Bullies win another round
“Gender and identity reporter” Vic Parsons at Pink News tells us about a protest against those evil bitches who like to swim at a women and children only beach:
A “swim-in for trans inclusion” at the women-only coastal swimming pool in Coogee, Sydney, on 17 January saw trans and cis swimmers defy a transphobic policy the pool released last week and celebrate transgender pride and solidarity.
That is, there was a swim-in to pressure women who use the women-only coastal swimming pool in Sydney to agree that it can stop being women-only now, and to celebrate the pride and solidarity of men who take everything away from women.
Protestors held signs reading “Stop drinking JK’s pool-aid!” and “Let them swim”.
That is, protesters trashed JK Rowling for the seventy billionth time even though she has nothing to do with this issue, and demanded that women who want to swim without men present just fuck all the way off.
The protest, which saw hundreds of LGBT+ people demanding that the organisation apologise and include trans women, comes after the women-only pool was heavily criticised for introducing a new policy banning some trans women from the pool.
That is, the protest saw hundreds of people demanding that the women-only pool apologize for being women only and include men.
The new policy was then retracted, and the McIver’s Ladies Baths has now deleted its Facebook page and website.
Men win, women lose. Men can invade women’s spaces, women cannot refuse. Funny how rapey that sounds, isn’t it.
Janet Anderson, who started the viral #LetThemSwim hashtag on social media in response to McIver’s exclusion of trans women, said in a statement before the protest: “It’s time for women’s spaces to start advocating for ALL women. No woman left behind.”
That is, it’s time for women’s spaces to start advocating for MEN. Shut up about women.
Mardi Gras board director and co-organiser Charlie Murphy added: “We have seen a massive outpouring of community support for transgender people. The council has received thousands of comments, and more than 10,000 people have signed a petition calling for the pool to adopt an openly trans-inclusive policy.
“Gender should not be determined by what’s in your pants.”
But what’s in your pants has been known to rape women, so women don’t actually have the luxury of ignoring it.
At Sunday’s protest, trans activist Janet Anderson gave a speech emphasising that “trans folk have been silenced for too long” by the cultural mainstream, and pointed out that the majority of the public support trans inclusion. “What will it take for organisations like this to understand that this is what the public wants?” she asked.
It sounds so amiable when you call it “trans inclusion”; naturally the public says yes, sure, include everyone, we’re all human. It sounds much less amiable when you call it “men demanding to be allowed to swim in the women-only pool” and that’s why Vic Parsons didn’t word it that way.
Anderson also said that the McIver’s Ladies Baths latest website update on the policy was “ambiguous” and “leaves [the] door open to discrimination”.
She concluded that “this is not about keeping women safe, this is about policing women’s bodies… we must ensure that all women are welcome to use the baths… [not just those] who fit [an inappropriate, narrowly defined] idea of womanhood”.
Yes inappropriate and narrowly defined in the sense of meaning women as opposed to men who think of themselves as fluffy pink laydeeez.
More than 12,000 people have signed a petition calling on the organisation to issue a full apology, make clear that all women are welcome at the baths, and to reinstate and update its website to reflect that the women-only baths are trans-inclusive regardless of what gender-affirming surgery a trans woman has had.
“If there are single-sex spaces, it should be the individual’s right to choose that which best matches their identity,” the petition says.
That is, if there are single-sex spaces, men should always have the right to say that the women’s space best matches their identity, period end of story no argument. If the men in question are 7 feet tall and muscular and belligerent in affect they still get to choose the single-sex space for women, and splash about to their hearts’ content. That’s only fair.
So, they have demonstrated that legal sex-based protections are utterly useless in the the face of a massive bullying campaign by men. Damn.
Sorry to burst their bubble, but sex is defined by what is in your pants (and your DNA). Gender is usually defined by sex. a societal construct about what each sex should be. Gender is based on fallacious ideas about women and men; sex is based on accurate observations that men and women are different. Sex is real, gender is a social construct. And men are men, even if they like to wear make up and fingernail polish and fuzzy pink negligees and stiletto heels.
It wasn’t just a women-only pool, it was the last remaining women-only seawater pool in Australia. In Sydney alone there are dozens of seawater pools; women can’t have even one for themselves.
No, I think it’s ultimately about how we differentiate women from men — and why we have single-sex spaces in the first place. They language used here deliberately makes it sound as if the bath is trying to exclude women who are overweight, have deformities, have had operations, or otherwise fail to look nice and toned.
