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

The figures are particularly clear about violent sexual assaults and sex. 97 %is committed by males. Lots of men are sexually assaulted too (by men) should they come into female spaces too.

Iam64

Glorianny - there is no valid way to compare male violence with the violence some women show. Generally,Men are more violent, they’re bigger and stronger so have the potential to intimidate and terrify women.

Of course men are more violent.However the concept that women have never been violent and therefore if a transwoman is, she is exhibiting male behaviour isn't true. Women have been,and can be, violent. There is evidence of it. However it has often been written out of history even by other women. One of the most violent suffragettes Kitty Marion was completely ignored in the first books written.

Transwomen are intimidated too.

Well done Dickens I so agree with your comments 👍

Either there is an issue with Male violence or there isnt. If there isnt then all men can be in all female spaces, it makes no difference to me whether its Eddie Izzard or Ricky Gervais I know they are both Male. All sorts of men are vulnerable to Male violence, they have no place in womens spaces either.

Glorianny

Dickens

The thing is it boils down to this, the problem for me and I suspect many other women - is men.

Male violence towards women is embedded in societies all over the world.

Of course, misogynist men don't always go so far as to commit acts of violence against women, but they harass, intimidate, challenge, and provoke. Nearly every woman in surveys conducted has admitted to being, at the very lest, the subject of unwanted and unasked for attention by men.

If you believe, as I do, that transwomen are inherently male, then they will always potentially be a threat in our confined and 'intimate' spaces. And that is why we are not discussing transmen, because they are not a threat to women.

I don't know what the answer is, other than transwomen being banned completely from these spaces. Even if they've had their 'bits' cut off. Sarah Jane Baker - without testicles - deems that the answer to a problem is violence against the offender - a typical male response (and one cheered on by the crowd).

Men have created this problem, and women are once again expected to either deal with it or accept it.

Why should men not be told that they must accept the appearance of transwomen in their toilets and changing rooms instead, and they must refrain from committing acts of violence or intimidation towards them? Why can't we put the onus on men to solve the problem that they have created? Let them deal with it. Let them learn to respect each others' rights instead of compromising women and making it our problem?

But transwomen are subjected to the same if not more violence than natal women. The concept seems to be "I think you are a man therefore you must take your chances". I can't see how that is at all feminist.
If someone looks like a woman they will necessarily be treated by society like a woman. They will suffer the same lack of opportunities, the same restrictions and the same levels of violence and assault.
I don't suppose any violent man asks a woman, "Are you natal? or Do you have a gender recognition certificate?. Because if you are one I might not bash you, but if you are the other I will."

One of the things that is being said about transwomen is that they have brought back to the feminist movement an acceptance of violence that hasn't been seen since the suffragette's bomb attacks. It isn't something I'm entirely comfortable with. But having decided sometime ago, when asked how far I thought I would have gone to get the vote, that I would have taken part in arson and bombing, I think it's possible I would be more active if I was more personally involved in this. So I don't think we can just say that transwomen being violent is a masculine thing, some women have used violence before.
We should remember Edith Garrud www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34425615

Violence against women be they natal or trans is our problem and some of us stand side by side with our trans sisters. Or would some people be happy if men stopped bashing natal women but carried on bashing transwomen? Not our problem has never been a reasonable response to any violence..

The concept seems to be "I think you are a man therefore you must take your chances". I can't see how that is at all feminist.

The concept is that men must learn, be trained, legally enforced - whatever - to stop using violence as a means to an end, on women, transwomen, and other men.

If someone looks like a woman they will necessarily be treated by society like a woman. They will suffer the same lack of opportunities, the same restrictions and the same levels of violence and assault.

Again - the problem is men. What excuse or reason do they have for behaving violently or intimidatingly towards someone who looks like, or is, a woman? None.

