Deliberate and orchestrated silencing of trans rights supporters on GN

I do not think that the small percentage of trans womens (1% of population I believe, happy to be corrected) rights should ride rough shod over natal born women.

Women have been fighting for years and years for their safe places, and we are not about to see them disappear or be opened up to men.

I dont think its a GC only space. I see feisty debates on royalty, politics, dogs (it gets very heated over dogs), I dont see anyone claiming to be silenced on those threads because there are differences of opinions.

Urmstongran

Trans protesters shout down a feminist group meeting discussing single-sex spaces is Manchester yesterday.
Feminist campaigners wanting to discuss single-sex spaces was hijacked by trans activists, reportedly forcing police to intervene and help attendees leave the venue.

Thanks urmstongran, one of those (rare) occasions when we agree on politics.

I know it’s a hot topic but we should be able to talk about it without being unpleasant
Yes indeed we should but it works both ways. It’s the abuse from a noisy, abusive group of transactivists that is a key factor in the unease expressed by those of us dismissed as Gender Critical. We are the wrong kind of feminist. We don’t care about the rights of trans people. Not true of course but repeated endlessly.

personal attacks and at times personal insults honestly where were these ? I guess I must have missed them. I’ve admittedly left threads because a)I’m confused about self identifying, intersexual feminism etc. and b) as I said before you and others are so quick to call posters transphobic when they express their doubts rather than answering and explaining. Eg Adunas post ?

'Deliberate and orchestrated'?? Really? So nobody else is entitled to have a point or to dare to disagree? Reminds me of something...

Today I read that transactivists have said that a Zoom conference run by Great Ormond Street about gender dysphoria is "unsafe" for them as there are other participants taking part who's views don't echo theirs!

True enough Galaxy. But unless GN is going to be a GGJ only space, there has to be room for *civil discussion.

Civil discussion is difficult when people are uncivil and constantly refer to others in blanket terms, like GC whether they claim to be or not.
Difficult when posters persistently aver that a lie is the truth. Some posters shout (capitals) that TWAW. I can more truthfully and accurately answer you
Trans Women Are Transwomen.
That’s not harmful to anyone. It’s not discriminatory because it’s the truth.

Oh God forbid there might be disagreement!!

Equality with whom? - Equality. With other humans. Treated equally. Equal rights to healthcare, employment, essential services.

Established by what means? - Legally and in society.

These are core tenets of feminist. And this is why, as an intersectional feminist, I believe these should be extended these to all.

Galaxy

I dont think its a GC only space. I see feisty debates on royalty, politics, dogs (it gets very heated over dogs), I dont see anyone claiming to be silenced on those threads because there are differences of opinions.

But unless GN is going to be a GGJ only space, there has to be room for *civil discussion.

1) Why start being rude Mollygo?

2) How can you take exception at discussions remaining civil and polite?

Transpeople absolutely dont have equal access to healthcare, as gender critical feminists have been saying for by my reckoning at least the last 5 years. The investigations into standards of healthcare provision are partly due to the voices of feminists on this issue and the brave whistleblowers.

Trans Women Are Transwomen.
That’s not harmful to anyone. It’s not discriminatory because it’s the truth.

A couple of points to make. The first, that is your perspective and opinion and I have no issue with you having an opposing POV to me.

But announcing an opinion as truth is contradictory.

The big question, as I see it, is ‘what is a woman?’, but this never gets answered.

Transwomen say that despite being born male they ‘identify’ as female. I would like to know, in the interests of debate, what that means, please.

How can trans rights activists insist on the right to be a woman (or a man) if they can’t say what that means? How can they claim that what it means to be female is not being diluted by their actions if they don’t know what being female means?

It seems to me that the question is avoided at all costs so that there is ‘wriggle room’, and the definition can shift to whatever they want it to mean at a given time.

So - simple question- can we please have a definition of ‘woman’? How does someone ’know’ that that is what they are, (or what they should be, when it is clear that biologically they are not)?

It seems the whole point of this thread is not to open debate at all.

This is going well isn't it?

Where have I been rude GGJ, unless you mean suggesting that you want this to be a GGJ only space by refuting attempts at civil discussion if they don’t agree with you.

