Question about the homophobia thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the PP who posted above that one of the things that bothers me the most about this entire discussion is the unending gaslighting from trans rights advocates, something that is seen on DCUM in the small and writ large across the movement in general. It’s a relentless narrative: “Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do? You must be absorbing propaganda because God knows you ladies couldn’t possibly reach rational conclusions based on living your entire lives as sexed females in a grossly misogynist world filled with sex-based violence!”

I read this article that I thought was excellent, and captures a lot of my feelings on the matter, so sharing:

https://thecritic.co.uk/we-know-what-a-man-is/

I am not afraid of trans people. I am afraid of losing the principle – within feminism, of all places – that female lives matter as much as male ones. That our desires are not trivial, selfish, frivolous, whereas those of male people are a matter of life and death. That our perceptions of reality are as valid as male ones. That we do not deserve to be bullied and gaslighted into pandering to male egos in the name of “being kind“. That we are not privileged airheads who should say yes to everything because hey, what does it cost us? What do we know about pain? What even are we?

I must have missed the bolded when it was written. Could you please link to that post?

I’m the PP. Are you asking seriously (e.g. asking for posts/Tweets/essays etc. in the vein of what the bolded says) or teasing/trolling? I can’t actually tell.

Also, did you read the linked essay?

I’m going to be offline for multiple hours and will respond if you actually are asking for a serious answer, but it will take awhile. If you are just teasing/trolling, that’s fine too and I will respond accordingly but also after awhile.

I’m back. Jeff, I had asked this before I left, but didn’t see an answer to my post above. That having been said, from the posts above you seem to want an actual literal quote that says both exactly the bolded? You also left off half my quote about the narrative; do you want the full actual literal quote? Of both parts?

I am genuinely puzzled. Surely you must understand it was, as someone pointed out, a narrative. But you seem to believe it was a literal quote by your post about English. If that is the case, you could solve that problem yourself by cutting and pasting the exact language into Google, which will of course show that there is not a literal exact quote of any of what I wrote.

I feel like this discussion has taken a turn into the Religion forum, frankly. This conversation is rather like one of the religious who is demanding chapter and verse examples of the non-religious who say that a religious text contains this or that problematic content. And I predict what will happen even if I make a good faith effort to find a (clearly non-literal) example of my point regarding the narrative, both here and more broadly: you will dismiss it, because it doesn’t literally say the exact same thing.

I suppose that is where this is all headed anyhow. The transgender rights movement has a strongly religious component to it; there is deep faith required. A close examination of claimed science shows that much of it starts to fall apart under rigorous scrutiny; this is happening with alacrity internationally and even in the US and Canada, scientific knowledge wants to be free. The lid can only be pressed down hard on the bubbling pot for so long. Faith, however, does not require scientific inquiry.

I genuinely don’t know what you would like, Jeff. Your posts over the past page have left me confused. But I suspect that we have entered into a non-factual portion of this discussion so I am not sure it’s relevant any more anyhow. One cannot argue with faith.

Finally, I will leave you with one thought: I’m opposed to the legislation banning affirmative care for children. I am opposed to it even though am convinced that the science for medical intervention for children is very weak, is driven by ideology and profit, and will be regarded with the same horror that lobotomies are in fifty years. Why I am I opposed? Because I might be wrong. I know that’s a possibility, and I don’t think I can rightly encourage state intervention here (especially because I am strongly pro-choice) when I might be wrong.

But I rarely see that same sort of willingness to look at the possibility of being wrong from people advocating for trans rights. Why? Do you ever wonder if you are wrong about your positions on trans rights, Jeff? Do you ever wonder if maybe the women who experience death threats, rape threats, etc. for publicly saying that the destruction of sex-based rights and spaces is harmful could be right? That maybe women of all races, backgrounds, and ages are enduring violence because they might be right? I am curious, because the discussion of the past few pages while I was out, with the literalism that at least seems to be requested, I can’t see how you could be considering that maybe you could be wrong, too. Literalism doesn’t really give a lot of room for nuance.

I like talking with you, Jeff. I really do. And I have a huge amount of respect for you. But I don’t understand the past few pages that have happened since I had to be offline. And therefore, I don’t really know how to respond.

Also, housekeeping, I probably can’t respond substantively until tonight at the earliest, maybe not until tomorrow. These long-winded posts take too long.

Thanks for hosting the discussion. I appreciate that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the PP who posted above that one of the things that bothers me the most about this entire discussion is the unending gaslighting from trans rights advocates, something that is seen on DCUM in the small and writ large across the movement in general. It’s a relentless narrative: “Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do? You must be absorbing propaganda because God knows you ladies couldn’t possibly reach rational conclusions based on living your entire lives as sexed females in a grossly misogynist world filled with sex-based violence!”

I read this article that I thought was excellent, and captures a lot of my feelings on the matter, so sharing:

https://thecritic.co.uk/we-know-what-a-man-is/

I am not afraid of trans people. I am afraid of losing the principle – within feminism, of all places – that female lives matter as much as male ones. That our desires are not trivial, selfish, frivolous, whereas those of male people are a matter of life and death. That our perceptions of reality are as valid as male ones. That we do not deserve to be bullied and gaslighted into pandering to male egos in the name of “being kind“. That we are not privileged airheads who should say yes to everything because hey, what does it cost us? What do we know about pain? What even are we?

I must have missed the bolded when it was written. Could you please link to that post?

I’m the PP. Are you asking seriously (e.g. asking for posts/Tweets/essays etc. in the vein of what the bolded says) or teasing/trolling? I can’t actually tell.

Also, did you read the linked essay?

I’m going to be offline for multiple hours and will respond if you actually are asking for a serious answer, but it will take awhile. If you are just teasing/trolling, that’s fine too and I will respond accordingly but also after awhile.

I’m back. Jeff, I had asked this before I left, but didn’t see an answer to my post above. That having been said, from the posts above you seem to want an actual literal quote that says both exactly the bolded? You also left off half my quote about the narrative; do you want the full actual literal quote? Of both parts?

I am genuinely puzzled. Surely you must understand it was, as someone pointed out, a narrative. But you seem to believe it was a literal quote by your post about English. If that is the case, you could solve that problem yourself by cutting and pasting the exact language into Google, which will of course show that there is not a literal exact quote of any of what I wrote.

I feel like this discussion has taken a turn into the Religion forum, frankly. This conversation is rather like one of the religious who is demanding chapter and verse examples of the non-religious who say that a religious text contains this or that problematic content. And I predict what will happen even if I make a good faith effort to find a (clearly non-literal) example of my point regarding the narrative, both here and more broadly: you will dismiss it, because it doesn’t literally say the exact same thing.

I suppose that is where this is all headed anyhow. The transgender rights movement has a strongly religious component to it; there is deep faith required. A close examination of claimed science shows that much of it starts to fall apart under rigorous scrutiny; this is happening with alacrity internationally and even in the US and Canada, scientific knowledge wants to be free. The lid can only be pressed down hard on the bubbling pot for so long. Faith, however, does not require scientific inquiry.

I genuinely don’t know what you would like, Jeff. Your posts over the past page have left me confused. But I suspect that we have entered into a non-factual portion of this discussion so I am not sure it’s relevant any more anyhow. One cannot argue with faith.

Finally, I will leave you with one thought: I’m opposed to the legislation banning affirmative care for children. I am opposed to it even though am convinced that the science for medical intervention for children is very weak, is driven by ideology and profit, and will be regarded with the same horror that lobotomies are in fifty years. Why I am I opposed? Because I might be wrong. I know that’s a possibility, and I don’t think I can rightly encourage state intervention here (especially because I am strongly pro-choice) when I might be wrong.

But I rarely see that same sort of willingness to look at the possibility of being wrong from people advocating for trans rights. Why? Do you ever wonder if you are wrong about your positions on trans rights, Jeff? Do you ever wonder if maybe the women who experience death threats, rape threats, etc. for publicly saying that the destruction of sex-based rights and spaces is harmful could be right? That maybe women of all races, backgrounds, and ages are enduring violence because they might be right? I am curious, because the discussion of the past few pages while I was out, with the literalism that at least seems to be requested, I can’t see how you could be considering that maybe you could be wrong, too. Literalism doesn’t really give a lot of room for nuance.

I like talking with you, Jeff. I really do. And I have a huge amount of respect for you. But I don’t understand the past few pages that have happened since I had to be offline. And therefore, I don’t really know how to respond.

