Deliberate and orchestrated silencing of trans rights supporters on GN

I had to look up the reason for and meaning of the term natal woman. Interested to read that it is a Trans term - whatever that means.

So why not use the term biological sex?

And the term gender neutral - does that mean that the role an individual conforms to neither the accepted gender roles.

That is interesting how do they behave differently from a man or woman?

Doodledog

I believe that misogyny does underpin the idea that womanhood is available to anyone, that safe spaces are not necessary and that the language should be changed to accommodate tiny numbers of people (eg pregnant transmen in maternity wards). It also explains the inability to understand why women would object to being asked to 'reframe the trauma' of rape, be worried at the idea of male sex-offenders sharing prison cells and furious at the idea of men competing with them in high level sport.

How could someone who cares about women believe that these things are ok? Sorry, but I stand by any posts I have made that have said so. The misogyny may well have been internalised, but it is there.

As for accusations - trisher it was only yesterday that you said that I had condoned violence because I pointed out that a poetry event had moved online, not been cancelled. I hadn't done so, and when I challenged the accusation, I was told that because I hadn't specifically posted that alleged threats of violence were wrong that I was as bad as those making the threats. I have also been called right wing, racist, homophobic and even Nazi at one point! My professionalism has been called into question, and the lived experience of my younger days doubted. Oh, and when I said that I was looking at Zoom screens with pronouns next to the participants' names, it was strongly implied that I was lying. All of these things were said or done by you, although you are not alone in resorting to such insults or slurs.

This whole thread is based on a false premise. I'm sure that it hasn't gone in quite the way it was intended, although I am pleased that (so far) it has remained civil. I am unable to let the victim-playing pass unchallenged, though - and I am certain that others who have followed 'trans threads' will have seen the things that I mention and will be nodding in agreement.

Have I actually said "safe spaces are not necessary" Doodledog has anyone?
Why is it mysogyny to consider that women is a gender construct that is delineated in society by certain sorts of behaviour and not a biological fact? Especially when the belief is not confined just to women but encompasses men? One of the problems with the gender critical is their insistance on focussing on transwomen and ignoring transmen until they ask for language to be changed to accommodate them. Then they cease to be women who matter and become people who can be ignored.
I think people should be treated as the gender they present as. That's how it has always worked. There is nothing new about transgenderism. People have been passing as the opposite gender to the one their body says they should be for centuries. The fact that there are now some individuals who choose to use this idea for nefarious purposes shouldn't stop us accepting and accommodating transpeople any more than a male paedophile stops us accepting men or an abusive mother stops us accepting women.

Whitewavemark2

And the term gender neutral - does that mean that the role an individual conforms to neither the accepted gender roles.

That is interesting how do they behave differently from a man or woman?

It means the individual refuses to be identified as either gender. They use a genderless name, use the pronun "they" and dress as they like. If you watched Pottery Throwdown AJ was gender neutral. Took me a bit to pick it up and when their mother called them "they" I was confused for a bit

Trisher says,
Firstly I accept totally that there are places and occasions when transwomen may not be welcome and the law actually covers this saying even if they have a GRC they can be excluded if women would not use the service if they were present.
Next step.

They can be excluded if women wouldn’t use the service if they (transwomen) we’re present.
Wrong way round. If women would not use the service if a male was present, make it so that women don’t have to discover a man is present in the toilet, the hospital ward, the changing room etc making the service unusable.
The fact that that rule needs to be made because of a small % of tw is not women’s fault.
Perhaps if those supporting ALL tw made it clear they did NOT support those ill-intentioned TW (easy) and instead supported arrangements to protect females from the ill-intentioned tw, there would be some progress.

trisher

Whitewavemark2

And the term gender neutral - does that mean that the role an individual conforms to neither the accepted gender roles.

That is interesting how do they behave differently from a man or woman?

It means the individual refuses to be identified as either gender. They use a genderless name, use the pronun "they" and dress as they like. If you watched Pottery Throwdown AJ was gender neutral. Took me a bit to pick it up and when their mother called them "they" I was confused for a bit

Oh I see. A new social construct.

