The worrying rise of TERFism in the UK (MOD WARNING IN OP)

JackTaylorFan

JupiterKid wrote: »

To be honest I’m frankly getting sick to my back teeth of all this guff about TERFs, cis, non-binary and such. We are really bogging ourselves down into rather pedantic and extremist ideology directly imported from American universities.

What about LGBT and just leave it at that?

So, essentially: Pull up the drawbridge, I'm safe now?

JackTaylorFan

splinter65 wrote: »

It's quite straightforward. Lesbians are being labelled by some transactivists as transphobic for not wanting to date a transwoman and being wary about allowing transwomen free reign in safe spaces they have created for themselves.
Some of these lesbians have had terrible experiences of men abusing them throughout their lives.

It's quite straighforward comparing transwomen to men (abusive or not) is transphobic.

splinter65

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

It's quite straighforward comparing transwomen to men (abusive or not) is transphobic.

....and telling women,gay or not, that they have no choice but to take the risk of being attacked by a predatory male disguised as a woman is both misogynistic and disgustingly bullying.

The Bishop Basher

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

It's quite straighforward comparing transwomen to men (abusive or not) is transphobic.

I’m quite comfortable with my transphobic label.

Of course I have no issue whatsoever with trans people but if not wanting to sleep with them makes me phobic then phobic I am.

Was there another point you wanted to make or is that it ?

baby and crumble

splinter65 wrote: »

....and telling women,gay or not, that they have no choice but to take the risk of being attacked by a predatory male disguised as a woman is both misogynistic and disgustingly bullying.

I honestly have to question this too.

How many times have women been attacked in public toilets by men, EVER? Like, I honestly think you're more likely to be attacked walking down a street. I have never once heard of any of my friends being attacked or threatened in a toilet or changing room, but I sure as hell have on the street, in their own homes etc.

I'd also love to know how many times someone has been attacked in a gender neutral toilet? There's lots of them, my entire office building just has "toilets" and, surprise surprise, no-ones been attacked.

99% of people using toilets just want to go in a pee. That's it.

If some areshole is going to attack you, he's going to do it regardless, suggesting he's going to think "oh awesome, I can just dress up as a woman, pretend I'm trans, use a ladies bathroom that's probably pretty busy and bobs your uncle. ITS THE PERFERCT CRIME!" is just the height of hysteria tbh. :rolleyes:

The Bishop Basher

baby and crumble wrote: »

If some areshole is going to attack you, he's going to do it regardless, suggesting he's going to think "oh awesome, I can just dress up as a woman, pretend I'm trans, use a ladies bathroom that's probably pretty busy and bobs your uncle. ITS THE PERFERCT CRIME!" is just the height of hysteria tbh. :rolleyes:

Attacks are at the extreme end of this..

The perverts that WILL abuse this will be far more likely to be just making deposits to the **** bank then actually attacking anyone and you'll never ever know so it kinda is the perfect crime..

baby and crumble

Rennaws wrote: »

Attacks are at the extreme end of this..

The perverts that WILL abuse this will be far more likely to be just making deposits to the **** bank then actually attacking anyone and you'll never ever know so it kinda is the perfect crime..

but like... changing rooms and toilets have cubicles. So all you actually see is someone fully dressed looking in a mirror or washing their hands.

They liteally see way more in the actual pool or on a beach than in a toilet, yet that's where people are so terrified about transmen and women being "in case" they're some pervert taking the trouble to dress up and pretend to be a different gender...

The Bishop Basher

baby and crumble wrote: »

but like... changing rooms and toilets have cubicles. So all you actually see is someone fully dressed looking in a mirror or washing their hands.

They liteally see way more in the actual pool or on a beach than in a toilet, yet that's where people are so terrified about transmen and women being "in case" they're some pervert taking the trouble to dress up and pretend to be a different gender...

Fair enough..

Female changing rooms are obviously very different to male changing rooms where we would all walk around starkers and think nothing of it.

I guess those pervert are going to be a little disappointed..

P_1

Has anybody been following the shambolic situation currently unfolding within the UK Green Party?

One eyed Jack

P_1 wrote: »

Has anybody been following the shambolic situation currently unfolding within the UK Green Party?

Is this what you’re referring to P?


Aimee Channelor’s statement on her No Fault Suspension from the Green Party of England and Wales.

I’m aware of it alright, wasn’t following it particularly closely though tbh. I don’t see how it’s relevant here though as it has nothing to do with her being transgender and everything to do with her being yet another example of a corrupt politician.

splinter65

P_1 wrote: »

Has anybody been following the shambolic situation currently unfolding within the UK Green Party?

