Staying on topic- threads in general

Violetsky are any men going to have to accept changes that are difficult for them?

I am taking a break from this subject but I when it's usually only myself and trisher holding a different (and also sometimes the same despite assertions otherwise) views against others...

Well I reserve my right to point out when the elephant in the room has done another widdle on the rug.

I would and have sincerely apologised when what I have said has been genuinely misinterpreted but perhaps there is a reason for that.

There is absolutely nothing justifiable telling women that they are not feminists, along with the other insulting labels that have been thrown around, because they have, and have expressed their concerns trisher.

"It would be possible for me to tell many on these threads that they are not feminists because their ideas have deviated from those of the first wave feminists". Really, can you direct me to any posts that could substantiate this claim?

There's a huge difference between something being genuinely misinterpreted and something that's said which is blatantly untrue.

Lionshead Solicitors, who acted on behalf of Maya Forstater, have today issued the results of her appeal:

This is an extremely important judgment and employers, service providers, landlords, educational bodies, trade unions and other associations must now ensure that any stance they have taken on discussion of trans rights or any diversity training they may have given to staff does not give rise to potential discrimination against existing or prospective staff on their gender critical beliefs. Diversity training and the provision of protections for trans-people must not be done in a way that leads to people with gender-critical beliefs being subjected to any detriments. The use of pejorative terms such as “TERF” (trans exclusionary radical feminist) or even “transphobe” to describe those holding gender critical views could now, in certain circumstances, amount to unlawful harassment.

Any organisation which has implemented diversity training for its staff may want to revisit that training in light of this judgment. Staff handbooks which make reference to trans rights may also need to be revised.

Full facts surrounding the Maya Forstater case, and appeal, is here:

lionsheadlaw.co.uk/a-gender-critical-belief-is-a-philosophical-belief-which-is-entitled-to-be-protected-under-the-equality-act-2010/

It's good to know that common sense is still alive and kicking Chewbacca.

Maya is just astounding. I have no words for her persistence. Thanks chewbacca.

Doodledog

*Its interesting that when I comment about others opinions and ideas about transpeople I am told they are not experts and they are not obsessed with the subject, but I can be cross examined to the Nth degree.*
That’s because you are fond of saying ‘most transpeople’, ‘all the transpeople I know’ and so on, suggesting that you have insider knowledge. This may be the case, of course, but we can’t be expected to accept your expertise as fact unless it is substantiated. You constant links to (usually anecdotal) articles, and your quoting of figures definitely suggests that you have more than a passing interest in the topic. Again, that is fine, but your voracious reading around the subject is not a reason why those of us with other interests should not be entitled to disagree with your points of view.

If your ‘weasel words’ comment was yet another dig at me, I think you’ll find that I favour plain speaking. Yes, if your ‘definition’ is as woolly as the one I quoted it will be questioned, but that’s not the same thing at all. It may be that I have missed the ‘numerous times’ that you have given a definition of ‘woman’, but I don’t recall seeing one, other than that it is someone who ‘presents as a woman and shares my (ie your) beliefs’ and even that came only after repeated requests from me and others.

Of course I t would be possible for you to categorise feminists based on your theoretical understanding of the term, but much beyond fairly basic level theory it would be pointless. People don’t fit as neatly into groups as theory would suggest. A feminist, in its accepted sense, is someone who believes in the rights of women, regardless of ‘waves’ or stages on the timeline in GCSE sociology books.

Actually Doodledog my interest is purely a matter for discussion on GN. All the links and articles I post have usually been googled by me while I've been posting in the various times I spend on here between doing other things.
I used to post links to trans inclusive feminist things as well until I realised that noone was interested.

If what I have been doing is "voracious reading" I dread to think of the amount of work actual scholars must be doing!

What I see happening now is the abandonment of yet another feminist principle. That oppressed minorities matter. The examples of the ones already lost interest me because I think the way women's past actions have been recorded and are remembered indicates not only a move to the right but a masculinisation of feminism which suits the agenda of a dominant patriachy. Most people will tell you that suffragettes and suffragists just wanted the vote, they are unaware of the ideas behind that demand

I wondered when suffragettes would be brought in ?.

Of course oppressed minorities matter, and if you can't see that nobody has ever said or implied otherwise, it confirms my suspicions that you don't read the posts other than to look for picky things to pull out of them in the hope of scoring points.

If you extended your reading to things outside of your narrow agenda, however, you would be aware of the fact that scholars have their hands tied where this issue is concerned. People have been hounded out of their jobs, and the atmosphere on campuses is one of fear. This fear and hounding may be happening to male academics, but the only ones I am aware of are female - something that I would have thought a feminist (or indeed any supporter of free speech, democracy or academic freedom) would oppose.

And there has still been no definition of 'woman' and no explanation of what you think 'transitioning' actually is.

Maya is just astounding. She is isn't she. She wouldn't be quiet. She refused to back down. And I'd love to see that Kathleen Stock began her fight back against the TRAs who hounded her out of her job, the university who stood feebly by and allowed her to be hounded out and the trade union that was too afraid to stand up and support her.

Trisher, your feminist principles are yours and you are entitled to hold them.
For me feminism is about women, and when it concerns women I agree that oppressed minorities matter, but my definition of woman involves being female and since yours apparently doesn’t, as TWANW, the oppressed minorities I am concerned about are different from those people you choose to endorse in matters of female rights.

trisher

Incidently my posts about the law on women's spaces and its plain statement that if admitting a transwoman would cause substantial disruption (like women not attending) then transwomen even with a GRC can be excluded have been met with derision. But that is the law. The reason it is not being correctly applied is another question.

