QT: Do you understand why women need single sex spaces?

submitted by Penultimate_Penance from self.GCdebatesQT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 16 insightful - 2 fun16 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 2 fun -  (40 children)

If women are so violent, abusive, and dangerous to males, why on earth is it so crucial to y’all that males get access to female spaces?

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 4 insightful - 7 fun4 insightful - 6 fun5 insightful - 7 fun -  (39 children)

Not all women are abusive to males. Not all males are abusive to women.

Keep in mind this is also a trans men fight. Trans men are fighting for access to male facilities as much as trans women are fighting for access to female facilities.

[–][deleted] 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not all women are abusive to males. Not all males are abusive to women.

Correct. But the overwhelming majority of violent acts committed against women are committed by males.

[–]AlexisK 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not all women are abusive to males. Not all males are abusive to women.

It just "happens" that 95% of all violence against women is done by men and 95% of all violence against men is done by men.

Do not try to show it like women are equally violent.

[–]BiologyIsReal 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (31 children)

Keep in mind this is also a trans men fight. Trans men are fighting for access to male facilities as much as trans women are fighting for access to female facilities.

Does that include prisons? There was a case here in Argentina of a convicted "trans man" who was sent to a men's prison. For a "mysterious" reason, she was very against the idea of going there with the men. Despite her protests, a judge decided that she belonged there because, legally, she was a "man". Do "trans men" in general agree with this judge criterion? Would they fight for the right of their "gender identities" being respected even in prison?

[–]worried19 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

Snarky from the old debate sub said he would choose to go to a male prison. So maybe there are some trans men who would try it. I have a feeling, though, that the vast majority would understand the extreme risk and decline.

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

Maybe. I think is easy to talk about hypothetical scenaries, especially if they are not likely to happen. So, it's possible Snarky would think otherwise if she were faced with the reality of going to prison.

[–]worried19 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

Perhaps, but Snarky was (and I presume still is) involved in very dangerous situations. I don't know if you remember the story about the fake kidnapping and rape. I certainly hope Snarky would reconsider if ever faced with this scenario in real life.

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

Ah, that changes it all. I wasn't at the old debate sub and I joined here this year. So, I don't know who Snarky is.

[–]worried19 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

I invited Snarky here, but he declined. I think he didn't want to join Saidit. One of our more interesting posters from the old debate sub. We lost a lot of good QT people in the transition. Although I think Snarky was more of a transmedicalist.

[–]questioningtw 6 insightful - 5 fun6 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 5 fun -  (12 children)

Hi! I decided to come back over here. I miss Snarky too along with MrFahrenheit. It still makes me mad that the subbreddit was banned when we had so many interesting people. I hope Snarky is ok because that situation was really scary.

[–]worried19 7 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 4 fun -  (11 children)

Hey, good to see you!

Snarky still posts on Reddit. I just looked up his profile, and his last post was 11 hours ago.

u/MrFahrenheit46 is on Saidit and I believe on Ovarit too under a different name.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (12 children)

I know there have been bathroom lawsuits by trans men. Gavin Grimm sued the school board because his high school wouldn't let him use the boy's bathroom. Drew Adams also sued his school for not being able to use the boy's bathroom. As for prisons, I read somewhere 4 trans men in California requested to be placed in male prisons. I usually agree with the ACLU, but I hate that they blocked a request for finding our how many trans people asked to be housed in prisons in accordance to their gender identity.

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Well, that is interesting... Though 4 is a low number compared all the Californian males who identifies as trans hoping to be place with the women. Though is hard to make a proper comparison because there are fewer females in prison. It would be interesting to know which proportion of "trans men" requested to be placed according to ther "gender identity" and which proportion of "trans women" did likewise. Then again, Californian women's prison won't be safes for females, regardless of how they identify, if trans males start being sent there.

As for the ACLU, it's obvious they don't want this information to be made public because most people woulnd't agree with this policy.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (10 children)

Well, that is interesting... Though 4 is a low number compared all the Californian males who identifies as trans hoping to be place with the women. Though is hard to make a proper comparison because there are fewer females in prison. It would be interesting to know which proportion of "trans men" requested to be placed according to ther "gender identity" and which proportion of "trans women" did likewise. Then again, Californian women's prison won't be safes for females, regardless of how they identify, if trans identified males start being sent there.

