cococandy:


European 4B movement? Idk. But honestly good for them.

Let only those who have a burning desire and capability to be parents become parents. Less people need to be having kids because that’s the social norm.

I agree. However, I don’t think that the 1,3, 1,5 or 1,8 (France) children per woman are all a result of families not wanting to have more children.

Maeve7:


I agree. However, I don’t think that the 1,3, 1,5 or 1,8 (France) children per woman are all a result of families not wanting to have more children.

I’d like to know more too.
Declining birth rates in US
Declining birth rates in Asia

We don’t keep good records in Nigeria but if I were a betting woman I’d bet it’s the same or similar.

cococandy:


I’d like to know more too.
Declining birth rates in US
Declining birth rates in Asia

We don’t keep good records in Nigeria but if I were a betting woman I’d bet it’s the same or similar.

Men are the reason why there are low birth rates..if they don't abandon misogyny the decline will continue to remain steady.

cococandy:
Magno liaa I read your response to Ije Bos. This part stood out to me.

Are you like cool with the gays and lesbians...

Yes. Absolutely.

...the transgenders are just a bit much over the line?

Not transgenders (as people), but trans ideology (as a set of beliefs). For example, 'a woman is a person who says they are a woman' and so-called 'gender-inclusive' language like chest-feeders or the 'partner with eggs' (see screenshot below).

IJB is saying that I'm taking a very very small percentage of people and like blowing it out of proportion...like okay, I get that lay everyday people around me, in my space offline, don't even give a heck about it (and I know this has more to do with the socially conservative terrains of Nigeria), but the *ideological and institutional capture* underpinning the trans movement is scary. The medical industry for trans health care is BIG.

If this should "get" into Nigeria, through imperialistic lobbying... I don't want to imagine the outcome.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-gender-industrial-complex-makes-billions-annually/amp/

There is no money in "feminism" or women's rights issues. But because transgenderism has a capitalistic aspect to it, I can tell you that it'll likely get much more traction and support from our lawmakers before they'll ever consider having 50% representation of women in politics at the federal level. You'll be shocked at how quick our traditions will fly out the window (Tinubu has a trans daughter) if a giant gender clinic/company were to open up a branch here. (Transgenderism doesn't even challenge gender roles on a deeper look at it).


From highly recognised medical journals to long-standing top US institutions to big, expert names across fields who are modifying their papers and articles, and all to reflect these beliefs (sex is on a spectrum; being a woman is a matter of neurology). These people are VERY reluctant to even as much as express a little doubt or ask questions or they risk facing social/economic ostracization from their peers.

From what I've experienced online, it has been a HOSTILE discussion ground between gender-criticals and pro-trans rights activists. With the TRAs being the harsher of the two, even going so far as to burn J.K. Rowling books (many years ago, it was religious fanatics burning her books for the promotion of "witch craft", now it is transactivists burning her books because they disagree with her views, and I can literally draw straight lines between the many commonalities of both groups, but that's maybe for another day). Note that the homicide trans people are overwhelmingly victims of has nothing to with those who are GCs online.

People, even feminists, readily spew anti-women/conservative rhetorics more than they express their reservations over the idea of (innate) gender identities. It's like women's rights is an old fad to some of these progressives, and women have become like men in their eyes. They treat trans people like a new dainty toy they must protect and virtue signal over.

Also see this post how do you carry out a research, funded by tax-payers money, and then refuse to publish the findings of the research because of ... politics?

https://oversight.house.gov/release/mcclain-probes-9-7-million-taxpayer-funded-study-buried-by-activist-researcher-on-puberty-blockers%EF%BF%BC/

Like what happened to science being neutral? Or making research and disseminating its findings for public good?

Richard Dawkins is also one of the most prominent atheist voices, and renowned biologist of our generation, do you think someone like that was suddenly possessed of a feverish conservative-inspired bigotry towards trans people for speaking up against the idea of transgenderism?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/books/2021/apr/20/richard-dawkins-loses-humanist-of-the-year-trans-comments

The award Dawkins won in 1996 was stripped from him; J.K. Rowling returned another that she received from the Robert F Kennedy Human Rights organisation. So, I think, that I'm not willing to believe that this is a matter concerning a fringe population should be understandable, if these are obviously the consequences for "dissension." Even to people who are elites - privileged and monied - as Dawkins and Rowling are.

Like, for a white person to call a black person "nigga" or an African "a monkey" IS UNLIKE me saying, "a transwoman is a man" or "sex is immutable." Yet all of these statements are treated as slurs/carrying the same amount of weight by 'liberal progressives.'

cococandy:


European 4B movement? Idk. But honestly good for them.

Let only those who have a burning desire and capability to be parents become parents. Less people need to be having kids because that’s the social norm.

