Gender again. Sorry!

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
I think we are probably more aligned than you might think. When it comes down to details and specifics though, most people on here will find themselves regarded as terfs. The benchmark for being a terf is actually very low lol.
 
Last edited:

mudsticks

Squire
I think we are actually more aligned than you might think.

Well we may be, I dunno.

I certainly know you're not a 'transphobe' I've seen you defend the rights of transpeople to be revognised, and to be protected.

I do the same both online and in real life, but it doesn't mean we can't (or shouldn't) ever question anything ever, as seems to be the attitude of some people.

Anyway my bedtime.

See you on the other side - perhaps..
 

multitool

Pharaoh
I think we are probably more aligned than you might think. When it comes down to details and specifics though, most people on here will find themselves regarded as terfs. The benchmark for being a terf is actually very low lol.

Screenshot_20230120_065447_Drive.jpg


Going by this definition it seems that you tick the boxes.

Having said that, I'm not a fan of people screaming TERF at each other, because it moves away from the actual issues at hand, and it is as dehumanising at some of the Terf rhetoric. You absolutely have a right to and should voice your views and your concerns, so it won't be me shouting you down with godwinised slogans. That said, as you know I don't think you've provided convincing evidence that the apocalypse of fake TW in women's spaces is likely and I feel you've been disingenuous and resorted to low tactics when falsehoods have been pointed out (clearly you will disagree). Your, and mudsticks, tactic of trying to deny me a voice on the basis of my gender is particularly dishonest given that there are many women who hold the same views as me. I showed you polling of women's views pre-self ID law that showed the majority of women's views aligned with mine (in contradiction to your claim that they aligned with yours) and you dismissed it. Clearly they are the wrong sort of women, suffering from patriarchal capture and without minds of their own (oooh the irony).

However, in so far as it is a threshing out of ideas, this thread is done and there is no point going over it again and again, especially, to be blunt, with such a poor debating partner as you. Views may change over forthcoming years in the light of social change, yours or mine, or maybe both. We will see.
 
Last edited:
Well we may be, I dunno.

I certainly know you're not a 'transphobe' I've seen you defend the rights of transpeople to be revognised, and to be protected.

I do the same both online and in real life, but it doesn't mean we can't (or shouldn't) ever question anything ever, as seems to be the attitude of some people.

Anyway my bedtime.

See you on the other side - perhaps..

When it comes to the practical details I think my views are actually pretty mainstream on the issue. I certainly fall short of what many radical feminists think. I've always felt there were some obvious 'middle way' solutions to a lot of the practicalities even if there could never be ideological agreement. The Newsnight journalist who investigated the Tavistock has a book out on it in a couple of weeks so that'll be interesting to hear about.
 

matticus

Guru
Going by this definition

"definition"? Must be a typo for long-winded rant.

I find TERF a particluarly odd term. trans-exclusionary radical feminist ...

It's like looking at racism, and deciding it would be better to talk about "Racism by White self-gratification artists" (and then giving it a catchy acronym), because that will surely result in more constructive, calm debate, right?
 

icowden

Legendary Member
I find TERF a particluarly odd term. trans-exclusionary radical feminist ...

It's like looking at racism, and deciding it would be better to talk about "Racism by White self-gratification artists" (and then giving it a catchy acronym), because that will surely result in more constructive, calm debate, right?
It's also not very accurate. Most "TERFs" don't want Trans people to be excluded, but ask for some reality checks on inclusivity if it affects the rights of women (cis and lesbian).
 

winjim

Welcome yourself into the new modern crisis
I muted the word 'terf' on twitter and my online experience became much more pleasant. It's a daft abbreviation and those who use it, both as a slur and as an identity are quite frankly very silly people indeed.
 

multitool

Pharaoh
"definition"? Must be a typo for long-winded rant.

Kind of goes with the territory...from all sides, but mostly the extremes.

I find TERF a particluarly odd term. trans-exclusionary radical feminist ...

There are quite a few groups encompassed by the word 'feminists', and some of them hate each other. Radical feminists (or at least some of them) want to exclude men entirely from their lives because they view them as dangerous and superfluous, and so champion structures like matrifocal families. Its not a huge leap to realise that if you view trans women as men you will exclude them too.

This is in contrast to many other groups of feminists (Liberal, black etc) who take a more inclusive view. Naturally, not everyone fits into these categories.
 
Last edited:
Worth noting that radical feminist are not trans excluding. Their feminism includes women, however they identify. It just doesn't include men.
 
They are excluded because they are men, not because they are trans. If you include men in feminism then it no longer centres women. It would be egalitarianism or humanitarianism or similar. Do you think white people should be included in a black civil rights movement?

Women are the only people not allowed to have a movement exclusively for themselves it seems.
 

multitool

Pharaoh
I muted the word 'terf' on twitter and my online experience became much more pleasant. It's a daft abbreviation and those who use it, both as a slur and as an identity are quite frankly very silly people indeed.

I stay out of all of it on twitter. There isn't a temperate debate, there's just sh1t slinging. People get sucked into radical rabbit holes really quickly.

Since this is a cycling forum I'm going to bring up Phillipa York. She is the epitome of a reasonable person. I saw an interview with her and when she was asked about all the invective she said she just wasn't interested in it, didn't have any strong opinions and just wanted to live her life.

Quite.
 
Top Bottom