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

The Bishop Basher

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I know yeah right. How dare they. How dare minorities ask to be accomodated. Its a disgrace. An outrage.

Your being deliberately disingenuous with that comment but as I’ve said, I don’t need anything to change so work away.

Just don’t be surprised when the 99.7% say no.

P_1

I wonder if lessons learned from the victorious campaigns to achieve marriage equality and repelling the 8th can be applied here. I certainly see parallels between the concerns regarding shared spaces and some of the concerns that were expressed by no or leaning no voters on the 8th.

The only concern on that score would be the potential mental health harm that having these conversations would have on some trans people.

LLMMLL

Rennaws wrote: »

Your being deliberately disingenuous with that comment but as I’ve said, I don’t need anything to change so work away.

Just don’t be surprised when the 99.7% say no.

You do realise that there are no constitutional issues at play here and so the general public will not be voting on these issues.

Legally, trans rights are advancing, even if there is horrific discrimination by the the general public.

Portraying yourself as someone who needs to be asked and placated so that trans rights can progress is nonsense.

You have zero power here. Nobody has to convince you about trans rights.

7aubzxk43m2sni

LLMMLL wrote: »

You do realise that there are no constitutional issues at play here and so the general public will not be voting on these issues.

Legally, trans rights are advancing, even if there is horrific discrimination by the the general public.

Portraying yourself as someone who needs to be asked and placated so that trans rights can progress is nonsense.

You have zero power here. Nobody has to convince you about trans rights.

It's a bit more nuanced if you're discussing single sex spaces and the ability of those who self identify to enter those spaces. Concerns about this idea are hardly "horrific discrimination".

Do you hold one fist in the air when posting stuff like your last sentence?

Goodshape

Emerie Witty Electricity wrote: »

It's a bit more nuanced if you're discussing single sex spaces and the ability of those who self identify to enter those spaces. Concerns about this idea are hardly "horrific discrimination".

Isn't it though? When you're literally talking about discriminating against an entire group of individuals based on your personal "concerns".

Isn't that pretty horrific discrimination?

7aubzxk43m2sni

Goodshape wrote: »

Isn't it though? When you're literally talking about discriminating against an entire group of individuals based on your personal "concerns".

Isn't that pretty horrific discrimination?

It's an undefined (limitless in size) group if the assertion is that anyone can self identify as any gender, and that is all that is required to access spaces designated for that gender only.

The Bishop Basher

LLMMLL wrote: »

Portraying yourself as someone who needs to be asked and placated so that trans rights can progress is nonsense.

Yet another disingenuous post.

I've portrayed myself as no such thing.

Change in any society requires consensus from the majority.

I didn't think I needed to explain that but there you go..

LLMMLL wrote: »

You have zero power here. Nobody has to convince you about trans rights.

Well yes and no..

Try sending a trans woman with a penis into the ladies changing room at my local gym and i'm guessing you'll have a problem on your hands.

As will all the members as they file out the door while canceling their memberships.

So yes we do all have power and you are correct, no one has to convince me of anything..

I honestly don't give a fiddlers. I have zero issues with nudity and would share changing spaces with (almost) anyone or any gender, trans or not.

You might need to convince a few others though..

LLMMLL

Rennaws wrote: »

Yet another disingenuous post.

I've portrayed myself as no such thing.

Change in any society requires consensus from the majority.

I didn't think I needed to explain that but there you go..



Well yes and no..

Try sending a trans woman with a penis into the ladies changing room at my local gym and i'm guessing you'll have a problem on your hands.

As will all the members as they file out the door while canceling their memberships.

So yes we do all have power and you are correct, no one has to convince me of anything..

I honestly don't give a fiddlers. I have zero issues with nudity and would share changing spaces with (almost) anyone or any gender, trans or not.

You might need to convince a few others though..

Except it’s not true that change in society requires consensus from the majority.

Homosexuality was decriminalised without consent from the majority in an atmosphere of extreme homophobia.

Gay people have only had to “convince” the majority in one case. Gay marriage. And that was only because of a constitutional issue.

Trans rights can progress in the same manner.

How people will react to sharing their single sex spaces with trans people is unknown but I’m doubtful any change will be made from debating people who already have their minds made up on boards.

JackTaylorFan

skybox2014 wrote: »

JackTaylorFan admits self-id isn't perfect and is open to abuse.
And who is the collateral damage?

