To wonder, where will a Trans pupil sleep on my DS's Europe trip?

[VioletVaccine]

In DS's form, there is a M2F trans pupil, aged 14. For the purpose of this, I'll call her Jenny, who used to be Jack.
Jack now identifies as Jenny, and is accepted as the gender she identifies as.
I don't know (it's none of my business) whether she takes hormones or not, but she dresses, lives, and wants to be considered as a female.
The vast majority of people have been accepting and understanding of the difficulties faced.
Jenny uses the disabled or staff bathrooms, and has a separate area to change after (girls) PE.
However, when the school year travel to Europe this year, I want to make a polite enquiry as to the sleeping arrangements.
This is a 6 day trip, 6 days 5 nights.
Boys are generally in one area of the hotel during school overnight excursions, and girls in the other, with respective form tutors overseeing the pupils when lights go out.
Jenny, according to DS, will be sleeping with her female best friends.
However, despite how she feels, she still has a Penis.
Should she really be in a dorm with three other girls?
Whatever Jenny identifies as her gender, her sexuality is not necessarily geared towards the opposite sex. Maybe she could be a M2F lesbian, who is attracted to girls?

Would you want your 14 year old daughter to share a room with an anatomically correct male for a week? I wouldn't.

And similarly, should someone who believes they are female, be forced to share a dorm with 3 teenage boys she isn't friends with?

Im hoping for some thoughts on how you'd handle this, and also, how to actually broach it with DS's school without being labelled a transphobic woman, a bigot, or any of the other terms that are so commonly used when you question the logistics of a situation like this?

Thank you.

For me it's a matter of logic and mental clarity.

If the definition of a group does not fit an individual, he won't be included in that group. "But he really really wants to be" is neither here nor there.

I'm not crying into my pillow that I'm not accepted into the billionaires' club, or children's activities, nor am I screaming, whining, and threatening people with violent death unless I am taken into those groups although I am not a billionaire or a child.

When we work out why we segregate, then we can work out how.

Absolutely this. Because approaches like this are surely the result of looking through the telescope backwards?

Golden apples, you conveniently missed another point that has been repeatedly made (perhaps because it was at odds with your clear agenda?)

Several posts also cited the protection of Jenny from vexatious allegations - which is actually quite pertinent.

The safety of women and girls is one reason why we segregate by sex in certain places and it doesn't depend on some idea that every single person with male biology (whether or not they're trans) is dangerous.

I think what lots of people think we have now is the same old segregation by sex but with a tiny number of trans exceptions. They assume that there is such tight gatekeeping of the 'trans' status, that any trans person such as 'Jenny' is by definition committed to that life, has been well advised by professionals who in turn have advised the school and so on, so of course it's no big deal.

In the case of 'Jenny' this is more than likely true, but what may be true of 'Jenny' is emphatically not true of everyone today who uses the label 'trans'. We're moving rapidly towards the loosest possible gatekeeping of 'trans' status - self-declaration - all anyone has to do is say they are a women or man and they are, no need to see any kind of professional, spend any set amount of time thinking about it first, or live in any particular way.

It is not sensible to make policies based on an assumption that we have tight gatekeeping of 'trans' status if actually we don't.

multivac - thanks for linking to that guidance from Brighton; it only reinforces my belief that schools are not being given objective support around these issues.

"As far as possible, pupils and students should be able to sleep in dorms appropriate to their gender identity. Some trans children and young people may not feel comfortable doing this and in such cases alternative sleeping and living arrangements should be made."

This paragraph relates to residential trips and overnight accommodation.

Absolutely no mention is made of how the other children and young people might feel about being expected to share with a classmate of a different biological sex. It's all about making sure that the needs of the trans-child are met, with no consideration of how to ensure the needs of the other DCs are also met.

I'm not crying into my pillow that I'm not accepted into the billionaires' club
actually i regularly do, but i don't want admission under false pretences.

Pretty I also linked a policy from a school in Cheshire. It was clear that some decisions would be made on a case by case basis. So a parent/teacher would share with the trans pupil or after further discussion and agreement (I presume parents) the trans pupil could share with friends.

I 100% agree with you that there is no external government body governing these policies. Perhaps at the moment these situations are still in the minority that they are not investing any resource in at. All pupils should feel safe, of course but can that only be done by excluded a trans pupil from certain experiences as a blanket rule?

I find it very worrying that the feelings of one individual is being considered over and above others. Many people are fearful of speaking out as it is to easy to label them as prejudiced, this particular example illustrates why we need to explain and clearly point out what we think is appropriate.

Apologies for grammar. Sausage fingers and autocorrect do not mix!

All pupils should feel safe, of course but can that only be done by excluded a trans pupil from certain experiences as a blanket rule?

What's the alternative?

Placing responsibility on the 'other pupils' to express their discomfort and feelings of insecurity, and assume that they 'feel safe' if they don't say anything?

The alternative in my opinion would be that the trans pupil follows the policy for visits in general (the one I linked) however as its normal to form close friendship groups in school that any request from the friends would be considered on a case by case basis, with parental consent. The policy I linked suggested decisions could be made on a case by case basis.

I mentioned earlier in the thread that if one or more parents declined the reject decision to the trans pupil would be from the school rather than X and Y have refused.

Perhaps my thinking is too liberal but times are changing and remembering how difficult my youth was I can only imagine the difficulties of feeling excluded because of being different.

