(Thread)
Arguing on Women’s Rights and Trans Issues
I am a visual learner and think in pictures (as opposed to kinesthetic/aural etc.) A key tool for me are mindmaps and below I have thrown one together on considerations between women’s rights and trans self-id issues.
/1
Caveat: It’s just an example, and I am not going to argue about what is/is not on there because any women or women’s org could expand it tenfold and cover an entire wall of topics and sub-topics and similarly for TRA’s. Also what I want to focus on are some of the
/2
types of rhetoric employed so you can spot it.

Linguistically it’s easy to get side tracked or DERAILED from a point and having a visual representation of the key topics and where they are in relation to each point is useful for keeping focus.
/3
Consider the often discussed issue of m->w, waving their genitalia around women’s changing rooms. This is entirely different from f->m trans and the person bringing this up is trying to get you to justify concept-D to deflect from having no argument for concept-A.
/4
Umbrella Terms (Brexit means Brexit)
Having umbrella terms means it can mean anything you want it to mean and different things to different people on different days against different arguments. It can also be used with subterfuge to hide less palatable views, or have
/5
unintended consequences (wax my ‘female’ scrotum).
If you have 17 categories of ‘trans’ then people can pick which ones validate which arguments (for and against to be fair!). Each individual category needs defined if only so people can agree what to argue about!
/6
Sophistry and Fallacious Arguments
Anyone used to making arguments, business cases, academia, lawyers etc. will know people that can get you to admit that black is white through some clever “linguistic prestidigitation”.
/7
Most of the times the logical conclusion of the argument is correct, however it it is predicated on an an earlier assumed starting point. For example “TWAW”. If that is the assumed starting position then anything can be possible. But it is so patently nonsensical,
/8
it defies belief that it has to be countered as even remotely true – especially with trans no longer being actual transsexuals (who generally accept its not true), but now including men who have no intention of transitioning.
/9
There are lots of others (Strawman etc.) but just a couple of concepts and my mindmaps are always scribbled on paper or wipeboard first. Hope this is useful food for thought and encourages you to explore further.
Lastly, for any trans people on this thread....
/10
No GC person is saying you do not exist, that trans is not real or that you should not be able to be with anyone who wants you or wear dresses if you want.
However, women's and girls sex based rights exist for a reason and serve
/11
as safe-guards based on reality and their lived experience and it is entirely up to women to decide who to allow into their safe-spaces. Any man with mother, wife, daughters, sisters, female friends should feel the same about men seeking access to those spaces.
/Ends
You can follow @paul_g_mclaugh.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: