The law as it stands on sex, Part 2

Ilovecheese

I have seen another new word used for women "cishet" which I don't understand and looks even more made up than "cis".

It is Ilovecheese a contraction of cis-heterosexual. Which is hilarious since those that love to use it comply with Stonewall's opinion that people have gender based attraction not biological sex attraction.

VioletSky

doodledog

I'm not going to argue about what I meant because I am a 100% knowledgeable expert on what I mean. So I have saved you the trouble and reported my own comment for consideration by gransnet.

It's not right for you to tell me what I meant and use that to insult me unfairly

That's 1 comment, 1 thread and 1 of my comments.

Let's hope it stays that way

I don't really understand why you are reporting yourself. If you want your post removed, I believe you can just ask them to do that. ?

Well sorry if you don't want to be called "cis" that's fine I won't call you it. However you cannot police my language much as you might like to. So if I continue to use the term "cis" as a term for women who were born women, well sorry you are just going to have to put up with it. Just as I have had to put up with being accused of being mysoginistic because I question discrimination, patriarchal because I support minorities and numerous other insults which trip so glibly off the tongues of some posters on these threads.
If you want me to stop using tems like "cis" well try demonstrating some solidarity with women who don't hold your views, acknowledge that actually it is neither as clear or as one sided as many of you seem to imagine. That limiting the debate to transwomen when there is a wider question of transgenderism is just some strange phenomena that seems now to be attemptiing to claim the credit for something which has never actually been a major issue or actually proved as far as I'm concerned. Are there probably some transwomen who don't like women, undoubtedly, just as there are men who don't like women and women who don't like women (Particularly women who will argue). Have the transwomen who don't like women taken anything from me? Well not that I know of. Perhaps they tried, but I don't see that. What I see is an attempt to accommodate fairly and reasonably a group of people who have been marginalised in the past. And in that attempt mistakes have been made, but imagining this was deliberate or anything more than just a period of adjustment is ludicrous.

And before anyone brings up another case of a sexual predator. They exist, they always have. Some of them are mentally ill some of them use anything available to justify and enable them to achieve what they wish. Just as all men are not paedophiles all transwomen are not predators. If you accept the former why not accept the latter and stop using abuse to vilify transwomen. Because by doing so you sow seeds of discrimination and hatred which lead to far worse abuse. And there is absolutely nothing feminist about that.

This constant referencing to screen shots being taken and keeping a tally of reports made, by whom, when and where feels vaguely threatening and makes me very uncomfortable. Not conducive to any debate on any subject and creates a toxic atmosphere.

"demonstrating some solidarity with women who don't hold your views" works both ways trisher and telling women that they'll just have to put up with it if you refer to women as cis, when posting on theses threads, despite being asked not too, demonstrates that you don't practice what you preach.

Of course, if you mean when you say "I won't call you it" you mean when posting on GN, that would I'm sure be appreciated.

I discuss male violence as part of feminism. It makes some people very uncomfortable. Not all men not all men etc etc. Its impossible to explore womens oppression if you dont discuss male violence because some oppression is linked to that violence.

I agree Chewbacca. Making people feel uncomfortable is unacceptable and surely must be against GN guidelines.

So should women just pipe down trisher? Accept that males will be amongst us in places that we'd rather they were not? Accept that when they've committed the most heinous acts against us, if they claim that they're "one of us", we should accept it with a smile and trot on? Should we smile and accept that we have little chance of winning in any competitive sport because the 6'2", 18 stone bloke with a six pack and a beard says he's "one of us"? Should we smile with gratitude when the rape counsellor sent to support us after that particularly vicious assault, is a bloke in a wig who first wants us to get our silly little heads to accept that he's "one of us"?

Ain't gonna happen.

trisher. Of course not all biological women think the same, and no reason why they should.

Any subject, be it this, politics, football, religion, or whatever, you will always find disagreement, even amongst the same biological sex, because that's society.

But, I would now say the majority of biological women do not want their (previously) female spaces "invaded" by biological men.

Nor do they wish to be re-titled.

They are quite happy just being called "women".

Thank you for the explanation of "cishet" Rosie51 I suppose I should have been able to work that out.

I'm happy to call transwomen women and use "she" and "her" in relation to them.

One of my teenage grandchildren has a non-binary friend who was a girl. She has changed her name to a name which could be male or female and all her classmates and teachers use the new name and also "they" and "them". It doesn't seem to cause those around them a problem. It is just accepted.

If that person is a girl they will still be discriminated against because of their sex.

varian

I'm happy to call transwomen women and use "she" and "her" in relation to them.

One of my teenage grandchildren has a non-binary friend who was a girl. She has changed her name to a name which could be male or female and all her classmates and teachers use the new name and also "they" and "them". It doesn't seem to cause those around them a problem. It is just accepted.

And you'd be equally happy if you or one of your female relatives was raped by a transwoman with a functioning penis, and in court you had to refer to your rapist as 'she' and 'her' ? It has happened and will happen again.

Thank you, Molly, Chewbacca and DL.

It's bloody exhausting at times.

There are too many excellent posts on the last couple of pages to quote, but FWIW, I agree that it started off as easy to go along with the idea that trans ideology was all about acceptance and being 'kind', but as time has gone on it has been increasingly obvious that 'being kind' means 'not speaking out', and that the TRA ideology is the antithesis of acceptance and tolerance.

