I'm a trans man and local trans activist, AMA

[Sideris]

Hi there, folks.

As the title says, I'm here to respond to questions in good nature.

For a bit of background information, I'm 30 years old, a trans activist out of necessity (being the first 'out' trans person in numerous spaces, which didn't have any rules or regulations before, but have since been commended for ease of process by some new trans members or trans members who have been referred by me), have been 'passing' for about three years, now.

Then why are you disregarding my opinions when I'm telling you that I've actually lived it? You've read threads, but I've lived it.

Many women on Mumsnet have lived it, are survivors of rape and abuse. Your arguments on this support the argument for more women only spaces. That there aren't enough at the moment is an issue - but allowing males to self-ID into women's spaces isn't going to make the issue any better for women.

Anyone listening to Jo Swinson on this prior to the election would have heard her struggling for answers to great questioning by a couple of female journalists - Emily Maitliss and Emma Barnett got it straight away - could see the dangers inherent in allowing males to self identify into women's spaces.

You want to increase the number of single sex spaces.

We are fighting a reduction in single sex spaces.

It's two sides of the same coin!

KnowBetterDoBetter yes I am reading your posts. They are contradictory and so make little sense on the whole. Also I disagree with you on some of the points you are more clear about.

I do think there should be leniency for someone who indicated being a girl at age 5 to receive estrogen before a hard cut off 18 if their indication is consistent, if they're allowed to socially transition and thrive, if they're clearly distressed by possible male puberty

Please could you explain what you mean by male puberty? How can puberty in a girl be male if you reject the concept of sex?

Can you explain why any people born male should be allowed into spaces that are currently women-only, just on the basis of their self-declared gender identity?

There are obviously transwomen who have lived as women for 20 years, had all the surgeries, you or I would think they are a woman. I think it's pretty messed up that if they got sent to prison, they would have to be housed with men, where they would be at extreme and highly likely risk of violence/ sexual attacks. I do not think that them being housed in female prisons would put the women there at a similar level of risk.

But - not all transwomen are like that, are they? Ans that's the problem. I think that the vast majority of dangerous transwomen, who want to cause women harm, aren't actually trans. Which I know goes against stonewalls definition and makes me transphobic or whatever, I've heard the usual arguments and I won't be offended by them - I'm not a TRA, remember. It doesn't matter to me if some batshit people reckon Karen White or the Jonathan fella are actually trans.

And how we would stop predatory men claiming to identify as women using self ID to gain access to vulnerable women?

Which brings me to your next question. I don't know. I think the arguments for self ID are pretty weak, tbh, though I can't say I've read too much outside of FWR and the linked threads there, which obviously only gives one view. I do think that in an ideal world, these decisions would be made on a case by case basis, to separate the fictional transwoman I describe above from the Karen White's of the world. But then, as I said earlier, subjectivity and human bias is going to mean that women may be put at harm.

On the other hand, I'd feel desperately sorry for the transwoman above having to be placed in a men's jail. I guess there's no answer that keeps all of the good people safe, and all of the bad people far away from everyone else - no matter what their sex or gender identity. I have empathy for all of the innocent involved on both sides.

In short - I don't know what to do for the best. I guess if I had to answer than a third space, which I still don't think is ideal, but probably keeps everybody as a whole at the least risk of harm. Would still put our transwoman with Karen though, which is shit.

There are obviously transwomen who have lived as women for 20 years, had all the surgeries, you or I would think they are a woman. I think it's pretty messed up that if they got sent to prison, they would have to be housed with men

Perhaps that’s something they could give some thought to before they decide to commit an act for which, if caught, they could be sent to prison?

I hope the people who surround you in real life are more open-minded than many of the posters on this thread

The arguments around sex and gender aren’t subject to open or close-mindedness. They are a matter of biology. It doesn’t matter one tiny bit if someone feels male or female, alters their body or their hormones. If you take a sample of DNA it will reveal their sex.

It isn’t close minded to question some of the logical fallacies and straw man arguments put forth by the OP. It is not close-minded to feel concerned about men in women only spaces such as hostels, hospital wards, changing rooms.

By being open-minded it feels like you are expecting the majority of women to accept whatever argument is made for the opening up of our spaces and erosion of our rights when presented with any male who identifies as female. Sex, like race, colour and species are not fluid. They just aren’t. Anyone stating otherwise is indeed close-minded and frankly quite ridiculous. I can no more change my sex than I can my race or my species.

actually, OP has come across as civil and patient

Really?? They accused me, on no evidence whatsoever and completely erroneously, of having a sock puppet; dismissed a whole tranche of posters’ questions as “not worth bothering with” despite the fact they posted in AMA; have repeatedly used a dismissive and sneery tone, and responded to an account of a young person’s sexual abuse with an admonishment against “weaponising rape”. Your definition of “civil” is obviously different to mine.

Sorry, I didn’t mean arguments around gender are fact. Just arguments around sex.