Also, housekeeping, I probably can’t respond substantively until tonight at the earliest, maybe not until tomorrow. These long-winded posts take too long.

Thanks for hosting the discussion. I appreciate that.

"I suppose that is where this is all headed anyhow. The transgender rights movement has a strongly religious component to it; there is deep faith required. A close examination of claimed science shows that much of it starts to fall apart under rigorous scrutiny"

Wokeism has more in common with fundamental religions than it does with liberalism. This is the premise of John McWhorter's book "Woke Racism." While the book focuses on race, McWhorter's point also holds true with gender.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the PP who posted above that one of the things that bothers me the most about this entire discussion is the unending gaslighting from trans rights advocates, something that is seen on DCUM in the small and writ large across the movement in general. It’s a relentless narrative: “Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do? You must be absorbing propaganda because God knows you ladies couldn’t possibly reach rational conclusions based on living your entire lives as sexed females in a grossly misogynist world filled with sex-based violence!”

I read this article that I thought was excellent, and captures a lot of my feelings on the matter, so sharing:

https://thecritic.co.uk/we-know-what-a-man-is/

I am not afraid of trans people. I am afraid of losing the principle – within feminism, of all places – that female lives matter as much as male ones. That our desires are not trivial, selfish, frivolous, whereas those of male people are a matter of life and death. That our perceptions of reality are as valid as male ones. That we do not deserve to be bullied and gaslighted into pandering to male egos in the name of “being kind“. That we are not privileged airheads who should say yes to everything because hey, what does it cost us? What do we know about pain? What even are we?

I must have missed the bolded when it was written. Could you please link to that post?

I’m the PP. Are you asking seriously (e.g. asking for posts/Tweets/essays etc. in the vein of what the bolded says) or teasing/trolling? I can’t actually tell.

Also, did you read the linked essay?

I’m going to be offline for multiple hours and will respond if you actually are asking for a serious answer, but it will take awhile. If you are just teasing/trolling, that’s fine too and I will respond accordingly but also after awhile.

I’m back. Jeff, I had asked this before I left, but didn’t see an answer to my post above. That having been said, from the posts above you seem to want an actual literal quote that says both exactly the bolded? You also left off half my quote about the narrative; do you want the full actual literal quote? Of both parts?

I am genuinely puzzled. Surely you must understand it was, as someone pointed out, a narrative. But you seem to believe it was a literal quote by your post about English. If that is the case, you could solve that problem yourself by cutting and pasting the exact language into Google, which will of course show that there is not a literal exact quote of any of what I wrote.

I feel like this discussion has taken a turn into the Religion forum, frankly. This conversation is rather like one of the religious who is demanding chapter and verse examples of the non-religious who say that a religious text contains this or that problematic content. And I predict what will happen even if I make a good faith effort to find a (clearly non-literal) example of my point regarding the narrative, both here and more broadly: you will dismiss it, because it doesn’t literally say the exact same thing.

I suppose that is where this is all headed anyhow. The transgender rights movement has a strongly religious component to it; there is deep faith required. A close examination of claimed science shows that much of it starts to fall apart under rigorous scrutiny; this is happening with alacrity internationally and even in the US and Canada, scientific knowledge wants to be free. The lid can only be pressed down hard on the bubbling pot for so long. Faith, however, does not require scientific inquiry.

I genuinely don’t know what you would like, Jeff. Your posts over the past page have left me confused. But I suspect that we have entered into a non-factual portion of this discussion so I am not sure it’s relevant any more anyhow. One cannot argue with faith.

Finally, I will leave you with one thought: I’m opposed to the legislation banning affirmative care for children. I am opposed to it even though am convinced that the science for medical intervention for children is very weak, is driven by ideology and profit, and will be regarded with the same horror that lobotomies are in fifty years. Why I am I opposed? Because I might be wrong. I know that’s a possibility, and I don’t think I can rightly encourage state intervention here (especially because I am strongly pro-choice) when I might be wrong.

But I rarely see that same sort of willingness to look at the possibility of being wrong from people advocating for trans rights. Why? Do you ever wonder if you are wrong about your positions on trans rights, Jeff? Do you ever wonder if maybe the women who experience death threats, rape threats, etc. for publicly saying that the destruction of sex-based rights and spaces is harmful could be right? That maybe women of all races, backgrounds, and ages are enduring violence because they might be right? I am curious, because the discussion of the past few pages while I was out, with the literalism that at least seems to be requested, I can’t see how you could be considering that maybe you could be wrong, too. Literalism doesn’t really give a lot of room for nuance.

I like talking with you, Jeff. I really do. And I have a huge amount of respect for you. But I don’t understand the past few pages that have happened since I had to be offline. And therefore, I don’t really know how to respond.

Also, housekeeping, I probably can’t respond substantively until tonight at the earliest, maybe not until tomorrow. These long-winded posts take too long.

Thanks for hosting the discussion. I appreciate that.

"Why I am I opposed? Because I might be wrong. I know that’s a possibility, and I don’t think I can rightly encourage state intervention here (especially because I am strongly pro-choice) when I might be wrong."

This makes you a good liberal. Conversely, there's a word for people who blindly follow an ideology: zealots.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:I genuinely don’t know what you would like, Jeff. Your posts over the past page have left me confused. But I suspect that we have entered into a non-factual portion of this discussion so I am not sure it’s relevant any more anyhow. One cannot argue with faith.

I think that I have been very clear. You stated that the thing that bothered you most was a narrative that you now concede was not literal. In fact, the narrative that you described did not occur in this thread at all. Now you are taking things a step further and implying that my views are not valid due to your opinion that they are merely based on "faith". Ironically, having posted a non-factual characterization of the views of posters in this forum, you are now complaining about entering the "non-factual portion of this discussion". Take a look in the mirror.

I will again say that posters like you make reasonable discussion impossible. You created a straw man argument which misrepresents the position of posters with whom you disagree. You could simply reframe your argument into one that accurately represents the views expressed in this discussion, but instead you are choosing to double down. Ironically, you have now buttressed your complaint that your views are dismissed by spending multiple paragraphs dismissing the views of others.

The views that I hold that you consider nothing but "faith" are supported by every major medical association in the Western world. I guess on your side you have the author of children's fantasy novels. But, sure, let's argue about religion or whatever it is that you are now using to dismiss views you don't like.

If you want to have a good faith discussion, start by acting in good faith. Why should we take anything you have to say seriously when it is based on a foundation of misleading caricatures of your opponents' arguments? You will simply misrepresent anything we have to say or dismiss it as "religion".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the PP who posted above that one of the things that bothers me the most about this entire discussion is the unending gaslighting from trans rights advocates, something that is seen on DCUM in the small and writ large across the movement in general. It’s a relentless narrative: “Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do? You must be absorbing propaganda because God knows you ladies couldn’t possibly reach rational conclusions based on living your entire lives as sexed females in a grossly misogynist world filled with sex-based violence!”

I read this article that I thought was excellent, and captures a lot of my feelings on the matter, so sharing:

https://thecritic.co.uk/we-know-what-a-man-is/

I am not afraid of trans people. I am afraid of losing the principle – within feminism, of all places – that female lives matter as much as male ones. That our desires are not trivial, selfish, frivolous, whereas those of male people are a matter of life and death. That our perceptions of reality are as valid as male ones. That we do not deserve to be bullied and gaslighted into pandering to male egos in the name of “being kind“. That we are not privileged airheads who should say yes to everything because hey, what does it cost us? What do we know about pain? What even are we?

I must have missed the bolded when it was written. Could you please link to that post?

I am not the person who wrote this but I can assure you that although these specific words may have not been written, this is the message we are getting.

I am unapologetic about fighting to keep biological males out of female spaces. I am not homophobic. But make no mistake, people like me are being told out feelings don’t matter.

So, your point is that the thing that bothers that poster the most is something that was not actually said?

Jeff I’ve really grown to respect you and your opinions during this discussion, but I think you’re being deliberately obtuse here.

You are not a female. I think it is difficult for you to understand that females have unique struggles that people who identify as women cannot possibly understand. And that males clearly cannot understand.

I understand your desire to be inclusive and to support trans rights. But let’s be honest - there is absolutely nothing that is on the line for you personally.

I say this respectfully Jeff, I really do. I enjoy your website and this important discourse you’ve allowed us to have on this topic. And I thank you for that.

