Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Please can someone who thinks that TWAW..

336 replies

BertrandRussell · 22/09/2018 01:03

...explain to me the intellectual process that got you there? I promise -and as far as I can I promise on behalf of other people - not to challenge or argue and only ask clarification questuons. I just want to understand, even if I don't agree.

OP posts:
MsBeaujangles · 22/09/2018 13:32

Teddy

I think it would be very wrong to expect a trans person to use facilities designated for their biological sex.
I think it would be very wrong to expect person of one sex to share sex specific facilities with people of the opposite sex.

I don't agree with any solutions that requires either of the above. There are solutions that do not require the above expectations, however, they are often rejected on the basis that they recognise sex based rights.

Can you fight for trans rights without trying to erode sex based rights? Many trans people can and do!

Ereshkigal · 22/09/2018 13:31

Yes I'd love an explanation of why that is necessarily the case.

Molokonono · 22/09/2018 13:28

but in every day life we rely more on the social construct of male and female

do we?

BrownPaperTeddy · 22/09/2018 13:26

@FermatsTheorem

Thank you for that explanation and I understand all of the reasons why and agree with them.

I think my difficulty is with the how.

How do we apply it in every day life?

We might agree, or disagree, on the scientific explanation of what is male or female but in every day life we rely more on the social construct of male and female.

Toilets and changing rooms can largely be overcome by individual cubicles, apart from where they create difficulty for women with children.

Sports there appears to be no answer too.

There is no way to reconcile the sides and yet if we insist on dividing into only 2 groups, male and female, then some way of defining who is in what group has to be found.

AnchorMum · 22/09/2018 13:18

That's so positive to hear Teddy. And I really hope you continue to contribute your thoughtful posts to the discussions.

FermatsTheorem · 22/09/2018 13:16

Perhaps one way through your confusion is to think of it in terms of "Chesteron's fence". Chesterton was talking about a new land owner wanting to remove a fence. Before he does so, Chesterton argues, he should first think about why the fence is there.

So - sex segregated sports. Are these just a hang-over from the days when women were treated as weak, delicate flowers? No, because there are genuine physiological differences between the sexes which mean that women cannot compete fairly against men and stand a chance of winning.

Sex segregated toilets. Are these just a hang over from Victorian days where women were thought of as the delicate sex? No, Victorian women actually had to fight for the creation of women's toilets, to enable them to get out of the domestic sphere of the home and into the public spheres of education and politics - and they needed sex-segregated toilets for reasons of safety. As do women in countries like India where absence of women's toilets is still a major barrier to women's participation in society, and where women are at risk of UTIs because of holding urine in all day, because the only way women in rural villages feel safe is to go, en masse, to the field set aside for toileting once a day, because if they go individually there's a very high risk they will be raped. Sex, not gender, segregated toilets arose for very good reasons and continue to be needed for very good reasons. (Which is why the TRA argument that they are in any way analogous to racially segregated toilets in the deep South prior to the civil rights movement is so TOTALLY FUCKING OFFENSIVE it's untrue).

Ereshkigal · 22/09/2018 13:12

The reason I continue to look at and post on these boards is in the hope that I will see something that will be the key to it making sense for me.

The trouble is there is no solution which will equally please males who actively want to violate females' boundaries either for validation or other personal reasons, and females who want privacy from said males. NATALT, obviously.

BrownPaperTeddy · 22/09/2018 13:06

@AnchorMum

I'm sorry for what has happened and how it has divided your family.

That must be incredibly difficult.

You are right - I am struggling.

I find it hard to reconcile the rights of the individual with the rights of the group when upholding the rights of one side will automatically erode the rights of the other side.

The reason I continue to look at and post on these boards is in the hope that I will see something that will be the key to it making sense for me.

VickyEadie · 22/09/2018 13:05

Anchor

Thank you for an articulate voice from someone with more 'skin in the game' than most people.

Molokonono · 22/09/2018 13:05

If this full room of people that Rat is speaking to is there for medical reasons; how would you direct the people who need a smear test to one door, and the people who need a prostrate exam to another?

Is there a word for each definitive group?

Are we really now going to say that 'those that need a smear go through the pink door, and those that need a prostrate exam go through the blue door'?

Or is painting the doors pink and blue seen as non-inclusive in the first place?

Ereshkigal · 22/09/2018 13:03

Yes, thank you Anchor. So sorry this issue has had such a personal cost for you Thanks

VickyEadie · 22/09/2018 13:03

Please stop using the idea that it's only religious women who will be excluded from public space when self-id goes through. It's so reductive. It's also a fallacy.

Yes. I'm entirely atheist and know that self-id means I am likely to have to give up using my gym changing room - for my own privacy and safety. Self-id means I am likely to be extremely fearful if I have to go into hospital for any overnight stays - and so on.

But thinking about others than myself - women in prisons are already being placed in danger of sexual assault because self-id is already being used to place transwomen there. Self-id means that my young relatives at school are likely to be made to change, shower and compete in sports with boys - because schools are already adopting 'self-id' principles (despite them not actually even applying to school-age children). Similarly girl guides, etc etc.

Ereshkigal · 22/09/2018 13:02

Then that is where we agree to disagree.

Fine with me! I'm not changing my views any time soon.

FermatsTheorem · 22/09/2018 13:01

Thank you anchor for that - it's a really helpful, rounded post about the complexity and emotional cost of this situation. Flowers

Ereshkigal · 22/09/2018 13:01

But they aren't. Because all of the arguments centre on trans women.

