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

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

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.

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.

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!

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.

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)?

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.

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.

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

"Who am I to judge?".

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.

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!......

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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'.

The usual diatribe about transwomen

The usual diatribe about anyone who doesn’t accept the current TW use of lying to cheat in sport, etc, etc.

In the past living as a woman didn’t involve the actions and demands perpetrated by those TW we now hear so much about.
They did not attack females, cheat in sport, make untruthful claims about being able to change sex, demand that words like mother, or breast-feeding were changed, claim to have period pains etc.

It’s interesting to wonder, do these violent or cheating TW who claim to be women think that the way women are treated by them, is the way women should be treated?
Do they believe that women who tell the truth -that sex is immutable, should be deplatformed, removed from office, threatened or actually physically harmed?
Is being under attack by males how they picture their lives as the women they purport to be?
Or do they think-as current actions seem to indicate- that as male women, they will be able to protect themselves from the actions of the TW and fans currently attacking females?

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?

Doodledog

*The usual diatribe about transwomen.* No need to be rude.

There are transmen and non-binary people. Quite where they fit in to this "men are taking over everything philosopy" I have yet to discover. In fact they don't.
Well that depends on your perspective. Transmen are 'identifying' into maleness - the head of the patriarchy, and as such are clearly not choosing to fight for women. Non-binary people seem to be rejecting gender by accepting that it exists. How can one be 'non-binary' unless there is a binary to reject? Again, by opting out, non-binary people are actively rejecting what is female, (and male, obviously, but we are addressing how this impacts on women) so again, are not, by definition, supporting women.
Not only the trans agenda. If they support transpeople women are denigrated as misogynistic by some who say they aren't TERFs but have a similar agenda.. Those designated women but want to be men or are non-binary, well they are just ignored. Only those who agree are respected. Those who don't comply with the concept that men are taking over, simply don't count.
How do you know who other people respect? Or who is ignored? That is a ludicrous generalisation, with another ill-concealed dig ('some who say they aren't TERFs', is reminiscent of 'Brutus is an honourable man').

Speaking for myself, I respect those who are honest and say what they mean. Pretending that TWAW, and a refusal to recognise that this means that femaleness has been reduced to an option that anyone can take, and the things that make us women are irrelevancies, is neither honest nor meaningful.

A transperson of any persuasion who says 'I am trans and therefore a man/woman who would like to 'live as' a woman/man is honest and straightforward (insofar as that aspect of them is concerned, at least). Someone saying 'I am a woman, despite the fact that I have a penis, male gametes and a male physique, and anyone who refuses to join in my fantasy is phobic' is not.

Well first of all not all men are complicit or part of the patriarchy. There are even feminist men. This drawing of lines and insisting on absolutes isn't compatible with real life.
Even if transmen are identifying with the patriarchy I would consider that is their right and that is nothing to do with gender. Many natal women identify with the patriarchy (Margaret Thatcher for example).
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. It is something which affects both sexes.
As for transmen being ignored, every time a post insists that the issue is solely to do with transwomen, transmen and non-binary people are ignored . This is a people issue.

I have no idea what the things that make us women are. I share some things with some women. I share some things with some natal women. I share some things with some transwomen.
As for what's in someone's pants. I have often been accused of obsessing about this. I really don't. I don't know what's in most people's and I don't want to know.
Few people examine what's inside most judge from external appearances and designate people man, or woman, or unknown, from that.

I am pro a womans right to choose but guess what I think women who dont believe in abortion are entitled to express their views and be treated with consideration.

What on earth do you mean. Lots of women hold completely different views to me this doesnt mean they dont deserve consideration. I am an atheist I think Christian women deserve consideration, I just dont believe what they do.

Galaxy

I am not sure how many times I have pointed out that the last thing gender critical people do is ignore transmen. I think this may be the billionth time I have pointed this out.

Could you explain to me exactly how transmen fit into this "men are taking things from women" then, please.
Because as I understand it the gender critical think they are women, just not women whose views deserve consideration. Which basically means some women are equal and some aren't.