bxgebbare

When 'trans rights' are demanded by these activists, typically it's because they want self-proclaimed 'gender identity' to override sex in every circumstance.

This is particularly harmful to women who need female-only spaces away from any males. Any man who calls himself a woman would be able to enter any space designated solely for women, with impunity.

This has already happened in many places that have acceded to 'trans rights' activist demands. It is a political and ideological assault on women's boundaries and consent.

What do you consider 'trans rights' to be?

From what I've encountered, the main principle of this activism seems to be around reorganising society by 'gender identity' in place of sex, and redefining language to further this aim. I'd be interested to hear your perspective on this.

Thanks for the clarification. By that, do you mean that you have no issue with the exclusion of 'trans women' (i.e. men who identify as women) from female-only spaces?

The trans rights are human rights slogan is typically used as a euphemism for removing all single-sex spaces and services, instead dividing them by self-proclaimed 'gender identity'.

This is particularly harsh on women who need female-only spaces away from any males.

For example, prisons are sex-segregated to prevent male predation on women. In some places, because of 'trans rights' activism, the authorities have incarcerated men who call themselves women in the female prison estate, and some of these men have sexually assaulted, raped and even impregnated women prisoners who were trapped there with them.

So you will find a lot of radical feminists and gender-critical feminists disagreeing with this slogan on that basis. And many other people too, when they learn about how women are being harmed by this.

Gender-critical feminists, who disagree with the practical application of 'trans rights' which is to erase all female-only spaces and language.

Could you explain why you disagree with the content of this article?