Endometriosis charity appoints trans woman as the new head of the organisation.

Dickens

I still don't understand why the charity cannot say that it exists for

Women
Transmen
Those who are non-binary

???

Are any of those titles taboo?

From what l heard in the interview, and quoted earlier it seems Steph Richards is comfortable with all those terms.
The charity uses 'people'.

How about if the charity used the term female, apart from the 29 men? That covers women, transmen and those non-binary who are female.

OldFrill

Dickens

I still don't understand why the charity cannot say that it exists for

Women
Transmen
Those who are non-binary

???

Are any of those titles taboo?

From what l heard in the interview, and quoted earlier it seems Steph Richards is comfortable with all those terms.
The charity uses 'people'.

Those who have endometriosis?

But this is what happens when charities etc feel they have to be on trend, all-inclusive, politically correct, (woke, if you prefer). The emphasis is on the person given the rôle rather than those sufferers in need of help.

As transmen and non-binary people exist the concept that transwomen only become trans in order to take over women's roles and functions is flawed.

But nobody has said that. You are twisting words again. As I see it, there are people who become trans because they are driven to do so by a desire to change sex, and there are those who do it for nefarious reasons, as saying they are women is a means for some men to access women's spaces and dominate them. The former group are victims of the TWAW agenda every bit as much as women are (in different ways). They are tarred with the same brush as the latter group, which is very unfortunate. Nevertheless, the fact that the latter group exists is why a lot of women don't want self-id to allow any man who says the magic words to access all areas.

Also many non binary people are males so obviously there needs to be a discussion with regard to non binary males being in womens spaces. This is not a comment on their existence or otherwise, it is a comment on single sex spaces. Non binary females obviously need to be in female spaces eg female prisons rather than Male prisons.

Doodledog

*As transmen and non-binary people exist the concept that transwomen only become trans in order to take over women's roles and functions is flawed.*

But nobody has said that. You are twisting words again. As I see it, there are people who become trans because they are driven to do so by a desire to change sex, and there are those who do it for nefarious reasons, as saying they are women is a means for some men to access women's spaces and dominate them. The former group are victims of the TWAW agenda every bit as much as women are (in different ways). They are tarred with the same brush as the latter group, which is very unfortunate. Nevertheless, the fact that the latter group exists is why a lot of women don't want self-id to allow any man who says the magic words to access all areas.

It isn't a question of twisting words, it is a question of ignoring what doesn't fit the proposal. So the emphasis is always on transwomen and transmen are largely ignored, probably because dealing with them means that the motivation and the reason for anyone transitioning is then brought into question. After all if men are motivated to become transwomen to gain some sort of power, the same motivation should surely be found in transmen. But if the motivation is purely that their bodies do not fit their assigned sex then the concept becomes much more logical.

As for the allegation that most transwomen are OK but the movement is being used by male predators. That may possibly be true, but even if it is why attack transwomen who are doing valuable jobs? Why not just let them get on with it? There were 480,000 transwomen in the last census (and the same number of transmen.) If predators are using the trans situation to enable them to abuse women, then transwomen deserve our concerns and sympathy even more, because not only does this open them up to abuse for their trans status, they also are just as liable to assault as cis women.

Glorianny says
*After all if men are motivated to become transwomen to gain some sort of power, the same motivation should surely be found in transmen.*🤣🤣🤣

I can’t believe even you think that could be true!
You really believe it would benefit TM to demand the right to enter male sports, or be incarcerated in male prisons?
You seriously think that the male dominated businesses would be more likely to award a post to a transman just because she says she is a man?
Seriously?

Yes, Molly, I agree that it is obvious that TW have a lot more to gain from nefarious use of self-I’d. We’ve all said it countless times before, but the main reason TM get less attention on here (they are not ignored) is because as feminists we are more concerned about what threatens women, and transwomen in our spaces pose a greater threat than transmen do to males.

Doodledog

Yes, Molly, I agree that it is obvious that TW have a lot more to gain from nefarious use of self-I’d. We’ve all said it countless times before, but the main reason TM get less attention on here (they are not ignored) is because as feminists we are more concerned about what threatens women, and transwomen in our spaces pose a greater threat than transmen do to males.