I have. Aimee Challenor has resigned totally from the Green Party today in a ludicrous display of faux outrage.
She seems to think that the Green Party has gone from proposing her (a 20 year old trans woman with no political experience) for deputy leader, to TOTAL transphobia.
The fact that she appointed her father as her campaign manager AFTER she knew that he had been charged with the most horrifying and appalling paedophilia, and while they were both constructing a twitter site dedicated to silencing any transgender opponents is completely ignored.
She asked the Green Party to accept that she lived in a tiny house with just her parents but didn’t know that he was sexually abusing a 10 year old girl who was suspended from the beams in the attic ( incidentally the father was dressed as a baby at the time, wearing a nappy). It’s telling of the mess that is the Green Party that they continued to support her until, apparently, today.
She’s resigned, partially because she claims that another party member dead named her.
You couldn’t make it up.

splinter65

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Is this what you’re referring to P?


Aimee Channelor’s statement on her No Fault Suspension from the Green Party of England and Wales.

I’m aware of it alright, wasn’t following it particularly closely though tbh. I don’t see how it’s relevant here though as it has nothing to do with her being transgender and everything to do with her being yet another example of a corrupt politician.

At one stage when we lived in the UK I would have been a Green Party voter. They’ve lost their way in recent years. The drive to embrace “diversity” and “be inclusive” meant that any other political aims were completely lost.
The Aimee Challenor saga is typical example of this. They were willing to ignore even till today, disgusting details just to have someone from the fringes of society on the ticket.

One eyed Jack

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

This might come as a shock to many here, but in the trans discussion groups I am in, I would be seen as quite the moderate.

It doesn’t come as a shock to me at all because this conversation has never been just about you, I’ve met people who are far more obnoxious, condescending and patronising than even you could ever hope to be.

Yet, people with transphobic agendas will still try hold-up transpeople (and in particular transwomen) as the aggressors merely for defending themselves n these situations.

Well seeing as you have me painted as transphobic you’re obviously going to assume that it’s because you are transgender that I don’t particularly care for your attitude towards other people. It has nothing to do with you being transgender, it’s entirely about your attitude towards other people, and the reason I will point out to you again and again that you aren’t representative of people who are transgender, nor do you represent them, is because you don’t. The reason I know for a fact that you don’t is because I know far more people who are transgender who aren’t at all obvious, condescending, patronising and self-absorbed. They genuinely care about other people and would have nothing to do with your divisive nonsense about terfs and terf sympathisers and all the rest of it. They see people as people, and they treat people accordingly, with the respect every human being deserves, regardless of their politics.

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

I called you out as a TERF sympathizer long before this thread. You are so transparently transphobic, it's ridiculous you are still allowed post in here.

You did. I didn’t care then, and I don’t care now, because your idea of transphobic is the same as the gay guy I mentioned earlier in the thread calling me homophobic because I wouldn’t let him perform fellatio on me. I’m still not letting him perform fellatio on me no matter how homophobic he thinks that makes me. You’re doing the same with lesbian women who don’t want to have sex with people who are transgender - trying to shame them and coerce them into submission by referring to them as terfs. Yet you’ll still berate another poster as “pulling the ladder up after them” while you’re in a position to shame women who don’t want to have sex with people who are transgender, who don’t want to share a space with people who are transgender, because like I said - it’s understandable that you couldn’t give a damn about other people once your own needs are met.

That’s exactly why some lesbian women feel that the mainstream LGBT community no longer represents them or their interests, because they don’t. It’s also why some people who are transgender feel that the mainstream LGBT community has never represented them or their interests, because it hasn’t. The so-called “LGBT community” was only ever an idealistic and fanciful notion of a tiny minority of people who appointed themselves representatives of the community they aspired to be, and that’s why more and more they’re being called out for giving an inaccurate representation of people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, intersex, asexual and a whole plethora of minorities of sexual orientation and gender identity.

Ten of Swords

Mod
Thread is being reopened but with a warning to all posters to continue the discussion in a civil tone and to report any posts you feel require mod attention.

JackTaylorFan, please stop making personal remarks, please attack the post not the poster if you feel transphobic statements are being made and as always report posts you feel are inappropriate

One Eyed Jack, your more recent posts in this thread are trolling and baiting other users, if you have nothing constructive to add to the discussion please refrain from posting.

