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

Everlasting got to page 29 managing to be respectful and patient

Wouldnt argue with that

I haven't lost my rag , just expressing what some of my friends have felt , there are a few hundred elderly people with a trans past reading these posts

I am in my 60,s now , what these debates has done is reunite many of us oldies who have lived under the radar for so long

we have kept quiet ,but as Stephen has already tried to convey we speak out when we have had to , only now people I haven't heard from in decades are speaking out many are very very hurt !

I wont argue and neither will any of us oldies , it cant be right that people think they can abuse senior citizens , because they transitioned 30 ,40 years ago , many of us have brought up children and grandchildren

I am not threatening anyone , just asking politiely to treat older citzens with a little dignity
we cant be held responsible for what some young and foolish activists are doing

@Stillscreaming if every major political party is publicly for self-id, which they are, it won't be long before there is a change to the law. No matter what the govt say currently, or if a different party or coalition get into power.

I think the concern is not just this thread, which , in the main has been polite and well handled. But like me they might be finding it much harder work on the thread running now titled 'Living as a woman' in Feminist chat.

I read only for a while then tried to politely comment in there the last day or so and it has been hard to do that as they just keep more or less accusing me of making things up, of not seeing any other point of view or have any concern for women and am happy to put women at risk of harm and am just mansplaining being a man and calling me boy and man repeatedly.

Oh and throwing at me as arguments against me things that I have repeatedly said for myself on here over the past week. Which I imagine most of them have not bothered to read.

I am managing to keep my cool by taking breaks off there and think I will just stay away entirely now because I prefer not to engage in discourse and look for arguments rather than seek common ground and solutions.

They appear only to see removing access to all men by repealing the GRA as the only fair way forward.

Which - okay - fair enough that is their position - but obviously I cannot agree and is not going to happen and so is just wasted energy when we do actually stand a chance of uniting and ensuring nothing happens that does make things worse for women in general as allowing another half million self identifiers access to the GRA without any of the current restrictions clearly would do.

So, it is frustrating for me but not something I cannot handle and I trust it will not stop me trying to look for solutions instead of further divisions.

However, if it is starting to get others not posting on here upset over what is being said I will stay away for their sake.

To clarify I mean only from that specific thread. Not this one or any others where we can continue to talk fairly and openly.

I have no issue at all with people holding their own views and will not even call out anyone on here calling me boy or man if that is their wish.

To be honest when I have been interacting with society as a woman for longer than I imagine some of them have been alive as one then it is not something I find hateful as much as just slightly odd. But I do appreciate their reasons so do not consider it bigotry.

I well know the difference between biology and status and am not attempting to rewrite science. Just find some agreement as to a way forward that achieves what I think most on here actually want on both sides of the divide that is for me far less of a divide than some wish to make it into.

Our common goal is to protect the concerns of women and girls from the potential consequences of self identification without restriction and the way that society would be impacted by the 7000 or so trans people legally protected at present to hundreds of thousands of people self identifying.

That will change the face of our society and so quite rightly needs to be very seriously discussed before irrevocable steps are taken.

Assassinated - I wish you could try to explain that to those over on the other thread. Because we have a better chance of making them see sense and reconsider the way they make any such changes if we act together than their apparent dream of bringing down the whole house of cards and repealing the GRA entirely.

I have tried to point out that that is an outcome that will not happen in a modern free society. They say I am wrong,.

And I am genuinely concerned that if they continue to not see the fight we can win versus the dream they have to damn us all then there will be only one group winning this argument.

None of which are on this forum.

