Letter in the Times - Plea To The Trans Lobby from group of transsexuals

.
Have read the links. Helpful that they were posted, thank you.
More helpful perhaps to have posted them earlier.
Personally, I would not have gone into "you are not the boss of me" mode ( versus accusations of "male hostility")

Ok, I understand what is being said now. I get it.

For clarity, what The Times letter was about:

to highlight the intimidation and promotion of rhetorical and physical violence against women, which is being justified by and in the name of transgender activism; and
to act as an invitation for transgender activists to recognise this and so denounce and distance themselves from the violence and violent rhetoric being acted in their name.

What The Times letter was not about:

Individuals;
Self-ID;
Validation;
The TS v TG faux debate;
Me.

On the subject of Rosa, does anyone know if any action will be taken re death threats and intimidation?

I just listened to Glinner and Derrick, and towards the end they spoke about importance of standing up for truth.
It's amazing that women are being vilified, shut down, attacked and threatened for simply speaking the truth. And for simply believing in the absolute necessity of current laws protecting our spaces.
In a rational atmosphere, nothing controversial about the definition of man and woman and a binary view of sex, or stating that women have a right to privacy, safety, dignity.
What the hell happened and how is it that so many of our politicians are either asleep to it or actively ignoring women's concerns?
It's not wrong to question the intentions of men who are basically saying that women's spaces aren't important and we should be allowed to do so without fear.

Each person speaking out honestly and with their own perspective, whether you agree with them or not, is making a contribution.

You've missed my point. It has nothing to do with whether or not I agree with a particular position. Everyone is welcome to advocate for their own positions.

I'm talking about conversations on topics about women being redirected to something else when male people are involved. That something else being, invariably, the male people themselves. And if a woman has the temerity to attempt to reorient the conversation back to women, she is met with very male hostility to the idea.

If I see it, I challenge it. Won't be stopping any time soon.

MirandaYardley concluded in article above (August 2018)

"Yes, transsexual voices matter, but again we are in the situation where these voices are elevated over and above the voices of women. No change there, then. In case I’m not making myself absolutely crystal clear, what I am saying to @ TSVoices is, hear this: in the words of Pink Floyd ‘you’re just the same as all the rest’. And yes, that feeling of discomfort you are having right now is déjà vu.

So, where do we go from here? Well, I get to say exactly the same damn thing I have been saying for years:

Disavow any claim to ‘woman’ and ‘female’, including all subsets, ‘lesbian’, ‘mother’, ‘sister’ etc., these are never yours to take;
Clearly and unambiguously denounce male violence against women without exception or qualification or any other way you lot keep trying to wriggle your way out of it;
Affirm that human beings are sexually dimorphic mammals and that what you presently call ‘trans women’ are biologically male;
Be honest about gender, this means recognising autogynephilia as a primary cause of male transsexualism and that the entire concept of ‘living as a woman’ when applied to trans males is just sexism;
Use your activism to support the rights of transsexuals, but not at the expense of women, and not as is so clear in this case to claim a higher step on the validation hierarchy;
Don’t ever use threatening language to women, and while your’re working on that, learn to apologise for being a dick when you’ve been a dick;
Don’t try to undermine women’s voices by using the term ‘radfem’ as a synonym for extreme, just like you actually did;
Fight against today’s fashion of coding sex role nonconformity in children as these children being ‘born in the wrong body’, this is dishonest and incredibly cruel and should be right at the top of your agenda;
Recognise that your own interests are best served by repositioning the trans movement, not the women’s movement; and
Listen to women.
End"

Lang,

Opposition to Self ID will happen for a number of reasons:

• women who worry about loss of their spaces, including prisons, refuges and sport
• lesbians and the apparent erasure
• the Christian right
• those concerned about free speech and the influence of small but powerful lobbies
• parents/professionals worried about children, perhaps with other abuse and MH issues, being groomed, and that a less than ethical medical approach is being used
• transexuals worried that acceptance earned over the years will be lost, and for some given the size of the decision and the scope for regret a belief that the process should not be too easy.
• white van man/Daily Mail reader, who is socially conservative and sees this as another example of the world going mad.

And more.

The more different voices the better. Each person speaking out honestly and with their own perspective, whether you agree with them or not, is making a contribution. And some (high profile; job vulnerable or transexual) face greater flack than others.

Even over the past few months it has become clear that there an increasing number of articulate GC voices. The recent Women's Hour series, where they did the best to balance academics, journalists and others, clearly illustrated that oppontents to Self-ID have good arguments. Whether this is enough to counter years of "equalities" infiltration of key organisaitons by Stonewall, remains to be seen. However I think, given this exeperience and that of Janice Turner, we can assume that the editors of both Mail and Times are pretty peak Trans'd. So to two brave women.

