Am I alone in wondering where the WOMEN wanting to trans are?

[loveyouradvice]

They feel so invisible....

Everywhere I look there are men who have or are transitioning to be transwomen - on magazine covers, on all women shortlists, in the media....

But where are the natal born women who are/have transitioned?

The only two I've come across are:

• one who detransitioned and wrote movingly about it, after ten years as a transman
• the american high school wrestler who is fighting to be allowed to fight in men's categories

And despite the odd angry post that Rat can drag up...

I'm sure that all of us have typed out something we're ashamed of in anger. When we're being our best selves, we apologise and move on. When we're being our worst selves, we dig in for a bit and then move on when we see that the position we've taken is a bit over the top.

(Some people are utter idiots who seem to be in a constant state of anger but they are few and far between.)

Both sides of this issue seem to have got themselves into the habit of constantly digging up these flash-in-the pan, moments of anger and using them as a stick to beat whole communities with.

For example, some fuckwit in Australia, tweeted that Mother's Day should be called, something like carer's day and it was faithfully reported on a thread today that trans people are trying to stop Mother's Day.

Now we do all know that there is no overriding Trans Authority, who are reporting the feelings of all trans people accurately and even if there were, Mother's Day renaming would be unlikely to be at the top of their list of actions.

Why do normally sane, responsible people, keep doing this?

@Jayceedove "...modern society is likely creating some cases and the numbers are swelling due to things that emerge from our lives today."

I do wonder if the numbers have been steady for quite a few years, no idea how to find these numbers but they must be out there, that now there is a real 'phenomenon' happening.

This is from last year. "More than double the number of teenage girls compared to boys are referred to the GIDS, while in the younger age groups it is more common for boys to be referred."

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/08/number-children-referred-gender-identity-clinics-has-quadrupled/

Must get off to bed soon. Peace and love, in the words of one of the Beetles!

I think Stephen will be fine. He has Ant and Dec protecting him as one of the 'honoured'. :)

PS @Stillscreaming I think the fact we are all here still trying to post politely is a good thing. But I do understand sometimes it gets impolite and maybe needs to. But it should try and avoid getting personal to others. Night night.

@Jayceedove "Ant and Dec" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! night night.

Italian - figures are very hard because outside those who were treated under the NHS nobody was tracking trans people until quite recently. A year or two after surgery we were signed off and left to fend for ourselves. We blended in, got on with life, stopped remembering our terrible childhood and nobody tracked us down or asked questions.

So all figures you see are approximations and guesswork and conclusions are dangerous.

For instance calculating the percentage of regret from transition is complicated by things like those who did regret having more incentive to speak out or reply to any efforts to get feedback and those who did not and were living in stealth had the opposite motivation - not to be found or speak out.

Even so figures were low, but it meant that you were more likely to hear the stories of the few who regretted because they had the desire to come forward.

What we seem to have evidence for is that the numbers who were transitioning fully (as in hormones and surgery) have remained pretty consistent over the past 50 years. This was about 100 per year in the UK in the early 70s and is not a lot more than that today.

The numbers seeking help but being sent away after diagnosis as not being sure who or what they wanted to be or do and so the doctors erred on the side of caution was about ten times that number.

So around 1000 or so a year.

Child clinics have been seeing steady rises of numbers over the past year or two but are not much beyond that level even now.

From early data we have only a percentage are transitioning full time from those clinics - a bit more than the 10% in the 70s but not a lot more, and as they will not be having surgery until 18 minimum we do not yet know if the numbers who transition fully fall to pretty much the same level as they were in the 70s.

So my take is that by and large we have a pretty similar level of trans people now as before and a pretty similar split between the numbers who wish to transition full time and all the way and the much larger number who prefer less dramatic solutions and find other ways to handle their confusion.

I suspect, but only a guess, that some of those who in the past were gay and confused in an era when this had been illegal quite recently have today embraced gender fluidity as a way forward as a better for for their uncertainty as to who or what they are.

But this is all to a degree speculation. The only things we know for sure are the numbers of Gender Recognition Certificates issued which, despite the exploding numbers of trans identifying people, have trundled along at similar levels of going up by a thousand or so every few years. And still totally well under 10,000 after 14 years since the GRA was passed. Many of whom applied in the first year or two.

Sorry, Italian, it was a joke that viewers would understand.

Night night. :)

I do wonder if the numbers have been steady for quite a few years, no idea how to find these numbers but they must be out there, that now there is a real 'phenomenon' happening.

