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

Leanne, sorry to hear what has happened. Good luck. Have you thought about asking Debbie for help. She has some good media contacts. And if you are on Twitter why not contact Glinner (Graham Linehan) as he is friendly with several of the more sensible transsexuals who oppose self ID. Being a very successful writer (Father Ted for instance) his view carries weight and will get the media interested.

This mess needs sorting and it will only happen if we talk to one another frankly. Something these activists seem incapable of doing.

It is odd that whilst the trans activists cry transphobia against many transsexuals (on Twitter it is almost a given if you post critically and admit you are TS - but the names you get called are usually nastier). And yet many of those who signed that Times letter seem quite happy to post amicably on here. A place the trans activists regard as deeply transphobic and which has been the subject of recent articles singling this forum out because women rightly express concern over how their rights are being eroded.

There is a pattern here and it infers clearly who is really transphobic and who is just seeing everyone as transphobic who does not share their mantra.

Hello BirdseyeFrozen & ROwantrees,

Thank you to you also for your warm words. I'm glad to say I have a local journalist waiting in the wings and am already contacting him as we speak. In addition I have the opportunity of bringing in another interested national newspaper (won't say which one less the TRAs get there first). So this fight goes on. I'll keep you posted.

Hi KayM2, thank you for your support.

Whether the Mail will eventually run the piece is anybody's guess. I acknowledge the activists seem to hold all the ace cards.

Still I have a few more ideas up my sleeve. My despair only strengthens my resolve. I know I'm just a little guy faced against them but I intend to be a thorn in their side.

Hello Leanne and Kay
Leanne I just read your post, I am really angry at the way you have been treated. It strikes me that this it is the ultimate in irony.

TRAs got wind of the article and, incensed at spotting my name in Debbie's letter, proceeded to apply pressure on the Daily Mail's chief editor (I have this on authority), even going as far as demanding I refer to myself as a 'trans woman' instead of a 'transsexual woman' (which I refused to do).

Now that is what I do see as transphobic behaviour, appalling behaviour towards you.

What you have to say is important, and that is why this ramshackle bunch of self interests, are so intent in shouting you down.

They can't shut everyone up.

However it appears that the TRAs got wind of the article and, incensed at spotting my name in Debbie's letter, proceeded to apply pressure on the Daily Mail's chief editor (I have this on authority), even going as far as demanding I refer to myself as a 'trans woman' instead of a 'transsexual woman' (which I refused to do).

I'm sorry to tell you that following the intervention by the activists the Mail now seems reticent to go ahead with publishing the piece.

Leanne
Have you thought about approaching other journalists not just with your intended perspective but also this development?

Bullying and coercive control by some seems to run almost unchecked.
That national newspapers can be so controlled by a single-interest lobby group should be deeply worrying to all.
Julie Bindel and Janice Turner have described this week the impact of trans-activists on their work as journalists.
As James Kirkup has described, MPs are similarly fearful and remain silent.

Good luck.

Hello Leanne; we don't know each other at all, but I signed the letter too.
I'm sorry you have had this setback. It does tend to underline the issue of TRA behaviour, aided, I think, by many organisations thinking that the " progressive" and " informed " thing to do is to support the self ID thing.

It all sounds great, and "politically correct" doesn't it? Till you think of the actual implications. All we can do is plug on. Some people DO get it.

We hope that in some small way the knowledge of the existence of some ( largely post op, more mature) TS people who think that self ID( especially rapid self ID) is a dangerous idea can be one more piece of evidence to be used in the campaign. People like us do enable those maknig the case against have one more thing to say to well meaning doubters.... I have experienced this myself; a hair dresser, and some relatives who went; " ah...… oh...…. see what you mean now"

Hello everyone.

I am a signatory of Debbie's letter to the Times and thank you to all on here who have shown support.

The Daily Mail has recently responded to a letter I sent them, in which I outlined my grave concerns regarding the negative effects on confused young people by the thoughtless and misleading philosophy of the TRAs, which I feel sure will result in disasterous, irreversible life-changing decisions for many of the individuals concerned. They agreed to expand my criticisms of the activists and the Self ID bill in a spread, originally intended for publication Saturday last.

However it appears that the TRAs got wind of the article and, incensed at spotting my name in Debbie's letter, proceeded to apply pressure on the Daily Mail's chief editor (I have this on authority), even going as far as demanding I refer to myself as a 'trans woman' instead of a 'transsexual woman' (which I refused to do).

I'm sorry to tell you that following the intervention by the activists the Mail now seems reticent to go ahead with publishing the piece.

People, THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS. IT IS A BLATANT ATTACK ON MY FREEDOM TO SPEAK OUT AND THAT OF THE PRESS! The TRAs are now succeeding in shutting down debate by a LEADING NATIONAL NEWSPAPER. It is ironic that Debbie's letter focuses on the very issue of TRA intimidation!

They have gone too far this time. Which newspaper will be censored next? I appeal to all concerned to raise merry hell on this one. I am willing to stand up in public and voice concerns over the dangers of this bill and the 'trendy to be trans' culture we now see. But alas I have lost my media platform. Needless to say I feel pretty gutted.

Yeah I know, Birdseye. PFC always used to make such a big deal out of effecting change through making friends though. That's a big part of the reason why we're in this mess - because they campaigned for things quietly, under the radar, through having chats with the friends they made in politics and the media.

Is this the payoff? Must we now be subject to violence, threats and intimidation because their backroom dealings no longer work (because we're watching now and women can see)?

