Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Goldsmiths University Diversity officer facing sack

Should she be sacked?

  • Yes she should

    Votes: 71 53.4%
  • No she should not

    Votes: 32 24.1%
  • Official warning

    Votes: 7 5.3%
  • Attention seeking option

    Votes: 23 17.3%

  • Total voters
    133
I respect your freedom to identify yourself how ever you want.

I have more of an issue where the expression of that identity clashes with some other women's rights to associate with whomever they choose, based on their own conception of identity.

There's a tension there. But not one that it's my place to resolve.
So if I chose to exclude lesbians or black women from women's spaces that would be fine? If not why not? And why is it OK to exclude just trans women alone among all the differently defining women?

Why your argument is wrong and dishonest is that the majority of feminists I meet and talk to are fully trans inclusive and define gender in the same way I would. And yet I am excluded and they are not.

Worse than that!! Trans men who identify as men and who have penises are included!

The Trans Exclusionary argument is entirely fallacious and is just a way to justify bigotry.
 
Last edited:
No, that's not accurate either. It's more accurate to say that our brains and "us" (which includes our social context, relationships etc) exist in a dialectical relationship.

You might be interested in Raymond Tallis's book Aping Mankind

Do you mean ' an interaction of conflicting ideas, forces, etc.' when you use the term 'dialectical'?
 
I mean that the two things which appear to be in opposition to each other actually exist as a whole, feedback on each other and one cannot be understood without the other.

I think it's helpful to define such terms and explain what we mean when using 'terminology'. So thanks for doing that.
 
So if I chose to exclude lesbians or black women from women's spaces that would be fine? If not why not? And why is it OK to exclude just trans women alone among all the differently defining women?

The intention behind women-only spaces is to exclude men; nobody seriously thinks it's necessary to exclude lesbians or black women to realise that intention. Some people believe it is necessary to exclude trans women, either because they believe that trans women are men, or that men might claim to be trans women in order to infiltrate those spaces.
 
To me the brain structure stuff, etc, however it turns out, is pretty much irrelevent when considered in the context of how trans people of both genders, and other variations, actually feel, how they behave and how they identify.

Gender is mostly a construct and they vary through the ages, but the construct people choose is pretty much hard-wired into us from an early age. Intersex people and the way they have been abused by medical science teaches us that gender identity is innate. Studies carried out on young children also show that children know exactly what gender they are from about the age of 4 - including trans children.

Plenty of trans women barely change their appearance and tend to wear androgynous or even masculine clothing because thats how they feel most comfortable. So no gender stereotypes being reinforced there. Not more than many cis women do already anyway!

Trans people are as varied as varied as cis people. We do not reinforce gender stereotypes we merely do as everyone else does, choose the one that suits us best!! It helps to stop us getting beaten up for one reason and in my case my depression has stopped now that i can stop trying to act male and pander to male stereotypes, and people accept me as female.
 
The intention behind women-only spaces is to exclude men; nobody seriously thinks it's necessary to exclude lesbians or black women to realise that intention. Some people believe it is necessary to exclude trans women, either because they believe that trans women are men, or that men might claim to be trans women in order to infiltrate those spaces.
a tiny minority and i've yet to meet one in real life. they are scared because our existence shows their theories to be complete bullshit. And I repeat, I am a woman. If you question my gender please go and question everyone else's.
 
So if I chose to exclude lesbians or black women from women's spaces that would be fine? If not why not? And why is it OK to exclude just trans women alone among all the differently defining women?

Why your argument is wrong and dishonest is that the majority of feminists I meet and talk to are fully trans inclusive and define gender in the same way I would. And yet I am excluded and they are not.

Worse than that!! Trans men who identify as men and who have penises are included!

The Trans Exclusionary argument is entirely fallacious and is just a way to justify bigotry.

The intention behind women-only spaces is to exclude men; nobody seriously thinks it's necessary to exclude lesbians or black women to realise that intention. Some women - I accept your point that it's not a majority of feminists, of course - believe it is necessary to exclude trans women, either because they believe that trans women are men, or that men might claim to be trans women in order to infiltrate those spaces. I've not argued that is OK. I've already pointed out that it's not for me to decide. And I fully accept that a trans exclusionary position might be motivated by bigotry.
 
a tiny minority and i've yet to meet one in real life. they are scared because our existence shows their theories to be complete bullshit. And I repeat, I am a woman. If you question my gender please go and question everyone else's.

I don't question your gender. If you're a woman, that's cool with me.
 
I don't question your gender. If you're a woman, that's cool with me.
stop reinforcing their bullshit arguments then. I've talked to the trans excluders online and they always start by calling me a man. They are not open to debate and they do not want to debate.
 
If we take this out of the realm of principle or theory and discuss it as simple day to day experience, I'd ask these questions: if trans women are included in a women only space, what harm is done? What are the non-trans women stopped from doing? What solidarity is breached?
And getting into conversation with myself... a further point: if some women want to exclude trans women from a women only space, do they extend that notion to the wider society? In other words would they also advocate trans women being excluded from women's loos, changing rooms etc?
 
And getting into conversation with myself... a further point: if some women want to exclude trans women from a women only space, do they extend that notion to the wider society? In other words would they also advocate trans women being excluded from women's loos, changing rooms etc?
On that point - in the US cis women who do not conform to the gender norm have already been attacked by transphobes while using the toilet.
 
stop reinforcing their bullshit arguments then. I've talked to the trans excluders online and they always start by calling me a man. They are not open to debate and they do not want to debate.

I haven't done that, though. I've been nothing but respectful: I've acknowledged your womanhood; I've stated that the exclusion of trans women is a minority opinion amongst feminists; I've agreed that it might (in some cases) be motivated by bigotry.

However,whilst saying that it's not for me (as a man) to say what women's approach to women-only spaces should be, I am uncomfortable with the idea that a group of cis women should not be allowed to organise based upon their own conception of their own gender, without others imposing themselves in their space - especially if that deters some women form using those spaces. I recognise that there is a compelling counter argument i.e. that the alternative also prevents some women (i.e. trans women) from using those spaces.

I guess, if pushed, my gut feeling would be pro-inclusion (if only on the practical weighing of harms, as per Wilf's posts), but I still feel the position is not as black-and-white as you make out from a theoretical/ethical perspective.

I thought we were having a sensible discussion, but maybe we're on the cusp of it becoming too heated (and I understand why you would be passionate about this issue), and I should bow out.
 
Back
Top Bottom