I am not sure whether you have realized it, but you have both moved the goalposts and reversed the logic of the issue that bothers the earlier poster the most. She was bothered by being told not to worry about "manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do". Your objection is to the invasion of women's spaces by people that you don't consider to be women. That is a different issue. Moreover, you are now telling me not to worry my pretty little head (very liberal paraphrasing here) about "women's" topics.

This thread started out with the original poster stating a desire to have good faith discussions of this issue. One of the reasons we can't have good faith discussions is that so many posters simply don't act in good faith. I am certain that nobody told the earlier poster not to worry her pretty little head about "manly" topics. With the exception of me, the posters in this thread are likely female and I absolutely said no such thing. Yet, that entirely made up quote is the thing that bothers her the most.

What that poster probably means is that she does not believe her arguments are taken seriously. I would argue they are taken seriously, but not always found to be persuasive. She blames this on misogyny rather than shortcomings with her arguments. Similarly, you also refuse to consider that your arguments simply might not be as strong as you seem to believe, but simply claim that only females are capable of understanding. Of course, you ignore the females who hold view identical to mine. What is your explanation for why they don't understand?

So PP’s “very liberal paraphrasing” wasn’t ok (you wanted a direct quote) while yours is? Talk about not discussing in good faith.

Apparently you are not familiar with the rules of English grammar. The earlier poster used quotation marks around the passage that I bolded. I am sure that you can Google the meaning of quotation marks, but to put it simply, they do not indicate that something is being paraphrased. To the contrary, they specify that they surround something that was literally stated. I, on the other hand, did not use quotations marks. To ensure that there would be no confusion, I offered additional clarification that I was not only paraphrasing, but doing so very liberally and, hence, far from literally. Hopefully this clarifies things for you sufficiently.

That PP also explicitly used the word narrative.

Do you know what that word means?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I do know what that word means. Can you show me where there is a narrative in which the earlier poster was told, "Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do?"

First, I don't think I've ever heard anyone ever suggest that transgenderism is a "manly" topic, let alone one with which women should not concern themselves. Second, who has told the poster that this is a topic for people who matter more than she does?

This is the thing that bothers that poster the most so certainly there is at least one example of it here.

I think that you’re failing to account for the manner in which women are constantly told to be quiet, spoken over, and dismissed. I promise we can see what’s happening.

That may well be true as a society-wide issue but is not something that has been happening in this discussion in which nearly all participants are women and all views are being given equal voice. It's hard to speak over a written message. Moreover, this is a different complaint than that made by the earlier poster who did not simply complain that her views were dismissed, but that she was told not to talk about "manly" issues that should be left to those that matter more than her. That simply didn't happen.

I am not the “manly” poster but even if we take “manly” out of the equation a large number of women definitely feel as though we are being told the feelings of trans people matter more than our feelings. We are told that our outrage over transwomen competing in women’s sports isn’t valid because there is such a small number of trans athletes so why would we be upset about this? That’s saying that Lia Thomas’ teammates have to just suck it up.

I disagree with your overall views about trans issues. Why do your feelings matter more on the subject than mine? I’m a woman. Does it make you a misogynist to not care about how some women feel just because they disagree with you? Because I’ve been told I’m a misogynist for not wanting to ban trans women from bathrooms and locker rooms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the PP who posted above that one of the things that bothers me the most about this entire discussion is the unending gaslighting from trans rights advocates, something that is seen on DCUM in the small and writ large across the movement in general. It’s a relentless narrative: “Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do? You must be absorbing propaganda because God knows you ladies couldn’t possibly reach rational conclusions based on living your entire lives as sexed females in a grossly misogynist world filled with sex-based violence!”

I read this article that I thought was excellent, and captures a lot of my feelings on the matter, so sharing:

https://thecritic.co.uk/we-know-what-a-man-is/

I am not afraid of trans people. I am afraid of losing the principle – within feminism, of all places – that female lives matter as much as male ones. That our desires are not trivial, selfish, frivolous, whereas those of male people are a matter of life and death. That our perceptions of reality are as valid as male ones. That we do not deserve to be bullied and gaslighted into pandering to male egos in the name of “being kind“. That we are not privileged airheads who should say yes to everything because hey, what does it cost us? What do we know about pain? What even are we?

I must have missed the bolded when it was written. Could you please link to that post?

I am not the person who wrote this but I can assure you that although these specific words may have not been written, this is the message we are getting.

I am unapologetic about fighting to keep biological males out of female spaces. I am not homophobic. But make no mistake, people like me are being told out feelings don’t matter.

So, your point is that the thing that bothers that poster the most is something that was not actually said?

Jeff I’ve really grown to respect you and your opinions during this discussion, but I think you’re being deliberately obtuse here.

You are not a female. I think it is difficult for you to understand that females have unique struggles that people who identify as women cannot possibly understand. And that males clearly cannot understand.

I understand your desire to be inclusive and to support trans rights. But let’s be honest - there is absolutely nothing that is on the line for you personally.

I say this respectfully Jeff, I really do. I enjoy your website and this important discourse you’ve allowed us to have on this topic. And I thank you for that.

I am not sure whether you have realized it, but you have both moved the goalposts and reversed the logic of the issue that bothers the earlier poster the most. She was bothered by being told not to worry about "manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do". Your objection is to the invasion of women's spaces by people that you don't consider to be women. That is a different issue. Moreover, you are now telling me not to worry my pretty little head (very liberal paraphrasing here) about "women's" topics.

This thread started out with the original poster stating a desire to have good faith discussions of this issue. One of the reasons we can't have good faith discussions is that so many posters simply don't act in good faith. I am certain that nobody told the earlier poster not to worry her pretty little head about "manly" topics. With the exception of me, the posters in this thread are likely female and I absolutely said no such thing. Yet, that entirely made up quote is the thing that bothers her the most.

What that poster probably means is that she does not believe her arguments are taken seriously. I would argue they are taken seriously, but not always found to be persuasive. She blames this on misogyny rather than shortcomings with her arguments. Similarly, you also refuse to consider that your arguments simply might not be as strong as you seem to believe, but simply claim that only females are capable of understanding. Of course, you ignore the females who hold view identical to mine. What is your explanation for why they don't understand?

So PP’s “very liberal paraphrasing” wasn’t ok (you wanted a direct quote) while yours is? Talk about not discussing in good faith.

Apparently you are not familiar with the rules of English grammar. The earlier poster used quotation marks around the passage that I bolded. I am sure that you can Google the meaning of quotation marks, but to put it simply, they do not indicate that something is being paraphrased. To the contrary, they specify that they surround something that was literally stated. I, on the other hand, did not use quotations marks. To ensure that there would be no confusion, I offered additional clarification that I was not only paraphrasing, but doing so very liberally and, hence, far from literally. Hopefully this clarifies things for you sufficiently.

That PP also explicitly used the word narrative.

Do you know what that word means?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I do know what that word means. Can you show me where there is a narrative in which the earlier poster was told, "Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do?"

First, I don't think I've ever heard anyone ever suggest that transgenderism is a "manly" topic, let alone one with which women should not concern themselves. Second, who has told the poster that this is a topic for people who matter more than she does?

This is the thing that bothers that poster the most so certainly there is at least one example of it here.

I think that you’re failing to account for the manner in which women are constantly told to be quiet, spoken over, and dismissed. I promise we can see what’s happening.

That may well be true as a society-wide issue but is not something that has been happening in this discussion in which nearly all participants are women and all views are being given equal voice. It's hard to speak over a written message. Moreover, this is a different complaint than that made by the earlier poster who did not simply complain that her views were dismissed, but that she was told not to talk about "manly" issues that should be left to those that matter more than her. That simply didn't happen.

I am not the “manly” poster but even if we take “manly” out of the equation a large number of women definitely feel as though we are being told the feelings of trans people matter more than our feelings. We are told that our outrage over transwomen competing in women’s sports isn’t valid because there is such a small number of trans athletes so why would we be upset about this? That’s saying that Lia Thomas’ teammates have to just suck it up.

I disagree with your overall views about trans issues. Why do your feelings matter more on the subject than mine? I’m a woman. Does it make you a misogynist to not care about how some women feel just because they disagree with you? Because I’ve been told I’m a misogynist for not wanting to ban trans women from bathrooms and locker rooms.

I said this before and I’ll say it again. Neither one of us is right or wrong. It’s an opinion on the status of trans people. It’s what the majority thinks/wants that will win in the end. And I am certain my side will win.

[Anonymous]

For those of you who want to ban trans women from locker rooms, can you tell me - without Googling - which of these women you think belong in the men's room?

1.



