Is this woman a transphobe?
- Thread starter co-op
- Start date
co-op if you want to say that trans rights are a good way for the left to alienate the working class and an opening for culture warriors on the right, can you please just say so and stop with the hiding behind gender critical feminism.
(Of course we have had all these arguments before wrt gay rights.)
(Of course we have had all these arguments before wrt gay rights.)
Not sure what options the UK team offer (now that we finally have a UK team with an NHS contract again
) but generally speaking, oophorectomy (removal of the ovaries) isn't necessarily required even for those transmasculine people who do have metoidioplasty or phalloplasty (the two "lower surgery" options).E2a also, hysterectomy, with or without salpingo-oophorectomy, is no longer recommended as standard for anyone on testosterone. Current advice is transabdominal ultrasound every two years to monitor for endometrial hypoplasia.
Athos
Well-Known Member
Thanks.Not sure what options the UK team offer (now that we finally have a UK team with an NHS contract again
E2a also, hysterectomy, with or without salpingo-oophorectomy, is no longer recommended as standard for anyone on testosterone. Current advice is transabdominal ultrasound every two years to monitor for endometrial hypoplasia.
I think it's obvious that Belboid and Lammy were both wrong.
Though I do wonder what the purpose of coop introducing Lammy was.
Athos
Well-Known Member
Can't say as I blame you!
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
the NHS guidance I am aware of says that hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oöphorectomy will need to be carried out before any further procedure. It is a few years old thoNot sure what options the UK team offer (now that we finally have a UK team with an NHS contract again
E2a also, hysterectomy, with or without salpingo-oophorectomy, is no longer recommended as standard for anyone on testosterone. Current advice is transabdominal ultrasound every two years to monitor for endometrial hypoplasia.
ginger_syn
Her Insanity laughs under pressure...👾
It is when a transphobe like you says it.
To some extent this is a case of if the cap fits then wear it.
But I was really thinking of anyone who thinks that GC posters on here are "transphobes" for not posting pro-trans messages on anti-trans threads from 16 years ago. Seems kinda clown-like to me.
But I guess it's safer than being accused of "transphobia" yourself, so maybe it's cowardice rather than clownitude? But the allegation of "transphobia" won't be easily pacified, you will have to keep making bigger offerings & in the end the most important offering is to publicly be-clown yourself. Case in point, David Lammy just shared with the world that he thinks transwomen have a cervix
What's your point here? You think that trans people want those who profess to be supporters to be completely ignorant of trans bodies and trans healthcare? You think we want our bodies to be used as gotchas to catch out poorly briefed MPs? To what end? Some inexplicable quest for dominance that actually does us harm?
This is why you're a crank.
8ball
Decolonise colons!
I think that’s kind of a high bar.
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
I stand by it. I also called you an obsessive cranky weirdo, that part is important too.What I've posted on this thread is a woman, a trade unionist getting harassed by her employer for saying the words I posted up. And asking "is she a transphobe?" for saying the words she said. You don't engage with that, instead you agree that the fact that I didn't condemn posts from 16 years ago on threads I didn't even read is evidence of my transphobia and accuse me of "posting tweets of random nutters"?
And then accuse me of not arguing in good faith. You really are a fucking idiot.
Honestly you lot really need to get out more. You are making clowns of yourselves on this.
bimble
floofy
Just sticking this here, interesting interview with someone who is refusing to get into either trench.
Can't justify buying it right now but would like to read their book.
www.theguardian.com
Can't justify buying it right now but would like to read their book.
Finn Mackay: the writer hoping to help end the gender wars
The sociologist and feminist campaigner believes it is possible to champion both women’s and trans rights. Can their new book help define some common ground?
Reno
The In Kraut
Why is the Guardian shit for reporting on someone who holds these views in a toxic culture war ? Did you bother to read the article ?
Athos
Well-Known Member
For presenting the rights and interests of the two groups as being in opposition.
Reno
The In Kraut
... members of both communities often present themselves as being in opposition. Why have trans threads here been so acrimonious that they get shut down ?
Athos
Well-Known Member
Most people in both groups recognise that their interests align most of the time. The focus on the differences is what causes a lot of the acrimony.
smmudge
i know the smudge is true
I believe the Guardian are perpetuating the toxic culture war by implying that people who support trans rights don't usually support women's rights as well. Fucking atrocious really, can't believe they actually wrote that.
I'm not shutting down the views of the person they're writing about, they seem fairly generic trans inclusive if I'm honest, but Guardian has to paint their views as "on the fence" to be able to report on them in a supportive way.
hitmouse
so defeated, thinks it's funny
Sorry, but I don't think that trans people present themselves as being in opposition to (cis) women. That's a framing that comes from one particular angle.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Also you can't end a war that one side doesn't want to end. Nor one with such an absurd imbalance of objectives between sides; namely the right to exist vs the right to be a gobshite.
