The argument from passport
Why are so many women pretending not to know what they’ve known ever since they were about 10 years old?
Gender-critical feminists want trans women to show their passports to use public lavatories, a veteran Labour MP has claimed.
Dame Angela Eagle, who is standing to be a Commons committee chairman, said lavatories were being “policed” at the expense of those who don’t conform to gender norms.
[Patiently but through gritted teeth] No, that’s wrong. That’s a falsehood. We’re just saying women need toilets/lavatories/restrooms for women and men have to stay out of them as men have always had to stay out of them. We don’t want to “police” them, we just want men to stay the fuck out of them.
The MP for Wallasey said the heated debate about trans people using single-sex spaces revolved around “recreating and then enforcing” gender stereotypes.
There. That’s the bit where she pretends not to know what she does know. It’s nothing to do with gender stereotypes just as it always has been.
This would make it clear that trans women have to use the men’s lavatories, while trans men have to use the ladies’, Dame Angela said.
Why are we saying “men’s” and “ladies'”? How about consistency? Either gentlemen’s and ladies’ or men’s and women’s. I, for one, don’t identify as a “lady.”
She added: “Whilst that may affect a small number of people, the actual effect is that loads of non-gender-conforming women will effectively be being policed in their use of public facilities.
“We’ve never had to show a passport to get into the toilet before. I dread to think what else they might want us to show if they change the law.”
So her point is that women who say they are men will get policed. I suppose that might happen, but I can’t really work up much sympathy. The trans army has zero sympathy for anyone else, so I find my organs of compassion have taken a beating over the years.
“This is all about recreating and then enforcing appearance, behaviour, making certain that you actually behave and look the way your sex, your gender ought to look,” she said.
No, it isn’t. That’s not true. It’s about hanging on to women’s rights until our fingers bleed.
I would assume that TIF’s are using the men’s room without problems. The odd female who is “gender non-comforming” and who looks a trifle “mannish” probably used to get stared at before I’m sure. But now that there’s TIM’s in women’s washrooms jerking-off in the stalls, taking pictures of women, and outright assaulting women and girls in washrooms, some women are getting upset and not worrying about whatever “the right side of history” means.
[Winston Churchill once said “History will be kind to me. Because I’m going to write it.”]
Did Churchill really say that? V. droll.
I don’t think Eagle’s point is that trans-identified males will get policed — asked to show ID or maybe even just challenged. She’s probably referring to one of the transgender movement’s most cherished pawns: women who present masculine or have mannish features. Because it’s increasingly common for men to use women’s washrooms, too many women have gotten “gun shy.” Other women who might have formerly caused puzzlement or invoked a mild “are you sure you’re in the right place?” are now routinely assumed to be TIMs making a political point and the pushback can be hostile. There are serious issues involved.
Thus “Get out: you don’t belong here” is being said to butch lesbians. Suspicion and skepticism are occasionally aimed at actual women who simply happen to be tall, or have square jaws, or wear baggy clothes. The Gender Critical as well as the conservatives can jump to erroneous conclusions because we’re hyper vigilant in expecting TIMs to try to stake our territory as their own, since there’s a culturally concerted push in that direction. Gender nonconformity can accidentally fall into the crossfire.
And, of course, instead of recognizing the cause for cases of mistaken identity and accepting the blame, trans rights activists themselves jump to the conclusion that no mistaken assumptions are being made: this was what was intended the entire time! We want to enforce femininity on women! We want to shame women who aren’t sufficiently feminine! See? Didn’t we tell you so? Trans Rights are inextricably bound up with the right for women to look, wear, and behave freely, as their will decides.
They get it backwards because of a superficial resemblance. Quelle surprise. It’s their method of operation.
That’s actually what I meant to say but I managed to get confused while trying to say it. I mean butch-appearing women but I said “women who say they are men”…which just goes to show how easy it is to lose the plot when trying to discuss this subject.
I am quite sure I could explain it to Angela, but I can not understand it for her.
And it’s more than that…more than just butch lesbians. I get the feeling she’s trying to say women like me, who wear pants instead of dresses, will also be required to “show our passport”. No one ever mistakes me for a man (except on the phone), but in the world she is describing, wearing pants and a sweat shirt could mark a woman as “gender non-conforming”. If what she’s implying is that we are enforcing femininity on women, I don’t fit. Sometimes I do, if I’m in the mood, as long as femininity can wear pants (plain black pants, with pockets. Or jeans.)
The picture she is painting…or trying to…is one where women who are obviously women but don’t fit the stereotype get removed from the woman’s restroom. At least, that’s how I read it. Butch lesbians, of course. But not just butch lesbians. ANY woman who doesn’t fit the stereotype. Never mind that it’s trans women who are more likely to fit the stereotype, though often exaggerated and over the top.
This is just utterly ridiculous!
25 years ago, there were a number of us that looked like “skater boys” although we were girls (teens). In many cases, it was genuinely not easy to tell with a quick glance if an individual was male or female – unless you saw both together, then it was obvious. Occasionally, one of the older ladies in the loos would be a bit alarmed because she hadn’t looked at us too closely (out of politeness – you don’t stare at strangers!) and she had mistaken us for possible teenaged boys instead, or she just wasn’t certain. The solution was the same one it has always been: we would say “Hello”, and something like “Lovely weather we’re having” / “It’s raining again, isn’t that annoying” – delete as appropriate – and thus reassure the women in the space that we were in fact female, and so supposed to be there.
It’s exactly the same as what happens in the factories (and other spaces where Working Class Butch women have been for ages) or in any other setting. The determination to ignore all this history of female gender-nonconforming is frustrating to say the least. Do these trendy twits think that nothing of any interest ever happened before their awareness of the issue?
We’re not the ones freaking out about all this. Why, it’s almost as if the issue is about women setting boundaries of any kind! As if the issue is that we can say “NO!” to males, however they are dressed. I wonder why that might be…