As for “keeping women safe,” if the goal is to support “the individual’s right to choose (the sex) which matches their identities” then there’s no point in their assuring women how harmless transwomen are. Theoretically, sexual assaults and other forms of violence could go through the roof and only the perpetrators who are caught would be removed. You couldn’t look at the evidence and change it back to “keep women safe” once the group prone to violence is now counted as “women.”
By the way, Australian feminist Holly-Lawford Smith has just put out a very thorough academic paper on “Women-only Spaces and the Right to Exclude.”
https://philpapers.org/archive/LAWWSA-4.pdf
When I think of how much beach space there is in Sydney, you think one sliver could be left to the sheilas.
Petition to return the bath’s to at least notionally women’s only:
https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/keep-mcivers-ladies-baths-women-children-only
There is a rival petition on change.org demanding apologies for men who felt bad about being excluded from women-only things on the flimsy pretext that they’re not actually women.
Those on the ground report that locals are largely unaware, and pool users and religious women horrified by the change. Also that a good proportion of current users are religious women culturally prevented from sharing with stunning and brave bepenised trans folk.
Please sign the petition.
We need to call out the fact that this bizarre notion that any space was established for “gender identities”. This happens constantly: a space that’s segregated by sex has TRAs loudly declare (or secretly and treated as incontrovertible fact, even when law says no) that it is or should be accessible by the opposite sex, in accordance with their “gender identity”, as though that’s the same thing. Sex still exists. The basis for the original concept is still in place!
If trans want a place accessible by gender identity, go out and create one. I know it’s cheaper, faster, and simpler to just steal what belongs to others, but it also makes you arseholes to those even worse off than you (who actually do exist).
No one established women’s bathrooms for people who “identified as women”, they’re for female people.
No one established women’s sports teams and leagues for people who felt feminine, or performed femininity, or wanked when called a “naughty girl”.
No one ever banned women from the vote because they were feminine: femininity was assumed based on being female, indeed, being female and masculine (and found out) got you treated to a trip to the insane asylum, not treated as being equally rational to men.
Except gender neutral, third, or trans spaces deny TIMs the VALIDATION and AFFIRMATION that being in women’s spaces provides. It’s the whole point of the operation. They need to have people forget the whole “trans” part while agitating for their own inclusion. It’s one of the built-in contradictions that they hope nobody notices. Another is the hatred of women they display while demanding to be recognized as women themselves. Forcing them to use some “other” space deprives them the imprimatur of “womanhood” that
invadingoccupyingappropriatingrightfully accessing female only facilities can give them. If TWAW, then TIMs BELONG in women’s spaces, no ifs ands or buts, and certainly no debate!Petition signed.
#8, Your Name’s Not Bruce?, that was one of my early “something’s not right here” moments on the way to Peak Trans: some TiMs talking in full on misogynistic terms about women, while “simulating periods”, and saying just how disgusting they thought actual female bodies were. I remember asking a wiser radfem friend: why do they want to BE us if they hate us so much?
Dammit, it’s satisfying and clarifying to take some nonsense and put in the words that convey their actual meaning:
Trans advocates use intentionally confusing language, which impairs understanding. So I’ve rewritten this, deleting the confusing terms and substituting plain language and meaning. The original can be found at the OP.
Women-only pool told biological sex (and access to the pool) shouldn’t be determined by ‘the genitals you have’ after ban on men with penises. Men still welcome at 34 other nearby pools and dozens of beaches
VIC PARSONS JANUARY 18, 2021
Hundreds of people, some queer, went to a protest and 12,000 have signed a petition against a partially male-exclusionary policy at the McIver’s Ladies Baths in Sydney, Australia.
A “swim-in for men’s inclusion” at the women-only coastal swimming pool in Coogee, Sydney, on 17 January saw trans (mainly male) and cis (mainly female) swimmers defy a trans-inclusive policy the pool released last week and celebrate male pride and solidarity with men and their penises.
Protestors held signs reading “Stop drinking JK’s pool-aid!” and “Let them (men) swim”.
The protest, which saw hundreds of people demanding that the organisation apologise and include all men, comes after the women-only pool was heavily criticised for a policy banning some men from the pool. The policy was then retracted, and the McIver’s Ladies Baths has now deleted its Facebook page and website. (Subsequent to significant harassment.)
Janet Anderson, who started the viral #LetThemSwim (men) hashtag on social media in response to McIver’s exclusion of most men, said in a statement before the protest: “It’s time for women’s spaces to start advocating for ALL men. No man left behind.”
Mardi Gras board director and co-organiser Charlie Murphy added: “We have seen a massive outpouring of community support for male people. The council has received thousands of comments, and more than 10,000 people have signed a petition calling for the pool to adopt an openly male-inclusive policy.
