The article is poorly written, that's my first thought since it's pushing an agenda.

My second thought is that it's a lot of hysteria over nothing and that things will be done with common sense in mind.

I guess a comparison could be a feather weight to a heavy weight boxer, they both put in equal work and train hard but making them fight eachother still wouldn't be fair

Well yeah. But you have also spent a fair amount of time on here saying that women are worrying for nothing? Which is kind of..the same thing to me, though not quite on the same level as men making the official decisions?

The current asks of transactivists (note I use activists, as transpeople do not seem to be as extreme in their misogyny) absolutely DO steamroll over womens current sex based rights. There is no doubt about it.

It is possible, to find solutions to advance trans rights. Without requiring women to lose their current rights. Just the current demands do not do this, they actively do take away the rights of female people. And this is why a lot of women are fighting back. Its not about attacking 'trans rights'. Its fighting to retain our existing rights, and saying we are bigoted for doing that, is..not good really.

As you seem quite adamant that current demandsdo not actually affect female people at all ad instead just help transpeople, can you explain to me how..as prisons are the easiest issue for people to see (though I always thought this would be sports)..the following does not remove the rights of female people, to be incarcerated with other female people.

A male person who is a transwoman (a male woman, when using both gender and sex I guess) is put in jail for rape. The current rules, and what trasactivists pushed for, say that this male woman, can be sent to the female estate. As their 'gender identity' is 'woman'. Even though prisons are split by sex, not gender. This move is automatic if the person has a 'gender recognition certificate' which means they have 'legally changed sex' (which is a mass of issues in itself) but even if they have not done this, they can be considered for a move to the female estate.

How does that not effect the rights of female people?

This is not a hypothetical. Its happening. And has already had the logical conclusion also. A 'male woman' in female prison, sexually assaulting, or/and raping the female prisoners. When this happens, sometimes the 'male woman' is sent to a different female prison as a 'solution'. Sometimes they are then moved to somewhere in the male estate, but by that point, there has already been victims that should never have been victims.

A situation that should, IMO never even be a possibility.

Acnowledging that this is a HUGE problem, does not mean I think all transwomen are rapists. It does mean that I think men will abuse such a system, and men already have.

And honestly, even one male person in one female prison is an issue for me. I know some will write off a certain amount of injured women as collateral damage, but I won't. And such people can never say how many women need to be harmed for the problem to be acnowledged either oddly enough.

Like..there are loads of these instances currently. And I feel, just a proper look at the topic could sort things for both transpeople and female people. Yes, a 'genuine' transwoman (meaning someone with dysphoria, not a random man trying to abuse this) might be in danger in the male estate. The answer to that though is not to use women as human shields, and say that any male who might be at risk (or 'says he is a woman') should become the female peoples problem to sort? The answer, surely, is to have...trans wings, or something like that. So yes, sex, and how it matters is acknowledged. But also, gender is acknowledged, along with general safety of different groups of people. And more people as a result are kept safe. The current way, men have a very easy loophole to transfer to female prisons (and its well known how awful mens prisons are, so in a way you cant blame a lot of them for trying, thats before even getting into the ones wanting to move to abuse the women) which simply results in, female people being massively more at risk, in a place where they absolutely cannot escape.

I also tend to think when the 'but transwomen are at risk in male prisons' somes up, think of the other groups who would be more at risk in a male prison, smaller males, disabled males, gay males, and so on. Should we also open up female prisons to those people as they are more at risk? Or is the answer, lowering the risk for those people in any way we can, instead of putting MORE people at risk instead?

Much thought is needed. The topic is not one that can be easily 'solved'. But current solutions, put women at risk. Not necessarily from transwomen, but from men. And anyone saying men would never abuse such a loophole is kidding themselves tbh. Some men train for years to be priests or teachers, in order to access victims. To claim to have a 'woman gender identity' is nothing to such people. Also, the proportion of sex offenders in prison claiming to be transwomen is hugely disproportional to the amount of sex offenders in the general male population. Which is something that should concern everyone tbh. I don't think transwomen are more likely to be sex offenders, however, something is happening. The logical conclusion is that male sex offenders are saying they are transwomen, to get a transfer. Which is unsurprising while the option exists.

The answer needs to keep transwomen safe, but also not make women unsafe. The current answer, places women in danger. And quite obviously, removes their current sex based rights.

