Apologies for that long ramble. I have been awake most of the night trying to figure out the reasons why there is such polarity between some women and trans women.
And why I understand what is being said on the other thread where exclusion is sought and yet feel horrified by it.
Bottom line I think is that - quite rightly - women see a need for biological protections against men intruding into personal spaces.
And regard transgender 'men' as wanting to invade these spaces out of disrespect.
I accept that there should be - and are - exclusions within the GRA for such spaces.
And I can also see - and indeed share - the concerns over giving access to any of the non protected spaces to someone who has not physically transitioned nor wishes to do so and simply wants to express a personal gender identity.
So with my personal head on I think - yes - they are right they should be excluded from changing rooms, etc, not because they are all perverts - course not - but because you just don't know what they mean by identifying.
Yet with my trans head on I feel ashamed at what looks like me saying they are less trans than me because I know this is not so. They are just different. And that is not fair reason to be exclusive with any group of society.
Especially as I am thinking that I do not want to be excluded from places like changing rooms or hospital wards and these women are saying I am just like all the others and yet I am feeling the same need to exclude as they are. So long as it does not include me.
So is that just total self protection?
Actually I think it is because transsexuals are viewing this biologically - as are women - so we see gender identity as a fuzzy definition upon which to put at risk intimate contact.
I don't have any answers as to solutions other than I feel the act as it stands broadly works as long as it.
Provides the right for exclusion of all transgender people from some agreed specific instances such as smear testing and rape centres. As in we can be excluded within the law by a decision of that individual or location.
I think that is more or less what is happening now but if not then it should be tightened to make it an option to exclude or include and not a right within the act.
But for more generic things such as changing rooms and hospital wards it should be a right within the act. Because the only alternative is to either define by DNA or create third spaces as some are suggesting.
And they will simply transfer to transsexuals the problems being fairly argued and removed from women.
So the only workable solution that might be acceptable to women and existing holders of a GRC probably has to be that the act is somehow strengthened around the degree of physical change required for someone to be granted a certificate.
That, I know, would not go down well. But it seems a reasonable place to start looking for compromise.