GC: What are "sex-based" rights?

submitted by GenderbenderShe/her/hers from self.GCdebatesQT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers[S] 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (59 children)

When we believe trans women should have the right to use women's restrooms and changing rooms, we also believe trans men should have the right to use men's restrooms and changing rooms. We are asking for trans men to be considered men.

[–]MarkTwainiac 16 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 0 fun17 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

In many workplaces, women fought for & gained the right to have a small room where breastfeeding women can go pump in privacy & under clean conditions (as opposed to having do pump in the restroom, which I hope you can see is wholly inappropriate for reasons of hygiene, convenience, comfort & privacy), as well as for a separate mini fridge where they can safely store the milk they've expressed until the end of their shift/workday (because, again for reasons I hope are obvious, it's not safe or appropriate to store women's breastmilk in the regular office fridge where everyone keeps their lunches, snacks, beverage & milk for the coffee station).

It's standard policy in every workplace I know of where women have obtained these "sex-based rights" that only female employees are allowed to access the breastmilk pumping rooms & fridges. Do you think males who claim to "identify as" women should also now be given access? How about other men with other "gender identities"?

What if men being able to access the pumping room makes it harder for women's milk to "let down"? What if the lack of privacy & the fear that any second a male workmate might walk in, watch & perhaps perv out on the sight of women expressing milk, causes some women to make stress hormones that affect the quality of their milk - & thus their babies' health & wellbeing? What if some women feel forced into stopping BFing altogether as a result?

In many workplaces where PPE is used or required, the PPE comes in "unisex" S, M, L & XL, but it turns out these are all based solely on male-sized & male-shaped bodies, faces, skulls, hands & feet. So the PPE doesn't properly fit the majority of female employees, & the female employees are put at risk as a result. Do you think that female employees should have the right to PPE that fits their female bodies, or they should have to suck it up & make do with the standard kit issued because everyone must treated exactly the same - & because you oppose rights & accommodations for women that could be said to be "sex based" beyond access to abortion & menstrual products?

In many office buildings, the air temperature is automatically set centrally based on what's most comfortable for employees with male metabolisms & endocrine systems who wear customary male business suits. The custom of setting the thermostats in this way is based on the fact that traditionally most employees, & all the employees who mattered, in office buildings were mainly men. But as it turns out, the temperature in these office buildings in the summer is way too cold for a majority of female employees, who make up a much larger proportion of the workforce in these buildings than in the past. Similarly, in the winter, the office temps are way too hot for the female employees, particularly women who are pregnant or going through menopause. But the women can't get building operations management to even consider changing the standard thermostat settings that have long been in place. Do you think women in office buildings like this are wrong to seek to have their workplaces better accommodate their female bodies? Or do you think only males have a "sex based right" to have the thermostat set to a temp tailored to their physical needs?

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You reminded me about Blizzard and Ubisoft situations: https://twitter.com/Iamthisnotthat1/status/1418623731182747650 (whole thread)

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Whatever.

Beliefs and concrete fact are two separate things.

It’s fucked up beyond measure to try to force your personal and unproven- actually constantly disproven- beliefs onto others, especially to the extent that you strip them of their rights in the process. It’s truly horrifying and I can’t wait for tras who aren’t trans to get their heads out of the asses of the people they are rallying behind.

Transwomen oppress women just as much and in some ways worse than other men.

And idgaf where transmen pee.

You are never going to succeed in convincing enough people that TWAW and TMAM because all evidence points to the contrary. But ask away, I guess.

That is a huge reason why the concept of females having SEX BASED protections (or the right to sex based protections) is so important. Because apparently men can take all protection and rights from us if they just say they’re ladies. It’s patriarchy at its finest and it’s hilarious that people actually support it and think it’s anything less than the most blatant example of misogyny.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What does that have to do with sex based rights?

We aren’t trying to take away a transmans ability to get an abortion or escape a violent spouse. We are not preventing them from putting themselves in harms way and using the men’s room.