This has probably gone on for longer than intended. This is because..well its a difficult topic with many areas that need looked at. Not simply a 'women, nothing is affecting you really, just shut up and think of the transpeople' like some seem to think it is. Nor is it a 'well tranwomen are male, just shove them in male prison if they are abused, tough' situation. An answer, needs to take both groups into account. The current answer, only considers transwomen.

I do hope so Dezzy, I really think that's all most people want

Yeah true , I think the problem aswell is the Media likes to run with a story aswell and likes to make people look bad .

And not all trans women want to compete in women's sports ,but we're led to believe they do .

Quite. Its a select few. Ones who..well have no sense of wanting fairness in competition I guess. And then often go on to abuse women who point out the lack of fairness, and call them transphobic.

I only know a couple of transpeople tbf, but they think it is ridiculous to even consider male people in womens sport. They say the same as anyone else who talks about the topic tbh, that such people know its unfair, and don't care, or are simply looking to take advantage of a natural advantage.

I think the loopholes and such are more at fault, than those who use the loopholes really though. Such things should not be allowed to start with. If you leave gaping holes like that, or specifically set up legislation in such a way, of course some will take advantage.

Its only a few at the moment, but even a few has the potential to devastate womes sport. Even teenage boys can run rings round adult professional sports players. Its blatantly unfair, and needs to end.

One would hope. I wish I could be so optomistic to be quite honest. But given past similar things that actually happened and are happening, I can no longer think common sense will win. Can hope though..

The trans ban in the military though absolutely should be lifted. I can understand it if it was a..medication issue. As as I understand theres a lot of people disqualified because of the meds they take/need for whatever reason. But it appeared to be a flat out ban on anyone who said they were trans, whatever their medical status, which is clearly just phobic and should not have happened at all. So I do 100% agree with lifting that.

When it comes to sports, the sad reality is that trans people can never compete on the same level as their gender. Trans men will never really have the same strength advantages that cis men have and trans women will have an advantage over cis women in most sports.

I don't think trans people in sports can ever really be a thing unless there's enough trans people to have them competing against each other. It's a bit exclusionary but it's the only way I can see trans men standing a chance and trans women not dominating traditional sports.

It's a **** solution but it's the only one that springs to mind.

There was a trans woman bodybuilder, I forgot her name but it was implied she was competing in women's sport.But I think she either competed with men or just didn't compete atall .

Yeah unfortunately people will always take advantage of loopholes .

The weird thing with public toilets now is the whole pandemic , before Covid I still hated using them . But I definitely think urinals should go and that we should have separate cubicles like what TS said . But I know that won't happen :rolleyes: .

It's a tricky issue Scarlett, and one that affects/effects (playing it safe there:laugh:) both you and Niamh so you're both gonna be passionate about the topic for different reasons, but also good reasons imo.

Obviously I don't fit into either group so it's not really my place to know what the right answers to this particular issue are, but hopefully countries worldwide will be able to come up with a compromise for both sides, whatever that may be.

I think a big area of frustration for transgender people is that they can't have access to what they really need/want because of a few bad cases, and people tend to focus more on the bad than the good.

Not that I don't understand it because, as Vicky mentionned for example, there are people that will try to take advantage of it and hurt people. And those hurt ones need to be heard too.
But really it's more the system that should be wronged rather than the people themselves, hence a well-needed good education about those issues.
To me there are way more good willing people than bad and I can see the frustration of transgender people always hearing "but it's unfair" or "transwomen beat up women in unisex toilets" etc all the time as a justification to what should be forbidden or not.
Not to mention that there are fully transphobic people who use these excuses to hide their transphobia (and again, I'm not talking about TIBB members who are fully genuine in their concerns about the topic and are not transphobic)

Again, not putting any justification of violence cases or people taking advantage of it aside whatsoever because it's a reality. I'm just pointing out what transgender people currently feel and that indeed, there is a way for both trans rights and womens rights to meet and fight for social justice together.

I believe you may be thinking of Laurel Hubbard. New Zealand IIRC. Quite crap in the male category. Came out as a transwoman. And is taking records in the womens category oddly enough, despite being well past the usual peak of weightlifters, at 40+. Trouncing the younger fitter competitors.

Edit. Maybe not, read body builder as weightlifter :blush2:

Some of the transwomen competitors DO still compete in their sex class. Those are the ones I would say are brave tbh. As especially if they are on medication, they are putting themselves at a disadvantage, and will have to work a lot harder than others. The ones who decide to just start competing as women instead though, I have no time for and cannot see as anything other than cheats. Though technically they are not cheating as its 'within the rules'. They certainly have no sense of fair play.