One of the things that is being said about transwomen is that they have brought back to the feminist movement an acceptance of violence that hasn't been seen since the suffragette's bomb attacks. It isn't something I'm entirely comfortable with. But having decided sometime ago, when asked how far I thought I would have gone to get the vote, that I would have taken part in arson and bombing, I think it's possible I would be more active if I was more personally involved in this.

But, yet again, the problem is men. Men who were opposed to women's suffrage. The violence was not carried out in the pursuit of misandry. Suffragettes didn't walk down the streets, go into other venues, to make explicit sexual remarks about men's appearance either to them or about them,nor did they threaten them with sexual assault.

Women are intimidated and attacked by misogynist men simply because they are women - for no other reason. And yes, a transwoman is likely to be similarly attacked because they look like one.

Violence against women be they natal or trans is our problem and some of us stand side by side with our trans sisters.

This I agree with. But the answer is for men to stop the violence - including violence towards other men. The answer is certainly not for our trans sisters to take part in it and threaten to punch women in the face for holding a view contrary to their own, nor to incite others to do it. Nor to mass together and hold placards threatening rape for the same reason.

There is an act committed by some men against lesbians which is called "correctional rape" - the assumption being that lesbians, in rejecting men, are insulting their manhood and therefore need 'correcting' through rape. What these transwomen are doing, and those that cheer them on, are suggesting 'correctional' violence (and rape) as a means to get TERFS to come round to their way of thinking. Not debate - that is censored, not discussion - that is no-platformed, but violence.

Glorianny, if I was in a crowd listening to a feminist speaking and she advocated violence towards the transgender community as a way of 'dealing' with them, I would walk away and inform the police. Those listening to SJB roared their approval. The activists may be a minority, but they appear to have a lot of support... support for a typical male response to people they don't like - hit them.

Not our problem has never been a reasonable response to any violence.

The perpetrators of violence are, mostly, men. They have to STOP IT. Our only part in this is to raise our sons not to be oafs (which I'm sure most on here do) and demand that the law does not find mitigating reasons why male violence (towards anyone) can be 'understood', explained, excused - or tolerated. And we have to call out unacceptable behaviour and attitudes by men, not remain silent - maybe we even have to start in infants' schools where attitudes toward women and girls begins to coalesce. And deal with pornography - though I do know that some transgender 'thinking' has it that working in such an industry is just plain old work like any other job. But young impressionable minds - kids as young as 6 years of age are watching it - are IMO damaged by what they look at. And none more so than girls who are not infrequently coerced into looking like and behaving like the 'star performers', by young boys and teens, and teased and bullied if they don't. Oh joy - young misogynists in the making whilst still at school!

I've gone on too long.

Dickens, no you haven’t gone on too long. I agree with every word you wrote.
I was particularly moved by your comment about kids as young as 6 years of age are watching it - are IMO damaged by what they look at

Working with child sexual abuse and exploitation was always challenging. The availability of all kinds of abusive pornography makes it even more so. Perpetrators use the ‘oh the saw it accidentally on a phone’ excuse with ease.

In 2018 the MOJ released figures showing half the people in prison who declare themselves transgender have been sentenced with one or more sexual offences. There is data confirming the vast majority of these trans sex offenders were born male. The conclusion is transgender women exhibit a male propensity to sexual crime that matches their birth sex, not their gender identity

Glorianny

Iam64

Glorianny - there is no valid way to compare male violence with the violence some women show. Generally,Men are more violent, they’re bigger and stronger so have the potential to intimidate and terrify women.

Of course men are more violent.However the concept that women have never been violent and therefore if a transwoman is, she is exhibiting male behaviour isn't true. Women have been,and can be, violent. There is evidence of it. However it has often been written out of history even by other women. One of the most violent suffragettes Kitty Marion was completely ignored in the first books written.

Transwomen are intimidated too.

Women aren’t as violent, don’t commit violent sexual offences to the extent men do

Glorianny says
However the concept that women have never been violent

Who has said that women are never violent?

and therefore if a transwoman is, she is exhibiting male behaviour isn't true

One part of your waffle is not a logical sequence of the other.

