Transgender is it just me that is totally perplexed?

[pengaleng]

Oh, might as well mention, one of the higher profile TERFs on Twitter last week was complaining that a man tried to stop her using the ladies toilet because she looks a bit boyish

Karma, or something!!!

oh the fucking irony thats actually hilarious, cheers stella

bit of lippie might sort that situation right out init, it's such a shame

 

[MochaSoul]

According to mumsnet there have been three trans women on the Jo Cox leadership programme out of an intake of around 150 (I suspect it might be a bit higherthan that but can't find exact figures. That is higher than the estimated number of trans women in the population, although possibly not by an amount that is statistically significant. It may be representative of the percentage of Labour Party members who are trans though, it's impossible to say. In any event given the under representation of trans people in leadership positions in the party, it seems to make pragmatic sense to allow them to access this rather than set up a whole new programme for three people.

They are not inevitable. The chances of two trans women or more needing access to a refuge at the same time in smaller cities are tiny. It might just about work somewhere like Birmingham or London but in general it's not practical. And given the immense amount of funding pressure women's refuges are under then how long would half empty trans refuges be tolerated if they were seen as competing for funds? Transwomen can't win, they will be attacked by some trans critical feminists whatever they do.

Stop skirting the matter. Self-id opens women's (and soon others too, if Young Labour's latest is a sign of what's to come) mechanisms to increase representation as well as other sex related mechanisms to redress the inequality they face such as scholarships and so on wide to abuse. If the idea is to dismantle them and/or render them useless then this is the best way to go about it. Three people? Why not open an LGBT programme so that trans men are included? Should they continue to be invisible while the born with penises get the opportunities at the expense of others born with vaginas? Think about it.

They will become inevitable if trans ideologues keep pushing for women to let go of their own boundaries. Self-id looks very much like abolishing women's power to set them... especially if sex based exemptions are not just kept but re-enforced.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Stop skirting the matter. Self-id opens women's (and soon others too, if Young Labour's latest is a sign of what's to come) mechanisms to increase representation as well as other sex related mechanisms to redress the inequality they face such as scholarships and so on wide to abuse. If the idea is to dismantle them and/or render them useless then this is the best way to go about it. Three people? Why not open an LGBT programme so that trans men are included? Should they continue to be invisible while the born with penises get the opportunities at the expense of others born with vaginas? Think about it.

They will become inevitable if trans ideologues keep pushing for women to let go of their own boundaries. Self-id looks very much like abolishing women's power to set them... especially is sex based exemptions are not just kept but re-enforced.

We shouldn't overstate this, though. How many women-only scholarships are there? In education, girls and women outperform men and boys in the UK today. It's a stretch to say that women-only places are needed to redress an imbalance in education in the UK today. What imbalance?

With women-only shortlists, I'm a little surprised there isn't more criticism of them, tbh. They represent some of the worst centralising, top-down tendencies in Blair's New Labour Party in the way they are selected.

 

[spanglechick]

They will become inevitable if trans ideologues keep pushing for women to let go of their own boundaries. Self-id looks very much like abolishing women's power to set them... especially if sex based exemptions are not just kept but re-enforced.

Why should women be the only people involved in demarcating those boundaries?

And what happens when assigned female at birth women disagree about those boundaries, as I do with you?

 

[MochaSoul]

Why should women be the only people involved

Women are not being involved at all. The consultation received several submissions from women's groups but none were invited.

When Jess Phillips who was part of the Committee realised the blunder back still in December she got so much abuse she never again spoke of it in public. Her tweets are still there and the responses.

 

[HoratioCuthbert]

I hope yer all enjoying yer 'peaktransing' love in

Wonder what would happen if I started calling radical feminism "peak women"

 

[spanglechick]

Women are not being involved at all. The consultation received several submissions from women's groups but none were invited.

When Jess Phillips who was part of the Committee realised the blunder back still in December she got so much abuse she never again spoke of it in public. Her tweets are still there and the responses.

No one on the committee is female?

Edit - which women's groups speak for all women?

 

[MochaSoul]

No one on the committee is female?

Edit - which women's groups speak for all women?

Is that all you can come with?
You actually think the reason to listen to, if only just one women's group is that it would be supposed that group to be the voice of all women? You think all women's groups are composed of rad feminists? Do you know (or think it fair, or even care) that Muslim women's groups were denied a say in the matter even though they have reasons to oppose it that go to the core of their freedoms?

 

[MochaSoul]

Who exactly here thinks they speak for all women?

 

[HoratioCuthbert]

that Muslim women's groups were denied a say in the matter even though they have reasons to oppose it that go to the core of their freedoms?

Which groups, what freedoms, and why? Genuinely interested, links appreciated.

 

[Treacle Toes]

No one on the committee is female?

