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 think it's helpful to define such terms and explain what we mean when using 'terminology'. So thanks for doing that.

Yeah, sorry, I think often there's an assumption that everyone is familiar with certain words and concepts, we should remember this isn't really the case.
 
So, unless you're a dualist, if we are, our brains are. Our brains are changing themselves. Behaviours do not have lives independent of the brains doing them. No?

I'm not a dualist, I'm a materialist. However considering brains in isolation tells us very little. We exist in relationships, can only exist in relationships. Reducing things to their fundamental parts only gets us so far. We have to reintroduce a holistic understanding at some point.
 
Yeah, sorry, I think often there's an assumption that everyone is familiar with certain words and concepts, we should remember this isn't really the case.

I am familiar with the term but it has other applications too. But yes, best not to assume. I also dislike the overuse of terminology because it can exclude people from conversations. Speaking plainly, where possible, is the the most inclusive way in my experience.
 
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.
sorry if I came across as aggressive but I see you actually repeating fallacious arguments from people that actively organise to deny that trans exists - men and women and non binary - and over decades have worked to have our rights removed. They're not happy to just deny us from entering women only spaces, most of which we are invited into (in my case, I would never enter a space in which I was wanted, not least because I've heard terrible stories of trans women who have been seriously abused and assaulted by bigoted cis women and I would never put myself into a vulnerable position like that) and yet the T.E.s lobby to have us barred, but they want to deny us any kind of right at all, and work to achieve that. The amount of abuse I have received from T.E. cis women and their lovely male transphobic sidekicks (funny how they tolerate men when it helps reinforce their bullshit) including an article in the New Statesmen that provoked such bile aimed at me (no right to reply) that I had to be prescribed anti anxiety meds and have time off work
 
Look like behave like a woman woman
Look like behave like a man man

Their maybe people who fall in the middle shouldnt really be too much of an issue
How does one behave like a man or a woman? Aren't all supposedly masculine and feminine traits actually just human ones, with none exclusive to just one gender?
 
sorry if I came across as aggressive but I see you actually repeating fallacious arguments from people that actively organise to deny that trans exists - men and women and non binary - and over decades have worked to have our rights removed. They're not happy to just deny us from entering women only spaces, most of which we are invited into (in my case, I would never enter a space in which I was wanted, not least because I've heard terrible stories of trans women who have been seriously abused and assaulted by bigoted cis women and I would never put myself into a vulnerable position like that) and yet the T.E.s lobby to have us barred, but they want to deny us any kind of right at all, and work to achieve that. The amount of abuse I have received from T.E. cis women and their lovely male transphobic sidekicks (funny how they tolerate men when it helps reinforce their bullshit) including an article in the New Statesmen that provoked such bile aimed at me (no right to reply) that I had to be prescribed anti anxiety meds and have time off work

The New Statesman are all upper middle class twats.
 
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?
Yes they do want to excludr all transvwoman women
 
Speaking of which, I did my own toilet selfie this summer!
IMG_0789.PNG
 
sorry if I came across as aggressive but I see you actually repeating fallacious arguments from people that actively organise to deny that trans exists - men and women and non binary - and over decades have worked to have our rights removed. They're not happy to just deny us from entering women only spaces, most of which we are invited into (in my case, I would never enter a space in which I was wanted, not least because I've heard terrible stories of trans women who have been seriously abused and assaulted by bigoted cis women and I would never put myself into a vulnerable position like that) and yet the T.E.s lobby to have us barred, but they want to deny us any kind of right at all, and work to achieve that. The amount of abuse I have received from T.E. cis women and their lovely male transphobic sidekicks (funny how they tolerate men when it helps reinforce their bullshit) including an article in the New Statesmen that provoked such bile aimed at me (no right to reply) that I had to be prescribed anti anxiety meds and have time off work

I was trying to tease out the issues by offering differing perspectives; I thought I'd made it clear that they were not necessarily views I hold. But I guess the danger is that people attribute those views to anyone playing the devil's advocate. And I certainly wouldn't want to be mistaken for someone who discriminates against any group. So I think I'll leave it there.

To be honest, it's not the first time that approach has landed me in hot water on here; I'll think twice before offering any theoretical talking points in areas which (understandably) are very emotive, even where (as is the case here) I believe there's a legitimate debate to be had that's a lot more nuanced than bigotry on one side versus intransigence on the other.

I'm sorry about what happened to you, and wish you all the best.
 
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.

I'd have a hard job coming up with any human behavior in the real world that is determined by physical processes within the brain. That only ever happens under laboratory conditions.

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

I'll check it out, ta.
 
Alternatively (and to paraphrase Butler) accepting that gender is something that you do, rather than what you are, seems to me to be a way to start to resolve the dichotomy.
Or maybe gender is something you experience?
 
sorry if I came across as aggressive but I see you actually repeating fallacious arguments from people that actively organise to deny that trans exists - men and women and non binary - and over decades have worked to have our rights removed. They're not happy to just deny us from entering women only spaces, most of which we are invited into (in my case, I would never enter a space in which I was wanted, not least because I've heard terrible stories of trans women who have been seriously abused and assaulted by bigoted cis women and I would never put myself into a vulnerable position like that) and yet the T.E.s lobby to have us barred, but they want to deny us any kind of right at all, and work to achieve that. The amount of abuse I have received from T.E. cis women and their lovely male transphobic sidekicks (funny how they tolerate men when it helps reinforce their bullshit) including an article in the New Statesmen that provoked such bile aimed at me (no right to reply) that I had to be prescribed anti anxiety meds and have time off work

Sorry that you have been put through all of that, you should not have to. These people are all dickheads and in particular The New $tatesman is a scum newspaper written by scum for scum
 
How does one behave like a man or a woman? Aren't all supposedly masculine and feminine traits actually just human ones, with none exclusive to just one gender?