After the Corbett Vs Corbett ruling in 1971 we all became none people, i was still in school at that point having the shte kicked out of me
having the shte kicked out of me at home too

it took till a dear Friend Judy Cousins set up SHAFT in 1984, for uis to start to get organised , 1992 saw PFC formed

we were allowed to change all our documents whilst we transitioned many of my friends were butchered , including my oldest friend Rachel Webb

it took until the 1990,s when these same surgeons started butchering famous footballers wives or natal males before the law caught up with The Butcher Of Hun***

many took cases to the ECHR , after John Smith death we were promised if Tony Blair became PM in 1997 we would be allowed to change our birth Certifcates
The New Labour government campaigned on the Manifesto nobody would be left out !

well not only did they leave the Transsexuals out the Blair labour government faught every case year on year taken to the ECHR at tremendous expense to the UK taxpayer

all they while promising us we would get our birth Certicates , right up until 2004 they were still promising us

then The ECHR found in the favour of Christine Goodwin & I ,
the lying Blair government had to run round and introduce the GRA 2004 on the cheap PFC movers and shakers were greatful

it was painful for many people having to find medical documentation as most of our specialists had died or retired,

it was the most degrading process of my entire life ,

i only applied because both my parents who disowned me decades before finally met me and suggested i get my birth cert so i could marry my husband officially

we could have got married some years earlier as my husband was F2M both our mothers were overjoyed

the one thing not reported then or now part of being given a new Birth Certicate , we had to agree to go on the Transsexual Persons Register , my husband refused in principle

so if this self Id ever comes in i doubt it will be in my lifetime and it wont just be some one putting on a frock and declaring themselves female

I promise you there will be some evaluation and a period of living the RLT for at least two years , with whoever swearing an oath in front of a commissioner for oaths they intend to live as a female/male for the rest of their lives

its looking likely us older folks will be on the panel along with other suitably informed parties reviewing any application similar as to today we will know who is genuine and who isn't

but instead of getting upset , please lobby or write to your local MP giving your objections to self ID

Why are you so confident about self-id being a process that still involves gatekeeping? Ireland introduced a self-id system where there is no gatekeeping at all, and apparently it's working wonderfully with no problems for transgender people. If Ireland has done it, why would the UK not?

Wow, that was such a powerful post. A lot in there I did not realise.

Huge credit for getting through all of that and what you did for so many.

I must have forgotten about the register you speak about and only found out by accident off a genealogy website that the new birth certificate has no real status and nobody can find you by searching for it. Because it does not exist in the records,

The only thing they can access is the one you had at birth. Which has not been touched.

So future genealogists are going to have fun with that mess!

If I understand it the GRA in Ireland has fewer rights attached than the existing UK one. If the UK one retains the existing ones over access and removes gatekeeping that will be the problem for many on this forum I expect.

Seems unlikely the intent is to bring in self ID, remove gatekeeping and reduce the equivalent rights all round.

I believe the difference is over segregated sex spaces of which there are more exclusions in Ireland.

Not 100% on that so could be wrong.

I haven’t read the whole thread because a) I’m lazy and b) some of the ignorant replies would make me respond in kind.

To answer the original question, yes, I do know a number of women that have trans’d to men.

They stay under the radar as much as possible because of backwards attitudes such as I’ve seen here. Frankly, I think most of you need to pull yourselves into the 21st century and deal with it.

That's helpful advice @ExploryRory, thank you.

@Beholdtheflorist "..= to use myself as an example; I think of myself as a woman. Not because of my socialisation or my biology but because that's is simply how I interpret the things that make me..."

I'm sorry but , with respect, that makes zero sense to me. How can you know that your biology, the fact you have been socialised as female and are , presumably, perceived as female by all who meet you plays no part in your own perception of yourself as female. You cannot divorce yourself from your body and even removing the influence of your upbringing is hard.

Sharp suits and flats shoes don't mean most people see you as anything other than female.

With the weight of millennium of expectations around females how can you think how you see yourself is purely all down to what you think in your head, quite in isolation to any other cultural expectations? Unless you were raised on an island as the only inhabitant I don't buy it.

"But I can't tell you why that is, why the clothes I wear make me feel comfortable and capable in a way that a more traditionally 'female' way of dressing doesn't. "

You Don't know why uncomfortable, perhaps lacy, restricting underwear cutting into bits of your body might be unpleasant? Why high heels or strappy sandels, or whatever feminine footwear you once wore, might be restrictive?

Or why dressing like the majority of powerful people in our society might be pleasant and empowering?