Me, and people in my position, we are the collateral damage. Because we are the ones facing the public backlash from one person in millions abusing a right that was meant to help us not make us public enemy no.1 as we are portrayed as so evidenced here on Boards every time trans rights comes up in debate.

But thanks for letting me make that point again.

JackTaylorFan

skybox2014 wrote: »

JackTaylorFan, if trans women are just as concerned about self ID being abused, then what are they and other activists doing about it? Genuine question.

I should clarify, I am not in any position to change anything. I am not a policy maker, nor do I hold much sway in any community. I would suggest, if I did hold any influence, that sexual offenders like White/Wood/Whatever gave up any right to be around gen pop in any prison system.

As I have stated before, this person is a monster and needs to be dropped down a hole and left there to rot, this is the latest on that individual - https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rapist-karen-white-in-women-s-jail-was-trans-faker-lbcwjp8jc. This deeply angers me, because, yet again, who will feel the public backlash here? As I said already, people like me. That's who.

The biggest issue for me with self-IDing is that it is a right that needs to be afforded to trans people - we have had to scrape and fight hard to get even this much. And yes, sadly, some people are going to abuse that right, by breaking the law. The crimes of White/Wood/Whatever (after that article, I am not even sure what I am supposed to refer to them as anymore) before entering the prison system were heinous, and regardless of whichever gender they identified as at the time of those offences, they seemed to have access to their victims. I have since read what this piece of **** is alleged to have done once inside - and yes, it is awful and can in no way be condoned - but was it as serious as the rapes committed prior to prison? Thankfully not - https://nypost.com/2018/09/07/transgender-woman-accused-of-sexually-assaulting-inmates/. I would actually welcome the idea of self-Iding criminals convicted of serious sexual assault and rape being sent to a prison where they are least likely to be able to hurt anyone else - and in most cases, that would be a men's prison. I don't know if this is a popular opinion or not in the wider trans community, because it is something I feel some don't want or can't face a discussion on because even by me saying this person's crime (White's) is too vile for me to respect their supposed gender identity's (fraudulently claimed or not) right to a woman's space does diminish what self-Iding is supposed to mean for our whole community.

Really, I don't know how you solve this. I am sorry it has happened. I am sorry for the victims. It honestly makes me sick and I am deeply upset by these kind of stories. It makes me ashamed and less safe being trans - it stigmatizes the whole community. And it troubles me that I find myself having to try justify my own existence and my need to feel safe once again - as if I am somehow personally putting women and children at risk by just existing at all. The fact is, I am just as much in danger of being assaulted in a women's only space by a monster like White, but I am made to feel like it's somehow my fault that this is happening. I feel guilt when I shouldn't. However, despite that misplaced guilt (and it is misplaced), what I am not prepared to do is give up those rights (diminished or not) for the rare instances where predators abuse the system and why should I or any other transperson have to for that matter?

The Bishop Basher

LLMMLL wrote: »

Except it’s not true that change in society requires consensus from the majority.

Homosexuality was decriminalised without consent from the majority in an atmosphere of extreme homophobia.

Gay people have only had to “convince” the majority in one case. Gay marriage. And that was only because of a constitutional issue.

Your confusing changing a law with changing society.

Changing a law requires a signature..

Changing society norms takes many decades of debate, education and campaigning..

LLMMLL wrote: »

How people will react to sharing their single sex spaces with trans people is unknown

If you're talking about trans women with penis's sharing spaces with women then no it's not unknown.

I'm sure many women might get used to it quickly enough if they were given the opportunity but equally there are large swathes that will never accept it.

Laws, as you suggest, could be introduced to force it on gyms, leisure centres etc but you can't force people to use them.

Whether you agree or not, at some point there has to be consensus.

LLMMLL

Rennaws wrote: »

Your confusing changing a law with changing society.

Changing a law requires a signature..

Changing society norms takes many decades of debate, education and campaigning..



If you're talking about trans women with penis's sharing spaces with women then no it's not unknown.

I'm sure many women might get used to it quickly enough if they were given the opportunity but equally there are large swathes that will never accept it.

Laws, as you suggest, could be introduced to force it on gyms, leisure centres etc but you can't force people to use them.

Whether you agree or not, at some point there has to be consensus.

But the point I’m making is that there does not need to be a consensus.

After 1993 for instance, gay men could not be criminally prosecuted in regards to their sexuality. It doesn’t matter that large swathes of the population were extremely homophobic. It doesn’t matter that there wasn’t a public consensus around gay people. Those prosecutions could not legally be made.

