Men wanting to be Women

[bert3400]

To think transgender women really have no idea what being a women is ? . Maybe it's time we had a 3rd Gender . Be interested in hearing what real women & transwomen feel ?

I suggest the "trans apologists" women have a look.

Wow, okay.

"Trans apologist", ey? Like "rape apologist" or "porn apologist"?

Why don't you tell us what you really think of transgender people??

Re men's attitude to this. Imo, most simply aren't interested, it has no impact on them. That is true of my dh, of his friends, acquaintances. Just not bothered.

Nothing to do with being scared of some sort of backlash.

I've peak transed two close male friends.

Rat: you've been on lots of these threads where women have described how transactivism or transactivists have caused upset, harm, permanent damage, and fear: and have been given multiple examples of predatory behaviour, abuse and threats. Why are you surprised ? Sounds like fake victimhood to me.

Transgenderism has been present in human history for centuries in cultures right across the globe

So why do they suddenly need to be treated like the opposite sex? Why not carry on as before for centuries.

The word 'transgenderism' has been critics as transphobic btw.

Self ID is a terrible and stupid idea: the fact that countries adopt it as law doesn't mean it's not a terrible and stupid idea.

I'm beginning to think that people who can't see the difference between concerns of male borns being in womens places/sports and disliking transpeople must be extremely hard of thinking. To the point of being pitied rather than blamed.

So why do they suddenly need to be treated like the opposite sex? Why not carry on as before for centuries.

I think the idea is that oftentimes before they were treated like the opposite of their bodily sex, because nobody knew any different.

But look, didn't this whole thing come up after Maria Miller's consultation? They established transpeople had an especially hard time and they recommended possible ways to alleviate that, no? I think if you know a minority group are having a tough time in society that's probably a fair reason to not "carry on as before".

I didn't really understand your post just before that; yes, TRAs can be heinous, aggressive sorts. But they're not the sum total of the group "trans" are they. So "TRA apologist", fine. "Trans apologist", not so fine, what with the word "trans" generally being the blanket term covering a majority of people who just want to go about their lives peacefully.

I'm beginning to think that people who can't see the difference between concerns of male borns being in womens places/sports and disliking transpeople must be extremely hard of thinking

I agree rosy. Why would somebody whose concern was with male born people in such spaces use a phrase like "trans apologist"; when quite clearly that implies a dislike of "trans", and that trans is a bad thing (see rape or porn) for which one might make excuses.

Oh, wait...

I think if you know a minority group are having a tough time in society that's probably a fair reason to not "carry on as before

It’s a reason to look at why people are discriminated against and by whom.

And yet it’s not feminists or women threatening transpeople. But it’s women who will suffer if self ID goes ahead.

It’s not children of both sexes threatening transpeople - yet child safeguarding will be diluted to the point of uselessness by self ID.

It’s generaly men who abuse trans women - yet there’s not really impactvon men at all is there?

The proposed changes to self ID will damage the protections of women, children. They don’t help people with gender dysphoria and they don’t seem to be aimed at tackling the core reason why men who present as women face troubles, which is Male violence.

So by all means work towards a society where anyone can wear/act how they wantvand gender boundaries are smashed, but this does the opposite - so why is it happening?

Most would not be perceived as the opposite sex, ever, Rat, so would not ha e been treated as the opposite sex: and anyway that's in direct contradiction to your next claim which is that trans/GNC people have an especially hard time. Which is it? They're usually treated as the opposite sex or they usually have a specially hard time?

Oh what a tangled web we weave

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the Tories were hoping self-ID would be a cheap, showboaty nod to "making trans lives easier"; blame them that it's on the table, don't blame me!

Regardless of what either of us thinks would be the upshot of self-ID (we know we disagree), what about self-ID plus doctor's note? No two year wait, no multiple assessments, but as much safeguarding as you have when applying for a passport and retained contact with the medical profession for access to support. Compromise?

No. Transgenderism is not only in direct opposition to material reality, it's also self-contradictory. The stuff of which bad law is made. Repeal the GRA 2004. Let people present how they want without having to change their bodies.

Most would not be perceived as the opposite sex, ever, Rat, so would not ha e been treated as the opposite sex: and anyway that's in direct contradiction to your next claim which is that trans/GNC people have an especially hard time. Which is it? They're usually treated as the opposite sex or they usually have a specially hard time?

You've confused two points Pratchet.

There are a good number of recorded card through history of people living their lives entirely believed to be one sex, then on their death it being discovered that bodily they are the other.