Absolutely! I have asked numerous times for examples of when a transman has impacted on male sports, taken a 'man of the xxxx' award, been promoted to the head of a company board, caused fear by insinuating themselves into a male changing room etc etc Not once have any of the TRAs answered with a single example, yet we can provide endless examples of women negatively impacted by trans identified males. The only time transmen make the headlines is when they do that most female of things, become pregnant and give birth to a baby. Doing what nature designed the female body to do, you couldn't make it up!......

Mollygo

Glorianny says
*After all if men are motivated to become transwomen to gain some sort of power, the same motivation should surely be found in transmen.*🤣🤣🤣

I can’t believe even you think that could be true!
You really believe it would benefit TM to demand the right to enter male sports, or be incarcerated in male prisons?
You seriously think that the male dominated businesses would be more likely to award a post to a transman just because she says she is a man?
Seriously?

No that is the point. If as you allege there are lots of transwomen who are purely using the issue to enable them to gain access to women's spaces, then surely there should be considerably more transwomen than transmen. But there aren't. The numbers are virtually the same.
So although there may be a few individuals who may use the issue it cannot be a significant number. The fact that there is no advantage for transmen, and the numbers transitioning are so similar, indicates that there is some other reason behind transition and that the reasons for transition are shared by both.

I am reminded of Pope Francis' comment when asked to declare openly against homosexuality :

"Who am I to judge?".

What is so difficult to understand about the idea that men in women's spaces can be dangerous? All the obfuscation in the world isn't going to change that.

Women in men's spaces are far less dangerous, which is why women, on the whole, are less concerned about transmen.

What I find baffling is when women are so absolutely determined to shut up other women when we point this out that they resort to sarcasm, snide digs and twisting our words. It is really very simple.

Doodledog

What is so difficult to understand about the idea that men in women's spaces can be dangerous? All the obfuscation in the world isn't going to change that.

Women in men's spaces are far less dangerous, which is why women, on the whole, are less concerned about transmen.

What I find baffling is when women are so absolutely determined to shut up other women when we point this out that they resort to sarcasm, snide digs and twisting our words. It is really very simple.

Sorry that isn't justifiable No one has denied that men can be dangerous. The argument you have tried to make, but which is unsupported by the evidence is that men are deliberately transitioning to access women's spaces. There is no evidence that this is so.

Doodledog

What is so difficult to understand about the idea that men in women's spaces can be dangerous? All the obfuscation in the world isn't going to change that.

Women in men's spaces are far less dangerous, which is why women, on the whole, are less concerned about transmen.

What I find baffling is when women are so absolutely determined to shut up other women when we point this out that they resort to sarcasm, snide digs and twisting our words. It is really very simple.

Yes. And when the point G makes is queried, she simply twists the point.
Some people never grasp the idea that I don’t think all TW are harmful-only those and their supporters who mean harm to females, claim rights that don’t belong to males, cheat in sport etc.
Even if she is claiming that TM do those things (evidence?), that doesn’t impact on the wellbeing of females in the same way that lying by TW does.
What I’d really like to know is
Glorianny, do you condone lying by all males, or only TW claiming to be women (AHF)?

All in all it's a one way traffic, particularly as regards to trans women taking part in women's sporting events and entering what should be private spaces. Just why would a trans man enter the male sporting arena when their muscle/skeletal system would be no match the cynic in all of us know quite why it works the other way round and time and time again we see the muscular, male bodied trans woman, often dwarfing and trouncing her female competitors, step up to the podium to take the first prize. If like Riley Gains, female competitors speak out knowing that they will never again stand a chance, in spite of all the training they've done, of taking the ultimate prize against a male bodied competitor, then they will be vilified as transphobic. Indeed in contact sports for a woman to compete against a male bodied opponent the potential dangers are dismissed. Maybe it's all part of the subliminal conditioning that some men have of "what I want trounces that of my natal female counterparts, what they want doesn't really matter, it's all about me" that still seems to exist with some of these high profile trans women who exemplify that macho streak when challenged.

This is not a man, this is a trans-WOMAN. Stop referring to her as a man! It is not only ignorant, it is extremely rude and disrespectful.

As others have said, one does not have to have direct experience of something in order to be fully capable of running an organisation regarding it. She obviously got the job on her credentials, which is as it should be, so I cannot see a problem. People are far too quick to jump on the complaints bandwagon these days!

Trying to argue against an indefensible situation such as the Isla Bryson debacle proved too nuch even for a politician such as Nicola Sturgeon who was not without a fair amount of gravitas.

