Untitled

[shejustsaidit]

Airbnb is funding apartheid and pretending it’s tourism

I’ve recently been targeted by adverts of Israeli properties on Airbnb and I found it absolutely appalling. Not just because of the location but because these ads don’t mention anywhere that these homes are in illegally occupied Palestinian territories. No disclaimer, no context, nothing. Just beaches, sunsets and fake normality.

So I did more research. And what I found made me sick.

Airbnb is listing and profiting from properties built on stolen land. Homes in illegal settlements in areas where Palestinians have been forcibly removed. These aren’t just “complicated political zones” they are war crimes. According to international law these settlements are illegal. According to basic human decency they are a disgrace.

Amnesty International called Airbnb “deeply compromised”. Human Rights Watch published a whole report showing how Airbnb helps whitewash apartheid by turning land theft into “holiday destinations”. Even the United Nations listed Airbnb as one of the companies complicit in the Israeli occupation. And the Guardian recently exposed that Airbnb still lists hundreds of properties in these settlements some of which are illegal even under Israeli law.

What’s more disgusting is that Airbnb knew this. They tried to act like they cared back in 2018 and announced they would remove these listings. Then they quietly reversed the decision after lawsuits and pressure from pro-Israel lobbies. They don’t care about justice. They care about profit.

This isn’t a tourism issue. It’s a human rights issue. It’s about corporate complicity in apartheid displacement and land theft.

I don’t want a holiday rental that comes with the blood of occupation. And I don’t want to give a single cent to a company that sanitises genocide into a beachfront experience.

Boycott Airbnb. Share this. Don’t look away.

[margeryofkelpe]

Socialization has outliers it's literally theory if you claim 100% coverage you're lying. Plus factually trans folks are the highest population of open outliers. You can hate it all you want but if Gender critical socialization theory holds, there wouldn't be trans folks, nor would anyone oppose gender roles and stereotypes. This is really basic stuff, so yeah you're just an invested bigot.

I would say that trans people exist in the sense that there are those with sex based dysphoria who are incredibly uncomfortable with their bodies and seek treatment for that in various ways, one of which is surgery and hormones. Unfortunately due to the patriarchy people have either observed this phenomenon and think their lack of identifying with made up gender stereotypes means they’re trans and also need this treatment, or pretend to have the mental illness of sex dysphoria in order to fulfil other perversions.

So in a society without socialisation yes there would probably be a small number of ‘trans’ people who suffer with dysphoria, but not nearly the amount that claim it today. People wouldn’t have to label themselves as trans in order to be gender non conforming, because the arbitrary rules of gender wouldn’t exist.

Sure there are outliers to socialisation but by and large males are raised under the patriarchy to be more aggressive, confidant, entitled, and dominant, whereas females are by and large raised by the world around them to be submissive. This is what socialisation theory refers to. Even a confident woman still often wears makeup and performs more housework because of socialisation. Even a kind man can be inadvertently entitled due to socialisation. Socialisation and patriarchy go hand in hand; you can’t acknowledge the existence of patriarchy without acknowledging it requires a fundamental implementation based on immutable characteristics. Otherwise you’re saying women naturally are submissive and should be treated as inferior.

If believing that trans women retain character traits from being raised male makes me a bigot then I really question what a bigot is at this point. I care deeply about the safety of all female people. Males wearing dresses and choosing to subvert masculinity doesn’t threaten me at all as long as it’s genuine and not mean spirited, but the belief that this makes these males the same as me and entitles them to my sex’s private and personal space (which are private for a reason) is where I have an issue.

In an ideal world where ‘gender’ wasn’t a thing we could all be equals and shower in a big mixed sex bathroom together. But as long as males commit more rapes and more violence I’m going to keep being a bigot, thanks.

[shejustsaidit]

The backlash is here, and it’s only just begun

For years we were told to stay quiet. To be kind. To let ourselves be redefined by people who don’t know what it’s like to live as a woman from birth. We were told that biology is bigotry, that boundaries are exclusion, that recognising material reality is hate speech.

We were gaslit into thinking that saying “women are adult human females” was somehow controversial. That wanting single sex spaces made us violent. That acknowledging the differences between male and female bodies made us fascists. All while actual women were being shouted down, threatened, and blacklisted for saying the most basic truths.

But guess what. People are done pretending. The backlash is here and it’s spreading like wildfire.

In the UK, self ID laws are being rolled back. In Europe, feminists are reclaiming their language and holding their ground. Courts are beginning to recognise that feelings don’t override facts. Female athletes, prisoners, rape survivors, lesbians, and young girls are speaking up, louder than ever. And they’re not apologising for it anymore.

And the best part? You can see how badly they are losing it. The tantrums, the threats, the incoherent screaming online. Every time someone utters a basic truth like “only women give birth” or “men have physical advantages,” they spiral into a meltdown. If your ideology shatters with one sentence, maybe it was never built on anything solid. The louder they yell, the more obvious it is they know they’re losing control.

This isn’t a fringe reaction. This is a wave. And it’s not about hate. It’s about drawing the line. It’s about saying no, you don’t get to colonise womanhood. You don’t get to dismantle decades of feminist progress in the name of a gender identity that changes based on mood and makeup. You don’t get to silence women forever.

The attempt to erase sex was always doomed to fail. Because sex is not a costume. Woman is not a feeling. And reality doesn’t care how many times you scream transphobe. When the consequences start landing on real people, real bodies, and real lives, the spell breaks. And that’s exactly what is happening.

So keep mocking us. Keep calling us dinosaurs or bigots or whatever your script tells you. It doesn’t change the truth. It only makes you look more desperate.

Women are waking up. Mothers, sisters, lesbians, teachers, midwives, athletes, survivors. We are no longer alone and we are no longer scared. You called it a backlash. Fine. Then brace yourselves. Because you lit the match. We are just the fire that followed.

[shejustsaidit]

Not a Trump supporter but this one thing makes sense

I don’t usually align with Trump’s politics, not even remotely. But I think his decision to exclude people with gender dysphoria from military service deserves more honest reflection than just outrage.

Let’s stop pretending this is only about inclusion. War, like prison, is a deeply male-coded, high-stress environment. Trans-identified males, born male, often default to male socialisation in these settings. That’s not hate, that’s observation. Social conditioning matters. It shows in behaviour, dominance, and the way space is taken up.

Trans-identified females, born female, are not safe in male-dominated spaces like the army. They carry the same risks any woman would in that environment. Sex matters. Ignoring it in a setting like war is not progressive, it’s irresponsible.

This isn’t about rejecting people with dysphoria. It’s about recognising what they bring into spaces where safety is already fragile. It’s about asking why women are always expected to give up safety in order to accommodate someone else’s sense of identity.

