Women’s Aid considers employing self-declared transwomen [i.e. men] in women's shelters

It used to be that job postings from the local WA indicated 'female only' but today they have all benn changed to 'women only'. I think they have already made their decision.

velourvoyageur

Lol. That made me laugh.

We're on the back foot, hopping on the back burner, on the defensive, climbing up the slippery ladder!

Still, you can't fault our multitasking.

So, although it has been something that has felt far too taboo to mention, and still is in a lot of places, I do believe that's changing.

Heartening to hear you say this :) guess we have to get over the hump of it being in the open first.

I don't think I'm more cynical than the next person, I have no reason to be, although this issue has certainly fuelled my cynicism.

Ah yes, this old chestnut. That we have to preemptively defend ourselves against dismissal on the grounds of being 'unreasonably cynical', as if on transition you become a blank slate & the socialisation which leads to others within your demographic committing the vast majority of sexual crimes is wiped out. Sigh!
During a discussion with a friend last month, they basically explained that I wasn't being objective on the issue due to a certain past experience, the implication being that if I hadn't gone through it, I'd be fine with male bodies in female spaces. Not a massive step from that to branding as hysterical people who have a direct insight into men treating women badly and as a result sidelining them.

I don't think you should have to include that caveat but sadly, while people don't understand that the socialisation of male children and adults is inextricable from the values we assign to sexual difference, I guess people will expect it at some point in the discussion. Debating this issue becomes a game, where one party has weighted dice and the other doesn't - those seen as 'TERFs' are being given so little political power, we have to jump through all these discursive hoops just to buy space in which we're listened to (and even then it's a minefield). Almost a bit like the beauty myth - we think in jumping through these hoops we'll get to be considered on the same level eventually, but of course having to be on the defensive just reinforces the fact that we do not approach the issue from equal standpoints, so are buggered from the start and deluded to boot. And at the same time, simply saying 'I am not unreasonable, I am not transphobic' is undermining in acknowledging that these things are linked to us (even if in order to then dispell the link).

velourvoyageur

Believe me, I get it.

I've noticed even in the last few months, that AGP is worming its way out of the woodwork.

All sorts of things are contributing to it. The assertion by TRAs that you don't need gender dysphoria to be trans. That's a bit of a strange claim to make.

It's pretty hard to make, I don't have gender dysphoria, but I really like wearing women's clothes, not sound dodgy. Even if you pepper it with 'authentic identity' and 'just want to be myself'.

Plus the complacency of, having assumed the protective mantle of transgender person, you can start talking about how sexy is to buy women's clothes. ( several Guardian articles).

So, although it has been something that has felt far too taboo to mention, and still is in a lot of places, I do believe that's changing.

Absolutely, Datun. I agree it's something that must be brought up. But in this climate it's a hard tightrope to walk - either you compromise too much, or you (inadvertently or not) push the wrong button that signals the end of the conversation.

It's incredibly frustrating. And I think you're right. They will be concentrating on damaged women, rather than dodgy men who claim they're women.

velourvoyageur

I agree that AGP is one of those topics that feels like a bridge too far. Nonetheless, it is vital to the issue.

It's worth noting that Stonewall includes cross dressing fetishists under the banner of transgender.

The existence of the fetish doesn't get more authenticated than that.

It's as though people simply don't acknowledge the existence of transvestism. Why not? It's been around forever.

Miranda Yardley has written a blog called where have all the transvestites gone?

Because we all know where. They are now transwomen.

It really takes a wilful blindness not to acknowledge that a man who enjoys cross dressing would immediately seek the legitimacy of transgenderism.

I don't think I'm more cynical than the next person, I have no reason to be, although this issue has certainly fuelled my cynicism.

But seriously, sex offences, rapes, the MeToo campaign, the Jimmy Savile scandal, Operation Yewtree.

Male predators aren't exactly thin on the ground.

As soon as a man insists on access to women, I can't understand how most people don't immediately think, hang on.

