To carry on this most excellent discussion that is only very occasionally touching on the subject of transmen?

[RatRolyPoly]

Thoroughly interesting, AIBU to keep it rolling?

I agree with the comments above. If all you do is 'identify' as a woman but are not willing to subject yourself to medical assessment to discover if there are reasons for that which could have consequences and/or follow the well established rules to demonstrate permanence, commitment, mental stability post transition and an ability to contribute to society post transition - then it seems totally reasonable that that form of 'identification' cannot commend the same commitment for recognition back from society,

These rules were designed to protect all - the transitioner and society around them.

I regard them as essential and if we make the boundaries more fuzzy then the concerns expressed by many about transgender people do start to gain legitimacy and traction.

When making rules that effect all parts of society by choosing to franchise a small minority the consequences on all, not just the minority, have to be taken into consideration.

You CAN make choices in your life about some things that should not be restricted. That is as free society.

But if you make changes that quite obviously impact on others around you then there have to be controls agreed by everyone.

You are free to go out and buy a book with a picture of a gun on the cover. There are rules in place to control who and how you can go out and buy an actual gun.

Different consequences on society require less freedom and consultation on the restrictions put in place.

@thanksjaneshusbandatcaresouth

I am ok A and B but not C

So your issue has nothing to do with 'self ID', the proposed changes to the law.

You're issue is with women who have undergone treatment and met the medical and legal 'gatekeeping' requirements.

I didn't follow what you said above about natural advantage.

As a feminist, I don't think that women are at an intellectually disadvantage to men. so, while I can see why some women would want a single sex environment for some physical reasons, (perhaps sport or areas where clothing is removed) I don't see why we would need a single sex environment for intellectual pursuits.

@thanksjaneshusbandatcaresouth

Your use of the word "pretending" suggest you think they know they are faking it. I'd say some do know, some genuinely think being a woman is something 'up for grabs'.

No, it suggests that I'm open to the possibility that someone could 'fake it'. I'm also open to the possibility that someone could, in good faith, mistakenly believe themselves to be trans when they are not or that there could be mental or developmental illnesses that could lead someone to sincerely believe they are trans when they're not.

still what are you talking about?

thanks said "I am ok A and B but not C"

Your C was self Id or are you doing some little exercise to suggest something different?

Women are not self iding!
People with GRC are not self id

It's self Id that is the issue for most women.

That quote was from me, still.

" I'm also open to the possibility that someone could, in good faith, mistakenly believe themselves to be trans when they are not or that there could be mental or developmental illnesses that could lead someone to sincerely believe they are trans when they're not"

So the best thing to do on that situation would be
D) let anyone identify into a sex class, who cares.
E) let there be a process as there has been
?

As a feminist, I don't think that women are at an intellectually disadvantage to men. so, while I can see why some women would want a single sex environment for some physical reasons, (perhaps sport or areas where clothing is removed) I don't see why we would need a single sex environment for intellectual pursuits.

It's nothing to do with intellectual disadvantage, it's to do with unconscious bias, unacceptable work/life balance and the old boys network. See here (PDF)

Law is not a single sex environment. The Law Society award is for women who have overcome these obstacles to achieve a senior position and who can inspire other women to pursue a career in law.

It's utterly pointless if it's open to any man who says he ID's as a woman.

I mean, how many women look at Pippa Bunce and think, 'gosh, if she can be so successful in investment banking, maybe I can too!'

Still, there are structural disadvantages to female lawyers. Trust me on this one!

Rofl

“I mean, how many women look at Pippa Bunce and think, 'gosh, if she can be so successful in investment banking, maybe I can too!'”

The intellectual pursuit side of law is a tiny tiny part of it Still.

Frankly it’s a treat when you get time to do the intellectual stuff. That’s why we turn to mumsnet!

poster Jayceedove Sat 17-Mar-18 13:22:41

Thank you this is so helpful.