2.



3.



4.



5.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the PP who posted above that one of the things that bothers me the most about this entire discussion is the unending gaslighting from trans rights advocates, something that is seen on DCUM in the small and writ large across the movement in general. It’s a relentless narrative: “Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do? You must be absorbing propaganda because God knows you ladies couldn’t possibly reach rational conclusions based on living your entire lives as sexed females in a grossly misogynist world filled with sex-based violence!”

I read this article that I thought was excellent, and captures a lot of my feelings on the matter, so sharing:

https://thecritic.co.uk/we-know-what-a-man-is/

I am not afraid of trans people. I am afraid of losing the principle – within feminism, of all places – that female lives matter as much as male ones. That our desires are not trivial, selfish, frivolous, whereas those of male people are a matter of life and death. That our perceptions of reality are as valid as male ones. That we do not deserve to be bullied and gaslighted into pandering to male egos in the name of “being kind“. That we are not privileged airheads who should say yes to everything because hey, what does it cost us? What do we know about pain? What even are we?

I must have missed the bolded when it was written. Could you please link to that post?

I am not the person who wrote this but I can assure you that although these specific words may have not been written, this is the message we are getting.

I am unapologetic about fighting to keep biological males out of female spaces. I am not homophobic. But make no mistake, people like me are being told out feelings don’t matter.

So, your point is that the thing that bothers that poster the most is something that was not actually said?

Jeff I’ve really grown to respect you and your opinions during this discussion, but I think you’re being deliberately obtuse here.

You are not a female. I think it is difficult for you to understand that females have unique struggles that people who identify as women cannot possibly understand. And that males clearly cannot understand.

I understand your desire to be inclusive and to support trans rights. But let’s be honest - there is absolutely nothing that is on the line for you personally.

I say this respectfully Jeff, I really do. I enjoy your website and this important discourse you’ve allowed us to have on this topic. And I thank you for that.

I am not sure whether you have realized it, but you have both moved the goalposts and reversed the logic of the issue that bothers the earlier poster the most. She was bothered by being told not to worry about "manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do". Your objection is to the invasion of women's spaces by people that you don't consider to be women. That is a different issue. Moreover, you are now telling me not to worry my pretty little head (very liberal paraphrasing here) about "women's" topics.

This thread started out with the original poster stating a desire to have good faith discussions of this issue. One of the reasons we can't have good faith discussions is that so many posters simply don't act in good faith. I am certain that nobody told the earlier poster not to worry her pretty little head about "manly" topics. With the exception of me, the posters in this thread are likely female and I absolutely said no such thing. Yet, that entirely made up quote is the thing that bothers her the most.

What that poster probably means is that she does not believe her arguments are taken seriously. I would argue they are taken seriously, but not always found to be persuasive. She blames this on misogyny rather than shortcomings with her arguments. Similarly, you also refuse to consider that your arguments simply might not be as strong as you seem to believe, but simply claim that only females are capable of understanding. Of course, you ignore the females who hold view identical to mine. What is your explanation for why they don't understand?

So PP’s “very liberal paraphrasing” wasn’t ok (you wanted a direct quote) while yours is? Talk about not discussing in good faith.

Apparently you are not familiar with the rules of English grammar. The earlier poster used quotation marks around the passage that I bolded. I am sure that you can Google the meaning of quotation marks, but to put it simply, they do not indicate that something is being paraphrased. To the contrary, they specify that they surround something that was literally stated. I, on the other hand, did not use quotations marks. To ensure that there would be no confusion, I offered additional clarification that I was not only paraphrasing, but doing so very liberally and, hence, far from literally. Hopefully this clarifies things for you sufficiently.

That PP also explicitly used the word narrative.

Do you know what that word means?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I do know what that word means. Can you show me where there is a narrative in which the earlier poster was told, "Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do?"

First, I don't think I've ever heard anyone ever suggest that transgenderism is a "manly" topic, let alone one with which women should not concern themselves. Second, who has told the poster that this is a topic for people who matter more than she does?

This is the thing that bothers that poster the most so certainly there is at least one example of it here.

I think that you’re failing to account for the manner in which women are constantly told to be quiet, spoken over, and dismissed. I promise we can see what’s happening.

That may well be true as a society-wide issue but is not something that has been happening in this discussion in which nearly all participants are women and all views are being given equal voice. It's hard to speak over a written message. Moreover, this is a different complaint than that made by the earlier poster who did not simply complain that her views were dismissed, but that she was told not to talk about "manly" issues that should be left to those that matter more than her. That simply didn't happen.

I am not the “manly” poster but even if we take “manly” out of the equation a large number of women definitely feel as though we are being told the feelings of trans people matter more than our feelings. We are told that our outrage over transwomen competing in women’s sports isn’t valid because there is such a small number of trans athletes so why would we be upset about this? That’s saying that Lia Thomas’ teammates have to just suck it up.

I disagree with your overall views about trans issues. Why do your feelings matter more on the subject than mine? I’m a woman. Does it make you a misogynist to not care about how some women feel just because they disagree with you? Because I’ve been told I’m a misogynist for not wanting to ban trans women from bathrooms and locker rooms.

I said this before and I’ll say it again. Neither one of us is right or wrong. It’s an opinion on the status of trans people. It’s what the majority thinks/wants that will win in the end. And I am certain my side will win.

You think that the majority of the country wants transgender women in the men's bathrooms and transgender men in the women's bathrooms?

Do you think the majority of the country should be able to decide if adults are allowed to transition and what adults should be able to do with their own bodies and how they live their lives?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those of you who want to ban trans women from locker rooms, can you tell me - without Googling - which of these women you think belong in the men's room?

1.



2.



3.



4.



5.

The ones with penises. C’mon - that was a gimme.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the PP who posted above that one of the things that bothers me the most about this entire discussion is the unending gaslighting from trans rights advocates, something that is seen on DCUM in the small and writ large across the movement in general. It’s a relentless narrative: “Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do? You must be absorbing propaganda because God knows you ladies couldn’t possibly reach rational conclusions based on living your entire lives as sexed females in a grossly misogynist world filled with sex-based violence!”

I read this article that I thought was excellent, and captures a lot of my feelings on the matter, so sharing:

https://thecritic.co.uk/we-know-what-a-man-is/

I am not afraid of trans people. I am afraid of losing the principle – within feminism, of all places – that female lives matter as much as male ones. That our desires are not trivial, selfish, frivolous, whereas those of male people are a matter of life and death. That our perceptions of reality are as valid as male ones. That we do not deserve to be bullied and gaslighted into pandering to male egos in the name of “being kind“. That we are not privileged airheads who should say yes to everything because hey, what does it cost us? What do we know about pain? What even are we?

I must have missed the bolded when it was written. Could you please link to that post?

I am not the person who wrote this but I can assure you that although these specific words may have not been written, this is the message we are getting.

I am unapologetic about fighting to keep biological males out of female spaces. I am not homophobic. But make no mistake, people like me are being told out feelings don’t matter.

So, your point is that the thing that bothers that poster the most is something that was not actually said?

Jeff I’ve really grown to respect you and your opinions during this discussion, but I think you’re being deliberately obtuse here.

You are not a female. I think it is difficult for you to understand that females have unique struggles that people who identify as women cannot possibly understand. And that males clearly cannot understand.

I understand your desire to be inclusive and to support trans rights. But let’s be honest - there is absolutely nothing that is on the line for you personally.

I say this respectfully Jeff, I really do. I enjoy your website and this important discourse you’ve allowed us to have on this topic. And I thank you for that.

I am not sure whether you have realized it, but you have both moved the goalposts and reversed the logic of the issue that bothers the earlier poster the most. She was bothered by being told not to worry about "manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do". Your objection is to the invasion of women's spaces by people that you don't consider to be women. That is a different issue. Moreover, you are now telling me not to worry my pretty little head (very liberal paraphrasing here) about "women's" topics.

This thread started out with the original poster stating a desire to have good faith discussions of this issue. One of the reasons we can't have good faith discussions is that so many posters simply don't act in good faith. I am certain that nobody told the earlier poster not to worry her pretty little head about "manly" topics. With the exception of me, the posters in this thread are likely female and I absolutely said no such thing. Yet, that entirely made up quote is the thing that bothers her the most.

What that poster probably means is that she does not believe her arguments are taken seriously. I would argue they are taken seriously, but not always found to be persuasive. She blames this on misogyny rather than shortcomings with her arguments. Similarly, you also refuse to consider that your arguments simply might not be as strong as you seem to believe, but simply claim that only females are capable of understanding. Of course, you ignore the females who hold view identical to mine. What is your explanation for why they don't understand?

