Talking to non GC people

male sexuality, which is so completely different in general from female sexuality - I think most women have a poor understanding of just how different, and resist the insights that may dawn on them from time to time.

Agreed, whole-heartedly. As I told someone recently: men constantly tell us how their sexuality works; all we have to do is take them at their words - and yet, we don't.

Thank you. That seems relatable. My feeling was underpinned by having been very gender nonconforming all my life - had I been forty years younger I’m sure transition might have crossed my mind - and by my improved understanding, after years of experience, of male sexuality, which is so completely different in general from female sexuality - I think most women have a poor understanding of just how different, and resist the insights that may dawn on them from time to time.

Certainly doesn't drive me. I've worn male clothing for as long as I've been able to choose my clothes, and I've never derived any kind of sexual thrill from it. Nor do I get any sexual feeling from my flat chest or my beard. Satisfaction, yes, but not sexual in any way.

I remember when I first learned about AGP, from other trans people in the community, who insisted that it didn't exist, it was just something psychiatrists had invented to oppress transwomen. I had no trouble believing them, because the very idea of deriving sexual satisfaction from transitioning was entirely alien to me. So when I came here and discovered that AGP is a very real thing... Well, I still don't get it, to be honest! I totally accept that it's a real thing (I mean, some TW make it very, very obvious), but it baffles me.

Thank you for answering, I appreciate you being candid.

Can I recommend that perhaps you actually spend time on this board and keep reading. Over time, I think you might appreciate just how often women on this board are denigrated, name called and misrepresented from many people telling us we are the extremists, we are bigots, fucking right wing, and a slew of other misrepresentations from people who have never taken the time to gain a depth of understanding of what we are discussing. Yet who feel they should be able to make judgements based on what they had falsely believed.

It really becomes very apparent when coming from the direction of safeguarding how women and girls have been failed. You already have stated just how important language is to women, so you can already see areas of failures of safeguarding there. Where by removing language needed by female people, our protections (physical, rights, opportunities etc) are diminished.

Yet so many people tell us safeguarding is just an excuse for bigotry. Partly because the accusers have not understood the distinction between legitimate and illegitimate discrimination. And they falsely use the misused word ‘rights’ to defend what are not rights but amounts to additional privileges when you analyse it further.

Women on this board are constantly told it is not what we say but how we say it that is the issue. We are constantly told that we are problem by people who then don’t seem to have a scooby about what it is they are discussing. This is not aimed at you, there have been others on this very thread. You may have missed the poster, claiming to be an academic, telling us how ignorant we were who then posted a list of failed and flawed links that either weren’t relevant or didn’t even work.

But apparently we are the ignorant ones who just don’t say the right things in the exact tone that some people need for them to hear the message. Rather than them doing their research asking questions etc. Rather than them asking questions first, some of them come to tell us where we have gone wrong and why we are hateful and why we just don’t understand.

The people on this board have accumulated a huge wealth of knowledge about this topic and have explored the issues over and over. Everytime there is a change, or new information , we analyse it and evaluate from as many angles as possible. Of course, we aren’t perfect and we don’t know everything and there is plenty for us to learn.

Thank you for the answers I will take the time after work to go through them.

I’ve come to more or less the same conclusion myself. But I’m not convinced that the same sort of sexually driven mechanism drives F to M transitioners.

The only stats I can find say 12% self reported experiencing harassment in toilets. But this doesn't differentiate between men's and women's toilets, so no indication there's a particular risk from men. It also includes 'exclusion' as harassment, so will cover women challenging men in the ladies, as well as any instances of men who at a glance mistake a TIM for a women, and tell them they're in the wrong toilet.

This isn’t specifically about toilets, but it does drill down into the stats behind the claim that trans people are the most abused and most vulnerable:

https://thecritic.co.uk/neither-marginalised-abused-nor-vulnerable/

Take-home message - if you examine groups of people by their protected characteristics, trans people are in fact the least abused and vulnerable.

I am aware I have stepped on various bombs. Some things I knew were sensitive. Others were totally unexpected to me.

