Their aim is to turn every hard-won single-sexed space into a mixed-sex space. Women's sports, women's rape refuges, change rooms, breastfeeding support groups, single-sex health care, everything thing we have fought for DECADES to carve out for ourselves.

Having to genuflect and pretend that TIMs are women is part of getting society to widely accept a legal fiction so it will be adopted into the legal system and used in lawfare against women.

They want women to be prosecuted and punished for trying to carve out spaces of their own.

Their aim is to turn every hard-won single-sexed space into a mixed-sex space. Women's sports, women's rape refuges, change rooms, breastfeeding support groups, single-sex health care, everything thing we have fought for DECADES to carve out for ourselves. Having to genuflect and pretend that TIMs are women is part of getting society to widely accept a [legal fiction](https://www.britannica.com/topic/legal-fiction) so it will be adopted into the legal system and used in lawfare against women. They **want** women to be prosecuted and punished for trying to carve out spaces of their own.


You might be interested in checking out this article: Women's Spaces, Women's Rights: Feminism and the Transgender Rights Movement, which analyses the legislative and policy goals of trans activists and advocacy organizations. The article was published in the Marquette Law Review (which is a prestigious law school journal).

Yes, I'm afraid you're right... although, there's so much more including: severely restrict women's freedom of association, compelling identity validation, and protecting conduct that is unrelated to gender identity using anti-discrimination law.

(pg. 17 👇)


This Section will describe four features of the transgender rights movement’s legal and policy goals that are particularly relevant for women’s rights: (A) to redefine sex discrimination, (B) to protect conduct unrelated to gender dysphoria, (C) to prevent sex-separated facilities from being assigned based on sex, and (D) to compel validation of a transgender person’s identity through pronoun use and other language requirements.

C. Preventing Sex-Separated Spaces from Being Assigned Based on Sex

Third, the transgender rights movement seeks to prevent sex-separated facilities from being assigned based on sex. This is not to say that certain kinds of accommodations (such as access to a single-user restroom) are not appropriate if a person does not wish to use communal facilities. However, many activists find accommodations to be unacceptable, because they are not validating in the way that admission to the opposite-sex facility is.99 Rather, advocates desire for people to access sex-separated facilities based on how they identify, 100 and reduce women’s concerns about physical safety to mere bias ...

THankyou for the link. It is good some legal scholars are writing these articles, we need them.

Women's public restrooms were a major part of the early feminist movements (not to mention the current feminist movements in poor countries). When women don't have a safe, private place they can go to pee, handle their menstruation, change a baby's diaper, etc; they will be too scared to venture far from the home. They will be held close to home by the "urinary leash" without men having to do anything to enforce it.

This isn't a bug in trans activism. Its a feature.

[–] Ladylucy 13 points Edited

The UN is also trying to establish restrooms for women, in India for example and third world countries, for the very reasons you stated. It’s more than ironic that in First World countries they are supporting TIMs in women’s restrooms. Which one is it UN? Women’s privacy and dignity or males invading our spaces?

Rights for women and girls, but not so many rights that we might actually be able to get the patriarchal boot completely off our necks.

[–] GenderHeretic Assigned2LegsAB 36 points

Well, illegal for women to have single-sex spaces, or any kind of gathering without male supervision.

Men will retain some single sex spaces, gatherings and patriarchal privileges.

Which is why I sometimes don my tinfoil hat and wonder where this came from. It came so quickly, and globally, just was women were starting to make a lot of progress, just as we were feeling secure.

It's not new - male transexuals were invading women's spaces and sports back during the second wave and we saw the first pushback against these invaders back then, e.g. Janice Raymond's The Transsexual Empire.

The explosion is due to the internet and the way that easily accessible porn has further warped men's (and women's) perception of what women are and what they're good for. It's no wonder that the largest categories of people transing themselves seem to be porn-addled AGP men and women/girls trying to physically remove themselves from being seen as sex dolls.

[–] Nediljka_Orwell PITA crone 3 points

The Internoodle provided psychological demand, but the nuts and bolts supply of how to physically transition (and some of the social attitudes permitting it) came from already existing cosmetic, plastic surgery, and pharmaceutical industries that were already humming along and just needed a trans tweak. And a bit of visionary (and no doubt insider) planning and marketing.

The transgender medicine gold rush started off like most other medical or cosmetic gold rushes before it. First slowly and quietly and pretty much exclusively for a limited amount of wealthy (or singularly determined) individuals and then explosively for the middle class. And their kids. I remember when breast implants, facelifts, liposuction, and Botox became crazily available and acceptable for the middle class to buy and enjoy. Laser hair removal and electrolysis followed the same path. You can do those at home now.