If there was a law introduced around this subject, or even general policy in this area, then that would further trans rights. Even if every cis person decided to stop using the changing rooms, a trans person would still have the right to use it. No consent from you needed. No begging the majority to allow them their rights.

So your portrayal of yourself as being part of a majority that needs to be convinced is just false.

Of course it would be bettter to have legal protections AND general social acceptance. But that’s not going to come from a trans person debating their identity with someone who clearly can’t be convinced on a niche Internet forum. Sorry rennaws but nobody owes you a debate, and it’s not going to affect the trans rights movement in the slightest if someone doesn’t want to debate your crude “scientific realities”.

The Bishop Basher

LLMMLL wrote: »

If there was a law introduced around this subject, or even general policy in this area, then that would further trans rights. Even if every cis person decided to stop using the changing rooms, a trans person would still have the right to use it. No consent from you needed. No begging the majority to allow them their rights.

That was exactly my point. No consent from anyone required. A few customers would be good though. Create spaces that make the vast majority of your customers uncomfortable and you won't be in business very long..

LLMMLL wrote: »

So your portrayal of yourself as being part of a majority that needs to be convinced is just false.

Jesus this dishonesty again.. For the second time, i'm not portraying myself as anything. Why do you keep coming back with this blatant lie ?

Is your position not strong enough that you have to try and undermine mine with lies ?

I've already said that i personally wouldn't have a problem sharing a changing room with a trans person or any other person, regardless of gender or anything else.

I've been to plenty of naked resorts and naked beaches, i'm happily married with grown up kids and i'm well passed the point of giving two fiddlers flucks what you have or haven't got dangling between your legs.

I don't need convincing of anything. Is that clear enough for you ?

Goodshape

Rennaws wrote: »

I don't need convincing of anything. Is that clear enough for you ?

So you're arguing for discrimination based on what you think other people might find objectionable?

Why on earth would you do that?

LLMMLL

Rennaws wrote: »

That was exactly my point. No consent from anyone required. A few customers would be good though. Create spaces that make the vast majority of your customers uncomfortable and you won't be in business very long..



Jesus this dishonesty again.. For the second time, i'm not portraying myself as anything. Why do you keep coming back with this blatant lie ?

Is your position not strong enough that you have to try and undermine mine with lies ?

I've already said that i personally wouldn't have a problem sharing a changing room with a trans person or any other person, regardless of gender or anything else.

I've been to plenty of naked resorts and naked beaches, i'm happily married with grown up kids and i'm well passed the point of giving two fiddlers flucks what you have or haven't got dangling between your legs.

I don't need convincing of anything. Is that clear enough for you ?

Here’s your quote from earlier in the thread:

I couldn’t give a fiddlers either way because being straight, white and male I like things just as they are anyway but trans people need the world to change to suit them while expecting the rest of us to ignore certain scientific realities and that’s going to take some serious debating.

You say you like things just the way you are and say “the rest of US” rather than the “rest of THEM” when characterising the group of people who trans people are supposedly reliant on convincing.

You’re very clearly presenting yourself as one of those who need to be “convinced” before trans rights can progress. Why else would you mention your happiness with the current situation?

As for gyms and their customers it’s completely irrelevant. If the right of trans people to use the changing rooms of the gender they identify as was enshrined in law or policy, the gyms would have no choice. All gyms. Trans people would have that right whether you liked it or not. No consultation would be made with you or people like you. nobody would need to convince you or anybody in your group to attain that right.

And it’s a little unrealistic to think that all gyms would have to close because they’d have no cutomers because trans people were using their changing rooms.

liamog

Rennaws wrote: »

That was exactly my point. No consent from anyone required. A few customers would be good though. Create spaces that make the vast majority of your customers uncomfortable and you won't be in business very long..

Isn't this why we have anti-discrimination laws, if a business creates a traveller free space because it makes their customers uncomfortable, they would quite rightly lose a case on discrimination grounds. By makeing special rules that affect trans people, your breaching the gender component of our equlity law.

The Bishop Basher

LLMMLL wrote: »

You say you like things just the way you are and say “the rest of US” rather than the “rest of THEM” when characterising the group of people who trans people are supposedly reliant on convincing.

I use the term "us" because

a) I'm not trans

and

b) I don't use the label that trans people use for us

This is getting really tiresome..

Not everything has to be an agenda and we're not all on a crusade you know..

LLMMLL wrote: »

You’re very clearly presenting yourself as one of those who need to be “convinced” before trans rights can progress. Why else would you mention your happiness with the current situation?

