Standing up for womens rights gets you labeled a TERF now. It's not exactly a bad thing to be called these days lol. Heck, even JK Rowling gets called this and shes the furthest from transphobic.
She is against womens rights being taken away. Trans people already have all the same rights as anyone else. Please name one right a trans person does not have that anyone else does
If predominantly one class of person wants to do something, you can easily discriminate against them by outlawing that specific action.
In contrast, articulating the "women's rights" that are being hurt by trans rights usually end up in an awkward formulation like "the right to have a place in which they won't see somebody they think is a man."
Losing access to single sex spaces (bathrooms, prisons, sports leagues, etc). Men are statistically more violent than women and you are suggesting we should just let them freely into womens spaces. This is why they have fought for their own spaces
Because, you see, after excluding all studies not carried out in the UK, restricting to studies on trans kids, and then individually discarding the studies that remain, there's no evidence of safety. In fact, there's no evidence at all! Further research is needed before we feed experimental drugs to our vulnerable children. (We have to pass an emergency prohibition about this, because those meddling "doctors" won't listen. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2024/727/made)
Cis kids are… biologically different, somehow? So the studies demonstrating safety and efficacy apply just fine to them. Yeah, that's totally the reason: medical necessity. Not politically-motivated discrimination against a protected minority, no siree.
https://cass.independent-review.uk/home/publications/final-r...
Regardless, and it's anecdata -- but everyone I know who is working in the fields of medicine on the subjects the cass review covers, have pointed out numerous critical flaws in it that undermine every single point it makes. It's actually somewhat worse than if you got a PDF paper from Natural News dot com, a site that I discovered in the mid 2010s was rehosting and editing medical papers to say whatever they wanted.
there's a cautionary tale in there that applies to a few other hot topic issues, but it will be ignored, of course.
More to the point, when a male says he identifies as a woman, what exactly is he identifying with? You can't identify with a organs you don't have, so what could he actually be identifying with, if not sexist feminine stereotypes?
And how is it progressive to say that a man who identifies with feminine stereotypes is a woman? Is it not more progressive to say that a man who identifies with feminine stereotypes is simply a feminine man?
Any definition of woman that includes all cis women must include all trans women, or will otherwise include trans men.
Fertility? Many women are infertile.
Chromosomes? There is at least one genetic line of women in the world where they were all identified at birth as women and have each given birth, but have XY chromosomes. Anecdotally, many universities have had to stop genetics students from testing themselves for their chromosomes as a fun thing to do on the weekend, because the incident rate of chirality is MUCH higher than you would otherwise expect.
Any other such metrics either end up becoming pure phrenology or excluding massive amounts (millions) of women.
Moreover, trans women do not "identify with female stereotypes" and they are often most often strongly aligned with cis women who break stereotypes, cis women who are also largely targeted by the bathroom bills you are in favour of. The science says that being transgender isn't purely social and cannot be fixed through therapy, please avail yourself of the cult[0] that you are a part of.
Thank you for your time.
correctly so.