The poster is asking a legit question. If lack of maternity and parental leave is blamed for low birth rate in the US, We should be seeing a high birth rate in Europe and other first world countries with this parental leave. RIGHT?

raumdeuter:


The poster is asking a legit question. If lack of maternity and parental leave is blamed for low birth rate in the US, We should be seeing a high birth rate in Europe and other first world countries with this parental leave. RIGHT?

I know it’s a legit question.

And 4B is a good example of a reason why birth rates might be going down all over the world.

Are you insinuating that lack of maternal health care is not a problem? Don’t do that.

AmazonTopaz:


Men are the reason why there are low birth rates..if they don't abandon misogyny the decline will continue to remain steady.

International 4B everywhere

Magnoliaa thanks for your detailed response.
I don’t disagree or have an opinion on every single thing you said so if I don’t address it. It’s probably because I either agree or don’t have an opinion either way.

1) How does it work to not have a problem with trans people but have a problem with trans ideology itself. In application, having a problem with the ideology itself has to directly impact the trans people who we don’t have a problem with. At first , I had to sit with that thought too and come to decision of where my line is. Which is surgery for the kids.


2) I don’t share the fear/concern that a trans wave no matter how popular or trendy it becomes (which I think will be neither) is taking my place. Not even in the least. If anyone stands to lose making a “trend” from this, it would be the trans community themselves not women. I’m not saying I don’t care about them but I’m saying it’s not a thing I feel women have to fear.

3) I must say at the moment my knowledge about current culture climate in Nigeria is limited. So I can’t make any inferences as to what trans culture in Nigeria would look like. What do you think the outcome in Nigeria would be? Worst case scenario in your opinion.

Tinubu’s daughter is trans? Interesting times.
Okay so you believe Nigerian politicians might back a transgender cultural shift for the sake of money? I can’t really see that. But again I could be remembering a different Nigeria.

My overall synopsis is that you’re concerned about the future of Nigerian women if trans culture gets accepted in Nigeria. I won’t minimize your concern.

My concern is that we’ll go far left enough and play ourselves right back into the hands of oppressive men. All the way back to the beginning and have to fight all over again for the basic right to vote. For me it’s less about inclusivity and more about seeing through the conservative ruse.

Some Republican men (even a senator) are saying that giving women the right to vote was a mistake. They are systematically brick by brick trying to dismantle the progress that has been made over the decades by women. They can’t succeed without the help of women. So their way of getting the female support is to amp up culture wars about the safe spaces of women.

And of course they’ll protect us from trans women for the low low price of our freedom and basic autonomy. It’s like when the neighborhood strong men charge you protection fees from “hoodlums” who happen to look exactly like them.

We buy into it, and before long every woman in America will be needing clearance from the man of the house to leave the house. I don’t expect you to share this same concern if it doesn’t apply to you.

cococandy:


I’d like to know more too.
Declining birth rates in US
Declining birth rates in Asia

We don’t keep good records in Nigeria but if I were a betting woman I’d bet it’s the same or similar.

It’s a very interesting topic.

cococandy:


I know it’s a legit question.

And 4B is a good example of a reason why birth rates might be going down all over the world.

Are you insinuating that lack of maternal health care is not a problem? Don’t do that.

4B movement started 5yrs ago. Was the birth rate pre 4B movement in those countries way higher than in the US?

Is data does not show that countries with parental leave have a higher birth rate than the US then maybe there is no stat linking both. And there is no correlation

cococandy:

Okay. What neighborhood do you live in America and what is the rate of trans violence against straight people in that neighborhood?
I want to be convinced with numbers. Not sentiments .

Nothing you guys have said is convincing enough to make me want to vote Republican.

Against my bodily autonomy.
Against no fault divorce.
Against Paid maternity leave.
Against income equality across the board.

These are issues that directly affect women and against which the right wing consistently votes.

A stance supporting "income equality across the board" isn't supported by data or common sense. There's VARIANCE in humanity.

Women tend to choose professions that pay less. Sweden, Finland and Norway are some of the most equalized countries in the world. Long term studies show that women there are more likely than Americans to choose jobs traditionally associated with women.

In the USA Black Women earn more college degrees AND earn less money than Black men. The major cause is type of degree and type of job chosen.

On the same jobs, men generally work more hours than women.

Anyone who has managed employees or been observant can tell that women call out sick or have more absenteeism than men. Such realities contribute to higher or lower earnings.

That gender income inequality is a form of oppression or systemic abuse has been THOROUGHLY debunked by data. It's surprising to still read this income inequality canard in the context of a political policy debate.

Consumers generally prefer to watch men play sports. That preference translates to money paid and therefore salaries of the players. It's amazing that USA female soccer players alleged gender discrimination in pay. It just blows the mind.

Same way female fashion models earn more than male fashion models.

By the way, let me ask an obvious question - is it possible for any two randomly chosen persons to have the EXACT SAME LEVEL of performance on the same job?