Maybe this policy will finally push us to look at sex-based boundaries with clarity. Not just in theory, but in law, in policy, and in real life.

[redditreceipts]

People who think creating more genders will somehow abolish gendered oppression are like those crypto bros who believe making more currencies will take down the monopoly on money. It’s not just delusional—it completely misses the point. Both gender and money rely on systems of authority to exist in the first place: the patriarchy enforcing gender roles, and the state enforcing currency through central banks. A new gender without patriarchy is just a word. A new currency without state power is just a pyramid scheme.

[taramaclaywasaterf]

Alrighty, I’ve finally got the time to sit down for the first time today, so its time to compile a nice little list of receipts:

*Trans”woman” doctor who drugged and raped his patients *Trans”woman” who had over 80,000 “indecent” images of children

*Trans”woman” who raped a female inmate while incarcerated and had it covered up by the authorities *I can’t even begin to summarize this shit, its that bad

*Trans”woman” pedophile attacking a young girl in the women’s bathroom

*Trans”woman” literally beat a baby to death, article makes no mentions he’s actually a man

*Trans”woman” who sexually assaulted his own daughter when she was THREE YEARS OLD, now gets to go to female prison

*Man who tied a couple to an anchor and dropped them into the ocean now a “woman”

*Trans”woman” who molested multiple women insists he shouldn’t get charged because he’s just soooo dysphoric

*Trans”woman” the size of a monster truck rapes a woman hired to take care of him, article doesn’t even bother to mention the fact that he’s actually a man

*Yet another pedophile

*Again, can’t even summarize this one

*And another pedophile

*Oh, guess what… yet another pedophile

*Trans”woman” who claims the reason he’s a rapist is because of his dysphoria, so we should all, like, totally feel bad for him,,,

*To the surprise of no one, yet another pedophile

*Yet another pedophile

*And another

*Trans”woman” who raped two women outside of prison, moved to female prison, where he proceeds to rape the female inmates Want more? Just go to r/thisneverhappens on Reddit. Here, I’ll even make it easy for ya!: https://www.reddit.com/r/thisneverhappens/

There’s literally hundreds of links to sources of violent MEN- excuse me, trans”women” (and, hey! even a few trans”men” too!)- who have raped, assaulted, stalked, tortured, or murdered people. Its all right there at your fingertips. Many of these men are pedophiles. Many of them are now currently being transferred to female prisons. The ones that are already in female prisons are currently raping the vulnerable women- overwhelmingly women of color due to systemic, institutionalized racism- incarcerated with them. Again, keep in mind that this is literally the tip of the iceberg. This isn’t even .01% of all the violent men who call themselves women who are being moved into female prisons. Moving on. Here’s a fun link! It’s of you freaks attacking women for daring to attend a women’s only speech!: https://www.womenarehuman.com/police-do-nothing-as-rowdy-transgender-activists-terrorize-attendees-scream-kick-windows-at-womans-place-uk-meeting/ Or maybe some other relevant links, hmm?

*Woman of color fired from position as president of Planned Parenthood for believing in biological sex. She gets replaced by a white trans”woman”

*An article about the white man who replaced her as the president of Planned Parenthood

*This ones about women in a homeless shelter being forced to shower with a trans”woman” who continuously sexually harasses them

*Here’s one about two women- survivors of domestic violence- being kicked out of a homeless shelter for daring to be concerned about the behavior of the trans”woman” they were forced to share a room with

*A breastfeeding mother was arrested in front of her young children and detained for hours without access to feminine hygiene products, all because she “misgendered” a trans”woman” online

*This is a great writeup summarizing several different cases of trans”women” being fucking awful, to put it mildly

*A man was investigated by the police for retweeting a limerick about transgenderism

*A young mother was thrown out of a bar and has since been harassed by the owners, all because she wore a shirt that stated the dictionary definition of “woman”

*Woman of color was fired from her job because she wouldn’t call an entirely gender-conforming white man a “woman” (This is an older article but it’s the only one I had on my phone- she ended up losing her case in court. This is the woman that JK Rowling tweeted out her support to, in case she sounded familiar)

*Trans”woman” who binds his feet to be more “feminine”, appropriating the sex-based oppression Chinese women faced with foot binding

*A bomb threat called into a Woman’s Place meeting

*A teenage boy with Asperger’s has been arrested and fined for “misgendering” a trans”man” cop

*Another article about the boy with Asperger’s

*Trans”woman” elementary school teacher demanding to have access to his female STUDENT’S bathroom. He already has full access to the female staff’s bathroom. Now he wants in with the little girls, too. Mind you, NO staff is allowed into the students’ bathrooms

*Documented pedophile Johnathan “Jessica” Yaniv is back at his misogynistic, racist bullshit once again

*Trans people are less likely to get murdered than the average person, and trans victims who are murdered are actually predominantly killed in domestic disputes, meaning they are rarely the victims of hate crimes These two are about the same event, where a feminist speaker was attacked by a trans”woman”:

*A great writeup filled with other sources

*This one goes into the trans cult’s reaction to the attack, which was, unsurprisingly, horrendous _________________

These are a few tumblr posts about TIM predators and other various trans bullshit, which provide additional sources in their posts. Actually read the posts, and click the sources: *Here’s a link to a post about another prominent TRA whose a child molester

*Just a quick one about how trans”women” love to portray themselves as the victims, even when it couldn’t be further from the truth (again, sources provided in the post)

*This is an excellent post (containing links to sources that back it up) about how homosexuality is viewed across the globe, vs. how transgenderism is viewed

*Excellent writeup with sources about a trans”woman” lies and blatant smear campaign against academics

*This is a link to screenshots from the rape victims of trans”woman” and very prominent “trans rights activist” Eli Erlrick

*And this is a wordpress linking multiple, in-detail, accusations against Eli Erlrick

*Gag-worthy post full of god knows how many screenshots of countless trans”women” shown fetishizing little girls, being misogynistic, being lesbophobic, and being all around vile, disturbing, predatory, male freaks

*Just…ugh. Video of some trans bullshit at a Pride event, with a comment by someone who was actually there

*Screenshots of a discord for trans”women” where they openly talk about their vile rape fantasies

*Post with multiple links talking about a French radical feminist who denounced the misogyny of the trans cult, only for them to put up a banner (in reference to other French protests) that said “TERFs burn at the stake”

*Post with sources, screenshots, and translations, about a white trans”woman” who got a lesbian only event shut down at a lesbian bar in Tokyo

*An amazing post about how trans activism has severely harmed intersex people, and how it is the exact opposite of everything intersex activists have been working for

*This has a bunch of screenshots and links to a Black woman getting ripped to shreds by the trans cult, all because she dared to make art about her own female body

*Here’s a fun post that documents all the crimes that GameStop He-Ma’am from a while ago has committed before he decided he’s a laydee. Remember him? He’s the guy who screamed at a GameStop, frothing at the mouth like a rabid dog, all because the poor cashier accidently called him “sir”?

