How can we work towards a constructive debate about all things transgender?

I think some of the problem is who owns the internet.

It's looking, anecdotally, as though a lot of late-transitioning men are in very tech-savvy positions.

Sittin. Great question. I don't know the answer but I was one of te well meaning lefties before I saw the threads here so maybe just direct them to the discussions here?

On the point of law I would be up for challenging this on any point, agree or not. If Labour feel they can break the law vs democratically change it, we are no longer living in a democracy.

So, I'm learning lots from this thread, but still more qs- appols if they are stupid! Is there a reason why no one says 'transvestite' any more? And secondly any suggestions for gentle Facebook stuff - my pals are pretty much nice vaguely lefties liberal types who I suspect would probably instinctively support GRA - but probably wouldn't if given all the facts!

Completely agree and up for challenging on points of law.

But the bigger game is preventing the law being changed. At the moment there is low awareness of the actual issues outside trans and radfem universes and those currently impacted.

Where there is awareness the debate has been twisted to obfuscate the actual issues. This has led to a culture of fear as PP have said and people feeling they can't argue for women.

Both of these things have to change if we want the GRC to retain any meaning and protection for bio women at all. Because MPs will decide and they respond to popular opinion. And to those who make their voices heard - which fear is currently preventing for many who see the problems.

The thing is, the issues are not going to be resolved by debate. The key issues will be resolved by the law, and clarity around rights.

Yep. Which is why it is so outrageous that the Labour Party announced that they want to get ahead of the law vis a vis AWS.

Political parties propose laws then steer them through Parliament so they get put into statute. Then the rule of law applies to everyone. Including political parties.

That the Labour Party see nothing wrong in announcing that the rule of law does not apply to them is, for me, something that disqualifies them from office. And I say that as a bloody member of the party! (Not for much longer if they seriously continue to show contempt for the rule of law.)

Had=has

The law, yes. But who makes the law? Politicians. And what affects them is debate and lobbying and sharing opinions and what is attracting attention in the media and online and how many people seem to notice and care about decisions they will make. At the moment the only really visible voices are TRAs. This had to change.

The thing is, the issues are not going to be resolved by debate. The key issues will be resolved by the law, and clarity around rights.
If/when this is confirmed, there will be winners and losers, and the losers will continue to lobby etc and the winners will be able to simply say ‘its the law’.
Until the law is made clearer, I expect the number of extremists will grow as people become more frustrated and more fearful or losing what they think they should rightfully have.

This is exactly what we need to shine a light on, so a proper debate can be had by MPs, actual stakeholders, the mainstream media: The trans people I know are horrified by the actions of transactivists and say they do not speak for them in any way. They are also massively against self-ID but apparently when they try to raise this they also get death threats and the likes and just get branded 'truscum'

How do you debate a religious belief? That's what "trans women are women" is. Facts that contradict the person's belief are then a test of their faith which they will attempt to rise to.

I don't think you need to do this. Accept and embrace whatever gender identities people have - it's not something you can change and it doesn't really matter, just make it very clear that this has absolutely nothing to do with sex.

Gender is not sex.

Fight to keep areas where biology makes a difference (health, prisons, sports) separate based on sex.

In my (albeit very limited) experience. Trans women do not all want to have a debate. Those I know have had a pretty tough time and want to keep their heads down. They would not want anyone to see what’s in their underwear and would avoid shared changing room situations like the plague.
The problem is the crazy folk like the man with the huge breast implants but working penis who wants to be in a woman’s prison. These people are not the majority.

This is my experience also. The trans people I know are horrified by the actions of transactivists and say they do not speak for them in any way. They are also massively against self-ID but apparently when they try to raise this they also get death threats and the likes and just get branded 'truscum'

Yes I agree the constructive debate has to happen in the middle. I am definitely not suggesting try to convince TRAs. That truly would be a pointless waste of time and energy.

There can be a constructive debate, but only by the people in the middle. The ones with views towards either side are always going to want things 100% their way because they know they're 100% right.

And Trans Identifying Male (TIM) makes no sense at all. To say that they identify as trans? They don't! Whether right or wrong they identify as women. Using TIM is like saying "you don't believe what you believe. Let me tell you what you believe!"

