There aren’t enough obscenities
Look at Peter Tatchell going out of his way to belittle and insult women.
No. No people are women “based on gender identity” just as no people are horses based on species identity. There are no people who are biologically male but women anyway. Women are the only kind of women there is; trans women are men. Men can feel womany all they like, but they don’t get to push us off the bench because of their womany feelz.
And fuck Peter Tatchell for trying to demolish our rights by saying this. Fuck him and all his friends and everybody else who is hell-bent on pretending women don’t get to have their own category.
Is Tatchell going to make the reposting of this a monthly event, hoping to wear us down until we give in? It’s slightly more sublle (though no less insulting) than the previous public service “reminders” that
TWAW!
TWAW!
TWAW!
TWAW!
TWAW!*
They don’t even try to keep the story straight anymore, do they? I guess Tatchell didn’t get the memo from some trans activists that they are the same. Isn’t this what Willoughby is always on about, that his oh-so-precious passport designation makes him an actual, honest-to-goodness, real-life woman? After all, what is the point of insisting that TWAW< if it's not to drop or hide the idea of "transness"?
And given the context and history, the "Unite!" comes across as a command rather than friendly advice. So yeah, fuck him.
*(I believe that five repetitions of this formula were the recommended number to make it true, with or without handclap emojis)
“Some people are women based on biological sex.” – Tatchell just admitted woman refers to people who are female. Obvious to us all along, but in trying to walk the fine line between catering to nonsense without going all the way, he sometimes accidentally gives the game away.
“They are not the same.” Heresy! TWANTSAW: Trans women are not the same as women. Agreed, may as well use a different word for them altogether.
Didn’t he tweet the same thing a little bit ago, or is my memory playing tricks?
If female sex and womanly gender identity are each sufficient, each on its own, to determine womanhood, then both TIMs and TIFs are women. What wonders what the criteria are to be determined a man? Does one need both male sex and manly gender identity in order to escape being a woman?
Room 101!
Remind us, once again, why they belong in the same bathrooms, changing rooms, showers, sporting events, jails, domestic abuse and rape shelters etc. etc. then.
As are all types of people. It’s just that, usually, the perpetrators aren’t women. Who they are remains a mystery.
Again, this implies that there is indeed a sense in which both groups are “types of women” (as opposed to unrelated groups that just happen to be called the same in Genderspeak). There is no sense in which fruit bats and baseball bats are both “types of bats”. There is one sense in which the former are bats while the latter are not, and vice versa. The same goes for “women based on biological sex” and “women based on gender identity”. Once again it’s all just a bad pun.