MirandaYardley shared this article earlier in the thread when asked for how she thought things might best move forward:

'Transsexual Voices Matter'
POSTED ON 17TH AUGUST 2018 BY MIRANDA
"So, the @ TSVoices (Transsexual Voices Matter) Twitter and Facebook came and went and is back again. There’s plenty I could say about the group’s initial statement. The claim to be diagnosed with ‘rare acute forms of gender dysphoria’ is just silly because whatever gender dysphoria is, the justification for treatment is that the condition supposedly is chronic, and anyway what we know about male transsexualism points again to this being a chronic condition. There’s a lot of whining about how the identity of ‘transsexual’ is being swept aside by ‘transgender’, which is a fair argument and one I’ve used myself, but as usual it’s what the statement manages NOT to say that gives the game away, and add to that the continual claim to ‘woman’ throughout the statement lets us all see exactly what this is:

It remains to be seen whether this group stand for anything different. They could have specifically identified and condemned the use of ‘TERF’ and the attack on female homosexuality; if they’re that concerned about respecting female culture, spaces and the lives of women, I’d look for an explicit distancing from the use of ‘lesbian’, ‘mother’ and ‘woman’. Unfortunately many of ‘the good trans’ still can’t bring themselves to this more evolved point.

Remember TSRainCrew? Tried to sell themselves as the ‘good trans’ and made similar arguments about cultural distinction. Yet in reality their spokespeople ended up being just as big dicks as the gendersists they criticised.

If they’re going to be different, they actually have to be different. Else this is just another attempt to claim a higher spot on the validity hierarchy." (continues)

mirandayardley.com/en/transsexual-voices-matter/

Miranda Yardley also recently wrote for AfterEllen:

'Girl Dick, the Cotton Ceiling and the Cultural War on Lesbians, Girls and Women'
www.afterellen.com/general-news/567823-girl-dick-the-cotton-ceiling-and-the-cultural-war-on-lesbians-girls-and-women

both articles worth reading... as is the case, in my opinion, with all Miranda's writing

The letter is about women. The thread is not.

I'd say to everyone reading: reflect on why that is.

extremely unhelpful

But can you answer the question? What''s the difference if both groups direct conversation to themselves and not women?

At what point do we centre women? Twelfth of never if any male people are involved.

comparing TRA to TS ? extremely unhelpful.

Trans-rights activism takes many forms.
Some TS are activists advocating for trans rights.

Just want to add my voice to give a big thanks to Leanne who is centering women and girls by speaking up xx

comparing TRA to TS ? extremely unhelpful.

and second TRA should be TS

Sorry!

pressed send too soon

? on the end

I certainly don't see it as "an opportunity to advocate for selves"

Nevertheless, and curiously enough, very little of this thread is about TRA behaviour towards women - purportedly the point of this letter. You might not wonder why this might be. I certainly do.

What is the difference between TRAs directing conversation to centre themselves and sideline women's issues and TRAs directing conversation to centre themselves and sideline women's issues

I certainly don't see it as "an opportunity to advocate for selves" LangCleg

There has been a letter in the Times from transsexual women which dissociated themselves from the TRA agenda.

There has been a discussion around that on this thread and empathy expressed to people. There has also been criticism, and some nasty hate speech towards one TS contributor which has since been deleted.

It is my choice to contribute to the thread. It took guts to speak out and distance themselves from the TRA agenda.

It does not mean that I am losing sight of the wider issues of Safeguarding, and violence against women and children nor the attempted erosion of Women's Rights.

It does not detract from the violence and intimidation I have experienced in my life as a woman and have called out and always will.

Perhaps it's time we got back to the topic of the letter to the Times, which is to condemn violence against and intimidation of women.

The thread seems to have devolved into centring something else altogether - clue: not women - and I am sure the signatories intended that to be the central message taken away, rather than a vehicle for collecting congratulations and an opportunity to advocate for selves. Right? Or not right? Beginning to wonder. Perhaps our TS friends here could confirm?

THis ^^

This is my opinion but I've been comparing the differences between transsexual and modern transgender agenda....it is a generalisation not true in every case.

cantgetridofthekids
They are closely interlinked though.
There was discussion about this yesterday evening on the thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3448102-why-my-transgender-son-dosent-want-self-id?pg=9

Welcome to MN, Leanne. Glad to see the Mail did, in fact, publish.

Perhaps it's time we got back to the topic of the letter to the Times, which is to condemn violence against and intimidation of women.

The thread seems to have devolved into centring something else altogether - clue: not women - and I am sure the signatories intended that to be the central message taken away, rather than a vehicle for collecting congratulations and an opportunity to advocate for selves. Right? Or not right? Beginning to wonder. Perhaps our TS friends here could confirm?