Being seen a certain way by people is not a right of any kind. Nobody is entitled to be perceived a particular way.

[–]adungitit 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (53 children)

we also believe trans men should have the right to use men's restrooms and changing rooms.

They already have this right, and GC doesn't care about revoking it, because women do not present a danger to men. As long as women have their spaces and their usage by women is taken for granted, the woman has the right to leave those spaces if she so chooses.

As long as you keep lying and being delusional in regards to how dangerous men are to women's well-being and how the opposite is not the case in the least, sex-based protections will not make sense to you. But that's like saying that as long as you keep insisting the Earth is flat, that astrophysics will seem like a conspiracy and giberrish.

[–]MarkTwainiac 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

They already have this right, and GC doesn't care about revoking it, because women do not present a danger to men. GC is worried about the enormous boom in impressionable anxious girls believing they're boys because they want to escape misogyny, but that's a different discussion from women being in men's toilets.

I'm "GC" and I do care about boys and men having a right to loos, locker rooms and changing rooms without any girls or women present. Pre-pubescent and pubescent boys and slow-developing teenage boys in particular are very self-conscious about their bodies. But so are other boys and men. Skinny men, fat men, old men, disabled men, men with beer bellies, hairy asses, scars, amputations, gynecomastia, small dicks and odd-looking dicks. Even very fit and good-looking men are often self-conscious about their bodies and do not feel comfortable being seen naked or urinating by members of the opposite sex other than their wives, GFs, very close friends or physicians.

The way I see it, respect for boundaries has to go both ways. When boys turn a certain age, it's not just inappropriate for them to continue to accompany their mums, grans, sisters and female carers into the ladies locker rooms, showers and loos for the sake of the privacy, dignity and safety of the women & girls in those spaces; it also becomes inappropriate for their own mums, grans, sisters and female carers to see and touch the boys' genitals for the sake of the boys' own privacy and dignity.

It's a big day in a young boy's life when the pediatrician at the annual checkup tells the kid to undress and at the same time turns to the mother and says, "Mom, the time has come for you leave the exam room now. Your boy is not your little boy any more." Mothers who disregard their developing sons' need for boundaries are liable to find that their sons develop disrespect for their boundaries in turn, and for the boundaries of women and girls in general.

Women are primarily the ones who teach little boys and girls about appropriate boundaries. I don't think we can expect boys to grow up into men who respect girls' and women's boundaries if we don't respect their boundaries in turn - and if we raise girls to think that boys have no bodily insecurities or right to visual privacy from girls and women when they are undressed or using the toilet.

The more that trans-identified females like Gavin Grimm and Chase Strangio barge in on male loos, locker rooms and change rooms - and het and bi trans-identified females insist that they have the right to be in places like gay male sex clubs, saunas, baths and sex parties, and to demand that gay guys date and have sex with them - the more guys in general are going to feel less and less compunction about entering female spaces like the women's area of Wi Spa and pulling out their dicks and waving them around in the faces of women & girls of all ages. And the less compunction boys and men in general will have about exposing their genitals in other places too - such as on trains, buses, subways and planes, or whilst sitting at their desks or walking around the premises at work or in school.

I believe that taking the position that boys & men have no right to bodily privacy from girls and women in restrooms and changing rooms will end up backfiring on girls & women. I also believe that saying "GC doesn't care" about the rights or boundaries of males because to some GC persons the rights and boundaries of males matter less than the rights of females do, or they matter not at all, is only going to turn potential allies away from the "GC" side.

[–]adungitit 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

There really is no need for sexed spaces once you remove the patriarchy. There is no basis for them. Male and female bodies being different does not translate into needing separate spaces for them.

I also don't see men being particularly self-conscious of their bodies, aside from anxieties over penis size that is more in place because of other men anyways and its association with masculinity. Men are not saddled with the beauty standards that women have their entire personhood defined by, nor is there a history of stigmatisation of their bodies. In fact, they're very loud, proud and in-your-face with their bodies and bodily functions and tend to think the universe revolves around their penises. As usual, the worst treatment men can expect in this area comes from, you guessed it, other men.

respect for boundaries has to go both ways.

