Same day
Fred spots an own goal.
Lesbians MAY NOT exclude men who claim to be trans.
People who claim to be trans or non-binary MAY exclude all non-trans and non-non-binary people.
Thass eeequaliteee.
Tip Jar
Fred spots an own goal.
Lesbians MAY NOT exclude men who claim to be trans.
People who claim to be trans or non-binary MAY exclude all non-trans and non-non-binary people.
Thass eeequaliteee.
Not only do they want to their cake and eat it too, they want everyone else’s cake as well. Or at least women’s.
I wonder how much of the motivation for their establishing a domestic violence shelter for themselves (go them) is not so much from a recognition of their own, particular needs (go them again), but from that desire to “exclude” that they project onto women. I don’t think there are going to be very many “cis” women demanding access to this facility for “validation” of anything in the same way that AGP men demand access to women’s shelters as part of their fetish (would AGPs even bother to use facilities that did not “affirm” their “womanhood”?), so it’s not exactly symmetrical, but the principle of “cis” exclusion is still in action. But there are bigger issues at play.
How will they “police” and “gatekeep” this exclusive facility to ensure that no “cis” women or men are attempting to access it? What test is there to establish that someone is in fact trans or NB? Wardrobe? Comportment? They’re going to be running a mixed sex facility; you can see the problems already. How is that going to work if sex is not going to “count” in determining access? How will they prevent sexual violence when they can’t clearly say what sexual violence is? Will the facility try to “identify” it away? Material reality raises its ugly head, even in Trans World.
Will services and accomodations need to be segregated by sex after all, or will they be divvied up by “identity”? (Which, ironically, would have all the men, i.e. “transwomen,” together. Oh no! EXCLUSION! SEGREGATION!!). Will they be as scrupulously solicitous of the whole multifarious taxonomy of identities as they have expected the “outside world” to be?* Will “gender fluid” clients be moving back and forth between “men’s” and “women’s” groups, or will they have sessions of their own? (Where would Philip Bunce go, when Pippa wasn’t present. Would he be considered “cis” during those spells).
However they label or segregate their facilities and programs, the administrators, staff, and clients of this shelter are still likely going to face attempts by opportunistic, predatory males (however they “identify”) to gain access to vulnerable people using the space. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, are they going to accept that males who “identify” as trans or NB become magically harmless in the same way that activists have been assuring women that they are? Suddenly they’ll be dealing with Schroedinger’s rapist. How are they going to handle that? Are they themselves going to allow (on their clients’ unwitting behalf) the same degree of “acceptable” collateral damage that has been forced upon women by trans activists in pursuit of their demands? Or are they going to treat their own clients better than they have been expecting women to treat themselves? Would they ever hire a “cis” person to run their facility? If not, why not? And if not, why cannot women use exactly the same reasons for controlling access to women only shelters? Maybe they’ll get some inkling of what women have had to deal with. Or is empahy a one way street that only goes in the direction they want?
Will they be able to put the safety of their clients ahead of the demands of gender politics, because at some point they will have to turn away or bar someone who “identifies” as trans or NB. How will they be able to refuse them service if the identity claim (which is, as far as I know, supposed to be taken on faith) is the sole criterion for admission, apart from being a victim of domestic abuse? All they’ve got left is “No True Trans.”
How will they react when the wolves in sheeps clothing show up in their fold? Have they thought any of this through? Are they prepared? Ironically, the best guidance and advice they could ever recieve on these issues would be from women who’ve opened and operated the same kind of shelters. But you’ve made them your enemy. Irony, tragedy, or both?
My prediction? Trans identified females, and females who identify as NB will seek out this facility; trans identified men will, for the most part, continue to demand access to women’s spaces, because they have the added bonus of “validation” which an exclusive, trans/NB space will not provide them. There will not be the frisson of violating women’s spaces.
* I can imagine a roomful of NBs, all using “they/them” pronouns, unable to figure out who’s talking about whom, and demanding clarification because “they/them” can’t tell whether it’s actually the third person plural being used or not.