Splinter65 do not post in this thread again

Feedback on moderation should be by pm, not discussed on thread.

JackTaylorFan

With all due respects to mods, I feel a need to reply to both these accusations

Rennaws wrote: »

Of course I have no issue whatsoever with trans people but if not wanting to sleep with them makes me phobic then phobic I am.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You’re doing the same with lesbian women who don’t want to have sex with people who are transgender - trying to shame them and coerce them into submission by referring to them as terfs.

You can back check all my comments on Boards, becuase I have literally, never once, uttered such sentiments. Not once. Just people trying to put words in my mouth.

Furthermore, if I call someone a transphobic bigot, it is becuase they are generally displaying an attitude that is transphobic. You don't have to be beating transpeople over the head with a metal rod, to be considered as such, you know.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

They genuinely care about other people and would have nothing to do with your divisive nonsense about terfs and terf sympathisers and all the rest of it. They see people as people, and they treat people accordingly, with the respect every human being deserves, regardless of their politics.

As for the above statement: well, I simply reject everything you claim on here, as we've established already, and if you think any self-respecting transperson wouldn't hold the same opinion as me concerning TERF's poisonous bile, then my friend, you are completely out of touch with the reality of the situation. <SNIP>

Mod: Final warning, no more personal jabs. Cards for the next one - this applies to all posters

JackTaylorFan

Since I'm here, may as well share the latest bit of TERF related garbage I've found:




https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/09/04/caroline-lucas-green-party-legitimise-hate-groups/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Buffer&utm_campaign=PN

Woman's Place is an organisation known for holding discussions around the Gender Recognition Act and what it could mean "for biological women"

People who’ve attended these events have spoken about how one-sided the discussion is, and have even said that misinformation is being shared to encourage an atmosphere of fear and outright transphobia in these discussions.

That last part in bold? Yeah, kinda sounds like exactly what is being allowed happen right here, to be honest.

Thanks, Mods

P_1

Jtf I say this with the greatest of respect. People here have the intelligence to recognise misinformation and outright horseshiit arguments for what they are.

Calling for censorship of this and throwing sly digs at mods is ineffective.

I completely understand why you would be justified in lashing out at those who wish to debate or deny your right to exist but sometimes this can manifest itself in ways that cause more grief.

By stooping to their level you let them win

The Bishop Basher

I said that I have no issue whatsoever with trans people but if not wanting to sleep with them makes me phobic then I must be phobic

To which you replied..

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

You can back check all my comments on Boards, becuase I have literally, never once, uttered such sentiments. Not once. Just people trying to put words in my mouth.

Yet a few comments previous you said..

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

It's quite straighforward comparing transwomen to men (abusive or not) is transphobic.

And yet if a trans woman was to make an advance on me I would 100% regard that person as male for the purpose of that interaction and I would reject any advances on that basis alone.

So you very much did utter those sentiments as according to you that makes me transphobic.

Annasopra

Rennaws wrote: »

I said that I have no issue whatsoever with trans people but if not wanting to sleep with them makes me phobic then I must be phobic

To which you replied..



Yet a few comments previous you said..



And yet if a trans woman was to make an advance on me I would 100% regard that person as male for the purpose of that interaction and I would reject any advances on that basis alone.

So you very much did utter those sentiments as according to you that makes me transphobic.

Rennaws you are being completely disingenuous in that argument. You are attempting to spin something here that was never claimed in the first place. JTF never argued that if you as a cis man or generally cis men that do not want to have sex with trans women are transphobic. This is just complete disingenuous strawmanning.

The Bishop Basher

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Rennaws you are being completely disingenuous in that argument. You are attempting to spin something here that was never claimed in the first place. JTF never argued that if you as a cis man or generally cis men that do not want to have sex with trans women are transphobic. This is just complete disingenuous strawmanning.

So why not let JTF answer..

Would they consider me transphobic ?

If I’m wrong and misunderstood the original post then I’m happy to put my hands up but let’s see how JTF interprets it first..

Annasopra

Rennaws wrote: »

So why not let JTF answer..

Would they consider me transphobic ?

If I’m wrong and misunderstood the original post then I’m happy to put my hands up but let’s see how JTF interprets it first..

I dont know whether she does or not. I dont know what her thoughts are. I didnt say she can't answer. I am highlighting that you are completely strawmanning this by creating an argument that was never made. You are putting words in peoples mouths that they never uttered. And then comparing apples and oranges to back up your point.