So PP’s “very liberal paraphrasing” wasn’t ok (you wanted a direct quote) while yours is? Talk about not discussing in good faith.

Apparently you are not familiar with the rules of English grammar. The earlier poster used quotation marks around the passage that I bolded. I am sure that you can Google the meaning of quotation marks, but to put it simply, they do not indicate that something is being paraphrased. To the contrary, they specify that they surround something that was literally stated. I, on the other hand, did not use quotations marks. To ensure that there would be no confusion, I offered additional clarification that I was not only paraphrasing, but doing so very liberally and, hence, far from literally. Hopefully this clarifies things for you sufficiently.

That PP also explicitly used the word narrative.

Do you know what that word means?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I do know what that word means. Can you show me where there is a narrative in which the earlier poster was told, "Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do?"

First, I don't think I've ever heard anyone ever suggest that transgenderism is a "manly" topic, let alone one with which women should not concern themselves. Second, who has told the poster that this is a topic for people who matter more than she does?

This is the thing that bothers that poster the most so certainly there is at least one example of it here.

I think that you’re failing to account for the manner in which women are constantly told to be quiet, spoken over, and dismissed. I promise we can see what’s happening.

That may well be true as a society-wide issue but is not something that has been happening in this discussion in which nearly all participants are women and all views are being given equal voice. It's hard to speak over a written message. Moreover, this is a different complaint than that made by the earlier poster who did not simply complain that her views were dismissed, but that she was told not to talk about "manly" issues that should be left to those that matter more than her. That simply didn't happen.

I am not the “manly” poster but even if we take “manly” out of the equation a large number of women definitely feel as though we are being told the feelings of trans people matter more than our feelings. We are told that our outrage over transwomen competing in women’s sports isn’t valid because there is such a small number of trans athletes so why would we be upset about this? That’s saying that Lia Thomas’ teammates have to just suck it up.

I disagree with your overall views about trans issues. Why do your feelings matter more on the subject than mine? I’m a woman. Does it make you a misogynist to not care about how some women feel just because they disagree with you? Because I’ve been told I’m a misogynist for not wanting to ban trans women from bathrooms and locker rooms.

I said this before and I’ll say it again. Neither one of us is right or wrong. It’s an opinion on the status of trans people. It’s what the majority thinks/wants that will win in the end. And I am certain my side will win.

You think that the majority of the country wants transgender women in the men's bathrooms and transgender men in the women's bathrooms?

Do you think the majority of the country should be able to decide if adults are allowed to transition and what adults should be able to do with their own bodies and how they live their lives?

I think the majority of the country doesn’t want penises in female spaces. And doesn’t want transwomen competing against females in sports. I also think the majority of the country doesn’t think that womanhood is a feeling.

I think adults can do whatever they want. I’m not sure how the majority of the country feels about that particularly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the PP who posted above that one of the things that bothers me the most about this entire discussion is the unending gaslighting from trans rights advocates, something that is seen on DCUM in the small and writ large across the movement in general. It’s a relentless narrative: “Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do? You must be absorbing propaganda because God knows you ladies couldn’t possibly reach rational conclusions based on living your entire lives as sexed females in a grossly misogynist world filled with sex-based violence!”

I read this article that I thought was excellent, and captures a lot of my feelings on the matter, so sharing:

https://thecritic.co.uk/we-know-what-a-man-is/

I am not afraid of trans people. I am afraid of losing the principle – within feminism, of all places – that female lives matter as much as male ones. That our desires are not trivial, selfish, frivolous, whereas those of male people are a matter of life and death. That our perceptions of reality are as valid as male ones. That we do not deserve to be bullied and gaslighted into pandering to male egos in the name of “being kind“. That we are not privileged airheads who should say yes to everything because hey, what does it cost us? What do we know about pain? What even are we?

I must have missed the bolded when it was written. Could you please link to that post?

I am not the person who wrote this but I can assure you that although these specific words may have not been written, this is the message we are getting.

I am unapologetic about fighting to keep biological males out of female spaces. I am not homophobic. But make no mistake, people like me are being told out feelings don’t matter.

So, your point is that the thing that bothers that poster the most is something that was not actually said?

Jeff I’ve really grown to respect you and your opinions during this discussion, but I think you’re being deliberately obtuse here.

You are not a female. I think it is difficult for you to understand that females have unique struggles that people who identify as women cannot possibly understand. And that males clearly cannot understand.

I understand your desire to be inclusive and to support trans rights. But let’s be honest - there is absolutely nothing that is on the line for you personally.

I say this respectfully Jeff, I really do. I enjoy your website and this important discourse you’ve allowed us to have on this topic. And I thank you for that.

I am not sure whether you have realized it, but you have both moved the goalposts and reversed the logic of the issue that bothers the earlier poster the most. She was bothered by being told not to worry about "manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do". Your objection is to the invasion of women's spaces by people that you don't consider to be women. That is a different issue. Moreover, you are now telling me not to worry my pretty little head (very liberal paraphrasing here) about "women's" topics.

This thread started out with the original poster stating a desire to have good faith discussions of this issue. One of the reasons we can't have good faith discussions is that so many posters simply don't act in good faith. I am certain that nobody told the earlier poster not to worry her pretty little head about "manly" topics. With the exception of me, the posters in this thread are likely female and I absolutely said no such thing. Yet, that entirely made up quote is the thing that bothers her the most.

What that poster probably means is that she does not believe her arguments are taken seriously. I would argue they are taken seriously, but not always found to be persuasive. She blames this on misogyny rather than shortcomings with her arguments. Similarly, you also refuse to consider that your arguments simply might not be as strong as you seem to believe, but simply claim that only females are capable of understanding. Of course, you ignore the females who hold view identical to mine. What is your explanation for why they don't understand?

So PP’s “very liberal paraphrasing” wasn’t ok (you wanted a direct quote) while yours is? Talk about not discussing in good faith.

Apparently you are not familiar with the rules of English grammar. The earlier poster used quotation marks around the passage that I bolded. I am sure that you can Google the meaning of quotation marks, but to put it simply, they do not indicate that something is being paraphrased. To the contrary, they specify that they surround something that was literally stated. I, on the other hand, did not use quotations marks. To ensure that there would be no confusion, I offered additional clarification that I was not only paraphrasing, but doing so very liberally and, hence, far from literally. Hopefully this clarifies things for you sufficiently.

That PP also explicitly used the word narrative.

Do you know what that word means?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I do know what that word means. Can you show me where there is a narrative in which the earlier poster was told, "Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do?"

First, I don't think I've ever heard anyone ever suggest that transgenderism is a "manly" topic, let alone one with which women should not concern themselves. Second, who has told the poster that this is a topic for people who matter more than she does?

This is the thing that bothers that poster the most so certainly there is at least one example of it here.

I think that you’re failing to account for the manner in which women are constantly told to be quiet, spoken over, and dismissed. I promise we can see what’s happening.

That may well be true as a society-wide issue but is not something that has been happening in this discussion in which nearly all participants are women and all views are being given equal voice. It's hard to speak over a written message. Moreover, this is a different complaint than that made by the earlier poster who did not simply complain that her views were dismissed, but that she was told not to talk about "manly" issues that should be left to those that matter more than her. That simply didn't happen.

I am not the “manly” poster but even if we take “manly” out of the equation a large number of women definitely feel as though we are being told the feelings of trans people matter more than our feelings. We are told that our outrage over transwomen competing in women’s sports isn’t valid because there is such a small number of trans athletes so why would we be upset about this? That’s saying that Lia Thomas’ teammates have to just suck it up.

I disagree with your overall views about trans issues. Why do your feelings matter more on the subject than mine? I’m a woman. Does it make you a misogynist to not care about how some women feel just because they disagree with you? Because I’ve been told I’m a misogynist for not wanting to ban trans women from bathrooms and locker rooms.

I said this before and I’ll say it again. Neither one of us is right or wrong. It’s an opinion on the status of trans people. It’s what the majority thinks/wants that will win in the end. And I am certain my side will win.

You think that the majority of the country wants transgender women in the men's bathrooms and transgender men in the women's bathrooms?

Do you think the majority of the country should be able to decide if adults are allowed to transition and what adults should be able to do with their own bodies and how they live their lives?

