[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

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!

...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...