Reno
The In Kraut
The article reports that certain prominent (cis) women present themselves in opposition to the interests of transpeople and that this has been getting a lot of publicity stirring up the debate and that isn't wrong. I don't see anything about transpeople presenting themselves in opposition to (cis) women in the article.
hitmouse
so defeated, thinks it's funny
Oh yeah, no disagreement with that, I just thought that this post:
Seemed to suggest that trans people were presenting themselves as in opposition to (cis) women, but if that's not what you meant then no worries. About the actual article, I'm still curious as to whether "it is possible to champion both women’s and trans rights" is something that Mackay actually said or if that's a form of wording that the Guardian writer chose to put into their mouth, because to me that still suggests two separate groups that don't overlap.
Reno
The In Kraut
As someone who works at an advice and crisis centre for transpeople and who has straight and lesbian female friends who are (far from radical) feminists, in my experience, there are certain points of conflict which are genuinely difficult to resolve. I've mostly kept out of these conversarions here because unlike the many (cis) straight men who appear very invested in this debate, as a gay (cis) man it's not my place to tell women or transpeople how to identify themselves or their politics and I don't presume to have the answers apart from "don't be an asshole". I just found the outrage at this particular Guardian article weird as it simply reports on something that is happening (the media debate about feminist vs trans issues) and voices like that of Finn Mackay don't often get exposure in the mainstream media. So hitting the outrage pedal struck me a little OTT.
I think presenting Finn as uniquely middle of the road and reasonable could be seen as insulting to the many trans people, including trans activists, who agree with them or have similar views. It perpetuates the narrative that most politicised trans supportive people are going round demanding lesbians have sex with them and denying biological sex exists when in reality this is largely a fabrication and most people's views are far more aligned with Finns than the grotesque caricatures of trans rights activists invented by their opponents.
But that's nit-picking a bit, it's a good interview and certainly not one which justifies outrage. I suspect The Observer yesterday shoe-horning an attack on trans women using women's toilets into a piece that was otherwise about Wayne Couzens and misogyny in the police force has caused lingering rage.
Serene
Slightly disgruntled
I just read this article about Carrie Johnson. She has just gone up in my estimation. Well done to her.
Carrie Johnson urges Tories to back transgender rights
Carrie Johnson urges Tories to back transgender rights
Cloo
Banana for scale
I found Finn Mackay's views very close to mine - also agree with others here that the actually lots of people do support trans rights and women's rights thank you very much.
What also struck me thinking about this yesterday is that some many difficulties for women of all kinds comes down to lack of resources. I often see on social media arguments claiming 'The Trans Lobby is backed by The Establishment and the Media and loads of money!' (it isn't) vs 'Cis Women are backed by The Establishment and the media and all the money' (women's rights are often only backed by establishment and media to the point of being able to throw women under the bus when needed). The fact is, it's white cis, able bodied men who have the Establishment, the Media and the Money - everyone else is fighting over scraps.
If there were well resourced women's refuges, for example, maybe we would be able to have in each area a totally open shelter for all women, and a shelter for women who, for whatever reason, no questions asked and no judgement, don't feel able to share space with trans women right now. But nobody gives enough of a fuck about protecting women and resourcing is incredibly tight and hard won.
Interestingly, just after I was thinking about this last night I saw a tweet from a transwoman laconically noting that for all those people saying 'Build your own spaces' her answer would be 'OK, I'll just go do that with all the resources I have lying around' and she totally has a point, but the fact is women as a whole don't have those resources either.
Which is why it breaks my heart a bit that sometimes on the Left, people wanting to do the right thing sometimes end up rushing into critising cis women for being unkind and unwelcoming TERFS to trans women in need, when the fact is women as whole (trans or cis) have so fucking little resource for their needs, given we are half the population, and that is the problem at the heart of all this.
Sorry for brain dump, was literally lying awake thinking about this. I'm sure this isn't some very original thought and that someone who knows all the issues better has thought it out more thoroughly than me....
What also struck me thinking about this yesterday is that some many difficulties for women of all kinds comes down to lack of resources. I often see on social media arguments claiming 'The Trans Lobby is backed by The Establishment and the Media and loads of money!' (it isn't) vs 'Cis Women are backed by The Establishment and the media and all the money' (women's rights are often only backed by establishment and media to the point of being able to throw women under the bus when needed). The fact is, it's white cis, able bodied men who have the Establishment, the Media and the Money - everyone else is fighting over scraps.
If there were well resourced women's refuges, for example, maybe we would be able to have in each area a totally open shelter for all women, and a shelter for women who, for whatever reason, no questions asked and no judgement, don't feel able to share space with trans women right now. But nobody gives enough of a fuck about protecting women and resourcing is incredibly tight and hard won.
Interestingly, just after I was thinking about this last night I saw a tweet from a transwoman laconically noting that for all those people saying 'Build your own spaces' her answer would be 'OK, I'll just go do that with all the resources I have lying around' and she totally has a point, but the fact is women as a whole don't have those resources either.
Which is why it breaks my heart a bit that sometimes on the Left, people wanting to do the right thing sometimes end up rushing into critising cis women for being unkind and unwelcoming TERFS to trans women in need, when the fact is women as whole (trans or cis) have so fucking little resource for their needs, given we are half the population, and that is the problem at the heart of all this.
