Until we organise as well as the transactivists we're not going to stem the problem

I've been chatting about all of these threads with my lovely mummy over a cuppa.

She's recently had professional contact with someone who has BIID (see here for an explanation if you aren't familiar: www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/body-integrity-identity-disorder-the-condition-where-sufferers-want-to-be-disabled-a6680306.html)

I'm sure this has been discussed here before, sorry if I'm duplicating, but it's interesting to me that it appears that many people with BIID can accept that it's something outside of "normal" (I know I know, what is "normal" anyway), but the trans activists seem to absolutely reject any suggestion that someone who feels like they don't match the sex of their given body is in any way "disordered".

I know, this is a seriously touchy subject. Please flame away if I'm being ignorant, I'm just trying to add layers of understanding as per the linked article:

"Sufferers from BIID experience a mismatch between their physically healthy body and the body with which they identify. They identify as disabled. They often desire a specific amputation to achieve the disabled body they want: for example, the left leg below the knee. The analogy with Gender Identity Disorder is clear: someone with Gender Identity Disorder experiences a mismatch of some kind between their chromosomal and genital sex and the sex they identify with."

I saw some tweets from a well known transwoman who was suggesting autogynephilia be considered a sexual orientation and not swept under the carpet.

To be strictly fair, I suspect she may have been attempting to get it out in the open as it would help women's cause re spaces. I could be wrong though.

To clarify: including BDSM under the LGBTQIAetc umbrella has already happened in some places. But not all because surprise! Gay people aren't all super keen on having their sexuality conflated with fetishes!

HuffPostQueer did an article on adults who wear nappies. The Twitter response was...not positive as regards including kink under the queer umbrella. (Though that has happened already in some places.)

Then again HuffPostQueer followers also don't seem to like Caitlin Jenner much. (HPQ: she's doing an interview with Diane Sawyer!
Twitter: are they going to discuss the manslaughter?)

I don't even know what kink is

Inclusive to kink, eh? Interesting. Wonder if the writer has any particular kink in mind?

www.unitetheunion.org/unite-at-work/equalities/equalitiessectors/lesbiangaybisexualandtrans/

www.unitetheunion.org/growing-our-union/communitymembership/

we can join with or without a job and organise in Unite to form policy
obv we need to have worked out our own strategy to promote our position

from there, we would get access to Labour MPs
(hopefully, sanity will soon be restored in the Labour Party)

Hello, been lurking for a few months, since the trans issue hit my family, and want to thank you all for helping me keep a shred of sanity when I thought I was losing my fucking mind. I want to help too if I can. Never used twitter so I'm going to set up an account now and see if I can work it out. But mostly here to say thank you - and hopefully there are lots of others like me who don't post but who are on the same page.

Baggy

Good. Hopefully that will make a few more people see the light.

@Huffpostqueer on Twitter have started an almighty row today by saying LGBT should be inclusive to 'kink'.
All the arguments used by nasty TERFS are now being trotted out to oppose this.

The transactivists have been so successful at getting their agenda into the mainstream, without people really noticing. I honestly think that as the contradictions and logical nonsense required to sustain the whole "transwomen are women" belief system become clearer, more people will start to question it.

YY. Pick your battles and moments well, but it's well worth doing.

science That sounds incredibly frustrating. Don't despair though. I'm increasingly thinking that actually the most important thing we can be doing is starting to talk to people in real life. I know that is easier for some people than others, especially for people in certain lines of work.

The transactivists have been so successful at getting their agenda into the mainstream, without people really noticing. I honestly think that as the contradictions and logical nonsense required to sustain the whole "transwomen are women" belief system become clearer, more people will start to question it.

People are so unaware of the basic facts - 70 percent of transwomen with functioning penis, Danielle Muscato etc.

Rant alert:

So I've been trying to get in contact with my MP to arrange a time to visit a surgery and discuss my concerns in person. There are no details on the website, but it says she holds them 'regularly' including at weekends. As a young-ish female MP, I thought I had a chance of getting through to her.