*And here’s the video of the GameStop bro to refresh your memory

____________________________

Now for some videos!

Trans activists assault woman:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_d3ozhSE-U

Different video about the same assault above:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uL26jtQXSJw

Trans activists shut down speech and interrupt moment of silence for the Pulse shooting victims:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Wc6-HikFz4

Trans”woman” whose a known sexual predator, interrupts Rose McGowen’s speech, while Rose was speaking about her own experiences with rape in the movie industry:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tW4X_IYDsJc

Trans”woman” attacks radical feminists in Argentina:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tsW0KxX92o

Here is a post that goes into more detail about what happens and translates a bit of what’s being said in the video above. It also provides screenshots from the woman who were there.

Trans”woman” attacks young Black girl:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0svl_5dFUOM

Trans activists harass women at the launch of the launch of the Vancouver Women’s Library:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJ4sbNVkJnM

Trans activists setting off a smoke bomb in a London office building:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLrqP7RavlU

Trans activists harassing lesbian feminist at Dyke March:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nblXa665laY

Trans”woman” spits in man’s face, says “go ahead, punch a woman”:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrJiIDP8Bhk

 _______________________

Is all that not enough for you?

What about Cherno Biko, a trans”woman” and trans activist who raped a transman with the deliberate intent of impregnating her, and still got to speak at the Women’s March on Washington AFTER that information was made public.

What about Allison Woolbert, the director of a transgender human rights organization, and convicted pedophile

What about The Cotton Ceiling, a movement created by trans”women” that paints lesbians’ underwear as a bigoted barrier that needs to be broken through

What about trans”woman” Dana McCallum, twitter engineer, who raped his wife

What about trans”woman” Donna Perry, a serial killer who murdered women because he thought they weren’t “using their uteruses properly by being prostitutes”, and claimed that he was innocent now that he’s transition to a “woman”

What about Chad Severance Turner, prominent trans activist and pedophile

What about Dana Rivers, a trans”woman” and Camp Trans activist, who beat an interracial lesbian couple and their son to death because they turned him down

_________________________

Here’s some lovely screenshots of trans activists nailing dead rats and spray painting death threats on the doors and windows of a Vancouver Rape Relief women’s shelter! Also screenshots of a Black woman being told by Canadian politician trans”woman”, Morgane Ogre, that talking about her being a victim of female genital mutilation is Evil™️ because it hurts trans”women’s” feelings, some lovely misogynistic lynchings of “TERFs”, a trans”woman” bragging about his (male) privilege, and more! I’m sure you still think this is all totally warranted behavior, right???

Is THAT good enough for you? Now do you understand why it is radical feminists want nothing to do with you monsters? Trans activism is nothing but the newest manifestation of the patriarchy. It’s men’s rights activism in a wig. And at this point, anyone who sees all the shit they’ve done and all the shit they’re doing, and still supports them, is just as fucking bad as they are. And remember, this barely touched on the lesbophobia (and homophobia in general) that runs rampant under the guise of trans “activism.” This doesn’t even go into the fact that trans”women” starting to take the very few places in businesses and governments reserved strictly for women, or them rolling back hard earned rights the suffragettes fought tooth and nail for. This doesn’t even touch on the fact that young girls and women are now losing out on desperately needed sports scholarships to universities, losing hard earned and long standing titles, all because trans”women” are taking over real women’s sports. If I were to go into all that, this post would be 10x as long as it is now, and the 35 minutes I’ve spent on this is too much as it is. So please. Tell me again how this sort of stuff “never happens” and how radfems are “just as violent”.

@the-snake-method

[feralrad-deactivated20200517]

This is awful

[femalebrain]

WAKE UP!!

[shejustsaidit]

Stop judging women for how they engage with beauty

It’s so easy to judge women for getting fillers, Botox, surgery, for wearing makeup or spending time and money on their appearance. But most women, especially in certain cultures, grow up thinking that beauty is their responsibility. It’s not about choice. It’s about survival. You’re raised with the idea that being beautiful makes you valuable, respectable, desirable, hireable. That your face is your currency. And then you’re mocked or belittled for wanting to improve it.

We are constantly told to look young but act mature, be attractive but not attention-seeking, glow naturally but never show effort. And then we’re supposed to pretend this obsession with beauty is our fault, as if it wasn’t drilled into us from the beginning.

People say “but men don’t do that.” Now they don’t, but that wasn’t always true. Men used to wear makeup, wigs, perfume, and elaborate embroidery. Look at Versailles. Nobles powdered their faces, rouged their cheeks, curled their hair, and wore heels. In 17th and 18th century France, status and power were displayed through appearance. Similar practices existed in Persia, in imperial China, in Georgian England. They used beauty as a tool for class performance, not to mimic femininity.

The point wasn’t to be like women. In fact, they worked hard to make it clear that what they were doing was not womanly. Being adorned didn’t threaten their manhood. They weren’t feminised by it, because beauty wasn’t seen as something that belonged to women alone. It was about class, not sex.

So what changed? Why now is beauty a prison for women and a joke for men? Why is being feminine mocked and punished while women are still expected to perform it?

That’s what patriarchy does. It strips something of its power and then uses it to oppress the group associated with it. Femininity becomes both mandatory and ridiculed. You’re punished if you don’t play the game and punished if you play it too well.

So no, I won’t judge a woman for trying to survive this mess. I’ll judge the system that put her there.

[reflejadoss]

I know drag queens are supposed to be in good fun and all but the mockery exhibited by them is actually disgusting. Posing as a stereotypical Russian hooker? It’s literally just a mockery of women who are being trafficked in foreign countries. People forget that Gay men can be just as misogynistic as straight men and it’s a huge issue.

[realist-fortheloveofwomen]

On my way to tell gendies this is misogyny, woman is not makeup and nails and lashes. It’s not “gender affirming care” it’s women being told all their lives they are ugly and their only worth is beauty, be so fr, it doesn’t affirm that they are women, they KNOW they’re women that’s why they feel they MUST wear it’ because they are being oppressed and pressured into fucking beauty standards!

Makeup actually isn’t something super fun n silly like it is for males! Women actually have deep and meaningful relationships with things that oppress them, like MAKEUP!