• 'Toilet' issue. This one I knew would be sensitive. I am grateful for the in depth information (especially @Keeptoiletssafe ), and many who have contributed thoughts, their experiences and thinking. I had not thought through in full and did not know the differences between various designs/ set ups. I do hear that this is an issue not only of safety but of comfort, privacy and dignity, and that many feel those needs extending into the wash area. And that all that is important, and yes I agree more important than other people's needs. I do understand and appreciate the rejection of 'quiet inclusion', while part of me still wishes I could cling onto it. So I feel more clarity with this issue - and indeed, better informed and more able to make the case for single sex toilets with others who would question it.
• The implication 'to be kind'. Though I didn't use those words, and don't think it was my intent - I understand the frustration, and the legacy of women being told to be kind, and I apologised, and do again for somewhat aligning with that. In a movement - regardless of who is protesting or fighting for what, I think there is strategic need for a variety of approaches from very fierce and unreasonable to conciliatory, empathetic and reflective. I believe both are needed at different points, with different audiences, to achieve different objectives. And I think women should be able to discuss that with each other. But yes, I agree, women being told to calm down/be kind when their rights are being infringed is unacceptable.
• bun fight - very unexpected and unintended. Didn't mean it as an insult, just as short hand for a debate that can become reactive - throwing out points and accusations, without much listening in either direction. I thought it was an uncontroversial thing to say that discussions on GC/Trans often end up like this. I think there has been a little of that in this thread, but that many, many of us have tried to hear and share information in depth.
• Asking for data on assaults. Totally unexpected. I now realise there is a history here of data wars, and the assumption on everybody's part seemed to be that I was demanding the data to prove there was no evidence of the problem or if there wasn't a big rise it didn't matter. Nope. I was thinking if there was evidence then it would be very useful in explaining to people and I would be able to understand the extent of the challenge. It is a great shame data is so poor and/or corrupted.
• The suspicion that I'm not who I say I am/ Trans Activist. Totally unexpected. It clearly happens to this board a lot - and that must be very tough and aggravating, making discussions very difficult to have. I did actually keep my normal username, partially so people could check my posting history. I've been here for years in other parts of the board - most frequently posting on threads supporting women trying to leave abusive relationships or trying to rebuild their lives after divorce/infidelity
• My cousin. I know there were lots of questions for specifics. But I don't think that is my information to share more on, as they are very private but I have absorbed the points people made around this. What I am trying to express, is that personal experiences and connections can create a powerful tension - as others have mentioned. I think they can distort or help to bring clarity, are distinct from policy needs, but can be one of many ingredients that inform them, if one's own experiences aren't used to invalidate others'.
• 'Middle ground'. I think there was some misunderstanding here. I was not advocating a middle ground in policy or the interpretation of sex. I was saying I was 'middle ground' - as in neither a Trans Activist, or a GC one. When I talked about 'celebrating shared ground' I was talking about celebrating what GC and non-signed up GC women can agree on - nothing to do with celebrating mixed sex spaces.
• Finally, I want to say that I maybe misunderstood this area of Mumsnet. I had understood this space to be like a stall set out for advocacy - with a desire and intention to engage, argue, broadcast, discuss with people passing by. But I think some have responded more like it is a space for GC women to meet with other GC women and support each other - ie more like a living room. I sincerely apologise if it is intended as the latter, which would make my entire participation totally inappropriate.

Over and out for now with thanks to everyone

@Helleofabore apologies I have failed to keep up with all your posts and questions to me and information. Thank you to you and others - I have been reading and absorbing. I'm going to try to answer some of your questions, and share a few final thoughts, then step back for a while.

You asked me about my first post: I think it was an attempt expressing my journey, starting with the earlier thoughts that were representative of my thinking a few years ago, towards the ways in which I now already feel aligned and the remaining uncertainties/blockers I have. And also to somewhat speak for a potential swathe of women who want to defend women's rights but are still dragging along ambivalently on this issue, and who I think have far less fundamental resistance than it may at first appear...so to some extent extrapolating my opinions to others (this assumption that my views aren't unusual appears correct, considering how many times people have responded 'same old' to what I have questions about). Something I hadn't mentioned, but is also perhaps a factor is that I work in communications. So yes - somebody dismissed my post as PR advice (and I think you also mentioned the frustration of communications gaps?)... my post was probably intended a bit that way... As the title of the thread was 'talking to non GC women', I didn't think a post of that nature was inappropriate.

Yes, when I described myself as 'muddled' I was signalling both openness and that I was aware I was not well-informed, and that I find some of it complex. This was in no-way disingenuous. You also asked if I know anything about safeguarding. The answer is I care about women's safety very much, but as a discipline/ set of laws/ whole political debate e.t.c., no I don't. And yes, this is the first time I've participated at any length in a discussion on GC/ Trans issues. I know that seems hard to believe for those who have been slaving intensely on this, but I think it's still true of many, many people, I do think in part due to a perception of 'high barriers to entry' and frankly fear. For me, I've been working on other things on which I feel more confidently placed. And that is even in geographic terms- I work a lot in Africa - where the trans issue is virtually non-existent, and the feminist issues are desperate, with different very extreme imperatives and parameters.

