Restoring Sanity Takes Time - Helen Joyce

To be absolutely clear, trans women have the right to be in single-sex spaces for women, and trans men have the right to be in single sex spaces for men, subject to the limited exceptions in the EqA.

Again the "limited exceptions" are the ones that apply to all men, including "trans women". To be absolutely clear.

Currently, transgender people have the right to use facilties which match their gender identity, subject to exceptions in the EqA.

They don't have those rights. The exceptions for male people include all males. They aren't "trans" based.

Invented by you in order to diminish the actual requirements under the EA2010.

YY. Tiresome pretendy legalese. He even made his own acronym for it on some threads: PAL.

Demands by men claiming to be women, to access women's single sex spaces where women undress etc conflicts with women's rights to privacy, dignity and safety from unknown males.
Demands by trans activists for uncritical access to children in schools in order to sell the notion that children's bodies can be flawed and be fixed with a sex change, conflicts with children's rights to be safeguarded from age inappropriate beliefs.

That's just the start in terms of conflicts between some trans people's demands and the rights of others to privacy and safeguarding.

"the root cause of people being gay is being sexually attracted to people of the same sex."

This doesn't make the remotest bit of sense. People aren't gay because they are gay. There is a lot of research in the area as to the "root cause" of being gay, which I am sure you can access yourself. It's a very complex issue.

I've given you my definition, and stated that being gay or being transgender is not a result of fetishism, social contagion, or any of the other degrading and unevidenced nonsense you've projected.

I've tended to assume DadJoke was an evangelical transman.

No, he's stated before that he's just an ordinary middle aged man, not a person with first hand experience either of being a woman or being "trans".

And these are exceptions under the Act.

So, again. What 'rights' that are not exceptions under the Act that you are referring to.

To be absolutely clear, trans women have the right to be in single-sex spaces for women, and trans men have the right to be in single sex spaces for men, subject to the limited exceptions in the EqA. And yes "sex" in the EqA does not equate in all cases to sex assigned at birth, or the gender reassignment definition would be meaningless.

Removing trans women from bathrooms and changing rooms which match their gender identity, for example.

And not "feminists" per se, but gender critical people.

You are, again, conflating women with gender critical people. Especially in the LGBT community, the majority of trans allies are women. Trans rights are in conflict with gender critical beliefs, not women in general.

Many gender critical people and groups have problems with LGBT rights in general. The people who are introducing bathroom laws and clamping down on abortion in the States are not left-wing feminists. The Tories who oppose trans rights are not left-wing feminists. The only thing left-wing gender critical feminists have in common with these groups is attacking trans rights, and that seems to trump every other feminist goal.

“Currently, transgender people have the right to use facilties which match their gender identity, subject to exceptions in the EqA.”

Ok. So they have ‘rights’ but only those not subject to the exceptions?

Please be very clear here, what are feminists campaigning for that are NOT those exceptions?

You seem to have confused sex and gender there. Easily done, some people do use the words interchangeably, though they mean different things. It's almost as if some people don't want to be clear about what they mean.

I'll give you the most prominent example of existing rights transgender people have which you want to remove.

Currently, transgender people have the right to use facilties which match their gender identity, subject to exceptions in the EqA. They have the right to change their documentation to match their gender identity. You might not like those existing rights, and you might well have a justification to take them away, but they are rights transgender people have, and you want to remove them.

I actually sighed when i read this.

If Women's rights and transgender rights weren't in conflict, we wouldn't have so many violent TRAs with signs about decapitating terfs, invading women's spaces and not getting out etc etc. Of COURSE they are in conflict. Women's rights are human rights. Transgender people are human and have rights. But their rights should not be allowed to trump women's rights. For many and various reasons.

And while i am here: the same applies to men and transgender men. Who are so often ignored in this by the TRAs.

It seems I misunderstood your post.

I have put forward a list of possible root causes of people adopting a transgender identity. I thought you were agreeing about some of them, but not others.

I note that the only one you didn’t comment on was the "literally born in the wrong body" one, but you seem to have rejected all my other suggestions of a possible root cause of the adoption of a transgender identity (trauma, sexual abuse, poor mental health or internalised homophobia, social contagion, fetishism).

So what do you think is the root cause of people identifying as transgender? For comparison, since you like to compare it to being gay, the root cause of people being gay is being sexually attracted to people of the same sex. Can you give a similar description for the root cause of identifying as transgender? Is it being born in the wrong body, or something else? If something else, what exactly?

Could you explain your first paragraph for those of us without a PhD in gender studies? Thanks!

What percentage don't have mental problems or aren't fetishes or aren't autistic?

Cos this is fairly important given the WPATH leaks and the Cass Review. And other stats.

