I can’t figure it out, you get more sisters to fight the feminism battle, so that’s a good thing right? Why don’t you welcome these real women with open arms?
if being a woman is nothing to do with biology and due to some ephemeral quality of "feeling" like a woman, then what women are essentially being told is they are complicit in their own oppression because they corks simply identify out of it. It is utter bollocks.
Funnily enough they seem to know which fetuses to selectively abort in India and China without asking them how the identify
I have no idea what feeling like a woman means, and no one have asked has been able to explain it without resorting to reductive sexist stereotypes about liking pink and gold lame handbags.
If men want to live as a woman then they absolutely can. But I won't swallow pretending some hulking 6 foot 200 pounds bloke complete with beard and penis is literally and actually a woman, and his dick is a "lady dick"
I don't feel that I should have to change my name as names should not designate sex and therefore I continue to refer to myself as Archibald
I also don't believe that the concept of a "woman" should be in any way defined or restricted.
Therefore I maintain my masculine clothing, I work out, I grow a beard. I have retained my penis and I still use the most appropriate toilets. I enjoy many of the stereotypical "male" things and in general am interested less in the stereotypial "female" things (excepting Made In Chelsea).
If you are a feminist you believe that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities. I definitely think there is room for trans/non-binary people within that concept, and am fine with saying that people of all genders should have equal rights and opportunities.
That doesn't mean they should always be treated in exactly the same way, because sometimes unequal treatment is needed to counteract natural inequalities which arise as a result of our biology and increase equality of access to opportunities.
That is why men and women generally do not compete against each other in sport. It is why women get maternity leave and there are growing calls to help women progress their careers after having children. It is why trans women without cervixes do not need to be screened for cervical cancer, but trans men who have cervixes do (and may need to use different toilet facilities when they menstruate).
in al seriousness though - why arent there trans women (who started as men) who retain all their "male" traits...and trans men (who started as women) who retain all their "female" traits.
And surely people should retain the same name - this seems very counterproductive!
Suppose we agree that men can't actually have babies, not having a womb, which is nobody's fault, not even the Romans', but men can have the right to have babies
I think there is a risk that "PC gone mad"-esque culture around this sort of thing means that we are going to miss a huge number of mental heath issues
What if we just felt that Anorexic people identified as thin people.
At the heart of a lot (not all)of trans issues it seems to me that there is a genuinely upsetting, almost self harming rejection of the self. Dead-naming sort of hits the nail on the head here, people literally want their past persona to be considered "quasi-dead".
I am a better me than I was 10 years ago but I dont want to reject that previous self!?
Actors, actresses, pop singers, security service employees, people in witness protection, people with names others may find hard to pronounce, people who just fancy changing their name ....
i struggle to imagine any woman would accuse someone of "dead naming" her because she was addressed by her maiden name, or a married name she no longer used.
tbf it is A Thing for some women to keep their name and for some people (often the mother in law - sexist generalisation emoji) to insist on repeatedly calling her Mrs Husbandname and that can be quite annoying
A rejection of a former self signified by the adoption of a new name is neither new nor indicative of self harm or mental illness. TBH framing it as a rejection of self is also innacurate in many cases. A person may be embracing an identity chosen for themselves when gaining their own agency e.g. Slaves and descendants of slaves rejecting their slave names. They aren't rejecting self they are asserting their self by rejecting a classification forced on them by others.
Archibald's post tries to insinuate that somehow uniquely for trans people however this rite of liberation and cleansing is a signifier of self-harm or mental illness. Apart from being bullshit it's also a hate speech technique seeking to slander and villify.
Meanwhile biotech has moved on a bit since Life of Brian was made. Not that possession of a womb and the ability to bear children would necessarily make someone a woman ofc but building a definition of "woman" around it would be as dodgy as transpeople seeking to use the male brain/ female brain argument to justify themselves.
0
0
Maybe tone it down a bit with the trolling ?
0
0
Seriously considering identifying as a woman in the pool this summer.
What's not to like?
0
0
Why would you do that m2? Don't you think you would look like a bit of a plonker?
0
0
I don't see what the trans debate has got to do with feminism, quite honestly.
0
0
It's got everything to do with feminism . That's the only reason people talk about it.
0
0
how do you count trans women in gender gap stats?
0
0
Have to agree with dux
if being a woman is nothing to do with biology and due to some ephemeral quality of "feeling" like a woman, then what women are essentially being told is they are complicit in their own oppression because they corks simply identify out of it. It is utter bollocks.
Funnily enough they seem to know which fetuses to selectively abort in India and China without asking them how the identify
I have no idea what feeling like a woman means, and no one have asked has been able to explain it without resorting to reductive sexist stereotypes about liking pink and gold lame handbags.
If men want to live as a woman then they absolutely can. But I won't swallow pretending some hulking 6 foot 200 pounds bloke complete with beard and penis is literally and actually a woman, and his dick is a "lady dick"
0
0
I think a lot of the problem is that the young people these days are idiots.
0
0
This for example is the SNP student women's group leader
https://twitter.com/snpstudents/status/1130399764191694848?s=21
0
0
Word clergs
we were quite idiotic too but we were mostly quite rightly ignored
0
0
I am trans
My name is Archibald and I was born a man
But now I live as a woman
I don't feel that I should have to change my name as names should not designate sex and therefore I continue to refer to myself as Archibald
I also don't believe that the concept of a "woman" should be in any way defined or restricted.
