gender is connected to sex in order to give it relevance, but made separate in order to give it flexibility. That's what the TRA's want. They want gender to be both fluid and important. The gender critical side isn't the one getting gender and sex mixed up, the TRA side is.

Like I said, everything you think you know about this issue is wrong.

If women prisons had been called female prisons I think transwomen wouldn't have been able to legally argue their way in there in the first place.

No. They just would have attacked the definition of "female" instead of the definition of "woman". Trans identifying males were not put into California women's prisons because anyone thought they were actually women. No, they were put into women's prisons because California passed a law specifically to put them there. And they could have passed a law to do that just as easily if those prisons were labelled "female" prisons instead. Because again, this has NEVER been about actual confusion over what words mean, or about the distinction between gender and sex. This has ALWAYS been about goals. Words get redefined to match goals, goals don't get adjusted to fit definitions. And the goal of the TRA's is to get trans identifying males into female spaces. No definition will stop that, because it's not a definitional problem. It's a political problem. To stop one group from wielding political power, another group has to wield greater political power.

You are wrong about everything. Pull your head out of your ass.

 

[d4m10n]

...empowering the monstrous far-right backlash, and quite likely gaining Trump his second term as POTUS, with consequences I hardly dare think about.

At the risk of violating my own advice (see signature below) it's worth pointing out that Steven Pinker warned us of this possibility back in 2022.

Steven Pinker, a professor of psychology at Harvard, contends that internecine conflict on the left has become “a profound issue, particularly for those of us who are terrified that the hard woke left will enable the resurgence of authoritarian populism by inflicting damage on the moderate left and center and by driving voters to the right.”​

He was not at all unique in offering this warning, but I think he was particularly prescient about how the damage was done.

 

[p0lka]

That's ridiculous. I'm going up to my local town centre on saturday and I will take some photos of our toilet cubicles for comparison (hope I don't get arrested haha), the doors there are basically scraping the ground when you close them.

They're upside down, I've flipped them in other software but they're still upside down here sorry.

First photo is the towns library toilets, they are any gender/sex. Second is the mens (should be male if you care about that) toilet, there's a tiny gap compared to the US massive vulnerability inducing gap. I have no idea if it's representative of the whole country but they are examples of around where I live.
I'm actually not surprised you people with the massive gaps in your spaces feel vulnerable when going to the toilet, I would too, bloody hell.

 

[d4m10n]

Separating gender from sex solves that.

Like others here, I don't see how it would solve anything whatsoever.

I'm curious to hear from @p0lka how it would solve any particular policy issue.

Is the idea that the courts would rule that laws which are arguably about gender (e.g. women's rights) are really about rights for people born female, or is the idea that the voters would come to accept the distinction first and then the legislators would make the necessary adjustments, or is there a third possible path?

 

[Aber]

I'm actually not surprised you people with the massive gaps in your spaces feel vulnerable when going to the toilet, I would too, bloody hell.

There are bloody good reasons for the gap, due to the number of medical emergencies/collapses that take place in toilet cubicles.

 

[Aber]

US Supreme Court hearing today on Sports

https://insider.espn.com/espn/story...uments-transgender-athlete-cases-live-updates

 

[p0lka]

And always will be. Because sex is important. Gender without sex is meaningless. Gender is connected to sex in order to give it relevance, but made separate in order to give it flexibility. That's what the TRA's want. They want gender to be both fluid and important. The gender critical side isn't the one getting gender and sex mixed up, the TRA side is.

Gender is a product of societies telling people to fit into roles according to sex. It has now become more than that and should be legally separated if it's causing so many problems. You might be helping the very people you resist by not acknowledging that.

Like I said, everything you think you know about this issue is wrong.

No. They just would have attacked the definition of "female" instead of the definition of "woman". Trans identifying males were not put into California women's prisons because anyone thought they were actually women. No, they were put into women's prisons because California passed a law specifically to put them there. And they could have passed a law to do that just as easily if those prisons were labelled "female" prisons instead. Because again, this has NEVER been about actual confusion over what words mean, or about the distinction between gender and sex. This has ALWAYS been about goals. Words get redefined to match goals, goals don't get adjusted to fit definitions. And the goal of the TRA's is to get trans identifying males into female spaces. No definition will stop that, because it's not a definitional problem. It's a political problem. To stop one group from wielding political power, another group has to wield greater political power.

You are wrong about everything. Pull your head out of your ass.

Re: the underlined. I'm in the UK and I don't think that would get any traction here, we have independent judges and stuff here.

 

[p0lka]

There are bloody good reasons for the gap, due to the number of medical emergencies/collapses that take place in toilet cubicles.

How does the gap help? The gaps are frankly non sensible, someone could reach under and steal all of your belongings that you put down, surely it makes you all paranoid when you just want to sit down in a private space?

Edit: oh, maybe it's not about other blah blah blah coming into private spaces, but really about the gap. People who have grown up with the massive gap are very territorial as the gap makes you feel very vulnerable. Other people that have grown up without the stupidly massive gap feel fine.

 

[Ziggurat]

Gender is a product of societies telling people to fit into roles according to sex.

You are describing gender roles, not gender. These are actually different things. But just like gender and sex, it's the TRA's, not the gender critical folks, who are actively conflating them.

It has now become more than that and should be legally separated if it's causing so many problems.

No. Gender and gender roles should be legally ignored, not separated.

You might be helping the very people you resist by not acknowledging that.

No. The TRA's are the ones obsessed with gender and gender roles, not the gender critical folks. We aren't helping them by trying to keep gender out of the law. We are helping them if we concede that gender rather than sex has any legal relevance to anything.

Re: the underlined. I'm in the UK and I don't think that would get any traction here, we have independent judges and stuff here.

And yet, despite a clear definition from your supreme court about that "woman" means sex and not gender, they are still trying to get males into female spaces.

Because it was never, ever actually about the definition. It was always about the goal. And you still haven't figured that out yet.

 

[p0lka]

You are describing gender roles, not gender. These are actually different things. But just like gender and sex, it's the TRA's, not the gender critical folks, who are actively conflating them.

No. Gender and gender roles should be legally ignored, not separated.

I'm describing a societal thing that has been around for a very very long time. There's sex roles, then over time people think 'why should that be the rule just because i'm female?', then over time we have ended up with this.

No. The TRA's are the ones obsessed with gender and gender roles, not the gender critical folks. We aren't helping them by trying to keep gender out of the law. We are helping them if we concede that gender rather than sex has any legal relevance to anything.

I said gender, your reply was to split it to gender and gender roles then accuse the TRA's of being obsessed with gender and gender roles whilst stating that the gender critical folks aren't.

And yet, despite a clear definition from your supreme court about that "woman" means sex and not gender, they are still trying to get males into female spaces.

Because it was never, ever actually about the definition. It was always about the goal. And you still haven't figured that out yet.

That's a completely stupid solution. They should have said that woman means gender then changed all the labels of the spaces they think are relevant to female or male spaces.

 

[Ziggurat]

How does the gap help?

If someone is incapacitated inside, you can get inside even with the door locked.

The gaps are frankly non sensible, someone could reach under and steal all of your belongings that you put down

What belongings would you be putting on the floor? The only thing I've ever put on the floor of a public bathroom is luggage at an airport. That's not exactly easy to grab even under the gap.

There is generally a coat hanger hook on the inside of the door if you need to hang something like a purse.

Edit: oh, maybe it's not about other blah blah blah coming into private spaces, but really about the gap.

No. The same debate is happening with changing rooms and prisons and sports, where the gap isn't relevant. It has nothing to do with the gap, and everything to do with whether or not males should be able to access female spaces.