If a TW is violent, he is exhibiting male behaviour, because he is male.

He can’t be exhibiting female violence, because TW aren’t female.

Dickens, as ever you put things in an admirably clear and reasoned fashion. You certainly don’t go on too long. Keep it up!

Dickens

Glorianny

Dickens

The thing is it boils down to this, the problem for me and I suspect many other women - is men.

Male violence towards women is embedded in societies all over the world.

Of course, misogynist men don't always go so far as to commit acts of violence against women, but they harass, intimidate, challenge, and provoke. Nearly every woman in surveys conducted has admitted to being, at the very lest, the subject of unwanted and unasked for attention by men.

If you believe, as I do, that transwomen are inherently male, then they will always potentially be a threat in our confined and 'intimate' spaces. And that is why we are not discussing transmen, because they are not a threat to women.

I don't know what the answer is, other than transwomen being banned completely from these spaces. Even if they've had their 'bits' cut off. Sarah Jane Baker - without testicles - deems that the answer to a problem is violence against the offender - a typical male response (and one cheered on by the crowd).

Men have created this problem, and women are once again expected to either deal with it or accept it.

Why should men not be told that they must accept the appearance of transwomen in their toilets and changing rooms instead, and they must refrain from committing acts of violence or intimidation towards them? Why can't we put the onus on men to solve the problem that they have created? Let them deal with it. Let them learn to respect each others' rights instead of compromising women and making it our problem?

But transwomen are subjected to the same if not more violence than natal women. The concept seems to be "I think you are a man therefore you must take your chances". I can't see how that is at all feminist.
If someone looks like a woman they will necessarily be treated by society like a woman. They will suffer the same lack of opportunities, the same restrictions and the same levels of violence and assault.
I don't suppose any violent man asks a woman, "Are you natal? or Do you have a gender recognition certificate?. Because if you are one I might not bash you, but if you are the other I will."

One of the things that is being said about transwomen is that they have brought back to the feminist movement an acceptance of violence that hasn't been seen since the suffragette's bomb attacks. It isn't something I'm entirely comfortable with. But having decided sometime ago, when asked how far I thought I would have gone to get the vote, that I would have taken part in arson and bombing, I think it's possible I would be more active if I was more personally involved in this. So I don't think we can just say that transwomen being violent is a masculine thing, some women have used violence before.
We should remember Edith Garrud www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34425615

Violence against women be they natal or trans is our problem and some of us stand side by side with our trans sisters. Or would some people be happy if men stopped bashing natal women but carried on bashing transwomen? Not our problem has never been a reasonable response to any violence..

The concept seems to be "I think you are a man therefore you must take your chances". I can't see how that is at all feminist.

The concept is that men must learn, be trained, legally enforced - whatever - to stop using violence as a means to an end, on women, transwomen, and other men.

If someone looks like a woman they will necessarily be treated by society like a woman. They will suffer the same lack of opportunities, the same restrictions and the same levels of violence and assault.

Again - the problem is men. What excuse or reason do they have for behaving violently or intimidatingly towards someone who looks like, or is, a woman? None.

One of the things that is being said about transwomen is that they have brought back to the feminist movement an acceptance of violence that hasn't been seen since the suffragette's bomb attacks. It isn't something I'm entirely comfortable with. But having decided sometime ago, when asked how far I thought I would have gone to get the vote, that I would have taken part in arson and bombing, I think it's possible I would be more active if I was more personally involved in this.

But, yet again, the problem is men. Men who were opposed to women's suffrage. The violence was not carried out in the pursuit of misandry. Suffragettes didn't walk down the streets, go into other venues, to make explicit sexual remarks about men's appearance either to them or about them,nor did they threaten them with sexual assault.

Women are intimidated and attacked by misogynist men simply because they are women - for no other reason. And yes, a transwoman is likely to be similarly attacked because they look like one.

