Deliberate and orchestrated silencing of trans rights supporters on GN

Trans people should be able to do sport and they should be able to participate in events celebrating their journey to womanhood.... And journey to manhood if that's a thing

I think sports can be organised fairly otherwise we wouldn't have the paraolympics

I think a trans person's journey to becoming their authentic selves is worth celebrating and they deserve their place in history too

VS Not listening to what people actually say is effectively silencing them.

Not reading what people actually say is effectively silencing them.

I didn’t ask about women because by some patriarchal juggling, that word now has to include males.
my post, which you evidently didn’t read so I’ll post it again said,

If I ask on here if safe spaces for AHF should be kept or set up ie needed without any further qualification?

How many posters would say yes there should be safe spaces for AHF?

How many would say, no there is no need for safe spaces for AHF?

How many would hedge and haver by adding ‘if’ or terms under which they feel the safe spaces are needed?
Or twist my words to suit their purpose?

What would you answer? Yes? No? Hedge? Twist?

Predictably, I would say that yes, we need single sex spaces. I suppose I would qualify that slightly, as I don't think we need to separate by sex all the time - mostly it doesn't matter.

I think they should be there when women feel vulnerable - so when they are undressed, when they are distressed, ill, incapacitated and so on, and when they would be at a disadvantage because of a sex-based strength differential. We don't need single-sex libraries or cake shops, but we do need single-sex hospital wards and prisons. We definitely need sex-based sports, and where an Arts event is intended to celebrate women, I would argue that a common-sense approach is needed, with the benefit of any doubt falling on the side of keeping it to females. As I said on another thread, something like a poetry event to celebrate womanhood could include a poet who lives as a woman, but not one with a beard and a misogynist attitude. It is sometimes nuanced, but the Herstory debacle most certainly wasn't!

You are reading something into it that's not there....

I've always agreed women should have safe spaces.

Whether or not that includes trans women is not my business. I wouldn't tell victims of trauma who they should share spaces with during recovery

I can think of one post without even looking for it, which ‘qualified’ the keep safe spaces for women by adding “if needed”.
So who is the arbiter of whether they are needed or not? The AHF who need them? Or someone else?
If I ask on here if safe spaces for AHF should be kept or set up ie needed without any further qualification.

How many posters would say yes there should be safe spaces for AHF?

How many would say, no there is no need for safe spaces for AHF?

How many would hedge and haver by adding ‘if’ or terms under which they feel the safe spaces are needed?

What would you answer? Yes? No? or hedge?

Except that's not true Mollygoand you are lumping us into one basket which is where the OP comes in.

Not listening to what people actually say is effectively silencing them

I’ve appreciated the more civil approach of the OP side. I thought it would be just as appropriate to have opened a thread entitled Deliberate and Orchestrated silencing of female rights supporters on GN. The attacks on AHF supporters appear more deliberate and less willing to concede anything, using ideas like , ‘I don’t wish harm on females’ but without being willing to agree safe spaces for AHF should remain.

Fair enough. Nice to be civil ??

Maybe not, but (a) I'm being upfront, not snarky, and (b) I was talking about the neutral observers - obviously I couldn't possibly comment on the opinions of 'the opposite side' .

Doodledog, I don't see you correcting the opposite side on here when they make statements about hostility. So not exactly an unbiased perspective.

I try my best Whitewavenark2

To be fair, I think that's a bit disingenuous, GagaJo.

As a number of people who don't usually post on these threads have pointed out, the mocking and jeering are not at all one-sided, and nor is the shouting down.

I agree that it's great when it doesn't, but don't push your luck .

M0nica

GagaJo Have you had time to investigate which GN members have been making orchestrated attacks on you and others on here who are not 'intersectional feminsts', whatever that may be. I haven't a clue, although I have been accused of being one.

MOnica, I know exactly who those individuals are. They've done it too many times for me to be in any doubt.

However, I am delighted to be able to say that recently (the last week or so) it seems to have been a lot more civil. And that was all I wanted really. I have no problem with people who have a different belief system to me. But I don't expect that any of us should to be mocked, jeered at, or shouted down. And it isn't happening at the moment, which is great.

Smileless2012

Yes, it can be bad enough posting on here as you say Doodledog but we do don't we.

Yes, for better or worse

But as I say, what I say on here doesn't matter. I'm not going to lose my livelihood if you (or anyone else) disagrees with me, thinks I'm a idiot or twists my words so that I am saying that transpeople are devil spawn (I'm not saying that!!!) I don't know how many people read GN, but not as many as read The Mail, and of those who do read a lot are bored of trans threads - it's not remotely the same as a Laura Kuenssberg interview on primetime TV. There is a lot more at stake for Starmer et al.