The Bishop Basher

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

It's quite straighforward comparing transwomen to men (abusive or not) is transphobic.

I’m challenging the OP on this statement.

I’ve presented a situation where I would be comparing a trans woman to a man.

Even though in every other situation I may treat them as a women if they asked me to.

You call it straw manning..

I call it asking a question and challenging OP on their statement..

Goodshape

Rennaws wrote:

And yet if a trans woman was to make an advance on me I would 100% regard that person as male for the purpose of that interaction and I would reject any advances on that basis alone.

But surely there's a countless reasons everyday why you might turn down an advance from any woman. You can't equate "woman" with "person I want to have sex with" exclusively.

Trans or cis, the person is no less of a woman just because you don't want to sleep with them.

One eyed Jack

Goodshape wrote: »

But surely there's a countless reasons everyday why you might turn down an advance from any woman. You can't equate "woman" with "person I want to have sex with" exclusively.

Anyone is entitled to do just that.

Trans or cis, the person is no less of a woman just because you don't want to sleep with them.

The argument isn’t whether they are or aren’t any “less” of a woman. The argument is that they aren’t women in the first place.



MOD:: One eyed Jack banned for 3 days for breaching forum charter. This is not the place to argue "that they aren’t women in the first place"

The Bishop Basher

Edited post as I see that OEJ has been banned for debating a point and I was arguing a similar point.

I’m not into thread bans and so will leave this topic.

The things we’re allowed debate with regard to this movement are getting fewer and fewer which is good for no one.

Slutmonkey57b

I've been reading linehan and the terf saga, and I think there are a number of interesting things (from an outsiders perspective).

1. Arguing that "biology isn't important" or "self-identified gender trumps biology" or "women have penises" is counter-productive. One is a physical, scientific reality and the other is a personal, internal thing. It will only seem, to someone from the outside, that one side of the argument is actively denying reality, whether that's the intention or not. "Because I say so" is not a counter argument to physical reality.
2. Women's concerns about single-sex spaces are not in any way unfounded. There need to be boundaries. Where those boundaries reasonably need to sit is a different question to whether boundaries should exist at all.
3. Unquestioned self-id opens the door for malicious people to leverage it for their own purposes. It's not a matter of "smearing" or "bigotry". Anyone who knows anything about gamergate or the chan boards can see a lot of the same ideas being tacked onto the trans movement. Malicious people have already started to leverage it. Attempting to pretend that won't happen, or hasn't happened, isn't a useful stance to take.
4. A "terf" (which is clearly a slur at this point) gets treated totally differently whether they're a woman or a man. Men get a tut-tut. Women get assaulted, and threatened with rape, stalking, violence and bomb threats. If you can't see this as plain old fashioned misogynistic behaviour then i wonder what you think you're looking at.
5. Dismissing genuine, factually based concerns with "It's not up for debate, get over it" isn't going to be a winning strategy. The Challenor family sued people who questioned them and used trans movements to silence others. Demanding that no dissent is allowed allows others to do the same. That's going to very negatively affect trans people in the short-medium term.

None of the above points mean that trans people aren't people or don't have rights, or don't need protection. But I think this "terf" business is going to backfire, and not in the way people who coined the term might assume.

P_1

So it is Twitter so best taken with a pinch of salt but seemingly there are reports of anti trans stickers being put up in train stations in Manchester with razor blades behind them. For context people have been removed these stickers when they see them.

If this is true then the phrase wtf seems woefully inadequate.

JackTaylorFan

P_1 wrote: »

So it is Twitter so best taken with a pinch of salt but seemingly there are reports of anti trans stickers being put up in train stations in Manchester with razor blades behind them. For context people have been removed these stickers when they see them.

If this is true then the phrase wtf seems woefully inadequate.

Well. What do you expect? TERFs are violent thugs. And, yet. you expect trans people to listen to "both sides of the argument".