Its not 'just a few bad people' though. I don't understand that argument in this context. We make laws on people based on classes. Not on the good people who exist. Otherwise, men would all be allowed in female areas, because most men are not dangerous and most do not want to abuse women. Female areas would not exist if we rationalise in the way you are doing above? Not sure if I am explaining myself right here. But no laws would exist at all really, if it was all based on that. As generally speaking, most people will be good, its only a few bad ones, in whatever you are talking about. There would not be laws around fraud, because most people would never dream of committing fraud, making laws around it is accusing good people of maybe not being good. We wouldn't need laws on child abuse, as come on, most people don't abuse children, its not nice to base stuff on the few who do, its insulting and upsetting to those who would never consider doing anything wrong. Basically, safeguarding does not work based on the good ones. It takes all into account.


transwomen beat up women in unisex toilets - Have literally never seen that said ever. Yeah it would be **** to hear that all the time though.

Agreed though, about people who hide actual transphobia by using other genuine issues to mask it. Thats generally quite obvious as...its people who only ever pop up in womens rights stuff when it comes to trans related stuff. They do not care about womens rights generally, yet suddenly do when its to do with trans people. The reverse happens also. People who give not a **** about 'social justice' or whatever, unless its a trans topic, in which case they use it to talk crap about women. Its hugely frustrating, but generally quite obvious.

I get why transpeople feel attacked. I also understand why women feel attacked. Neither should be attacked. Both deserve rights, of their own. And solutions need to be found that benefit both groups. Not one group totally ignored and silenced, in order to please the other. Its possible to do. Just seemingly, unwanted.

I'm not saying laws should be based only on good willing people because that's not possible and you stated it clearly.
I'm saying it's the way it's put across to transgender people, there's a difference. It's always "but your people are dangerous" kind of speech from some people to shut down the discussion instead of really opening it up.

When it comes to the unisex thing, I've heard it from transwomen who experienced it first hand, and I understand that it must hurt because they're mixed with the bad ones (the one who take advantage of situations like that such as robberies, sexual assault etc). It's quite devastating to them. It takes one case to put people in that box.

And obviously rights that are respectful to all :love:

Totally misunderstood that bit then, sorry D:

I get that it would be annoying and upsetting if people were always saying stuff like that. Thats kind of why I try to..be so specific when talking about this, that its not really transpeople that are the issue that I see, though it comes under the 'trans rights' argument. Its, the consequences of doing away with sex based rights, which so many transactivists seem to want, yet, transpeople themselves are less keen on that, transsexual people at least (another kind of issue is how..wide the 'umbrella' is these days, near anyone could legitimately claim to be trans when you remove sex dysphoria from the equation..and when this happens, the 'womens spaces' issue becomes even harder to deal with, if suddenly there are 500k people wanting in, instead of 5000). I..attempt to make it clear that its men who will abuse it, or general pisstakers who do not actually have dysphoria.. that are my problem, not actual transwomen, for example. Or if its about a specific person, will try to make sure I only talk about them (then get accused of being focused on one person!) make very clear that that person is my issue, and the loophole they are currently showing to the world.

FFS in these discussions before I have tied myself in knots so much I end up saying 'person with a penis' or 'female person with a gender identify of a man but who is feminine' and other ridiculous things as I have been so specific with wording that thats what I am left with and it needs to be said in order to make the point make any sense :laugh:

Its hard, to find wording sometimes to say what you mean without offending anyone. And despite what some think on here, I genuinely do not want to offend anyone.

My main point in this will always be, its possible to advance the rights of all. Without removing rights from anyone. But this will take hard discussions. Trying to prevent the discussion by shutting it down, is not helping anyone in the long run really. There are solutions, maybe not ideal solutions, but solutions better than the current ones. Its not fair, not should it be accepted, to just expect women to roll over and give up their rights. Especially not when such rights are so recently won, and honestly, still a bit flakey in some areas. Nor is it fair to expect transpeople to do nothing to advance their own situation. The two don't HAVE to clash. And needs actually cross over in some areas tbh. But..the state of things today is just crap, and helps noone and just creates resentment where there doesn't need to be resentment really.

Theres always darts and snooker and bowls

No the person I'm talking about is Janae Marie Kroc she's American.

Except there hasn't been any hatred. Not from the people actually engaging in the discussion, anyway.

This debate goes far far beyond "accepting differences, sexualities and genders". It's about how the rights of different people can come into conflict and can only be resolved by respecting and taking BOTH groups into account.

