AIBU to think that this has gone way too far?

[dorade]

The Alberta Government in Canada has issued guidelines to schools that essentially allows kids to 'identify' however they want, use whichever toilet/changing room they want and play on whichever sport team they want.

I can't help feeling this is bad for girls.

(PS I'm a long time mumsnetter (2004), just have not posted for ages)

But it's only gender that gets the full support of the law for totally unverifiable inner feelings that contradict physical reality, right? I can't identify as a badger and get government protection for my wish to wear a smelly striped coat and live in a dirt burrow?

What's the difference? If I sincerely feel my badgerness is causing me species dysphoria and the only remedy is acceptance of my need to express my transspecies nature, why is this off-limits and unsupported when people acquire all kinds of legal rights on the basis of a different feeling that is just as unverifiable and also at odds with my physiological reality?

OK, maybe the badger example is silly. But why is sex considered to be something people can choose for themselves but race is not? I would argue that race has a far less profound influence on a person's psyche than sex because it is purely social with no physiological components (eg periods, testosterone) at all. So why can't people be trans-race if that's how they identify?

So presumably as things advance athletes like Oscar Pistorius will be entitled to identify as able-bodied, as will anybody with advanced, powered prostheses.

Nobodys human rights should extend so far as to impact someone elses human rights. Why should person x right to recognition of their sexual identity trump person y and their right to privacy.

DD would jump down my throat if I said that... "feel selves to be".... DD would shout "they are, they ARE!!"

Maybe go back to first principles, why do we segregate in changing rooms or sport, and from that basis can make a reasoned decision how to accommodate rights of TGs and non-TGs.

It could solve some problems though, Corbyn could have a few of his front bench identify as women, same in boardrooms - "of course we are gender balanced, old Tompkins there identifies as a woman". If we extend it we could get the black and white minstrels back because they aren't blacking up they are identifying as an ethnic minority.

We have to be able to have debates and discussion, law and rules changes cannot only endanger women and children but also the very people they are helping. The idea that no one would abuse these rules is ridiculous as with all aspect of life people lie and cheat. For me the rules whilst they apply to transgender they are open for abuse to anyone even to someone wanting to abuse the transgender person.
I noticed at school, military and work those who already have status could quite easily abuse this whilst their peers believe they are just piss taking the rules would allow them access as fear of discrimination can trump fear of abuse.

Presumably we segregate by gender b/c...

1. social conventions about sexual threat/opportunity,
2. social conventions on modesty about nudity
3. other physical safety issues for more vulnerable gender
4. personal preferences
5. *more opportunities for sporting success

*also applies to disabled groups, why they have separate sport comptns.

OTHManatee makes a good point about it being OK to self-identify one's gender but not one's race. Wasn't there a news story last year, about a woman who had 'self-identified' as coloured, when she was in fact, genetically white - and she received almost universal condemnation for what she had done. Had she self-identified as male, and insisted for years that she was male, that would have been OK.

Yes, I didn't understand why she was so condemned, she had grown up with black siblings, and had lived as a black person, supporting black rights, for years. And yet trans men-to-women get so much support (Caitlin Jenner got a woman of the year award ffs). I don't notice trans "women" supporting women's rights. They go on about trans rights- they often seem to hate women, which is rather incredible given their choice of persona.

They go on about trans rights- they often seem to hate women, which is rather incredible given their choice of persona.

I need to stress I'm commenting on high-profile and/or politically active transwomen - who are the transwomen I'm worried about, since they're affecting our rights. There are still plenty of low-profile trans*people going about their daily lives without stampeding over anybody.

After considerable research on the matter, I'm not surprised about the misogyny or, at best, dismissal of female women & girls. The adopted "woman" persona isn't one many of us would recognise as real. It's a caricature, drawn from stereotypes. It objectifies women as decorative & sexual emblems. It's all about appearances, sex and 'girlish' mannerisms. It is what a sexist man sees when he thinks "woman".

It's degrading. It is what women have fought against since the 1950s. It's the gender performance most of us feel we have to put on occasionally, because we live in a patriarchal world, but very few of us identify with it. A man who decides to be a woman, and who chooses this channel of expression, knows nothing about real womanhood and cares less. He's never looked past the stereotype - and resents female women for insisting there's more to us.

Transwomen are not women. That they feel justified in telling female women we're wrong about what we are (!) is the clearest possible demonstration of misogynistic male entitlement. Even when it's trans entitlement.

SirVix
I don't notice trans "women" supporting women's rights. They go on about trans rights- they often seem to hate women, which is rather incredible given their choice of persona.

