Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me how anyone other than a biogenetic woman with an X chromosome can me strays?

This is going to far if someone tries to argue that.

People who menstruate include women and trans men. That wasn't difficult or confusing.

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me how anyone other than a biogenetic woman with an X chromosome can me strays?

This is going to far if someone tries to argue that.

They want to change the langauge to something like, 'people who menstruate' to include trans men who may identify as male but menstruate. And exclude something like that from the definition of 'woman' because there are some woman (trans women, and to be fair, women with certain health conditions) who do not menstruate.

I strenuously disagree with this personally. And I am a lefty lefty lefty pro LGBTQ person.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. It really annoys me how people are conflating a person's right to publicly transition and be accepted that way with their right to compete in sports. Even after transitioning, there are still biological differences between men and women. You wouldn't try to hide the fact that you transitioned from a medical doctor, for example, because it might actually be relevant to your diagnosis or treatment options - you're really the sex you started with, biologically. Sports are a biological thing. The fastest and strongest woman in the world will NEVER be as fast or strong as the fastest and strongest man. It's biological.

Honestly, I don't think male athletes should even be able to transition. I don't think they should pass the psych tests. Well, certainly not at the moment when they have huge incentive to transition by knowing that they'd win when maybe they wouldn't otherwise stand a chance. Men should not be able to compete against women in women's sports. Period. I've never been an athlete in my life and that's still obvious to me. It's not "anti-trans" to say so. If anything, it's "anti-women" to say otherwise.

What are we even talking about? Like how many people would this effect? We are talking about being elite, best of the best and also trans....we can't make our lives around someone being able to "steal" a gold medal in women's slalom or some shit.

Sports is how a lot of young people pay for college. If it is no big deal, then trans women should just compete with men. Why would they "make their lives around (to use your words)" competing against biological women.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why she keeps wading into this particular issue. It’s coming across as a hangup or fixation. Does she not have 400 things to do?

She seems to think that the growing acceptance of trans rights is negatively affecting biological women’s place in society and also her involvement with domestic and abuse charities. Though I’m less clear on how that works for the second one.

https://www.philanthropy-impact.org/inspiration/personal-stories/jk-rowling-obe

Time for the older women to have several seats if they can't understand intersectional is the way things are now.

It seems that it's the younger feminists who don't understand that.

Intersectional means seeing the differences and advocating for what each group needs. It means acknowledging that black women and latina women and gay women and transgendered women all need specific advocacy and that we lift one another up in support of that advocacy. It SHOULD mean acknowledging the realities of biological sex and calling them what they are, women's issues.

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me how anyone other than a biogenetic woman with an X chromosome can me strays?

This is going to far if someone tries to argue that.

Meant MENSTRUATE

Anonymous wrote:The only reservation I have is children (under the age of 18) making changes to their bodies that are permanent and irreversible. I couldn't care less about debating whether it's identity or sexuality. It's not for me to debate. My rights have never been impeded by a trans or gay person and I think they should have all of the same protections under the law.

I also have this reservation. I don’t have that large of a social circle, but I know one lesbian couple who gave birth to a son who just happened to become a daughter in early elementary school (now has curves and breasts as a teen so I’m assuming hormones are involved), and a couple of gay men who adopted a girl who just happened to become a boy in early elementary school. All this is to say that I don’t think gender dysphoria is totally inborn. I think young children have a powerful urge to imitate their parents, a tendency to go along with their friends, etc. Responsible adults should not let them permanently alter their bodies in childhood.

Can someone explain to me how anyone other than a biogenetic woman with an X chromosome can me strays?

This is going to far if someone tries to argue that.

Anonymous wrote:Someone born male has a tremendous advantage over those born female in some sports. Track and field is a good example. Lung capacity matters a lot. Those born male usually have a lung capacity exceeding that for born females.