@EverlastingLove "I like socialising with Transmen (they are nearer my height )
a sfew years ago was out with my friends 5 or 6 transmen, , I had my Levi 501,s on t shirt no bra and just a biker jacket (I have very short hair )
a gay guy saw us all together and picked on me as I was the shortest , he laughed at me , and said you,ll never make a man !! you are too short and too feminine ! I so said thanks you are probably right "

What a delicious moment!

My new birth certificate didn't change my life ! but it took me several years to get over ! opening old wounds , making me feel dirty !

I felt for one straight couple who had got married years before , and were expected to get divorced to remarry

yes Jaycee you are right about the new birth certificates not being able to be checked by geniologists , please see the website for latter day saints who list all births deaths etc

but many births are missing they made a mistake on my fathers birth registration so he has two entrys

but as you also will know all transsexuals NI and tax records are marked case sensitive wether a GRC has been issued so clerks working for the DWP cant check up on one of their neighbours who they may suspect may have a trans past

even with a GRC the original primary name is still visible , but only can be accessed by a HEO within the DWP or HMT
years ago getting a pension forcast took several days

strangely enough others non trans people who have perpetrated serious crimes and been issued with a new identity their records do not show any reference to their old name !

But not many of you probably know the Blair government lifted everyones entire medical records directly from your GP,s practice years ago without yours or your GP,s authority ! try googling The Spine

us oldies from the trans community stopped ours and our familys and friends being lifted to , "The Spine " its been , "alleged ", some of these medical records have been sold on to third partys in the USA

So theres something else to get mad at TB for !

best of luck trying to dismantle that , before thinking about dismantling other things

@Jayceedove "But I still hope he manages to extricate himself from that religious group who in my view are using him as a patsy to do their dirty work"

I totally agree (and I am a Christian).

I find the gingerbread picture very odd. Biological sex, yes verifiable, sexuality, yes you can be whatever sexuality you want/like/are. But gender identity is a social construct so why place it alongside the others.

The fact transsexuals used to transition physically, as far as they could, suggests that it was actually a sexual dysphoria, they might like things associated with females because they wanted to be female. And vice versa. Hence the name Tran sexual.

A lot of natal women understood this, were supportive and had no issue with transsexual women, or men. The new trans gender agenda is not about surgery or hormones, for some, it is about clothing, and pronouns and spaces.

Transsexual behaviour felt like a desire to come over 'to our side', as much as possible to be one of us, but the trans gender movement now, as distinct from all those with GRC who transitioned ages ago, feels more like cultural appropriation to me.

Not that people want to wear 'our' clothes, i don't care about that. But rather to be us, without really being us at all. To speak on behalf of females.To dictate how feminism should run.

To some extend the gender agenda is advertising. I didn't realise I needed a gender until someone told me!

We don't.

Have one if you want one, but don't impose it on everyone. Let kids be kids. They don't need a label to play with a Barbie.

alling me boy and man repeatedly

I hope you have reported that as its just not on at all

access to all men by repealing the GRA as the only fair way forward

Ive never seen this before but i am not on that thread so will absolutely have missed it

Most people on here seem to be unhappy with self ID and not the GRA

Dont blame you at all from absenting yourself from that thread when that sort of stuff is going on

But that’s the same position as many women feel they are now in, stillscreaming.

I think this is the issue (and why most women have no problem ideologically with trans men).

Trans women are claiming a protected characteristic (sex - the one that is discriminated against). If anyone can claim to have that characteristic it becomes meaningless and not actually protected at all.

I'm on that other thread, so I guess Jaycee is talking about me too?

The thread has evolved from discussing what it means to live as a woman, to how that is a plausible 'state' to get enshrined in law.

People aren't using the words man or boy or male to berate or upset.

The debate is robust and there is disagreement.

Largely around how possible, or impossible, it is to make it legal distinctions.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3193236-Living-as-a-woman?msgid=76387572#76387572

The thing is jelly the fact that womanhood brings protections on account of societal oppression does not have anything to do with whether or not someone should be able to be considered one so long as they present a good enough case.