According to a National Trust report on the baths, they have been used as a spot for bathing for women since before 1876.
The baths themselves were built in 1886 and the lease expired in 1901. The McIver family ran the baths until 1922 when the Randwick Ladies Amateur Swimming Club was formed. The club took over the lease and has held it since that time.
At Sunday’s protest, men’s activist Janet Anderson gave a speech emphasising that “men folk have been silenced for too long” by the cultural mainstream, and pointed out that the majority of the public support men’s inclusion in all women’s spaces. “What will it take for women’s organisations like this to understand that this is what the public wants?” she asked.
Anderson also said that the McIver’s Ladies Baths latest website update on the policy was “ambiguous” and “leaves [the] door open to discrimination”. [Noting here that the ambiguous policy also leaves women in the dark about whether or not they will encounter stranger’s penises at the baths, but this issue apparently either does not occur to or exercise Ms Anderson.] She concluded that “this is not about keeping women safe, this is about policing men’s bodies… we must ensure that all men are welcome to use the baths… [not just women] who fit a scientific and material idea of being female”.
The deputy mayor of Coogee reportedly supported the petition and protest against the some men being excluded from the only women’s baths in the country, unlike the 35 other public baths who welcome all men, which dispersed into those taking part in the “swim-in” at the baths and others heading to the beach.
The criticism began with thousands of people commenting on a Facebook post on the McIver’s Ladies Baths page that introduced a new “breathtakingly offensive” rule mandating that only men “who’ve undergone a gender reassignment surgery to remove their penis” could swim in the pool.
As the negative responses to the “disappointingly misandrist” new policy continued, a second update to the McIver’s Ladies Baths website said that: “Only women and children (boys up to 13 years of age) are permitted entry.”
With calls – backed by the local council – growing for the organisation to make a clear statement in support of male inclusion, the McIver’s Ladies Baths made a third update to its website on 13 January stating that the organisation would comply with New South Wales’ (NSW) (so-called) anti-discrimination laws. “Yes. Men are welcome to the McIver’s Ladies Baths, our definition for transgender (males, in this case) is as per the NSW Discrimination Act,” it read.
Both the McIver’s Ladies Baths website and Facebook page have now been deleted.
More than 12,000 people have signed a petition calling on the organisation to issue a full apology, make clear that all men are welcome at the baths, and to reinstate and update its website to reflect that the women-only baths are male-inclusive regardless of what gender-affirming surgery a man has had.
“If there are single-sex female spaces, it should be the individual man’s right to choose that [space] which best matches their identity (male or female),” the petition says.
“‘What if?’ situations (men assaulting, harassing and harming women and children in women’s spaces) are often raised but there is no evidence they ever happen. (Except https://www.womenarehuman.com/, http://transcrimeuk.com/, and https://fairplayforwomen.com/transgender-male-criminality-sex-offences/, and https://fairplayforwomen.com/criminality/, I could go on.) Exclusion of male people (from a tiny handful of women’s spaces) however, is well-documented and degrading (to males who think they’re women).”
Ends
From the Pink News article above
‘What’s in your pants’ doesn’t rape women, its who’s wearing them. Even if they put on a cocktail dress instead.
Arcadia @ 11 – however satisfying and clarifying it is I’d rather you didn’t do it to a whole entire article. Enough is as good as a feast, as the saying goes.
Very well. I’m just so over both reading articles that state the very opposite of what they mean, and having to translate every second word in my head (gender to sex, trans woman to man, “policing non-normative bodies” to “observing men aren’t women” etc). Reading all that confusing BS makes me feel like I’m losing my grip on what’s true, just due to the sheer volume of propaganda. Writing it all out like that makes me feel better, and sane again.
Oh, I get that. I keep notebooks (you know, those spiral-ringed ones for taking notes in high school) for purposes of that kind; I’ve filled an embarrassingly large number of them.
You can still write it all out and then just post part of it here.
Will do. I think I’d have carpal tunnel if I translated the actual volume of trans euphemisms and obfuscation I read on the regular though.
Someone should do a browser extension, like shinigami eyes, but to auto translate things like “trans woman” into man who thinks he’s a woman, etc.
I feel this is increasingly a refuge for my skepticism. Most left/liberal forums are 110% in on TR. I have to admit I have absolutely no personal ax to grind. I am male (although a Friend of Dorothy, so I understand oppression as well). But it is just the sheer fantasy, illogic, craziness of it all. It just BUGS ME. Even though I have no real need to be involved.