In some states, all a high school student has to do to compete is say (s)he identifies with a certain gender. There's a lawsuit in Connecticut brought by born females who lost out to born males and thus were blocked from going forward. For example, for one event, the top 2 finishers in each section go on to the state final. In one section, both of the top 2 finishers were born male. This meant that no born female from that section advanced to the state final. In reality, this means that those young women aren't going to get the benefit of competing in the state finals in college admissions and/or athletic scholarships. So, they are suing.

I agree with them. This is unfair competition. You don't have to hate trans people to think it's unfair.

Agree is actually cheating IMO.

Anonymous wrote:NP. It really annoys me how people are conflating a person's right to publicly transition and be accepted that way with their right to compete in sports. Even after transitioning, there are still biological differences between men and women. You wouldn't try to hide the fact that you transitioned from a medical doctor, for example, because it might actually be relevant to your diagnosis or treatment options - you're really the sex you started with, biologically. Sports are a biological thing. The fastest and strongest woman in the world will NEVER be as fast or strong as the fastest and strongest man. It's biological.

Honestly, I don't think male athletes should even be able to transition. I don't think they should pass the psych tests. Well, certainly not at the moment when they have huge incentive to transition by knowing that they'd win when maybe they wouldn't otherwise stand a chance. Men should not be able to compete against women in women's sports. Period. I've never been an athlete in my life and that's still obvious to me. It's not "anti-trans" to say so. If anything, it's "anti-women" to say otherwise.

What are we even talking about? Like how many people would this effect? We are talking about being elite, best of the best and also trans....we can't make our lives around someone being able to "steal" a gold medal in women's slalom or some shit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why she keeps wading into this particular issue. It’s coming across as a hangup or fixation. Does she not have 400 things to do?

She seems to think that the growing acceptance of trans rights is negatively affecting biological women’s place in society and also her involvement with domestic and abuse charities. Though I’m less clear on how that works for the second one.

https://www.philanthropy-impact.org/inspiration/personal-stories/jk-rowling-obe

Time for the older women to have several seats if they can't understand intersectional is the way things are now.

It seems that it's the younger feminists who don't understand that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why she keeps wading into this particular issue. It’s coming across as a hangup or fixation. Does she not have 400 things to do?

She seems to think that the growing acceptance of trans rights is negatively affecting biological women’s place in society and also her involvement with domestic and abuse charities. Though I’m less clear on how that works for the second one.

https://www.philanthropy-impact.org/inspiration/personal-stories/jk-rowling-obe

Time for the older women to have several seats if they can't understand intersectional is the way things are now.

I'm glad someone like her has the guts to say something that a lot of us feel. Shame on the mob mentality attacking her for actually being very affirming and reasonable with her views.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It sounds unlikely to you because you’ve never dealt with abusive men.

Women trying to get out of abusive relationships are in a lot of danger. It doesn’t take much imagination to think of scenarios where the abuser could get a friend to go find his wife in a shelter and use the trans-label as a cover. This is exactly what JK Rowling was talking about when she said this destroys safe spaces for women.

How exactly do you think DV shelters work? Do you think anyone can just turn up and walk in?

I think domestic violence shelters have a lot of discretion — however, there’s already been one example where a trans woman (who sounded and presented as male) was not allowed to volunteer with rape victims because it made them feel uncomfortable. The trans woman sued and succeed in shutting down the shelter. This literally “destroyed” a safe space for women.

If you think other shelters haven’t taken notice, you are delusional. For a violent man wanting to locate his wife, the trans exception provides very easy access to formerly safe spaces.

I would really like the PP to provide a link to that story before people just go restating her comments as fact.

Here you go:

https://www.feministcurrent.com/2012/05/14/rape-relief-v-nixon-transphobia-and-the-value-of-women-only-space-an-interview-with-lee-lakeman/

Kimberly Nixon vs. Vancouver Rape Relief

A trans woman sued the Vancouver Rape Relief because she wasn’t allowed to volunteer directly with rape victims — she refused to settle or accept other forms of volunteering. This tied up their efforts and resources for over a decade of defending themselves and defending female-only safe spaces for battered and abused women. In 2020 they were denied funding by the city of Vancouver directly because of their stance that a female only space was critical in making battered women feel safe.

