Trans women and single-sex spaces

Seriously - how very dare these trans rights protesters deface the statue of a suffragette. It’s feeling increasingly like men are attacking feminists - now, where has that happened before we ask ourselves.
Mass pee ins and defacing suffragettes - they’re just bliddy awful

In fact Millicent Fawcett was a suffragist, not a suffragette. They campaigned for women’s suffrage through non violent and legal means. Good women

Bullying men activists in their skirts. Gah!
They’re not going to settle quietly are they?

Luminance

You will have to forgive me because again, discussing this issues usually I wouldn't receive a "but" every time I spoke and no one has ever mentioned a "TRA" so this to me does feel extreme in conversation. Is this a subset of gransnet? How does gransnet react in general to trans women? Does everything said get challenged with an essay about "TRA" because it makes me feel uncomfortable when a conversation has to be directed so heavily.

The reason the conversation so often centres on trans rights activists is because it was TRAs who did all the attacking of women who wanted to keep the right to be in the refuges they had fled to from male violence in their own homes, without males being admitted. These women were terrified of men, and in many of them, even delivery men were not allowed across the threshold.

It was male-bodied TRAs in tight tights who tried to insist on being included in an event for lesbians, to which they had not been invited. The lesbians did not want them there, as they wanted to date people with female bodies, not male bodies, but these TRAs claimed that they too preferred people with female bodies, so they were lesbians too, so they had a right to join the event. The event was cancelled and eventually found a different venue - with difficulty, because no venue wanted to risk being invaded by violent demonstrators.

It was TRAs who got teachers into trouble for referring to pupils by the wrong pronoun.

There were other occasions, but three is enough for now. My point is that it was not the majority of trans people who did these aggressive things, and that is demonstrated in the number of times TRAs are mentioned in posts.

You replied to me above when I said that the actions of TRAs had sent tolerance of trans people down, not raised it up, by saying "Anyone who agrees with me on my rights is not my enemy and does not "look bad" because someone else of the same marginalised group does not respect my rights." but you don't take into account the number of people who DO believe that "what you see is what you get" and if they see self-publicising trans people doing outrageous things that cause alarm and fear to others, they imagine that all the ones they have never met are also just as aggressive and violent.

You, yourself, often talk as though, because you see a few posters who criticise some aspects of the way trans lives impinge on the non-trans, then Gransnet is a hotbed of hatred, chock full of people with total illwill toward all trans people. That is taking the few as illustrating the many, and it is not true. Most posters are neutral toward how other people live their lives. However, most posters also want safe places and categories for females to be just that. This is to keep out the small number of transwomen who have retained the attitude of macho men that females are fair game when they are feeling horny, and the male athletes and sportsmen whose performance against their fellow men is mediocre, but they can beat any woman to a medal in a women's event by the use of their natural male physical difference.

It is an aggressive men's rights movement, and men are sometimes very dangerous when told no.

Aggressive is the right word indeed. I've just been looking at pictures from one of today's protests, with placards urging 'bring back witch burning' and 'kill all TERFS'. And yet they are the very same people who are constantly harping on at us to 'be kind' to them. Surely the trans people who just want to live their lives and get on with things in their own way must be horrified at this kind of thing do?

ViceVersa

Aggressive is the right word indeed. I've just been looking at pictures from one of today's protests, with placards urging 'bring back witch burning' and 'kill all TERFS'. And yet they are the very same people who are constantly harping on at us to 'be kind' to them. Surely the trans people who just want to live their lives and get on with things in their own way must be horrified at this kind of thing do?

Yes they probably are horrified. Possibly even terrified, just as women are and will continue to be whilst men are acting like this and in some cases, being supported in their actions by women.
Why wouldn’t they be terrified? The men and the supporters of men’s rights are having a field day because they’ve been told that they can’t be women.
Their behaviour exactly clarified the need for female safe spaces.
If there needs to be trans safe spaces, now would be the time for TIM to canvass vigorously for them, without taking away safe spaces for women.

Yes, exactly, Mollygo.

Thankfully there will be a variety of media who will report this accurately, the times, the telegraph and the spectator can be relied on to show the misogyny. If the BBC and the guardian cover it I will be amazed but we can but hope.

What I want to know now is whether M &S have returned their changing rooms to Female and Male. Last time I was there each one just said changing room.

The demonstrations and calls for violence against women have really made it plain why transwomen can’t be allowed into women’s safe spaces.