I think this is perfectly emblematic of what’s wrong with left and right wing in regards to women. Right wing takes the stereotypical misogyny approach- ie, woman are mothers, must be feminine, shave, wear makeup. Left wing changes it up but still says misogynistic - woman is when feminine feeling, ‘women’s’ clothes, makeup, these thing empower women and there’s nothing wrong with wanting to look SNATCHED!!

Like neither side acknowledges WHY women do this and are pressured into it, neither side is neutral about it- both agree that makeup is for women, just disagree on what defines a “woman”

[shejustsaidit]

If Your Politics Require Lying, You’re in a Cult, Not a Movement

I’m not afraid of disagreement. I’m afraid of people who can’t tell the difference between a conversation and a witch trial. When “you made me feel unsafe” is used to shut down facts, that’s not safety. That’s emotional blackmail in a progressive costume.

[shejustsaidit]

Self-expression, biological sex, and the cost of shutting down conversation:

I believe in freedom of self-expression. Deeply. The more people feel free to express themselves fully, the more joy and creativity we’ll see in this world.

That’s why I want to say this clearly: acknowledging the difference between biological sex and gender doesn’t contradict the value of self-expression, it reinforces it.

Biological sex is real. It’s not a feeling or a vibe. There are two: male and female, determined by chromosomes (XX and XY). These biological markers give rise to different physical traits. Whether we like it or not, some of these traits make one sex more physically dominant, and that has real-world consequences, especially for safety.

Now, gender is something else entirely. It’s the set of roles and behaviours society has historically assigned to people based on their sex. But being a woman doesn’t mean liking pink or having long hair. And being a man doesn’t mean you can’t express softness, sensitivity, or creativity.

So when a boy realises he loves wearing pink, growing his hair, and dancing in glitter, why should we jump to the idea that he was “born in the wrong body”? He wasn’t. His biological sex doesn’t limit his ability to express himself. He can be fully himself as a boy. Expression should be free, not boxed into stereotypes that demand a new gender label every time someone steps outside them.

In the UK today, if someone wants to be referred to by a different gender, they can do so without needing medical or legal approval. That’s their right in a free society. If it makes people feel happier and more aligned with themselves, I don’t believe it’s anyone’s place to stop them. Live your life. Be who you are. No one should feel shame or rejection for that.

But here’s the line we need to draw: the law.

When legal rights, safety, and services start referring to gender instead of biological sex, we step into dangerous territory, especially for women. You cannot identify into a sex class that has been oppressed, violated, and silenced for centuries, and expect to instantly access the same protections, services, and safe spaces.

85 percent of women aged 18 to 24 in the UK report having experienced sexual harassment (ONS, 2021). This is not about feelings, it’s about structural vulnerability. Women, as a biological sex, are at greater risk. And biological sex-based spaces like refuges, hospital wards, and changing rooms exist to protect that vulnerable class. They matter for safety and for mental wellbeing.

To those who say “trans women aren’t a threat to women,” I ask: how do you make women feel safe? Telling women they’re irrational for feeling unsafe is just another way men have historically told women how to feel.

And to those pointing out that trans people are a small minority, around 0.5 to 0.75 percent of the UK population, I say this: women are more than half. Women’s rights are not a side note in the pursuit of inclusion.

I recognise that making clear distinctions between gender and biological sex might feel threatening to some trans people. That’s not my intention. But we need to be able to talk openly, respectfully, seriously. Right now, many women are afraid to speak for fear of being called bigots. That’s not progress. That’s suppression.

In the name of inclusion, we’re forgetting common sense.

So let’s talk. Let’s listen. Let’s stop shouting and start rebuilding clarity, because this isn’t about hate. It’s about boundaries, safety, and truth, and how we protect everyone without erasing women in the process.

[spoonbread5]

GC radfem is the SOLE version of feminism that openly, publicly seeks to revoke and remove minority status across multiple nations. No other form of feminism or 2nd wave needs this and again daily.

OP is trying a soft sell on this.

[shejustsaidit]

Interesting take, but no I’m not “soft selling” anything. I’m just not shouting in all caps and calling people names, which seems to confuse some folks these days.

Pointing out that biological sex exists and has legal and safety implications isn’t a plot to “revoke minority status.” It’s just… reality. That’s not oppression, it’s clarity. And if your version of feminism can’t handle open conversations without accusing everyone of being a bigot in disguise, maybe it’s not as inclusive as you think.

Not everything that challenges your worldview is a threat. Sometimes it’s just someone thinking critically in public.

[spoonbread5]

No you're a literal threat to any trans of LGBT+ persons rights.

You soft sold discrimination in your OP.

GC radfem is right wing.

As shown by your platformers and public allies and this OP.

[shortopinions]

At this point they all sound like paranoid schizophrenics ranting about how anyone who believes in sex and sex based violence is “out to get them”

[spoonbread5]

Not a bit.

OP shared a GC radfem hate post from a serial abuser for here stating Minorities have to ask nicely and politely for their needs.

It's not even far a scroll in her feed, no tags, no comments just a boost.

Not even her shittiest take.

GC radfem in everyday public IRL time calls in every public GC radfem forum the public removal of existing minority status across multiple nations.

Only GC radfem does this, 2nd wavers don't do this.

[shortopinions]

Nobody is threatening you by acknowledging biological reality.

[spoonbread5]

Me no, I'm Cis.

But...All still facts, you can check them at anytime.

GC radfem are 2nd wave Larpers half of them mad because 2nd wave active scholars aren't on board.

Near none have any theory, schooling just regurgitated GC bigot points and white power and other right wing factors from allies to popular conspiracies.

Also GC argues with biologists, medical professionals as well as historians and archeologists in embarrassing levels.

[shortopinions]

So your response to sex is real is to just call everyone white supremacists and pseudo science deniers 👌 okay.

Two spirits isn’t proof of gender.

Intersex doesn’t prove gender ideology.

Gender isn’t even proof of genders.

(Also kind of weird how the people who say “gender is social construct” are the same ones trying to force us to participate in gender ideology.)

We’ve seen all your evidence before, all it proves is that there are people in history that believed they were a different gender. That’s fine, believe what you want.

There’s also people throughout history that believed in god/s. We can prove that through archeology, history and biology too, but the existence of people believing in god doesn’t make god real.

[spoonbread5]

Sex based protections aren't the argument as I and the other folks you accused of that today has never said.

In fact we're both clear.

As is the fact the LITERALLY LARGEST radfem GC organization on EARTH is allied to the Heritage Foundation, the Alliance Defending Freedom and since b4 his 1rst term, through it, through Roe and into now.

WoLF has international membership and is publicly allied to every known GC group.

All checkable from their website.