2 weeks passed, no response. So yesterday I tweeted her. Had a call back today, her next surgery isn't until a Friday at the end of April, in the afternoon during working hours. The next one hasn't been scheduled but all future surgeries will be on Fridays.

I've been advised to write if I want to discuss policy. But when I wrote about the Article 50 debate it was 3 months until I received a generic letter in response.

I'm furious. They completely dismissed my wish to discuss this with her, basically said she's too busy being important to care about her constituents' opinions . So my biggest chance of making a 'real life' difference is down the drain.

Riley J Dennis explains why lesbians should have sex with men.

The trans agenda is, I believe, collapsing under the weight of its own contradictions. RJD at one point says, in discussing whether it ok for a lesbian to say she doesn't want to have sex with someone with a penis "this is centering the feelings of CIS people in a discussion about trans people". So even when women are thinking about prospective partners, they need to be putting the feeling of other people (ie trans) people ) first. Uh huh.

What I do think this video demonstrates is that once you "accept" one piece of untruth - in this case that transwoman are women - you inevitability have to accept a lot of other untruths (eg lesbians should have sex with transwoman). Alternatively you could think about these increasingly ridiculous untruths and this could cause you to reject the original premise - which I suppose is what peaktrans is.

Love the first comment which is along the line of "If genitals are so unimportant, why are lots of trans people having surgery?".

You couldn't make it up ...

Just wanted to share this I saw on Twitter - lesbian event on silencing of lesbians silenced.

It's getting hard to tell which are real stories and which are spoofs as the real stories get more bizarre, but I think this is real.

gendertrender.wordpress.com/2017/03/22/fayetteville-goddess-festival-bans-lesbian-event/

Thank you! :)

Welcome to MN, Writersblock!

I don't have kids either, I'm (mostly) here for the feminism.

Poor Andie's is rather deluded. So intent on finding women to hate ( nasty feminists) they don't even realise that we share some of their views.

"And as for playing with Barbie dolls and dressing up as a princess, he’d just be labelled a sissy. How come “tomboy” is acceptable and yet “sissy” is not? Where’s the equality?

I found a great website the other day called A Boy Can Too – I guess it was inspired by brilliant campaigns such as This Girl Can and then Trans Girls Can.

It contains dozens of images of boys sticking their fingers up (metaphorically) to the feminists who don’t believe they should get in touch with their feminine sides. I suggest you take a look at it."

FROM GENDER RECOGNITION ACT 2004:

Peerages etc.

The fact that a person’s gender has become the acquired gender under this Act—
(a)does not affect the descent of any peerage or dignity or title of honour, and

(b)does not affect the devolution of any property limited (expressly or not) by a will or other instrument to devolve (as nearly as the law permits) along with any peerage or dignity or title of honour unless an intention that it should do so is expressed in the will or other instrument.

kim

I can't find much about the legal status of it all, but this would seem to indicate that equality was proposed, but not passed.

"The bill did not progress beyond the committee stage and will make no further progress.[3]"

"The bill has been referred to as the "Downton law" in reference to the British television drama Downton Abbey where the Earl's eldest daughter is unable to inherit the family seat because it can only be passed to a male heir.[2]"

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_(Titles)_Bill

There was an amendment so that, in the case of the royal family, the title could be passed to a girl, if Prince George has been born female, but it didn't extend beyond the monarchy.

Our friend Andie is back at it again, providing a helpful definition of feminism this time. In case any of you were wondering what it's all about...

"Feminism – at least to me – is all about everyone – female, male or non-binary, cis or trans – being treated equally and being given the same opportunities."

Got that? Feminism is about everyone, not just you, you srsly annoying mn terf women!!!

andiepasdedeux.wordpress.com/2017/03/20/trans-children-where-terf-feminism-fails/

You are so kind Venus, you always say "welcome"

So a female can't identify as a male and take the inheritance

I am not 100% sure in England but Scots law does not distinguish between the sexes on the right to inherit , except on hereditary titles and even then inheriting the title does not mean you inherit the other assets the deceased title holder owned.

Those will be disposed by the will or if no will, by intestacy statutory rules , which make no distinction. I would be very surprised if English law were different.

Welcome writersblock!