Latest from Mridul Wadhwa

If no one has the right to impose their ideas on any other person , why are you supporting Wadhwa, who is quite open about imposing her ideas ’ about the way in which raped women can receive support.

These women have said clearly and over and over again that the support offered is not what they want and yet Wadhwa ideas are all that is on offer.

Is she not imposing her ideas? And you support that imposition.

"We are a group of students and former students and we represent the feminist student society Women Talk Back! Our group has been officially affiliated with the Bristol Students' Union (BSU) and we have been sanctioned for being women-only, despite being in compliance with the Equality Act. Please help us protect single-sex spaces from the Bristol SU's discriminatory practices and policies. "

www.crowdjustice.com/case/student-society-sanctioned-for-being-women-only/

trisher

Mollygo so will you address transmen as "he"? and allow them to be "birthing people"?

Luuurvely Diversion!
Why are you asking this?
Have you suddenly decided that transmen are female and transwomen are male?
Birthing people has no significance. I’d happily say any person that gives birth is female and therefore cannot be a man as men cannot give birth.
If a transman appears as a man and gives rise to no reason to consider otherwise, of course I’d say he. If a transman appears as a man but demonstrates as a female then I’d use the appropriate pronoun.

F it’s wrong for TERF to do it to trans, it must be wrong for trans to do the same to gay, mustn’t it?

Or do you have a different logic?

Here is an interesting article from transwoman Debbie Hayton.

Debbie says "I May Have Gender Dysphoria. But I Still Prefer to Base My Life on Biology, Not Fantasy"

quillette.com/2020/02/02/i-may-have-gender-dysphoria-but-i-still-prefer-to-base-my-life-on-biology-not-fantasy/

trisher there may be american money going to european far right organisations.
That has nothing to do with women's groups such as A Woman's Place & Fair Play for Women, which fundraise from supporters who genuinely want to protect the rights of women.

The Stanford article shows some very confused reasoning, possibly deliberately. It positions being white, or being a feminist from the 70's, as bad things for no reason that is given, and seems to suggest that people should automatically be sidelined for being those things.

This statement "Bey pointed out that TERF discourse places feminism on the side of figures that come out of traditional gender roles, rather than the ones that destabilize them." is completely opposite to the truth.

Feminists who oppose trans ideology are in favour of everyone expressing themselves however they like, and following whatever lifestyle they want, without denying the reality of their sexed body.

Just because two groups in society agree on one thing, that doesn't mean they agree on everything.

If those two articles are examples of your usual reading, it's a miracle you manage to sound as coherent as you do on GN

Peasblossom

If no one has the right to impose their ideas on any other person , why are you supporting Wadhwa, who is quite open about imposing her ideas ’ about the way in which raped women can receive support.

These women have said clearly and over and over again that the support offered is not what they want and yet Wadhwa ideas are all that is on offer.

Is she not imposing her ideas? And you support that imposition.

I don'tthink she has Peaseblossom I suppose it depends on if you just belive the hype in the media or actually read her words for yourself.

FarNorth the position of privilege of white feminists and white gay men has been questioned for some time. I would imagine the Stanford experts would naturally expect a certain level of knowledge about this and so not imagine they would need to give explanations. If you are interested in learning about it this is interesting files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ899418.pdf
Basically intersectionality gives white women a position of privilege- they are white and a position of oppression- they are women. The privilege is the default position, and contrasts with BAME women who are oppressed in both areas.

If you refuse to recognise people who are challenging gender roles are you not, even if unconsciously, supporting established ones?

Sigh. And again for the lurkers the last 4 court cases on this issue were instigated from women from the BAME community. And if we want to play the white privilege game, which I dont particularly, the people who most strongly criticise the gender critical viewpoint include Owen Jones, Jolyon Maugham, etc etc.

No if you insist that the way we dress, or the activities you participate in are synonymous with a particular sex then it is you who is entrenching gender roles. The gender critical position is the exact opposite.