Becauuuse...? Women aren't the ones with an entire history of disrespecting men's boundaries and leering at them, to the point that they couldn't even leave the house due to constant sexual harassment and assault. No, protections do not need to go both ways because protections serve to protect the people who are actually endangered.

You proceed to talk about a person's normal right to privacy, which would apply both to their female and male family members. That is different from claiming that people must have privacy specifically from the opposite sex for really no reason.

I don't think we can expect boys to grow up into men who respect girls' and women's boundaries if we don't respect their boundaries in turn

Men don't understand boundaries because they don't experience the same traumas and dangers that women experience. Men are the ones who'll tell you it'd be awesome if they were sexually assaulted, because sex still by and large revolves around their pleasure and wants, glorifies their lack of self-control and overblown sexuality, and doesn't treat them as worthless objects for someone else's one-sided sexuality in all aspects of their life.

the more guys in general are going to feel less and less compunction about entering female spaces like the women's area of Wi Spa and pulling out their dicks and waving them around in the faces of women & girls of all ages.

What a stretch. Men already don't care about that. That's why they employ such a long list of double standards to control every aspect of a woman's life, and not once do they think of how it would be if this was applied to them. They apply entirely different rules to women to excuse their shitty treatment of them. A woman walking into their spaces isn't going to make them disregard women's spaces any more than women having to cover their chests is going to make men ashamed of being topless. They might try to whine about the double standards regarding sexed spaces and how unfair towards men it is that women are abused to such an extreme that they literally need separate spaces to lead a semblance of a normal life, but they already do that.

I also believe that saying "GC doesn't care" about the rights or boundaries of males because to some GC persons the rights and boundaries of males matter less than the rights of females do, or they matter not at all, is only going to turn potential allies away from the "GC" side.

LMAO what is this libfem attitude of shedding tears over male allies feeling "alienated"? There is no feminist movement that isn't going to alienate men. None. Even liberal feminism, for all its desperation to pander to men, is still seen as a matriarchal dictatorship by them.

GC cares a lot about not alienating and hurting the feelings of its conservative cesspool, but it fails to realise that the men who can't form a thought beyond spamming "there are only 2 genders!" and calling feminine men "trannies" aren't actually "on their side" just because they happen to turn their brainless ire on trans people. Instead of caring about alienating those patriarchal shit stains, GC should instead think about how it's alienating the women who don't want to suck up to misogynistic men just so they'd get their very limited back-stabby "support".

[–]MarkTwainiac 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

There really is no need for sexed spaces once you remove the patriarchy. There is no basis for them. Male and female bodies being different does not translate into needing separate spaces for them.

Huh? I don't get this at all. Can you explain further please? Thanks.

Also, I wasn't aware that the patriarchy had been slated for removal. Even if it does get removed one day, it's not gonna happen in my lifetime. The policies I advocate are for the real world in the here and now, not for some imaginary utopia that might happen far off in the future or the realm of fiction or science fiction.

BTW, in more than 50 years of being a feminist and many convos about what a world without male supremacy would be like, I have never heard anyone say there'd be "no need for sexed spaces" and "no basis" for them anymore.

So in the post-patriarchy utopia as you envision it, there'd be no spaces for lesbians or gay guys that exclude members of the opposite sex? Ever? Events like Michfest not allowed, and no more men getting together only with other men for hookups in bath houses and weekend orgies in places like Fire Island Pines? Really? I can see how this wouldn't go down well with a lot of people.

There really is no need for sexed spaces once you remove the patriarchy. There is no basis for them. Male and female bodies being different does not translate into needing separate spaces for them.

So a world without patriarchy would mean "no basis" for separate male and female sports? "No need? and "no basis" for corresponding sex separate locker rooms, training facilities, showers, saunas, therapeutic baths, either?

Sorry, a world in which there's only mixed-sex sports and therefore all the athletics opportunities, awards and glory go to males sounds exactly like patriarchy to me. No more sports for girls and women sounds eerily like the situation with school sports was in the US when I was growing up prior to US Title IX, in fact. Been there, done that and worked hard to change it. So to quote Sara Robles, "no thank you."

Also, no need or basis anymore for single-sex support groups for males with testicular and prostate cancer, erectile dysfunction, hemophilia and male-pattern baldness - or for females dealing with menstruation, pregnancy issues, endometriosis, PCOS, childbirth injuries and trauma, breast and gynecological cancers, fibroids, menopause, pelvic organ prolapse, aging-related UTIs, incontinence and vaginal atrophy?

No separate accommodations for the two sexes in jails and prisons, hospital wards/rooms, LTCFs, dorm rooms, school and scouting trips?

In the post-patriarchy utopia you imagine, women who go to, say, a community swim pool with their teen or adult sons and male in-laws will have to share the same change rooms and showers with them? Will getting rid of patriarchy mean the vast majority of boys and men won't be heterosexual any more, and/or they won't have eyes and dicks? And that within families and households, there will be no need or basis anymore for the kinds of sex separation that customarily is put in place as children grow up and relationships change? Such as girls no longer being seen naked by their dads or brothers once they hit puberty? And pubertal boys being given bodily privacy by their mothers - and vice versa - too?

In the scenario about pumping breastmilk at work that I asked GenderBender about but she never addressed, no women in a post-patriarchal world would want, need or be permitted to pump breastmilk at work (or anywhere else) in a place where their male colleagues can't walk in and watch? Humans will have no need or desire for personal boundaries or privacy from any other members of the other sex ever?

Middle- and high-schoolers on overnight trips with school or scouts will all share sleeping arrangements, and all the tween or teen pregnancies that will inevitably result will be no big deal coz "no patriarchy" anymore? WTF? That sounds nuts.

[–]adungitit 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

The policies I advocate are for the real world in the here and now

Just because you advocate a policy for a current issue does not excuse a complete lack of thought into any of its future implications and reasons for existence.

I have never heard anyone say there'd be "no need for sexed spaces" and "no basis" for them anymore.

lol what an argument. I've never heard of tau neutrinos either, but that doesn't make them stop existing.

So in the post-patriarchy utopia as you envision it, there'd be no spaces for lesbians or gay guys that exclude members of the opposite sex?

People have the right to form spaces on the basis of certain shared interests and identities. That is entirely different from legal protections for said spaces because they are necessary to lead a normal life, as is the case with women.

So a world without patriarchy would mean "no basis" for separate male and female sports?

Obviously sports require a sex-based division, as do medical issues. These divisions are based in physical differences in male and female bodies requiring different expertise and different evaluation standards. This is different from spaces that serve to protect women from the social problem of patriarchal violence and harassment. Women are still targeted specifically for their sex, but the reason why they need protection is entirely external.

No separate accommodations for the two sexes in jails and prisons, hospital wards/rooms, LTCFs, dorm rooms, school and scouting trips?

If we were ever to reach a world where men did not pose a threat to women in these environments, yes.

In the post-patriarchy utopia you imagine, women who go to, say, a community swim pool with their teen or adult sons and male in-laws will have to share the same change rooms and showers with them?

If they would get naked with their male parents, why would they not with their female parents?

Will getting rid of patriarchy mean the vast majority of boys and men won't be heterosexual any more, and/or they won't have eyes and dicks?

It's unlikely that most men would be heterosexual if we got rid of the patriarchy. Most "heterosexual" men really just have a fetish for femininity and misogyny. Moreover, you can be heterosexual and not act like a creep, just as homosexual people manage to do.

And that within families and households, there will be no need or basis anymore for the kinds of sex separation that customarily is put in place as children grow up and relationships change?

How exactly do you think gay people are able to function? Is there sexual tension between every non-straight family member?

Such as girls no longer being seen naked by their dads or brothers once they hit puberty? And pubertal boys being given bodily privacy by their mothers - and vice versa - too?

