Gruffalox wrote: » It is why campaigns for toilets for females only take place all over the planet. It is why women got their own spaces in the first place. Safeguarding.
Bannasidhe wrote: » No. That is not why women created women only spaces. We were not given them. It is not a case of we 'got' them. We made them for ourselves so we could get a break from men telling us what women are, what women can and cannot do, etc etc. And in a great many women created women only spaces the criteria is 'identifies as female'. If you think it was about 'safeguarding', and toilets, it just shows your profound lack of understanding of feminist history.
Gruffalox wrote: » I find you extremely contradictory. How about you have any male who identifies as a woman in your female space and I fight as a woman for the protection of my sex based spaces. Let us do our own thing. I know females rape by the way. And I am not a feminist. I like men. I seek EQUALITY only. Feminism is a movement that seriously lost its way.
CtevenSrowder wrote: » I'm not dealing with your ultra deconstructionist 'tables of exemplars' rubbish again. We are discussing humans, unless you think trans-people aren't human?
ohnonotgmail wrote: » why dont you contact twitter and ask them why they dont? i dont see the need myself. I find following the "dont be a dick" rule to be sufficient to avoid trouble.
Sir Oxman wrote: » Careful now, the 'don't be a dick' rule can expand and contract at merely one person's whim.
LLMMLL wrote: » I never said anything about humans or non humans. No idea what you're talking about.
CtevenSrowder wrote: » This why 3rd spaces are the best solution, although unfortunately not always practical.
Gruffalox wrote: » I agree. They are not impracticable. We do not have to hew them out of the rock with our finger nails. By the way for others to know it was a transwoman called Morgane Ager who got the Vancouver Womens Refuge shut down last year because it would not accommodate male bodied people. 1200 women were thus left without a service because one man who identifies as a woman decided. Fcuk that **** all to way to the hob of hell if that is the new feminism.
CtevenSrowder wrote: » I've no idea what you are talking about. You quoted me. We are talking about trans-people who are human. I defined what a female was, a human female. Whether the word female is used in other contexts to, for example, distinguish between screw sockets is neither here nor there.
CtevenSrowder wrote: » I meant impracticable is a business sense. They may not have the room or funds to create them.
LLMMLL wrote: » What are you talking about? The anonymous twitter account it's not that website. That website has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.
LLMMLL wrote: » Female is used outside of science all the time and is synonymous with woman. Anti trans activists try to pretend that female.is some kind of protected scientific term that only scientists use and only refers to cis women. That's just not the case.
CtevenSrowder wrote: » Yes it is synonymous with woman. You've just argued against your own World-view. A trans-woman isn't a woman because they aren't female. I'm glad you finally understand.
tigger123 wrote: » Genuine request: does anyone have a link handy that would explain why women get so riled up about trans women? I really cant make sense of it or understand it at all.
Gruffalox wrote: » I find you extremely contradictory. How about you have any male who identifies as a woman in your female space and I fight as a woman for the protection of my sex based spaces. Let us do our own thing. I know females rape by the way.And I am not a feminist. I like men. I seek EQUALITY only. Feminism is a movement that seriously lost its way.
Sir Oxman wrote: » It wasn't clear. Is Michael Biggs in the 'can of history' or can this study stand on it's own legs is the only question. If not, does the original Dutch study stand up. And yes, I know who he is.
CtevenSrowder wrote: » Noone gets riled up by trans-women. They get riled up by trans-activists and their unscientific nonsense. The two are not the same.
Bannasidhe wrote: » You don't appear to understand that 'rape' is a legal term and the only way women could rape is if they are a pre-op transwoman but you don't think they are women therefore women can't 'rape' - they can, and do, commit sexual assault. I'm not sure it's feminism that is lost tbh.
LLMMLL wrote: » A trans woman is a woman and is female. No need to out makey uppy words in my mouth.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Because some people are protective about sex specific rights and or sex specific areas where they are only permitted and think that it is wrong to enable the opposite sex into such areas or take advantage of sex specific rights they should not be afforded. And some people think acknowledgement of actual basic biology is better than capitulation to spare the feelings of others.
tigger123 wrote: » Ok. I think its safe to say then that they are riled up by trans women wanting to share bathrooms and what not. I'm trying to understand where that feeling is coming from.
Deleted User wrote: » Hahaha. Jesus, specific about the meaning and definition of the word rape, yet loosey goosey when it comes to woman and man.
Bannasidhe wrote: » You don't appear to understand that 'rape' is a legal term and the only way women could rape is if they are a pre-op transwoman but you don't think they are women therefore women can't 'rape' - they can, and do, commit sexual assault.
(a) penetration (however slight) of the anus or mouth by the penis, or (b) penetration (however slight) of the vagina by any object held or manipulated by another person.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