I think that a lot of people aren't particularly bothered about trans issues. Unless people know someone who has transitioned, they will see it as an irrelevance, and a lot of people will buy the facile (but ubiquitous) 'be kind' message and see it as being 'inclusive', without realising the wider implications.

I do think that the sport incidents will turn the tide though. No rational person can think that it's fair for a 6 foot man to compete against a woman of 5 foot 3, and sports fans like fairness. The trans lobby has overplayed its hand with this one, and the message will spread to other areas, I'm sure.

Please let’s not have any expressions of surprise or astonishment about this. The 2004 Gender Recognition act came about because of and to suit
.
.
.
MEN!
The decision to use the term for AHF was made by
.
.
.
MEN.
The trans now, who want to use the word women are . . . Yes, you guessed it. MEN!
Now tell me that that isn’t patriarchy in power.

Starmer and the other Labour politicians mentioned are keen to avoid becoming the targets of the noisy trans activists. They don’t want their words twisted, want to avoid being labelled in the way gender critical people are.
I can’t imagine Starmer changing whatever his mind is in response to emails. I do believe it’s important not only those who make most noise are heard

Yes, it can be bad enough posting on here as you say Doodledog but we do don't we.

FarNorth

Whitewavemark2

So the young male, who at pre-puberty is uncomfortable in his assigned gender role.

My question is, what is pushing him to try to change his gender.

Is it simply a rejection of his gender or is it something in his biology?

Now I am stuck. As I don’t know. It makes a huge difference in the answer to this as one is a preference and the other is predetermined I think.

Do you mean "What is pushing him to try to change his sex?" ?

He can change his gender by simply behaving & presenting himself in non-stereotypical ways.
He can't change his sex but many are encouraged to try to resemble the opposite sex.

No I chose my words very carefully, because I am not clear and neither are the scientists that it is biology that is pushing the rejection of the sex of an individual.

He's trying not to put himself in a position where his words can be twisted to sound as though he's saying that TWANW, and that will then be further twisted to make him into a 'transphobe' (which to some is simply anyone who doesn't agree that sex can be changed by uttering magic words).

I get it - I really do. It can be bad enough posting on here, knowing that some eejit is going to come along and say that because I said that laws exist to protect people against serial killers (they do) I think that transpeople are serial killers (I don't), or that I am a Nazi sympathiser, or a racist or whatever (I'm neither). And I'm not posting on here for a living - I'm just pootling about online when I'm not working. Absolutely nothing depends on my posts or opinions.

Starmer (and Lammy and Dodds and the rest of them) have to be so careful, as the last thing they need is to have every interview turned into a defence of something they didn't say - they have far more wide-reaching issues to deal with.

I very much doubt that they don't know what a cervix is, or that they believe that chanting a mantra can change someone's sex. Of course they don't. They are playing a game that they won't want to play, but can't afford to lose. It's madness, and it's divisive, but there's not a lot they can do but try to play it to win.

How can anyone respect KS if he can't or wont answer such a straightforward question?

GrannyGravy13

A woman doesn’t have a penis, never has, never will.

??? post of the day

FarNorth

Whitewavemark2 says this on page 3 of this thread :

By the time the child is at school it is entirely established in its gender role.

That seems a very depressing thought to me.
What happened to "anyone can have whatever interests teyat want, dress how they choose etc"?

I know that many children are encouraged to fit stereotypes and I'm sure that this is behind many of the claims that a child is 'trans'.
The limited thinking of adults leads to those adults deciding that a child is 'trans' because they don't fit the desired stereotypes.

No it isn’t as simple as stereotyping.

I haven’t got the research to hand, someone may have it on here, but it has been established that boy and girl babies are treated differently. There are different expectations, and unconscious bias between the two sexes. So you may consciously encourage neutral behaviour in a child, like choice of toys etc, but if you watch pre-school children at play the difference in their behaviour is clear.

A woman doesn’t have a penis, never has, never will.

KS was asked “Can a woman have a penis?” Instead of answering yes or no, he waffled his way through a reply which didn’t answer the question in any shape or form. So how can we know what his personal beliefs are? Imo, he is not worthy of respect.

We don't know what his personal beliefs are. Do not assume they correspond with you own. We don't know because he won't tell us.

Plus, he's changed his mind about the pledges he made to get elected as leader, who knows what he really believes about anything.