Sorry that isn't justifiable No one has denied that men can be dangerous. The argument you have tried to make, but which is unsupported by the evidence is that men are deliberately transitioning to access women's spaces. There is no evidence that this is so.
I am not 'trying to make' and argument. I am making the argument that there are men who use the cover of self-id to access women's spaces. That is undeniable, as numerous news reports and court cases show.

As Terribull reiterates, there is also the fact of male competitors in female sport, which benefits transwomen and not transmen. You appear to believe that what you see as transmen being ignored is because they don't fit with our argument, but the reverse is the case - they absolutely do. It is the danger from self-identifying transwomen that forms the crux of the argument we are making, not the transphobia of which you accuse us (however passive-aggressively you try to couch it). As transmen do not pose that danger, we are less likely to mention them, but we are not ignoring their existence.

OddOne, whether you like it or not this person is a man.

Total aside, but interesting.
Olympic diving champion Tom Daley says he is "furious" at his sport's world governing body for voting to stop transgender athletes from competing in women's elite events.

Yes, you read it. A male thinks it’s unfair to stop males competing in female events.

Ah the I don't mind transwomen really just the ones I don't like argument now.
Wouldn't you then agree that transwomen using women's spaces are just as much at danger of assault as natal women? And that the constant linking of transwomen to predatory males actually damages transwomen. So they are more at risk than natal women.
And that constantly insisting this is a major problem stirs up hatred for transpeople.

Glorianny

Ah the I don't mind transwomen really just the ones I don't like argument now.
Wouldn't you then agree that transwomen using women's spaces are just as much at danger of assault as natal women? And that the constant linking of transwomen to predatory males actually damages transwomen. So they are more at risk than natal women.
And that constantly insisting this is a major problem stirs up hatred for transpeople.

Ah the I don't mind transwomen really just the ones I don't like argument now.

That's your interpretation.

The problem we have is with a transwoman who has made it quite clear that those women who do not agree with her that men, women and children are social constructs are TERFS - a label she knows is offensive and uses it deliberately. That's the background to her becoming the head of a charity set up to deal with endometriosis which is a condition that affects, mostly, women. Many of whom will not agree with her socially constructed view of sex.

Also, her insistence (and the terminology used to enforce it) on entering female changing rooms and other spaces, is a stance which many women will probably find provocative.

So, no - we don't have an intrinsic problem with transwomen - but we do have a problem with Steph Richards.

Ah the I don't mind transwomen really just the ones I don't like argument now.

Ah, the ‘my attempt to silence them by a spurious claim that they were ‘trying’ to make arguments was quashed, so I will attempt to do it with sarcasm and a superior attitude’ defence.

Also, speaking for myself, I don't 'mind transwomen'. I am not a transphobe, despite what you may say. 'The ones I don't like', in fact the ones I object to strongly, are the ones who bend the language, impose themselves into women's spaces, render research irrelevant, cheat at sport and reduce women to 'menstruators' and 'birth givers'.

Dickens

Glorianny

Ah the I don't mind transwomen really just the ones I don't like argument now.
Wouldn't you then agree that transwomen using women's spaces are just as much at danger of assault as natal women? And that the constant linking of transwomen to predatory males actually damages transwomen. So they are more at risk than natal women.
And that constantly insisting this is a major problem stirs up hatred for transpeople.

Ah the I don't mind transwomen really just the ones I don't like argument now.

That's your interpretation.

The problem we have is with a transwoman who has made it quite clear that those women who do not agree with her that men, women and children are social constructs are TERFS - a label she knows is offensive and uses it deliberately. That's the background to her becoming the head of a charity set up to deal with endometriosis which is a condition that affects, mostly, women. Many of whom will not agree with her socially constructed view of sex.

Also, her insistence (and the terminology used to enforce it) on entering female changing rooms and other spaces, is a stance which many women will probably find provocative.

So, no - we don't have an intrinsic problem with transwomen - but we do have a problem with Steph Richards.

But I thought that beliefs didn't matter. That people could believe in God or not, you didn't have to agree with them. So what you are now saying is that unless someone's beliefs match yours they shouldn't be permitted to do a job, even though they bring a wealth of experience to that position. What about the women who believe transwomen are women don't they have a say? What about transmen (who some think are women) don't they have a say? What about non-binary people don't they have a say?
You are quite entitled to dislike what she says. You are not permitted to police her language- it's called free speech.
I thought the gender critical believed in that.