Just when you thought Everyday Transactivism could no longer surprise * title edited by MNHQ*

Have started a separate thread to discuss the HH response, because there are comments split over various different threads. Let's draw it all together ...

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/2859462-Harriet-Harman-webchat-her-responses-to-the-self-identification-question

As far as I understand it, the trans equality report has a few recommendations for changing the equality act and the gender recognition act which taken alone are workable, but put together do effectively mean an end to women's spaces:

• replace gender reassignment with gender identity in the EA - so non-binary people and others who don't identify with either male or female are protected, people don't need to go through any reassignment process, it's all on how they identify.

• remove exemptions in the EA for single-sex facilities and services and occupational requirements so that trans must be included in the sex with which they identify, if they have a GRC.

• remove any 'gatekeeping' requirements for getting a GRC - change it to self-identification.

Those are the report recommendations though. We don't yet have the wording of the bill, which should be published before Friday's debate.

It was a great response.

But I'm not sure HH fully understands the implications of the bill - that if this new acceptance of gender identity does go through, the extent to which it will be transphobic to state that a transwoman is anything other than a woman.

Of course we know what we mean by women only spaces and I'm sure HH means the same thing but that is precisely what we won't be able to specify under the new legislation, I think? Surely transwomen would just be able to say "but we are women" and therefore have the right to access to women only spaces?

The only real protection is if we have a definition of women that excludes transwomen. Which the whole TRA movement is determined to wipe out.

Very Eeyore of me, I know, but I can't see how HH's vision would work in practice.

Anyway. While we're on the subject, could someone please tell me - if anyone knows for sure - does this new bill really propose to do away with the category of sex as a protected characteristic and replace it with gender identity? Because that's the impression I'm getting from some quarters.

Or is "gender identity" intended to replace the current "gender reassignment" category while leaving the sex category intact? In which case, things aren't quite so drastic.

I'm not sure where to find the answer. if anyone knows, TIA!

Right now, part of the reason why people are not listening to us is that they think we're not listening to them.

I, too, wondered if this was some kind of code.

Ok I'll take that back. She's finally answered one.

Taking what I said back. That's probably the best response we've ever had from an MP on this issue.

I'm biting my tongue sitting on my hands because HH has posted this 'Right now, part of the reason why people are not listening to us is that they think we're not listening to them.' while systematically ignoring the 6 or 7 questions on the trans issue.

I can't quite decide if it's a lack of self awareness having posted that comment, a calculated strategy to say you are concerned that your party isn't listening while doing just that, or self preservation.

Happy or scared?

They all talk about not being scared to tackle the tough issues, listening to the public. Then they contradict themselves with their actions.

Harriet's going to ignore it too isn't she?

Yup. Another politician to add to the list of those happy to throw the rights of biological females under the pink bus.

Harriet's going to ignore it too isn't she? That or throw out a woolly disclaimer like Jess did.

And for that matter Ruth Davidson and Kezia Dugdale, leaders of the Scottish Tories and Labour respectively who are lesbians. Can't imagine them being too pleased with the cotton ceiling bollocks

Thanks! He is rather a nice chap.

He will still say of his GNC schoolfriends, though, that 'Alex* is really trans. I was just having a bad patch, but she's really trans. And Charlie is agender, and...'

I haven't asked how he knows, and I presume he's too polite, kind and accepting to ask how they, personally, know the difference between a bad patch and a lifelong need.

*Names changed...

As a matter of interest, does anyone know how Mhari Black, the young SNP MP and a lesbian, views this issue?

I don't think we should be just talking amongst ourselves, It's being debated in parliament this week and changes to the law are imminent

This^

Mary I think these webchats are a great chance to directly speak to politicians who are so much in their so-called progressive bubble that they don't apply any critical thinking to trans issues. They probably dismiss us as those bigoted women but it's worthwhile to take the chance to speak directly to people who are not generally listening to our concerns.

Datun crossed posts, I totally agree

kitties I don't have time to reposed prop leery but just wanted to say that your son sounds brilliant.

KittiesInsane

Your son sounds brilliant. And well done to that 'no nonsense' therapist.