You know how we've discussed the problems around sexual coercion, I'm being told by a few people, that women don't have whatever it is they need to say 'no', to people they don't want to have sex with?

I've said that I don't think it's fair to lay the blame for that at the door of the trans community and I stick with that but, perhaps, we need to take a look at some of the wider reasons that young women don't feel they have bodily autonomy?

Could the problem have its roots in the same societal need to tell young people that they are not trans when they say they are? Surely if we're happy telling young people that they don't have control over their bodies when they say they are trans, we can't expect them to be able to voice that control when they need to?

I'm not claiming it's the whole problem but I think we have to recognise that there has to be some consistency with the message we are sending young people about exactly who their bodies belong to.

@nanny

But you were well aware that cis is considered offensive by most feminists and gender critical women but you mentioned it anyway and tried to use it as leverage to get me to shut up about something you objected to. Pretty shitty debating tactic really.

My suggestion was light hearted, a joke.

You're quite right in that I know that some women find the term 'Cis' insulting so I don't use it. I took the trouble to find out what terms were and weren't acceptable to each side before I jumped in.

As well as not using 'Cis', to describe anyone, I don't use the words transphobic or TERF because I know that they are problematic for some. It didn't take me long to find which words people found insulting but, as you say, each to their own.

A friend of mine has a relative that is FtM and truly awful to the family about it. He's cut off everyone so they don't know whether he's alive or dead and used to hurl abuse at them all prior to that.

It's clear he has severe mental health issues.

why - why anyone cuts themselves off from their family can be difficult, but what actually goes on inside families can be hard for any outsider to know, and the experience of different family members can be profoundly different - just read some of the relationship boards to see that.

As I've said, there is a problem with young women of all sexualities being coerced into sexual activity they don't want. It does seem to be even worse than it was when I was a young woman but this is something that effects young women from all communities.
Actually I have talked to pretty mature young gay men, who say that some of their contemporaries don't quite get the "I don't fancy you so I don't have to sleep with you" basic rule. And this does remind me of the pressure put on left wing girls in my youth "if you believe in sexual liberations you should sleep with me otherwise you are repressed".

For self identifying - there are a limited range of places and times this is threatening. I hate communual changing spaces anyway, and avoid as much as possible (as do my DD). At least we don't have US public toilets which always have to be readjusted to afresh when I visit. But the fact that some safe spaces for the very traumatised don't seem safe enough now, and I do include in this refugees which I have heard being criticised for being "unfriendly" even when a transwoman has sought refuge and received it there. Of course better funding and more places might ease this (better security and different refugees for different people).

if you're looking for middle ground, would you be good enough to give up using the 'cotton ceiling' as a stick to beat trans women with. would you, personally just drop that?

In return, I'll give up the phrase ' cis'. How would you feel about that?

Does not sound light hearted, does it? I’m not engaging in tit for tat. I thought we were exchanging views and you decided to get offensive slurs involved. If you don’t want to talk about the ‘cotton ceiling’ anymore then that is fair enough. I’d actually said all I needed to on this thread about it and another poster, who knows more about it’s impact than I do, had taken over. I actually hadn’t mentioned in in my last four or five posts.

You were the one that brought it up again. But I get the feeling that you were looking for a disagreement rather than a friendly debate. That is not what I am looking for. I’m trying to find common ground with people. There has already been too much mud slinging. It’s not helpful.

I'm sorry that my tone didn't come across well. As I've said, I've not actually called anyone 'Cis'.

Ok, apology accepted. I hope you understand that ‘cis’ is often used to ‘other’ women, particularly feminists in debates and is often used pejoratively, as in ‘Cis priviledged’. It’s a label applied to women without their consent to define them in a way that they haven’t agreed to and is then used to negatively describe them.

I’m sure we can all think of other words that are used by one group about another group they don’t like or respect that has come to represent the othering of that group so they can be vilified. I would put TERF is that catagory as well.

cis is considered offensive by most feminists
No it’s not, almost all feminists aren’t terfa.

*terfs

I definitely don't like "cis" though I've never been called it. I wouldn't like to be called it.

Bravo eleanor two slurs for the price of one.

Do you have anything positive to add to what has so far been a respectful and interesting debate. It’s been nice to not really have any name calling so far.

@nanny

I don't use TERF much either but I've noticed that a number of women have it, or a play on it, as part of their MN username. They are naming themselves TERF.