If the same things were to be normal with their same-sex family members, then yes.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (48 children)

If they already have this right, why did Gavin Grimm and Nick H have to sue their schools?

[–]adungitit 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (47 children)

People can sue you, you can sue them... That's different from a movement focusing on certain goals. In fact, it is a common complaint among trans activists that GC ignores female trans people and focuses only on men, despite even the most cursory overview of GC ideology showing the reasons for this (men present a danger to women, vice versa isn't the case).

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (46 children)

Quite the opposite. We complain the GC movement doesn't focus on male trans people like Buck Angel. The reason is GC complains themselves the the trans movement doesn't focus on trans men. There have also been instances where GCs outright forget trans men exist. Although they don't believe trans men are men, they will sometimes use "he" inadvertently because they assumed the trans man is a trans woman. One guy on r/GenderCynical linked to a comment where someone replied to him "stop calling yourselves women". Well he already stopped calling himself a woman. So thanks for the validation that he's not a woman! :)

Daily reminder that trans men don't exist

[–]adungitit 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (45 children)

The reason is GC complains themselves the the trans movement doesn't focus on trans men

Misogynistic movements tend to disregard female people, hence why the trans rights movement performs in line with said roles. Again, the whole of trans ideology has consistently acted in line with patriarchal attitudes, and the reasons for this have been noticed and pointed out by radical feminists.

So thanks for the validation that he's not a woman! :)

Awesome :) ! So, every single time a trans person gets "misgendered", it's comfirmation that they're not actually what they claim to be, right? Dunno about you, but I see a metric ton more cases of misgendering, including from supposed allies of the trans movement, than I see cases of people "forgetting trans people exist", so, I guess that's a win against trans ideology, right?

Disclaimer: I personally think that the ad populum fallacy is ridiculous and pathetic, and I roll my eyes whenever both sides try to employ it. I'm just working with your logic here.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers[S] 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (44 children)

Misogynistic movements tend to disregard female people, hence why the trans rights movement performs in line with said roles.

It's the opposite. Anyway trans men are invisible in society compared to trans women. I believe this is because trans men pass better, and as a result get noticed less. A trans man walking into the men's restroom is much less likely to get noticed than a trans woman walking into the womans restroom. As a result of passing better, they experience less discrimination and harassment than trans women. This is not to say they don't experience discrimination at all. Also masculinity is not so much celebrated in society as much as femininity. A few trans men have said people will make statements like "men are trash" but then turn around to them and say "no, not you!" as if they aren't men. "People think of trans women as perverted men and trans men as harmless, silly or even misguided lesbians."

Trans men of reddit, what problems do you deal with that people of other identities don't know or think about?

Trans Men of MensLib: What insights to manhood and masculinity have you gained after transitioning?

Oddly enough most trans men are more supportive of the trans movement than gender critical feminism. For instance, on r/ftm, I only found TWO threads complaining about trans women.

Discrimination Against Trans Men [vent]

Frustrations with trans community of reddit?

However I foumd 20+ threads complaining about "TERFs". Funny enough GCs say trans women talk over trans men way more than trans men say that themselves. Yet GCs themselves talk over trans men. They keep insisting trans men are only transitioning to escape sexism or that they are lesbians in denial or are fetishizing gay men. Most trans men say that is not the case.

Feminist Trans Men & the Narrative of Internalized Misogyny

I want to die... confused, scared, am I manipulating myself?

The idea that trans men are “lesbians in denial” is demeaning and wrong

[–]adungitit 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (21 children)

Anyway trans men are invisible in society compared to trans women.

  1. Men are a threat to women. Other women can suck up to a patriarchal society, but they're ultimately not the ones causing the issues, nor are they a threat to other women. As such, GC focuses on upholding the rights of women in face of a male threat.

  2. Misogynistic movements tend to disregard women, which is why you see the same patriarchal dynamics play out the same way, even when the parties involved roleplay as the opposite sex.

All of this is predictably in line with the patriarchy and pretty easily explained.