(Note: I have been informed by Mods I am not thread banned)

JackTaylorFan

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

1. Arguing that "biology isn't important" or "self-identified gender trumps biology" or "women have penises" is counter-productive. One is a physical, scientific reality and the other is a personal, internal thing. It will only seem, to someone from the outside, that one side of the argument is actively denying reality, whether that's the intention or not. "Because I say so" is not a counter argument to physical reality.
2. Women's concerns about single-sex spaces are not in any way unfounded. There need to be boundaries. Where those boundaries reasonably need to sit is a different question to whether boundaries should exist at all.
3. Unquestioned self-id opens the door for malicious people to leverage it for their own purposes. It's not a matter of "smearing" or "bigotry". Anyone who knows anything about gamergate or the chan boards can see a lot of the same ideas being tacked onto the trans movement. Malicious people have already started to leverage it. Attempting to pretend that won't happen, or hasn't happened, isn't a useful stance to take.
4. A "terf" (which is clearly a slur at this point) gets treated totally differently whether they're a woman or a man. Men get a tut-tut. Women get assaulted, and threatened with rape, stalking, violence and bomb threats. If you can't see this as plain old fashioned misogynistic behaviour then i wonder what you think you're looking at.
5. Dismissing genuine, factually based concerns with "It's not up for debate, get over it" isn't going to be a winning strategy. The Challenor family sued people who questioned them and used trans movements to silence others. Demanding that no dissent is allowed allows others to do the same. That's going to very negatively affect trans people in the short-medium term.

None of the above points mean that trans people aren't people or don't have rights, or don't need protection. But I think this "terf" business is going to backfire, and not in the way people who coined the term might assume.

1. You are essentially trying to argue that trans women are not women again. Using a junior cert level of biology to back your points up.

2. Agreed : women's rights to safe spaces from sexual predators is not an unfounded necessity. However claiming transwomen are somehow more likely to attack a cis woman in these spaces is very much unfounded.

3. You are again, like so many on here, trying to compare and conflate transwomen to male sexual predators.

4. TERF is no more a slur than NAZI is.

P_1

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

Well. What do you expect? TERFs are violent thugs. And, yet. you expect trans people to listen to "both sides of the argument".

(Note: I have been informed by Mods I am not thread banned)

Listen yes, tear to shreds if it is transphobic horseshiite yes, do something positive rather than just shout back yes

The Bishop Basher

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

1. You are essentially trying to argue that trans women are not women again. Using a junior cert level of biology to back your points up.

Why is it that this topic is continuously brought up by JTF and other posters as if it's fact, which it's not, and gets ignored by mods on every occasion, yet if anyone else attempts to debate the concept using scientific FACT backed up by scientific evidence, they get thread banned

LLMMLL

Rennaws wrote: »

Why is it that this topic is continuously brought up by JTF and other posters as if it's fact, which it's not, and gets ignored by mods on every occasion, yet if anyone else attempts to debate the concept using scientific FACT backed up by scientific evidence, they get thread banned

Unfortunately you seem to have no concept of what science can and can’t tell us and how it’s misused in debates.

Take for example abortion debates. A major issue in these debates is when does life begin. Science can tell us things like when conception takes place, when a nervous system is present in the foetus, when the foetus can survive outside the womb etc. But science can not tell us when life begins. Which is at least part of the reason the abortion debate will never be truly resolved.

What has happened with the so called “it’s just science” people on other forums such as after hours is they start off by saying “women have breasts and vagina, men have no breasts and penis. Simple”, and when the issues with those simplistic, not simple, definitions are highlighted they always fall back on “chromosomes”.

If “chromosomes” were the defining factor, how come people were capable of making Male/female distinctions for millions of years whereas the knowledge of chromosomes have been around less than 100 years?

This pretends of just being a noble scientist armed with facts is pure nonsense.

JackTaylorFan

I'm not even going to dignify the deeply flawed and outdated bioessentialism arguments now being put forward on here, which are essentially being used to deny trans identities (with a particular focus on the vilification of transwomen as sexual predators).

Point by point barguments don't work anymore - not with TERFs and not with anyone who supports TERFS. It's clear to me, the people with prejudice commenting here will continue to be prejudiced no matter what you show them as evidence.

But for those who are genuinely interested, I'm just gonna leave this here - https://www.iflscience.com/brain/born-this-way-transgender-brains-show-similarity-to-those-of-their-desired-gender-from-a-young-age/ - all these groundbreaking studies are all showing the same thing - biological influence is at play in gender

wexie

LLMMLL wrote: »

If “chromosomes” were the defining factor, how come people were capable of making Male/female distinctions for millions of years whereas the knowledge of chromosomes have been around less than 100 years?

......I'm sure this isn't the point you're trying to make but it was a lot easier back in the days when assuming someone with an adamsapple and winky was male didn't somehow make you a bigoted a**hole

LLMMLL wrote: »

This pretends of just being a noble scientist armed with facts is pure nonsense.

Out of curiosity where does science stand on gender dysphoria?

I presume a lot of research has been and is being done but has it lead to any conclusions / explanations?

EDIT : just spotted link in previous post I'll have a read.