Datun,

Yes, I have emailed her those concerns, and I think they were taken seriously. She said I made a good point about male sex offenders changing their names and presenting as women with no criminal history. I honestly don't think she'd personally considered the necessity of DBS checks (and if you can self-ID as a woman and change your name simply by filling in a form, then I'd wonder how thorough those DBS checks would be anyway).

Lots of refuges have children and this is basic safeguarding.

I think one of the issues that we have is that people who work in things like domestic violence refuges tend to be focused on that and perhaps not so much aware of the trans movement. I don't think the person that I emailed has had any reason to be aware of it.

That's the problem, I think. They can't see it coming at all. And once self-ID transwomen are let into the tent, there will be no getting them out again.

I think people are very unwilling to even consider that transwomen may be autogynephiles. I'm reluctant to mention it because I predict they'll just have the knee-jerk 'TERF propaganda' reaction and switch off.
I had a long conversation with my friend recently (100% agrees that transwomen are women and should have a shot at shortlists, be allowed in refuges etc) and it was actually a very calm and good debate - but when I cautiously broached the subject of AGN, they just sort of smiled thinly and we just moved on without addressing that point. I could practically see the 'oh god This Is Transphobia 2K18' thought bubble above their head.
The significant number of male Tinder users in their 20s and 30s who set their preferences to 'women' and refer to themselves as 'transgirls' in the bio doesn't seem to ring any alarm bells for many either, that I know of.
I'd be wary of pushing the point before people show themselves a bit open-minded to what you're saying.

Maybe would help to quote the 41% of UK transwomen prisoners in 2017 sex offences stat (but then I feel like I'd have to debunk that Independent article at the same time in case they then go to check the figures, fall on the article and then dismiss the stat without pursuing further) before talking about AGN...makes it more approachable via association.

Popchyk

Have you emailed them what you have just predicted?

if the email exchanges ongoing, with what sounds like a sensible person, can you cite examples and send them? The man who tied up the rape refuge in Canada for 12 years, for instance.

And alert them to autogynephilia.

Yes, I do think WA are being exceptionally naïve here.

I think in their eyes transwomen are older people who have lived quietly as women for many years. I don't think they realise that this is a tiny group and it is much overshadowed by predatory men who intend to self-declare themselves as women.

If you believe the TRA rhetoric, transwomen are the most disadvantaged, the most suicidal, the most beaten of all "women". Surely their greater need for support would come before the rest of womankind? If refuges are based on need, then surely transwomen should come top every single time? Plus I suspect transwomen coming out of prison would also expect to be automatically accommodated there.

I've emailed our nearest shelter and had a good email exchange with the female manager there. My own feeling (not that she said that) is that WA will accept self-identified transwomen and then try to manage the situation such that women are either unaffected or minimally affected. I suspect that they think they'll be dealing with perhaps 10 transwomen (who have lived as women for decades) nationwide per year.

I don't think for a moment that they realise what they are up against. The first man to be turned down a place in the refuge will sue or kick up a fuss in the media. This will then happen when men are turned down for jobs and then senior jobs there. There will be men at every level in WA. Not by any coincidence, but because this is what they are setting out to do.

And then really, what's the actual point of WA?

That's the point, though, is that the various legal and cultural challenges aimed at women's orgs are trying to prevent any such triage process from happening. Your org could employ 50% males individuals and, if there was a single position for which "must be female" was part of the requirements, that's the position they'd hone in on. In the Kimberly Nixon case he already had a job at a different rape crisis org that did employ trans women, but still went after Vancouver Rape Relief specifically because they didn't.

Actually, men can play an important role in the support of women fleeing domestic abuse. We employ a male IDVA (Supporting the most serious cases). He used to be a police officer specialising in domestic abuse and has been incredibly effective in supporting women though the legal processes to protect themselves and their children. Our triage process ensures that he is placed only with women for whom a male worker is appropriate.