Violence against women be they natal or trans is our problem and some of us stand side by side with our trans sisters.

This I agree with. But the answer is for men to stop the violence - including violence towards other men. The answer is certainly not for our trans sisters to take part in it and threaten to punch women in the face for holding a view contrary to their own, nor to incite others to do it. Nor to mass together and hold placards threatening rape for the same reason.

There is an act committed by some men against lesbians which is called "correctional rape" - the assumption being that lesbians, in rejecting men, are insulting their manhood and therefore need 'correcting' through rape. What these transwomen are doing, and those that cheer them on, are suggesting 'correctional' violence (and rape) as a means to get TERFS to come round to their way of thinking. Not debate - that is censored, not discussion - that is no-platformed, but violence.

Glorianny, if I was in a crowd listening to a feminist speaking and she advocated violence towards the transgender community as a way of 'dealing' with them, I would walk away and inform the police. Those listening to SJB roared their approval. The activists may be a minority, but they appear to have a lot of support... support for a typical male response to people they don't like - hit them.

Not our problem has never been a reasonable response to any violence.

The perpetrators of violence are, mostly, men. They have to STOP IT. Our only part in this is to raise our sons not to be oafs (which I'm sure most on here do) and demand that the law does not find mitigating reasons why male violence (towards anyone) can be 'understood', explained, excused - or tolerated. And we have to call out unacceptable behaviour and attitudes by men, not remain silent - maybe we even have to start in infants' schools where attitudes toward women and girls begins to coalesce. And deal with pornography - though I do know that some transgender 'thinking' has it that working in such an industry is just plain old work like any other job. But young impressionable minds - kids as young as 6 years of age are watching it - are IMO damaged by what they look at. And none more so than girls who are not infrequently coerced into looking like and behaving like the 'star performers', by young boys and teens, and teased and bullied if they don't. Oh joy - young misogynists in the making whilst still at school!

I've gone on too long.

Well a very long diatribe about male violence with some completely irrelevant and upsetting images which are calculated to inflame. No one has mentioned rape until now. But let's be correct about this, transgender individuals are just, if not more ,liable to suffer sexual violence as natal women. The figures in the UK are not reliable and only started in 2019. But US data puts sexual assaults of transgender people as high as one out of two people.
ovc.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh226/files/pubs/forge/sexual_numbers.html

The suffragettes were not reacting. They deliberately and as a matter of policy set fires and set off bombs. It was a calculated use of violence as a tool for a political end. It was a tactic used by many other organisations at the time.

Of course violence is mostly men, but transwomen do not look like men, do not act like men and are therefore not treated as men by society. They are in appearance, in their actions, in the society they live in women. Trying to justify the level of abuse they suffer by implying it is nothing to do with anyone except men is ridiculous. It may be men administering the blows, but their violence is rooted in the discriminatory and belittling comments made by many women. Comments which establish and promote the idea that transgender people are in some way "other," are deviant and untrustworthy, and so deserve to suffer.
Interestingly the concept of transpeople as "other" by women is exactly the concept which Simone De Beauvoir says men have of women. It's sad to see women using it.

Men may administer the blows but their hatred is fueled by some women. As I think these threads illustrate.

Trans women are women.

Glorianny Women blaming other women for the actions of men is the antithesis of feminism.

Sorry, ASG that can only be true if you redefine what ‘woman’ means, so that it becomes an option that anyone can exercise. Many women are not prepared to be erased like that.

Glorianny Since you brought in Simone De Beauvoir....

AmberSpyGlass Transwomen are male, women are female. Equal as humans but different and not the same sex.

AmberSpyglass

Trans women are women.