Therefore I maintain my masculine clothing, I work out, I grow a beard. I have retained my penis and I still use the most appropriate toilets. I enjoy many of the stereotypical "male" things and in general am interested less in the stereotypial "female" things (excepting Made In Chelsea).
0
0
this was a good tweet "Jobs for the boys just levelled up."
0
0
heh, tell us more about the stereotypical "male" things you enjoy
0
0
Archibald you sound hot. Dscrb norks?
0
0
If you are a feminist you believe that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities. I definitely think there is room for trans/non-binary people within that concept, and am fine with saying that people of all genders should have equal rights and opportunities.
That doesn't mean they should always be treated in exactly the same way, because sometimes unequal treatment is needed to counteract natural inequalities which arise as a result of our biology and increase equality of access to opportunities.
That is why men and women generally do not compete against each other in sport. It is why women get maternity leave and there are growing calls to help women progress their careers after having children. It is why trans women without cervixes do not need to be screened for cervical cancer, but trans men who have cervixes do (and may need to use different toilet facilities when they menstruate).
0
0
Men can have children you giant fash, anna
0
0
Only joking
0
0
But I can have the right to have children if I could.
0
0
Heh @ Clergs
0
0
in al seriousness though - why arent there trans women (who started as men) who retain all their "male" traits...and trans men (who started as women) who retain all their "female" traits.
And surely people should retain the same name - this seems very counterproductive!
0
0
Suppose we agree that men can't actually have babies, not having a womb, which is nobody's fault, not even the Romans', but men can have the right to have babies
0
0
Not even women have the right to have babies.
0
0
well they kind of do in an article 8 sort of way
0
0
Anna, it's the right NOT to have a baby that women need to be worried about, the way things are going ...
Under his eye.
0
0
You're both right.
Nobody has a right to have a baby. You either can have a baby (if you have the correct reproductive organs and are fertile) or you can't.
Everybody should have the right not to have a baby. I avoided getting into a cripple fight with a pro lifer from Alabama on Facebook this morning.
0
0
yeah but that's a bit like saying there is no right to life because we all die
there are arguments for IVF etc predicated on the obligation of the state to help people achieve their right to a family
ditto the right for prisoners to inseminate their partners during their sentence
some people are very into the idea of men being allowed to have womb transplants
which
just
fook off, Brian
0
0
I think there is a risk that "PC gone mad"-esque culture around this sort of thing means that we are going to miss a huge number of mental heath issues
What if we just felt that Anorexic people identified as thin people.
At the heart of a lot (not all)of trans issues it seems to me that there is a genuinely upsetting, almost self harming rejection of the self. Dead-naming sort of hits the nail on the head here, people literally want their past persona to be considered "quasi-dead".
I am a better me than I was 10 years ago but I dont want to reject that previous self!?
0
0
Well that's married women, religious converts, monks, nuns, popes and monarchs sussed out.
0
0
Not all women change their names when they get married.
0
0
Not all monarchs do. In fact, it's quite rare.
0
0
Victoria, Edward VII & George VI have used their middle names, but I think most if not all others have used their first Christian name.
0
0
Actors, actresses, pop singers, security service employees, people in witness protection, people with names others may find hard to pronounce, people who just fancy changing their name ....
0
0
i struggle to imagine any woman would accuse someone of "dead naming" her because she was addressed by her maiden name, or a married name she no longer used.
0
0
tbf it is A Thing for some women to keep their name and for some people (often the mother in law - sexist generalisation emoji) to insist on repeatedly calling her Mrs Husbandname and that can be quite annoying
but is totally different
0
0
and in fact the opposite of the thing
0
0
To answer the OP, because my legs are better than theirs.
0
0
A rejection of a former self signified by the adoption of a new name is neither new nor indicative of self harm or mental illness. TBH framing it as a rejection of self is also innacurate in many cases. A person may be embracing an identity chosen for themselves when gaining their own agency e.g. Slaves and descendants of slaves rejecting their slave names. They aren't rejecting self they are asserting their self by rejecting a classification forced on them by others.
Archibald's post tries to insinuate that somehow uniquely for trans people however this rite of liberation and cleansing is a signifier of self-harm or mental illness. Apart from being bullshit it's also a hate speech technique seeking to slander and villify.
0
0
Oh please
0
0
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/men-pregnant-womb-transplant-dr-richard-paulson-transgender-a8037201.html
Meanwhile biotech has moved on a bit since Life of Brian was made. Not that possession of a womb and the ability to bear children would necessarily make someone a woman ofc but building a definition of "woman" around it would be as dodgy as transpeople seeking to use the male brain/ female brain argument to justify themselves.
0
0
Bigots gonna bigot.
0
0
that may be so fookwit, and I don’t really know any transgender people so can’t comment personally
however my mother is a qualified professional and comes across transgender patients almost every day
she claims that, without fault, every one of them was deeply unhappy (with a variety of diagnoses) before their sex change
and funnily enough, they almost all remain deeply unhappy afterwards
0
0
I think this one might now have been fairly fully discussed.
In short, trans people and non-trans people and non-people are all people, or not people.
And all of them that were total fookwits before these issues were raised, remain total fookwits today.
0
0
What's wrong with being sexy?
Join the discussion