I can see why campaigning for trans rights might be a more immediate concern and I wouldn't expect transwomen to necessarily want to campaign for women's rights. Equally and evidently not all feminists support/campaign for transwomen. As for your comment about transwomen hating women - I think any provocative comments by a vocal few need to be considered in the context of ongoing (decades old) criticism and rejection of transwomen/transexuals from some feminist quarters.

GarlicBake Thus far, how have your rights as a woman been eroded by transrights? The erosion idea seems to be a common claim on these threads, but I can't see any evidence of it here (UK). It seems to be largely based on supposition, what ifs and unbalanced accounts of stories involving transwomen.

The Alberta guidelines are interesting. Leaving aside the benefits to those who are transgender, they could result in reduced segregation and challenge gender stereotypes. And if they don't work, no doubt they will be changed.

I agree with garlic's post.
I also think that there seems to be a trend to take children's normal playing around of idenitites and turn it into something far more serious and life-long. Katherine Hepburn as a child insisted on wearing boy's clothes, having short hair, and being called Jimmy. Her parents were completely relaxed about this. I thought the op's comment about her "tom-boyish" interests being more acceptable in the supposedly less liberal 70s was an interesting one. I do think that the cult of the individual we have now, with so much focus on personal desires and so little focus on society, has the the effect of taking what can be fairly whimsical and transitory ideas about ones own identity and making them into something huge, in the attempt to take seriously each person's individuality. And yet women seem to be pigeon-holed more than ever. Look at the abuse Mary Beard had on Twitter for being a woman over 50 in the public eye without a face-life or dyed hair. Women need safe spaces from men, and someone with a functional penis is a man, whatever sort of knickers he has over the top.

Apologies for only picking up one point in what is a complex debate, but re sports - how about moving towards team allocation by other measures than sex/gender, for example weight, height, reach, speed, skill, strength? Then no-one is disadvantaged.

GarlicBake Thus far, how have your rights as a woman been eroded by transrights?

The question presupposes that people only care about matters that impinge upon them, personally and immediately. I am neither so childish nor so narcissistic that I can't see beyond my own nose.

I don't need to re-post all the real, verified and worrying arguments from this and threads past. My concerns are valid.

Garlic, your post really resonates with me. Totally agree.

Sorting by size in sport is still unfair to women. Barry McGuiguan at his prime was 5ft 6 & weighed just over 9 stone. But considerably stronger than even a strong athletic woman. Men tend to have a longer reach than women of the same height. Men have upper body muscles with larger, stronger attachments to the bone than women and the angles at the shoulder are different. The shoulders are wider than those of a similar height woman. These differences, once developed in puberty will not disappear with hormone treatment, even if muscle mass is lost.

My friend is very hairy and has not been able to access laser treatment
If she identified as a trans man living ad a woman would this open the door to services

Hmmm, Babylon!

For female women:
"There are a number of ways to remove or disguise excess hair. As these are considered 'cosmetic' treatments to improve your physical appearance, they are unlikely to be available on the NHS."
www.nhs.uk/Conditions/hirsutism/Pages/treatment.aspx

For transwomen:
"Adults with gender dysphoria should be referred to a specialist adult GIC. As with specialist children and young people GICs, these clinics can offer ongoing assessments, treatments, support and advice, including ... hair removal treatments, particularly facial hair"
www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Gender-dysphoria/Pages/Treatment.aspx

We have never segregated anything based on GENDER. We have always segregated based on SEX which is biological fact. Because segregating sexes keeps females safe AND makes practical sense for the provision on urinals and sanitary bins

I hope the school will now be providing sanitary bins in all cubicles (which will double that bill), but I bet they aren't going to.

Noons who has been a teenage girl, would think this a good idea

awkwardsquad I have never read a more bonkers idea regarding sport in my life! just had to comment on this point. do you not know already how few women take part in sports and the impact that this is having on heart disease and obesity in woman? the impact that this is also having on the children of woman who didn't take part in sport and therefore don't encourage their children to be as active as they need to be?

it is absolutely essential that we keep separate mens and womens teams. if we don't the bigger, stronger men will always dominate and even the bigger stronger woman who are able to compete will feel in such a minority that they will stop.

can you really see the awkward shy 12 year old with bits that wobble and all the lack of self confidence pitching up to the under 13's football with all the lads that already hang out together in school and feeling that she belongs. you can argue that this isn't right but it is what it is.

Men and women are different. they are. I completely agree with lagoonablu.

when this was on the news here they said wd be providing more than the trad b&g facilities.

but that means providing 4 facilities doesn't it. b,g, identifies as b and identifies as g. how will this work with adults?

Fallon Fox gets to batter women as a TG fighter whilst people cheer them on. Disgusting