And btw this is coming from a genuine curiosity and trying to understand. I tend not to post here because quite frankly I think there are some disgusting attitudes on both sides of the argument and generally I prefer not to get caught up in it.

JackTaylorFan

wexie wrote: »

......I'm sure this isn't the point you're trying to make but it was a lot easier back in the days when assuming someone with an adamsapple and winky was male didn't somehow make you a bigoted a**hole

To assume someone's gender is not really what makes someone a "bigoted asshole", I often assume people's gender (daily), if I'm ever wrong, and misgender someone I will apologise and accept however they identify within the gender spectrum. No, what makes people "bigoted assholes" is the continued denialism and refusal to even try and understand.

_____________

And just as a PSA let me break down some numbers: Percentage of people who say things like "Did you just assume my gender":

99%: Cis people being transphobic

1%: Trans people making fun of transphobic cis people making "assuming my gender" jokes

Annasopra

Rennaws wrote: »

Why is it that this topic is continuously brought up by JTF and other posters as if it's fact, which it's not, and gets ignored by mods on every occasion, yet if anyone else attempts to debate the concept using scientific FACT backed up by scientific evidence, they get thread banned

Mod

It is in the forum charter. Thats why. And we wont be changing the forum charter. Also this is a discussion on terfs in the UK so please keep on topic and dont veer off into a discussion on the lgbt forum or its charter or if trans women are women at all. Thats a general thread warning.

lgbt forum charter wrote:

Saying that transgender is a choice, saying that trans surgeries are cosmetic, or calling trans people "a man/woman who thinks they are a woman/man ", will result in an immediate infraction and/or ban, as these things aren't "opinions", they are falsehoods rooted in transphobia.

EdgeCase

I think this has to be seen in modern British political context too. There's an alarmingly rapid building of bunkers going on in the UK and everyone being out to get everyone else.

It's symptomatic of a society in a bit of a mess at the moment and I don't think the rise of so called 'TERFs' can be seen outside of that context.

What I'm noticing in the UK is a general growing inability to put oneself into someone else's shoes. It's something that had been a hallmark of the post Thatcher society that developed into all of the 'cool Britannia' era of tolerance and open-mindedness, that's suddenly gone away and there's an oozing toxicity now getting into lots of aspects of society on both the right and left.

The only solution I can see is for trans people to keep talking about their experience and lives and trying to bring people on-board. You'll be very unlikely to ever change the minds of hardliners on any topic, but you can win over the hearts and minds of the general public, as has been clearly demonstrated in both recent Irish referenda, by telling real human stories about real lives in a way that people can relate to them.

I guess what I'm trying to say is bunkers cause wars and sometimes, recognising that they're being built is all important to preventing conflicts.

I'm not trying to say that there's nothing can be done, I just think it's probably better off not to be sucked into a troll war with extremists and far better to spend energy communicating with people who are open minded enough to listen.

P_1

EdgeCase wrote: »

I think this has to be seen in modern British political context too. There's an alarmingly rapid building of bunkers going on in the UK and everyone being out to get everyone else.

It's symptomatic of a society in a bit of a mess at the moment and I don't think the rise of so called 'TERFs' can be seen outside of that context.

What I'm noticing in the UK is a general growing inability to put oneself into someone else's shoes. It's something that had been a hallmark of the post Thatcher society that developed into all of the 'cool Britannia' era of tolerance and open-mindedness, that's suddenly gone away and there's an oozing toxicity now getting into lots of aspects of society on both the right and left.

The only solution I can see is for trans people to keep talking about their experience and lives and trying to bring people on-board. You'll be very unlikely to ever change the minds of hardliners on any topic, but you can win over the hearts and minds of the general public, as has been clearly demonstrated in both recent Irish referenda, by telling real human stories about real lives in a way that people can relate to them.

I guess what I'm trying to say is bunkers cause wars and sometimes, recognising that they're being built is all important to preventing conflicts.

I'm not trying to say that there's nothing can be done, I just think it's probably better off not to be sucked into a troll war with extremists and far better to spend energy communicating with people who are open minded enough to listen.

Agreed. Perhaps this is only why were seeing stuff like this happen in the UK and the US. Arguably both societies are a mess at the moment

bodice ripper

Any evidence of these stickers?

P_1

bodice ripper wrote: »

Any evidence of these stickers?