Every modern medical health care system in the world has the same medical eval of trans people save those with your side literal hard fascist governments and entrenched Oiligarchy like the UK.

Not even counting the literal presence of white power fascists at your rallies.

Again no other school of feminism does this, need to do this including second wavers.

Again literal OG radfems.

Not you.

[shejustsaidit]

Thanks @shortopinions for bringing clarity and saying it with some actual wit.

As for you, @spoonbread5 , you’ve now called me a fascist, a bigot, and a threat to humanity all because I suggested we protect women based on biological sex and keep public debate open. Not exactly revolutionary.

You haven’t engaged with a single point I made. You didn’t challenge the data. You didn’t counter the argument. You just threw a tantrum in paragraph form.

You even messaged me in private, which I declined, because I don’t do whisper campaigns—I debate publicly. So here’s your chance. Say something worthy. Bring a real argument. Make a case so strong it might actually change my mind.

But you won’t. You can’t. Because your research starts with memes, ends with vibes, and relies on shouting down any woman who won’t sit quietly.

You’re not fighting fascism. You’re performing it.

[spoonbread5]

I never PM'd you you best screenshoot that.

Memes?

No, my point is what GC radfems does in public.

Who openly platforms you, who your gender critical radfem organizations are allied to.

And definitely yes I see you as a fascist bigot and that's from the content on your account.

Like you reblogging minorities need to be nice and polite for their needs.

Again screenshoot my PMing you it's not hard my name'll be at the top of the chatbox.

Oh wait, you're lying.

[shejustsaidit]

I’m not here to entertain people who lie, delete messages, and then scream “liar” when the memory gets inconvenient. If you can’t maintain a conversation without rewriting your own history, we’re not on the same level.

Also, anyone describing themselves as a “Dickrider” and “Comfort person” in the same breath might want to rethink their brand before accusing others of incoherence.

I’ll wait for an actual argument. You know one with sources that aren’t rage memes and Reddit flair.

[spoonbread5]

I deleted nothing.

I've never described myself as anything to you either?

Honestly baffled by this whatever it is.

[shejustsaidit]

Lol

[shejustsaidit]

Self-expression, biological sex, and the cost of shutting down conversation:

I believe in freedom of self-expression. Deeply. The more people feel free to express themselves fully, the more joy and creativity we’ll see in this world.

That’s why I want to say this clearly: acknowledging the difference between biological sex and gender doesn’t contradict the value of self-expression, it reinforces it.

Biological sex is real. It’s not a feeling or a vibe. There are two: male and female, determined by chromosomes (XX and XY). These biological markers give rise to different physical traits. Whether we like it or not, some of these traits make one sex more physically dominant, and that has real-world consequences, especially for safety.

Now, gender is something else entirely. It’s the set of roles and behaviours society has historically assigned to people based on their sex. But being a woman doesn’t mean liking pink or having long hair. And being a man doesn’t mean you can’t express softness, sensitivity, or creativity.

So when a boy realises he loves wearing pink, growing his hair, and dancing in glitter, why should we jump to the idea that he was “born in the wrong body”? He wasn’t. His biological sex doesn’t limit his ability to express himself. He can be fully himself as a boy. Expression should be free, not boxed into stereotypes that demand a new gender label every time someone steps outside them.

In the UK today, if someone wants to be referred to by a different gender, they can do so without needing medical or legal approval. That’s their right in a free society. If it makes people feel happier and more aligned with themselves, I don’t believe it’s anyone’s place to stop them. Live your life. Be who you are. No one should feel shame or rejection for that.

But here’s the line we need to draw: the law.

When legal rights, safety, and services start referring to gender instead of biological sex, we step into dangerous territory, especially for women. You cannot identify into a sex class that has been oppressed, violated, and silenced for centuries, and expect to instantly access the same protections, services, and safe spaces.

85 percent of women aged 18 to 24 in the UK report having experienced sexual harassment (ONS, 2021). This is not about feelings, it’s about structural vulnerability. Women, as a biological sex, are at greater risk. And biological sex-based spaces like refuges, hospital wards, and changing rooms exist to protect that vulnerable class. They matter for safety and for mental wellbeing.

To those who say “trans women aren’t a threat to women,” I ask: how do you make women feel safe? Telling women they’re irrational for feeling unsafe is just another way men have historically told women how to feel.

And to those pointing out that trans people are a small minority, around 0.5 to 0.75 percent of the UK population, I say this: women are more than half. Women’s rights are not a side note in the pursuit of inclusion.

I recognise that making clear distinctions between gender and biological sex might feel threatening to some trans people. That’s not my intention. But we need to be able to talk openly, respectfully, seriously. Right now, many women are afraid to speak for fear of being called bigots. That’s not progress. That’s suppression.

In the name of inclusion, we’re forgetting common sense.

So let’s talk. Let’s listen. Let’s stop shouting and start rebuilding clarity, because this isn’t about hate. It’s about boundaries, safety, and truth, and how we protect everyone without erasing women in the process.

[spoonbread5]

GC radfem is the SOLE version of feminism that openly, publicly seeks to revoke and remove minority status across multiple nations. No other form of feminism or 2nd wave needs this and again daily.

OP is trying a soft sell on this.

[shejustsaidit]

Interesting take, but no I’m not “soft selling” anything. I’m just not shouting in all caps and calling people names, which seems to confuse some folks these days.

Pointing out that biological sex exists and has legal and safety implications isn’t a plot to “revoke minority status.” It’s just… reality. That’s not oppression, it’s clarity. And if your version of feminism can’t handle open conversations without accusing everyone of being a bigot in disguise, maybe it’s not as inclusive as you think.

Not everything that challenges your worldview is a threat. Sometimes it’s just someone thinking critically in public.

[spoonbread5]

No you're a literal threat to any trans of LGBT+ persons rights.

You soft sold discrimination in your OP.

GC radfem is right wing.

As shown by your platformers and public allies and this OP.

[shortopinions]

At this point they all sound like paranoid schizophrenics ranting about how anyone who believes in sex and sex based violence is “out to get them”

[spoonbread5]

Not a bit.

OP shared a GC radfem hate post from a serial abuser for here stating Minorities have to ask nicely and politely for their needs.

It's not even far a scroll in her feed, no tags, no comments just a boost.

Not even her shittiest take.

GC radfem in everyday public IRL time calls in every public GC radfem forum the public removal of existing minority status across multiple nations.

Only GC radfem does this, 2nd wavers don't do this.

[shortopinions]

Nobody is threatening you by acknowledging biological reality.

[spoonbread5]

Me no, I'm Cis.

But...All still facts, you can check them at anytime.

GC radfem are 2nd wave Larpers half of them mad because 2nd wave active scholars aren't on board.