I don't know when they did it, but you can bet Big Pharma and the surgical/medical device companies ok'd R&D investments for future profits quite some time ago that are paying off now. New hormone pills, patches and creams. Vaginal dialators and penile implant tech found new markets. It seems to me that alotta the biotech that the trans market is using now was started from aging Boomer populations fighting back against natural sexual decline and the un-pleasantries of menopause. Hmmm.

Divide & Rule WORKS. Most "democracies" are fake. The ruling class has to polarize the population along as many axes as possible to prevent people finding enough solidarity to take back the power that was stolen from voters decades ago. Why? so they can keep siphoning our hard-earned tax dollars into bailouts and endless wars. There has been a MASSIVE transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class (who are poorer every day) into the very deep pockets of the ultra rich in recent years. The pandemic only accelerated this.

Ditto. It can't be a coincidence that this shit exploded just as feminism was making real progress. Now Roe is gone and we have to choose between two equally misogynistic parties.

Not entirely.

They don't want truly mixed-sex spaces which any men and any women may enter. They want spaces where women and a select few men with no respect for boundaries can go. Allowing all men in ruins the whole thing. Regular men would serve as a buffer for the worst, boundary-violating men. The presence of men 24/7 also means that women will be more careful than the current status quo where we're lulled into a false sense of security. And, of course, these spaces becoming sausagefests means that TIMs don't get to be the special man surrounded by adoring women.

In the haste to carry their penises into women-only spaces, they demanded that every man be allowed into those, though.

They could have demanded access to womens' spaces for provably castrated TIMs, but that would not serve their purpose of getting to rape vulnerable women, obviously, so it never was an option.

And well, from the outside, there's no difference between a pervy man who wants to invade womens' spaces and is too lazy to don a wig, and a regular guy.

The moment the man in the women's changing room becomes a certainty, men will start accompanying their daughters and sisters and wives there for safety - after all, they can't be making the other women uncomfortable if there's already a male in there.

It will result in only mixed sex spaces, whether the TRAs want that or not.

Though sometimes I wonder if it perhaps was the plan all along to drive women out of the public sphere. Women voting and being voted into offices meant that even a Musliim patriarch couldn't just beat up his wife with impunity, there was the theoretical possibility that he would be punished for it, because laws were made to protect all women, including women who weren't allowed to leave their private home.

TIMs clearly want all laws that protect women abolished. And that will be easier once women can't participate in politics anymore.

They want to push women back into the home, notice how its always about women, its the same old opposition, its interesting to note the first public toilet in London was by the Thames in the 14th century to get washed out by the tide and featured over 100 stalls split between women and men, but at some point later down the line we suddenly were not allowed public bogs and had to start fighting for them in the 1850s, its always the same like the tides, women fight for things or people with their heads screwed on right give us things, and then the incels moan and try to take them away to push us back under their control.

this time they are banking on female nature to exclude ourselves quietly from places we feel unsafe, that way they can blame us for it and say its all our own fault

They don't want to end single-sex spaces, they want to end WOMEN'S spaces. Men's bathrooms are fine and dandy with them.

See also how often we have formerly "men's and women's" restroom pairs turned into "men's and unisex."

[–] no- 7 points

They also want to make it illegal for women to speak out about it and congregate without men in any capacity.

[–] Chronicity 7 points Edited

I don’t know if that’s their intent but its certainly the logical destination of their demands.

I figured this out when reading Title IX’s proposed rule for redefining sex to include gender identity. Right now, single-sex spaces are permissible for select purposes (like restrooms, sports, etc), but they are not required. The guiding principle for sports is that if there are sports for boys, then girls are entitled to sports too. This principle could be met, in theory, if a school just decided to make all sports co-ed and scrap girl teams altogether.

Under the proposal, schools will have to accommodate all gender identities, including any non-binary identity that an imaginative kid could dream up. The language in the proposed rule makes clear that if there isn’t a program or provision that is consistent with a person’s gender identity, then this is impermissible discrimination. So a school could find itself sued by catgender students if the school provides boy sports and girls sports but not a catgender division. Same with restrooms, locker rooms, etc.

Why would a school take on that litigation risk when it could just do away with all single-sex programs and still be compliant with Title IX? Just make everything sex neutral and the catgender edge lords can no longer cry discrimination. This is where we are headed if this rule is finalized.

[–] hmimperialtortie AGP = evil 11 points

Yes. They want women available for them to rape whenever and wherever they want.

It will have the opposite effect… we will be confined back to the home. So they will only get to rape the ones that belong to them

Yes, particularly women in religions that mandate single-sex spaces. They were just getting a taste of freedom in many western countries, mixing with the rest of us in gyms, single-sexed swimming pools, and mother's groups, broadening their lives and hope. They will be relegated back indoors, invisible, isolated, and away from any outside support.

I am inclined to wonder if ONLY such women will be allowed to have single sex spaces, in an effort to "nudge" westerners towards [at least feigning ] conversion to a religion that might be more in mind with what our rulers would like to see in the west.

Load more (2 comments)