If there were any examples, we'd sure as hell hear about it.

But yet...🤔

Its Cassandra's fault.

Blame her.

Post on X seems to show judicial as well as biological reality entering some workspaces at least:

Other Heather dot connectr ...... reposted

𝕄𝕖 🫟 𝕄𝕪𝕤𝕖𝕝𝕗 🫟 𝕆𝕟𝕝𝕚𝕟𝕖

@MeMyselfOnline

A few weeks ago, the company I work for issued compulsory "training", including statements such as: “Remember, if Cathi is trans, saying ‘she used to be a man’ isn't accurate. Trans women are women, and they've never not been a woman”. I shit you not. So I've waited till today, when the company hosts one of its quarterly meetings with all the top brass across several sites, in person and online, to read out a statement on exactly what I thought of this “training”. I made reference to the precedent set when
@MForstater
won her appeal in June 2021, and levelled an accusation to the entire company that they are indirectly, and possibly directly, discriminating against all its employees under the protected characteristic of their freedom of belief. You could have heard a pin drop. At first. The result? HR is now bricking it. The training is no longer compulsory. They're taking matters under review, and I've had so many hugs and messages off support from my female colleagues. My boss shook my hand. It isn't easy speaking up. I've been very nervous till today. But as
@ThePosieParker
keeps telling me: if not me, then who? If not now, then when? I think it was important that someone saw a gay man stand up and defend the women he works with, and send a message that this absurd nonsense has no place being forced upon us. I've sure I've made plenty of enemies at work today and pissed numerous people off. And I'm glad. I'd do it all again in a heartbeat because it's simply the right thing to do.
2:45 PM · Sep 24, 2024
·
2.1M
Views

And in the same vein. Why is it when women describe their lived exprience and the dangers of males in our spaces, we are ALWAYS asked for statistics and studies to back this up. But when trans identified males talk about their lived experience and vulnerabilities we are aways supposed to take this on trust and asking for evidence is "twansphobic"? Why are they automatically believed and women (the old fashioned cunty variety) aren't?

I am just reposting this video about emotional manipulation.

This is a general comment. How many threads have we seen the dynamic of women who understand safeguarding being referred to as extremists and hardline?

How many threads have we seen those who refer to women as extreme for pointing out safeguarding failures as insisting that there are ‘some’ male people who should be allowed to bypass female people’s consent / laws / policies etc because they pass / are lovely / are in danger / are so sad?

Just a note: referring to women as being extreme for reminding people that safeguarding requires exclusion of ALL male people is emotional manipulation whether it is intended to be or not. Stating that some male people should be able to be treated as special and bypass safeguarding laws and policies and societal standards makes that emotional manipulation with intention.

I think this video is a very good place to start for people to reflect on.

That and the question for any of those reading who do believe that some males who fulfil your (general) personal criteria should be able to access a single sex provision stealthily, where do the needs of female people feature in that belief?

Also, why the fuck do you (general you) think female male cannot reliably identify the correct sex of that male person?

What I woud find more interesting is what are the stats of trans identifying males being attacked in male toilets? Are there any? Are they really a dangerous place?

Unless the sight of a transwoman triggers a very specific kind of rage in men, I imagine male toilets are about as safe for a TW as they are for me, which is, very.

When they claim that they are frequently abused what does this mean in practise? Does it mean physical assault or does it boil down to being correctly sexed?

Well, since being "misgendered" is ~literal violence~... Yet, the people I see being uneasy around me are the non-trans people, some of whom seem outright afraid of making a mistake when interacting with me, and treat me like like a grenade that could go off at any time. Man, I wonder what happened to them to make them so jumpy 🤔?

Some bloke might look at them weirder than three teenage girls! Horrooooorrr!

Plague, War, Fire and Damnation!

What I woud find more interesting is what are the stats of trans identifying males being attacked in male toilets? Are there any? Are they really a dangerous place?

This, 100% - no, actually 200%.

What I would like to learn more about is the statistics of safety comparing different toilet set ups for women, and if there has been a statistical rise in attacks since male/trans people being in female toilets became more acceptable

What I woud find more interesting is what are the stats of trans identifying males being attacked in male toilets? Are there any? Are they really a dangerous place?