It will be interested to see what happens to that construct after a number of years have passed and whether it stands the test of time.

What is interesting in that idea is how that person behaves, as there is no societal model for that role as far as. I am award. Except perhaps a Hindu god - they are always so interesting I think.

I assume that they do not reject their biological sex?

Women have been rejecting gender roles for decades.

If women would not use the service if a male was present, make it so that women don’t have to discover a man is present in the toilet, the hospital ward, the changing room etc making the service unusable. The fact that that rule needs to be made because of a small % of tw is not women’s fault. Perhaps if those supporting ALL tw made it clear they did NOT support those ill-intentioned TW (easy) and instead supported arrangements to protect females from the ill-intentioned tw, there would be some progress.

Well said, Molly. If this came to pass, so much of the disagreement would dissipate. As usual, however, it is women who are expected to do the legwork when it comes to accommodating male interests, and many of us have just had enough. I think that a lot of women might possibly let things pass for themselves, but when they think about the impact on their daughters and granddaughters they come out fighting. Maternal instinct is a female trait that should never be underestimated ?

Galaxy

Women have been rejecting gender roles for decades.

That's intresting Galaxy but is it true? One of the gender roles is that women take care of children. The number of men helping care for children has increased but it is still the exception. Now you could argue that men impose this on women and they have no choice. But there is evidence that very well qualified women choose to adapt or change their own career path in order to accommodate child care. Now this could be for a number of reasons but it certainly isn't "rejecting gender roles". I would say that women's roles have been changing and adapting (sometimes because it suited the events of the times) but not that women have as a whole rejected them. I would acknowledge that there are some women who have rejected the gender roles of their time but they are generally not the norm.

I think having children is decreasing quite significantly in the young, one way of rejecting that particular dilemma.

WWM2, I know a few 'gender-neutral/non-binary' people. They are all young, and (in my entirely inexpert opinion) mostly Autistic. They (boys and girls) wear jeans, t shirts and waistcoats and have Eton crops or undercuts with slightly spiky tops. Mostly they are very introverted - to the point of social anxiety - and more often than not have same-sex partners.

Time will tell whether they will come out as gay down the line.

I actually meant to say feminists rather than women, I know they can be one and the same

Galaxy

Women have been rejecting gender roles for decades.

Yes that is true, but I’m not aware that they have ever identified as anything other than women, certainly not as gender neutral.

But as I said it will be interesting to see how this new gender develops and how it impinges on societal rules on sexual behaviour. Although, given that some of that behaviour I have argued is innate it is a bit if a difficult one.

I think really that just as we can remember outlandish and pointless behaviour and constructs when our generation introduced the concept of feminism, (I am aware of people like - bugger senior moment - Mary someone in the nineteenth century) this may well go the same way, as the idea of Trans develops.

I may add that I am fully supportive of the feminist idea - well at least what I understand as such, as undoubtedly the concept has moved on.

I'm not convinced that maternal instinct is a gender construct. It's hard to be sure, but I'm willing to believe that it is at least partly biological. It's not guaranteed to be there in all women, and many men are also nurturing types, but on the whole I think it's more about sex than gender.

Doodledog

*If women would not use the service if a male was present, make it so that women don’t have to discover a man is present in the toilet, the hospital ward, the changing room etc making the service unusable. The fact that that rule needs to be made because of a small % of tw is not women’s fault. Perhaps if those supporting ALL tw made it clear they did NOT support those ill-intentioned TW (easy) and instead supported arrangements to protect females from the ill-intentioned tw, there would be some progress.*

Well said, Molly. If this came to pass, so much of the disagreement would dissipate. As usual, however, it is women who are expected to do the legwork when it comes to accommodating male interests, and many of us have just had enough. I think that a lot of women might possibly let things pass for themselves, but when they think about the impact on their daughters and granddaughters they come out fighting. Maternal instinct is a female trait that should never be underestimated ?