I have no intention of working together with any TRA. Our goals are objectively different and for me, there is no middle ground. In fact, I see them as the enemy. For me, it is a just war question to some degree - would I enter into an alliance with someone who was either inherently evil or obviously has me in their sights in some way. It's Chamberlain appeasing Hitler all over again.

I am more than happy to work with 'old style' transwomen (and any old-style transmen out there) because I think that our interests segue and there is room for dialogue about common ground, respective needs and goals and possible strategies.

I am also more than happy to work with the parents of transing young people, assuming they are not pushing the Mermaid bollocks line.

Finally, I think it is important to not assume that we are a homogenous group. Within us, BME, disabled, lesbian women may have needs that are different or similar but reflective of a different level of need.

I just think women need to hold up a great big STOP sign.

Trans people are already protected in law from discrimination in employment, housing and the like. And are protected from face-to-face abuse in terms of hate crimes.

Trans people already have access to free NHS therapy, medication and surgery where needed.

Trans people already have a legislated route to change their legal gender - which also changes their legal sex. The gatekeeping is already minimal.

THEY. DON'T. NEED. ANY. MORE. RIGHTS.

We women don't need a constructive debate to work out how to kindly explain this to a movement that has been overtaken by violent misogynists. We just need a fuckload of STOP signs. Enough so the politicians shit themselves and stop taking away our rights in order to pander to a load of patriarchal arseholes.

Well, that's how I see it, anyway!

Sitting a woman's place has some great stuff on contacting your MP. Will see if I can find a link

We can challenge it Upstart. Men don't always win over all women. I have my hairs out all over the shop today.

We need to challenge it. It needs to get out in the wider daylight and the arguments properly debated.

'Woman' and 'Female', 'Man' and 'Male'describe biology, not gender.
'Feminine and 'masculine'' are social constructs dependent on culture.

We can't challenge it. This is male driven. In any situation the victim cannot challenge the bully, it takes a person the bully considers to be an authority to do that. The bully cannot see their victim as a real person.

Women are told their hairis oppressive to men, and they have to cover it. They cannot uncover their hair in front of a biological male, no matter how he identifies.
How are those women supposed to access a smear test if they cannot ask for a female nurse?

Yes MsBeau, I think definitions are so important here. Legally and in the debate more generally. We already have a bit going on what is a woman?
What do people mean by and understand by 'trans' and 'trans woman'? My OH was gobsmacked to discover that even with a GRC transwomen often still have dicks. Let alone the self-defining floodgates. I think most people - including me a few weeks ago - have no idea either.
What specifically do trans activists mean when they accuse others of bullying, abuse, violence? Where are the clips of feminists beating up transpeople vs the other way round?
Etc

I fully understand why the focus on these threads is on transwomen. I am struck by (but not really surprised by) the TRAs singular focus on transwomen and not all trans people.

There are a growing number of gender non conforming people, for whom solutions lay in removing gender role and expression expectations. I am not aware of any TRAs campaigning for this!

I agree that what is needed is (I) a legal definition of the terms woman, man, girl and boy (ii) a formal declaration of the reasoning for exemptions that allow for sex segregated spaces/service (iii) continued drive to challenge gender stereotypes.

I think the absence of legal definitions play a big part in fuelling the problems.

I actually don’t mind recognising somebody’s “chosen gender” as long as services remain sex segregated not gender segregated.

In my (albeit very limited) experience. Trans women do not all want to have a debate. Those I know have had a pretty tough time and want to keep their heads down. They would not want anyone to see what’s in their underwear and would avoid shared changing room situations like the plague.
The problem is the crazy folk like the man with the huge breast implants but working penis who wants to be in a woman’s prison. These people are not the majority.

I agree about the use of 'trans woman' (I find it confusing - for ages I thought a trans woman was a woman who had transitioned to a man). What about 'female identifying man'? Clear and accurate. Acknowledging that they identify as female (gender) but not sex (woman). I'm going to write to my mp today - any hints? I'd love to put something on Facebook too - but afraid - I only have a small number of people on there and they are all rl friends!