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 no, I'm not going to shut up about women's biology and why it's different to feminising surgery on a man.

I absolutely have no problem with specifics about biology being discussed at any time that it is pertinent to the debate.

So that's a #YesDebate from me!

But when the details do not seem pertinent, but seem to be being included purely to dehumanise and elicit a negative reaction then they cease to be contributing to debate.

Obviously I'm not always right that something is or is not pertinent at any specific point, but I call it like I see it. The level of detail I called you up on, to me, seemed unnecessary to the point you were making.

still

Nope. Action for Trans Health were specifically consulted. They are named as giving written evidence to Maria Millers transgender report. They weren't just openly surveyed.

No feminist groups, on the other hand, were asked for written reports.

Action for trans health also 'liked' the let's fuck up some terfs comment made by the person involved in the violence at speakers corner.

Their manifesto is unhinged.

Presumably Maria Miller had no idea.

Due diligence doesn't seem to have been her forte.

Giving an intern two hours and a keyboard, would have sorted that.

Neo vagina seems a perfectly acceptable term so long as any women who has a breast reconstruction is also said to have a Neo breast. Then it is not being selectively used to create an effect.

I'm not on board with the #NoDebate. Not a bit of it.

I think on page 38, with over 900 posts, it's safe to say that none of us are on board with 'no debate'.

You said that words have means and that it's important to respect those meanings. I'm happy with that but you can't use words that you know are inaccurate 'to make a point' and get offended when some else does the same thing.

You can demand two opposit things at the same time.

Yikes, that Scottish manifesto from the Monster Raving Looney Party on trans health was fun.

Did they also do a real one that had a hope in hell of being taken seriously or ever funded by the NHS?

God, I'm right behind you when it comes to slating a Tory Datun

One of most 'interesting' aspects of working in politics is that you have to 'consult' everyone. As many will be aware, that consultation process is either 'open', when you have a webpage to take views or you send a request for views to anyone who could possible claim to be, even vaguely, 'interested'.

OK maybe consulted on was not the right way to say this. Sorry I am about the least political person there is and was going from memory here.

In 2015, a new Conservative Party Government was elected (the previous government had been a Liberal Democrat-Conservative coalition). The first act of the new Women and Equalities Select Committee, under Tory MP Maria Miller, was to hold an inquiry into Transgender Rights. This inquiry called plenty of transgender campaigning organizations (which had proliferated since the passing of the GRA) to give oral evidence, but not a single women’s organization. That report recommended that Gender Recognition Certificates should be issued without any conditions, but by a process of self-declaration, and that exemptions protecting single-sex spaces should be reduced or removed.

Explains it a bit better. It was the Transgender Rights Inquiry, and they were invited to give oral evidence. Off the back of this inquiry, were the proposed changes.

( www.feministcurrent.com/2017/11/28/judith-green-gender-recognition-act-fight-womens-sex-based-rights-uk/ )

Either way, they were taken seriously. When they clearly should not be. This group were also the ones cheerleading the assault against Maria McLaughlin at speakers corner.

But I guess that might be how certain radical feminist ideas are perceived from the outside too, like political lesbianism and all heterosexual sex being rape. (Btw I appreciate the two are not directly comparable).

Well tbh, I am a radical feminist (apparently, as TERF is yelled at me many times per day*) and I do not understand politicial lesbianism at all, and definitely do think 'all heterosexual sex is rape' is pretty batshit too.

*Slightly tongue in cheek. I also do support the Nordic model and am anti-porn, which seem to put me pretty firmly in the radfem camp as liberal feminism seems to be mainly about being 'sex positive' and being very pro-transactivist and pro-anything that might please men

Quoting from the "Sex Matters" sheet? That's an odd sort of authority on the matter; a bit like quoting your mate's homework isn't it?

The level of detail I called you up on, to me, seemed unnecessary to the point you were making.

I'm not sure how you can make the requisite distinction between a neo vagina and a vagina without listing the differences.

And yes it does need saying.

Women's anatomy has a purpose. It's a miracle of design. And women are relentlessly disadvantaged on the basis of it.

It can also cause numerous problems, many of which are dealt with poorly by the medical profession.

It being termed exclusionary is insulting.

As is the idea that a neovagina and a vagina is, in any way, the same thing.

The very idea that this is offensive, is also insulting.

No one knows what it 'feel' like to be another person. I do not know what it feels like to be any other woman or man on this planet. Men do not know what it feels like to be female. They can imagine and prefer it and identify with it , but they do not know. Feeling womanly does not make you female.

I've got no idea what it feels like to be a woman. I born female but as I've nothing to compare it to, I don't know if any of my feelings about myself are 'woman' or just me.

