If you're pro Self ID for trans people please could you explain it to me?

Who would employ a man claiming to be a self identified woman as a rape counsellor?

And if you don't gel with a counsellor for any reason I would assume you can request a swap.

Yes let's put the onus for requesting a different counsellor on the woman who has just been raped. She doesn't know which way is up but let's put it on her to make a fuss (because it would be a fuss) and risk being marked down as a difficult bigot when she should have just been given a female counsellor in the first place because basic human decency.

Sex is a protected characteristic and there are exceptions specifically to deal with these situations in the equality act.

@flamingo sorry for what you went through and I completely agree you should have a female counsellor (not a trans gender woman).

My point is I don't believe that allowing people to self identify will change this. There should be a way to allow people who feel they are the wrong gender to correct that feeling while still keeping victims safe.

I think the number of people who pretend to be TIM for this reason will be small and there will be ways to keep everyone comfortable.

No problem, do stick around. We have a few GC men posting on Fem Chat.

And thanks for the welcome :)

so we have to fight to preserve clarity of meaning

Not only this, we have to fight for more clarity than we have currently. Both the GRA and the EA make a total fudge of sex and gender, using them interchangeably as if they meant the same thing. Maybe they did in 2004 and possibly too in 2010? In both Acts 'gender' seems to be just being used as a politer word for 'sex'.

Did anybody have a 'gender identity' in 2004?

There is a proposal to change 'gender reassignment' to 'gender identity' in the EA. Gender identity is how someone thinks about themselves in their own mind. It's purely subjective.

The Scottish consultation includes a proposal to give people a GRC for being 'non-binary'. How would this work exactly? What would it be for? Will we still have 'non-binary' people in 5 years time or will the term have become outdated and discriminatory?

When language and meanings are in this much flux it's a very bad time to pin them down in law. Imagine if adding 'cowabunga' to the dictionary had had major life impacts for half the population.

Yes, ova. After a Lot of thinking I've come to the same view as most of the posters on this board. I believe trans people should be accepted but I don't agree with self ID and TRA ideology. Its not only harmful to woman, but the overall trans movement

Welcome chambeni

I do understand the frustration that people with gender dysphoria feel about gatekeeping and the length of time it takes but puberty blockers, hormones and surgery are irreversible procedures and not to be taken lightly. It would be highly unethical for people to be rushed into these decisions with disastrous consequences.

I would also like to point out that other groups of people in society are subject to far worse timescales of gatekeeping. For example it's taken me 8 years to get extra education funding for my disabled child.

However the timescales of getting a GRC are a bit of a moot point in the face of self ID becoming law. Because then literally anyone will be able to identify as any sex with nothing more than a signature or maybe just their say so.

You say you are already gender critical so I'm sure you can see the massive implications of that.

Then you're clearly talking about people with gender dysphoria who have had extensive treatment. And what do you mean what about butch women? There's been plenty of them in the lesbian community for years, I'm related to two of them, often mistaken for men.

What does that have to do with self ID and piss taking men who intend to access women using it?

That's helpful chambini, thanks

Myunicornfliessideways I've met transwomen that you definitely wouldn't know. When I worked for Vice Squad it was something that caused great hilarity with new officers who didn't realise they were dealing with men.

What about butch women, I used to work with a woman who was regularly identified as male. Very embarrassing for all concerned.

Why are you so confident LML? Genuine Q

Hi all! I believed for a long time that I was a feminist and a believer in trans rights despite being a gay man meaning I didn't have any experience of belonging to either of those groups.

I don't have many trans friends but when I started asking questions to some of them that, unbeknown to me, were transphobic, TERFy, and gender critical I began to see that TRA's are not really willing to engage in a debate - and I'm usually all about the debate! My questions centred on the untested safety of giving puberty blockers to young people and the necessity of a mental health assessment for GRA to be granted.

Now, I am an empathic person, and in many ways I think my friend is fantastic, so I listened to her counter arguments wanting to understand and see if my feminist leaning mind could understand. It's also an argument I haven't really seen posted on any of the discussions in favour of self-ID here.

It came down to the fact that being subjected to years of medical and psychological scrutiny to prove one is who one says one is is invasive, distressing and demeaning. Why should anybody have to go through that? I never had to prove my sexuality to a doctor or make anybody "believe" me. When put like this, and knowing my friend is an incredibly genuine person who I do view as a woman, well, I did empathise.