But Galaxy as is being constantly posted this has nothing to do with sex.

As for Owen Jones and Jolyon Maugham of course they also occupy a position of privilege.
4 cases may have been presented in court but who funded those cases? Just a few cases by no means exhibits a level of support from BAME. nor does it show that the movement is not primarily led by white women.

Trisher I honestly am not sure what you are talking about now. What has nothing to do with sex.

Galaxy

Trisher I honestly am not sure what you are talking about now. What has nothing to do with sex.

I don’t know either.

trisher

But Galaxy as is being constantly posted this has nothing to do with sex.

When a Gender Recognition Certificate entitles a person to alter the Sex category on their birth certificate and when people are claiming their gender identity means they should be in single-sex places and also their gender identity is related to other people's sexuality - of course it is to do with sex.

Sorry none of the words you are saying explain why you think the gender critical position is to reinforce gender roles.

"according to the 2011 Census, the total population of England and Wales was 56.1 million, and 86.0% of the population was White"

www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/uk-population-by-ethnicity/national-and-regional-populations/population-of-england-and-wales/latest

So it's not surprising if the majority of people in most UK movements are white.
And not surprising that women, especially older women who have a bit of life experience, are mainly the ones who want to protect women's rights.

trisher are you suggesting, as the writer of that article seems to be, that older, white women should be disregarded simply because they are older and white?
What sort of feminism is that?

FarNorth what I think is generally accepted in the wider world of feminism is that there are degrees of oppression and that it is necessary in the interests of equality to recognise that. So the experiences of a BAME woman are not the same as those of a white woman, but you could also take into account poverty, education and other factors. It's called intersectionality. It doesn't disregard anyone's views or experiences simply asks that they be balanced and considered in relation to others. Saying that because the majority of women in the UK are white and therefore their views matter more than any others is just about as far from real feminism as you can get. It has always been about the fact that minorities matter and oppressed minorities matter more.

Galaxy if you don't undertand that by saying transwomen are dangerous or that men are dressing as women to access women's spaces and harm women you are in fact setting out ( perhaps unconsciously) standards of what a woman should look like then, perhaps you should examine the effects of your assertions on the wider public. Because you may be considerate and caring, but when the idea that someone who looks even vaguely masculine may be a threat is carried into the wider public arena it carries with it all sorts of consequences, for the woman who looks a little different, for butch lesbians, for non binary, for girls challenging the social norm. They can be abused or attacked on the grounds that they might be men. The result naturally is that fewer women and girls choose to dress in such ways and more conform. It may not be the result you intended but it is what happens when bias and discriminatory stories are spread about any group.

I dont think transwomen are dangerous I think they are of the Male sex. I think pretending that people cant tell the sex of people is partly why we are where we are.

No when you tell people that they must be of different sex because of the way you present you are reinforcing what it is to be a woman or a man. It is you who is doing that.

Women get attacked just for being women, not only for looking a bit different.

Ilovecheese

Women get attacked just for being women, not only for looking a bit different.

So that's OK let's add another standard of the way they should look then more of them can be attacked- Hurrah!

Galaxy

No when you tell people that they must be of different sex because of the way you present you are reinforcing what it is to be a woman or a man. It is you who is doing that.

Galaxy I don't care what someone looks like I don't care how they present. I only use the terms I use because they are the conventional terms for appearance. If you really don't see the dangers in trying to identify a person's sex from the way they present then there is little I can do. But some people will take on board what you say and demand that women are clearly identifiable and abuse them if they are not.

I have no standard of how women should look. You have frequently talked about appearance in relation to women. Off the top of my head I remember always wearing trousers, and facial hair as a signifier that a woman must be a man.

Beckett (here we go again) please see my reply elsewhere. Your comments make no logical sense. If men weren't 'allowed' in these spaces - how exactly would you check - to enforce the rule? (I do find this amusing though!)