Author Topic: Poll: What is actually bothering you most about the trans thing?  (Read 1094 times)

Offline Betty Croker

  • Gingerbeer Goddess
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • Gingerbeer.co.uk - The Lesbian Guide
Re: Poll: What is actually bothering you most about the trans thing?
« Reply #15 on: Jul 20, 2018, 12:03:20 PM »
It happened to her, Wolfie. Thatís not scaremongering. Itís not some worst case scenario. Cheer up it might never happen. It did happen. And that experience grounds where she is coming from. So someone suggesting she is just a big transphobe is adding insult to injury. And are you really well placed to say how realistic her fears are giving that you donít live the reality of her life and face the scenarios she has to negotiate?

Oh and your comparison to immigration fears is beneath you. Male violence and sexual violence is epidemic. Proven fact. Not comparable with some eastern Europeans might come and burgle your out house.
« Last Edit: Jul 20, 2018, 12:19:16 PM by Betty Croker's frosted buns »
And now I know how Joan of Arc felt.......

Offline Wolfgang

  • Gingerbeer Goddess
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,070
Re: Poll: What is actually bothering you most about the trans thing?
« Reply #16 on: Jul 20, 2018, 09:54:13 PM »
This thread isn't about anyone in particular, it's about an unfocused argument, and I haven't yet called anyone on here a transphobe.

And are you telling me lefty lesbians are immune to reactionary prejudice? 
I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong that transwomen aren't shouting at me to suck their balls. - Hhayt

Offline Lust for Life

  • Gingerbeer Goddess
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,296
  • deep down, I think I am an optimist ...
Re: Poll: What is actually bothering you most about the trans thing?
« Reply #17 on: Jul 21, 2018, 05:00:25 AM »
I'd say the bits that look like reactionary prejudice are the articles quoted from the Sun and the Daily Mail....

Offline Betty Croker

  • Gingerbeer Goddess
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • Gingerbeer.co.uk - The Lesbian Guide
Re: Poll: What is actually bothering you most about the trans thing?
« Reply #18 on: Jul 21, 2018, 03:36:07 PM »
This thread isn't about anyone in particular, it's about an unfocused argument, and I haven't yet called anyone on here a transphobe.

And are you telling me lefty lesbians are immune to reactionary prejudice?


I don't think anyone is immune to it but I think they are less likely to succumb to sustained unexamined prejudice. The arenas they frequent will tend to knock it out in no time.

But I'm not seeing any of that here. I do see it on Twitter and it makes my toes curl and I avoid those corners. And I do think its reactionary as in reacting to sh*t coming their way - going low to meet the level of those who literally hate women. People hating women, openly, culturally, personally is a major unaddressed problem in our society. There are even lesbians who hate women.

I know this thread is not about one person. She was an example, a good example because she was so candid. She was willing to open up about something painful and offer up why she held the position she did. And that was admirable - you don't see the men who are harrumping at Man Friday at the Mens Pond in Hampstead opening up their souls publically and exposing their vulnerability in justifying what they want from public facilities. They assume their wants and needs are valid by virtue of them being as important as anyone else. They don't feel the need to explain where those wants and needs come from.

And the fact that she got accused of weaponising her trauma to "prove transwomen weren't transwomen" was dispicable. Really, beaneath contempt. Possibly the worst abuse of these boards I've ever seen apart from the thinly veiled threat to get people sacked from their employment for holding a different point of view.

I know it wasn't you who did that and I'm not making a comparison. I'm saying it shouldn't be difficult for anyone with any sense of balance to hold in mind that women who say that "my motivation for this is the protection of women in the face of a culture of male sexual and other violence" are telling the truth about that  - and still be able to argue about we how we meet our duty of fairness to everyone concerned.

There is no need to imply bad faith where objectively its a perfectly rational position. There is no need to smear people when they are putting forward a perfectly sensible argument - all of these protections and safe spaces for women weren't brought into being by radical feminists on a mad mission.

The idea of having female prisons and male prisons, female and male toilets, female and male changing rooms, female-bodied rape crisis centres, none of these spaces segregated by sex irrespective of self-indentifying gender were the dreamchild of Andrea Dworkin. They are not a mad blueprint for a segregated society designed by Julia Long. They are not proposed radical changes. They are existing arrangements that came about as cultural and sometimes legal protections made necessary by power relationships and potential abuses by the sexes.

So if they weren't brought in by reactionary prejudice, why must it be assumed that arguing for their continued protection is motivated by reactionary prejudice?




« Last Edit: Jul 21, 2018, 03:55:45 PM by Betty Croker's frosted buns »
And now I know how Joan of Arc felt.......