Your opinion on the TERF/self-ID debate

[wishingonastar95]

I'd really love to hear some opinions/arguments for and against in this debate.

Outside of MN, it seems that 'TERFs' are seen as discriminatory and generally 'in the wrong'. For example JK Rowling being so heavily criticised by the general public and condemned by the Harry Potter actors.

However on MN it seems that it's common for people to agree with the 'TERF' viewpoint, and feel quite strongly about this. I've seen lots of comments saying that they could never vote Labour based on their stance on this one issue.

I'm genuinely confused by the debate and undecided on my own opinion, so interested to hear others' viewpoints.

I'm in a weird situation that I can come across as a 'terf' but have life long friend who are FTM, I remember getting shouted down in FWR years ago around pronouns.

In general I agree with JKR on this issue, but she and a lot of her supporters do not seem to realise that they have been happily using the same tactics and stoked the IDPOL narrative to name and shame when it suited them.

A lot of the noise at the minute is around 'bad targets' and not the wider topic of free speach, the later is something her supporters seem to ignore. JKR openly retconed a lot her childrens books to placate the crowd and openly set her twitter mob on the dementors.

This situation gaining tract IMO is because it's a wider situation of the genral public can see who where quite happy to try and ban someone for 'wrong thought', now being held to the same standard

It's a reap what you sow situation for many whilst pretending the slippery slope is a right wing meme.

No I was answering your point. And asking if you do the same.

And I told you I did. Please do people the courtesy of telling them what you personally think is "unlawful" about what's been said on this thread.

The OP is so interested in answers that they haven’t been back since page 1. Another plop and run. With a nice slur in the title of the thread

Just to reiterate - being concerned with sex-based rights and safe spaces does not make anyone a bigot. Women don’t have penises. Penis-havers should not be in women’s prisons, on women’s hospital wards, in women’s sports. They should not be in our changing rooms or toilets. They should not be winning business awards for women.

@Furries

The OP is so interested in answers that they haven’t been back since page 1. Another plop and run. With a nice slur in the title of the thread

Just to reiterate - being concerned with sex-based rights and safe spaces does not make anyone a bigot. Women don’t have penises. Penis-havers should not be in women’s prisons, on women’s hospital wards, in women’s sports. They should not be in our changing rooms or toilets. They should not be winning business awards for women.

Agreed I am am concerned about sex spaced rights but I also accept trans women.

Yes, I've noticed that too. People are very quick to jump on me on here if I tell them the trans people I know are quite nice. I have agreed with many of the practical points on how both sides can get along, but I will not and never will agree with the idea that trans people are somehow dangerous.

I know mole that of lovely homosexual people and a lovely trans woman lives in my area. She dresses amazingly and what sees sees as feminine and like a woman. Always in short black mini skirt, high heels and some variation of leopard skin top, long hair done immaculately and make up.

Thing is though this is their interpretation of what a woman is. I just see it as how they prefer to dress. They still have a penis and I still wouldn't want them in my changing room or to compete against them in sport. I totally utterly respect their decision to dress this way as that's how they choose to. I chat to them as they are perfectly lovely.

The most interesting thing I find is that compared to all the biological woman in my area they are the outlier dressed like this. It's not the way most of the female population dress day to day.

This is why I'm so sure if my stance that feeling like a gendered woman/man is a social construct and something everyone views differently.

No one ever asks if I'm a trans man when I'm wearing combat shorts, t shirt trainers and baseball cap in the summer 🤷‍♀️

autie what were you referring to when you said unlawful?

Why won’t you explain what you meant by ‘unlawful’ @autienotnaughty?

In that the law recognises and protects gender change.

I agree women need to be safe.
I agree that men should not have the right to decide they are female and access womens spaces without any legal process having taking place.
I have some thoughts around should gender change also involve surgery but it's something I'm still researching.
I agree children should not be making life changing decisions/taking medications to change gender until they are adults and able to fully understand their choices.
I think any consenting adult who has grown up feeling like they are the opposite sex should have the right to follow a process both physical and legal that can lead them to change their gender.

I hope this answers your questions

@Beefcurtains79

Why won’t you explain what you meant by ‘unlawful’ *@autienotnaughty*?

It's Mother's Day and it's early morning I was asleep!!! 😂😂😂

@autienotnaughty

In that the law recognises and protects gender change.

I agree women need to be safe.
I agree that men should not have the right to decide they are female and access womens spaces without any legal process having taking place.
I have some thoughts around should gender change also involve surgery but it's something I'm still researching.
I agree children should not be making life changing decisions/taking medications to change gender until they are adults and able to fully understand their choices.
I think any consenting adult who has grown up feeling like they are the opposite sex should have the right to follow a process both physical and legal that can lead them to change their gender.

