You are showing your misogyny. I support your right to trans-only spaces. In fact, I’d go so far as to do what the Quakers did for the Black Panthers during the civil rights movement in the US. The Quakers and the Black Panthers had diametrically opposing politics (like radical feminists and trans activists) but when the Panthers wanted to meet and needed a safe space to do it, the Quakers would form a circle around them, holding hands, to prevent white supremacists from invading their space. Why can’t trans women show born women the same courtesy? No one is saying you’re not women, you’re just not female and your experience of womanhood is fundamentally different to mine because of that. Not worse, not better, just different. I would like to stand in solidarity with you but I can’t if your boot is on my neck.
Perhaps if you read Roz Kaveney’s Guardian article about this, you’d learn that the trans opposition to this Conference had nothing to do with cis-only spaces, and everything to do with the presence of Sheila Jeffreys. Anjem Choudary and Fred Phelps have both been banned from speaking publicly in the UK, so why would Jeffreys be any different? Choudary, Jeffreys and Phelps are all hatemongers who speak out against the civil rights of people they don’t like, which is why the 2010 Equality Act is used to stop them spreading their propaganda in the UK.
For the record, there weren’t any trans people who wanted to attend the event anyway, even if they had been allowed.
If you read Sheila Jeffreys, you’d learn that her primary interest is the liberation of women from male oppression. Professor Jeffreys does not propagate hate speech and that is a libellous accusation. To compare her to a holocaust denier and two religious extremists is fucking offensive at best. Anyway, we heard Sheila speak. Twice. So you’re late to the party.
Yes, I realise Jeffreys wishes to overcome male oppression, and I can only commend her on her efforts with it. However, that does not negate the fact that she has propagated hatred and prejudice against bisexuals and trans people, along with making it clear that she thinks of femininity as inferior to masculinity. She said that “the notions of love and human relationship in much bisexual practice are extremely impoverished”, making bisexuals all look like a bunch of sluts. She’s constantly critiquing any legislation protecting trans people - comparing Tony Blair to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for being trans-positive, and she’s trying to get our right to healthcare banned (anyone attempting to strip away the civil liberties of others can be regarded a hatemonger). She also theorises that femininity “is the behaviour required of the subordinate class of women in order to show their deference to the ruling class of men”. I don’t think it’s libel to claim that this is a highly prejudiced woman.
Ohhhh, you think gender is “natural”. It’s not hate speech to disagree with that claim.
Now you’re derailing. I have never claimed that it’s hateful to disagree that gender is natural.