Trans Park Run Deletion

I have conceded many times I am not biologically female but that colloquially I am a woman, a trans woman. Does that make sense?

It might, if you defined it properly.

Because, at the moment, we are seeing people acknowledge that they are transwomen, but then acquiring, or trying to acquire everything to do with natal women, as though the differences are negligible. So it would be more than useful if you actually defined what you see as the meaning of the 'colloquial word woman'.

In the interests of honesty, I have to say upfront, I don't think you will be able to do it.

I do not agree with you that the issues faced are superficial. Are you saying a trans woman would only be raped or sexually assaulted if they pass? Not trying to argue this, it is a genuine question.

No, of course not. Men are also raped by other men. Male violence affects everybody. Although they can't get pregnant.

But sexism will not be demonstrated towards transwomen unless the men demonstrating it think those transwomen are women.

It's good that you do not echo the more bonkers narrative of a lot of transactivists. Frankly anyone who does is dismissed out of hand by me.

But there is something I want you to understand.

There are 117 million girl babies who are never born because they are not boys. The only reason for this is that females, globally, are seen as 'lesser than'.

In the last hundred years, women have had to fight for:

The idea that they are not too stupid to educate.

The idea that giving them the vote wouldn't automatically give their husband two votes, because they didn't understand the issues. Illogical.

Right to be able to purchase property, by themself, without the contract being countersigned by a male family member. Because they are crap with money, irrational.

The right to be able to enter a pub and buy an alcoholic drink, without being accompanied by a man. (This only changed in the 1980s). Because they don't have agency over their own choices. Irresponsible.

The right to refuse to have sex with their husband. (1992 is when this law changed. Prior to that rape within marriage was completely illegal). Men are entitled to sex on demand and it is women's job to provide it.

Women are identified because of their biology. The roles and characteristics that they are assigned, as above, are: irrational, illogical, irresponsible, no bodily autonomy, under an obligation to provide sex on demand, not worth paying the same money, because they are simply worth less.

And many, many more. Women here still cannot get an abortion without the permission of two professionals.

All those roles and characteristics are gender. Women fought to change the law, but the misogyny that allowed those laws, still remains.

Your inner sense of being a woman is based on gender. You can't possibly identify with a uterus, fallopian tubes and ovaries. The aspects you might identify with will probably not be those women actually suffer from, because they won't apply. You will want to identify with those that you perceive as being positive. (Feminine, vibrant, caring, cute.)

But feminists are trying to dismantle gender so they are not labelled as anything, other than who they actually are. So no roles, characteristics, or appearances are assigned to them purely on the basis of their biology.

You saying that the definition of women is nothing to do with biology, but to do with the way someone thinks or feels is perpetuating the damage that gender does to women.

Women are oppressed because of their biology, and gender is the means by which it's done.

What on earth is the reasoning for splitting runners by gender?

I can't think of any reason.

The better argument is surely for no categories at all, from a TRA perspective?

That is not an acceptable solution as it's not validating.

Same question goes for changing rooms etc, Material. Why would I want a changing room for people who identify with femininity, or female gender roles? For what purpose?

Here's what confuses me. For argument's sake, let's say that we take the TRA position that 'woman' is a gender and that transwomen are women.

What on earth is the reasoning for splitting runners by gender? You might as well split them by eye colour or favourite movie. Gender doesn't refer to biology, so any person with any characteristics can be any gender. What makes it a sensible way of categorising? The better argument is surely for no categories at all, from a TRA perspective?

I don't need to give you a label of man or woman, because in this sense you indeed "just are". You're an Ada. I'm a Yambabe. Our biology is irrelevant to a degree

I can't tell you how much I'd love to live in that world! But I don't. If I don't actively tell the world who I am, then people will keep telling me I'm someone I'm not. And as nice as it would be to worry less about this label, having the wrong one repeatedly stuck on me is a really unpleasant experience that I'm keen to avoid.

Particularly confusing is that if any change in perception re trans women was to happen it would pretty much have to happen offline, in a space where you can actually see and interact directly with the person. How we perceive people is visceral, it's sight and sound and smell and touch. Words can then change our perception of whether the person is kind, intelligent, etc, but I don't think they can over override what the senses are telling us. So for those of us who've met many trans women offline and have in every case perceived them as male how are words on a screen going to change that in any way?

What's the goal, then, given that neither party is likely to change the mind of the other?

Quite!

Having been bitten by believing a trans woman who came on here with a large violin and huge dose of woe is me, I am highly sceptical these days when trans women come here telling us sad tales and how to do feminism.

You're right of course, that is the heart of it. And as much as I would love universal acceptance of my identity, that's not what you're talking about. You're offering acceptance as long as I pretend to be someone I'm not. And I can't do that. I tried to do it for so long, I really did. And I simply can't anymore.

Actually, that's exactly what I'm talking about. I accept you as you. A discrete person, an individual. I don't need to give you a label of man or woman, because in this sense you indeed "just are". You're an Ada. I'm a Yambabe. Our biology is irrelevant to a degree. It's essential in determining some medical issues, of course, and it needs to be considered to give both of us safety and protections against discrimination based on it.

But you (well your TRA colleagues) are trying to say that Adas are the same as Yambabes. They're not.

I can't speak for anyone else here, this is just my personal opinion. But in simple terms if you could concentrate on being an Ada rather than that Adas and Yambabes are the same you might just find that a whole army of Yambabes has your back

But Ada, your identity is "trans woman". There's nothing wrong with that! In fact it is the identity you specifically chose for yourself, it has not been forced on you by anyone.

Claim it, own it, be it - you are it!