I hope this answers your questions

Could you say what you’re referring to on here though as unlawful?

@MarshaBradyo I am specifically referring to some posters comments that trans women who have legally changed their identity are not women. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

How is that "unlawful"?

In that the law recognises and protects gender change.

Only if you've gone through the process for it. Right now, males are being considered women without any more process than saying they are women - a little hormone fiddling for sports - and women are being harmed in the process. And that's actually not enshrined in law here, but the pressure is such that their feelings, and nothing more, are being prioritised over women's actual physical realities.

So what are people saying here that is unlawful?

[quote autienotnaughty]@MarshaBradyo I am specifically referring to some posters comments that trans women who have legally changed their identity are not women. Sorry if that wasn't clear. [/quote]
Sorry, I missed this.

If they've got a GRC, they're legally women, by which we mean that they will be treated as women for legal purposes. Biologically, they never will be and everyone knows it.

A woman is an adult human female. When we say "legally" a woman, we are making the distinction while trying to be polite about it.

I know that not all men are rapists.
But I don't want them in the changing room at my gym or in my toilet.

The same goes for make to female "trans" people with penises.

It's quite simple really.

Most people I know in real life haven't really thought about it that much.

This week I was on some nonsense lqbtq awareness thing at work - no awareness was raised about lgb people by the way - and the issue of toilets came up.

Now I'm not brave at all and I never speak up. So while people were talking I thought I was being very brave to suggest but the reason our toilets are separated by biological sex (we work with very vulnerable people) hasn't been removed despite someone identifying as the opposite sex. I prepared myself for the backlash but actually the response was a very polite 'oh yes now that's true I hadn't really thought of that.' I think it's a very intense debate online but offline 90% of people aren't that bothered.

You were brave. Well done!

A gender recognition certificate is an example of a legal fiction. For legal purposes a company can also be a person. However if you chuck a brick through the window of your local Tesco you will be prosecuted for criminal damage to property, not actual bodily harm.

Literally everyone I've spoken to about this is strongly on JKR side. Emma Watson et al are the only people I've heard of who don't support her.

People tend to be on JKR's side once you explain what she actually said. That she respects gender identities, that she wants trans people to be safe to live authentically to themselves, but she can't agree with opening up women's spaces to literally any male person who merely says he is a woman.

Most people try to stay away from heated and polarised debates, so I can see why this has happened. The TRAs who keep threatening Rowling, Davies et al know by now that they can't scare them into silence (though obviously they're scared of these potentially violent people getting into women's changing rooms and refuges). They're not trying to scare Rowling and Davies, they're trying to scare everyone who's watching. And it's working. Fear is a powerful weapon. Nobody knows that better than the woman who created the Dementors...

@DrSbaitso

In that the law recognises and protects gender change.

Only if you've gone through the process for it. Right now, males are being considered women without any more process than saying they are women - a little hormone fiddling for sports - and women are being harmed in the process. And that's actually not enshrined in law here, but the pressure is such that their feelings, and nothing more, are being prioritised over women's actual physical realities.

So what are people saying here that is unlawful?

Yes agree there should be a definition between the two

@autienotnaughty
I completely agree about womens safety and I feel the legislation around gender isn't tight enough to meet the needs of people wishing to transition and also keep those people and other women safe. My concern is the denial of trans women right to change gender.

I agree that men should not have the right to decide they are female and access womens spaces without any legal process having taking place.

Canada allows undocumented self ID a self declaration of I am a woman is sufficient evidence. So you would not be in favour of that?

The Irish system of issuing a GRC is fill in an application form, supply proof of identity, promise to live in a gender then 90 days later the State issues a GRC or goes to court to defend why a no GRC will be issued. That changes legal sex and legal gender for every aspect of the individuals life (apart from sex offences). If a female has a GRC and is sent to prison (eg. for not paying a court fine), by law the prison system must place that individual in the male prison system.

So what changes do you think should be made in UK law around gender.
What rights or obligations should be changed?

Eg in Ireland the GRA created a stupid consequence.
Legislation is should be enacted / amended to provide publically funded sex based services in the based on actual sex not legal sex.

So what are your proposed changes or even what area needs to be reviewed?

[quote autienotnaughty]@MarshaBradyo I am specifically referring to some posters comments that trans women who have legally changed their identity are not women. Sorry if that wasn't clear. [/quote]
Most of the time posts state you cannot change sex. So a factual statement on biology

I think mners would follow the law on access etc irl but when it comes to statements on biology are you including that as unlawful?

Oh he's got a piece of paper ? That makes everything so different- why didn't you say you had a piece of paper ?

If I told you some of the people who had that piece of paper, you would see how very flimsy that distinction is, autienotnaughty