UK not polarised over trans equality

The Equality Act is clear, a protected characteristic is "sex reassignment". That is the definition of transsexual. It is not self-ID or gender identity.

I don't think these answers mean anything at all, tbh.

If you'd asked me a few years ago whether a trans woman is a woman, I'd have said yes without really thinking about it.

Then this whole toxic debate kicked off, people started saying JK Rowling was a hateful bigot which I found so unlikely that I wanted to read for myself what she had said, and I became aware of things like trans women competing in women's sport, the prison issue, the rape therapy issue, Maya Forstater, Allison Bailey and James Esses.

When you become aware of these issues you have to engage with them. And you can't really engage with it all without giving some real thought to the question "what is a woman?"

It sounds stupid but I'd never really thought about it before.

Most people don't.

I think we all instinctively understand that a woman is a female person and a man is a male person but some people believe they were born in the wrong body and want to "live as" the opposite sex. For most of us, our first instinct is to be kind and say they should be allowed to do that and everyone should be free to live their lives as they want.

Most of us don't really give it any thought beyond that until we are forced to.

But when you are forced to ask yourself "what actually is a woman?" it's very difficult to conclude that a male person is one. Unless you are willing to define a woman as a person who has a particular feeling that no one can describe, or someone who wears dresses and makeup. Which I'm not.

It's hard to take a survey seriously that categorised it's respondents as gen z, Gen X etc then have to explain this in each diagram that it refers to age brackets. Why not just use age brackets? And of course the word cis to refer to women.

Why aren’t readers on AIBU allowed to see this?

Generally this is how it goes:

Person A: "I support trans rights, trans women are women"
A: "Wait a minute, why is there a bearded male in a suit in the women's toilets?"
Person B: "Well you said you support trans rights, and that person is a trans woman".
A: "I thought trans women were men who actually had sex changes".
B: "No a trans woman is anyone who identifies as being a woman".
A: "What?"
B: "And don't call yourself a woman now because it's discriminatory, you are a bleeder now".

It's the same old slippery slope. And we have to ask why no one is upfront about their definition of a trans person.

I think trans issues should be taught at school.
Kids need to know that surgery and hormones can only change superficial features, and have serious health complications as standard.
Kids need to know that wearing various items of clothing and styling your hair in any given way does not affect your sex.
Kids need to know that biological sex is binary, and though there are a tiny proportion of people who have some complexity in their DNA they still fall under one sex or the other.

Well, we have various surveys on the issue, don't we?

Here's one carried out by Panelbase, consulting 1,000 people.

wingsoverscotland.com/voting-for-people-who-hate-you/

The Equality Act says that public authorities have a duty to foster good relations between groups with different protected characteristics. IDK if The Guardian counts as a public authority but I think they should bear it in mind, and leave women's sex based rights alone.

Stonewall would brand all those people who don’t want TW in women’s sports or changing rooms as “transphobes”, and shout “acceptance without exception” at them.

Less than 50% of the population agree that TWAW, and for the vast majority that falls apart in real world situations (sports, changing rooms). None of the stats suggest “widespread acceptance” that TWAW to me.

The results are far more in line with what feminists/GC people say than what Stonewall seeks to impose.

a radically different attitude among ordinary people

'ordinary people'?

I think most people who don't have a strong opinion either way are the ones who think it's all about being kind and haven't really twigged that trans women are physically indistinguishable from men, and being housed in women's prisons and competing in women's sports.

Why was this thread moved?

It moved whilst I was typing! FFS

the report reveals widespread acceptance that a trans woman is a woman and a trans man is a man, with 46% agreeing, 32% disagreeing

That sounds fairly polarised to me. "Widespread acceptance" is pushing it.

I don't know about the numbers of people with trans friends - probably more common among younger people. The Stonewall estimate (provided courtesy of a recent tweet by Nancy Kelley) of the proportion of people who are trans is 0.6%.

The word woman is defined in the Equality Act as a female of any age and a man is defined as a male of any age. Our right no to be discriminated against of the basis of sex depends on us being able to define what that is. I do not think its unreasonable to ask politicians questions to establish what they mean when they use the words man and woman. To characterise such a question as a "gotcha" suggests we are not being given information from an impartial source here.