Sorry for brain dump, was literally lying awake thinking about this. I'm sure this isn't some very original thought and that someone who knows all the issues better has thought it out more thoroughly than me....
I agree the lack of resources is the key issue, especially when it comes to refuges, and where I disagree with Finn's interview is the implication that there are already some specialist resources for trans/queer/non binary people. There might be some sparse specialised counselling but there are no specialised refuges or accommodation providers I'm aware of - meaning that if a trans woman needs to leave a violent partner unless she can find a trans inclusive refuge there is nowhere for her to go. I think a properly funded VAWG sector with a range of provision to ensure a place of safety for everyone whatever their needs would take a huge amount of the heat out of this conflict.
I think another problem though is that a lot of people, and especially GC people, don't really believe that trans women suffer from sexual violence, or if they do it's very rare when in fact it's endemic. And this is partly because it's assumed that straight men have no interest in trans women - an assumption which has been magnified by the recent dogmatic insistence that sexual attraction can only ever be based on biological sex and not gender. But you only need to talk to trans sex workers about who their clients are to realise that huge numbers of straght men have sex, or want sex with trans women, but very few are prepared to openly admit it. The kind of creepy men who contact trans women on dating sites will frequently open with the question R U discreet - meaning will you fuck me in secret. There are clubs in every big city (or were pre-Covid) where men who overwhemingly identify as straight go to pick up trans women - or more commonly cross dressers, but it's frequently a secretive activity. There are vast numbers of couples on hook up apps looking for trans women because 'he' wants to try it.
This secrecy not only makes trying to navigate relationships dangerous for trans women attracted to men but it also hides a huge amount of often abusive male behaviour. And it happens because many men cannot own their sexuality because they're so terrified they might be thought of as gay. I don't really know how this can be addressed, other than a recognition that sexuality is often far more complex than is often assumed and believing trans women when they say this is happening. Sadly things seem to be sliding in the exact opposite direction.
(and before the angry straight men pipe up, I'm not saying all straight men are into trans women, just that a lot are, certainly enough to generate a significant trans sex work and 'shemale' porn industry and the secrecy associated with this desire doesn't just create the perfect conditions for abuse but also mean that abuse is often not recognised by wider society.)
I think another problem though is that a lot of people, and especially GC people, don't really believe that trans women suffer from sexual violence, or if they do it's very rare when in fact it's endemic. And this is partly because it's assumed that straight men have no interest in trans women - an assumption which has been magnified by the recent dogmatic insistence that sexual attraction can only ever be based on biological sex and not gender. But you only need to talk to trans sex workers about who their clients are to realise that huge numbers of straght men have sex, or want sex with trans women, but very few are prepared to openly admit it. The kind of creepy men who contact trans women on dating sites will frequently open with the question R U discreet - meaning will you fuck me in secret. There are clubs in every big city (or were pre-Covid) where men who overwhemingly identify as straight go to pick up trans women - or more commonly cross dressers, but it's frequently a secretive activity. There are vast numbers of couples on hook up apps looking for trans women because 'he' wants to try it.
This secrecy not only makes trying to navigate relationships dangerous for trans women attracted to men but it also hides a huge amount of often abusive male behaviour. And it happens because many men cannot own their sexuality because they're so terrified they might be thought of as gay. I don't really know how this can be addressed, other than a recognition that sexuality is often far more complex than is often assumed and believing trans women when they say this is happening. Sadly things seem to be sliding in the exact opposite direction.
(and before the angry straight men pipe up, I'm not saying all straight men are into trans women, just that a lot are, certainly enough to generate a significant trans sex work and 'shemale' porn industry and the secrecy associated with this desire doesn't just create the perfect conditions for abuse but also mean that abuse is often not recognised by wider society.)
19force8
For the avoidance of faith
The Guardian is shit for publishing shit like this which uses the death of Sarah Everard to push their shit transphobia:
You can’t opt in and out of taking violence against women seriously | Catherine Bennett
Sarah Everard’s murder has highlighted the inconsistencies in the provision of safe spaces
and shit like this that manages to shoe horn the same shit into an editorial about how the Met are shit at dealing with misogyny:
The Observer view on institutional misogyny in the Metropolitan police | Observer editorial
Sarah Everard’s murder has shaken public confidence in the Met and an independent inquiry must take place without delay
Last edited:
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
I won't read that article, the headline sounds like a machine learning programme that was fed Glinner's twitter feed for 5 years. Makes no sense.The Guardian is shit for publishing shit like this which uses the death of Sarah Everard to push their shit transphobia:
You can’t opt in and out of taking violence against women seriously | Catherine Bennett
Sarah Everard’s murder has highlighted the inconsistencies in the provision of safe spaces
and shit like this that manages to shoe horn the same shit into an editorial about how the Met are shit at dealing with misogyny:
The Observer view on institutional misogyny in the Metropolitan police | Observer editorial
Sarah Everard’s murder has shaken public confidence in the Met and an independent inquiry must take place without delay
Shechemite
Be the sun and all will see you
Similar threads
