Trans women have a cervix according to David Lammy.

VS

(Good Morning)

This is the issue that has led and is still leading to posters responding to you in a way that appears to both puzzle and upset you.

You say...

People cannot accept it is possible to accept trans people while protecting women's safe spaces... Or as I would word it, having spaces for natal women for whatever reason they need it.

As brief as I can word it - your acceptance includes the affirmation that transwomen are women. If that is the accepted position by society, then transwomen can go into any space previously designated for women, or be in any organisation or movement organised for the sole benefit of women - because that's what transwomen-are-women means in reality.

Therefore it is not possible to support or accept both positions - you cannot protect women's safe spaces if transwomen are allowed into them - which they would have to be if we accept the premise that transwomen are women.

So that is why we "people cannot accept it is possible" - because it isn't. Both from a logical - and legal perspective.

If you can't do that too, if you can't show acceptance to trans women and protect women, there is an underlying reason for that... That only the individual can address

... and the above statement from you is where the passive-aggressive stance you take causes the responses that you find unacceptable.

I don't know if you genuinely can't see it - but that comment implies that if we cannot see this matter from your perspective of acceptance, then there is something lacking either in our thinking or our moral code - some underlying 'deficiency' that we need to address

You not infrequently tell people to "think about that" in your posts when you make an observation on a particular aspect of the matter.

The latter comment from you follows the same pattern - the instructor (you) tutoring the instructed (us).

You might be totally unaware of it - but that is how you come across and why people respond in the way that they do which results in you believing you are being 'got at' because of your views when, in fact, it is the somewhat condescending and slightly patronising tone, and the apparent belief that you are speaking on behalf of the trans community to the ill-informed who need to "think about" what they say.

I don't say any of this with malice VS - I'm simply attempting to explain to you why I believe we end up on these threads on trans matters where the subject becomes you rather than the topic of the original post.

Perhaps it is you that needs to "think about that" in this instance?

Because we are all responding to you in the same way, so we are obviously all getting the same impression.

VS
I’m delighted to see that you finally admit that the actions of a tiny minority of trans have caused problems for people suffering from gender dysphoria.

I’ve waited a long time for you to admit that, so thank you.

I’ll probably wait even longer for you to explain how you
it is possible to accept (all) trans people while protecting women's safe spaces

Exactly how are you protecting female safe spaces from any trans, (you have said you accept all trans, without any but proviso) who are intent on accessing female safe spaces to harm or intimidate females?

You’ve never actually explained that.
Other posters have said that they do it because they “uphold the law” and that females can confront or report any trans who are in female safe spaces, but that isn’t protecting females.
So how is what you are doing different?

If you can’t explain in a comprehensible manner, you’re welcome use the strategy that you’re not responding to my posts.

Yes, that’s the issue.

You asked why I thought it was impossible both to accept/humour transpeople and protect women and I told you what I think, not what you think.

I don’t understand the rest of your post.

VS, what are you on about? Sorry but you talk in riddles and are very annoying. People aren't generalising about transsexuals in the way you put it. Shows your listening skills need a brush up.

That's the issue isn't it

That's why people keep telling me what I think and mean even though it is opposed to what I am saying. That's why they become so angry with me they want to define me as a horrible person on these threads who somehow isn't safe around children (I've never discussed trans issues with children and the one child questioning their gender I have supported just needed someone to listen, nothing more, not my place to tell them anything, I wouldn't ever take any risk with a child's mental health).

People cannot accept it is possible to accept trans people while protecting women's safe spaces... Or as I would word it, having spaces for natal women for whatever reason they need it.

If you can't do that too, if you can't show acceptance to trans women and protect women, there is an underlying reason for that... That only the individual can address

Stereotypes, generalising or in any way implying that all trans people are responsible for or sullied by the actions of a few is a huge part of that issue and we all know how that has led to hate crimes and discrimination against other demographics...

Thank you, I truly needed to understand why... It takes the sting out of people's words and has brought peace back

VioletSky

Why do you feel it is not possible for me to accept trans people and protect women

Why is that so hard?

Because it’s not possible.

If a woman wants a space where men are not allowed (her reasons shouldn’t matter, but if you want any it could be for religious reasons, because she’s been raped, she suffers from anxiety, she has her period and wants privacy, she is sick and feels vulnerable, she is tired of the male gaze, whatever else) and a transwoman insists on the right to be in that space, despite having an intact penis, male hormones and a heterosexual sexuality, then both of those people cannot be accommodated.

The idea that it should always be women who make way for men is what angers so many feminists. It took long enough to get female spaces- why should we give them up because a male person wants them?

VioletSky

The list goes on . . . and you absolutely know I agree to protect women's safe spaces

No I don’t know that.
Unless you truthfully agree that no male, no matter how he feels should access female safe spaces
and that you accept that transwomen are not women (adult human females),
then what you say you are agreeing to is meaningless.