Hence treated as the sex they feel not their bodily sex.

Then today, in this day and age, doesn't happen so much. Apparently they have quite a tough time these days, although of course that's not my experience to relay.

So yeah, the two aren't contradictory what with being separated by a couple of hundred years.

Ahhhh, here we go; so it's the ideology that the problem?

I said on the self-ID thread, this is always where we end up.

what about self-ID plus doctor's note? No two year wait, no multiple assessments

No. The process including multiple assessments itself is what keeps the GRCs as a rigorous process. A doctors note cannot replace that. A single practitioner cannot replicate that process. No dilution, no doctors notes, no self ID.

You’re all about the loopholes - women say no and you chip chip away at that no. Asking for compromise, baskets of sanpro, how about this? Or that? Let me just get rid of your protections women, but it's ok look because here are some crumbs.

No means no. It isn’t the start point for chipping away at people’s resolve.

Women and children will be directly harmed if self ID comes in - I oppose it.

Actually I'm all about practical solutions and getting things done with everyone's interests accounted for.

A hard line means you either get what you want - everything you want - or you end up entirely unrepresented in the solution.

We will see how all of this pans out.

Women rugby players were badly injured recently by a transwoman in the opposing team. Never gets a mention!

A practical solution is working to reduce gender stereotyping. It would be to fully prosecute any person who physically attacks a trans woman (but that’s men so that’s not happening...) It would be to redraw the GRA to get rid of the legal fudge language about changing sex to assert that sex is not gender and assert everyone’s right to present as they wish. It would be to assist transpeople to set up their own refuges etc with services tailored to them.

Removing protections from women is not a solution, it’s certainly not practical. It doesn’t help people with gender dysphoria. It reinforces the ideology that if you don’t fit a narrow box you’re not really that sex. It creates problems, it doesn’t solve them.

We were living in a live and let live sort of practical tolerance until TRA groups started all this. But what they want is not logical, not practical and not reasonable.

No: I pointed out that you confused two points. I am now pointing out that you are back pedalling.

No means no. It isn’t the start point for chipping away at people’s resolve. Women and children will be directly harmed if self ID comes in - I oppose it.

Me too. We have an inch and transactivists took a mile. We'll have the inch back now, along with the mile.

Um, don't think so Pratchet, it's right here on the thread for you to go back and check.

Um, I think so Rat, and I agree, it is right there on the thread.

Me: Transgenderism has been present in human history for centuries

Ereshkigal: I'm sure you are retrospectively transing the dead

Me: Do you mean my being aware of numerous cases of people who lived their whole lives appearing to be one sex only for it to be discovered on their death that they were bodily the other?

Pratchet: So why do they suddenly need to be treated like the opposite sex? Why not carry on as before for centuries.

Me: I think the idea is that oftentimes before they were treated like the opposite of their bodily sex, because nobody knew any different Referring to the centuries in which transpeople were simply treated as the opposite sex, as per your post

Me:

Pratchet: Most would not be perceived as the opposite sex, ever, Rat, so would not ha e been treated as the opposite sex: and anyway that's in direct contradiction to your next claim which is that trans/GNC people have an especially hard time.

Me: "you're confusing what I said about transpeople who have been around for centuries and the transpeople of today"

Pratchet: no I'm not.

Sorry, I didn't mean that to come across like I was taking a tone - I wasn't! I can be a bit officious. I just wanted to clarify that there was clearly a misunderstanding between us; I hate misunderstandings.

Me: Transgenderism has been present in human history for centuries

Three points here. Firstly for many different reasons and motivations. A woman dressing as a man so she can do things women were forbidden from is different to nobility donning frocks for kicks. Which is different again to eunuchs. Which is different to Greenlandic hunters assuming a male role to hunt after the death of a partner. It’s an interesting and fascinating subject. And it tells you a lot about the societies these individuals lived or live in.

1. But... it’s not comparable to TRA activism today in the west. Most past transgenderisn was a response to societal limits and was a socially allowed adaptation to very specific circumstances and allowed only within very strict bounds. Our female hunter had to stay that way for example - she couldn’t switch back.

So 3... leads us in to the consequences of transgenderisn past and present. In the past it’s been under very limited circumstances and people have never used it as a way of reducing women’s rights like the modern TRA movement is.

There have always been people who do this - how and in what context tells us a lot about past societies and their social mores but it doesn’t make what modern TRAs want normal, progressive or ok. It’s not a logical progression.