When you refer to women's spaces and the law you're obviously recognising the dictionary definition of woman: adult human female. By agreeing that transwomen even with a GRC can be excluded you are acknowledging that they do not meet the criteria, they are not adult human females (women). The reason the law is not being applied is because so many places and institutions have been duped into Stonewall's interpretation of what they wish the law was. They fear the violent backlash if they dare step out of line.

From Doodledog's post This fear and hounding may be happening to male academics, but the only ones I am aware of are female

I've yet to read of a male academic being hounded out. Kathleen Stock is only the latest casualty and the vicious bullies who engineered it were gloating all over the internet. All for stating the scientific fact that humans can not change sex. I wonder if these students are climate change deniers, evolution deniers and antivaxers as they seem incapable of digesting scientific fact. I'll credit them with realising the earth is not flat

time.com/5865581/transphobia-terf-harm/

/thread

I think that's one of the strengths of the gender critical approach is that we all have slightly different positions and are mostly able to thrash that out. I remember when Mayas court case came to the fore there was quite a lot of criticism of the approach being based around a protected belief. I must say I was not clear if that was the right approach and wondered about the reasoning behind it. I was completely wrong and she was much more far sighted than I was. What she has achieved has such wide implications way beyond her individual case.

"There is no evidence that trans inclusive laws lead to a rise in criminality -assaults, stalking or harassment in single sex spaces" and there's no evidence that trans inclusive laws don't.

Women are fearful. Fear is a natural, powerful, and primitive human emotion. It involves a universal biochemical response as well as a high individual response. Fear alerts us to the presence of danger or the threat of harm whether that danger is physical or psychological (the emphasis is mine).

The fact that some women are fearful, whether or not there is any evidence to support that fear should be enough to maintain the places that until now, they have felt safe.

I suppose it depends on your idea of what number of women raped or assaulted is ok to make men feel better, mine is 0.

The fact that some women are fearful, whether or not there is any evidence to support that fear should be enough to maintain the places that until now, they have felt safe.

I think that what gets lost in a lot of the arguments is that the reason women needed the safe spaces in the first place was that they felt threatened by the presence of men. This is not about wanting women-only bars, or excluding men from anywhere other than places where women are vulnerable. That could be because they are ill, because they are in a state of undress, because they are locked in a cell, because a man has just raped them, because they are running away from male violence, or similar circumstances. It's not something that most of us would ask for very often - the cases are exceptional rather than usual.

It's not about unfounded prejudice or misandry - as you say, Smileless, it is based on fear. IMO it doesn't matter whether that fear is justified in every individual case. It matters that for generations women have been aware that there are times when even the strongest of us are vulnerable, and IME most men understand that, and are respectful of our choices not to have them there on those occasions.

Exactly Galaxy.

VS that link slings figures around purporting to show that transwomen are far more at risk of violence than women. Jess Phillips read out in parliament a list of women who had been murdered in the previous year. There was not one transwoman on that list because not one transwoman had been murdered. That's a good thing, but would seem at odds with the dangers alluded to in what was a very biased and unsubstantiated piece. There was deliberate misreporting of J K Rowling, and not one mention of the disgusting vile abuse, including death threats she was subjected to by some transpeople and their allies. Articles like that do nothing to advance any reconciliation.

Articles like that do nothing to advance any reconciliation.

No, I agree. What would be good, if we could get past the climate of fear in universities, is proper research. Apart from the No Debate agenda, though, is the fact that as long as anyone can identify as anything, accurate and useful data is impossible to collect.

I've never known such censorship and oppression of freedom (whether academic or more general) in my life.

No one should be subject to bullying and death threats over their opinion but I do think it's a shame that JKR has alienated so many of her readers and its been left in a position where the actors in the films have had to publically oppose her views.

I also dislike her for claiming that some demographics were in the books after the fact... She should have been brave enough to make that clear at the time, if it were true.

I don't like her honestly but I'd never wish any harm on her and I do think that needs to be taken very seriously by authorities because people should not be allowed to use the Internet or anonymity to make threats.

No one should be subject to bullying and death threats over their opinion but I do think it's a shame that JKR has alienated so many of her readers and its been left in a position where the actors in the films have had to publically oppose her views.

It's a shame that readers (most of whom are children) have been poisoned against JKR because of her opinions on something that has nothing to do with her books.

As for the actors - nobody has forced them to publicly oppose her views. If they are fighting shy of TRA bullying, that says more about the climate surrounding these issues than it does about JKR, and if they genuinely don't support her views they can say so if they want to - they don't 'have to' if they don't want to.

How many actors have been called to account over the views of the author of the book on which a film they acted in was based? None at all, that I can think of.

You should see the messages of support she gets from women, its endless, I think she is secure enough to know that some people will like her and some wont and not care either way. I think her courage is again beyond words.

Rosie51

VS that link slings figures around purporting to show that transwomen are far more at risk of violence than women. Jess Phillips read out in parliament a list of women who had been murdered in the previous year. There was not one transwoman on that list because not one transwoman had been murdered. That's a good thing, but would seem at odds with the dangers alluded to in what was a very biased and unsubstantiated piece. There was deliberate misreporting of J K Rowling, and not one mention of the disgusting vile abuse, including death threats she was subjected to by some transpeople and their allies. Articles like that do nothing to advance any reconciliation.

Given that transpeople are a very small minority of the population if the figures for murder even approached those for women it would be truly shocking. As it is the real figure is probably around one murder a year. The figures for hate crime and violence are much higher.
I know that many women are subjected to unacceptable violence everyday. I just don't understand how this is some sort of a competition and not something that women and transwomen should stand against together. www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-how-many-trans-people-murdered-uk