It’s difficult to understand why anyone would continue to support those who issue death threats and advocate physical violence and continue to believe that they should have the right of entry to places where women are seeking safety.

Absolutely spot on, Lathyrus!

Exactly Lathyrus3.

Galaxy

Thankfully there will be a variety of media who will report this accurately, the times, the telegraph and the spectator can be relied on to show the misogyny. If the BBC and the guardian cover it I will be amazed but we can but hope.

You are joking . They are no different than the Daily Mail . Sensationalist journalism to attract the easily led .

I just feel rather sad that saying anything positive about trans people is met with an essay about "TRA". I feel that I have read that same essay over and over again. It's become a stick to beat with. I don't think anyone here needs that particularly.

I don't think we need passive aggressive posts about how you are kind and we aren't though.

Unless you can say how you feel you would behave differently from me, say, we are not going to move forward.

People have said that they are not anti-trans and you have said that you understand the reality, which is that one set of rights (or protections if you prefer) will always get in the way of the other. Women can't have safe spaces at the same time as men are allowed into them.

We have explained that the reason TRAs come up a lot is because they are at the root of the issues that have led to the need for yesterday's ruling, not because we think that all transpeople are TRAs. We can't discuss any trans issues without reference to TRAs because letting any men into our spaces means that we have to let all of them in, and that will include the criminal element and remove our rights and protections.

So having said all that, what is it that you find 'sad'?

Sensationalist journalism to attract the easily led

The easily led, in this case, being men who haven't got the gumption to realise that they have the exact same privileges and protections today as they had on Tuesday. They're so easily led that they've gone on a spree of vandalism and destruction that could well land them in jail. Locked up with those big burly men that they fear so much. Typically male trait of lack of critical thinking.

Thank you Doodledog for putting it so clearly, starting with the rejection of the passive aggressive features, which seem to have become a feature of Luminance’s posts.
Also for your reiteration of the need for mentioning TRA in relation to the issue of the ruling.
A need highlighted by the behaviour of TRA in Parliament Square yesterday.

Any criminal damage should be paid for by these people. Should have a criminal record.. Trans should not be in women's safe spaces their actions prove this to be true. .
No amount of drugs or surgery, anyway, turn one sex into another.

Surely when speaking about the atrocious behaviour on display yesterday in Parliament Square, it's imperative to say we are referring too TRA's as no decent, self respecting trans woman would want to be associated with them.

They are not IMO trans women or their representatives. They're misogynist, bullying biological men.

In the Guardian's article "One Hell of a Turnout" a sort of up beat inference to yesterday's demonstration and what appears to be a dogged attitude by those together with a handful of Labour MPs to flout this new ruling, I can't help wondering how bad it would be if the ruling had gone the other way. Two demonstrators were pictured in this article, bearing placards, with "Trans People are Not a Threat" and in many instances that may well be the case. However given there are umpteen recorded instances where they have been. The hate, that women are accused of so often, has become evident since the ruling from the opposing side, no many trans people are not a threat, but those who say that are talking from their perspective and seem to have a blind eye as to the aggressive and sometimes violent amongst their number. If they weren't a threat then how do they explain the death and rape threats against the women who oppose them ?

What could have happened had the ruling been any different, doesn't bare thinking about TerriBull.

Not all trans people are a threat, but yesterday we saw some who are and they're doing a great disservice to those who are not.

TerriBull

In the Guardian's article "One Hell of a Turnout" a sort of up beat inference to yesterday's demonstration and what appears to be a dogged attitude by those together with a handful of Labour MPs to flout this new ruling, I can't help wondering how bad it would be if the ruling had gone the other way. Two demonstrators were pictured in this article, bearing placards, with "Trans People are Not a Threat" and in many instances that may well be the case. However given there are umpteen recorded instances where they have been. The hate, that women are accused of so often, has become evident since the ruling from the opposing side, no many trans people are not a threat, but those who say that are talking from their perspective and seem to have a blind eye as to the aggressive and sometimes violent amongst their number. If they weren't a threat then how do they explain the death and rape threats against the women who oppose them ?

It is not umpteen . It is a small few .It is heterosexual males that create the most danger for women . The numbers are huge .
Yet here we are discussing a tiny few cases where transgender women have created a criminal act .

They are in the same group. Its like saying men called Harry only commit a small number of violent crimes.

Now who's cherry picking?