Scared to approach this. Advice needed from the wise women of the Feminist board

There are some excellent suggestions here. Will the conversation be held in private?

I'd be tempted to tearfully admit that I belong to the lgbt group, that I'm not quite ready to come out because I'm trying to be sure which category I fit in to- I mean, women are really gorgeous sexy creatures, but I've never had a relationship with one so can I really say that I'm bi? It's actually been a while since I've fancied sex so I may actually be asexual. And also, I'm definitely not cis- I'm still working out which gender best describes me. I have decided though that whatever gender I find out I am, I will be sticking with pronouns she/her, because that just makes it easier for everyone. I really believe that going to the women's conference will help me so much to come to terms with all this, so I can he,p other people too! Oh, and I actually have dyslexia...

Don't thank me, thank those 3 clear thinkers (I'm not any of those 3 incognito, alas!)

@QueenoftheAir, thank you for that. Helpful, clear and concise.

From the transcripts of 9th December, 2020. Really good stuff here:

Peter Gibson: Thank you for clarifying that no advantage was given to them. Could you each confirm for me your view as to whether a trans woman is a woman and whether a trans man is a man, please?

Professor Freedman: I will go down the law route because that is my expertise, and I think you would rather have my expertise than my personal opinion. In law, it says that a man is someone who is born male with biology in terms of chromosomes, gonads and genitalia, and a woman is someone who is born female with the same biological factors. Now, there is the legal fiction where a trans woman or a trans man may gain a gender recognition certificate that changes their legal sex but does not change their actual sex. Currently, in law, a trans woman is a trans woman unless she holds a GRC, in which case she is male, she is a trans woman, but, legally, she would be recognised as a woman for many but not all purposes.

That sounds complicated because the law is currently in a bit of a mess and that is why we need to change and streamline it. My opinion, therefore, changes depending on whether someone holds a GRC, but I stick in line with what the law currently says, which is that your sex is determined by biology.

Dr Stock: I think that we have two sexes, males and females. We have the human versions, the human males and females, and we have the adult and younger versions, adult and younger human males and females. We need a category to describe the adult human male and the adult human female because it aids communication about a vast range of things, given that we are a sexually dimorphic species that reproduces via heterosexuality. In other words, woman is adult human female and man is adult human male. That is the best understanding of those categories.

Professor Sullivan: I have been very clear. There is a distinction between sex and gender identity. Both of them are quite properly protected characteristics and we need to see them as distinct. The slogan “trans women are women” has been really unhelpful. Grown‑up, mature adults do not talk in slogans. We need to think about the fact that there might be contexts where we want to treat trans women as though they were women and trans men as though they were men. In other contexts, that may not be appropriate. For example, if we think about sporting categories, changing rooms or data collection, all sorts of different issues may come up and we need to have a sensible conversation about those different contexts.

Here's the link - find Rosa Freedman's nearly last speech in the transcript or the vid:

committees.parliament.uk/event/2998/formal-meeting-oral-evidence-session/

@GoddessOfHellfire if you want to raise the outing issue, be sure to quote Principle 6 of the Yogyakarta Principles.

yogyakartaprinciples.org/principle-6/

Arrgh, feel for you @GoddessOfHellfire that is a really difficult situation, and typical of the way we've all been 'captured.'

I've got two suggestions. You say here:

There are a few legal brains within the group (one of whom is full on TWAW) so I need to construct a clear, concise and logical argument.

If you can find the video-recording, Professor Rosa Freedman (together with Prof Kath Stock, and Prof Alice SUllivan) gave an amazing answer to the Parliamentary Equalities Group in evidence, when asked whether she thought that 'transwomen are women' (a nasty leading question if ever there was one.It was at te end of their evidence. If you could find that, and transcribe it, I think you'd be able to make a very legally-informed statement.

I'll see if I can find it.

My other idea is much more passive-aggressive "feminine" confrontation-averse: can you talk to a couple of other group members - particularly those who might fall into the LGBT disabled etc category - could you have a quiet word, and give one of the actual women a push?

I agree about the categories being organised in a rubbish way - as if it's a "normal" person plus an "other" person.

The problem is those two designations are not categories so much as ragbags of cobbled together ill defined characteristics so that it's impossible to know who qualifies and who doesn't.
I would propose that for the future the two representatives be selected by election - individual ballot by the whole group - as the two other designations are vague and ill defined - I could qualify myself on a couple of grounds but prefer not to disclose private matters - the rule is arbitrary and not necessarily representative (excludes other considerations and designations) and in the meantime I would like to go forward as the second representative as I am well qualified to represent the group and wish to advocate on matters affecting women and girls.
If they question this, well I'm a woman (I have daughter(s) and...) and I am concerned about the whole gamut of issues affecting women and girls and I'm an experienced, longstanding committed member of this women's group, which should not be disregarded or overlooked as lesser than other statuses or designations) and what could be more qualification than that for a woman's group meeting?

