Trans and losing my mind...

Personally speaking, I'm completely relaxed about men seeing me undressed or in underwear, particularly in certain contexts (I'd happily go naked in a mixed sauna, for example, or swim from and sit on a nudist beach; in these contexts it's just more convenient and less faff not to worry about clothes and that towel-wrestling thing when getting in and out of swimming gear.)

But that's ME. Not my many female friends who, for reasons of religion, culture, past issues and traumas, or just a desire for privacy, do not want to share spaces where they might be partially or fully unclothed with men. I have no truck with organised religion (of any stripe), but I would never say that a woman with religious faith was being unreasonable wanting a single-sex space for those reasons. What's feminist or progressive about that?

If you want to do it from a safety point of view what's to stop a predator sneaking into a current female toilet and waiting in a cubicle until only one girl remains? Nothing. But why does that mean we should make it easier for predatory men to just walk into women's loos unchallenged? Why give them MORE chances? Currently (or, sadly, I think I should say 'in the past'), there's a social norm/taboo whereby people know which loo they should use and feels uncomfortable if they go into the wrong one by mistake/do not go into the wrong one deliberately as they know the social pressure and likelihood of getting challenged exists. Erode that social pressure and it's a free-for-all.

Why should an opinion that doesn't align to the modern view on gender identity be allowed to remain. No one would accept splitting the population by race so why is sex okay? What about religion you could have toilets for separate religions. All toilets female toilets are single sex in effect, as you have a separate cubicles with one toilet in it. I'm sorry but a man seeing me putting on my lip stick or washing my hands isn't a threat. By going to mixed sex it is men who are being asked to give up urinals.

If you want to do it from a safety point of view what's to stop a predator sneaking into a current female toilet and waiting in a cubicle until only one girl remains? Surely it would actually be safer to have one toilet that is busier so is less likely to be empty.

Woman who are confident in their own skin are those who aren't that bothered about a man seeing them undressed or in underwear. It's no different to walking along the beach in a bikini or sunbathing topless which shock horror was normal in the 80s and 90s so we have actually gone backwards not forwards. I don't spend hours a week at the gym to hide behind my husband as someone might get turned on.

This sums it up very well. I have huge sympathy and compassion for the OP, @bluepetergeneration

I also think the more trans people like the OP who speak up against the TRA agenda, the better for both women and genuine dysphorics.

But I fear this particular person will retreat deep into the shadows and silence after the anger in some of the posts. I don't see how that benefits women.

Also ... the OP has a daughter, and is probably fearing for her future. The OPs daughter also needed us - those who live her experiences- to help out.

I know I'm going to get totally flamed for this, but if you are not a women, you just don't get it. It needs to be explained carefully and possibly patiently. I'm not sure if men will ever get it, but we need them to to a certain degree because Rosie Duffield can't fix this by herself.

I'm not 'being kind', I'm being pragmatic.

It's not so much that it has its own name, its the idea that its being separate out from other disorders in law, and its allowed to, at best, confuse the definition of sex, female, woman, girl.

Keep it as medical diagnosis and treatment and don't let it interfere with anyone elses rights. I shouldnt be under any pressure to say that men are women and lose the right to have spaces away from men.

Policians were wrong to assume that a small subset of men will have little negative effects on women.

I think the motive driving the trans engine for girls is the porn-fueled sadistic way you will be treated by boys and men once you are seen as sexually mature
Sex-positive feminism has been utterly harmful.
Growing up in the 60s and 70s women expected to find sex pleasurable and men to pleasure them. How Radical!

It's incumbent upon adult women to band together and reject and scorn porn-usage and the men and boys that consume it. We have a current grass roots feminist movement now; this needs to be part of it if we want to save and nurture young girls

The problem with you going into the ladies is that you are setting a criteria.
If a man is
(1) 57 years old and
(2) has been on hormones for 15 years and
(3) dresses as a stereotypical woman
then it's fine for said man (you) to be in women's spaces.

What about if he is 56?
Been on hormones for 14 years?
Is that still ok?

For you the criteria is YOU. For another bloke the criteria is them.

What gives you the right to decide which blokes are fine in the ladies toilets?

We have to say NO MEN ALLOWED IN WOMEN'S SPACES.

Every time you exercise your choice to enter the ladies toilets, you are potentially excluding a woman from a facility that is rightfully hers.
Do what women do and live by the toilet leash or go in the Gents. And campaign for mixed sex toilets in addition to single sex ones.

The reason i don’t think it should have its own name and be considered a special category of disorder, is because it paves the way for ‘special treatments’ which are offered/suggested for no other mental illness and which unfairly impact others.

All this is only unlocked if gender dysphoria is considered as a mental illness.

I am not convinced the name ‘gender dysphoria’ is helpful.