A few trans men have said people will make statements like "men are trash" but then turn around to them and say "no, not you!" as if they aren't men.

It's almost like even supposedly progressive people understand why trans ideology is bullshit. They know that women do not pose a threat, no matter how much they roleplay as men. As such, they forget to lie and pretend that they do, and trans people as usual freak out when they're reminded of reality and demand that others play into a lie.

Male trans people are still the ones with male-pattern violence like sexual assault and homicides. If you think this fact is unfair solely because it's not gender-affirming to trans people, try thinking of the women who are actually targeted by and who experience this male-pattern violence, and then ask yourself which of these two is an actual problem that needs to be addressed.

Also masculinity is not so much celebrated in society as much as femininity

Is this going to end up with you going full MRA claiming that men are actually the real victims of society?

Just don't forget to mention that you're totally not misogynistic, but...

most trans men are more supportive of the trans movement than gender critical feminism

Duh. More women in general are supportive of progressive movements. I have yet to come across a progressive movement where women didn't let others walk over them, or threw other women under the bus for the patriarchy's approval.

Funny enough GCs say trans women talk over trans men way more than trans men say that themselves. Yet GCs themselves talk over trans men.

I mean, we also talk over women who think it is their duty to be an obedient slave to their husband and a walking sex doll for the male gaze. Talking over misogynistic women has always been what feminism does. Certain women being invested in supporting and excusing the patriarchal system because they don't want to rock the boat and they think they can make it work in their advantage does not discredit feminism. If it did, women wouldn't get the right to vote because they'd just agree to not talk over the women who thought they didn't need the right to vote. The key difference is that we're not progressive men talking over women, like how male trans people talk over female trans people.

They keep insisting trans men are only transitioning to escape sexism or that they are lesbians in denial or are fetishizing gay men. Most trans men say that is not the case.

Is there any misogynistic woman out there who just comes out and says that she hates women? Misogynistic people's "I'm not misogynistic, but..." disclaimers are worth jackshit. What matters is the kinds of views they espouse and support. I don't for a second believe that self-hating women who parrots misogynistic ideas aren't in any way motivated by these views, and that they're instead lead by some gendersoul or whatever. I'm gonna go for a more logical conclusion here.

Also, what is it with you using Reddit threads as...evidence? I've talked to plenty of trans people and been to their spaces. None of what you say is in any way surprising to me, or the GC movement. It's pretty consistent with how men and women act under patriarchal pressures in other areas as well.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers[S] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (20 children)

Men are a threat to women. Other women can suck up to a patriarchal society, but they're ultimately not the ones causing the issues, nor are they a threat to other women. As such, GC focuses on upholding the rights of women in face of a male threat.

Yup, women are never a threat to men. Talk about stereotypes.

Misogynistic movements tend to disregard women, which is why you see the same patriarchal dynamics play out the same way, even when the parties involved roleplay as the opposite sex.

Well the trans movement disregards trans men more than trans women. Anyway, there is no such thing as roleplaying the opposite sex. When you transition, you are the sex you identify as.

It's almost like even supposedly progressive people understand why trans ideology is bullshit.

Being trans is only "bullshit" to transphobes.

Is this going to end up with you going full MRA claiming that men are actually the real victims of society?

There are ways which men are disadvantaged by society over women. Pointing it out does not make you an MRA or a misogynist.

Duh. More women in general are supportive of progressive movements. I have yet to come across a progressive movement where women didn't let others walk over them, or threw other women under the bus for the patriarchy's approval.

The reason trans men oppose gender critical feminist is because the movement is transphobic to them and contradicts their values. For instance, many trans men get top surgery and sometimes bottom surgery, but GCs consider that "mutilation". Many GCs insist the majority of trans men are transitioning to escape sexism but most trans men say that is not why they are transitioning. GCs even call trans gay men attracted to other men fetishists and fujoshis.

I'm a progressive cis woman. I don't let anyone walk all over me and I have excellent critical thinking skills, and I still support the trans community.

