Mixed sex wards and trans women.

There are no men allowed in the mobile screening units though. There are signs up everywhere stating that and the mammographers will tell you the same. It is a women's only space.

Breast screening is totally private. It's carried out in a little cubicle. No nudity until you're in the cubicle, plus there are numerous female HCPs around. There's no reason for sex segregation. A few men have enhanced risk and I would have no problem whatsoever at them being around.

Much less vulnerable than a loo or a changing room.

MasterWench - the mobile unit I've used, you have total privacy with the nurse performing the mammogram. You're not in a vulnerable position with respect to others being screened. While some womens spaces need defending, I'm not sure this one does - bearing in mind also that it would only be relevant for transwomen on hormones not the self-identifying 'feelz' types.

Yes, the figures on sexual attraction among transwomen are, as I recall, 27% who are exclusively attracted to men, with the other 73% roughly evenly split between being exclusively attracted to women and bisexual.

Men with AGP are often heterosexual pre-transition but will have sex with men post-transition because it validates their new womanly identity. It appears to be common that late transitioners are heavily into forms of kink: sissification, forced feminization, BDSM, among others. They may describe themselves as pansexual or plain desperate.

There's also the angle that, having transitioned for sexual motives, many transwomen find it very difficult to find partners. I've seen numerous articles, blogs and videos by transwomen complaining that mean lesbians won't sleep with them and that straight men are only interested in occasional no strings sex. These complaints are usually couched in terms of the intolerance and transphobia of the uncool people who aren't open-minded enough to expand their dating pool.

I read these whines as coming from privileged white men who don't understand that the world doesn't see them as the women they claim to be. There's a strong flavour of magical thinking about it: "I believe I'm a beautiful, sexy woman so you must see me as one too."

Men, and society at large, think that men are entitled to sex. Men "have needs" and this is used to justify anything from porn to prostitution. Post transition, the difficulties transwomen face in finding sexual partners comes as a very nasty shock, and their outrage and sense of entitlement comes across loud and clear.

Prawnofthepatriarchy

According to the website I was linked to today, being attracted to men, does not preclude autogynephilia. The idea of being a woman is still arousing, and being 'courted' by a man augments it.

I ask because a lot of mnetters don't agree with trans women (men) in women's only spaces, which is what I would class a mobile breast screening unit as.

It appears that the answer to "What is a woman?" now includes being permanently aroused by our own bodies.

The overt fetishism on sites where transwomen post makes our point over and over again. The trouble is that it appears the powers that be have swallowed the lie that they're all sexually attracted to men and have all had SRS. The ones that are pose no risk to women. The great majority, however, are essentially cross-dressing heterosexual males who may or may not have had cosmetic surgery, and who pose the same risk in women's spaces as any other man. I suspect they may pose more of a risk in some settings, as fetishizing femininity contains an intrinsic element of boundary violation.

.

Datun - You wouldn't believe half the contorted delusions being used to minimise autogynephilia. From resolutely denying its existence to the fact that all 'cis' women have it and it's actively 'encouraged' by women everywhere. To the real leap saying that as women like to have a mental image of themselves being alluring in a sexual situation

• sounds like a variation on a typical heterosexual male fantasy to me ... all women are hot, wet, primed and ready to 'go' ....

YetAnotherSpartacus

You wouldn't believe half the contorted delusions being used to minimise autogynephilia. From resolutely denying its existence to the fact that all 'cis' women have it and it's actively 'encouraged' by women everywhere. To the real leap saying that as women like to have a mental image of themselves being alluring in a sexual situation - that's the definition of autogynephilia, so it's fine.

God only knows how I manage to leave the house in the morning, or sit still on the tube if I'm wearing women's underwear. Exhausting isn't the word.

YetAnother
Ugh. It seems that fetishistic men can't tell the difference between a woman being aroused by a sexual experience or fantasy, and a woman being aroused by merely having a vagina. What a surprise

From Cote's links...

"The notion that it can be used to say someone is not a "real woman" should die, but the data shows that cis women experience autogynephilia, so its not really that damning of an accusation to begin with. Women like feeling sexy, who knew."

Whaaaaaat?

How do you feel about trans women being invited to breast screening?

If they're on hormone therapy and if that increases their risk to the level at which screening is assessed to be beneficial then obviously yes. They should certainly be advised to self examine - but blokes should too once in a while (their lifetime risk is 1 in 1000 which is low but not negligible). And clearly this is something for which statistics need to be accurately recorded.

Breast cancer might be an increased risk on HRT, especially when they develop breasts. I don't know enough about it to have feelings on it. Why?

How do you feel about trans women being invited to breast screening?

That's reassuring Hairy, I hope you're right.

Probably not on deaf ears Datun.