Only seems to be tweets. Asked some manc friends but they haven't been around the city centre today or yesterday

pl4ichjgy17zwd

P_1 wrote:

Only seems to be tweets. Asked some manc friends but they haven't been around the city centre today or yesterday

bodice ripper wrote:

Any evidence of these stickers?

The Manchester transport police tweeted that they sent officers to check but have yet to report if it's a hoax or not.

Slutmonkey57b

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

1. You are essentially trying to argue that trans women are not women again. Using a junior cert level of biology to back your points up.

I'm not arguing anything. I'm just observing what the argument looks like, to someone on the outside. You can ignore that if you like, people on the outside of this debate really won't care as the outcome doesn't affect them.

2. Agreed : women's rights to safe spaces from sexual predators is not an unfounded necessity. However claiming transwomen are somehow more likely to attack a cis woman in these spaces is very much unfounded.

You are putting words in my mouth again, I did not claim any such thing. There is no concept that a safe space for women is one which is "sexual predator free". Sexual predators are hardly going to announce themselves at the door. It is one which women deem to be safe by design rather than assumption.

3. You are again, like so many on here, trying to compare and conflate transwomen to male sexual predators.

3 points and the third time you've put words in my mouth, which doesn't reflect well. Malicious people (who may have no trans identity at all) are going to or have already exploited the trans movement for their own (non-trans) ends. Read up on gamergate, and you will see a lot of the same tactics employed, against women, as they always have been. Read up on what the Challenor family did, and you'll see similar tactics at play.

If you are part of the trans movement, then this is something it would pay to be aware of. Your choice.

Accusing someone who's trying to warn you about a legitimate problem that might impact you of something they're not doing isn't going to win you any allies.

4. TERF is no more a slur than NAZI is.

Like I say, I believe the current course of events isn't going to play out that way. The fact that the word "terf" is employed in different ways against men vs. Women, and the fact that there's no equivalent term for men who don't agree with some of what's coming out of discussions around trans people tells us that it's intended, and used, as a slur.

Nobody's going around making bomb threats against men's groups on behalf of trans men, are they?

Annasopra

Mod

A reminder of the mod warning above;

this is a discussion on terfs in the UK so please keep on topic and dont veer off into a discussion on the lgbt forum or its charter or if trans women are women at all. Thats a general thread warning.

JackTaylorFan

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

I'm not arguing anything. I'm just observing what the argument looks like, to someone on the outside. You can ignore that if you like, people on the outside of this debate really won't care as the outcome doesn't affect them.

Oh, I really wish I could agree with this statement, really, I do. But nah... There's a ton of people out there for whom trans rights won't affect in the slightest way, who are really, really angry. Like really angry. Only someone being contrarian would deny this. Now, I don't know why people are upset exactly. I mean, I have some theories - for instance: why straight men get so upset. it's usually got to with their own sexuality being challenged. And well, you only have to look at the latest Alex Jones nonsense to start to think "Wow! All that trans-bashing for so long. Hmmm... Maybe it really is as simple as that. Wow!" I mean, that's just one theory of many.

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

You are putting words in my mouth again, I did not claim any such thing. There is no concept that a safe space for women is one which is "sexual predator free". Sexual predators are hardly going to announce themselves at the door. It is one which women deem to be safe by design rather than assumption.

I did no such thing. You made it clear that you think giving transwomen access to women's spaces would put cis women more at risk of being attacked. Thus implying, deliberately or not, transwomen are sexual predators, whilst also playing straight into the narrative created by TERFs and their sponsors and sympathizers.

There has literally never been anything stopping a male predator gaining access to a women's public restroom or changing room up to this point. Fact is, if someone is going to assault someone a sign on a door ain't going to be a deterrent. Seems you just want to punish transwomen for a crime they never committed. Also, I always find it quite fascinating how the concern never goes the other way. Should we protect men from trans men invading their space?

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

3 points and the third time you've put words in my mouth, which doesn't reflect well. Malicious people (who may have no trans identity at all) are going to or have already exploited the trans movement for their own (non-trans) ends. Read up on gamergate, and you will see a lot of the same tactics employed, against women, as they always have been. Read up on what the Challenor family did, and you'll see similar tactics at play.

So, you want to punish all transwomen for the actions of a few malicious types, as you said yourself, who may actually have no connection to the trasn community at all? Yeah, that seems fair.

I also have a suggestion though... It's a radical one, granted, but... how about we punish the actual people committed of a crime? And not blame an entire community - one of the most marginalised and vulnerable communities on the planet, by the way - for the ill will of a few "malicious" types? I don't know... is that too crazy to hope for?

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

If you are part of the trans movement, then this is something it would pay to be aware of. Your choice.

Accusing someone who's trying to warn you about a legitimate problem that might impact you of something they're not doing isn't going to win you any allies.

Your definition of the word "allies" must be very different than mine.

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

Like I say, I believe the current course of events isn't going to play out that way. The fact that the word "terf" is employed in different ways against men vs. Women, and the fact that there's no equivalent term for men who don't agree with some of what's coming out of discussions around trans people tells us that it's intended, and used, as a slur.

To be honest, I usually call men who support TERFs
TERFs/Bigots/Assholes/C*nts/etc. Pick one if it helps.

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

Nobody's going around making bomb threats against men's groups on behalf of trans men, are they?

Just to put things into perspective, I've had two death threats this year - one, where I asked for help with on here. And for which I was subsequently harassed further and was on the receiving end of good old victim blaming. What was my crime? Just being a transwoman minding her own business. I suppose that's enough for some to want me dead. But sure, the poor TERFs. I'll cry tears for all their bitter, twisted little hearts this evening before bedtime prayers, I'm sure.

JackTaylorFan

Someone mentioned that this endemic of a much bigger political problem, and to be honest, they are right - but don't think TERFs don't stoop to these same levels: https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/oklahoma-schools-close-after-adults-threaten-transgender-student-n900881

P_1

So after an hour I'll never get back properly looking into the argument raised by the TERFs I have to say it's an argument that does not hold merit. For context, and to bring some rational evidence to the table, heres an example of a somewhat reasonable appearing propaganda piece from them.
https://twitter.com/fairplaywomen/status/1037779769608335362?s=19

An_Toirpin

The word Terf is a disgusting hateful slur. No one should try to divide us like that.

Slutmonkey57b

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

There has literally never been anything stopping a male predator gaining access to a women's public restroom or changing room up to this point. Fact is, if someone is going to assault someone a sign on a door ain't going to be a deterrent. Seems you just want to punish transwomen for a crime they never committed.

So you'll have read the news, then.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-45436953

This wouldn't be possible without self-id. Men were not transferred to women's prisons before self id. Anyone who suggested it would have been dismissed as a crank. Instead, women who raised concerns about single sex spaces being eliminated by self-id were dismissed as cranks. Even in this thread, when someone's attempting to make the point reasonably, you're so busy over reacting and making false claims about what is being put to you, that you seemingly won't accept the possibility that there are very serious, even life-threatening consequences to eliminating single sex spaces, and instead you're sticking to the notion that the wants of one small section of society not only should trump the very serious needs of another, but that anyone who disagrees should be branded a bigot.

I'll leave you to explain how it didn't happen and isn't the result of self-id.

Note: I don't claim that the perpetrator of this crime has any status or is representative of anyone other than themselves. You'll no doubt attempt to suggest I am. But i can only repeat that i can only see anyone advocating that women should have no say in determining who gets to share their spaces is going to find themselves on the wrong side of history.

If self-id is a law worth advocating for, then these types of fallouts need to be addressed, discussed, and solved the same as any other law. "It's not up for debate", again, is not a line that's going to succeed if obvious consequences like this get dismissed out of hand.

Also, I always find it quite fascinating how the concern never goes the other way. Should we protect men from trans men invading their space?

Trans men don't seem to be making death threats either. But then, trans men would find it more difficult to physically or verbally intimidate any male opponents into silence or compliance.

Just to put things into perspective, I've had two death threats this year - one, where I asked for help with on here. And for which I was subsequently harassed further and was on the receiving end of good old victim blaming. What was my crime? Just being a transwoman minding her own business. I suppose that's enough for some to want me dead. But sure, the poor TERFs. I'll cry tears for all their bitter, twisted little hearts this evening before bedtime prayers, I'm sure.

I'm not getting into "who's worst off" with you. In an ideal world nobody would be getting death threats. It's worth asking why things are this way.

If the answer is "It's the terf's fault" then... off you go, I suppose. I personally don't believe it's as simple as that.

bodice ripper

An_Toirpin wrote:

The word Terf is a disgusting hateful slur. No one should try to divide us like that.

Sorry, who is "us" in that sentence?

Franz Von Peppercorn

bodice ripper wrote: »

Sorry, who is "us" in that sentence?

Feminists I assume. I have a longer post on this tomorrow but terfs didn’t arise as a response to transgenderism - feminists who held the same opinions they always held were labelled terfs as the ideology took hold.