Pint of beer for a man
Fruit based drink for a lady

Next question :D

Seriously if you want to enter a woman only place and by your actions you make other people uncomfatable you shouldnt be there.
 
Seriously if you want to enter a woman only place and by your actions you make other people uncomfatable you shouldnt be there.
That could apply to a lot of cis women. And trans men.

Also im not going to be told by a man where i as a woman can and cant go
 
Last edited:
I've not ignored it, I've replied several times pointing out that transwomen aren't men. Pointing out that transwomen were raised as men and were born as men then banging on about oppression of women by men really isn't relevant. Some transwomen still have male sexual organs, so what... are they OK then if they've had surgery?

You've ignored it again. Do you still think that your earlier description of women who have concerns or ideological issues about mtf trans people being allowed into women-only spaces or discussions that can only concern women with female sexual organs as "being hung up about sexual organs" - with its accompanying sub-text that they are slightly hysterical or uptight - is ok?

You've ignored the context that much feminist theory is about how reproductivity is a key part of the issue of how women end up oppressed and therefore my point about "male oppression" is to show how your casual dismissal of "sexual organs" and the silly womenz who are "hung up" about them is missing a pretty massive point.

I've never called mtf trans people "men" btw, so I don't know why you keep making this implication?

I predict you will now post that 'oppression of women by men isn't relevant' as though this is refuting anything I've said rather than missing the point.
 
I've not ignored anything, I just don't agree with you... I could claim you're ignoring the points I've made as you don't seem to be taking them into account - it is a bit pointless and we'll go round in circles so I think I'll leave it at that... no point in repeating what I've already posted on the matter.
 
In terms of transphobia, on a personal level I wouldn't want to hurt anyone's feelings and am happy of course to call anyone by any name or pronoun they want, but I don't believe in the theory of gender or definition of womanhood that seems to have been argued on this thread. Are some people taking the position that not believing in this or disagreeing is transphobic?
 
In terms of transphobia, on a personal level I wouldn't want to hurt anyone's feelings and am happy of course to call anyone by any name or pronoun they want, but I don't believe in the theory of gender or definition of womanhood that seems to have been argued on this thread. Are some people taking the position that not believing in this or disagreeing is transphobic?

I can only speak for me of course but as I read it the 'phobic' part is in the fear that allowing trans women into women's spaces makes them unsafe. It suggests that they are not seen or believed to be women and that they are a danger.
 
I can only speak for me of course but as I read it the 'phobic' part is in the fear that allowing trans women into women's spaces makes them unsafe. It suggests that they are not seen or believed to be women and that they are a danger.
But surely that comes from the belief about how gender is defined? If somewhere is a safe space because it is only accessed by women, then allowing people in who those using it do not believe to be women is what makes it feel unsafe. So it still comes down to "accept this definition of what it is to be a woman or you are phobic".
 
In terms of transphobia, on a personal level I wouldn't want to hurt anyone's feelings and am happy of course to call anyone by any name or pronoun they want, but I don't believe in the theory of gender or definition of womanhood that seems to have been argued on this thread. Are some people taking the position that not believing in this or disagreeing is transphobic?
It depends on how it's likely to play out in real life. For example - 1 in 2000 babies are born with a Disorder of Sex Development. So the likelihood of encountering one of those children in a career in education is quite high. If they are developing their own sense of gender which isn't necessarily matching biological sex, denying them (for example) using the girls toilet instead of the boys or vice versa is how not believing/disagreeing might play out to their detriment. In employment it's even clearer cut, where it's a protected characteristic.
 
I note that trans/cis isn't on the wheel of oppression. Although I only did a quick google image search so it may have been updated.
 
I can only speak for me of course but as I read it the 'phobic' part is in the fear that allowing trans women into women's spaces makes them unsafe. It suggests that they are not seen or believed to be women and that they are a danger.
is the reason men are excluded from women only spaces because men are 'a danger'?
 
But surely that comes from the belief about how gender is defined? If somewhere is a safe space because it is only accessed by women, then allowing people in who those using it do not believe to be women is what makes it feel unsafe. So it still comes down to "accept this definition of what it is to be a woman or you are phobic".

It comes from the individual making that judgement IME. You and I are both women yet I am sure we could find something we disagree on in terms of what it means to be a woman and how we should define it.

Yes, sure, if someone believes that you need to be born a woman n the biological sense to be defined as such the chances are they would feel uncomfortable and maybe unsafe allowing trans women to share women only spaces. That feeling of being 'unsafe' is fear/phobia.
 
It depends on how it's likely to play out in real life. For example - 1 in 2000 babies are born with a Disorder of Sex Development. So the likelihood of encountering one of those children in a career in education is quite high. If they are developing their own sense of gender which isn't necessarily matching biological sex, denying them (for example) using the girls toilet instead of the boys or vice versa is how not believing/disagreeing might play out to their detriment. In employment it's even clearer cut, where it's a protected characteristic.
Lots of children do not behave in a way that matches stereotypical expectations of their gender. When does it become a disorder?
 
Back
Top Bottom