I make this point because I think that it is important to draw the distinction between male workers and those masquerading as female workers.

My post was never that I don't get it. I absolutely do. That other thread linked is saying what I'd expect. But as per my posts I have been not all men-ed in the most unlikeliest of company/circumstances. Time will tell I guess. I think there's so many key moments missed. Common sense always on the hop. Now WA will conduct a survey (whatever their exact plan is) and I can see how it can be shaped to give results that will not be as per the thread Datun linked. I hope not.

A lot of people don't really think ahead about this sort of thing and then they get a male marriage guidance counsellor who is unconsciously biased or realise that they do mind a man doing their smear test when actually confronted with one. Or they find a bloke a bit creepy working with their kids and want to pull them out.
If you had asked them beforehand they would have said they had no problem with it.

Messagefromyoshimi

This might sound stupid but I've been wondering what DA victims would say if asked about this issue.

One such person has started a thread. Unfortunately, for her, although it says feminist support, it's a little used part of the board.

So here is her answer.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/feminist_support/3158693-self-declared-transgender-males-working-in-womens-refuges

RadicalFern

Also, I feel like nobody’s asking - why do transwomen WANT to work in women’s refuges so much?

Any man who can't understand why women may not want men in rape refugees is exactly the sort of man who should never be considered.

There is no possible rational reason for man to demand access to rape victims.

So it's either for validation, or because of a the sexual fetish involved in autogynephilia, or to just exercise power for the sake of it.

Guardian - my thoughts were based on conversation with victims - only one had stayed in a refuge. Very limited experience but not completely random speculation. I found the responses unsettling because it made me wonder how much we are trained (not really the right word) to deny the reality of our experience.

Clearly I've posted about this in a clumsy way.

Thanks for replying that the views I've heard aren't typical. It's something I've been wondering.

RadicalFern I hadn't really worked out what I think the significance would be if that is the majority feedback. I was worrying more about the implications for influencing policy decisions - rather than the rights/wrongs.
Because arguing it's what women need would seem rather different if it's not backed up by what women are saying.

I think you cannot bring sons 13 yrs and older to refuges. There are other schemes to try to cater to families with older sons.

I have a feeling there will be more than you would think who will not object to men helping them,

Out of interest - what gives you this feeling? Have you spoken to any women who have lived in a refuge before?

(just to let you know my experience of having worked with women who have been victims of DV - I have a very, very strong 'feeling' that the vast majority would mind/feel uncomfortable - but probably wouldn't 'object' out loud)

But Message, it is not right to waive or remove the right to single sex spaces simply because some women don’t have a problem with there being men around.

This might sound stupid but I've been wondering what DA victims would say if asked about this issue. I have a feeling there will be more than you would think who will not object to men helping them, especially if it is put to them within the context of appropriate vetting training etc. I know that sounds naive but I've heard surprising views on this both from victims and from support workers - although not even nearly enough people to generalise. I could be wrong, I think it will be interesting to see what WA come back with.

Also, I feel like nobody’s asking - why do transwomen WANT to work in women’s refuges so much? Because apparently it’s a massive problem to them that they can’t. Why is there such demand?

They absolutely need to be asking that question. And be open to the unpalatable answer.

They don't want to work in the refuges.

They want to fight.

I didn’t know women had to leave their boys behind. That is just heartbreaking.

Also, I feel like nobody’s asking - why do transwomen WANT to work in women’s refuges so much? Because apparently it’s a massive problem to them that they can’t. Why is there such demand?

Yes exactly. They have infiltrated or taken over every women's organisation.

I just had a light bulb moment. The TAs are lobbying hard within Womens aid - and I bet this coincided with the reasonable demand to have women's groups consulted on the GRA.
Women & Equalities will think their job consulting women's groups is done once they speak to the biggest women's charity (without noticing that has been infiltrated and held to ransome by TAs).
Strategic MRA bastards.