Near none have any theory, schooling just regurgitated GC bigot points and white power and other right wing factors from allies to popular conspiracies.

Also GC argues with biologists, medical professionals as well as historians and archeologists in embarrassing levels.

[shortopinions]

So your response to sex is real is to just call everyone white supremacists and pseudo science deniers 👌 okay.

Two spirits isn’t proof of gender.

Intersex doesn’t prove gender ideology.

Gender isn’t even proof of genders.

(Also kind of weird how the people who say “gender is social construct” are the same ones trying to force us to participate in gender ideology.)

We’ve seen all your evidence before, all it proves is that there are people in history that believed they were a different gender. That’s fine, believe what you want.

There’s also people throughout history that believed in god/s. We can prove that through archeology, history and biology too, but the existence of people believing in god doesn’t make god real.

[spoonbread5]

Sex based protections aren't the argument as I and the other folks you accused of that today has never said.

In fact we're both clear.

As is the fact the LITERALLY LARGEST radfem GC organization on EARTH is allied to the Heritage Foundation, the Alliance Defending Freedom and since b4 his 1rst term, through it, through Roe and into now.

WoLF has international membership and is publicly allied to every known GC group.

All checkable from their website.

Every modern medical health care system in the world has the same medical eval of trans people save those with your side literal hard fascist governments and entrenched Oiligarchy like the UK.

Not even counting the literal presence of white power fascists at your rallies.

Again no other school of feminism does this, need to do this including second wavers.

Again literal OG radfems.

Not you.

[shejustsaidit]

Thanks @shortopinions for bringing clarity and saying it with some actual wit.

As for you, @spoonbread5 , you’ve now called me a fascist, a bigot, and a threat to humanity all because I suggested we protect women based on biological sex and keep public debate open. Not exactly revolutionary.

You haven’t engaged with a single point I made. You didn’t challenge the data. You didn’t counter the argument. You just threw a tantrum in paragraph form.

You even messaged me in private, which I declined, because I don’t do whisper campaigns—I debate publicly. So here’s your chance. Say something worthy. Bring a real argument. Make a case so strong it might actually change my mind.

But you won’t. You can’t. Because your research starts with memes, ends with vibes, and relies on shouting down any woman who won’t sit quietly.

You’re not fighting fascism. You’re performing it.

[spoonbread5]

I never PM'd you you best screenshoot that.

Memes?

No, my point is what GC radfems does in public.

Who openly platforms you, who your gender critical radfem organizations are allied to.

And definitely yes I see you as a fascist bigot and that's from the content on your account.

Like you reblogging minorities need to be nice and polite for their needs.

Again screenshoot my PMing you it's not hard my name'll be at the top of the chatbox.

Oh wait, you're lying.

[shejustsaidit]

I’m not here to entertain people who lie, delete messages, and then scream “liar” when the memory gets inconvenient. If you can’t maintain a conversation without rewriting your own history, we’re not on the same level.

Also, anyone describing themselves as a “Dickrider” and “Comfort person” in the same breath might want to rethink their brand before accusing others of incoherence.

I’ll wait for an actual argument. You know one with sources that aren’t rage memes and Reddit flair.

[shejustsaidit]

Self-expression, biological sex, and the cost of shutting down conversation:

I believe in freedom of self-expression. Deeply. The more people feel free to express themselves fully, the more joy and creativity we’ll see in this world.

That’s why I want to say this clearly: acknowledging the difference between biological sex and gender doesn’t contradict the value of self-expression, it reinforces it.

Biological sex is real. It’s not a feeling or a vibe. There are two: male and female, determined by chromosomes (XX and XY). These biological markers give rise to different physical traits. Whether we like it or not, some of these traits make one sex more physically dominant, and that has real-world consequences, especially for safety.

Now, gender is something else entirely. It’s the set of roles and behaviours society has historically assigned to people based on their sex. But being a woman doesn’t mean liking pink or having long hair. And being a man doesn’t mean you can’t express softness, sensitivity, or creativity.

So when a boy realises he loves wearing pink, growing his hair, and dancing in glitter, why should we jump to the idea that he was “born in the wrong body”? He wasn’t. His biological sex doesn’t limit his ability to express himself. He can be fully himself as a boy. Expression should be free, not boxed into stereotypes that demand a new gender label every time someone steps outside them.

In the UK today, if someone wants to be referred to by a different gender, they can do so without needing medical or legal approval. That’s their right in a free society. If it makes people feel happier and more aligned with themselves, I don’t believe it’s anyone’s place to stop them. Live your life. Be who you are. No one should feel shame or rejection for that.

But here’s the line we need to draw: the law.

When legal rights, safety, and services start referring to gender instead of biological sex, we step into dangerous territory, especially for women. You cannot identify into a sex class that has been oppressed, violated, and silenced for centuries, and expect to instantly access the same protections, services, and safe spaces.

85 percent of women aged 18 to 24 in the UK report having experienced sexual harassment (ONS, 2021). This is not about feelings, it’s about structural vulnerability. Women, as a biological sex, are at greater risk. And biological sex-based spaces like refuges, hospital wards, and changing rooms exist to protect that vulnerable class. They matter for safety and for mental wellbeing.

To those who say “trans women aren’t a threat to women,” I ask: how do you make women feel safe? Telling women they’re irrational for feeling unsafe is just another way men have historically told women how to feel.

And to those pointing out that trans people are a small minority, around 0.5 to 0.75 percent of the UK population, I say this: women are more than half. Women’s rights are not a side note in the pursuit of inclusion.

I recognise that making clear distinctions between gender and biological sex might feel threatening to some trans people. That’s not my intention. But we need to be able to talk openly, respectfully, seriously. Right now, many women are afraid to speak for fear of being called bigots. That’s not progress. That’s suppression.

In the name of inclusion, we’re forgetting common sense.

So let’s talk. Let’s listen. Let’s stop shouting and start rebuilding clarity, because this isn’t about hate. It’s about boundaries, safety, and truth, and how we protect everyone without erasing women in the process.

[spoonbread5]

GC radfem is the SOLE version of feminism that openly, publicly seeks to revoke and remove minority status across multiple nations. No other form of feminism or 2nd wave needs this and again daily.

OP is trying a soft sell on this.

[shejustsaidit]

Interesting take, but no I’m not “soft selling” anything. I’m just not shouting in all caps and calling people names, which seems to confuse some folks these days.

Pointing out that biological sex exists and has legal and safety implications isn’t a plot to “revoke minority status.” It’s just… reality. That’s not oppression, it’s clarity. And if your version of feminism can’t handle open conversations without accusing everyone of being a bigot in disguise, maybe it’s not as inclusive as you think.

Not everything that challenges your worldview is a threat. Sometimes it’s just someone thinking critically in public.

[spoonbread5]

No you're a literal threat to any trans of LGBT+ persons rights.

You soft sold discrimination in your OP.

GC radfem is right wing.

As shown by your platformers and public allies and this OP.

[shortopinions]

At this point they all sound like paranoid schizophrenics ranting about how anyone who believes in sex and sex based violence is “out to get them”

[spoonbread5]

Not a bit.

OP shared a GC radfem hate post from a serial abuser for here stating Minorities have to ask nicely and politely for their needs.

It's not even far a scroll in her feed, no tags, no comments just a boost.

Not even her shittiest take.

GC radfem in everyday public IRL time calls in every public GC radfem forum the public removal of existing minority status across multiple nations.

Only GC radfem does this, 2nd wavers don't do this.

[shortopinions]

Nobody is threatening you by acknowledging biological reality.

[spoonbread5]

Me no, I'm Cis.

But...All still facts, you can check them at anytime.

GC radfem are 2nd wave Larpers half of them mad because 2nd wave active scholars aren't on board.

Near none have any theory, schooling just regurgitated GC bigot points and white power and other right wing factors from allies to popular conspiracies.

Also GC argues with biologists, medical professionals as well as historians and archeologists in embarrassing levels.

[shortopinions]

So your response to sex is real is to just call everyone white supremacists and pseudo science deniers 👌 okay.

Two spirits isn’t proof of gender.

Intersex doesn’t prove gender ideology.

Gender isn’t even proof of genders.

(Also kind of weird how the people who say “gender is social construct” are the same ones trying to force us to participate in gender ideology.)

We’ve seen all your evidence before, all it proves is that there are people in history that believed they were a different gender. That’s fine, believe what you want.

There’s also people throughout history that believed in god/s. We can prove that through archeology, history and biology too, but the existence of people believing in god doesn’t make god real.

[spoonbread5]

Sex based protections aren't the argument as I and the other folks you accused of that today has never said.

In fact we're both clear.

As is the fact the LITERALLY LARGEST radfem GC organization on EARTH is allied to the Heritage Foundation, the Alliance Defending Freedom and since b4 his 1rst term, through it, through Roe and into now.

WoLF has international membership and is publicly allied to every known GC group.

All checkable from their website.

Every modern medical health care system in the world has the same medical eval of trans people save those with your side literal hard fascist governments and entrenched Oiligarchy like the UK.

Not even counting the literal presence of white power fascists at your rallies.

Again no other school of feminism does this, need to do this including second wavers.

Again literal OG radfems.

Not you.

[shejustsaidit]

Thanks @shortopinions for bringing clarity and saying it with some actual wit.

As for you, @spoonbread5 , you’ve now called me a fascist, a bigot, and a threat to humanity all because I suggested we protect women based on biological sex and keep public debate open. Not exactly revolutionary.

You haven’t engaged with a single point I made. You didn’t challenge the data. You didn’t counter the argument. You just threw a tantrum in paragraph form.

You even messaged me in private, which I declined, because I don’t do whisper campaigns—I debate publicly. So here’s your chance. Say something worthy. Bring a real argument. Make a case so strong it might actually change my mind.

But you won’t. You can’t. Because your research starts with memes, ends with vibes, and relies on shouting down any woman who won’t sit quietly.

You’re not fighting fascism. You’re performing it.

[shejustsaidit]

Self-expression, biological sex, and the cost of shutting down conversation:

I believe in freedom of self-expression. Deeply. The more people feel free to express themselves fully, the more joy and creativity we’ll see in this world.

That’s why I want to say this clearly: acknowledging the difference between biological sex and gender doesn’t contradict the value of self-expression, it reinforces it.

Biological sex is real. It’s not a feeling or a vibe. There are two: male and female, determined by chromosomes (XX and XY). These biological markers give rise to different physical traits. Whether we like it or not, some of these traits make one sex more physically dominant, and that has real-world consequences, especially for safety.

Now, gender is something else entirely. It’s the set of roles and behaviours society has historically assigned to people based on their sex. But being a woman doesn’t mean liking pink or having long hair. And being a man doesn’t mean you can’t express softness, sensitivity, or creativity.

So when a boy realises he loves wearing pink, growing his hair, and dancing in glitter, why should we jump to the idea that he was “born in the wrong body”? He wasn’t. His biological sex doesn’t limit his ability to express himself. He can be fully himself as a boy. Expression should be free, not boxed into stereotypes that demand a new gender label every time someone steps outside them.

In the UK today, if someone wants to be referred to by a different gender, they can do so without needing medical or legal approval. That’s their right in a free society. If it makes people feel happier and more aligned with themselves, I don’t believe it’s anyone’s place to stop them. Live your life. Be who you are. No one should feel shame or rejection for that.

But here’s the line we need to draw: the law.

When legal rights, safety, and services start referring to gender instead of biological sex, we step into dangerous territory, especially for women. You cannot identify into a sex class that has been oppressed, violated, and silenced for centuries, and expect to instantly access the same protections, services, and safe spaces.

85 percent of women aged 18 to 24 in the UK report having experienced sexual harassment (ONS, 2021). This is not about feelings, it’s about structural vulnerability. Women, as a biological sex, are at greater risk. And biological sex-based spaces like refuges, hospital wards, and changing rooms exist to protect that vulnerable class. They matter for safety and for mental wellbeing.

To those who say “trans women aren’t a threat to women,” I ask: how do you make women feel safe? Telling women they’re irrational for feeling unsafe is just another way men have historically told women how to feel.

And to those pointing out that trans people are a small minority, around 0.5 to 0.75 percent of the UK population, I say this: women are more than half. Women’s rights are not a side note in the pursuit of inclusion.

I recognise that making clear distinctions between gender and biological sex might feel threatening to some trans people. That’s not my intention. But we need to be able to talk openly, respectfully, seriously. Right now, many women are afraid to speak for fear of being called bigots. That’s not progress. That’s suppression.

In the name of inclusion, we’re forgetting common sense.

So let’s talk. Let’s listen. Let’s stop shouting and start rebuilding clarity, because this isn’t about hate. It’s about boundaries, safety, and truth, and how we protect everyone without erasing women in the process.

[spoonbread5]

GC radfem is the SOLE version of feminism that openly, publicly seeks to revoke and remove minority status across multiple nations. No other form of feminism or 2nd wave needs this and again daily.

OP is trying a soft sell on this.

[shejustsaidit]

Interesting take, but no I’m not “soft selling” anything. I’m just not shouting in all caps and calling people names, which seems to confuse some folks these days.

