Explicitly and exclusively “by women for women”
Can women have something? Just a small something? If we’re very good? No?
British Cycling is allowing biological males to participate in its female-only Breeze community rides and has ejected one concerned woman from its Facebook group for ride leaders for using the term “male”, on the grounds that this constitutes discriminatory language.
That’s so interesting. Women are not allowed to say “male” now. So we can’t report rape now, we can’t say we were passed over for jobs that went to men now, we can’t take precautions to avoid male violence now unless we do it in complete silence.
The Breeze programme was set up explicitly and exclusively “by women for women”, but those born male are still self-identifying into these events without any questions being asked.
Which just goes to show how fucking male they are.
Women mostly don’t risk that kind of brazen entitlement, because we’ve been trained (through violence) not to. Men grow up secure in the knowledge that there’s half of humanity they get to bully and push aside and take everything from.
Back in June a woman was banned from the Breeze Facebook group for pointing out that Breeze was meant to be for women and thus not for men.
It has been confirmed that the woman was subsequently banned from the organisation’s Facebook group for Breeze champions. She argued that she was only stating biological reality and that she was legally entitled to express gender-critical views, but the ban has remained in place.
Sarah Doney, a Breeze ride leader in mid-Wales, was so upset by the situation that she sent a letter last week to the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, requesting urgent advice. “I am concerned because women come to these rides expecting them to be male-free, and I’ve been told by British Cycling staff that we are not allowed to use the terms ‘men’ or ‘male’. That means I am not allowed to tell women the truth even if they ask.
“I cannot see how it is acceptable for them to compel my speech in this way. I feel my own belief that people cannot change sex is being denied. I am not the only woman in this situation, but everyone is afraid of being dropped as a Breeze champion.”
It’s compelled speech and it’s compelled accept men in your group for women or be kicked out and ostracized. That’s a lot of compelling.
Doney also copied the letter to Jon Dutton, chief executive of British Cycling, who this week replied to her: “Whilst individuals are entitled to hold gender-critical views, that does not give them the unfettered power to voice those views without consequence. Misgendering of a trans person can constitute a form of discrimination.”
So women have to give up all possibility of having groups of their own, on pain of accusations of discrimination, banishment, and being systematically libeled.
A British Cycling spokesperson said: “With inclusion at its heart, the Breeze programme has always been open to transgender women, and we restated this commitment in our revised transgender and non-binary policy position in May this year. We have been very clear that the deliberate misgendering of individuals is a breach of our code of conduct.
Then Breeze is not what it pretends to be, and should say that on the tin.
I would be very surprised if the correct legal interpretation of the Equalities Act is ‘Sure you can hold those views, but we’ll discriminate against you if you express them.’ That would rather negate the point of the Act.
O for the halcyon days when transwomen were women because “woman” is a gender word. They were of the male sex, yes, but gender is more important.
However, it then then became necessary to the eradicate the meaning of “male” because it was just too easy for people to argue that sex was sometimes more important than gender. Transwomen, who used to be male but it was impolite to bring that up, are now no longer male and it’s therefore discriminatory to bring that up. Sex is such a hopeless, muddled mess it’s unscientific to talk about male and female as if there was a meaningful distinction between them. Referring to transwomen as males is like referring to them as vermin, there’s no other reason to say it.
I occasionally run into wise old scientists who defend the gender/sex binary and then try to point out that whether there are two sexes or not doesn’t matter to trans rights. What’s the connection, they ask in good and puzzled faith. Why is this even a thing?
They’re not familiar with what’s going on in the trenches.
Better phrasing: the belief that people can change sex is being imposed. We are not the ones with the religious belief, they are.
The latter completely contradicts the former. Granting the legitimacy of a view but binding people to not act in accordance with it is not freedom of speech or belief.
“Sure you have the right to hold and express your belief, but we’re going to make you wish that you hadn’t.”
So calling a male a male is discriminatory? How does that work? It’s not “misgendering,” it’s correctly sexing. Sex doesn’t change. Men remain men. Yes, it’s “discrimination” in the sense of being able to distinguish and separate men from women. Trans activists refuse to admit that there are any occasions at all where this is important and necessary. They’re trying to convince us that by being “misgendered” they’re being subjected to some kind of gender apatheid, or that everyone is being mean and spoiling a clever magic trick. In reality it’s more like blowing an enemy agent’s cover, revealing their true identity. And it’s not that of a superhero. The words that apply aren’t “brave and stunning” but “brazen affrontery.”