Precisely, and the irony that some of the LGBT community who fought a battle against being slurred and who had many woman standing by them in their fight are now resorting to slurs themselves to shut down debate instead of engaging in resolution is frankly mind blowing

And to answer again to that, the initial comment I made was not towards women but more so towards transphobic people who hide behind issues like sports or unisex toilets to be transphobic.
I meant in a more general way because there are people reading this thread that are not members. Not meaning you or women in particular. As I have said, some people have genuine concerns and want to engage in the discussion, and some just use that as an excuse.

Hence the discussion I had with Vicky later to say that both groups need to be heard and a war doesn't have to happen when it comes to both rights. It can be worked out but it's an incredibly touchy and sensitive topic on both ends. LGBT people and women always fought together for social justice, it cannot stop now and hopefully never will.

I also shared my view that lately there has been a lot of heat and intense discussions about those topics (ie The sexuality thread or whatever it's called) that can be perceived as hurtful. That's it, it doesn't get beyond that.

...just to follow on to what Remy has said in the thread, there are many very interesting articles...I’m not sure if these are ‘the best’ as such because there are so many, but these are a few I read...


https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/politi...e/trans-rights

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...re-not-enemies

Your comment was made about discussions on this forum. I was assuring you that, in the majority of cases, you have made incorrect assumptions about them.

I politely suggest you word things more carefully when highlighting the two main discussion points people have raised in the thread with the addendum that they are "what transphobic people hide behind" if you are not trying to insult people simply discussing the topic.

I don't think most women would mind if a man brought his daughter into the womens toilets.

But yeah individual cubicles is obviously the best solution but agree with LT that space and money would be the biggest obstacle there

Ammi your first link, I genuinely cannot see how anyone can read that as anything other than a propogada piece against feminists :laugh2: Maybe I have been reading into this crap for too long now. But I have actively tried and cannot read anything in that bar 'many feminists are nasty and will not yield to my opinion when I demand it. The only right feminists are the ones who say women are not actually female people, and are certainly not oppressed, everyone should fight for MY cause, not their own. Else bigot.'

The second one is quite 'everythings fine behind the scenes, press are just going mad' which is..partially true but not totally. Certainly more honest and open than the GQ link :laugh:

Loos is the easiest part of it, always has been. Thats kind of what surprised me, when these convos turn to loos. I think most people in general, would be much happier with individual rooms with basins and such...rather than any part of it 'communal'. Loos is...just not a issue overall.

The real problems lie in the likes of prisons, refuges, sport...there are no easy aswers to those. Thats where the discussion needs to be. And its not as easy to just say 'oh, single areas..for those things.

But don't you see that those of us who have concerns are not able to engage as as soon as anyone puts their head above the parapet they are immediately insulted, as evidenced in this thread

Trans women are trans women. They are not born women, they have a Y chromosome, They don't menstruate, they can't reproduce and they've lived their formative years as males, with all the privilege that brings. That said, I believe trans women should be able to live as they like, they are worth just as much as born women, but they are different.

Women have fought for centuries not to be second class citizens, now we're third class, with our rights trailing behind not only men, but trans women too.

....:laugh:....hmmmm, that’s not how it read to me, it was more that it was looking at both ‘sides’ as it were and concluding that ...(as has been said...)...there needs to be a coming together...

...I don’t see how any trans person ...(...male to female..)...would feel it in any way a ‘privilege’ to have been born male and to have lived part of their life as male...for many it would have meant extreme unhappiness and not feeling any ‘fit’...how could that in any way be thought to be a privileged life....(...obviously exclusive of any specific advantages in competitive sports, which is obviously a huge thing to be addressed and conversations to be had...)...

I see how some could read it as that I guess. But theres not much 'both sides' in that at all. Its all...nasty feminists, be inclusive! Which reads fine to people if they..don't think that the 'be inclusive' thing is an issue, but when whats being expected to be 'inclusive' is..well female peoples sex based rights should be inclusive of people who are not of the female sex...it kind of puts a different spin on things. Everyone wants to be inclusive and nice. Or most do. I swear, if the demands were different to what they are, I would 100% be standing besides activists fighting with them. But I find it unreasonable to expect feminists to..be complicit (and even enthusiastic) in the erasure of their current rights tbh. I find it even more unreasonable to make out its feminists who are in the wrong and saying they are just being nasty and bigoted (as the first article says) for NOT conceding their rights.

NOT saying you are saying this ammi, as sometimes my posts come across wrongly. I am talking about the 'be inclusive' article. The second one, by a transwoman..at least recognizes some issues. The first is just handwaving 'nothing to see here, feminists should be kind' to me.