I mean, we also talk over women who think it is their duty to be an obedient slave to their husband and a walking sex doll for the male gaze. Talking over misogynistic women has always been what feminism does.

Trans men aren't women. They are a separate, marginalized group. I oppose any privileged group talking over a marginalized group. This includes cis people talking over trans men, including cis women.

Is there any misogynistic woman out there who just comes out and says that she hates women?

Yes. There are women who opposed women's rights to vote. There are women who believe women should be restricted to certain occupations. There are women who harshly judge other women for not meeting their standards of modesty.

Also, what is it with you using Reddit threads as...evidence? I've talked to plenty of trans people and been to their spaces. None of what you say is in any way surprising to me, or the GC movement. It's pretty consistent with how men and women act under patriarchal pressures in other areas as well.

So the Reddit threads I cite aren't surprising but aren't evidence either?

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Yup, women are never a threat to men. Talk about stereotypes.

Not what’s being said. Men are factually more likely to be violent or criminal. Women can be as well, but are so less frequently.

Well the trans movement disregards trans men more than trans women. Anyway, there is no such thing as roleplaying the opposite sex. When you transition, you are the sex you identify as.

Sex changes don’t happen. Performing the roles invested by sexism is not changing sex.

Yes. There are women who opposed women's rights to vote. There are women who believe women should be restricted to certain occupations. There are women who harshly judge other women for not meeting their standards of modesty.

And there are women who would take away the rights of their fellow women to prove to a sexist ideology that they are a good little gender supporter.

So the Reddit threads I cite aren't surprising but aren't evidence either?

They’re not representative of anybody outside their niche communities and not representative of the whole population. Especially when you make a point to not read any subs that discuss differing opinions to the ones you hold. That’s not evidence that’s cherry picking.

[–]adungitit 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Yup, women are never a threat to men. Talk about stereotypes.

Is that why no men fear women assaulting them, while women do? Is that why half of women are murdered by their male intimate partners while the reverse not only barely happens, and when it does, it's usually done by a victim of domestic violence towards her abuser? You've always so quickly gone silent when this reality of violence against women was pointed out to you, but that's never stopped you from disappearing, reappearing elsewhere, and still continuing to lie about this. You have been told the statistics before and even if you weren't, the ubiquity of male harassment in the vast majority of women's lives that isn't replicated in reverse should clue you in. You only have to open your eyes and think about the world around you, instead of parroting patriarchal delusions because men will get pissy and called out otherwise.

When you transition, you are the sex you identify as.

Based on what exactly? The amount of testosterone and estrogen in your body? This is not what sex is, or else we wouldn't be able to recognise the sex of men and women with hormonal disorders, and reproduction wouldn't still keep working the way it does in literally all cases known to humankind. Moreover, aside from making mentally ill people feel better, what is the benefit of actually changing the definition of sex from what it actually is to how much of a certain hormone you have in your body? The reality of one's sex is still impossible to change, and that is a simple biological fact.

Also, you do realise you're being transphobic, right? Trans ideology claims that people do not need to transition in order to be whatever sex they claim they are. How do you justify this transphobic view to fellow trans activists? Are you also the same transphobe who said you wouldn't have sex with female genitalia even if the person identified as male?

There are ways which men are disadvantaged by society over women. Pointing it out does not make you an MRA or a misogynist.

Continuously lying that women do not experience oppression while also lying about ways in which men do does. If you are parroting misogynistic myths for the sake of patriarchy, you are pretty much an MRA even if you don't actively identify as such. You don't need to actively be a member of a patriarchal movement to be affected by patriarchal brainwashing and misogyny. Again, "I'm not sexist, but" is not the excuse you think it is.

most trans men say that is not why they are transitioning

Right, just as you say you're feminist while lying, downplaying and covering up the oppression that women experience while pushing imaginary male oppression against all evidence to the contrary and women's lives being ruined as a result of this tradition of lying about their oppression. Just as traditional women claim they're not in misogynistic relationships when they think they deserve to be beaten and have their husbands control every aspect of their lives.