Important Guardian article with background 2013:
Christine Burns on how Press For Changed successfully lobbied for the Gender Recognition Act:

Much of their campaigning remained on the quiet. The passage of the 2004 law to give trans people legal status was "remarkable," says Burns, because "the government was able to pass an entire act in parliament without anyone throwing a fit in the press"

in same article, James Barrett (lead clinician at the Charing Cross Gender Identity Clinic, the largest and oldest in the world):

In 25 years, Barrett has seen trans people become "a networked bunch" – more so than other people, he thinks – thanks to the internet. Lees, who also works for Trans Media Action, says social media is the "essential catalyst" for the transformation of trans people in society. "Society is in transition and we've woken up from the operation and there's no going back. We can't pretend that trans people don't exist any more," she says. "People have been taking the piss out of trans people for 60 years. The narrative on trans issues has been controlled by people who have no understanding of them. Social media is about us grabbing the narrative back and telling our own stories – this is our reality, this is what we go through and this is what matters to us. We're here, we're in your face, we definitely exist. That's the most important thing – realising we exist." (continues)
www.theguardian.com/society/2013/jan/22/voices-from-trans-community-prejudice

"And I can honestly say that the work that trans people do for each other means that, for me at least, the trans community is a beautiful place to be. Despite our differences, we have each others' backs"

Jess Bradley 'To My Trans Sisters' edited by Charlie Craggs (publ Oct 2017)

Robin Green has stated that he wouldn't be keen to have sex with transwomen (or words to that effect).

Yes, Robin: Mr "women, except for relationship purposes".

Never heard of him, nor his penis beaker.

If it means Robin will take his sex equipment elsewhere, I hereby claim my special status of (saggy titted) AFAB trans woman.

If we're going to play pass the parcel with Robin can we at least wear gloves?

Wow thanks debbie we shal truly feast tonight!

Robin Green has stated that he wouldn't be keen to have sex with transwomen (or words to that effect).

Thank heavens for that, that's what I say. Ladies, you are welcome to him.

Debbie H's Twitter thread about the letter is interesting both for the additional links and some of the side conversations:

Ahh, that link..Robin Green..of 'I see them as real women, except for relationship purposes' has reared his head again

We've moved past the point where the long grass option is the best one - two years ago, I would have agreed with you. But not now - there is too much already happening where organisations and individuals are acting as if self-ID was already enshrined in legislation (prisons, politics, refuge funding, toilets etc etc etc)

What ZuttZeVootEeeVro said. If government kicks GRA reform into the long grass, we will still be faced with the gradual erosion of our sex-based rights. Better we get it all out in the open.

We're getting off topic from the letter itself, which I still commend as a condemnation of male violence.

Zutt is right.

The concept of self-ID needs debating (and, obviously IMO) rejecting. At the moment, we already have people behaving as if self-ID is the law. And swallowing the TWAW dogma, with no apparent consideration of the implications for women. And accepting the ludicrously large 'stonewall umbrella' definition of 'trans'.

And that's before we get to all the issues surrounding gender nonconforming children...children 'self id'ing' as trans (or in some cases a parent ID'ing them) and expecting 'affirmation' etc

I think kicking self id into the long grass will only benefit transpeople, it will be a disaster for women and girls.

By ignoring the problems, we will be unable to stop the gradual erosion of sex segregation and the growing influence of trans rights organisations.

If we discuss self id, we can also discuss our rights under the EA to sex segregation and let women and organisations know that excluding male transpeople, whether self id or not, is allowed and very important in many cases.

To women and girls, it doesn't matter if a person is self id or not,what matters is sex segregation.

I think this letter is an extremely good thing. I reckon that for most people out there, who are neither on mumsnet, nor friends with Stonewall, the idea they have of a “trans person” IS a transsexual. Somebody who hates their body, has dysphoria and in the main seeks surgery and hormone treatment.

I think that idea of TWAW, and “some women have penises”, as well as the concept of self ID is probably just not appreciated by the general public.

What letters like this will do is show firstly that opposition to the TRA agenda is not exclusively rabid feminists (ie women), and also that there is dispute actually amongst trans people concerning the proposed changes. THAT makes it clearer that it cannot be “transphobic” to object to those changes.

Langcleg and shotsfired;
Once again I have managed to give the wrong impression; when I said that people like me did not often have contact with the TRA lobby, I wrote it in answer to those who have said that we " were brave" to sign the recent letter. And that for some of "us" it was, but for many it wasn't. This was intended to be the opposite of " accepting accolades"

We signed it because we thought it was right to do so.

And as for creating solutions, the very small group of transsexual women I am in discuss possible solutions all the time, and currently have none beyond agitating to get the Self ID thing kicked into the very long grass.

And as for raising support in " our own community", as I and others have said there is no one " trans/ transgender/ transsexual community.

What Pencils said. I fail to see the point in signing a letter condemning male violence if you're just going to fan yourself and accept the accolades for signing, then turn around and pretend it's not really of much consequence. Charming.

Everything Pencils said. I am sick of having to have A Good Reason why I want hard-won sex segregated spaces to remain that way. I just do. That should be reason enough.

I am equally sick of having to perform utterly laughable, apparently mandatory, ritual genuflections to the entire trans world before I make any comment on female only issues, spaces and causes.

KayM2 - We just don't meet these people, or them us. For me, and some others , it is not a thing that needs courage.

Well aren't you lucky?

You must have noticed by now that women do inevitably come up against these people, whenever we try to prevent the erosion of our rights. Look at the footage of Speakers' Corner and of JamJar Bristol, Read the many accounts on FWR of women who have very bravely stood up at work or in other contexts.

Women do need courage to resist this bullshit and thankfully there are loads of very courageous women in this newly burgeoning feminist resistance movement

If it's all so easy for people like you, maybe you could expend a bit of spare energy on coming up with some solutions and raising support for them within your own community.