Leanne - echoing what VickyEadie said below - please do stay around on the forum. Your insights would be appreciated and you will have lots of support here.

Irrespective of people's views on women's spaces there is no denying that historically those biological men who were using them were a very small number who were medically assessed.

I think the medical assessment process is often flawed though.
Many people who have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria might have been better helped by the medical profession if other very relevent factors were identified and nuanced support was available for these.

Abuse, childhood trauma, homophobia etc seem often also present in people's stories. If this is the case, contextualising it as transsexualism lessens the possibility of healing from what may be the source/s of the dysphoria.

I was so struck by Debbie's story. She was diagnosed with gender dysphoria, underwent full medical transition without her PTSD as a result of being sexually abused as a child being identified.

Mirror November 2018 (also in Mail)
(extract)
"After undergoing years of counselling, he says he has finally discovered he wasn't transgender. Instead, he says, he was a woman suffering with horrific complex PTSD after years of sexual abuse.

"Looking back now I realise that it was simply a feeling that if I didn't have a vagina, I couldn't be raped," he revealed.

"I feel completely 'mutilated'," he added.

He has spoken out on the 'taboo' subject of gender reassignment reversal to encourage others to seek talking therapy before surgery.

He says he should never have been allowed to transition, claiming sexual abuse sparked his dissatisfaction with his female body.

He alleges his father raped and abused him when he was a teenager, but died five years ago, before he could be charged.

Now, he looks in the mirror "through the eyes of that terrified 15-year-old girl and see this funny little man staring back at me".

He said: "I wish I could turn back the clock and just have the foresight of what the nightmare the next 15 years would be.

"I'm a woman I'm not meant to be a bloke. I'm trapped. It's a complete mess - where do you even start? I just regret the decision.

"There is this myth that when an individual 'changes gender' they go into hospital one gender and come out 'all done'. That isn't the case, there are years of surgeries and hormones for the rest of your life.

"The session where I realised this was so bad that I had a complete break down and panic attack because I realised it was a huge mistake.

"It should never have happened. It was a big wake up call.

"I was traumatised by what had happened in my life and it was misdiagnosed as being transgender.

"I was vulnerable, I just though that if I wasn't a girl my life would be different, I would be different, I would be accepted and that would be it.

"I thought that becoming a man would make me worthy and I would become a different person."

He added: "I'm not a man, I am an approximation of a man.

"I wish I could wake up as Debbie and realise that the last 15 years were just as bad a nightmare."

Lee primarily blames his father for what has happened to him.

But he says he believes the private psychiatrist who started off his transition should have "picked up on the fact I was abused".

"I should have had help somewhere along the line," he said.

"Nobody ever raised the idea that I could feel like this due to trauma. Not once - until it was all done.

"I have spent my life despising my own body.

"It's so inhumane to feel that was about your own body. But the fact is I now know I rejected my body because of the way my father treated me." (continues)
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/im-still-debbie-man-reveals-13532989

Like Leanne, Debbie was motivated to share her story to try to help others. I hope people with influence in transgender communities listen to them & reflect.

LeanneMills1961

Just read the Mail article and your comments on this thread.

Stay around on this forum (and Mumsnet generally, which can be a good source of contacts, help, advice and laughs, especially AIBU - to which I go when I need cheering up!) - you're very welcome here.

I have just read the article in the Mail. It feels so realistic. I loved the pictures.

There are a lot of supportive comments underneath it. I think a lot of people do understand, and Leanne has connected with them.

I hope that your other press contacts come good for you, Lianne. It can't be an easy process to go through for someone who is thoughtful and lives a quiet life. But it is so good to hear from speaking out for themselves.

This is my opinion but I've been comparing the differences between transsexual and modern transgender agenda....it is a generalisation not true in every case.

TG loves their body and is proud of their lady penis.
TS is ashamed and embarrassed by their body and sees it as a birth defect

TG argues TWAW
TS accepts the realities and acknowledges biological sex can't be changed

TG tramples womens rights
TS look to establish common ground and work with women on solutions

TG is proud to shout their transition from the rooftops
TS has been through a medical process and comes to transition at the end of a long journey

TG accepts sexual motivation perfectly valid
TS is about an inner conflict, often for years typically causing many comorbid mental health issues

TG says anyone should be able to change gender easily just be declaring it
TS wants self id scrapped and continued medicalisation

Leanne - I've just read your story. It's heartbreaking - I really feel for you.

Thank you for being so honest about your truth to help others (and especially the young) decide what's right for them - and for speaking out despite the hostility that you know you may receive from some quarters.

Please don't let any of that get you down. It's a tiny minority and as the comments show you have so much support.

You have my full admiration and I wish you well. 💐💐