@pencil

*Law is not a single sex environment. The Law Society award is for women who have overcome these obstacles to achieve a senior position and who can inspire other women to pursue a career in law.

Quite, which is why I don't think that 'anyone why identifies as a women' is problematic. When the fear with self ID is that someone might pretend to be a woman in order to gain the 'privileges' of being a woman (such as they are), this is not a situation, in which that might apply.

Both the ideas that someone might throw a dress on a Tuesday and apply for this award on a Thursday and not raise the suspicions of some of the greatest legal minds on the country or that someone who isn't trans would go through the the long and arduous task of obtaining a GRC are improbable.

I don’t think you’re right Still.

With respect I think you don’t know much about this particular business environment and you need to gather more information.

For a start this has nothing to do with the finest legal minds. You don’t win for writing a judgment, doing advocacy or writing a book.

With respect I think you don’t know much about this particular business environment and you need to gather more information.

Oh, I didn't know that there was a qulification needed to answer questions in AIBU, particularly when the question was thrown into a broader thread.

You are right in saying that I don't have much experience in this sector, just a few weeks temping as a student and visiting legal firms for bits and bobs of work/advice.

I've found them to be quite staid environments. Lots of navy blue suits on both the men and the women. Lots of 'old school boy' types. They didn't really strike me as the types that were inviting to those who didn't fit into quite ridged boxes.

There are areas of the charity sector or more creative industries where being trans might be celebrated but in the law firms I've visited, the impression I got, was it would be tolerated and accepted, legal-requirements-met sort of thing.

Still no one needs to throw on a dress, that's a red herring.

sorry I could not resist this

Still,
You know a lot more than I do about other subjects we’ve discussed so it’s only fair for it to even up a bit :)

To get an award you need nerve, arrogance sometimes or (more likely) a marketing team who are paid to big you up.. You have to approach clients who’ve spent lots of money on you (and rarely got exactly what they wanted) to ask for recommendations and nominations. You need self belief. Ideally you will have a marketing team who do it all for you -they spot the moment of client gratitude and quickly monetise it as an award nomination, often making the request after some generous corporate hospitality.
If you have friends who have gone to work for a corporate client, that obviously helps. That’s the networking bit.
There are a couple of firms in my area of law who are, in truth, the best. Sometimes they do win awards but not that often as they get their repeat work from their clients (who are highly skilled in house lawyers themselves and don’t give a shit about the awards). usually it’s more of a marketing project and a B-team man with nerves of steel can get one through sheer ambition and a good marketer. I know this because my ex boss, whose work was technically poor, managed to win one.
Put it another way, winning awards is something your firm decides to do.

Now, imagine how many women push for these awards. Very few. Because of the ways that women behave. We tend to be less confident about our entitlement to awards. As you know, we tend on average to behave in less assertive ways. So there is an argument for the woman solicitor award. There is a poster on the other thread who is celebrating her own award without apology. This is to be celebrated, but it’s rare for a woman to be so confident. I read her post and I think “gosh, maybe I could do it too!”.

Others say that the category doesn’t help women. I acknowledge that too.

But if we are going to have the category, it does need to be for women by which I mean (a) women and (b) people who have gone through all the commitment needed to become one of us.

thanks great post.

@thanksjaneshusbandatcaresouth

Thanks for taking the time to give me the explaination, I appreciate it.

But if we are going to have the category, it does need to be for women by which I mean (a) women and (b) people who have gone through all the commitment needed to become one of us.

I couldn't agree with you more. The point I was trying to make is that anyone applying would be in group a. or b., that the likelihood of someone from group c. slipping in under the wire, particularly in the circumstances you have gone to the trouble to describe to me, are unlikely.

My view has shifted a bit on group c., I'm feminist and a fundamental part of that, for me, is showing respect towards other women because we don't always encounter that in wider society because wider society is a patriarchy. I don't always succeed but I try.