What's the goal, then, given that neither party is likely to change the mind of the other?

LangCleg nails it at 14:26

And you're only offering friendship if we lie about how we perceive you

I don't expect you to lie. I fully acknowledge that some people don't accept my identity, and whilst that's not the greatest feeling in the world, most people I know do accept me for me.

@NatLuc
most women in this thread are using the word woman as a strict biological identifier.

Yes, because that is what the word means. There is no other definition.

You're offering acceptance as long as I pretend to be someone I'm not

And you're only offering friendship if we lie about how we perceive you, which just isn't going to work.

Do try to keep the goady to a minimum, Rat, MNHQ frowns on it you know...

I'm OK with Ada calling herself a woman. She's probably had to go through a lot to get here. I'm fine as long as it is the whole deal... no identifying as a woman because they put on a bit of lippy but the full oestrogen and chop it off deal. That shows commitment. What I don't like is the them competing against natal women as the same physically... because they are simply not. That's not bloody fair.

Parkrun could collate data for trans runners, split by "gender", and make that available.

I've just looked at the Park Run website and it appears that they do split by gender.

Perhaps natal women should ask Park Run if they would kindly do an additional split for natal sex?

I'm just saying that our fundamental starting points are different

I acknowledge that @Yambabe. And I'm going to avoid debating the details of the nature of identity. We both know our own positions, and I'm pretty sure we know each others arguments as well. Neither of us is going to convince the other to change our understanding.

The way forward is going to involve juggling those disparate perspectives

But I would prefer to freely accept you for what you are and live alongside you than be forced to accept you as something you're not and feel bitter and resentful about it, and that to me is the heart of the current self-id debate.

You're right of course, that is the heart of it. And as much as I would love universal acceptance of my identity, that's not what you're talking about. You're offering acceptance as long as I pretend to be someone I'm not. And I can't do that. I tried to do it for so long, I really did. And I simply can't anymore.

Or as I suggested earlier Parkrun could collate data for trans runners, split by "gender", and make that available. Obviously this wouldn't be much use on a local level because of small numbers but if national data was offered then people could actually get a sense of how they're doing in comparison to other people with the same physiological factors impacting their performance without stepping on the toes of women runners.

Ada you say you feel like a women , and more, you are a woman. However, we women don't "feel" like we are women , we watch our womanhood emerge as teenagers. We see that we are women when we menstruate. We acknowledge that we are women when we buy pregnancy tests. We suffer as women during childbirth. We nurture in the best possible way as women when we gestate and breastfeed. These and other issues did not and will not happen to you. These things, and many others, only happen to women and that's why we know we're women. It's evidence based Ada. Your feelings are not evidence-based. In fact all evidence strongly points to maleness. Be a feminine man by all meano but face facts.

Just be careful with your "to a feminist" points there Lang, and also when you say "as feminists perceive it".

You don't speak for all feminists.

And it looks like you mean to.

So hold on a wee moment...

I was probably a bit too harsh on the previous thread by saying she was cheating by entering as a woman. With a male anatomy, and despite oestrogen she would have advantages over other natal women. So what should she enter as... well what about just running and not scanning her code? That'd be a solution instead of taking other women's times.

@spontaneousgiventime - If I mistook your intent in your words then I apologise however they were patronising. To me at least. I apologise for striking back with the 'spit and seethe' statement. It is not a case of trying to belittle you. I genuinely took your comment about dress wearing, makeup blabbing and hair flicking to be quite stereotypical. which is not fair. Neither is referring to an appendage that I have as personifying me. Let us just agree that there are some rights which on both sides of the fence should be fought for but that in trans rights, these need to be carefully considered so as not to infringe or endanger natal woman whenever possible?

Sorry, they were not patronising at all. I write here by what I learn here and elsewhere. When I first heard about self ID I wanted to learn from the women here and also trans women so I could form my opinions on my own. I read two trans forums, Angels based here in the UK, Susan's place based in the USA. I felt by reading both I could get a better idea of the trans issue. The vast majority of things I read were about HRT, boobs, make-up, hair, shoes and clothes. I also read how women should do as they're told and give up their spaces and also how spouses of trans women (yes, just trans women) should put up and shut up and accept their husband was now their wife and accept being a lesbian. I have purposely named both forums so people can judge for themselves.

You may have an 'appendage' you don't like but you have it. That means, should you decide to go into women's spaces then again, women and children (young girls) have to put up and shut up about people with a penis in their spaces - that is misogyny.

If you want rights as trans people, that's fine, let us know and we will all come and support you. We will not support you appropriating women's spaces - ever!

I do not think it combative at all, I know that I take too long to get to my point sometimes but only because I am trying to put my entire point across.

Ok. Well, in that spirit, let me break down this dynamic - which, as I say, is very typical and not unusual or peculiar to you hereabouts - as feminists perceive it:

• You arrived on this thread with a thousand word-plus post that was all about yourself with lengthy autobiographical details that most people would be sympathetic about. You ignored the interests of women even though you expended all those words

• To a feminist, this is an appeal to the female socialisation of women, designed to manipulate them into putting their interests in the topic of this thread below your own.

• When you got some pushback on this you became rude and demanding and made a number of offensively sexist remarks (eg "natal women should helping to protect us").

• To a feminist, this is a display of male entitlement and anger at encountering the word "no".

My assumption is that you have joined this thread in order to persuade feminist women out of their view that Parkrun participants should categorise themselves by the correct sex, or at least mark themselves as assisted so that women can accurately compare their performance with other women.

I hope this helps explain why your approach is less productive than you may have hoped.