Why on earth wouldn't I be happy with the current situation ?

No offence but I mind mine and my own.

For the most part, and certainly for the purpose of this conversation, I couldn't give a shi1te about your life or anyone else's that I don't know.

But then i've also explicitly expressed the fact that i'd also be happy were the current situation to change.

So i'm not sure what it is that you expect but please, feel free to keep it to yourself.

I'm not asking..

On that note..

Annasopra

Rennaws wrote: »

I use the term "us" because

a) I'm not trans

and

b) I don't use the label that trans people use for us

This is getting really tiresome..

Not everything has to be an agenda and we're not all on a crusade you know..



Why on earth wouldn't I be happy with the current situation ?

No offence but I mind mine and my own.

For the most part, and certainly for the purpose of this conversation, I couldn't give a shi1te about your life or anyone else's that I don't know.

But then i've also explicitly expressed the fact that i'd also be happy were the current situation to change.

So i'm not sure what it is that you expect but please, feel free to keep it to yourself.

I'm not asking..

On that note..

I don't understand. You claim not to care about this issue but it obviously does excercise you a lot. Your protestations to be honest sound quite hollow. I mean if you really are that non plussed about the issue why is it irking you so much that you are posting here.

Oh by the way. The "current situation" changed 3 years ago in Ireland. We have self ID. We have had self ID for 3 years. No big deal.

LLMMLL

Rennaws wrote: »

I use the term "us" because

a) I'm not trans

and

b) I don't use the label that trans people use for us

This is getting really tiresome..

Not everything has to be an agenda and we're not all on a crusade you know..



Why on earth wouldn't I be happy with the current situation ?

No offence but I mind mine and my own.

For the most part, and certainly for the purpose of this conversation, I couldn't give a shi1te about your life or anyone else's that I don't know.

But then i've also explicitly expressed the fact that i'd also be happy were the current situation to change.

So i'm not sure what it is that you expect but please, feel free to keep it to yourself.

I'm not asking..

On that note..

This is quite bizarre.

You’re basically proclaiming to have very little interest in a topic that you’ve commented on multiple times across multiple threads.

TheAsYLuMkeY

Mods wrote:

Finally, to be crystal clear, it is against the forum charter to say or imply that transwomen are not women,

Is that not an oxymoron?

The way is see it,

Transwomen are Transwomen
Transmen are Transmen
women are women
Men are Men

Is that not a factual reality of the existence of all of the above terms in our lexicon?

Annasopra

TheAsYLuMkeY wrote: »

Is that not an oxymoron?

The way is see it,

Transwomen are Transwomen
Transmen are Transmen
women are women
Men are Men

Is that not a factual reality of the existence of all of the above terms in our lexicon?

Mod

Sorry but as always and as per the whole site we dont debate or discuss moderation on thread.

The forum charter is very specific in saying trans identities are not up for debate in this forum. We wont be changing the forum charter right now as it was arrived at by consultation and consensus.

Sorry but as per the original mod instruction we will not having a debate here that transwomen are not women.

ingalway

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Mod

Sorry but as always and as per the whole site we dont debate or discuss moderation on thread.

The forum charter is very specific in saying trans identities are not up for debate in this forum. We wont be changing the forum charter right now as it was arrived at by consultation and consensus.

Sorry but as per the original mod instruction we will not having a debate here that transwomen are not women.

Can I ask who you consulted to get the consensus that transwomen are women and transmen are men?

Why do you not ban the term 'trans' altogether as surely that must be transphobic as it clearly highlights that there is a difference between biological sex and gender identity?

L.Jenkins

ingalway wrote: »

Can I ask who you consulted to get the consensus that transwomen are women and transmen are men?

Why do you not ban the term 'trans' altogether as surely that must be transphobic as it clearly highlights that there is a difference between biological sex and gender identity?

I fail to see how your comment is help, beyond the thinly veiled troll like remark. I could be biased, being trans and a mod.

ingalway

L.Jenkins wrote: »

I fail to see how your comment is help, beyond the thinly veiled troll like remark. I could be biased, being trans and a mod.

My comments are questions, perfectly reasonable and no trolling whatsoever.
The purpose of this site and life in general is to ask questions, get answers, debate, agree, disagree, in a reasonable manner.

I'm not sure who I'm supposed to be helping?

Is you telling me that you are a mod a thinly veiled suggestion that I shut up?

Annasopra

Mod

Sorry. Nope. Trolls not welcome.