Here is another one where abused women were harrasssed.
An individual identified in the lawsuit as a transgender woman and described as “a male who identifies as female” was also staying at Naomi’s House. That person is not named in court documents and is referred to by initials.

Women staying at the shelter must shower each day, the lawsuit says. Although they shower separately in individual stalls, the women must dress and undress in a common area and place their possessions in crates before and after each shower.

It was during these moments, the lawsuit says, when the transgender woman began making lewd comments to the women, specifically saying things about their breasts and other body features as the group was nude. Some of the women also caught her looking at them through cracks in the shower stalls and while they used the restroom.

The lawsuit claims the alleged harasser showed some of the women nude pictures and videos, including media that showed the transgender woman masturbating.

Kapetan said his clients told Poverello House staff about the harassment, but were told they had to be more accepting of the transgender community.

Read more here: https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article219560720.html#storylink=cpy

An individual identified in the lawsuit as a transgender woman and described as “a male who identifies as female” was also staying at Naomi’s House. That person is not named in court documents and is referred to by initials.

Women staying at the shelter must shower each day, the lawsuit says. Although they shower separately in individual stalls, the women must dress and undress in a common area and place their possessions in crates before and after each shower.

It was during these moments, the lawsuit says, when the transgender woman began making lewd comments to the women, specifically saying things about their breasts and other body features as the group was nude. Some of the women also caught her looking at them through cracks in the shower stalls and while they used the restroom.

The lawsuit claims the alleged harasser showed some of the women nude pictures and videos, including media that showed the transgender woman masturbating.

Kapetan said his clients told Poverello House staff about the harassment, but were told they had to be more accepting of the transgender community

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It sounds unlikely to you because you’ve never dealt with abusive men.

Women trying to get out of abusive relationships are in a lot of danger. It doesn’t take much imagination to think of scenarios where the abuser could get a friend to go find his wife in a shelter and use the trans-label as a cover. This is exactly what JK Rowling was talking about when she said this destroys safe spaces for women.

How exactly do you think DV shelters work? Do you think anyone can just turn up and walk in?

I think domestic violence shelters have a lot of discretion — however, there’s already been one example where a trans woman (who sounded and presented as male) was not allowed to volunteer with rape victims because it made them feel uncomfortable. The trans woman sued and succeed in shutting down the shelter. This literally “destroyed” a safe space for women.

If you think other shelters haven’t taken notice, you are delusional. For a violent man wanting to locate his wife, the trans exception provides very easy access to formerly safe spaces.

I would really like the PP to provide a link to that story before people just go restating her comments as fact.

Here you go:

https://www.feministcurrent.com/2012/05/14/rape-relief-v-nixon-transphobia-and-the-value-of-women-only-space-an-interview-with-lee-lakeman/

Kimberly Nixon vs. Vancouver Rape Relief

A trans woman sued the Vancouver Rape Relief because she wasn’t allowed to volunteer directly with rape victims — she refused to settle or accept other forms of volunteering. This tied up their efforts and resources for over a decade of defending themselves and defending female-only safe spaces for battered and abused women. In 2020 they were denied funding by the city of Vancouver directly because of their stance that a female only space was critical in making battered women feel safe.

There was a time when white assumed that what was right for them was right for all women, then we found out that black and brown women had issues unique and specific to them -- as women of color -- that needed to be addressed, too. I think this poster is laying out the right path.

NP, but a large component of "women's right" center on women's reproductive rights (access to birth control, abortions, etc) which are inherently only something cis-women experience. I liked the PP that described it as a ven-diagram. There are cis-women only issues, there are trans-women only issues, and there are women issues .... so if gender is non binary, having more specific categories for these things seems to make sense. Not all "women's right" issues pertain to trans-women and vice versa.