Having considered it some more I don't believe it's a fair comparison for many reasons and, after listening to both sides of the argument I think women's rights (as natal females, for want of a better description) need to be protected more. I believe it's wonderful having trans people in society but, being gender critical, I can't help but think the TRA lobby is encouraging old fashioned gender stereotypes that are not built into our brains.

Anyhow, just thought this was an interesting possible pro point for self ID that some might agree with

Granny almost all the time you will know without the slightest difficulty, take a look at videos of India Willoughby who has had extensive treatment. Many who had seen pictures of her looking stunningly feminine were shocked when they saw her walking and talking on Big Brother, that there was no difficulty at all seeing she was biologically male.

Besides, we're mostly talking about men with no gender dysphoria and no history of treatment who under self ID wouldn't need to outwardly make the slightest attempt to present as a woman.

There must be safeguards in place to prevent this, and those same policies should stop fake self identifying men becoming rape counsellors.

Work around teaching, social services, psychology, police, you'll always find a very few people who got into the job for totally the wrong reason and are abusing it. Total straw man.

The issue is that there are a very few occupations and situations where biological women should continue to have the legal right not to be forced to accept a biological male providing care in a vulnerable situation. Do you really feel a raped woman should put her feelings aside to be inclusive and validating to a man?

Really great thread.

A really interesting point there about men and notmen. Self ID does make more sense if you believe men is the default and women is the other. It also makes sense how people say they feel like a woman because what they mean is they don't feel like a stereotypical man.

However, personally, I don’t see woman as notman so although I can see what the pp was saying I fundamentally don’t agree with it. I don’t see woman as notman as I see it as something else, so I don’t see how a Tim becomes a woman because woman is not a notman.

Well what happens if you decide someone isn't a woman and she says she is? Are you going to do an on the spot exam? If their genitals are ambiguous are you going to do an on the spot DNA test?

Everyone is subjected to safeguarding proceduresn not because the number of offenders is so high, but because any place without safeguarding attracts abusers like wasps to jam. It's called gatekeeping. Why remove barriers to offending, just to make TIMs feel more like women?

I don't think a male would ever be employed in a shelter/rape counsellor role. Even if he claimed to be a different gender.

Yes I get exactly where you're coming from Flamingo I do think getting down on their level and using their language is dangerous though, especially because, as you point out, sexual orientation as a protected characteristic may be under threat in the near future.

So much of this debate is about language: woman, female, sex, gender, transgender, transsexual, gender reassignment, cis, lesbian, sexual orientation, sexual preference, vagina fetishist, TERF, bigot, truscum, violence ... and the law is made of words so we have to fight to preserve clarity of meaning.

Sex and sexual orientation are protected characteristics in the equality act. I believe in most situations it's better to simply remind people of that where necessary, rather than go down the route of 'and anyway, even if they weren't ...' because that would suggest we might possibly countenance those protections being removed.

How often do you think this will be an actual problem? Hypothetically it may be possible but it would be very unlikely to happen.

JFC - because, as the push for self-ID shows, these people are unable to perceive the boundaries of others AT BEST, and more often, actively seek to undermine them.

As for males who pose risk to women and children, they will actively seek out the vulnerable wherever the opportunity exists. Just as, in the past, they have spent lifetimes as Catholic priests, youth sports coaches, Scout leaders, gynaecologists, etc etc. Open DV shelters to them via trans self-ID, THAT'S WHERE THEY WILL GO.

Regardless of the possible ulterior motive of a woman, a male bodied person is not appropriate in a shelter/counselling rape victims. How is that not obvious?

What if a woman with an alterior motive becomes a rape counsellor? A woman who doesn't want to help but for some sick reason wants to blame the victims or for any reason not help?

There must be safeguards in place to prevent this, and those same policies should stop fake self identifying men becoming rape counsellors. If they made it past the interview in the first place.

Safe spaces argument is punishing trams gender women for the actions of abusive men.

Sex segregated areas is punishing men for the actions of other abusive men. NAMALT. Etc.

Do you disagree with sex segregation?

LML83 wrote - "Who would employ a man claiming to be a self identified woman as a rape counsellor?"
Women's Aid are reviewing this employment possibility, as detailed in the thread link in my previous post.

"And if you don't gel with a counsellor for any reason I would assume you can request a swap."
What if your assumption is wrong if self-declared gender identity replaces biological sex as a protected characteristic for employment (which I think is the government's proposal)?

"How often do you think this will be an actual problem? Hypothetically it may be possible but it would be very unlikely to happen."
Where is your evidence that it is very unlikely? I hope it is not just wishful thinking. Even if it happened only once, it would be too often.