I just don't understand why you only seem to care about transwomen being allowed in these spaces at some point in the future, and not about the thousands of men that are already in them?

My point is - I find it hard to worry too much about every 1 in 1000 toilets I go into containing a transwoman, when there are thousands of places right now where vulnerable women are being housed with men. Even if the number of dangerous people in each group are the same, there are a lot more men than transwomen, hence these spaces are causing a lot more women harm right now - so how can you really get yourself so worked up about transwomen?

I thought you must just not know about it, but a PP said there have been threads. Blows my mind that this is not the main area of concern for MN feminists, rather than shouting YOU ARE A MAN at every innocent transwoman (or vice versa) that tries to have a conversation with you.

TrueCrimeFan - I agree with you re systems these are there for screening purposes so it strikes me as potentially dangerous

Yes it is potentially dangerous in many ways, whether it's deciding who should be included in a screening programme, interpreting your blood results or diagnosing your acute life threatening illness when you are brought unconscious into A&E. All HCPs in the NHS are working under extreme pressure. They need the most accurate and relevant data asap in order to do their jobs effectively, up to and including saving your life.

There are obviously transwomen who have lived as women for 20 years, had all the surgeries

Do you know what current TRAs do to those passing transwomen? They say they have passing privilege - and really a transwoman at any stage of their transition should be entitled to the same rights as them - leading to beards, deep voices, muscular male bodies, and penises in women's spaces.

Also, do you know what happens if women try to differntiate between transwomen who have had full GRS, and those who haven't? We get told we're obsessed with genitals, and that penises can be female. Just no.

So I'd ask again, how do we differentiate? I see you say you don't know. The answer is we can't. Not in the face of Stonewall's "acceptance without exception" ruling, where of course, Karen White IS a woman, and if self ID becomes law, legally a woman.

I think it's pretty messed up that if they got sent to prison, they would have to be housed with men, where they would be at extreme and highly likely risk of violence/ sexual attacks.

If you'd read my earlier posts you'd know that current policy is for prisoners to be allocated initially to a prison according to their legally recognised sex. So for these transwomen, assuming they have GRCs, they would be sent to a women's prison.

I think the arguments for self ID are pretty weak

Please let the Scottish government know that. They are consulting about bringing in self-ID for GRCs, and they don't think the arguments are weak at all.

I do think that in an ideal world, these decisions would be made on a case by case basis, to separate the fictional transwoman I describe above from the Karen White's of the world.

Unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world. We live in a world where the people making these decisions, like the Scottish government, want to allow people like Karen White to be able to get a GRC using self-ID so that they can automatically go to a women's prison.

The most vociferous of trans activists don’t want a third space, though, @KnowBetterDoBetter. Using a separate third space loo/changing room etc does not validate their identity as the gender they claim they are. A trans woman using a third space is tacitly admitting they are not female - they want the validation of going in the Ladies loos.

And it is pretty clear that their feelings matter more than the dignity, safety and feelings of women and girls.

I don’t know if you saw my earlier post, but there are schools, both primary and secondary, where the loos are now all gender neutral, and girls are not eating or drinking properly in school, in hopes of avoiding going to the loo so they don’t risk being in the next cubicle to a boy. They are holding on, rather than using the unisex facilities, risking UTIs. Girls are also avoiding school whilst they are on their periods - so the health, well being, dignity and education of girls is already being affected.

Will also add that i have previously been witness to a horrendous situation where someone born male but having transitioned was sent to a male prison. She looked like a female including boobs etc. It felt like sending a lamb to the slaughter. The two options availabe were to serve in the hospital wing/psychiatric wing or isolation. She was charged with minor offences and ended up serving her sentence in a way a mass murderer would.
Horrendous situation allround

Perhaps that’s something they could give some thought to before they decide to commit an act for which, if caught, they could be sent to prison?

That's pretty grim. Do you know how many people are in prison for shoplifting, or for not paying their TV licence? I don't think that either of these offences means they should get raped or savagely beaten, personally. I don't think any offence does, tbh. Do you? Or have I misunderstood you?

*Do you know what current TRAs do to those passing transwomen? They say they have passing privilege - and really a transwoman at any stage of their transition should be entitled to the same rights as them - leading to beards, deep voices, muscular male bodies, and penises in women's spaces.

Also, do you know what happens if women try to differntiate between transwomen who have had full GRS, and those who haven't? We get told we're obsessed with genitals, and that penises can be female. Just no.

So I'd ask again, how do we differentiate? I see you say you don't know. The answer is we can't. Not in the face of Stonewall's "acceptance without exception" ruling, where of course, Karen White IS a woman, and if self ID becomes law, legally a woman.*

Yeah, I know all of this. I've mentioned some of it in my posts. I said that there is no way of differentiating without increasing the risk for women. I've said that Stonewall's definition is batshit and I don't agree with it. I can't help feeling sorry for the innocent trans people caught up in all of this.