My annoying brother once posted a scathing rant online about swing voters and how stupid they were to not be able to commit to a party and make their minds up. And I thought, well, it's the mind changers who end up changing the world when it gets really crap, the people who can change their stance who make lives better for everyone.

Spartacuses are not born, they are made. This whole sex/gender argument is brand new to all of us at one point and many of us didn't start out with a well thought through and reasoned argument.

It's hard to change a swell of public opinion but trends outlive their usefulness and die out as people move on to the next topic. Also, all it takes is something high profile and toxic to become associated with a cause and suddenly people drop it like a hot potato.

Battle is far from over.

HairyLittlePoet

I completely agree about picking your arguments. It's why, although I totally understand and agree with the fact that gender identity is a nonsense in and of itself, I'm not sure that argument makes much headway with law makers.

In my letter to my MP I provided a link over the sterilisation of a 12-year-old in the name of trans. And copy and pasted some random, unsavoury comments regarding AGP. Plus the relative ease of obtaining hormones on the black market, among other things.

The links I provided were irrefutable and damning and I purposely kept it succinct. When I re-read my letter, I had to sit on my hands to stop me from typing are you all insane?

And it's all fallen on deaf ears.

Pink - google "blindfold". This will suggest "blindfold someone" as the search term. Enter this. Read the first page - 7 of the 8 links are clearly related to blindfolding as sexual play. Now come back and tell me that you don't think blindfolding is a common fetish

lots of third wavers believe that we've won all the major battles for women's rights but they don't seem to realise that we have to keep fighting to maintain them, otherwise there'll be a slow edging back of the line.

YY... except, sadly, I don't think there will be anything slow about it. How fast do you think Trump will roll back Roe vs. Wade, women's right to contraception as part of their occupational healthcare, etc? Then ask yourself what will happen in the UK if Labour alienate their traditional voter base in the north and provide UKIP with a foothold (their new leader, Nutall, has tweets where he has likened women who have abortions to Myra Hindley).

I know. I watched the "debate" in horror.

When I can, I send links to MPs who might be able to find common ground with the rights of women. Not everyone is a complete virtue-signaller, and whilst everyone is susceptible to a bit of self congratulatory right-on-ness, everyone has a button to push.

If an MP cares about lesbians, They might, if introduced to the idea, have concerns about the transing of young girls.
If an MP cares about how they are perceived publically and wants to be seen championing the most oppressedest group, you need to convincingly find another group that they consider also oppressedest and set up a conflict that makes them backtrack. (This isn't going to be straight white middle class women, but they might feel awkward about chucking children/minority groups/ etc under the bus)
Not everybody's trigger is logic and reasoned argument (unfortunately) and it's a mistake to exclusively resort to that and ignore methods that work with other people!
There's also blindsiding people - most people if confronted head on during a trans rights conversation have learned to shut down any and all opposition immediately. But at the same time, they hold the entirely contradictory position already that girls and women should have rights and be supported and have their oppression recognised. Sometimes a stealthier approach works, gaining agreement on every point in favour of protecting boundaries for women and girls, ensuring bodily rights, and only once that has been agreed bringing the conflict with trans rights into the discussion.

But it feels like tiny drips compared to the deluge that is Transnami.

I agree with Hairy - lots of third wavers believe that we've won all the major battles for women's rights but they don't seem to realise that we have to keep fighting to maintain them, otherwise there'll be a slow edging back of the line.

HairyLittlePoet

I agree. Unfortunately women's rights are already going backwards, as evidenced by one or two previous posters' remarks that they were unable to insist on a female HCP.

Can anyone enlighten me as to how to get womens' voices heard. I see the sentiments on this thread echoed over and over on the Internet, but it simply fails to go up the food chain in any meaningful way.

There must have been a high number of people writing to their MP in advance of the debate on the 1st. But the MPs in the chamber were all of one mind.

I'm not interested in debating a right already won, such as whether women should have the right to request a female HCP for intimate stuff.

I'm kind of preoccupied with making sure our government doesn't formalise in law the destruction of rights of females so that they can replace them with rights for males who identify as whatever we are now defining womanhood as.
And I'm pissed off at the effort and commitment it is taking just to keep women's rights standing still. Forget progression, feminists are fighting to stop things going backwards, which they already have.

What next - "Voting - are women truly up to the task?"

Bartholin
For me it's not about doing the job well - I'm sure there are many male HCPs who are excellent at vaginal exams, etc. It's more about the fact that having a male I'm not in an intimate and trusting relationship with in contact with my genitals and/or other usually covered areas, makes me feel violated, panicked, and sick to my stomach.
It's unfortunate, but there it is. And a male who's got on makeup and women's clothing is still, undeniably, a male.