I think the majority of the country doesn’t want penises in female spaces. And doesn’t want transwomen competing against females in sports. I also think the majority of the country doesn’t think that womanhood is a feeling.

I think adults can do whatever they want. I’m not sure how the majority of the country feels about that particularly.

So you're saying you want pre-op trans women in the men's bathroom and post-op trans women in the women's bathroom?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the PP who posted above that one of the things that bothers me the most about this entire discussion is the unending gaslighting from trans rights advocates, something that is seen on DCUM in the small and writ large across the movement in general. It’s a relentless narrative: “Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do? You must be absorbing propaganda because God knows you ladies couldn’t possibly reach rational conclusions based on living your entire lives as sexed females in a grossly misogynist world filled with sex-based violence!”

I read this article that I thought was excellent, and captures a lot of my feelings on the matter, so sharing:

https://thecritic.co.uk/we-know-what-a-man-is/

I am not afraid of trans people. I am afraid of losing the principle – within feminism, of all places – that female lives matter as much as male ones. That our desires are not trivial, selfish, frivolous, whereas those of male people are a matter of life and death. That our perceptions of reality are as valid as male ones. That we do not deserve to be bullied and gaslighted into pandering to male egos in the name of “being kind“. That we are not privileged airheads who should say yes to everything because hey, what does it cost us? What do we know about pain? What even are we?

I must have missed the bolded when it was written. Could you please link to that post?

I am not the person who wrote this but I can assure you that although these specific words may have not been written, this is the message we are getting.

I am unapologetic about fighting to keep biological males out of female spaces. I am not homophobic. But make no mistake, people like me are being told out feelings don’t matter.

So, your point is that the thing that bothers that poster the most is something that was not actually said?

Jeff I’ve really grown to respect you and your opinions during this discussion, but I think you’re being deliberately obtuse here.

You are not a female. I think it is difficult for you to understand that females have unique struggles that people who identify as women cannot possibly understand. And that males clearly cannot understand.

I understand your desire to be inclusive and to support trans rights. But let’s be honest - there is absolutely nothing that is on the line for you personally.

I say this respectfully Jeff, I really do. I enjoy your website and this important discourse you’ve allowed us to have on this topic. And I thank you for that.

I am not sure whether you have realized it, but you have both moved the goalposts and reversed the logic of the issue that bothers the earlier poster the most. She was bothered by being told not to worry about "manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do". Your objection is to the invasion of women's spaces by people that you don't consider to be women. That is a different issue. Moreover, you are now telling me not to worry my pretty little head (very liberal paraphrasing here) about "women's" topics.

This thread started out with the original poster stating a desire to have good faith discussions of this issue. One of the reasons we can't have good faith discussions is that so many posters simply don't act in good faith. I am certain that nobody told the earlier poster not to worry her pretty little head about "manly" topics. With the exception of me, the posters in this thread are likely female and I absolutely said no such thing. Yet, that entirely made up quote is the thing that bothers her the most.

What that poster probably means is that she does not believe her arguments are taken seriously. I would argue they are taken seriously, but not always found to be persuasive. She blames this on misogyny rather than shortcomings with her arguments. Similarly, you also refuse to consider that your arguments simply might not be as strong as you seem to believe, but simply claim that only females are capable of understanding. Of course, you ignore the females who hold view identical to mine. What is your explanation for why they don't understand?

So PP’s “very liberal paraphrasing” wasn’t ok (you wanted a direct quote) while yours is? Talk about not discussing in good faith.

Apparently you are not familiar with the rules of English grammar. The earlier poster used quotation marks around the passage that I bolded. I am sure that you can Google the meaning of quotation marks, but to put it simply, they do not indicate that something is being paraphrased. To the contrary, they specify that they surround something that was literally stated. I, on the other hand, did not use quotations marks. To ensure that there would be no confusion, I offered additional clarification that I was not only paraphrasing, but doing so very liberally and, hence, far from literally. Hopefully this clarifies things for you sufficiently.

That PP also explicitly used the word narrative.

Do you know what that word means?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I do know what that word means. Can you show me where there is a narrative in which the earlier poster was told, "Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do?"

First, I don't think I've ever heard anyone ever suggest that transgenderism is a "manly" topic, let alone one with which women should not concern themselves. Second, who has told the poster that this is a topic for people who matter more than she does?

This is the thing that bothers that poster the most so certainly there is at least one example of it here.

I think that you’re failing to account for the manner in which women are constantly told to be quiet, spoken over, and dismissed. I promise we can see what’s happening.

That may well be true as a society-wide issue but is not something that has been happening in this discussion in which nearly all participants are women and all views are being given equal voice. It's hard to speak over a written message. Moreover, this is a different complaint than that made by the earlier poster who did not simply complain that her views were dismissed, but that she was told not to talk about "manly" issues that should be left to those that matter more than her. That simply didn't happen.

I am not the “manly” poster but even if we take “manly” out of the equation a large number of women definitely feel as though we are being told the feelings of trans people matter more than our feelings. We are told that our outrage over transwomen competing in women’s sports isn’t valid because there is such a small number of trans athletes so why would we be upset about this? That’s saying that Lia Thomas’ teammates have to just suck it up.

I disagree with your overall views about trans issues. Why do your feelings matter more on the subject than mine? I’m a woman. Does it make you a misogynist to not care about how some women feel just because they disagree with you? Because I’ve been told I’m a misogynist for not wanting to ban trans women from bathrooms and locker rooms.

I said this before and I’ll say it again. Neither one of us is right or wrong. It’s an opinion on the status of trans people. It’s what the majority thinks/wants that will win in the end. And I am certain my side will win.

You think that the majority of the country wants transgender women in the men's bathrooms and transgender men in the women's bathrooms?

Do you think the majority of the country should be able to decide if adults are allowed to transition and what adults should be able to do with their own bodies and how they live their lives?

I think the majority of the country doesn’t want penises in female spaces. And doesn’t want transwomen competing against females in sports. I also think the majority of the country doesn’t think that womanhood is a feeling.

I think adults can do whatever they want. I’m not sure how the majority of the country feels about that particularly.

So you're saying you want pre-op trans women in the men's bathroom and post-op trans women in the women's bathroom?

Quite honestly the bathroom thing doesn’t bother me as much as the locker room thing. I definitely don’t want to be changing or showering with a biological male.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the PP who posted above that one of the things that bothers me the most about this entire discussion is the unending gaslighting from trans rights advocates, something that is seen on DCUM in the small and writ large across the movement in general. It’s a relentless narrative: “Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do? You must be absorbing propaganda because God knows you ladies couldn’t possibly reach rational conclusions based on living your entire lives as sexed females in a grossly misogynist world filled with sex-based violence!”

I read this article that I thought was excellent, and captures a lot of my feelings on the matter, so sharing:

https://thecritic.co.uk/we-know-what-a-man-is/

I am not afraid of trans people. I am afraid of losing the principle – within feminism, of all places – that female lives matter as much as male ones. That our desires are not trivial, selfish, frivolous, whereas those of male people are a matter of life and death. That our perceptions of reality are as valid as male ones. That we do not deserve to be bullied and gaslighted into pandering to male egos in the name of “being kind“. That we are not privileged airheads who should say yes to everything because hey, what does it cost us? What do we know about pain? What even are we?

I must have missed the bolded when it was written. Could you please link to that post?

I am not the person who wrote this but I can assure you that although these specific words may have not been written, this is the message we are getting.

I am unapologetic about fighting to keep biological males out of female spaces. I am not homophobic. But make no mistake, people like me are being told out feelings don’t matter.

So, your point is that the thing that bothers that poster the most is something that was not actually said?

Jeff I’ve really grown to respect you and your opinions during this discussion, but I think you’re being deliberately obtuse here.

You are not a female. I think it is difficult for you to understand that females have unique struggles that people who identify as women cannot possibly understand. And that males clearly cannot understand.

I understand your desire to be inclusive and to support trans rights. But let’s be honest - there is absolutely nothing that is on the line for you personally.

I say this respectfully Jeff, I really do. I enjoy your website and this important discourse you’ve allowed us to have on this topic. And I thank you for that.

I am not sure whether you have realized it, but you have both moved the goalposts and reversed the logic of the issue that bothers the earlier poster the most. She was bothered by being told not to worry about "manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do". Your objection is to the invasion of women's spaces by people that you don't consider to be women. That is a different issue. Moreover, you are now telling me not to worry my pretty little head (very liberal paraphrasing here) about "women's" topics.

This thread started out with the original poster stating a desire to have good faith discussions of this issue. One of the reasons we can't have good faith discussions is that so many posters simply don't act in good faith. I am certain that nobody told the earlier poster not to worry her pretty little head about "manly" topics. With the exception of me, the posters in this thread are likely female and I absolutely said no such thing. Yet, that entirely made up quote is the thing that bothers her the most.

What that poster probably means is that she does not believe her arguments are taken seriously. I would argue they are taken seriously, but not always found to be persuasive. She blames this on misogyny rather than shortcomings with her arguments. Similarly, you also refuse to consider that your arguments simply might not be as strong as you seem to believe, but simply claim that only females are capable of understanding. Of course, you ignore the females who hold view identical to mine. What is your explanation for why they don't understand?

So PP’s “very liberal paraphrasing” wasn’t ok (you wanted a direct quote) while yours is? Talk about not discussing in good faith.

Apparently you are not familiar with the rules of English grammar. The earlier poster used quotation marks around the passage that I bolded. I am sure that you can Google the meaning of quotation marks, but to put it simply, they do not indicate that something is being paraphrased. To the contrary, they specify that they surround something that was literally stated. I, on the other hand, did not use quotations marks. To ensure that there would be no confusion, I offered additional clarification that I was not only paraphrasing, but doing so very liberally and, hence, far from literally. Hopefully this clarifies things for you sufficiently.

That PP also explicitly used the word narrative.

Do you know what that word means?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I do know what that word means. Can you show me where there is a narrative in which the earlier poster was told, "Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do?"

First, I don't think I've ever heard anyone ever suggest that transgenderism is a "manly" topic, let alone one with which women should not concern themselves. Second, who has told the poster that this is a topic for people who matter more than she does?

This is the thing that bothers that poster the most so certainly there is at least one example of it here.

I think that you’re failing to account for the manner in which women are constantly told to be quiet, spoken over, and dismissed. I promise we can see what’s happening.

That may well be true as a society-wide issue but is not something that has been happening in this discussion in which nearly all participants are women and all views are being given equal voice. It's hard to speak over a written message. Moreover, this is a different complaint than that made by the earlier poster who did not simply complain that her views were dismissed, but that she was told not to talk about "manly" issues that should be left to those that matter more than her. That simply didn't happen.

I am not the “manly” poster but even if we take “manly” out of the equation a large number of women definitely feel as though we are being told the feelings of trans people matter more than our feelings. We are told that our outrage over transwomen competing in women’s sports isn’t valid because there is such a small number of trans athletes so why would we be upset about this? That’s saying that Lia Thomas’ teammates have to just suck it up.

I disagree with your overall views about trans issues. Why do your feelings matter more on the subject than mine? I’m a woman. Does it make you a misogynist to not care about how some women feel just because they disagree with you? Because I’ve been told I’m a misogynist for not wanting to ban trans women from bathrooms and locker rooms.

I said this before and I’ll say it again. Neither one of us is right or wrong. It’s an opinion on the status of trans people. It’s what the majority thinks/wants that will win in the end. And I am certain my side will win.

You think that the majority of the country wants transgender women in the men's bathrooms and transgender men in the women's bathrooms?

Do you think the majority of the country should be able to decide if adults are allowed to transition and what adults should be able to do with their own bodies and how they live their lives?

I think the majority of the country doesn’t want penises in female spaces. And doesn’t want transwomen competing against females in sports. I also think the majority of the country doesn’t think that womanhood is a feeling.

I think adults can do whatever they want. I’m not sure how the majority of the country feels about that particularly.

So you're saying you want pre-op trans women in the men's bathroom and post-op trans women in the women's bathroom?

Quite honestly the bathroom thing doesn’t bother me as much as the locker room thing. I definitely don’t want to be changing or showering with a biological male.

So you're opinion is, bathroom whatever because it's closed stalls. Locker room, pre-op and post-op trans women should change in the men's locker room with your men and boys?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the PP who posted above that one of the things that bothers me the most about this entire discussion is the unending gaslighting from trans rights advocates, something that is seen on DCUM in the small and writ large across the movement in general. It’s a relentless narrative: “Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do? You must be absorbing propaganda because God knows you ladies couldn’t possibly reach rational conclusions based on living your entire lives as sexed females in a grossly misogynist world filled with sex-based violence!”

I read this article that I thought was excellent, and captures a lot of my feelings on the matter, so sharing:

https://thecritic.co.uk/we-know-what-a-man-is/

I am not afraid of trans people. I am afraid of losing the principle – within feminism, of all places – that female lives matter as much as male ones. That our desires are not trivial, selfish, frivolous, whereas those of male people are a matter of life and death. That our perceptions of reality are as valid as male ones. That we do not deserve to be bullied and gaslighted into pandering to male egos in the name of “being kind“. That we are not privileged airheads who should say yes to everything because hey, what does it cost us? What do we know about pain? What even are we?

I must have missed the bolded when it was written. Could you please link to that post?

I am not the person who wrote this but I can assure you that although these specific words may have not been written, this is the message we are getting.

I am unapologetic about fighting to keep biological males out of female spaces. I am not homophobic. But make no mistake, people like me are being told out feelings don’t matter.

So, your point is that the thing that bothers that poster the most is something that was not actually said?

Jeff I’ve really grown to respect you and your opinions during this discussion, but I think you’re being deliberately obtuse here.

You are not a female. I think it is difficult for you to understand that females have unique struggles that people who identify as women cannot possibly understand. And that males clearly cannot understand.

I understand your desire to be inclusive and to support trans rights. But let’s be honest - there is absolutely nothing that is on the line for you personally.

I say this respectfully Jeff, I really do. I enjoy your website and this important discourse you’ve allowed us to have on this topic. And I thank you for that.

I am not sure whether you have realized it, but you have both moved the goalposts and reversed the logic of the issue that bothers the earlier poster the most. She was bothered by being told not to worry about "manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do". Your objection is to the invasion of women's spaces by people that you don't consider to be women. That is a different issue. Moreover, you are now telling me not to worry my pretty little head (very liberal paraphrasing here) about "women's" topics.

This thread started out with the original poster stating a desire to have good faith discussions of this issue. One of the reasons we can't have good faith discussions is that so many posters simply don't act in good faith. I am certain that nobody told the earlier poster not to worry her pretty little head about "manly" topics. With the exception of me, the posters in this thread are likely female and I absolutely said no such thing. Yet, that entirely made up quote is the thing that bothers her the most.

What that poster probably means is that she does not believe her arguments are taken seriously. I would argue they are taken seriously, but not always found to be persuasive. She blames this on misogyny rather than shortcomings with her arguments. Similarly, you also refuse to consider that your arguments simply might not be as strong as you seem to believe, but simply claim that only females are capable of understanding. Of course, you ignore the females who hold view identical to mine. What is your explanation for why they don't understand?

So PP’s “very liberal paraphrasing” wasn’t ok (you wanted a direct quote) while yours is? Talk about not discussing in good faith.

Apparently you are not familiar with the rules of English grammar. The earlier poster used quotation marks around the passage that I bolded. I am sure that you can Google the meaning of quotation marks, but to put it simply, they do not indicate that something is being paraphrased. To the contrary, they specify that they surround something that was literally stated. I, on the other hand, did not use quotations marks. To ensure that there would be no confusion, I offered additional clarification that I was not only paraphrasing, but doing so very liberally and, hence, far from literally. Hopefully this clarifies things for you sufficiently.

That PP also explicitly used the word narrative.

Do you know what that word means?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I do know what that word means. Can you show me where there is a narrative in which the earlier poster was told, "Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do?"

First, I don't think I've ever heard anyone ever suggest that transgenderism is a "manly" topic, let alone one with which women should not concern themselves. Second, who has told the poster that this is a topic for people who matter more than she does?

This is the thing that bothers that poster the most so certainly there is at least one example of it here.

I think that you’re failing to account for the manner in which women are constantly told to be quiet, spoken over, and dismissed. I promise we can see what’s happening.

That may well be true as a society-wide issue but is not something that has been happening in this discussion in which nearly all participants are women and all views are being given equal voice. It's hard to speak over a written message. Moreover, this is a different complaint than that made by the earlier poster who did not simply complain that her views were dismissed, but that she was told not to talk about "manly" issues that should be left to those that matter more than her. That simply didn't happen.