The most vociferous of trans activists don’t want a third space, though, @KnowBetterDoBetter. Using a separate third space loo/changing room etc does not validate their identity as the gender they claim they are. A trans woman using a third space is tacitly admitting they are not female - they want the validation of going in the Ladies loos.

See, why do you think they all want to go in the Ladies toilets for validation? I personally think it's much more likely that the vast majority of transwomen just want to live their lives peacefully and without judgement.

And I think they should be able to, and I can understand why using a third space is very likely to 'out' them, and why that would be so traumatic in lots of cases. Hence why I don't think third spaces are an ideal solution, but I do think it's the one that causes the least harm or potential harm to everybody involved.

@OldCrone and the uk government... the consultation went out last year. Conservatives didn't seem to think it would pass though.

I can't help feeling sorry for the innocent trans people caught up in all of this.

Absolutely - this is where I agree, I think it's awful. There's a blog where a transsexual woman speaks about this, and she sometimes comes on to Mumsnet.

I think until the recent uprising of trans-activism, which has only happened in the past 10 years or so, there was an honour system, where transsexual women (usually effeminate, homosexual born males) were genuinely accepted into women's spaces, as "honorary women" if you like - and were never considered a risk to women.

Unfortunately, things have changed hugely recently - (since the clamour by TRAs for self ID, and for a gender dysphoria diagnosis to NOT be required - that sort of thing) to the detriment of both women and transsexual women (who I notice are now being told their title "transsexual" is "outdated" and even considered offensive by some.

My dad is good mates with a person who is biologically male but identifies as female - which seems to manifest as wearing stereotypically female clothes in the shape of a cardie & skirt, usually, & uses a female name.

Dad & this person (who is by all accounts absolutely lovely) are in a music club where they bring along records of a particular music genre to share & discuss. The club members are aged 60ish to 90. Most controversy within the club seems to be based on the logistics of lift shares from outlying villages; no one cares what anyone wears, or how they identify.

Would I think it harsh for my dad's nice friend, who is late 70s, to find himself in a male prison? Yes. I reckon it would be awful.

However, firstly, I don't think that's all that likely. He drives pretty badly so might get in trouble over that, but generally lives a quiet & blameless life.

& well, he'd be an elderly, vulnerable, male prisoner. Still not a woman.

*Absolutely - this is where I agree, I think it's awful. There's a blog where a transsexual woman speaks about this, and she sometimes comes on to Mumsnet.

I think until the recent uprising of trans-activism, which has only happened in the past 10 years or so, there was an honour system, where transsexual women (usually effeminate, homosexual born males) were genuinely accepted into women's spaces, as "honorary women" if you like - and were never considered a risk to women.

Unfortunately, things have changed hugely recently - (since the clamour by TRAs for self ID, and for a gender dysphoria diagnosis to NOT be required - that sort of thing) to the detriment of both women and transsexual women (who I notice are now being told their title "transsexual" is "outdated" and even considered offensive by some.*

Yep, I can agree with a lot of that too. I do think that the vast, vast majority of transwomen & transmen are normal people eg some nice, some idiots, most a mixture of both - same as everyone really. There are quite clearly a few who are absolutely vile and obviously despise women, but I really do think they are in the minority. The loudest people are often those least worth listening to, and if you spend too much time on Twitter, you'll convince yourself that your average trans person shares those views, and I don't think that's true. Most people just want to get on with people and be happy in their own lives, I think.

I am only half way through the thread , but I am mulling over what it is about America in particular that has made transgenderism as a belief system, quite so popular.

I think until the recent uprising of trans-activism, which has only happened in the past 10 years or so, there was an honour system, where transsexual women (usually effeminate, homosexual born males) were genuinely accepted into women's spaces, as "honorary women" if you like - and were never considered a risk to women.

I know this is a popular viewpoint but I don't think it's accurate. I don't think there was ever an honour system, just a bunch of male sexologists sending their patients into women's spaces as a test for suitability for surgery. The Hansard records of the debates pre 2004 GRA were all about it not happening often so women shouldn't make a fuss.

Lots of women minded they just felt unable to say anything. Women were not consulted on this 'honour system' so there can have been no honour in it.

I couldn’t agree more. I know two transsexual women (their term - not mine) who are horrified at the uprising.

For what it is worth, when they first transitioned over 20 years ago, they were accepted here with love and open arms. They were very open about their hopes and aspirations and crucially, very concerned on how they would affect others.

They didn’t march around the toilets braying about tampons and lipsticks. They quietly became who they always wanted to be and as such were accepted readily.

They are horrified at how it is affecting them as the women they are. (Both saved for years for private surgery).

They do not want self id-ing males in their space and nor do they want to share spaces with males after they fought so hard to become the women they always were inside. They feel at risk the same as we do.

I’m sorry if I’ve offended anyone with outdated terminology - but the above is right to them - they fought to become ‘honorary’ women. And the recent demanding brigade has made their life more difficult not easier.