Cherish the men, shut down the women
You want trans visibility? Here’s some trans visibility.
What does “act on them” mean? There is no “act on them.” It’s about rhetoric and belief. We’re not the ones constantly threatening violence.
Tip Jar
You want trans visibility? Here’s some trans visibility.
What does “act on them” mean? There is no “act on them.” It’s about rhetoric and belief. We’re not the ones constantly threatening violence.
And so few people see this for what it is – terrorism. Totalitarianism. Basically telling women to sit down and shut up.
I’m so used to the twitter heart-react that I was looking around for where it was on your comment, iknklast.
iknklast @ #1: Quite right. This sort of thing has a long history, and it actually is a confession of ideological weakness. Those who cannot counter ideas with stronger ideas reach instinctively for the handiest club, and use that instead. Witness for example, Stalin vs Trotsky in the 1920s and 1930s.
One of the more sober assessments of the TRA’s vs. Gender Critical debates. Note the weakness:
“Many women of my generation have a hard time accepting Trans women as women. Some have even argued that the Trans movement is destructive to feminism. They always bring up these myths about attacks in bathrooms. I’ve asked for even one example of a Cis woman being attacked in a bathroom by a Trans woman. No-one can come up with a single one. Then they bring up violence in prisons. Prisons are violent places, and indeed, women in prison are more vulnerable to attack, an issue that should be addressed,but that has little or nothing to do with Trans people who are even more vulnerable to attack in prison. As Kai Cheng Thom persuasively argued recently, vilifying marginalized minorities as dangers to women and children is common during periods of economic and social upheaval.”
From: “My feminism is Trans inclusive” [ https://rabble.ca/columnists/my-feminism-is-trans-inclusive/ ]
@ #4: See https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/women/sexual-assault-unisex-changing-rooms-sunday-times-women-risk-a8519086.html : The result of a 2-minute Google search.
A very basic principle of neo-Darwinism: where an ecological niche is created, sooner or later an organism arrives to fill it. Where ‘women’ with male genitalia are permitted into ‘women-only’ facilities, opportunities galore are created for sexual opportunists, including of course, heterosexual male rapists.
@4 Rebick is saying that if “alt-right” people are against men in women’s spaces and endeavors, then feminists should be for it. She also argues that people who are against trans “women” will use this to be against actual women, because they are going to be counted as women. There are some flaws in this reasoning.
Omar,
I had remembered the change-room incidents. But when it came to washrooms I knew that Graham Lineham had specifics but I couldn’t find them after a quick search.
twiliter,
Yes. It’s a rambling set of assertions. But the statement that prison violence has nothing at all to do with “trans-rights” stood out for me as ridiculous.
True, but don’t just give us a context-free assertion. Now tell us why.
It’s because they are men, and they know it. They say “Transwomen are women” which, logically, would imply the opposite. Do a quick search of Twitter for “AFAB Transwoman” to see all the men being furious at women who claim to be transwomen, to see that even those who call themselves transwomen know that they have to be men first and foremost.
That’s because it is. Besides accusing anyone mentioning women’s rights of ‘transphobia’, the movement has aggressive gangs of men, and some women, which picket any meeting of women, and violently attack women of all ages if they have the opportunity. It’s hardly supportive of feminism to refuse to allow women to meet to discuss their rights.
This is just a blatant set of lies. Attacks in ‘bathrooms’ (by which I suppose she means public toilets) by men who claim to be women (and boys who claim to be girls) on women and children are horrifyingly common. The only way she could suppose them to be myths is by never reading a single newspaper, news website, Facebook page or magazine, or listening to the radio or watching television. There are hundreds upon hundreds of examples. Try going to This Never Happens.
‘Barbie Kardashian’, ‘Karen White’, ‘Isla Bryson’ etc, etc, etc. Address the issue of women in prison by keeping men out, especially the ones who have shown their eagerness to breach women’s boundaries by calling themselves women. Address the vulnerability of men claiming to be women by not allowing them to transition and making it clear that no man will ever be transferred to the women’s estate, whatever he calls himself. And stop locking up people for non-violent offences.
Quite possibly true, but:
Firstly, the cult is not made up of marginalised people.
Secondly, no-one is vilifying them. It is a known fact that men are a danger to women and children, the statistics support the assertion that men claiming to be women are at least as much of a danger as any other men, and safe spaces are predicated on reducing risk from men as a class, not on vilifying individual men, most of whom are perfectly safe.
Why does anyone think that men who claim to be women are in danger in male spaces? Whereas it is a lie that women haven’t been attacked by them in the ladies, there are no statistics of men who claim to be women being attacked in the gents.
Me @7 I agree. Prisons are not only segregated into men’s and women’s, but they are also further segregated by other criteria, mostly to do with levels of violence. Putting men into women’s prisons just because they want to be put there is spectacularly irresponsible. That’s not how prisons work, elsewise we’d have the most dangerous, violent offenders living in minimum security facilites on their say so.