I am interested in the answer to this question. MochaSoul Do you know?

 

[MochaSoul]

Do you own research.

 

[Treacle Toes]

Do you own research.

Right. A cheery wave to you too.

 

[MochaSoul]

And you too. There will be a meeting of Woman's Place in London on the 27th. Be there and learn.

 

[HoratioCuthbert]

Who exactly here thinks they speak for all women?

I've been accused of not listening to the concerns of women a few times. There's a lot of things being posted on here that bother me on a personal level (being LGBT), out of concern for the trans people I have spoken to on here and the ones I know(including the parent of my son's classmate) as well as politically-the damage this stuff is doing for working class solidarity because funnily enough being Transgender isn't generally a political stance so this can be a class issue too. Are these not also the concerns of women?

 

[spanglechick]

Is that all you can come with?
You actually think the reason to listen to, if only just one women's group is that it would be supposed that group to be the voice of all women? You think all women's groups are composed of rad feminists? Do you know (or think it fair, or even care) that Muslim women's groups were denied a say in the matter even though they have reasons to oppose it that go to the core of their freedoms?

Whoa! I'm not trying to "come with" anything.

As you seem to agree, "women's groups" tend to represent specific interests. Therefore, once you start including them, it becomes critically important to ensure that all are represented and, furthermore that the balance of views in the gen pop is represented.

Otherwise you run the risk of the groups shouting loudest being the ones who set the agenda. I'd rather not be represented as a (not trans) woman at all, than for trans exclusionary women to have the power to speak for me (which regularly seems to happen in this debate).

 

[HoratioCuthbert]

Right. A cheery wave to you too.

BE THERE AND LEARN DID YOU HEAR THAT

 

[Treacle Toes]

And you too. There will be a meeting of Woman's Place in London on the 27th. Be there and learn.

You know what, just don't speak to me like that. There's no fucking need.

This is being talked about as the biggest and most challenging feminist issue of the times and whilst I am taking an interest and trying to navigate the extreme bilge on both sides I simply will not be condescended to by you or anyone else. We've no need to interact again.

 

[spanglechick]

And you too. There will be a meeting of Woman's Place in London on the 27th. Be there and learn.

Well no. I won't. Because debating with trans exclusionary people frequently makes me very depressed and frustrated, so an event organised by them sounds like a nightmare.

For the record, I also wouldn't choose to debate with the more idiotic factions of Reddit / twitter's trans activism.

 

[Sea Star]

what a sensible article about the GRA actually looks like:

 

[HoratioCuthbert]

what a sensible article about the GRA actually looks like:View attachment 127454

He sounds like a pleasant man indeed! SEction 28- We were still in school ripping keep the clause posters down all over Inverness when that cunt Brian Souter got behind the campaign. Then Yes took a fucking donation from him and bragged about it!!! No one cares about us man.

 

[MochaSoul]

Whoa! I'm not trying to "come with" anything.

As you seem to agree, "women's groups" tend to represent specific interests. Therefore, once you start including them, it becomes critically important to ensure that all are represented and, furthermore that the balance of views in the gen pop is represented.

Otherwise you run the risk of the groups shouting loudest being the ones who set the agenda. I'd rather not be represented as a (not trans) woman at all, than for trans exclusionary women to have the power to speak for me (which regularly seems to happen in this debate).

None were allowed a hearing. None.

 

[8ball]

Who exactly here thinks they speak for all women?

<starts raising hand tentatively>

<thinks better of it...>

 

[smokedout]

I am interested in the answer to this question. MochaSoul Do you know?

Nine women, two men when the inquiry took place.

 

[HoratioCuthbert]

Nine women, two men when the inquiry took place.

Yeah but the concerns of women

 

[elbows]

Anyone got a link to, for example, a boring official website where I can learn some of the undisputed basics about that inquiry/whatever the proper name for it is?

 

[Sea Star]

He sounds like a pleasant man indeed! SEction 28- We were still in school ripping keep the clause posters down all over Inverness when that cunt Brian Souter got behind the campaign. Then Yes took a fucking donation from him and bragged about it!!! No one cares about us man.

I'm pre section 28 but I don't remember any discussion of sexuality at school at any point. As for trans, well, I didn't even know trans was a thing until the 1990s . I just thought I was a weirdo who should probably just keep the whole thing to themselves forever.

 

[Treacle Toes]

Nine women, two men when the inquiry took place.

Thanks. I can see why this answer didn't suit then.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Do you know (or think it fair, or even care) that Muslim women's groups were denied a say in the matter even though they have reasons to oppose it that go to the core of their freedoms?

The 'core of their freedoms'? What does that mean?

 

[Magnus McGinty]

No one cares about us man.

I ken!

You swing between Scot and Geordie! (Unless Scots say that too; I thought it was NE folk and hippies).