“Progressive” woman risks all to tell the world what used to be screechingly obvious:
I asked why as a woman who was born with woman parts it is now considered transphobic to want to have conversations about the distinct and unquestionable differences in life experience between cis and trans women. I asked why when women have faced systematic violence at the hands of men and 1 in six women is raped, is it wrong for cis women to have some spaces just for them to feel safe in a world where they don’t? And I was immediately threatened, labeled as transphobic, and left to feel as if my voice was nothing.
I am angry. Angry because now even questioning these issues is seen as an act of hate, discrimination, or intolerance. Angry because wanting to have open conversations is now considered hate speech. I am angry that as a woman who has constantly had to be careful of my language and behavior around men to ensure my own safety, I am now being forced to police my language even more, around and for trans women who had entirely
different experiences and anatomy. Female language around female issues is important to many cis women because we have struggled to even have our identities and issues seen as valid.
All these liberals reading 1984,and nobody gets it; it’s not about solving anything. It’s about destroying the will to be free by making it too exhausting, fraught, and dangerous.
The funny thing is that nobody on the left is figuring out that not wanting to share space with “trans” people is not about trans people at all, but rather about the 845000 people on Megan’s List who might use this as an opportunity.
Since “transphobic” is not a real thing, how can a person ever demonstrate that they are not “transphobic”?
Since “transphobic” is not a real thing, how can a person ever demonstrate that they are not “transphobic”?
MP, that’s the beauty of it! Like gender, “hate” is fluid and can be coming from anyone who threatens the deviants’ acquisition of power.
Funny how worshipping “inclusivity” results in more division, not less, among the faithful.
Just for you, MP, transphobic will show up in next edition of Websters and Oxford dictionaries. Wanna place bets?
JPA, whether a thing shows up in dictionaries is not a measure of whether a thing is real. “Fairies” and “Santa Claus” are defined in dictionairies. “Transphobic” is a political label, applied by one group of people on another group of people. It is a word that means whatever its user wants it to mean. It is not real, in the way that, say, “arachnophobe” describes a person with a an irrational fear of spiders. If you and I are arguing about whether a person a person is na arachnophobe, we can refer to the DSM, as a good starting point.
Here, BTW, is the DSM on phobia’s:
https://www.theravive.com/therapedia/specific-phobia-dsm–5-300.29-(icd–10–cm-multiple-codes)
Note that “phobia” as used by the Left (“homophobia”, “transphobia”, “islamaphobia”) is a thing made up by them that they apply to others. It is “fake science.”
The leftist centipede has formed a circle.
NW, sort of like the fact that diversity training results in less respect for diversity. But companies do it because lawyers.
Diversity training will be even more entertaining (and depressing) when they get some transgender activists who as as clueless about Megan’s List as the native american trainer I had was about the disfunctions of the reservations. I anticipate some fistfights (catfights?) among the motivated and politically correct.