I think the same source said 13 trans women requested to be transferred to women's prisons but I'm not sure the exact number. Also, isn't the term "trans identified males" not allowed?

As for the ACLU, it's obvious they don't want this information to be made public because most people woulnd't agree with this policy.

Most people in the US are not gender critical. Also, cis women are less likely to be gender critical than cis men.

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I think the same source said 13 trans women requested to be transferred to women's prisons but I'm not sure the exact number.

Just 13? This news article suggests there are hundres of request from transgender inmates.

Also, isn't the term "trans identified males" not allowed?

I just changed it. Grixit said he would allow this term (but not the acronym), though the new rules hasn't been officialized yet.

Most people in the US are not gender critical. Also, cis women are less likely to be gender critical than cis men.

Most people in the US are likely not aware of what activists actually mean by trans rights. American liberal media takes a great effort to ofuscate the issue. For instance, they often talk about how Republicans want to ban trans identified athletes from sports, when actually they are being asked to compete according to their biological sex. The article from the LA Times that I linked above dismiss female inmates's worries as transphobia or propaganda.

This is by design. The activists that are changing laws worlwide know how umpopular their aims are and that is why they work behind the backstage. Here are two articles talking about transactivists secretism in the UK:

The document that reveals the remarkable tactics of trans lobbyists

Revealed: the secret trans-rights lobbying operation in parliament

Something similar happened in my country. When transactivists lobbied for making self-ID possible, they were clever enough not to make a big deal of access to sex seggregated spaces. They focused on the concept of identity and how this law, supposedly, wouldn't affect anyone else. Just an change in their documents that would make their lives more easy, they say. However, although the gender identity law of 2012 says nothing about sex seggregated spaces, it has been used to priorititise "gender identity" over sex. Because it turns out if you are legally a "woman" or a "man" you should be treated as such by the law.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

Most people in the US are likely not aware of what activists actually mean by trans rights. American liberal media takes a great effort to ofuscate the issue. For instance, they often talk about how Republicans want to ban trans identified athletes from sports, when actually they are being asked to compete according to their biological sex.

Most people know the sports thing is about trans women being made to compete with men. Most of us are not stupid.

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I didn't say they were stupid. I said they were misinformed, which is different. Anyway, the sports seems to have exploded recently there, so problaby many people are waking up about what is happening. This poll from WoLF suggests trans activists' aims are not popular with Americans. If you think WoLF is biased, here is another poll, made by Politico, that shows that Republican laws regarding trans athletes have wide support.

[–]adungitit 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

cis women are less likely to be gender critical than cis men.

??? men are known for their misogyny, which doesn't change much regardless of whether they identify as feminist or as women or whatever else. Progressive female communities on the other hand tend to dedicate a lot of discussion to the issue, even if the (sometimes even correct) conclusions tend to get drowned in coddling men's feelings. The notion that men are more gender critical than women is laughable. Even progressive liberal men don't pay gender much mind and mainly revolve their opinions on it around which porn they jack off to and wanting to be open about their fetishes. They also expect and jerk off to femininity in women. The depth of male opinions on the issue can pretty much be described by that "are traps gay" meme. Some gay men might take on a more nuanced approach to gender, but even they are getting pushed out by the loud-mouthed "just like any other dude" gay men.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (5 children)

According to a poll, 59% of men support banning trans women in women's sports compared tp 46% of women. 29% of men oppose banning trans women in women's sports compared to 34% of women.

In a PPRI study, 51% of men support requiring transgender individuals to use bathrooms corresponding to their assigned sex at birth, compared to four in ten 40% of women.

Feminist does not equal gender critical. There are many branches of feminism and yes women are more likely to be feminist than men, but less likely to hold gender critical views than men.

[–]adungitit 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

ROFL being against trans ideologies =/= being GC. GC is feminist. You cannot be GC if you are against women's rights, because GC is a branch of feminism. Seriously, how can you people constantly base your entire worldview on an easily disprovable lie, disappear when you realise it's a lie, and STILL repeat it the next time you open your mouth? That is absolutely baffling to me.