It's a pity they can't be proud to be trans women, and happy in their own skin 😕

Of course violence is mostly men, but Some transwomen do not look like men, some do not act like men
But Some do, and it is that group, whose lies, cheating, and threatening behaviour, plus their vociferous followers who also enact violence towards AHF women who have caused the problems for those TW who don’t.
I keep saying this, but you keep insisting that people can’t tell.
Your point that people can’t tell means that precautions have to be taken which is why the demand for female spaces, sports, etc free from males -*any males including TW* has become needful.
Because of the actions of a few people, shops and airlines take precautions against all people including those who would do no harm, because they might be shoplifters or terrorists.
All those who actually are shoplifters or terrorists would lie if asked.

TW are male. Once a TW enters a female safe space, be it toilet, refuge or wherever, or enters a female sport, he is enacting a lie.
Liars are frequently violent when challenged.

It makes some people very uncomfortable when Male violence is discussed, but we are going to keep doing it. Women many who have experienced violence and in particular sexual violence will continue to talk about no matter who feels a bit hurt about it. No one is describing transwomen as other we are describing them as men. Oh and society does not for one second treat transwomen as women, society treats them as a special type of man.

AmberSpyglass
Trans women are women.

In the passage of time, when we are all bones and dust, archaeologists will identify male and female largely by their bones. The majority of women have wider pelvises. The majority of men's bone / joint surfaces are larger; and where muscle attaches to bone - there is more of it. Generally, the male skull is thicker, and heavier. There are other differences.
Your transwoman will, most likely, be identified as male.

V3ra
It's a pity they can't be proud to be trans women, and happy in their own skin.

It might not be widely proclaimed - but some are. Otherwise, what is 'Pride' about? There's nothing inherently wrong in identifying with the opposite sex - or not identifying with either, or - identifying with both at the same time. I haven't studied the matter, but I imagine such 'identification' has been going on for centuries.

Future archeologists would never be interested in digging any of us up when digital medical records exist and information about our generation is readily available on Google...

Even if they did, traces of hormone adjustments would likely be detectable.

Perhaps archeologists would also be interested to see the strives humanity made at the time to be inclusive and properly treat gender dysphoria

Some of those archeologists may be trans themselves living in an age where people no longer look sideways at people born with conditions such as gender dysphoria and treat them with the same kindness and dignity as anyone else.

Archeology tells us nothing about the person who was supported by those remains. Were they a teacher? A doctor? Did they have morals and treat others with kindness? Or did they spend their days on the internet spreading conspiracy theories and hostility about people they had never met and didn't understand?

Archeology will tell them nothing of the person and the person they were and how they navigated their life was everything

We have no idea what archaelogists in the future might do.

Our present thoughts, words and deeds might seem very quaint to people in the future.
Times change, but not necessarily for the better.

Glorianny

I'm not going to respond to your post. I've said all I intend to say in my diatribe.

You twist things to mean something other than intended - as others have pointed out - and then make accusations based on your own interpretation. To respond, point-by-point, would just be more of the same. It's futile.

Whether someone is a teacher or is kind or is a doctor doesn't change their sex. If I say the magic words it will have no impact on someones sex.

Perhaps someone will study the phenomenon of using generalised slurs to try to attack people during an internet discussion.

Galaxy

Whether someone is a teacher or is kind or is a doctor doesn't change their sex. If I say the magic words it will have no impact on someones sex.

I don't think anyone on here has argued that transwomen cannot be kind or nice human beings, or doctors, etc. I'm sure they can be, and are, all of those things - why should they not be!

I'm not sure why this aspect has been introduced - it's not what we are debating!

"The evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones.”

Dickens

Glorianny

I'm not going to respond to your post. I've said all I intend to say in my diatribe.

You twist things to mean something other than intended - as others have pointed out - and then make accusations based on your own interpretation. To respond, point-by-point, would just be more of the same. It's futile.

Agreed, Dickens. Don't take it to heart. The insults, twisting and gaslighting are par for the course, and you get used to it after a while. Readers can see through it, so whilst it may feel uncomfortable for a while, as you wonder if there is any truth in it, the important thing is that it is very clear what is going on to anyone reading the thread. Your post was not irrelevant, unless you think that women are irrelevant.