I suppose I could compare it to waking up in the morning with male bits but, to be totally honest, I don't think that would cause me undue distress. I'd have a nice morning 'helicoptering' and weeing standing up. I'd be miffed that I'd missed my chance to write my name in the snow but otherwise I'd be grand.

I don't have a feeling of dysphoria with my body. I can't imagine what that feels like, none of us knows what happens in another person's head.

If you've got working tackle down there - you're a man, might prefer to present as a woman - but you are male.

I don't think that anyone is arguing that's not true. Just that being a woman is more than being female. I was born a female but it's taken an awful lot more than that basic biological fact to turn me into what I am today. We are the sum of more than our biology.

You said that words have means and that it's important to respect those meanings. I'm happy with that but you can't use words that you know are inaccurate 'to make a point'

It's not inaccurate, as you well know.

castration
kaˈstreɪʃ(ə)n/Submit
noun
the removal of the testicles of a male animal or man.

How about you give me the definition of affirmation surgery?

Quoting from the "Sex Matters" sheet? That's an odd sort of authority on the matter; a bit like quoting your mate's homework isn't it?

Is this in reply to me?

Its not quoting from a sex matters sheet, if so.

Sorry, ignore that. LOL. Clearly not a reply to me. I think I need sleep

As is the idea that a neovagina and a vagina is, in any way, the same thing.

I've got a friend with a prosthetic leg, would you feel the need to keep pointing out to her that your leg was factory fitted and better in all ways?

Would you find it insulting and offensive if she called her leg a 'leg'?

The post its replying too though, I would be interested to know which of

• Being biologically male or female is determined by our sex chromosomes in our DNA within every cell of our body, shaping not just the reproductive system we are born with, but our bone structure, cardiovascular system and other biological factors, such as the risk of specific health problems.

• Because the ‘blueprint’ of our sex chromosomes is in our DNA, our sex can be known through examining any of our cells, our blood, saliva, even our bones long after our death.

• Our sex and reproductive organs are sexed. Female sex organs are the ovaries, uterus, vagina and vulva and the male sex organs are the testes, prostate, scrotum and penis, by definition, so there can be no such thing as a ‘female penis’ or a ‘male vagina’.

You are taking issue with.

Desperately trying to catch up!

@Datun excellent as always

@TheGoalIsToStayOutOfTheHole some brilliant posts.

@jayceedove "I really do think now two quite separate things are going on here with very different origins, very different desires for outcome or needs of expression and a huge imbalance in numbers too." So agree.

I know you do not want to sieak on behalf of trans men but any idea how many camps there are for trans nen? Genuine question. I can see three or four! But as I am not a trans man, or any kind of man, I am not sure if I am needlessly complicating my own mind!

Sorry, ignore that. LOL. Clearly not a reply to me. I think I need sleep

But yes, this still stands. So off to attempt some sleep now

Been good talking to you all anyway. Even if we appear to very much disagree on some parts of it.

That's the thing Datun, you went off on a bit of a thing when noone on this thread had said anything was exclusionary.

I can be fairly safe in saying that all of us think the idea of saying "women have vaginas" being terribly persecutory is barmy, because we all seem like normal people.

Of course I can see why you did it; because it has been said, and you've seen it said, and you're rebuking the wider point as well as saying what you wanted to say, which is that you found the two things having a word in common insulting. For which you could have said "I find the two things sharing a word insulting".

I personally don't agree with you on that, but then I'm not reverential about female biology. If someone draws a picture of a car, as long as I can recognise that is a car, I call it a car. I don't care that it doesn't drive when deciding what to call it.

How about you give me the definition of affirmation surgery?

We've just spent two or three pages agreeing that there is more to it than that. We were still working on our issues with language, potato/potata vagina/neovagina.

still

I probs wouldn't to her face, no.

But I have seen too many posts that are claiming a neovagina is better than a vagina, more fragrant, more receptive, and doesn't smell of fish, to make me anything other than pro vaginas, pro vulvas and an advocate for making distinction.

Night thegoal

Night TheGoal :)

(PS no problem with the facts listed, just poking fun at the source being a funny sort of authority on the subject. My sense of humour is perhaps niche.)

apparently taking issue with GCSE level biology facts.

Of course I could paste pages and pages and pages and pages.... of facts, which would keep you very busy, rebutting with 'feelings' about things, but I do think you deserve a chance of downtime. So yes, nice and succinct group of facts, rather than feelings.

Maybe your mates' homework is of much poorer quality, somehow I suspect It probably is.

Affirmation surgery:

Sex reassignment surgery or SRS (also known as gender reassignment surgery, gender confirmation surgery, genital reconstruction surgery, gender-affirming surgery, or sex realignment surgery) is the surgical procedure (or procedures) by which a transgender person's physical appearance and function of their existing sexual characteristics are altered to resemble that socially associated with their identified gender.

It's not very specific and doesn't tell you anything.