Who are these lots of people you mention? Do you really pontificate about this subject all the time apart from on GN?
Who gave you the right to speak for
all people suffering from gender dysphoria as you claim here?
^ It's how trans people feel^

According to what I’ve read, many LB people are unhappy about being linked to trans because of the actions of the minority e.g. where TW are insisting they are women and should be accepted as such by lesbians.
Some trans report that they are unhappy about their views being misrepresented by others.

Why do you feel it is not possible for me to accept trans people and protect women

Why is that so hard?

The list goes on doodledog and you absolutely know I agree to protect women's safe spaces

Why do you not feel it is not possible for me to accept trans people and not uphold women too?

I literally am doing that? Lots of people would say my views are too anti trans by protecting safe spaces and sports but those are my actual views so

It's not my view

It's how trans people feel

And I asked for people to show me what their acceptance looked like because they were saying that they did... It was apparently just words

Except Dickens, who almost got it spot in for showing real genuine exceptance and then spoiled it by saying "he" where no he needed to be

VioletSky

Except I didn't say that

doodledog try again

I actually take a middle road because I accept trans women as trans women, for many reasons that protect everyone's rights, ensure people receive the right medical treatment, ensure women's sports can be regulated fairly, the list goes on

But they are women in almost every situation except where I personally feel the trans identifier is needed for everyone's benefit, them included.

That is what you said.

VioletSky

I have never been accepted on these threads from the very moment my view differed... Think about that

It's not your view VS, a view to which you are entitled - it's the way you both passively and faintly aggressively challenge other people's, and frequently imply that they need to examine their conscience and morals, witness the frequent 'requests' you make for posters to "just think about that".

That is the tone of your posting and replies.

It would appear, from your many posts on this thread, that unless we agree with your idea of acceptance of the trans community, then we are simply not accepting them for who they are.

In fact, we are not really discussing the trans community per se anyway, we are debating trans women who insist that they are women.

And that is the sticking point. Because we do not accept that they are. But what you then do is introduce the issue of DSD in an attempt to prove that we - and the science we quote - is wrong. It's disingenuous.

And you do this over and over again. You signal your virtue about the way you are accepting of "people who are different" as if you are talking to a bunch of posters ready to attack anyone who isn't like them. That is the impression we get, and the one we respond to, which then ends up with you feeling that you are under attack, and then defending yourself by becoming the victim.

Except I didn't say that

doodledog try again

This has turned into a drama triangle.

VioletSky

If it's double standards

Point out both

That's fair right?

I did. Twice.

You said that you accept transpeople as their chosen ‘gender’ except when you personally feel that they don’t deserve it.

You then went on at length about the rest of us saying that we accept transpeople but don’t want males in female spaces.

That is a double standard, no?

It's ok Mollygo I won't treat you the way you treat me... I tried that once and I didn't like myself for it

Galaxy

You do know that many gay and lesbian and bisexual people are gender critical? They are real too you know.

Yes of course

But the ones I know discuss things very differently

Bisexual people are still the sex they are born with. It has nothing to do with David Lammy’s incorrect statement.

Bringing them into this discussion is, as has already been pointed out, only fulfils the need to make it all about the poster.

VS says I have never been accepted on these threads from the very moment my view differed... Think about that

A rather grandiose, self centred claim as neither VS or anyone else has asked to be accepted, nor been told they are not accepted.

And funnily enough, VS, if it was accurate, it could equally be said about your persistent attitude to other posters.
Think about that.

You do know that many gay and lesbian and bisexual people are gender critical? They are real too you know.

No I don't and if a person can bring my job to the thread and tell me that something that means the absolute world to me is something I must be bad at, then I can bring the fact that I am also LGBTQ to the thread because it is relevant to me and the topic

Have you ever considered other people are other people, different, and real

I asked you to tell me what a acceptance meant to you

I told you what it means to trans people and trans allies or other LGBTQ people like myself

You place your view of acceptance above other people's needs of acceptance

That's the truth whether you like it or not

And just because I treat discussions as if I am in a place where people can also get to know eachother and not as a place where we are all shouting from a soapbox, is not a bad thing in my world... That's another way I show acceptance

I have never been accepted on these threads from the very moment my view differed... Think about that

Personally, if there is one person who thinks something on a thread, and 99 who dont, I sort of come to my own conclusions about the thread.

I ask again VS what does your bisexuality have to do with this discussion? The answer is absolutely nothing apart from perhaps your need to make the discussion about you, which it isn't.

You are the one who attempts to make these discussions personal. You share personal information and then take offence when you don't get the response you want.

I said I would accept that you are bisexual just as I would and do accept that trans women are trans women but I do not and will not accept that they are women, because they are not.

You are telling me that when I say I accept trans women it isn't true don't call me a liar VS, because regardless of how you try to dress it up, that is what you are doing.

But I'm just a happy person who likes humour

If it's double standards

Point out both

That's fair right?

Someone built a building with a gender neutral option for toileting?

The public toilets outside the Tower of London are for everyone. Lots of individual cubicles, everyone queuing together.

The mens toilets at my local train station were out of action last Wednesday.
A very apologetic young man came into the ladies while I was washing my hands.