I am not the “manly” poster but even if we take “manly” out of the equation a large number of women definitely feel as though we are being told the feelings of trans people matter more than our feelings. We are told that our outrage over transwomen competing in women’s sports isn’t valid because there is such a small number of trans athletes so why would we be upset about this? That’s saying that Lia Thomas’ teammates have to just suck it up.

I disagree with your overall views about trans issues. Why do your feelings matter more on the subject than mine? I’m a woman. Does it make you a misogynist to not care about how some women feel just because they disagree with you? Because I’ve been told I’m a misogynist for not wanting to ban trans women from bathrooms and locker rooms.

I said this before and I’ll say it again. Neither one of us is right or wrong. It’s an opinion on the status of trans people. It’s what the majority thinks/wants that will win in the end. And I am certain my side will win.

You think that the majority of the country wants transgender women in the men's bathrooms and transgender men in the women's bathrooms?

Do you think the majority of the country should be able to decide if adults are allowed to transition and what adults should be able to do with their own bodies and how they live their lives?

I think the majority of the country doesn’t want penises in female spaces. And doesn’t want transwomen competing against females in sports. I also think the majority of the country doesn’t think that womanhood is a feeling.

I think adults can do whatever they want. I’m not sure how the majority of the country feels about that particularly.

So you're saying you want pre-op trans women in the men's bathroom and post-op trans women in the women's bathroom?

Quite honestly the bathroom thing doesn’t bother me as much as the locker room thing. I definitely don’t want to be changing or showering with a biological male.

So you're opinion is, bathroom whatever because it's closed stalls. Locker room, pre-op and post-op trans women should change in the men's locker room with your men and boys?

I’m not sure why you want me to keep repeating it, but I don’t want a penis in the locker room with me. Post op clearly wouldn’t have a penis, but that would be difficult to police. So it would have to be segregated by male/female. That’s the only way to keep the penises out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the PP who posted above that one of the things that bothers me the most about this entire discussion is the unending gaslighting from trans rights advocates, something that is seen on DCUM in the small and writ large across the movement in general. It’s a relentless narrative: “Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do? You must be absorbing propaganda because God knows you ladies couldn’t possibly reach rational conclusions based on living your entire lives as sexed females in a grossly misogynist world filled with sex-based violence!”

I read this article that I thought was excellent, and captures a lot of my feelings on the matter, so sharing:

https://thecritic.co.uk/we-know-what-a-man-is/

I am not afraid of trans people. I am afraid of losing the principle – within feminism, of all places – that female lives matter as much as male ones. That our desires are not trivial, selfish, frivolous, whereas those of male people are a matter of life and death. That our perceptions of reality are as valid as male ones. That we do not deserve to be bullied and gaslighted into pandering to male egos in the name of “being kind“. That we are not privileged airheads who should say yes to everything because hey, what does it cost us? What do we know about pain? What even are we?

I must have missed the bolded when it was written. Could you please link to that post?

I am not the person who wrote this but I can assure you that although these specific words may have not been written, this is the message we are getting.

I am unapologetic about fighting to keep biological males out of female spaces. I am not homophobic. But make no mistake, people like me are being told out feelings don’t matter.

So, your point is that the thing that bothers that poster the most is something that was not actually said?

Jeff I’ve really grown to respect you and your opinions during this discussion, but I think you’re being deliberately obtuse here.

You are not a female. I think it is difficult for you to understand that females have unique struggles that people who identify as women cannot possibly understand. And that males clearly cannot understand.

I understand your desire to be inclusive and to support trans rights. But let’s be honest - there is absolutely nothing that is on the line for you personally.

I say this respectfully Jeff, I really do. I enjoy your website and this important discourse you’ve allowed us to have on this topic. And I thank you for that.

I am not sure whether you have realized it, but you have both moved the goalposts and reversed the logic of the issue that bothers the earlier poster the most. She was bothered by being told not to worry about "manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do". Your objection is to the invasion of women's spaces by people that you don't consider to be women. That is a different issue. Moreover, you are now telling me not to worry my pretty little head (very liberal paraphrasing here) about "women's" topics.

This thread started out with the original poster stating a desire to have good faith discussions of this issue. One of the reasons we can't have good faith discussions is that so many posters simply don't act in good faith. I am certain that nobody told the earlier poster not to worry her pretty little head about "manly" topics. With the exception of me, the posters in this thread are likely female and I absolutely said no such thing. Yet, that entirely made up quote is the thing that bothers her the most.

What that poster probably means is that she does not believe her arguments are taken seriously. I would argue they are taken seriously, but not always found to be persuasive. She blames this on misogyny rather than shortcomings with her arguments. Similarly, you also refuse to consider that your arguments simply might not be as strong as you seem to believe, but simply claim that only females are capable of understanding. Of course, you ignore the females who hold view identical to mine. What is your explanation for why they don't understand?

So PP’s “very liberal paraphrasing” wasn’t ok (you wanted a direct quote) while yours is? Talk about not discussing in good faith.

Apparently you are not familiar with the rules of English grammar. The earlier poster used quotation marks around the passage that I bolded. I am sure that you can Google the meaning of quotation marks, but to put it simply, they do not indicate that something is being paraphrased. To the contrary, they specify that they surround something that was literally stated. I, on the other hand, did not use quotations marks. To ensure that there would be no confusion, I offered additional clarification that I was not only paraphrasing, but doing so very liberally and, hence, far from literally. Hopefully this clarifies things for you sufficiently.

That PP also explicitly used the word narrative.

Do you know what that word means?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I do know what that word means. Can you show me where there is a narrative in which the earlier poster was told, "Why are you worrying your pretty little heads with important manly topics that are for people who matter more than you do?"

First, I don't think I've ever heard anyone ever suggest that transgenderism is a "manly" topic, let alone one with which women should not concern themselves. Second, who has told the poster that this is a topic for people who matter more than she does?

This is the thing that bothers that poster the most so certainly there is at least one example of it here.

I think that you’re failing to account for the manner in which women are constantly told to be quiet, spoken over, and dismissed. I promise we can see what’s happening.

That may well be true as a society-wide issue but is not something that has been happening in this discussion in which nearly all participants are women and all views are being given equal voice. It's hard to speak over a written message. Moreover, this is a different complaint than that made by the earlier poster who did not simply complain that her views were dismissed, but that she was told not to talk about "manly" issues that should be left to those that matter more than her. That simply didn't happen.

I am not the “manly” poster but even if we take “manly” out of the equation a large number of women definitely feel as though we are being told the feelings of trans people matter more than our feelings. We are told that our outrage over transwomen competing in women’s sports isn’t valid because there is such a small number of trans athletes so why would we be upset about this? That’s saying that Lia Thomas’ teammates have to just suck it up.

I disagree with your overall views about trans issues. Why do your feelings matter more on the subject than mine? I’m a woman. Does it make you a misogynist to not care about how some women feel just because they disagree with you? Because I’ve been told I’m a misogynist for not wanting to ban trans women from bathrooms and locker rooms.

I said this before and I’ll say it again. Neither one of us is right or wrong. It’s an opinion on the status of trans people. It’s what the majority thinks/wants that will win in the end. And I am certain my side will win.

You think that the majority of the country wants transgender women in the men's bathrooms and transgender men in the women's bathrooms?

Do you think the majority of the country should be able to decide if adults are allowed to transition and what adults should be able to do with their own bodies and how they live their lives?

I think the majority of the country doesn’t want penises in female spaces. And doesn’t want transwomen competing against females in sports. I also think the majority of the country doesn’t think that womanhood is a feeling.

I think adults can do whatever they want. I’m not sure how the majority of the country feels about that particularly.

So you're saying you want pre-op trans women in the men's bathroom and post-op trans women in the women's bathroom?

Quite honestly the bathroom thing doesn’t bother me as much as the locker room thing. I definitely don’t want to be changing or showering with a biological male.

So you're opinion is, bathroom whatever because it's closed stalls. Locker room, pre-op and post-op trans women should change in the men's locker room with your men and boys?

I’m not sure why you want me to keep repeating it, but I don’t want a penis in the locker room with me. Post op clearly wouldn’t have a penis, but that would be difficult to police. So it would have to be segregated by male/female. That’s the only way to keep the penises out.

You answered a question, you don't want to be in a locker room with a male. Male, not trans woman. Male is used by people that do not like transgender women to discuss all trans women because they are assigned male at birth and have XY genetics. Therefore, when you said, you don't want to change in front of a MALE, that means you want post op trans women changing in the men's locker room. At least that's how I read it. Maybe your language isn't as precise as I thought it was.