Follow on thread III - Feeling sad and weary that feminists and trans-women are constantly pitted against one another.

I think - (sorry to speak for you) Perfectly meant - going along with the consensus on MN FWR, rather than the Status Quo.

That doesn't make much sense.

How would you describe the 'status quo' and in what ways do you not support it?

I don't support the status quo. I've explicitly stated what I think is wrong with the way things currently are and what I'd like to see change. I haven't been called any of those things.

I learned anyone not willing to support the status quo is called a TRA, a troll, a sea lion and a pedophile sympathiser.

I don't think it was your not supporting the status quo that led to you being called TRA, troll, or sea lion - I think that was more how you flung around inflammatory words, changed your name with an odd explanation, 'high fived' someone else who was behaving in a similar way, and co-opted the language of your 'opponents' for your arguments....

As far as the pedophile sympathiser - I can't see how that came about - it was a first for me.

Anyway, for me personally I think you have done well perfectly sticking it out and I admire your tenacity.

Pencils I learned anyone not willing to support the status quo is called a TRA, a troll, a sea lion and a pedophile sympathiser.

And now I know.

Great.

So, cards on the table, what do you now know that you didn't 2227 posts ago? What insight have you gained? What, in your opinion, given all you have learnt from these threads, is 'going on'?

is another person's necessary articulation of how things will end up if TRAs successfully erode the category of woman as meaning biological female requiring protections and specific rights in law.

YY. And that's why it hit such a nerve with people both anti and pro these changes. Because it really brings home the direction of travel. Nowhere to hide.

I never claimed to be an expert on anything. I came on here after that 'letter to the woman who called me a terf' thread as I care about both women's rights and trans rights. I was aware the Self ID proposal was causing a big furore on here, everyone was going around peak transing and calling themselves Spartacus, I wanted to find out what was going on so I came on the feminist board to get some insight. And now I know.

Love that sea lion meme Xenophile

Well I suppose one person's bloody ridiculous, full of scaremongering, mean spirited and made out trans people were bad men in dresses trying to violate women is another person's necessary articulation of how things will end up if TRAs successfully erode the category of woman as meaning biological female requiring protections and specific rights in law.

perfectly at the end of thread 2 you appeared to have no idea what you were talking about. You proposed:

1. Leave the GRA well alone
2. Self ID would work on a honour system controlled by women

Clearly this is bobbins because self-ID is the change that is proposed to the GRA. Do you now understand this?

I know you are seeking compromise, how are your suggestions going down with the transactivists?

Guidance is not the law itself and can be legally challenged. It's an incredibly risky thing to do in the current climate though and would take a huge amount of money and effort. It also involves knowing that the guidance has misinterpreted the law in the first place.

Fantastic summary of the issue pencils

Guardian because that letter to the woman who called me a terf was bloody ridiculous, full of scaremongering, mean spirited and made out trans people were bad men in dresses trying to violate women.

Guardian if you look at the last thread, I pointed out that not all trans people support the TRAs. Just like not all Muslims support Isis

I am pro trans but that does not mean pro TRA and I think there is a lot of confusion on here between the two.

I dunno perfectly I think the phrase "I support the rights of transsexuals to live in peace, but my problem is with TRAs" or thereabouts is pretty common on the FWR board - years of transactivists has meant that it is as common as NAMALT, I don't see why this thread would be any exception.

My observation is that you have shifted position a bit, or perhaps you have clarified your position, perhaps through being less combative/mudslinging?

Anyway, if you do mean as you said, agreeing with Datun above, then you agree with the general MN FWR consensus - so I don't know why you were so offended about the 'letter to the woman who called me a terf'....

It seems so many are fearful the law will not protect them

Because at the moment it doesn't. The fear is legitimate.

Organisations don't on the whole go trawling through the actual legislation to find out what they are supposed to be doing. Legislation is not reader-friendly and also cannot be properly understood without considering case law. Miss something, fail to follow sub-para b(ii) where it sends you back to another schedule, section and para UNLESS sub-para f (iv) applies (but see also ECHR J Bloggs vs. Herts County Council 2011) and you can land in court (all details here made up by the way but you get the picture).

So instead organisations rely on guidance. This is written sometimes by the government and sometimes by other organisations that interpret the law into human-friendly language and apply it to specific situations. Increasingly, guidance around trans equality is written by campaigning groups such as GIRES and Mermaids. They don't tell orgs about those exceptions. Instead they tell them trans people must be treated as their preferred gender for all purposes or they might kill themselves and no org wants that.

Most orgs (businesses, charities, govt. departments etc.) are not deeply invested in this issue. This is all just red tape they have to comply with before they get on with whatever their purpose is. So they just pick some off the shelf guidance that seems to be widely endorsed by other respectable organisations, maybe tweak the wording a bit for brand and stick their logo on it and call it done.

Guidance is not the law itself and can be legally challenged. It's an incredibly risky thing to do in the current climate though and would take a huge amount of money and effort. It also involves knowing that the guidance has misinterpreted the law in the first place.

Guardian if you look at the last thread, I pointed out that not all trans people support the TRAs. Just like not all Muslims support Isis

I am pro trans but that does not mean pro TRA and I think there is a lot of confusion on here between the two.

"I felt we had reached a point where pro trans feminists could back the feminist movement without throwing their transgender friends under a bus.

Wish we could have left it at that."

Whereas I am happy about this thread #3 because now you have explicitly stated:

"The really important part is the exemptions. And knowing how and when to invoke them.

Datun I completely agree, and also that women know these laws actually exist. It seems so many are fearful the law will not protect them."

I didn't realise you were so strong in your opposition to the TRAs efforts to erode those exemptions and their vociferous and sometimes violent efforts to prevent discussions around them until you said that.

I wonder if posters can spot a textbook case of this:?

Inevitable switch and bait.

perfectly The reason that women are fearful that the law won't protect them is because ALL of the pressure groups are actively promoting ignorance of the law. ALL the new guidelines and every one of the training packs that I have seen makes NO reference to the exemptions and they ALL without exception, promote the 'if women don't take self ID people into sex segregated spaces then the women are transphobic and must be moved / punished.
That is why there is such a backlash - these organisations are only interested in promoting their self ID rights and have zero interest in the welfare / safety of women or children.

Anyway I was delighted with the outcome of Thread #2 - I felt we had reached a point where pro trans feminists could back the feminist movement without throwing their transgender friends under a bus.
Wish we could have left it at that.
Doesn't look like I'll be getting that apology...!

Guardian I am sure it was a shock tactic using a slippery slope argument! But it was actually nothing to do with trans people as it's about sexual preference so irrelevant to the discussion as well as being very offensive.

The really important part is the exemptions. And knowing how and when to invoke them.

Datun I completely agree, and also that women know these laws actually exist. It seems so many are fearful the law will not protect them.

Therefore insinuating that because I support LGBT equality I would be happy to support paedophilia as a sexual preference.

Or it could be a shock tactic using the slippery slope argument?

ie- if you believe/argue that 'equality = equal treatment' (rather than equality = equal freedom from disadvantage), then where do you draw the line? If the Ts are able to claim to be identical to LGBs and women, then surely nonces can use the same reasoning, piggy-backing on LGB or other rights?

The rights of trans and gender non-conforming people may overlap with LGB or women's rights in some ways, but they are not the same and they don't really belong squarely in either movement.

Datun my suggestion would be trans women are given an enhanced DBS / CRB check as part of the GRC process and if anything shows up they should be banned from using female facilities or having access to vulnerable women.

Except a fetish isn't illegal and won't show up on a DBS.

I agree that self ID shouldn't happen as a process. And that under the EA, it's here anyway.

The really important part is the exemptions. And knowing how and when to invoke them.

So a woman who is uncomfortable with a cross dressing fetishist giving it large and causing discomfort in a changing rooms at Marks & Spencer's can slap a leaflet on the counter explaining the exemptions and asking staff to invoke them.

And the staff realise they can, and will, purely on that basis.

so well put pencilsinspace . Gender non-conformity sounds like it would be a good option for some people at least. Maybe not the AGPs though