Part of that respect is being willing to consider what other women are saying. A significant number of women have said that they are afraid of the implications of self id, whilst, I'm not personally afraid, (I live in a country with self ID, that's working well), I've come to think that it shouldn't be imposed while those women have genuine fears and concerns.

I don't think that there is any point to discussing anything unless we are open to the views of others, open to the idea of learning from each other and open to the the idea of changing our minds.

However, I think to argue effectively against a position, a group have to be very specific on what they are arguing against and that it's most effective to bring up arguments against something that is demonstrably happening or likely to happen and that causes demonstrable harm.

It is happening Still. Pipa Bunce made it onto the FT top 50 women in business list.

On the other thread, Pencils found some very interesting stats that tell a powerful story. They show the breakdown of GRCs awarded by year, quarter year, how many are awarded to trans women and trans men (not as big a disparity as you imagine) and age group of awards.

What this reveals is that we are only talking about a few hundred per year and these numbers have not skyrocket over the past 14 years - indeed are LOWER than in the first year or two when many older trans people registered.

In the 1970s I was told, as I have reported before, that around 1000 people a year passed through the NHS with gender dysphoria and about 100 of those had medical transition and surgery.

That all these years later and after massive social upheavals, gender debate, social media, mass market publicity etc that still the very same kind of level - a few hundred transitioning - probably only a couple of hundred having surgery - is occurring amidst that very different landscape seems very significant.

Especially against the backdrop where that same gender debate has led to hundreds of thousands of self identifiers and numbers at child clinics booming.

That looks a little like a social contagion driven by publicity and belief.

Whilst the transsexual population stays at almost exactly the same level (in fact possibly exactly the same level allowing for population rise) and no apparent increase amidst that same social upheaval.

You might think that powerful evidence for two very different things going on here.

Just some figures. In 2005 1181 GRCs were awarded - 912 changing from male, 269 from female.

The total for the last 4 years - 2013/14 to 2016/17 have been 318, 244, 332 and 318 - with the splits 220/98, 147/97, 223/109 and 219/99

Very interesting data. Thanks pencils

Jayceedove

Polly Carmichael of the Tavi has just, for the first time ever, publically endorsed, or rather recommended Stephanie Davis Arai's Transgendertrend schools' guide.

Precisely because of SDA's stance on social contagion.

Clinics are at the coalface of the overwhelming number of confused kids.

Carmichael's talk is on SoundCloud.

"My view has shifted a bit on group c., I'm feminist and a fundamental part of that, for me, is showing respect towards other women because we don't always encounter that in wider society because wider society is a patriarchy. I don't always succeed but I try.

Part of that respect is being willing to consider what other women are saying. A significant number of women have said that they are afraid of the implications of self id, whilst, I'm not personally afraid, (I live in a country with self ID, that's working well), I've come to think that it shouldn't be imposed while those women have genuine fears and concerns."

well said. my views are shifting daily! so much to think about...

What's swaying it for me is the testimonies by women "at the coal face" saying that idiotic students are lecturing them on how to be working class, how to help the poor, how to help women in shelters - that sort of thing.

still "Part of that respect is being willing to consider what other women are saying. A significant number of women have said that they are afraid of the implications of self id, whilst, I'm not personally afraid, (I live in a country with self ID, that's working well), I've come to think that it shouldn't be imposed while those women have genuine fears and concerns. "

Great post.

"I've come to think that it shouldn't be imposed while those women have genuine fears and concerns." Hooray (Said completely genuinely.)

"I don't think that there is any point to discussing anything unless we ad open..." I agree.

These discussions help to make me more tolerant too. It may not seem it, but they do!

"However, I think to argue effectively against a position, a group have to be very specific on what they are arguing against and that it's most effective to bring up arguments against something that is demonstrably happening or likely to happen and that causes demonstrable harm."

For me the Girl Guides and Labour party jumping the gun and bringing in new rules is a biggie. I don't want to de rail the thread and threads do exist inbound these topics.