The liberal obsession with equality is very destructive. People are not the same, genders don't behave the same, races and tribes have differences. Those are facts. All fingers are not equal. Different outcomes aren't always the result of malevolence.

Good Luck to Nigerians.

I’m talking about equal pay for the same job.
Not a female teacher excepting the same pay as a male neurosurgeon. I thought that was obvious.

Even when they are doing the same jobs, men get paid better. The “men negotiate better than women” argument is a cop out for refusing to address the fact that employers favor men over women.

More recent data shows that women are negotiating without the same result. I can’t force you guys to be concerned about this because you don’t think it’s important. And that’s why I can’t support a republican mandate. You guys actively vote against women and make light of it by insinuating we complain unnecessarily.

To your question, yes two people can have same performance at a job if the metrics are objective.

Are you saying the unions that have a pay structure whereby workers are placed on the same pay scale according to their job description and years of experience are doing it wrong?

Next we’re going to have the argument that men perform better than women hence they’re paid better.

That’s the problem with republicans. Even when they’re good people with good intentions, It’s difficult to overlook the soft misogyny and that’s why I don’t trust y’all.

In summary, I can’t be convinced that you guys care about women the way you are carrying on. I’m okay with you guys doing what you’ve been doing and women will oppose you the same way we’ve been doing. So far it’s been working and we’re making progress.

To come out with faux concern about women’s spaces from the right wing is insulting to women’s intelligence.
In the same thread that I’m supposed to believe you guys care is the same thread where income inequality is being dismissed as nonexistent and maternal leave is being discussed as not an important factor affecting women. Tell me how I’m supposed to be convinced (rhetorical).

Anyway, I feel I’ve said my piece on this topic and I’ll be moving on.

IbeOkehie:


A stance supporting "income equality across the board" isn't supported by data or common sense. There's VARIANCE in humanity.

Women tend to choose professions that pay less. Sweden, Finland and Norway are some of the most equalized countries in the world. Long term studies show that women there are more likely than Americans to choose jobs traditionally associated with women.

In the USA Black Women earn more college degrees AND earn less money than than Black men. The major cause is type of degree and type of job chosen.

Men generally work more hours than women.
Anyone who has managed employees or been observant can tell that women call out sick or have more absenteeism than men. Such realities contribute to higher or lower earnings.

That gender income inequality is a form of oppression or systemic abuse has been THOROUGHLY debunked by data. It's surprising to still read this income inequality canard in the context of a political policy debate.

By the way, let me ask an obvious question - is it possible for any two persons to have the exact same level of performance on a job?

The liberal obsession with equality is very destructive. People are not the same, genders don't behave the same, races and tribes have differences. Those are facts. Different outcomes aren't always results of malevolence


Good Luck to Nigerians.

cococandy:


International 4B everywhere

Apart from one I am willing to go with 3B instead. I think your guess may be as good as mine as to the one in particular. Anyway I support the movement but I may not be a willing participant but I will always support the cause. It's a noble one.

AmazonTopaz:


Apart from one I am willing to go with 3B instead. I think your guess may be as good as mine as to the one in particular. Anyway I support the movement but I may not be a willing participant but I will always support the cause. It's a noble one.

It shows feminism is a net negative to society.

There is no denying that marriage and children make women happier.

cococandy:
1) How does it work to not have a problem with trans people but have a problem with trans ideology itself. In application, having a problem with the ideology itself has to directly impact the trans people who we don’t have a problem with. At first , I had to sit with that thought too and come to decision of where my line is. Which is surgery for the kids.

2) I don’t share the fear/concern that a trans wave no matter how popular or trendy it becomes (which I think will be neither) is taking my place. Not even in the least. If anyone stands to lose making a “trend” from this, it would be the trans community themselves not women. I’m not saying I don’t care about them but I’m saying it’s not a thing I feel women have to fear.

When I say I have no problem with "trans" people, but the ideology, I'm simply saying that I do not buy into the reasons for why being "trans" is a thing or what it means. For example, I do not believe in polytheism but that doesn't mean I have a bone to pick with practitioners of polytheism. As people. As persons.

You seem to be viewing this matter from a subjective lens, when it is rather a structural one.

When laws that have been made for women's sex-based rights are modified to allow for gender identification, you have cases of males being put in women's prisons where they end up raping them. This is not an hypothetical argument anymore. It is happening in real time, and it is affecting real women. Girls who were supposed to come first in a sports scholarship competition with financial and career rewards are losing their spots to a male who has a biological advantage. That it affects one woman is enough of a feminist issue. And that woman doesn't have to be me before I understand the snowballing implications.

So that it's not happening to you, hence you have no reason to be concerned doesn't mean it's not happening to other women, including lesbians.

Lesbians are called bigots and viciously attacked online for simply stating that they do not want to date "a woman with a dick." That is evidentially FEARFUL.