Why can't being flamboyant and enjoying a colourful, creative clothing be just that? Why does it have to be indicative of something deeper, more meaningful, more profound? Why isn't it just fun?

I don't think we should be just talking amongst ourselves. It's being debated in parliament this week and changes to the law are imminent. We have to bring this to the attention of MPs, even if they are very unlikely to give any straight answers on a webchat.

I think we need to be careful not to bombard MPs with lots of questions on this topic all at once but one or two questions on each webchat is fair enough, given how important and urgent this is.

" I'm getting sick & tired of the blatant stifling of genuine concerns women have, the silencing of our voices to allow transgender rights to erase women's rights & hard fought for protections."

That said...I do hear you. It frustrates me, too.

I think you're probably right, Mary.

I will be honest, I think that stopping the questions about the trans issues on web chats might be the best idea--for the moment.

MPs (and similar public figures) are notorious for being cagey about giving direct, straight answers about even the most uncontroversial issues. The chances of Harriet Harman offering anything other than the most bland, PC responses on transgender-related issues during a Mumsnet web chat have to be utterly remote.

I think we are better off just sticking to talking about this among ourselves and gradually, cautiously trying to raise the issue among people we know in real life. I think a lot of people reached peak trans in the last couple of years, and no doubt there will be more and more as the situations get steadily sillier/scarier (Ian Huntley, yikes). As more people start to raise questions or say "I am not sure about this," there will be more leeway for having these kinds of discussions during Mumsnet web chats and so on.

If we keep bringing the issue up again and again during the web chats, I am worried that MNHQ may start cracking down on trans related discussion on MN as a whole. Which would be awful, because this is one of the few places we can actually talk about this, and because the discussion that has gone on so far has already played a big role, I think, in changing the minds of other women who use this site.

if someone is deliberately attention seeking, you really need to ask why? There is usually some inner turmoil, so attention seeking in and of itself is often just a cry for help.

I've mentioned this before on such discussions, but it's relevant:

At 11-12, DS was deeply, almost suicidally unhappy with who he was, and did indeed say to his GP that he hated himself and wished he was a girl. We were very lucky, in retrospect, that he was just about young enough not to have much access to social media, and that the CAMHS professional who saw him listened to him carefully and then said, in no-nonsense fashion, that he had neither a gender problem nor a mental health problem but a school bullying problem: he was being ostracised and called gay, girly, wimpy, weirdo...

He moved schools. It seemed a huge upheaval and over-reaction, to a lot of our friends, but by god it was less of one than having him well-meaningly encouraged down the route of gender transition.

And an even moderately pro-transition professional could so easily have looked at him and thought it was a clear-cut case - shaggy curls, dainty face; history of dressing in bright, flamboyant, silky clothing (including tutus, of course); love of reading, dancing, singing, cooing over baby animals; preference for avoiding football and playing with his female cousins (while wearing their clothes and hairclips) - I've seen pretty much this exact history online as leading other kids to transition.

He's late teens now: flamboyant, happy, into musical theatre, has a terrific hat collection, loves shopping, has had a couple of teenage relationships (boy-girl: he's not even gay).

He can't be the only one.

I think it's typical of MN's efforts to stifle the debate on transgender issues - for purely business reasons of course. Numerous questions on the issue illustrates the concerns women have & should somehow alert people like MPs who come here for PR purposes no matter what topic they intend to expose for the masses here, this is a huge concern. But, MN don't seem to want to allow that picture to emerge. Which brings us back to the whole trans media watch & how their efforts impact disproportionately the way MN operate. No other topic on MN gets actively moderated in the way transgender threads do. MNs whole ethos of being here to 'make parents' lives easier' goes out the window if you have concerns over a child with GI issues, or you have a child whose parent has decided to transition. All without an actual definition of what is considered transphobic.

I don't envy anyone trying to operate a business with that in the background but I'm getting sick & tired of the blatant stifling of genuine concerns women have, the silencing of our voices to allow transgender rights to erase women's rights & hard fought for protections.

Plectrum - wonder how many questions re Brexit would be allowed? :)