Maya Forstater

I don't think twitter is the best medium to get into long discussions on this but you can find a whole load of links to resources in https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3145470-Break-it-down-for-me … if you're genuinely interested in the gender critical viewpoint...

I should also clarify, I'm not interested in the 'gender critical' viewpoint. I'm interested in making sure that protecting trans people doesn't hurt anyone else, which I don't think is likely and would like to make sure no one has good evidence for to be absolutely safe

The difference may seem slight and it might just be semantical word use, but I've seen 'gender critical' used by too many people I know full well I very much don't agree with to trust it on sight

That doesn't mean I'm not going to look into the links you've provided or continue to learn on my own. But my goal will continue to be protecting everyone equally and fairly, and just double checking to make sure no one's noticed anything unintended I might not haven thought of

That doesn't seem to be the goal of the 'gender critical viewpoint' in any situation I've encountered. And I honestly can't begin to imagine what it would take for the argument that trans women are not women to be as compelling as the experiences shared by trans women themselves

So a woman is anyone who has a female gender identity? In that case, how can we talk about the group of humans who have the potential to gestate and bear young? This group of people face oppression because of their biology. We need to define them. What word would you use?

A: ciswomen, trans men and at a bare minimum maybe biologically female are all terms that fit that criteria. B: defining female nature purely by reproductive capabilities is extraordinarily reductive and unfair to any women who fall outside that standard and you should know that

Ciswomen and transmen doesn't include women who have no gender identity.