I'm also interested in this trope that trans identified people (but especially the males) are vulnerable. While I'm sure many are, especially the children, where is the evidence for this? When they claim that they are frequently abused what does this mean in practise? Does it mean physical assault or does it boil down to being correctly sexed?

@financialcareerstuff

I am not sure if you have a self-determined definition of GC, but if it is purely that you are GC if you believe that women are adults who were born with vaginas etc, ie biologically based, then yes, I basically believe this already.

That's all we're saying!

There are two sexes and people can't change sex.

That's it.

You know it, we know it, even trans people know it.
You seem to be of the opinion that women here have extreme views. These are not extreme views. This is just reality. All the rest is fluffy and guff.

Women had to go to the Supreme Court to just have this basic fact everyone knew until 5 minutes ago reiterated. And it is deemed controversial!

Think about that. How has such a 'vulnerable and marginalised' group managed to get whole swathes of society to believe (or pretend to believe) a completely obvious lie?

My sense is that the restraint you talk about is itself a conscious feminine pose. The sense that women don't take up as much space or make such big physical gestures.... more delicate, refined, considered; a flick of the hair; a tilt of the head, very controlled movements. I've observed this too.

In what way did these few 'unfeminine' transwomen present ( if not in typically feminine attire?) if you don't mind me asking?

Well, it was feminine attire, but nothing flashy or short or tight. Like, long and loose skirts or dresses, in neutral tones. Jumpers or blouses again on the loose side, with long sleeves, and discreet motifs. Classic female haircuts in natural colours. Stuff like that. I guess what I'm trying to say is that they looked like they were trying to blend into the background, instead of showing off their femininity, you know? There was also an air of... restraint, around them, like they were trying to take up as little room as possible.

But again, it's true that I didn't spend entire days around them, so maybe this was just a facade they were presenting when around the group...

Depends what you want, really? I got some Baileys and chocs and a nice bag.

If GC people don’t draw that distinction themselves, then they can sound prejudiced/demonizing/stigmatizing or mocking of very pleasant, struggling people in the lives of the people they are talking to.

To touch on this reoccuring point.

If you decide that someone GC is being prejudiced because of their tone, who is being the prejudiced one here in trying to silence, belittle and shut down the conversation because it raises some really difficult and uncomfortable shit you don't want to acknowledge? If you assume they are 'bad people' because they disagree with the idea that there is no middle ground without fully engaging with the subject you are caught up in your own ignorance, narrow mindedness and holier than thou self righteousness. ESPECIALLY if you know this person well, think well of them, are articulate or intelligent or otherwise demonstrate themselves as being people who think of others and help others. ENGAGE YOUR BRAIN rather than being so fucking dismissive and ask the crucial question; what are they seeing that I'm missing?

This is not our problem to fix.

I'm not going to compromise and self censorship because someone doesn't like the way I say something. It doesn't mean I don't have a completely valid, reasonable and fair point. If you need everything packaged in a PR feeling, glossy case more fool you - you are clearly vulnerable to how something is presented not the merit of a case. Now go away and think about the implications of this and how much of a politicians wet dream you are for being so unthinking and uncriticial in your own right. Go away and and think about how vulnerable to advertising and political messaging you are, if you can't cope with criticial debate.

You've got a brain. Get off your arse and use it.

After nearly twenty years of dealing with this shite, I'm well past the point of giving a shit anymore. If you decide I'm a bigot thats your problem not mine. I know I'm not and those that matter to me know I'm not. I demonstrate I'm not in multiple ways that I don't feel the need to plaster all over social media.

In what way did these few 'unfeminine' transwomen present ( if not in typically feminine attire?) if you don't mind me asking?

The TW I see around and about in my city, even if dressed in jeans and a jumper - still hold feminine postures and adopt feminine mannerisms which always appear very consciously studied - until the moment they think nobody is looking or when they lapse into instinctive, unguarded movement or behaviour when the masculine poses and stances re-appear.

I used to see one guy who would ride around the city posing very provocatively on his bicycle - in front of queues of traffic at traffic lights - in a sort of 'tennis girl bare bum' way in his short tartan mini skirt ( you know the famous poster?) - but then another time as i was walking into the city alongside the riverside promenade ( very sparsely populated) he cycled by in a very strong and athletic 'masculine' way going in the opposite direction.

And it bothers me that posters think they are being objective when they do this.