This would be a bold stating of your rightful claim as a woman and on behalf of women and girls. Would you do it and would it fly?

Good luck!

Was the TWAW mantra voted on? Did members agree to let makes who identify as women in? Sounds like the history needs looking at, but also sounds like you may have outgrown that group. You should never have been put in this position. If transwomen were transwomen we wouldn't be in this ridiculous situation. When did that mantra and brainwashing start?

She's funny.

Man taking up place in woman's group - stunning and brave.

Woman taking up place in woman's group - white, privileged, cis-het, Karen.

Brilliant. [waves]

Can’t 2 people just be nominated then have a vote.

I could be on the queer spectrum.

46 sexualities ...Maybe you can find something suitable there... Or maybe you are "Questioning", OP www.healthline.com/health/different-types-of-sexuality?c=638486765592#a-c

A disabled woman is definitely a woman.

But I agree the T person has the right as they're in the group and fit the LGBT category.

Are you sure there are no women who fit the BAME, LGBT, or disabled categories who could be persuaded to put their name forward to go?

I don't know, it feels wrong to try to stop T person, thems the rules. I couldn't lie, and I'd feel people could see through the motives, even if it could be accurate like not "identifying" with any "gender" bollox.

Do you know there are genders like "Astralgender is a xenogender that feels connected to space, stars and the universe. Similar identities include stargender, galaxxin, genderspace, and many other astronomique genders."
lgbta.wikia.org/wiki/Astralgender

imagine if you put that or one like that.

"Xenogender is a nonbinary gender identity and umbrella term that defines gender identities which “cannot be contained by human understandings of gender.”

Is this for real ... optimistminds.com/xenogender/

"Arithemegender
A number gender. Numbers can vary from negative, positive, decimals, infinite, square roots, etc. "

Are people taking that seriously? Surely not.

I see a certain someone on twitter is over this like a rash, puffing out her cheeks with all her might and blowing her dog whistle to rally her team together.

I think you could ask questions about the policy, like 'what happens if no one from those groups is available, is the place offered to another women?'
And you could raise the point made by JustGotHere, why aren't mothers or carers included, and would suitable childcare or respite care be funded?

Maybe, for a women’s group, it might be more important for the second person to be required to have gone through pregnancy, abortion, menopause, or childbirth. Especially since the goal seems to be discussing policy issues that affect women. Probably too late to make this change.

participation in many things is often physically difficult for disabled people

I know that this comment was meant well but disability does not always equal mobility difficulties.

Someone who is deaf will not necessarily have problems as someone with a visual impairment.

People on the spectrum, like me, will have different issues from people who have sensory or mobility impairments.

That's really shit OP and I completely appreciate your dilemma - either play a false game of self-ID in order to go to the event; OR refuse to play and watch a man go instead. As others have pointed out - the real issue here is the group you're involved in and the decisions they've made. You're already on the backfoot because a man has entered the group. It's a mess.

Having said that, I also get that staying in and seeing if you can make changes feels like the better option at this point. This is what I would do.

The immediate problem is the 'qualification' needed by one of those representing the group at this event. I would claim such a qualification in very vague terms - a hidden disability that you don't want to disclose; or something under the LGBTQ umbrella (I mean you're a woman with short hair ffs. Obviously that makes you something very special - agender/ pansexual/ queer/ non-binary/ demi-queer - probably some really complex combination of the above). And then say - you felt really uncomfortable having to disclose private information in order to represent the group and that that requirement is really problematic, no longer fit for purpose etc. Don't underestimate the number of other women who will be also be secretly sickened at the thought of a man taking the second spot and who'll be pleased to support you. But either way, how all of this plays out will really tell you a lot about whether there's any future for you with the group.

Obviously - if you can sort this one, it still leaves the larger problem you have. But come back at that stage - the wise women will still be here!!

You say you have a male member of a women's group.

That could cause problems.

Oh! It has!

I agree if they’re allowed in the group they should be treated as a second class citizen and not allowed to represent the group. But nor should they be given priority at the expense of others. Why can’t a woman represent a woman’s group? Why do they have to be lgbt or disabled?

Maybe it should just be names out a hat?

You sound agender, non binary , gender free or whatever you like (I’m sure I’m technically one of those under the enormous umbrella because I wear trousers!) plus what about your Jewish grandmother, and Anglo Indian great grandfather in your family tree ? (All of these are nobody else’s business ) .

Just say you’re under the LGBT umbrella but you’d rather not discuss it as it makes you uncomfortable. (I am also middle aged and angry with it all )

I would flag invisible disability but invoke right to not have to disclose medical info

Even better. I’d do this.