The "debate" is about the implications of self ID, not trans rights, unless you believe we should all have the right to change legal documentation to match our internal sense of self, but it is important for those who want to force through changes to legislation to frame it in such a way so that they can claim the morally righteous side.

If you establish, in law, the principle that individuals have a right to legal recognition for however they perceive themselves then you need to think through exactly what the might mean. Would you be OK with a middle aged man claiming to be a toddler and attending play group with your children? How would you feel if your bank manager humped your leg because they identify as a dog? They can't help it, it's just canine instinct!

Of course this sounds ridiculous but self ID literally means legal recognition of identity based on nothing more than someone's say so, at the moment the issue is around gender but if you agree with the principle of self ID then you need to make a good case for why it should be limited to gender and explain how you will achieve that.

It does not follow that you hate a group, wish them harm or want to "erase their existence" by asking whether that's a good idea and if it could have unintended consequences.

Seems they are determined to contain it within one small, designated space. Damned difficult women, actually daring to talk openly about their concerns. They must be restricted as soon as may be.

Another survey that never asks or defines what a trans person is.

It is always deliberate ambiguity that sways these polls, and time and time again it is shown that when trans is defined to someone their opinion changes.

OP , would you like to give the results on the question about inclusion of self identifying persons in sporting events which were previously restricted to natal women.

Thank you

Yeah but that describes me (well, to an extent- I have a couple of NB and trans friends and I obviously love them) and I’m still GC!

I suspect most said that people should be taught about trans issues at school because they haven’t thought it through. There are issues with social contagion and self misdiagnosis- which is a problem because the treatment pathway involves drugs with harsh side effects (or just harsh effects!) and surgery. Most people just aren’t aware of the problems, because the news doesn’t report on it and a small percentage of the population are on Twitter/Mumsnet. They just think it’s the new gay rights.

Other surveys suggest that if they’d asked people about whether or not male bodied transwomen should complete in women’s sport they’d get different answers…

If you include teenagers-
I know one very well (taking testosterone)
two of my wider circle friends have children who are socially transitioned, both autistic as it happens.

And a relative is currently going by they/them.

So the one in five figure really depends who you know and who you count.

What do you mean by trans equality, and what does it show when people know trans people?
Obviously most of us now will know people who identify as trans, and most of us will have compassion surely, but ' trans equality' is a bit of a vague term as it could mean that you think trans people should be treated with the same respect as anyone else, or it could mean that you think males and females should be in the same sports categories if they want.
I know plenty of people that identify as trans. Not all agree on everything though, and its not as if people who criticise the concept of innate gendered souls, have just never met transpeople or want people to be treated badly.

Oh the thread has been moved, despite being about a story on the main page of the Guardian Online. Quelle surprise.

Can anyone remember which Tory MP said the purpose of polls is to influence public opinion not to reflect it?

I do know trans people in RL. They have nothing in common with TRAs and know transwomen are not female.

Think you may have a few too many zeroes there - did you mean 0.1%?
e.g. www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-81411-4
'Studies estimate that gender-diverse persons represent 0.1 to 2% of populations investigated' (whatever that means).

Any kid in a big Brighton school, or any of their parents, will know/know of at least one transgender student though.

Our family address book has at least 4.

Yes, the discussion is polarized. Just look at the public treatment of Kathleen Stock, J K Rowling, Maya Forstater, Allison Bailey, Nina Power, Martina Navratilova, Sharron Davies, and countless others, all who have in common the one factor that they've tried to contribute respectfully to the discussion whilst also recognising that sometimes, biology matters.

What's happened to them is the online equivalent of being put in the stocks and pelted with rotten tomatoes. Worse, in fact, as it's also involved 'enough death threats to paper my living room with', as JKR puts it.

I wonder who commissioned and carried out this study, who funded it, and who, precisely, is telling the UK populace that in their majority they capitulate to this kind of treatment? Would it be men, perchance?