all 32 comments

[–]BEB 63 insightful - 2 fun63 insightful - 1 fun64 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

The director of the Women and Gender Studies program at Rutgers University in the US is a TIM - does that answer your question?

Also adding TIMs to crime statistics bugs the F out of me. Like some Antifa person arrested in Portland was a TIM and he goes into the female crime statistics.

Same with the Capitol One hacker, with even news reports not mentioning she was a he. She had bombs in her house, and weapons, which is just so womanly.../s

[–]anonymale 21 insightful - 2 fun21 insightful - 1 fun22 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Same with the Capitol One hacker

Thank you! I never saw a photo of him, and it didn’t occur to me at the time that the obvious mental instability was glitter-related. Speaking of instability I wonder whether those companies which hire TiMs over women might come to regret it because of that kind of behaviour.

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

Anecdotally, I've read of quite a few lawsuits filed by TIMs against their employers. There's a fairly well-known one that a TIM filed against the liberal UK paper, THE GUARDIAN.

I think that very soon these same corporations and their virtue-signaling HR departments that are ramming gender "Diversity" down our throats - gender neutral bathrooms, forced seminars with TIM speakers, pronouns in email signatures - are going to realize that TIMs are just too problematic as employees, but by then they would have dug their own grave.

[–]LesbiSilly[S] 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

...eek. That is worrisome. Not to mention that Tran= sometimes a get out of jail freecard.

[–]itsnotaboutewe 38 insightful - 1 fun38 insightful - 0 fun39 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

I started my working life in the 1970's when women had only just been allowed to enter professions and jobs that had hitherto been male only domains. If a pretty female was hired at a firm that had been all male prior to the changes it was assumed she was employed because she had great tits or the boss wanted to sleep with her. If a plain woman was hired it was assumed she probably had talent but it still was suspected that hiring her served some hidden agenda. Women were hired on their merit but they really had to prove their worth to help kill the discrimination that was still pervasive at that time. Over the years as more women proved themselves capable these stereotypes dissipated and up until recently being female had no bearing on whether someone hired you or not. A lot of work went into changing the human resources culture, and the way it used to be for women should never be forgotten.

Now we have identity politics and many companies are using a system of hiring on the basis of diversity rather than merit. If a man can tick the diversity boxes of both woman and LGBTQ+ without the need for maternity leave, special bathrooms, etc, then he will be seen as having more going for him as a prospective employee than a woman who may need time off to have children and may have ongoing commitments to children and family that require altered hours of work and such.

I have watched women in the workplace go from excluded to exploited and then to accepted and normalised in society. Now it is changing again and women are being overlooked if there is a minority or 'diverse' candidate whose social identity outweighs their merit when it comes to fulfilling the job criteria.

One generation was all women got to be treated as equals in the workforce. One lousy generation that nobody will remember in another 20 years if this identity politics keeps going.

[–]BEB 27 insightful - 1 fun27 insightful - 0 fun28 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I'm so with you on this:

"Women were hired on their merit but they really had to prove their worth to help kill the discrimination that was still pervasive at that time. Over the years as more women proved themselves capable these stereotypes dissipated and up until recently being female had no bearing on whether someone hired you or not. A lot of work went into changing the human resources culture, and the way it used to be for women should never be forgotten."


I keep hearing trans activists say that white women were the number one beneficiaries of Affirmative Action, and I'm thinking, "Who?" because my experience was just like yours.

Except for a few women who were hired because men wanted to sleep with them, the rest of us had to prove our worth 100 times over. But we weren't hired BECAUSE we were women. It was still a very uphill battle to get the job BECAUSE we were women.

And, over the years, we became just a hire, not a WOMAN hire either way, and we didn't have to be Super Woman, we were just an employee. That was a true victory, and, as you say, it's now gone, and it's all about "diversity" but with plain ol' women not counting - a woman with a penis? Well, there's your diversity box checked.

[–]Delia 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

When they are the actual beneficiaries of affirmative action will they say that about themselves? Trans have no idea how women fought for every crumb and I was a young leader of a team of men at 21 and had to work so hard to not be put down as a women.