Bearing in mind that you've been comfortable to favour another lesbian's experience of the 'cotton ceiling' over mine, have you discussed this use of TERF with those women who are using it to describe themselves?

I’m sure we can all think of other words that are used by one group about another group they don’t like or respect that has come to represent the othering of that group so they can be vilified.

I agree but I don't often see examples of this in the places you've suggested I look for information. When I've suggested on the Feminist board that less inflammatory language is used, I've experienced sea lion noises, in response. If you're using and recommending a place that uses inflammatory language, it seems inconsistent to take offence at similar phrases being used.

We all need to be the change we'd like to see.

We all need to be the change we’d like to see

Good point. People can start by not using offensive terms used to create divisions. I know I try.

The use of TERF by posters in feminism is an attempt to reclaim it. This is a really good example of what happens when a particular word becomes a marked term and develops perjorative associations. Quite often, the group that the term is used against will use it either in jest for humour or try to take ownership of it to reduce its power to be used as a weapon. TERF is a fine example of this as it very often used, especially on Twitter, to shut down debate. The cry of TERF goes up in response to someone and their name is added to the TERF blocker and they have a black mark against their names from that point onwards. You can be added to this list for something as simple as following a gender critical account or asking simple questions like: what is a woman? As part of a wider debate. Nothing at all inflammatory.

If we are talking about sticks to beat people with then TERF is defiantly one and many of the women labelled with that term have done little to earn the label. Which is awful because TERF has come to equal bigot. It has come to represent a way of suppressing any kind of discussion, respectful or not.

I would sooner label myself TERF than cis because at least I would be taking back that word from the people who would use it to silence my questions. In fact, I would probably be labelled a TERF by most activists because I wouldn’t unquestioningly follow their dogma. I still believe in sex based exemptions.

But I don’t actually believe in excluding people. And I don’t think many who are labelled TERF do either. If you actually read what they are saying.

So, yes. Let’s be the change we are trying to see in the world and not use marked or offensive terms to one another. Let’s try for respectful, open and honest debate where questioning and thinking is encourage and everyone gets to speak. That would be lovely. Don’t you think?

another example would be the "Nasty Woman" t-shirts worn by Clinton supporters. They aren't excusing Donald Trump for calling them nasty women. They are instead wanting to own the language for themselves and reshape its meaning into a positive meaning that it can have if used by the disadvantaged group in resistance.

If you want to look for respectful debate then try IRL. A Woman’s Place meeting would be a good place to look.

Online is often not representative. I pride myself and saying nothing on here that I wouldn’t in real life.

I like the look at all sorts of sources before I make my mind up about things. More data is always good. I’ve already said I recognise that the feminism boards can be a bit combative. But it’s good to read and have a think about. I also read pro- TRA accounts and all the stuff from Mermaids.

Reclaiming words is something that repressed minority groups occasionally do. I think comparing the use of the word TERF, with the 'n' word, which @thanksjaneshusbandatcaresouth, has been tone deaf enough to type out in full, is not reasonable in a discussion. To compare the plight of the 'gender critical' who often receive tweets that they disagree with, with a group who've endured slavery resulting in millions of deaths and still suffer horribly with institunal racism, leading to ten if not hundreds of thousands of deaths, demonstrates how unrealistic this position is.

I don't use the term 'deluded' lightly but it's appropriate here.

The use of the term TERF, in a user name isn't the equivalent of wearing a 'nasty woman' t-shirt, it's the commensuratestar with waving a Confederate flag.

To pretend that your dog whistle is just background noise is disingenuous, to think others will accept you doing so, is silly.

I imagine that the post with the n word typed in full will be removed but it's currently been sitting there for an hour, unchallenged. I think there folks who wouldn't recognise respectful discussion.

Look still you obviously hate us, no matter what we say. So let’s stop, shall we? This is going nowhere fast.

You’ve just compared women reclaiming the slur TERF, which is used to bully and silence women, with waving the confederate flag. Making it all too clear that you think we are bigots.

You’ve attempted to silence me a couple of times now. And I have been unfailingly polite to you in response.

But I am starting to feel, again, that you are after an argument, not a discussion. You seem to find a way to twist things no matter what is said. thanksjane gave some examples to help you understand. You asked the question and she answered. I have explained in even more detail.

Comparing us to racists is quite frankly out of order. If you don’t want to debate politely then don’t debate at all.