Like, okay, I get that you said you agree with some things I said or just do not have an opinion on it...so if that's the case...I do not understand your reason for maintaining that women have nothing to fear. I mean, I don't want to be repeating the things I've said, some of which you may already agree with, but everything I've said is my basis for why women should legitly be concerned (about erasure). The things I mentioned about "partner with eggs," "birthing bodies," "womb carriers?" And if these are the things you have no opinion on...then I find it to still negate you saying that women should not be worried about them.

My concern is that we’ll go far left enough and play ourselves right back into the hands of oppressive men. All the way back to the beginning and have to fight all over again for the basic right to vote. For me it’s less about inclusivity and more about seeing through the conservative ruse.

Some Republican men (even a senator) are saying that giving women the right to vote was a mistake. They are systematically brick by brick trying to dismantle the progress that has been made over the decades by women. They can’t succeed without the help of women. So their way of getting the female support is to amp up culture wars about the safe spaces of women.

And of course they’ll protect us from trans women for the low low price of our freedom and basic autonomy. It’s like when the neighborhood strong men charge you protection fees from “hoodlums” who happen to look exactly like them.

We buy into it, and before long every woman in America will be needing clearance from the man of the house to leave the house. I don’t expect you to share this same concern if it doesn’t apply to you.

If the "right" will be rolling back on women's rights, it'll be because the "left" handed them the "weapons" to do so on a platter.


We can go back and forth on these "strand" and "stray" conversations, but principally, it all boils down to a few cogent points:

- If members of the 'oppressor/privileged' class can self-identity into the class of the 'oppressed/underprivileged' and consequently take center stage in the movement and affairs that is meant to address the issues of the oppressed, then that is the beginning of the end of such a movement. If men can be women, it rubbishes the lived experience of many women in a society that is not only patriarchal but misogynistic to them on the basis of their sex.

- Being a woman is not a matter of self-identification or the performance of gender roles. If the young girls in oppressive Islamic regimes cannot "opt out" of being a woman to avoid the sexist norms and behaviours of their societies, then so also can nobody "opt into" being a woman. On their say so.

Most trans people I've interacted with base their ideas of being a woman/man on stereotypical, even regressive beliefs of what it means to be a woman/man. The majority of them identify with femininity and social roles expected of women. Another subset believe that it is matter of the brain/psychology, hence they think they are internally women, but outwardly male. Still another subset are "transwomen" for purely erotic reasons - sissy pornography and autogynephilia.

As a feminist and a woman, which of these definitions do you find plausible?

A woman is an adult, female human being. It is an objective definition I accept, and there is absolutely NO WAY, NO WAY IN HELL that it plays into any patriarchal concepts or misogynistic beliefs about women. This definition does not reduce women to simply biological females neither does it purport metaphysical characteristics about women. You are both biological and human, and (a) grown (female) (as opposed to a young child). This is what you and I share in common. Not likes, not hobbies, not careers, not phenotypes, not because of the fact that we like pink or love to cook.

Yeah, the conservatives tell you that 'a woman must be XYZ' or 'as a woman, you must be XYZ.' The gender ideologues/radical left are telling you that 'this person is XYZ so they are, or they must be a woman.' So you see, it is two sides of the same coin, and believers in an innate gender identity are simply reaffirming the existing cultural models of masculinity and femininity. The conservatives don't have a problem with what gender proponents are actually saying, they only have a problem with the fact that the biological sexes are
behaving in ways that is stereotypically expected of the other sex.

I remember when traditionalists wanted to kill us with "acting, thinking and feeling like a woman," as if there is one divinely outlined way to be so. Now that is exactly what transactivists are parroting.

So I am not for the left or right. Many of us gender-critical feminists are not. But for me, and I say this emphatically, I am not running into the open arms of disguising anti-feminists.

I am as concerned about people who pigeonhole women into a set of attitudes just as I am of people who declare "everyone is female" (a transwomen said this).

So speaking in defense of women's sex-based rights and spaces and the words we've come to know and use to discuss our individual and collective realities is valid irrespective of the grifters and all.

Magnoliaa:


You seem to be viewing this matter from a subjective lens, when it is rather a structural one.

When laws that have been made for women's sex-based rights are modified to allow for gender identification, you have cases of males being put in women's prisons where they end up raping them. This is not an hypothetical argument anymore. It is happening in real time, and it is affecting real women. Girls who were supposed to come first in a sports scholarship competition with financial and career rewards are losing their spots to a male who has a biological advantage. That it affects one woman is enough of a feminist issue. And that woman doesn't have to be me before I understand the snowballing implications.

Lengthy post. You guys are trying.

Ije Bo and some people here, like Coco, usually subscribe to many things that are coming out from the left, and they look for excuses to believe it even if it does not make sense.