As a point of curiosity, those worrying about students feeling comfortable and safe, and feeling that the trans girl should be excluded to ensure this, would you feel the same dealing with a lesbian or bisexual girl?

A friend of mine came out at a major girl's public school in the 1990s and was promptly moved out of a shared bedroom and expected to shower separately, sleep separately, get changed for sports separately for the next year until she finished school, for the sake of the privacy and dignity of the other girls.

Was that a fair call to make? Same situation? Genuine question.

I've been following this thread with absolute fascination- and I slowly moved away from "bollocks to OP and your nosey pearl-clutching prudish curiosity" (round about page 5) to "wow this is such a complex issue which mainstream media has been silent about- how can the privacy and safety concerns of women be so minimised and falsely re-cast as hatred and transphobia?" Great job to all you MN feminists for spelling out these issues so clearly where our media and politicians have so dismally failed us. This particular round here on MN clearly goes to the feminists.

One thing I am wondering about the particular OP situation is why adult chaperones aren't actually sharing same sleeping area as the kids? When my DD (13) went on a two-day school trip, the chaperones slept in the same cabins as the kids- one adult assigned to each cabin which accommodated 4-5

Tab - Maybe your lesbian friend was acting in a way that disturbed the girls she was sharing private spaces with and making them uncomfortable. That may have been the reason why she was made to stay away from girls' showers & dorms. It is hard to pass judgement without knowing the specifics of her case.

Under normal circumstances - no. Dormitories, showers, etc are segregated according to sex, not sexual orientation.

But you already know that, if only because you've been told several times on this thread only.

3) we separate by sex not gender for reasons of privacy and dignity and
4) jenny is male so shouldn't be sharing with girls.

That's good enough for me.

If "jenny" still wishes to change sex when he's an adult, and has the relevant hormonal and surgical treatment, then I'll accept that she's become a female.

Until then, he's a boy who feels like a girl.

As a point of curiosity, those worrying about students feeling comfortable and safe, and feeling that the trans girl should be excluded to ensure this, would you feel the same dealing with a lesbian or bisexual girl?

Interesting question.

My DH went to an all-boys school and was targeted and sexually assaulted by an openly gay student. He'd have been far worse off if they'd had to share a dorm; It was actually a boarding school, but DH was a day attendee.

However, I've been socially conditioned not to consider other women as a threat, irrespective of their sexuality, so I wouldn't necessarily consider a lesbian a potential threat to girls in a dorm scenario.

I wonder if, in 20/30 years time, people will be conditioned to the new meaning of the word "woman" and accept that it is biology that is/was a social construct and that gender is identifying?

All you conflating being lesbian or bi with being trans - please don't. Sexuality is a thing quite separate from gender identity.

Also, lesbians and bi women and girls aren't socialised differently from straight women and girls, and neither do they have different bodies. Trans women and girls have been socialised differently (male socialisation begins at birth), and they have significantly different bodies.

I'm seeing a lot of homophobia in the "well, should lesbians be separated in case they have sex too" comments.

CoteDAzur - it just came up as a memory because the arguments are so similar.

But, as ever, I have been told. I am convincing no one, and you aren't convincing me. So I shall leave you to it.

sallying - I appreciate you may not have read the whole thread, but just to warn you that your post may well be deleted due to your misgendering of a trans-girl.

I think it is naive to think that the only lesbian or bisexual women are out ones, or indeed to assume that people in general are straight unless you know definitely otherwise. We cannot segregate people away from anyone who might feel attracted to them, it's completely impossible, even if you were to go on people's declared sexual orientation. If we were aiming to do that, we definitely shouldn't be having trans women in with other women as a group because a lot of trans women (particularly older-transitioning ones) identify as 'lesbians' i.e. are still attracted to women.

Despite its imperfections in protecting people from all possible particular negative outcomes, there's still value in creating safe spaces for women by dividing people according to biological sex, which has certain very definite class differences such as strength and susceptability to pregnancy associated with it.

Someone might well argue that the fact that it doesn't keep lesbians away from straight women (or each other!) is a failing of segregation by sex and so we might as well abandon it. It's also a bit rubbish if you're a woman with dependent male children changing together. But if so we should do it completely, not pretend to keep it going with exceptions only for certain males who say they are 'trans' (which with today's loose gatekeeping of trans status, does not necessarily mean what a lot of people think it means).

I don't think that not keeping lesbians and straight women apart is a failing of segregation by sex, it's a completely impossible aim in any case.

Trying to finds a One Size Fits All solution will not work. It never has.

If this is the way the world is going, I reckon we should ditch 'woman' as a group, let whoever wants it have it. Start the fight for rights for Vagina Owning People.

I'm a vop, I want to have changing rooms and other spaces exclusive to vops. Feminism is the fight for equal rights for vops. Pregnancy is a condition exclusive to vops. Cervical cancer is only a worry to vops, non-vops probably need to have a think about prostate cancer instead.

I'll kind of miss being able to describe myself as a woman, I've got used to it over the 30 odd years I've used it, but I need clarity and accuracy, so I'll take vop instead...

I don't see any issue here.

graceful I wouldn't give in just yet - I don't want to be defined as a bagina owning person, and the vast majority of sensible people when they are presented with the issues, see the problem with redefining "woman" as a feeling, rather than a material, lived, biological reality. I'm not prepared to roll over just yet.

I actually think it would be harmful for TW as well. I believe having a category of TW who are a distinct subset of men with their own experiences, health issues and service requirements is important.