[–]BEB 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I am so with you too. So much of my young life was struggling to prove I, as a woman, could do the class, the job, the whatever, as well as a man.

I have concrete examples where I was told to my face that I was being discriminated against solely for being a woman.

And yet, being the arrogant men they are, TIM activists shamelessly APPROPRIATE women's historic struggles as they COLONIZE the sex-segregated spaces our ancestress fought for.

[–]endless_assfluff 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I am so with you too. So much of my young life was struggling to prove I, as a woman, could do the class, the job, the whatever, as well as a man.

But not better than a man! You have to be competent, but not too competent lest someone's masculinity is threatened.

[–]Wandering_Idiot 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Exactly. Women were hired to check the diversity box but they were often overlooked for raises or not given special projects that would lead to promotions because they were female. It was only during the last ressession we saw the last of the 'old boys club' fired simply because when management looked at who was doing the majority of the work (women) for less amount of pay because they never got/asked for raises (women). That's why people called it a Mansession during the 2008 ressession.

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

When I was young, the women I knew were hired on their own merit and it was an uphill battle to even get the interview. I honestly don't know one woman from that era who was hired to check a box, although I'm sure it happened.

All the women I knew had to work like fiends for men to take them seriously, and there was a tremendous amount of sexual harassment. Think a slightly more benign MAD MEN.

[–]LesbiSilly[S] 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I love what you wrote. I don't think you're my generation, but I agree with what you say and yeah. Women aren't going to be hired over TIMs, which makes me sad. And ID politics in the workplace drive me crazy. Thankfully, I think I will be going into a more conservative profession.

[–]Delia 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I am from your generation and this was deliberate, women got power positions in world politics and men are busting that by promoting transgender.

[–]LesbiSilly[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Wow... that's annoying. Anyway to stop this?

[–]Tikiri 29 insightful - 2 fun29 insightful - 1 fun30 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

I think it depends on the field, but no you’re not crazy! It’s definitely a legitimate concern that I share too. I’ve read anecdotes about how hiring TiMs to fill the “women’s” quota is a real occurrence in tech fields. I can see that happening in other male dominated science/tech fields too, and I actually get a bit conspiracy/tinfoil-minded that the overwhelming support for trans people (esp. TiMs) in tech companies is because it’s a way to keep natal women out, because TWAW etc.

I don’t know whether it’ll be the case in other fields though, esp. female-dominated ones like teaching, and in fields such as medicine/nursing where I can see TiM and TiF employees being super problematic (a TiM obstetrician? GAAAH!!).

You have an extremely pertinent and timely concern, I think. Are you on Ovarit? Because I think this will be a very good question over there!

[–]our_team_is_winning 22 insightful - 3 fun22 insightful - 2 fun23 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

I’ve read anecdotes about how hiring TiMs to fill the “women’s” quota is a real occurrence in tech fields.

California has a law now forcing companies to have at least two women on the board of directors. And that's not just in tech, that's all big companies. So I can already see "Bosom Buddies" sitting at the table. (If anyone is old enough to remember the TV show Tom Hanks started on!) In fact, this might inspire MORE men to pull the TiM AGP thing in middle age. They've lost their jobs, prospects are tough, but wait, there's an opening that MUST go to a woman, by law. Aha! Wig, lipstick, you're in! It WILL happen.

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

Yeah it's unfortunate that a company can knock off a couple of diversity quotes by hiring TIM staff. Of course if they are.good at the job, and there's no reason they won't be, they're a good hire anyway. But it makes a mockery of diversity hiring if it's being used to avoid hiring icky girls.

[–]LesbiSilly[S] 20 insightful - 1 fun20 insightful - 0 fun21 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I am on Ovarit and I will post this there as well. I am glad to know i'm not crazy. I just feel like i'm wearing a tin-foil hat all the damn time. And you might be right about the Tech Companies. To me, it seems like a cost-saver as well. TW don't need maternity leave and period sick-days. I am also wondering if females will only be able to go into 'female' jobs like teaching once this is all over. It worries me.