These days, studies can be made to push narratives, and all sorts of journals are being accepted to push these crazy gender ideologies.

During my BSc, I had a lecturer who was a man in my first year. He interacts with people and has conversations with a class that is packed with guys (STEM). This dude transitioned and started carrying handbags. His interaction with people dropped so bad, he is always alone, doing stuff alone. I don't see women around him, nor does he interact with other academic staff he used to interact with.

Our brain just does not agree everything is normal.

Contrast that to gay guys who always have girls around them and boys interacting with them with no issue.

The main issue is how what these people want is not enough when they get it. They tend to want to expand, force everyone to their will, and make everyone look like them.

See what they are saying about 2 years old in their Supreme Court arguments

As a follow up on Magnoliaa argument

If due to years of oppression of colored people, society decides to create opportunities for colored only. Few years down the line, People now argue that anyone can identify as colored

Can a non colored man who didn't go through these oppressions identify as a colored man to get these benefits

Or if in a bus stop they say because of age difference they prioritize minors entering a bus first before adults, Later adults now identify as minors and get the little benefits a minor gets at the bus stop

As a man you have the natural benefits of being a man, now you want to import that into women spaces and challenge them on an unequal ground

bemeruca:
During my BSc, I had a lecturer who was a man in my first year. He interacts with people and has conversations with a class that is packed with guys (STEM). This dude transitioned and started carrying handbags. His interaction with people dropped so bad, he is always alone, doing stuff alone. I don't see women around him, nor does he interact with other academic staff he used to interact with.

This is just so sad.


And would you look at that?

So because women carry handbags, he thinks that's a way to validate his identity?

Every other people with other forms of mental illnesses or health conditions, no one is required to validate them in that identity as if it was naturally occurring.

It's simply not just possible...thousands of years of evolution and survival as a species...all through wars, languages and inventions...but people should trust their eyes anymore or else they are bigot.


And this is not even comparable to the women's rights movement, because women literally are the half of the population, world over. Women were never a minority in any case, they were simply "hidden in plain sight" from public spaces and barred from general institutions. Feminism also stresses women's humanity and independence APART from men as a sex class.

cococandy:
I’m talking about equal pay for the same job.
Not a female teacher excepting the same pay as a male neurosurgeon. I thought that was obvious.

Even when they are doing the same jobs, men get paid better. The “men negotiate better than women” argument is a cop out for refusing to address the fact that employers favor men over women.

More recent data shows that women are negotiating without the same result. I can’t force you guys to be concerned about this because you don’t think it’s important. And that’s why I can’t support a republican mandate. You guys actively vote against women and make light of it by insinuating we complain unnecessarily.

To your question, yes two people can have same performance at a job if the metrics are objective.

Are you saying the unions that have a pay structure whereby workers are placed on the same pay scale according to their job description and years of experience are doing it wrong?

Next we’re going to have the argument that men perform better than women hence they’re paid better.

That’s the problem with republicans. Even when they’re good people with good intentions, It’s difficult to overlook the soft misogyny and that’s why I don’t trust y’all.

In summary, I can’t be convinced that you guys care about women the way you are carrying on. I’m okay with you guys doing what you’ve been doing and women will oppose you the same way we’ve been doing. So far it’s been working and we’re making progress.

To come out with faux concern about women’s spaces from the right wing is insulting to women’s intelligence.
In the same thread that I’m supposed to believe you guys care is the same thread where income inequality is being dismissed as nonexistent and maternal leave is being discussed as not an important factor affecting women. Tell me how I’m supposed to be convinced (rhetorical).

Anyway, I feel I’ve said my piece on this topic and I’ll be moving on.

OK, no problem 😊

The objective facts are that

1) No two persons can have the exact same performance on the same job. It's impossible. That is actually why labour unions destroy
productivity.

2) Men and women soccer players do the exact same job but CUSTOMERS prefer the output produced by men. So it's LOGICAL that men are paid more than women in soccer

3) Male and female fashion models do the exact same jobs but CUSTOMERS prefer the end output produced by women. So it's LOGICAL that female fashion models are paid more than male fashion models.

Between men and women doing the same job in the same work place, women generally call out sick more than men. That's FACT that any work place manager knows. Men generally work more hours too on the same jobs.

Variance is an iron clad fact of human life. It exists even among siblings of the same sex who are all doing the exact same job. Anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of biology knows that.

Caring, morals and such have NOTHING to do with hard data. Your post that I replied to made reference to conviction based on data. Variance in pay is justified by objective data and logic such as I've outlined above.