I think you know what I mean. MTF trans people are male. I don't subscribe to the idea that they are in any way women.

BrownPaperTeddy · 22/09/2018 13:00

So you don't want even post op trans women even with a GRC to be allowed in? Or under the old GRC where people have to live for 2 years before surgery - these people aren't allowed in

No. Not sure how more I need to stress this, when I said no males?

Then that is where we agree to disagree.

AnchorMum · 22/09/2018 12:58

Teddy I see how you're struggling with this and I do understand that it can feel complex and nuanced - especially when you know individual trans and NB people
who simply want respect for being who they are without discrimination and abuse.

My own young adult child is trans. I still think that she's my daughter - I gave birth to her and know the factual truth of that statement.

She was raised as a female, and identified as one for 20 years. Perhaps if she'd felt unhappy being a girl from a young age I might feel different. But probably not.

To me, transmen are still women. Not socially, and not in their own minds of course. But all the surgery and hormones in the world will not make them actual men.

So the truth is they are trans people. The same applies to transwomen. It is sad and unfortunate that transpeople cannot actually change sex - and for some we know this is exceptionally challenging.

However, natal women should not be expected to budge up and make room for transpeople regardless of the consequences. And there are many many reasons most of us don't want to.

Not because we are afraid that transpeople per se are dangerous and will harm us, but because we have sex-segregated spaces to protect women and girls from men who wish to cause harm. And, also importantly, to provide a space where women and girls' dignity and privacy can be upheld.

I would personally like to see trans/NB people thinking about the wider issues themselves a bit more and helping to come
up with some solutions. We live in this world together, and it's important to work for the benefit of all, even if that's personally challenging. My own child will not engage and has cut off all contact. This is the legacy of #no debate.

Aside from personal identity, trans ideology is a multi layered and complicated business. There are so many different aspects to think about - many of which are deeply troubling and of concern.

It's definitely important that we don't roll everything up into one issue or that we stop thinking and caring about the individuals who are at the heart of this. But as women, and as part of a responsible society, we must have boundaries. Without them we are lost.

We must protect transpeople from discrimination and harm
and respect their valid concerns and feelings. But we can't promote this one small group over 51% of the population, not when there is so much at risk - not when actual women throughout the world face sexism, inequality, oppression, abuse, violence and misogyny every day due to their actual biology.

The vast majority of women are unable to identify out of the sex into which they've been born - they just have to get on with it, regardless of what society, men and biology throws at them. My own child has the structures, provision and support systems in place to be able to transition - some would say that is due to first world privilege and I wouldn't disagree.

I know how hard it is to hold 2 very differing viewpoints inside - it's cost me a lot in terms of my
own mental and physical health. But this is what we're all struggling with on these boards.

If we didn't care about trans people you'd soon know it. It's because we care so much, especially about actual women and girls (whether they still identify as such or not), that we come here day after day to read, absorb, think and learn.

It's emotional labour and it's exhausting. But we're doing it because we believe that 'woman' means something and don't want to lose the means of identifying our own selves - and risking all the consequences that will inevitably come from that.

BrownPaperTeddy · 22/09/2018 12:58

And I am a woman so it's also about what I want too.

No one is saying it isn't. Your voice is equally important. But they need to stop pandering to the desires of men.

But they aren't. Because all of the arguments centre on trans women.

Ereshkigal · 22/09/2018 12:56

So you don't want even post op trans women even with a GRC to be allowed in? Or under the old GRC where people have to live for 2 years before surgery - these people aren't allowed in

No. Not sure how more I need to stress this, when I said no males?

Melanippe · 22/09/2018 12:56

Please stop using the idea that it's only religious women who will be excluded from public space when self-id goes through. It's so reductive. It's also a fallacy.

Ereshkigal · 22/09/2018 12:55

And I am a woman so it's also about what I want too.

No one is saying it isn't. Your voice is equally important. But they need to stop pandering to the desires of men.

BrownPaperTeddy · 22/09/2018 12:55

I agree. And I don't want intact males (or any others actually) in with you and your twins. People need to start fucking listening to women and what women say. It's not all about what men want, all the time.

So you don't want even post op trans women even with a GRC to be allowed in? Or under the old GRC where people have to live for 2 years before surgery - these people aren't allowed in

@FermatsTheorem

I agree with you on this. I think a formal, medical approach is a more realistic way forward. I fear many don't agree though.

ShotsFired · 22/09/2018 12:55

All the issues around how do we gatekeep to let the nice TW in but not the bad guy?

NOT OUR FUCKING PROBLEM.

It is MEN who created the risks we are protecting ourselves from, it is MEN who can sort their own rapey/aggressive/voyeuristic/fetish selves out and it is MEN who are responsible for expanding their own safe/private places to accommodate differently-presenting MEN in a safe and dignified manner.

This is 100% a problem created by men, that needs dealing with by men and resolving by men.

We spent decades sorting shit out for ourselves when we realised they were never going to help us with our own requirements. Enough.

Ereshkigal · 22/09/2018 12:53

You can't do that though can you because these things have to be testable in court. You can't argue someone did something wrong if that wrong thing isn't defined and relies on individuals to determine for themselves what is right or wrong.

Have you read the Equality Act? You might find it interesting and instructive to do so.

BrownPaperTeddy · 22/09/2018 12:49

People need to start fucking listening to women and what women say. It's not all about what men want, all the time.

And I am a woman so it's also about what I want too.

And I don't want someone who looks and acts like a man sharing my spaces.

Swipe left for the next trending thread