The women who are most vocal now are largely left-leaning, older feminists, who on the one hand were mostly likely to be caring and nurturing types because of their socialisation and disposition, but on the other are most likely to have no f*cks left to give, because of age and weary experience.

I am sick of men trying to shame women into silence. Whether it is Jimmy Saville and his cronies, in their culture where 'young ladies' were fair game, or women being written off as hairy legged feminists for wanting equal pay, called man-hating lesbians for not wanting to have sex and loose-moral led slags if they did. No more. I am not going to stand back and see my daughter's generation bullied into erasure.

The fight is not about not letting men into changing rooms - that is a symptom more than it's the problem itself. It's about having boundaries, having agency, having the right to be women on our terms, not on the terms of men who want to muscle in on the best bits of being a woman.

Oh dear trisher, at 12.43 we reached a concensus of no longer using the deeply offensive cis epithet for Women.

At least, in the absence of any reply from you to my post, I thought we'd reached a consensus but then hey ho at 15.24 you posted, in effect, that no one was policing your use of language - deeply ironic to the point of hilarity - and f*ck you if you don't like it, I'll call you what I like.

It's really not worth entering debate with someone who's views can turn on a sixpence.

Another excellent, clear post Doodledog Your final paragraph says it all.

Smileless2012

"demonstrating some solidarity with women who don't hold your views" works both ways trisher and telling women that they'll just have to put up with it if you refer to women as cis, when posting on theses threads, despite being asked not too, demonstrates that you don't practice what you preach.

Of course, if you mean when you say "I won't call you it" you mean when posting on GN, that would I'm sure be appreciated.

I would never refer to an individual woman or a group of women who objected to the term "cis" as "cis" I don't think I ever have. I don't abuse women even when I absolutely disagree with them. I may point out that I find their posts or their views discriminatory and dangerous, but I don't regard that as being a slur against them. They may. But I certainly have been called names by other women on these threads. Not my views but me.

Nannee49

Oh dear trisher, at 12.43 we reached a concensus of no longer using the deeply offensive cis epithet for Women.

At least, in the absence of any reply from you to my post, I thought we'd reached a consensus but then hey ho at 15.24 you posted, in effect, that no one was policing your use of language - deeply ironic to the point of hilarity - and f*ck you if you don't like it, I'll call you what I like.

It's really not worth entering debate with someone who's views can turn on a sixpence.

Golly is it so difficult to understand that I will use the term but not about you personally. It simply means I disagree with you and I accept the term. You are not permitted to police my language. You may ask me not to use the term about you and I would comply with that. Doesn't mean I will never use it.

The fight is not about not letting men into changing rooms - that is a symptom more than it's the problem itself. It's about having boundaries, having agency, having the right to be women on our terms, not on the terms of men who want to muscle in on the best bits of being a woman.

Transwomen suffer abuse, are subjected to violence, are raped, are discriminated against and are poorer. Could you please explain to me how these are "the best bits of being a woman".

Chewbacca

So should women just pipe down trisher? Accept that males will be amongst us in places that we'd rather they were not? Accept that when they've committed the most heinous acts against us, if they claim that they're "one of us", we should accept it with a smile and trot on? Should we smile and accept that we have little chance of winning in any competitive sport because the 6'2", 18 stone bloke with a six pack and a beard says he's "one of us"? Should we smile with gratitude when the rape counsellor sent to support us after that particularly vicious assault, is a bloke in a wig who first wants us to get our silly little heads to accept that he's "one of us"?

I would also like to hear your views on this most excellent post Trisher.

Especially this bit

Should we smile and accept that we have little chance of winning in any competitive sport because the 6'2", 18 stone bloke with a six pack and a beard says he's "one of us"? Should we smile with gratitude when the rape counsellor sent to support us after that particularly vicious assault, is a bloke in a wig who first wants us to get our silly little heads to accept that he's "one of us"?

Trisher:^"However you cannot police my language much as you might like to. So if I continue to use the term "cis" as a term for women who were born women, well sorry you are just going to have to put up with it."^ But WE can have our language policed, and we can be reprimanded and told we are disrespecting trans women, if we inadvertentently use the wrong pronoun.

Trans women suffer abuse, are subjected to violence, are raped, are discriminated against and are poorer. Could you please explain to me how these are "the best bits of being a woman".

They'll have to fight those issues and find a way forward; just like women have had to do for millennia trisher. But hitching their wagon onto women's hard fought for rights, altering those rights to suit themselves to a better advantage and to alter the lexicon of the female language to shoehorn themselves in, isn't the way to garner our sympathy or support. Maybe if the TRAs hadn't been so verbally and physically aggressive and violent, women would have listened to them and leant our support. Instead they chose to cancel us. I. Will. Not. Be. Silent.

Trisher are you just being disingenuous for the sake of it or can you really not see the total irony of your statement - no-one can police your language ergo you WILL use an offensive term when it suits you but, graciously, just not about me, cos I've said I don't like it?

So that's a free pass to anyone who wants to use offensive terms because they will not have their language policed is it?

Never mind the policing attempts on MY language by the trans lobby.

Let's all take no notice of any language policing and say what we like regardless of giving offence.

That's ok isn't it?

Sorry elegran, Chewbacca x posts