Trans Women Are Transwomen.
That’s not harmful to anyone. It’s not discriminatory because it’s the truth.

A couple of points to make. The first, that is your perspective and opinion and I have no issue with you having an opposing POV to me.

But announcing an opinion as truth is contradictory.
Trans Women Are Trans Women. How is that an opinion? It’s the truth, unlike Trans Women are Women, which is an untruth because Women are AHF and TW are not.

GagaJo

Equality with whom? - Equality. With other humans. Treated equally. Equal rights to healthcare, employment, essential services.

Established by what means? - Legally and in society.

These are core tenets of feminist. And this is why, as an intersectional feminist, I believe these should be extended these to all.

Ok - In what way(s) are transpeople not equal, treated equally, denied access to healthcare employment or essential services?

These are tenets of decency, incidentally. Many people believe that human rights should be extended to all - you can’t claim that view for intersectional feminists alone!

I see no deliberate and orchestrated silencing - that implies there's behind the scenes colluding.

What I do see is many posters are like me and of the opinion that a person with a penis is not a woman, no matter how that person self-identifies.

Some things I can't be budged on.

I think most people accept that the majority of transwomen are not part of the vociferous minority who seem hell bent on making life very uncomfortable/dangerous for natal women. There have been several cases of natal women being punched and physically assaulted by aggressive transwomen at rallies.

The case of the woman who was raped on a hospital ward and then that was denied on the basis of there weren't any men present highlights the fear of such a crime happening if female spaces are removed. Ok so such a case maybe rare, but once is enough and in the case of Karen White that person assaulted four women whilst they were in a woman's prison. I don't think it's an overreaction by women per se to have such fears and to express them. Of course MN is a host to many of these arguments, the posters there are mainly a younger demographic than those here and many will have adolescent daughters who are more likely to be affected by the loss of female only spaces that women of our generation have taken for granted. Talking of MN there was a poster on that site who got hauled off by the police in front of her young children for saying something along the lines on a Twitter spat that she didn't believe that a transwoman was a woman. That's an opinion! I wouldn't call it a hate crime. It's amazing to compare the heavy handiness around that perceived transgression compared to the denial on the part of the hospital trust who accused the rape victim on the women only hospital ward, possibly quite ill, of lying about what had happened to her. Which brings to mind another injustice surrounding transwomen issues, of how crimes are recorded as being committed by a woman when in fact that person will have male genitalia.

Then of course there is the sheer unfairness of transwomen competing in competitive sports.

It's quite obvious that most concerns raised are apropos of transwomen and NOT transmen who really aren't seen as a threat, could it be that male traits of aggression are more prevalent in male of the species and it's clear that a small element of transwomen retain those male characteristics and are often spoiling for a fight.

Nannee49

It seems the whole point of this thread is not to open debate at all.

It is certainly doing what I suspected it would - which is to let readers see where the goading and silencing is coming from.

Maybe there will be more sensible debate when there is an answer to the ’what is a woman’ question, though. Without that as a baseline it’s always going to be impossible. The so-called ‘gender critical’ view is that a woman is an adult human female. We just need the TRA definition to clarify where the differences in our viewpoints lie.

It's great to see the fence sitters on here today and hear what they think.

It would certainly be a good starting point Doodledog.
It concerns me that I hesitated to agree and respond to your post in case there's the view that a cohort is being formed rather than completely disparate individuals open to listening and questioning.

Nannee49

It seems the whole point of this thread is not to open debate at all.

Or to continue an argument.

Re my first comment.
Can someone who labels themselves an ‘intersectional feminist’ please tell me where they have got the idea intersectional feminism includes transwomen from?
I can’t find a source.

Thank you

No way is the response “deliberate and orchestrated”, much less than the pro trans lobby I would surmise. Very few have any problem with anyone who wants to wear what they like or call themselves what they like- that’s fine. What many people object to is the idea you can “be” something you biologically aren’t and in doing so disadvantage others. Someone who is 40 years old may “identify” as a 5 year old, but we wouldn’t collude and say “Ok then, off to primary school”, we’d think they needed psychological help.

No one will be getting an argument from me as I am in a complete muddle about the whole issue.

I need to go back to basics, whatever they are, and try and sort the whole thing out.