Good Luck to Nigerians.

raumdeuter:
As a follow up on Magno liaa argument

If due to years of oppression of colored people, society decides to create opportunities for colored only. Few years down the line, People now argue that anyone can identify as colored

Can a non colored man who didn't go through these oppressions identify as a colored man to get these benefits

Or if in a bus stop they say because of age difference they prioritize minors entering a bus first before adults, Later adults now identify as minors and get the little benefits a minor gets at the bus stop

As a man you have the natural benefits of being a man, now you want to import that into women spaces and challenge them on an unequal ground

I never thought I'd read these words or see this coming from you of all people. 🤣🤣🤣

The universe must be rotating in reverse today.

Magnoliaa:


I never thought I'd read these words or see this coming from you of all people. 🤣🤣🤣

The universe must be rotating in reverse today.

Jk Rowling a true feminist is hated because she wants to protect women. Even someone whose life she changed for the good feels it's okay to hate her for calling all the crap this fringe group wants women to bow to just because you have to put common sense aside and must support any group that is deemed oppressed.

Magnoliaa:
I never thought I'd read these words or see this coming from you of all people. 🤣🤣🤣

The universe must be rotating in reverse today.

That means you don't know me well enough

raumdeuter:
That means you don't know me well enough

Oh, but I know you well enough. 😹

On these thread-y streets, I do. From the EPL chatroom to screenshots from your former moniker.

Anyway, that post of yours is an exhibit in a line-up of evidence in the case "Men Understand Feminist Arguments and Analogies but Play-Acts a Devil's Advocate for the Thrill of It."

At some point, you have to admit any form of freedom women are enjoying in many places, including Nigeria and the USA, is due to the generosity of men(enlightened men). Just look at Afghanistan. Just one word tumbled everything.

Nature is truly humbling.

I don't support red pill or mgtow, I'm just stating a personal observation.


@raumdeuter @gloriousgbola @lordadam

Raumdeuter, Ibeokehie and Magnoliaa I’ve seen your mentions. I have nothing else to add on the trans issue.
So far, thanks for keeping it respectful.

I’m not a rigid person whose opinions are cast in stone. I’m open to changing my opinion if or when data showing that women are at significant risk of being harmed by trans women is available.

So far what I’ve seen is that anti LGBTQ rhetoric that’s being pushed (unprovoked might I add) by the right wing not only promotes harm against them up to 4x more than the average person (of which I don’t intend to cry more than the bereaved on their behalf) but it’s also being used as a tool to further right wing narrative against women and I refuse to participate in it.

Magnolia I can understand you not being right or left because it’s not your direct cup of tea but I don’t have the luxury of being neutral. Because what’s at stake for me and my daughters as women in America is more important than bathroom and sports debacle. If I have a 10 year old who gets sexually assaulted. Under a successful right wing agenda, she can’t get an abortion unless her life is at risk (and even then it’s not guaranteed).

I’ll have other conversations though concerning Trump and what not if it’s interesting enough. But I’ve said all I have to say on the LGBT (especially trans) issues.

raumdeuter:
As a follow up on Magnoliaa argument

If due to years of oppression of colored people, society decides to create opportunities for colored only. Few years down the line, People now argue that anyone can identify as colored

Can a non colored man who didn't go through these oppressions identify as a colored man to get these benefits

Or if in a bus stop they say because of age difference they prioritize minors entering a bus first before adults, Later adults now identify as minors and get the little benefits a minor gets at the bus stop

As a man you have the natural benefits of being a man, now you want to import that into women spaces and challenge them on an unequal ground

Funny enough, a non-coloured person identifying as a coloured person, has happened. A caucasian woman tried it and lost her job when found out. And there was a man of 60+ who wanted to self-identify as half his age, which I found amusing. The courts didn't, and thereby dissuaded me from self-identify as the King of England to my utter chagrin. I was looking forward to my royal visit to Nigeria.

Thailand likely has the most transgenders of all countries, though I don't think they go as far as cutting off or adding bits, and mainly stick to cross dressing. They seem to have three genders - hetero male, hetero female, and people born male who are actually female. What's different about them is they don't seem to have the urge to combine hetero females with born males who are actually females, who seem to have carved out a niche of their own. And the Thailand hetero women seem not to be in fear of their spaces being invaded. I can bet you that if a born male who is actually female commits a crime in Thailand he'd end up in the prison that is consistent with his born gender.

America has a problem. Its the same country that seems to have aliens from outer space visiting them regularly, and is where you'd find the most people claiming the earth is flat. They even want to reintroduce the Bible in schools, when places like China have adopted the newer religion based around the scientific method. A rational nation will insist that your gender doesn't change just because you say so. A compassionate nation will however accept you as Karen even though you were named Bob at birth.

I oppose the cutting or addition of gender bits to children. UK does not allow such nonsense, and would send you off for gender affirmation care, which is mainly psychiatry for both the child and its parents to understand why the child is dysphoric, and medication if your urges are so critical they stop the child from functioning. If you want bits added or deleted, you'd need to wait till you are 16+, and you'd might even need to self fund such deletion or additions from your own pocket since the NHS has better things to spend money on. It is however a crime to discriminate against a person because of the gender they choose to be. The wonderful transgender at the checkout of my local Tesco is the most pleasant and popular person there. The queues at her till are always longer than others as more people seem to want to be served by her. The second longest tends to be that of the hijab wearing woman.