^They can be excluded if women wouldn’t use the service if they (transwomen) we’re present.
Wrong way round. If women would not use the service if a male was present, make it so that women don’t have to discover a man is present in the toilet, the hospital ward, the changing room etc making the service unusable.
The fact that that rule needs to be made because of a small % of tw is not women’s fault.^
So those of us who don't mind if a transwoman is using a facility don't count. Only people with restrictive and discriminatory views count? I don't mind if a transwomen is in the next cubicle when I'm trying on clothes. My mum spent 3 months in a huge hospital ward which seperated the sexes into bays but which was mixed. There were no problems (unless you regard a woman with dementia wandering into all the bays as a problem) /. There were many more women patients than men. It was easy to accommodate more women. They just changed the bays. How long would women have to wait if the beds were assigned by sex and not changeable? I don't want restrictions which may seem to protect me but actually do no such thing and just encourage the belief that women are nothing but victims who need protection. It leads to dangerous philosophies and the possibility of real restrictions.

The thing is trisher its about consent so I might not mind all sorts of things but I cant give consent for other women.

Using a mixed hospital ward is a good example of how mixed sex environments don’t work well trisher. Patients dislike the environment, it makes them feel vulnerable. Changing a male bay to a female bay or vice versa to accommodate patient mix causes issues with toilets in particular, and patients constantly wander into the wrong areas. Assaults by patients with confusion is quite common. That is why hospitals are now built with single en-suite rooms.

Galaxy

The thing is trisher its about consent so I might not mind all sorts of things but I cant give consent for other women.

But I'm not giving consent Galaxy don't I count?

So those of us who don't mind if a transwoman is using a facility don't count. Only people with restrictive and discriminatory views count?
Nobody said that - there is no need to take everything so personally. And the 'restrictive and discriminatory views' dig is unnecessary, too. If you think that is what Molly and I were being, why not explain why, as I did when I stood by my misogyny opinion? That way, we could respond if we felt that it was unjust, or at least explain our point of view.

Thinly-veiled digs like that are what give these threads the reputation for getting nasty, and as I say, I really don't think that most of them come from the GC 'side'. People can only take so much, and it's understandable if they fight back when on the receiving end of such unpleasant comments.

Its the consent to being in a space with men say in a refuge or prison. If you want to be in a mans space no one is stopping your consent to that as long as the men are ok with it.

Casdon

Using a mixed hospital ward is a good example of how mixed sex environments don’t work well trisher. Patients dislike the environment, it makes them feel vulnerable. Changing a male bay to a female bay or vice versa to accommodate patient mix causes issues with toilets in particular, and patients constantly wander into the wrong areas. Assaults by patients with confusion is quite common. That is why hospitals are now built with single en-suite rooms.

Doesn't exactly work like this. The bays have their own washing and toilet facilities which are what used to be known as unisex now I think gender neutral. There were single en-suite rooms, used when patients had infections and needed barrier nursing or extra care. My mother spent a couple of weeks in one. She detereorated considerably because of the isolation. We spent much longer than most families there but she still suffered and became delusional. When she went back into her bay she was fine.

But surely you understand that a woman who had been raped might feel differently.

Doodledog if you stop some people accessing something what else is that but "restrictive"?
If you examine people and only allow people with certain characteristics to do something what else is it but "discriminatory"?
I think you have already brought in allegations from another thread which I chose to ignore (strictly against the rules) so perhaps I'm not the one bringing acrimony into this discussion

It does work exactly like that in most hospitals trisher, having worked in NHS hospitals for over 40 years I think I do know the system. Most have a fixed number of toilet facilities, marked by sex spread through the ward. When bays change sex patients go to the nearest available toilet for their sex. The designation of the toilets isn’t ever changed, because it causes more confusion to already confused patients to have to change which facility they use.

I mentioned things from another thread in response to your doing the same?. You mentioned having been called mysogynist (ages ago) as though you are the victim here, and I reminded you of some of the things you have called me recently. I'm not attempting to be acrimonious - I just object to being cast as someone who deliberately orchestrates ways of silencing those who support trans rights.

To restrict access to women's spaces is not the same as having restrictive views. It is, in fact, safeguarding when those spaces are prison cells and the people wanting access are male sex-offenders. IMO, discrimination is absolutely necessary in those circumstances - acting with discrimination is not the same as having discriminatory views.