Its all such a shame. It really is. This is literally the very first time I have ever opposed 'progressive' politics. The issue is, I do not see it as 'progressive' at all, to deny that sex is a very important thing for women, and IMO quite simply, to ignore sex (or minimize the importance of it in history/currently really), means you simply cannot see/measure sexism in any meaningful way, let alone fight it!

Male socialisation.

It's most likely one of the biggest causes of what gets called the "pay gap", as men's socialisation gives them the extra confidence to chase that promotion or ask for that payrise, while societal expectations mean men are more likely to spend more time working.

...I don’t see it as saying that, though...it’s more concluding that ‘the two sides’ need to be both understood and protected, which isn’t appearing to happening because it’s less ‘conversations being had’ and more ‘war zone’ vibe...

...bib...?...ok, I guess that sometimes the same words are said or in this case, read...but those same words aren’t being heard in the same way ...and as we’re not ‘hearing the same thing’, I’ll leave it that maybe that wasn’t a good article to quote...

See this is true of transsexual people. People who feel dysphoria at their physical reality and do whatever possible to alleviate said dysphoria. Issue is, this goes WAY beyond that today. Its the 'beyond' thats causing the current problems. Without going into essays, my issue has NEVER been genuine transsexual people. Its the 'other' who have basically latched onto the whole thing as..seemingly a way to crap all over women, that are causing the issues, as the second group are being lumped in with the first group as 'disadvantaged' when really, thats far from the truth. The first group are absolutely disadvantaged and deserve empathy and understanding tbh. The second group..are the ones causing the huge majority of issues now. Feminists tend to push back against the second group, not transsexual people. Infact, from what I have seen, transsexual people seem t be against the second group as much as many feminists are..

The wants (not needs) of the second group are made out to be things that would benefit the first group. When in reality, they wouldn't, and the 'war' is infact making things MUCH worse for the first group (aswell as for women), but the second group don't care..

Thats exactly it I think :p

The other ironic thing is that the issues woman have are not about transwomen at all but about predatory men who will seek to take advantage of loopholes whether that be financial or otherwise

most people really don't care how others choose to live their lives, we are too busy with our own

Quite.

But this is continually glossed over, and outright denied as a possibility, or something that should be worried about, despite many/most women (and many men too!) knowing its not just a possibility, its a definite if the potential is there. I mean, there are some who will still claim 'that will never happen' when you bring up people abusing it,despite there currently being..well examples of it having happened. Its just such nonsense at times.

It just sometimes feels like constant gaslighting. The denial that bad men exist, if they do exist they are too few in number to care about, and even if a bad man gets you, it doesnt matter as the law can deal with them, even though the law does **** all to most bad men.

Which did make me slightly, militant in such discussions in the past, though that helps noone really. I self edit to a ridiculous degree on this, both to try and not use language that might offend (though these days, even saying women is offensive) and to try and not come across as..harshly as I might otherwise. These days am used to talking in..well feminist spaces, rather than 'in the general public. so tend to use a lot of shorthand for stuff, and assume everyone knows the stuff I am talking about..and where I am coming from too. so need to edit that out also!

I am aware that sometimes I may also come across as maybe a bit..man hating too. Though I swear I do not hate men. I just am very very aware of how many bad men are out there. And honestly, sometimes I wish I wasn't as aware, life would sure be simpler.

I agree with this post cherie, it's just so exhausting bothering about what other people get up to.

Most people yes, except the homophobics, transphobics etc who always have something really negative to say about those people and base their stereotypes or fears on a few "bad" cases (ie transwomen issue in unisex toilets etc) unfortunately.
Hence education is key, and that applies to all communities really.

That's a shame really. Thankfully it's not most people, but it still hurts targeted communities, specifically when social media amplifies those phobic voices. :shrug: It's a tough daily struggle.

I do get this point, and agree some use it that way.

I feel sometimes feminists are written off with these people though for using examples of 'obvious conclusions' that they warned of(ie abusive men who claim to be trans, NOT transpeople) as..well we said it would happen, here is an example. And another. And another. And another. After being told it would NEVER HAPPEN and that to even consider it happening was manhating.

I think theres a world of difference between 'look, here is an example of what we said, and why that example slipped through the net so to speak' and 'look, this one transperson doing this means all are transpeople are bad!!!'

Though the difference is often..ignored. And made out to be the same thing. Sometimes purposely in honesty, though not always. Not sure if am explaining that right though..

Nuance.