Feminist does not equal gender critical

Radical feminism pretty much does. Feminism nowadays can mean anything from men supporting prostitution and kinky porn while actively sabotaging women's rights, to liberal feminists kissing the shoes of male trans people talking about how valid their ladybrains and makeup make them feel. All of these groups will call themselves feminists, but at some point you have to notice that fixing the actual problems and inequalities women face isn't compatible with a movement engaging in constant gaslighting and apologetics for why said problems and inequalities aren't really a problem, that they are actually "empowering" or that they even count as privileges. Nevertheless, I don't care to argue that liberals (or even conservatives) who claim they're feminists while espousing misogynistic values aren't really feminists - that's a lame attempt to divert to semantics and it doesn't actually answer the question of whether their ideologies are misogynistic.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 1 insightful - 7 fun1 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 7 fun -  (3 children)

ROFL being against trans ideologies =/= being GC. GC is feminist. You cannot be GC if you are against women's rights, because GC is a branch of feminism.

You have a point. But a tent in gender critical feminism is anti-trans views, like believing trans men are women and trans women are men, against allowing people to use facilities that align with their gender identity, etc. Men are more likely to support that than women.

Radical feminism pretty much does.

Radical feminism =/= gender critical. In fact, the term TERF was coined by radical feminist blogger Viv Smythe to distinguish themselves from transphobic feminists.

Feminism nowadays can mean anything from men supporting prostitution and kinky porn while actively sabotaging women's rights, to liberal feminists kissing the shoes of male trans people talking about how valid their ladybrains and makeup make them feel. All of these groups will call themselves feminists, but at some point you have to notice that fixing the actual problems and inequalities women face isn't compatible with a movement engaging in constant gaslighting and apologetics for why said problems and inequalities aren't really a problem, that they are actually "empowering" or that they even count as privileges.

I am a feminist who supports the trans community. I support respecting trans people's identities the right to use facilities that align with your gender identity. I do not kiss the shoes of trans men.

Anyway, there are many different branches of feminism. On another forum I once asked a question specifically to feminists, and a user (who identifies as a cis woman) replied "how can anyone not be a feminist?" Granted they are a TRA site. It's against their rules to misgender celebrities. You can google in quotes "everyone should be a feminist" and find a lot of results. I also heard from other people that men can't be feminists, only allies. Which one is it?

When I was 16 and on the internet, there was an article about the wage gap. I commented the wage gap doesn't exist, and I was wrong. I said women tend to work less hours, but women who work the same jobs and the same hours as men get paid the same. Users started to argue with me I was wrong. At one point I said believe men and women should be paid equally and treated equally, and someone told me I was a feminist simply because I supported equality. So clearly there are different branches and interpretations of feminism.

My favorite branch of feminism is social justice feminism. I know people criticize SJWs, but social justice works to fight all oppression like racism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, etc. not just sexism. They believe privileged people have a duty to dismantle systems of oppression and all people have some sort of privileges and oppressions. I'm white, straight, cis. But I'm also a disabled Ashkenazi Jewish woman. The discrimination I experienced the most is able, so I work to fight that. I experience sexism, so I work to fight that too. While I don't experience racism, I work to fight that and other oppressions by voting in every election, signing petitions and looking at the ways I'm racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. and try to change that. Social justice also believes in intersectionality, the idea that oppressions are interconnected. For instance, women get paid less than men. But WOC will get paid less than white woman. Being gay and disabled is different from being straight and disabled, even if both groups share many experiences with ableism. I fully support social justice.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Way to miss the point entirely. It’s like you practice doing just that tbh.

[–]adungitit 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

Nothing says feminism like writing off the patriarchy with #NotAllMen.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (2 children)

I also said #NotAllWomen.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

So two useless platitudes instead of one. Good stuff.

[–]adungitit 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Right, you've made one statement that is actually supported by reality (the idea that women do not engage in widespread abuse of men, and never have, a simple fact that should be obvious to anyone with eyes and a brain, let alone even a cursory understanding of social issues and history), and followed it up with a statement that relies of denying widespread systemic human rights' abuses that women have been fighting against for centuries because not every single man in existence is beating his wife. When one side is disadvantaged by the other and vice versa isn't the case, and you're expending disproportionate effort and publicity on overblowing the non-existent issues of the disadvantaged side in a faulty attempt to make them seem equally pressing and problematic, that is not "being unbiased". Making things up and showing bias against one side in order to make both sides look equally bad despite this not being the case is not "equality" - that's the golden mean fallacy.

Serious question: do you even know why statements like #NotAllMen and #AllLivesMatter are so popular with misogynists and racists?