I've in the past called this transgender issue an on-going conversation, which is bound to be resolved eventually. There's already reports of how dysphoric children and adults have faired over time, with some regretting their change and some not. And in the future, we'd have more evidence of how gender dysphoric children and adults have faired, which will inform those contemplating it, and show us how to handle them and the situation much better. It is however comical that a country that expouses freedom of speech and expression would discriminate against those who wish to express themselves as whatever gender they wish.

TemporaryHansel:
At some point, you have to admit any form of freedom women are enjoying in many places, including Nigeria and the USA, is due to the generosity of men(enlightened men).

The above is like saying the equality black people enjoy in America today is due to enlightened white people, when the facts are that the oppression black people experienced in America was due to the backwardness of the white people (and some ignorant black people, I dare add).

The oppression and lack of freedom that women experienced was due to the backwardness of men who oppressed them. And the freedom that women experience today is due to their own fight back.

budaatum:


Funny enough, a non-coloured person identifying as a coloured person, has happened. A caucasian woman tried it and lost her job when found out. And there was a man of 60+ who wanted to self-identify as half his age, which I found amusing. The courts didn't, and thereby dissuaded me from self-identify as the King of England to my utter chagrin. I was looking forward to my royal visit to Nigeria.

Thailand likely has the most transgenders of all countries, though I don't think they go as far as cutting off or adding bits, and mainly stick to cross dressing. They seem to have three genders - hetero male, hetero female, and people born male who are actually female. What's different about them is they don't seem to have the urge to combine hetero females with born males who are actually females, who seem to have carved out a niche of their own. And the Thailand hetero women seem not to be in fear of their spaces being invaded. I can bet you that if a born male who is actually female commits a crime in Thailand he'd end up in the prison that is consistent with his born gender.

You know, I was going to respond to coco, but got distracted and the page refreshed. You've taken the words, point by point, out of my mouth. Don't you think someone can identify as another race, given the genetic plausibility of transgenderism?

America has a problem. Its the same country that seems to have aliens from outer space visiting them regularly, and is where you'd find the most people claiming the earth is flat. They even want to reintroduce the Bible in schools, when places like China have adopted the newer religion based around the scientific method. A rational nation will insist that your gender doesn't change just because you say so. A compassionate nation will however accept you as Karen even though you were named Bob at birth.

Every country has its own version of "Space Aliens." I think America's problem is selling itself as something it is not, which is, earth's utopia. It is a society that is profit driven, not humanity driven. Humanity has a cancer concern. Americans go: How much is my return on investment? Americans cry about Billionaires and co-operations using silly gimmicks to evade tax, but have they asked themselves why? The shareholders want 10% per annum on investment. Shareholders are account managers of investment banks, hedge funds, IRA, 401K, all contributed into by the same Americans complaining about capitalism. A snake biting its own tale. With one side of their mouth, they complain, on the other, they make deposits to investment and savings account hoping they make 5-10% every year. Of course, there's always the greed on the part of cooperations.

As for transgenderism, which has been a thing for aeons, only entered the world stage when somebody on TikTok says he deserves to use the women's bathroom. The central left will lose women to the right if it continues to pander to the radical left and their ridiculous identity politics. If I may, my buda, do you identify as black? These days one never knows with you guys. hahaha.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5Q1s_fB7Pg

I've in the past called this transgender issue an on-going conversation, which is bound to be resolved eventually. There's already reports of how dysphoric children and adults have faired over time, with some regretting their change and some not. And in the future, we'd have more evidence of how gender dysphoric children and adults have faired, which will inform those contemplating it, and show us how to handle them and the situation much better. It is however comical that a country that expouses freedom of speech and expression would discriminate against those who wish to express themselves as whatever gender they wish.

If only, the west will not always assume their ahead at everything, and go to Thailand and learn what it means to be transgender.

Conservatives are not our allies in this fight. Their opposition to trans ideology is different from of gender critical feminists like us. Their opposition to it is driven by what you have outlined and how some men have expectations of how men are supposed to act and that's not always in women's interest. If they cared about women they wouldn't stay silent on abuses meted out against women. I am a feminist who leans center-left of the political spectrum anyway. I agree with your submission.

Magnoliaa:


When I say I have no problem with "trans" people, but the ideology, I'm simply saying that I do not buy into the reasons for why being "trans" is a thing or what it means. For example, I do not believe in polytheism but that doesn't mean I have a bone to pick with practitioners of polytheism. As people. As persons.

You seem to be viewing this matter from a subjective lens, when it is rather a structural one.