And I HAVE heard of TIM OBYGN. It's NASTY! Thankfully I haven't needed to go to a OBYGN. But, yeah. I honestly would rather have a MALE OBYGN than a TIM.

I wonder how long this will roll until women are like, "OMG! My job was taken and I can't raise a sex-discrimination case."

[–]denverkris 23 insightful - 1 fun23 insightful - 0 fun24 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

"is anyone else worried about employers hiring TW over females?"

I mean, they altered the rules for the democratic party in NY so that a Tim could take a female spot. Now both reps from the area are male.

Does that answer your question?

[–]BEB 25 insightful - 1 fun25 insightful - 0 fun26 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

And the NY guy had only been a "woman" for a few weeks or months when he got the rules on female representation altered. There's a shot of him in front of a Democratic party banner wearing a dress with a visible erection.


BTW: WoLF's (Women's Liberation Front- US radfem group) Twitter is on fire lately - funny, fast and informative.

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

[–]OrangeFirefly 18 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 0 fun19 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Same in the UK. All-women shortlists for the Labour party are open to trans-identified males.

Males who have been socialised as boys, who never have to deal with menstrual pain every month, who will never have to deal with pregnancy and childbirth or take on the 'carer' roles that are more likely to be carried out by women. Anything that affects women specifically does not apply to TiMs. These reasons are more likely to hold women back in the workplace - not the fact that they might wear a skirt or have long hair.

Personally, I don't agree with quotas and all-women shortlists. However, if you're going to have them, the positons should go to women. The old-fashioned xx-kind who don't have penises.

[–]LesbiSilly[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

...Yes it does. Ugh. WHY! Has anyone made a stink about this, yet?

[–]Comatoast 16 insightful - 2 fun16 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah. They're not less emotional. That's a joke.

[–]zephyranthes 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

less 'emotional'

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Absolutely not. Anyone who discriminates against women for what he thinks are practical reasons will never ever ever in a million years hire a trans. The muh misgenderings, the accusations of transphobia, the bathroom drama, the sexual harassment, the terrible health, and when you finally try to fire him you bet he'll cry wrongful termination and cost you twice his aggregate wages in lawyer-hours. A "practical" man who needs to fill a vacancy with a "safe" woman will just hire someone's female relative.

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

Yes, I think we're going to be a subclass under these men.

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

It's not being far-right to care about lost jobs and equality between sexes. Those are very much left-wing issues.

[–]BEB 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It used to be the Left in the US that supported equality for women, but now it's the Far Left, with the full support of the Democratic party, which is attacking women's rights.

They're very tricky about it too - they advocate for "women's rights" but are legally changing the definition of "sex" to include "gender identity" - this is what the Equality Act would do on the federal level, but state and local laws have already done it.

So VOILA - women are erased as a distinct legal category, the laws that protect us (and gay men!) on "the basis of sex" are thrown into limbo, and our ability to organize as women is made impossible.

However, the Equality Act also spells out the destruction of pretty much every single sex-segregated space, so in the US, the "Left" is very deliberately setting women's rights, safety and sports back 50- 100 years or so.

[–]LesbiSilly[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh, thanks. I guess the internet makes me feel like a crazy nazi or something. Because yeah! I DO care about sexism as a WHOLE and I DO care about jobs. Why has the far left moved on without me? I want to stay where I am, but how can the left leave people like me in the dust? (note: progressive dust). I am FOR most of their policies, but NOT to the extreme. I still believe in being colour-blind and all the things I was taught growing up, but now, it seems like it's ALL backwards. I hate it.

[–]Femaleisnthateful 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I assume this is explicitly happening in Silicon Valley already.

But yes, I can see the appeal to employers of hiring transwomen who will never need maternity leave, never have to prioritize their families etc

[–]organic 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I predict this will happen...mostly because TIMs can’t get pregnant so they don’t need to worry about paying maternity leave. They can check the diversity box without actually having to hire women....