In my opinion, it is an identity disorder combined, in some cases, with body dysmorphia and has a dysfunctional psychosexual component.

I don’t think we should be reifying it or dignifying it with its own name.

It seems to be co-morbid with personality disorders.

@EndlessTea (apologies I can't grab the message to reply for some reason)

"Transition" means like the OP. I should probably have said "live as a transexual person". Hopefully without any hormones or surgery - that should be the last resort of the last resort I would hope.

And no, anyone should either use spaces that are for their own biological sex or single occupancy third spaces as per my previous comments.

For the vast majority of people who suffer gender dysphoria, living as the opposite will not be the right answer. Unfortunately it's seen as the go-to under the affirmation model and as per the findings of the Cass Review, children with gender incongruence are being treated as if they have gender dysphoria.

My summary would be:

1. End puberty blockers and hormone therapy for all children
2. Spend time with anyone presenting with gender incongruence or dysphoria to unpick why (and hopefully treat through talking therapy, but if all this fails consider "transition" for adults as a final option)
3. create access to single occupancy third spaces for anyone who feels that they can not use single sex communal area that is commensurate with their biological sex
4. link all single sex institutions to birth sex only (and repeal GRA to stop legal change of sex on birth certificate)

All this is only unlocked if gender dysphoria is considered as a mental illness.

there will be a small number of people for whom transition is right

What does that mean?

What is ‘transition’?

Does that mean for all purposes they are treated as the opposite sex? Does that mean that it is right from them to use all provision for the opposite sex where they don’t want to be inconvenienced by using their own?

I don’t think living a lie is a good idea for anyone and I’m sure there are some anorexics who manage to find a ‘happy underweight’ they can live with.

Agreed. I don't think I explained myself fully.
In the vast, overwhelming majority of cases (hence the now very high numbers of detransitioners), I suspect most people with gender dysphoria would be helped by being given therapy to understand their body. For example, the large number of teenage girls with ROGD who also have autism may be struggling with change (autism and sensory related) rather than being "genuinely transgender". There will be lots of other explanations behind other co-morbities I should imagine.

Also, totally agree with the anorexia analogy for the majority of cases. The idea of enabling someone to stay as thin as possible would be shocking.

However, I think where it differs from anorexia is that there will be a small number of people for whom transition is right. It sounds like the OP may be in that category, similar to the two people on the video clip that I posted (who also say it's a mental illness).

I just clicked. This guy. He reminds me of the pp saying insisting that a child is no worse off without a mother. There are some seriously twisted individuals in the TA movement.

Nor can I. The last one managed several pages of such posts, and called us shrill. Standards have dropped!

Maybe it's lingering post-Christmas lethargy.

As a PP stated, third spaces are for everyone, not just the TQ group.

If they don't work because of bad behaviour by a particular demographic, that would presumably be dealt with if it happens.

Hang on, ignore the second bit. I was mixing this article up with another article about a fetishist who approached children. There is no evidence that this one has! Gullmeier is innocent of this charge!

Not innocent of sharing images of pregnant women in fetish gear though.

Anyway, I thought we'd been told all the answers, how do they go....?

oh yes. NAMALT! They just want to pee. And you shouldn't be looking. They know the right space for them, its none of your business. You can self exclude if you want to be silly about it. And if you get raped you can always call a policeman.

I have seen the TQ+ lobby response of 'I don't want third spaces cos there'll be scary men in them'.

To which female people tend to respond with a long, hard, stare.

There is rather a lot about Gallmeier's penchant for BDSM photos on social media and interests in talking to children about same. I would recommend only clicking after you've donned a protective helmet.

Yes. Genuine answer.

Many women hurry to post on MN about how they would love to share spaces with male people and freely undress in front of them, they will be very happy to use gender neutral third spaces.

Indeed, I've seen women say they would prefer to share spaces and freely undress with male people than with "terfs". These third spaces will be ideal; finally female trans activists and allies will be able to avoid women who hold the wrong opinions!

I daren’t click on the link otherwise my head will explode.

sighs OK, you're a nice guy. You're on our side. You're just one of the girls. We get it.

No thank you.

I'm for third spaces.
Third spaces return autonomy and choice to females. They can choose if they want to use the female space, or the third space. It seems the best solution all around to me.
Asking a question about third spaces doesn't make me against third spaces.

What I am doing is questioning some of the rationales. Let me put my third space question from my post above a different way. If men identify as not threatening, do trans women still have the right to percieve the men as a possible threat? If all the scary men from the men's toilet's choose to use the third space toilet are they still scary or did they become magically not a threat by identifying as such.

It's sort of me holding up a mirror to self identification, and the problems self identification brings. It's putting trans women in the same spot that they have already put women in. I want to see if their logic and reasoning remains consistent, or if it changes when the tables are changed.

I hope this helps.