When laws that have been made for women's sex-based rights are modified to allow for gender identification, you have cases of males being put in women's prisons where they end up raping them. This is not an hypothetical argument anymore. It is happening in real time, and it is affecting real women. Girls who were supposed to come first in a sports scholarship competition with financial and career rewards are losing their spots to a male who has a biological advantage. That it affects one woman is enough of a feminist issue. And that woman doesn't have to be me before I understand the snowballing implications.

So that it's not happening to you, hence you have no reason to be concerned doesn't mean it's not happening to other women, including lesbians.

Lesbians are called bigots and viciously attacked online for simply stating that they do not want to date "a woman with a dick." That is evidentially FEARFUL.

Like, okay, I get that you said you agree with some things I said or just do not have an opinion on it...so if that's the case...I do not understand your reason for maintaining that women have nothing to fear. I mean, I don't want to be repeating the things I've said, some of which you may already agree with, but everything I've said is my basis for why women should legitly be concerned (about erasure). The things I mentioned about "partner with eggs," "birthing bodies," "womb carriers?" And if these are the things you have no opinion on...then I find it to still negate you saying that women should not be worried about them.



If the "right" will be rolling back on women's rights, it'll be because the "left" handed them the "weapons" to do so on a platter.


We can go back and forth on these "strand" and "stray" conversations, but principally, it all boils down to a few cogent points:

- If members of the 'oppressor/privileged' class can self-identity into the class of the 'oppressed/underprivileged' and consequently take center stage in the movement and affairs that is meant to address the issues of the oppressed, then that is the beginning of the end of such a movement. If men can be women, it rubbishes the lived experience of many women in a society that is not only patriarchal but misogynistic to them on the basis of their sex.

- Being a woman is not a matter of self-identification or the performance of gender roles. If the young girls in oppressive Islamic regimes cannot "opt out" of being a woman to avoid the sexist norms and behaviours of their societies, then so also can nobody "opt into" being a woman. On their say so.

Most trans people I've interacted with base their ideas of being a woman/man on stereotypical, even regressive beliefs of what it means to be a woman/man. The majority of them identify with femininity and social roles expected of women. Another subset believe that it is matter of the brain/psychology, hence they think they are internally women, but outwardly male. Still another subset are "transwomen" for purely erotic reasons - sissy pornography and autogynephilia.

As a feminist and a woman, which of these definitions do you find plausible?

A woman is an adult, female human being. It is an objective definition I accept, and there is absolutely NO WAY, NO WAY IN HELL that it plays into any patriarchal concepts or misogynistic beliefs about women. This definition does not reduce women to simply biological females neither does it purport metaphysical characteristics about women. You are both biological and human, and (a) grown (female) (as opposed to a young child). This is what you and I share in common. Not likes, not hobbies, not careers, not phenotypes, not because of the fact that we like pink or love to cook.

Yeah, the conservatives tell you that 'a woman must be XYZ' or 'as a woman, you must be XYZ.' The gender ideologues/radical left are telling you that 'this person is XYZ so they are, or they must be a woman.' So you see, it is two sides of the same coin, and believers in an innate gender identity are simply reaffirming the existing cultural models of masculinity and femininity. The conservatives don't have a problem with what gender proponents are actually saying, they only have a problem with the fact that the biological sexes are
behaving in ways that is stereotypically expected of the other sex.

I remember when traditionalists wanted to kill us with "acting, thinking and feeling like a woman," as if there is one divinely outlined way to be so. Now that is exactly what transactivists are parroting.

So I am not for the left or right. Many of us gender-critical feminists are not. But for me, and I say this emphatically, I am not running into the open arms of disguising anti-feminists.

I am as concerned about people who pigeonhole women into a set of attitudes just as I am of people who declare "everyone is female" (a transwomen said this).

So speaking in defense of women's sex-based rights and spaces and the words we've come to know and use to discuss our individual and collective realities is valid irrespective of the grifters and all.

TemporaryHansel:
At some point, you have to admit any form of freedom women are enjoying in many places, including Nigeria and the USA, is due to the generosity of men(enlightened men). Just look at Afghanistan. Just one word tumbled everything.

Nature is truly humbling.

I don't support red pill or mgtow, I'm just stating a personal observation.


@raumdeuter @gloriousgbola @lordko

Women fought for their freedoms men didn't give us shit. Study history before coming here to talk bull. Women in Afghanistan will do the same thing when they have become hit against the wall. Freedoms are fought for and not given. You don't get to water our struggles to satisfy your fragile egos. We owe men nothing.

AmazonTopaz:

Women fought for their freedoms men didn't give us shit. Study history before coming here to talk bull. Women in Afghanistan will do the same thing when they have become hit against the wall. Freedoms are fought for and not given. You don't get to water our struggles to satisfy your fragile egos. We owe men nothing.

Wrong