Again, "I'm not sexist, but" is not the excuse you think it is.

I have excellent critical thinking skills

lmao you continuously lie when faced with evidence to the contrary. Your comments usually don't even respond to anything that was said, but only stick to parroting "Transwomen are women". How in the flying fuck do you think that's compatible with "critical thinking skills"? You can't repeat whatever you've been trained to, refuse to respond to any criticisms, lie and ignore anything that rips your parroting apart, and brag about what great "critical thinking skills" you have lmao

Trans men aren't women.

See, if engaged in the kind of brainwashed parroting that you do, I would just respond "Female trans people are women". You would respond "Transmen are men" and we could keep going on and on like this forever. Given that my brain doesn't get a rush of "Wow I'm so smart" from just copy-pasting a single statement regardless of what is being said, I can't actually do this dance with you. But I can take it further and explain why women biologically cannot become men and vice versa, and also why trans ideas (along with a host of other accompanying misogynistic ideas) are damaging to women's rights. And it's not because "they feel that way".

I actually don't care if you feel that "transwomen are women" or that cats are actually dogs or if the Earth is flat. No, really, I don't. What I do care is when you cannot justify this statement with anything. If you say the Earth is flat, I will demand you to explain why. If you merely respond with "The Earth is flat" and then add that you have "great critical thinking skills", how convincing do you think I'll find that to be?

Yes. There are women who opposed women's rights to vote. There are women who believe women should be restricted to certain occupations. There are women who harshly judge other women for not meeting their standards of modesty.

I don't know if you've ever spoken to these women, but very, very few of them will tell you they hate women and that women are subhuman. So, by your logic, they are not sexist, nor do they actually hate women. See, that's the problem with "I'm not sexist, but...". Even women beaten by their husbands and the husbands who beat them have used this. It's almost like people parroting mantras that are directly at odds with all of their sexist behaviour and ideals doesn't magically render everything they do not-sexist. It's almost like things exist beyond just people telling you stuff that isn't true, and you having to believe them in order to be emphatic and validating.

Also, I love how your example of "real" sexism is vapid stuff like "Being judgemental of the way someone dresses" while here you are, literally lying though your teeth about all the assaults, rape, deaths and terror that men put women through. Honestly, I'd rather you criticised someone's shoes than pushed the delusional male fantasy of women lying about their oppression and actually being the real abusers of men.

So the Reddit threads I cite aren't surprising but aren't evidence either?

Evidence of what? That trans people go against radical feminism, pander to men and believe they have magical gendersouls or brainsex compelling them to transition? Yes. I know. Duh. How is this relevant? Can you spend more time actually addressing what I say without lying or ignoring it and less time hunting down friggin Reddit threads that tell me all the things I've already addressed and explained why they're in line with patriarchal socialisation? What's next, you're gonna hunt down comments about women claiming they don't need abortion and gendered spaces to prove that feminism is bs?

Also, ofc you're only gonna get the affirming trans stuff when anyone who takes issue with it gets banned.

[–]BiologyIsReal 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Well the trans movement disregards trans men more than trans women. Anyway, there is no such thing as roleplaying the opposite sex. When you transition, you are the sex you identify as.

"Trans men" are disregarded in the trans movement because everyone knows they are biologically female (you know, the kind of people who can produce eggs and get pregnant). Yes, even other trans identified people and the most fervent supporters understand this fact even if they won't ever admit it out loud. It's not a coincidence this is the only movement that put "men" last. Playing word games won't change reality. You can glue a horn onto a horse's head and make everyone call it an unicorn. It's still a horse!

Trans men aren't women. They are a separate, marginalized group. I oppose any privileged group talking over a marginalized group. This includes cis people talking over trans men, including cis women.

Either trans identified people are marginalized group who are oppressed in the worst ways possible by a hierarchy of "cis" vs "trans", or most people respect their chosen "identities" and GC are a fringe group who nobody else likes. Pick a damn position! You cannot have it both ways!