Pointing out that biological sex exists and has legal and safety implications isn’t a plot to “revoke minority status.” It’s just… reality. That’s not oppression, it’s clarity. And if your version of feminism can’t handle open conversations without accusing everyone of being a bigot in disguise, maybe it’s not as inclusive as you think.

Not everything that challenges your worldview is a threat. Sometimes it’s just someone thinking critically in public.

[shejustsaidit]

Let’s stop pretending it’s about how people look

“Do you even know any trans women? Have you seen them? Right! They’re women! Which bathroom should they use?”

That’s the kind of argument I hear all the time. And here’s my honest response:

No, trans women are not women. They are trans women. That doesn’t mean they deserve disrespect or dehumanisation. But it does mean they are not biologically female. We need to stop confusing kindness with denial of reality.

And no, not all trans women “look like women.” Not all trans people are conventionally feminine, and many don’t want to be. In fact, the ones who are most discriminated against are often those who don’t pass. Those are the people who are often denied jobs, safety, and housing.

So what are we really saying here? That a trans woman should be allowed into women’s spaces if she looks good enough? If she looks soft enough? Small enough? Feminine enough?

Is that our standard now how someone looks?

That’s not inclusivity. That’s aesthetic discrimination. And it’s deeply unfair to everyone: to trans people who don’t or can’t “pass,” and to women who are told their safety should depend on how polite or feminine someone seems.

What we need is clear, factual, respectful categorisation. One that doesn’t rely on how someone looks, but on stable, objective criteria like biological sex. That way, we protect the people who are most vulnerable, instead of relying on vibes and visual cues.

This isn’t about hate. It’s about creating systems that are just not aesthetic, not performative, not based on flattery or fear.

Because honestly, if we can’t even talk about this without being shouted down, what does that say about how much we really care about fairness?

[shejustsaidit]

Being called a TERF nowadays doesn’t mean you’re hateful. It usually just means you said something obvious like “sex exists” or “being a woman isn’t a feeling”

Let’s be clear. Acknowledging biological sex isn’t transphobic. It’s factual. Female is not an identity. It’s a material, observable reality. And in a world where women are still oppressed because of that reality not because of how they identify erasing it helps no one

The irony? The more people push this idea that womanhood is about softness, passivity, or loving pink, the more it circles right back to the worst parts of gender stereotypes. That’s not progressive. That’s just misogyny with a glittery filter

What’s actually ideological is saying that “woman” can mean anything, that it’s just a vibe or an outfit. That’s not liberation. That’s incoherence. And incoherence is the perfect tool to silence women when they speak about their own lives

Sex is not a spectrum. Gender roles are. And they’re oppressive. Fighting against that doesn’t make you a bigot. It makes you a feminist

And yes, the legal definition of “woman” matters. It matters for rights, protections, statistics, prisons, sports, services. Replacing it with identity-based terms isn’t inclusive. It’s erasure

This isn’t about hate. It’s about clarity. About refusing to abandon reality to soothe an ideology full of contradictions

Women are not an idea. We are a class, rooted in sex. You don’t have to apologise for saying that

[unsentimentaltranslator]

The irony? The more people push this idea that womanhood is about softness, passivity, or loving pink, the more it circles right back to the worst parts of gender stereotypes. That’s not progressive. That’s just misogyny with a glittery filter

I need to start being blunter about how this specifically is feeding the "pink job blue job" bullshit. I've been yelling at gendies and libfems and really all of my fellow left wingers about how the left's male worship and abandonment of any actual advocacy for women who are being harmed by patriarchal systems and male violence has caused it, but I've largely held back from saying "what the fuck did you think would happen when you told young women and girls that if their personality doesn't fit stereotypes of femininity then they're not female?!" because it's so taboo. Well, pandering to it hasn't helped so fuck 'em.

[shejustsaidit]

Self-expression, biological sex, and the cost of shutting down conversation:

I believe in freedom of self-expression. Deeply. The more people feel free to express themselves fully, the more joy and creativity we’ll see in this world.

That’s why I want to say this clearly: acknowledging the difference between biological sex and gender doesn’t contradict the value of self-expression, it reinforces it.

Biological sex is real. It’s not a feeling or a vibe. There are two: male and female, determined by chromosomes (XX and XY). These biological markers give rise to different physical traits. Whether we like it or not, some of these traits make one sex more physically dominant, and that has real-world consequences, especially for safety.

Now, gender is something else entirely. It’s the set of roles and behaviours society has historically assigned to people based on their sex. But being a woman doesn’t mean liking pink or having long hair. And being a man doesn’t mean you can’t express softness, sensitivity, or creativity.

So when a boy realises he loves wearing pink, growing his hair, and dancing in glitter, why should we jump to the idea that he was “born in the wrong body”? He wasn’t. His biological sex doesn’t limit his ability to express himself. He can be fully himself as a boy. Expression should be free, not boxed into stereotypes that demand a new gender label every time someone steps outside them.

In the UK today, if someone wants to be referred to by a different gender, they can do so without needing medical or legal approval. That’s their right in a free society. If it makes people feel happier and more aligned with themselves, I don’t believe it’s anyone’s place to stop them. Live your life. Be who you are. No one should feel shame or rejection for that.

But here’s the line we need to draw: the law.

When legal rights, safety, and services start referring to gender instead of biological sex, we step into dangerous territory, especially for women. You cannot identify into a sex class that has been oppressed, violated, and silenced for centuries, and expect to instantly access the same protections, services, and safe spaces.

85 percent of women aged 18 to 24 in the UK report having experienced sexual harassment (ONS, 2021). This is not about feelings, it’s about structural vulnerability. Women, as a biological sex, are at greater risk. And biological sex-based spaces like refuges, hospital wards, and changing rooms exist to protect that vulnerable class. They matter for safety and for mental wellbeing.

To those who say “trans women aren’t a threat to women,” I ask: how do you make women feel safe? Telling women they’re irrational for feeling unsafe is just another way men have historically told women how to feel.

And to those pointing out that trans people are a small minority, around 0.5 to 0.75 percent of the UK population, I say this: women are more than half. Women’s rights are not a side note in the pursuit of inclusion.

I recognise that making clear distinctions between gender and biological sex might feel threatening to some trans people. That’s not my intention. But we need to be able to talk openly, respectfully, seriously. Right now, many women are afraid to speak for fear of being called bigots. That’s not progress. That’s suppression.

In the name of inclusion, we’re forgetting common sense.

So let’s talk. Let’s listen. Let’s stop shouting and start rebuilding clarity, because this isn’t about hate. It’s about boundaries, safety, and truth, and how we protect everyone without erasing women in the process.