What I mean is if there is a strong case to suggest this is a legitimate thing to do - a legitimate human condition and a legitimate individual need - then one needs to at least consider if there can be a workable compromise. Any legitimate request tends to be accommodated, in as much as it safely can be, and I think that's right.

As a group, transpeople have presented a good enough case both in Britain and worldwide to be legally recognised as the opposite sex to the one they were at birth. That's why we have the GRA.

And now as individuals (self-ID aside) they are again asked to make that case for themselves before they get that recognition.

The exemptions in the Equality Act are the compromise asked of transpeople to keep women safe, and the legal entitlement to "identify" into their class is the compromise of women. This, I would suggest, has been working just fine for the last 14 years; I originally thought most people on MN agreed.

That there has now been this shift of acceptance in the wider population that has given rise to this idea of self-ID; people are more inclined to believe in the legitimacy of transgenderism in general, so feel they don't need to place such a large burden of proof on the individual. Obviously there are two schools of thought about that.

But more broadly I can't see how repealing or amending the GRA would be a proportionate step in ensuring women's safety, when the EA is able to achieve the same WITHOUT the delegitamising of transgenderism.

@Rufustherenegadereindeer1

Ive never seen this before but i am not on that thread so will absolutely have missed it

This is the central point. The organisation who put together the petition that is being passed around MN, have views so extream that they were banned from holding a meeting at Millwall FC, I don't know if you know much about London football teams but suffice to say their tag line is 'everybody hate us, we don't care'. They're not a 'PC' bunch, if your views are too extreme for Millwall, then your views are very extreme.

They were then allowed to hold the meeting at the House of Commons, hosted by David Davis MP, not the Brexit one, another one, who's says there's no climates change.

This is a report of that meeting:

www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/03/15/anti-trans-activists-hit-out-at-parasitic-trans-people-at-event-in-parliament/

There's two bits of extra information you should know, Shelia Jefferies, doesn't just call trans women 'parasitic' and want the 14 year old Gender Recognition Act rolled back, she's also known for telling straight women that, if they want to be proper feminists, they can't have sex with men. I'm a feminist and a lesbian but, for me, the idea of telling straight women that they can't have consensual sex with men is, off the chart, batshit crazy.

You might think 'well I don't hold those views, that has nothing to do with me' which is reasonable, I don't think that the sex police are ever going to come and stop you having sex with you husband or partner. However, do you remember when Britian First got started, they were sharing images all over FB that no one could object to, remembering fallen servicemen, nice ones of Princess Diana?

It wasn't until they had clocked up eleventybillion 'likes' that their true addenda came out and they claimed all of those 'likes' as being support for a much more extreme cause.

They weren't "banned" from holding their meeting at Millwall. It was a decision made by Millwall in the face of the extreme hostility and constant contact from activists to stop the meeting. Nothing to do with the content of the talks being too extreme.

The Pink News story is apparently, according to several people actually at the meeting, not at all accurate and is deliberately misrepresenting the comment about parasites. However, there are very few options available to complain about inaccurate reporting from Pink News as they don't seem to be signed up to any press regulatory bodies.

I care about what happens on Mumsnet

As i have said i havent seen people on mumsnet saying that they want to get rid of the GRA

At all...

But i am not saying it can't be true cos i dont read every single thread and i may well have missed it

In the same way as i dont give a shiny shit if someone says i cant be a feminist on mumsnet I'm not going to get work up about some random saying that i cant be a feminist if i have sex with a man

I think the odds of anyone getting rid of the GRA are teeny teeny tiny, i dont doubt that it must be very worrying if you feel you will be adversely affected but every political party is in support of self ID so no Rights can be taken away

Milwall arent half as hard as they think they are and the only political party who are saying no self ID (and would be a threat to the GRA) are UKIP...and they couldnt get themselves elected if they were the only party standing

No idea about britain first...are they the old BNP?

Would be interested in reports from more than pinknews...i prefer information from more than one source ...which is why im lurking here

Thank you for engaging with me, its very interesting hearing from all points

I think most people are like me...dont want any rights taken away, very happy with the status quo, dont want naughty men to take advantage of self ID and very worried for some of the children in particular who are affected by this