We do not agree any such thing, and you clearly aren’t engaging in good faith. To be clear, some gender critical people are fetishists, some have trauma, sexual absue, poor mental health or internalised homophobia

(I'm a lesbian.) I've written m/m, m/f, f/f and gen fic (no romance).About 65% of my fics are either gen or m/m, and about 35% are either m/f or f/f. So not such a massive difference, but I do think I read a greater share of m/m and gen than that 65% it represents in terms of my writing. This is in various fandoms, only a few works are from Harry Potter.

For me, a large part of the cause is that in many fandoms for which I write for, there are many more male characters and they are more central. This makes it more likely that some of them will spark my interest.

More generally, some of the character types I like in fiction are more likely to be created as male characters than as female ones. For this reason, I do actually quite like 'always the other sex AUs' in some fandoms (actually not HP), but I'm frequently disappointed, because often I dislike the choices made and feel they tend to go for quite gender essentialist takes.

In terms of the m/f I read, this tends to be more heavily plot-based than the fics I read in other categories - in m/m and f/f I have a greater interest in some romance than in m/f. In other kinds of media, I'm also rarely interested in the heterosexual romance presented. So I think some of it also comes from that, coupled with the fact that in many fandoms, m/m occupies a much larger space than f/f. Actually, some of my work is on background female characters in very m/m dominated fandoms, but then I'm often nearly the only person writing them.

But as I said in a previous comment, I do think it can be unfortunate and a bit harmful to constantly centre the imagined male experience. But the extent of this varies and it's also a broader cultural problem than just fandom.

She ALSO criticises the updated version. Helen choice describes "manifesting" as "letting others know you held them."

That was HJ quoting A Practical Guide to Transgender Law second edition.

I mean, the transgender woman would be able to use the women's loos, and anyone who objected could use the single user cubicle, not that the trans woman would have to use another facility.

Do you have one of those sets of glasses that turn everything upside down? Where I work, biological women can use either the women's toilet or the male/ female. Biological men can use the men's toilet or the male/female. Anyone can use the male/female. This plan was signed off by our magic circle lawyers.

Specifically a "proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim." with regard to people with the protected characterstic of gender reassignment being exluding from single-sex spaces. "Legitimate and proportionate" is just shorthand.

Invented by you in order to diminish the actual requirements under the EA2010.

This is possible, but can be quiet difficult. If someone asked you to sign a contract stating that you wouldn't express gender critical views (eg trans women are not women) on your public social media, it could be quite hard to enforce.

Perfect misunderstanding. The contract, or more likely Ts&C's, wouldn't refer to gender critical views, gender affirmative views, political views etc. It would restrict employees from expressing contentious opinions on SM. It is very common.

I would still like the references that you appeared to quote.

If I use the correct pronouns I use the ones that reflect my reality.

Thats sex.

There is a conflict between gender critical beliefs and transgender rights. There's no conflict with women's rights.

Of course there is a conflict, @DadJoke , please stop denying that women's rights as based on their sex and transwomen's 'rights' as based on their feelings, are not in direct conflict with each other. It is so tiresome when people deny reality.

But thank you for stating what the discrimination of women could be in the workplace. So women should have some rights left by employers providing single occupancy toilets. This is still discrimination though, as women have just one single occupance toilet, and men & transwomen have multiple toilets to choose from, leading to women having to wait longer.

I would also argue that demanding people to use preferred pronouns in discrimination for people with certain disabilities, who sometimes struggle with remembering this kind of information. So what should an employer do then?

Of course women, and men, can be politically active in a variety of ways on social media in a private capacity. Even with points of views other people disagree with. Human rights laws give people, even employees, the right to a private life and trying to fire people would again be in breach of these laws. Yes, even religious, BLM, womens rights, JSO, antifa, xenophobic, homophobic, whatever statements.
But in Maya's case, let's face it, was commenting on a public consultation from the UK government. How any employer could think they could fire someone over something like that is beyond me.

Indeed.

It has clearly been written by a poster who actually has absolutely no lived experience as a female person and who has little idea of what facilities a female person needs when they want to use a single sex toilet. Male people only ever think that women go to use a toilet to pee. They have no fucking idea. So therefore to them, of course any male who wishes to should use a female toilet. Because male people have decided what female people need the toilet for and have decided that other male people should have the priority.

What I have never seen on MN ever, was one of these male posters who are extreme trans activists (as opposed to other male posters, including trans posters, who have told us that they will not use female toilets and respect female people's needs) ever start or support a campaign to make male toilets more inclusive and safe for all male people to use.

I mean, the transgender woman would be able to use the women's loos, and anyone who objected could use the single user cubicle, not that the trans woman would have to use another facility.

Yet another example of how gender ideology is simply men's rights activism by another name.