AIBU .... to open a transgender discussion thread for respectful debate !

[wrexhamtrans]

For the last couple of days I enjoyed a great discussion over transgender rights on a thread that has now closed. Despite over 1000 posts it was on the whole very respectful and insightful.

So let's have something new.... let's have a thread started by myself, a transsexual woman where we can have a healthy dialog. No TRA agenda, no erasure, no abuse or disrespect......

To kick things off I'd like to pick up on a comment made on a previous thread.
I fully accept many other women, who would previously allowed this [transgender women in women's spaces], now wouldn't because "we gave an inch and they stole a mile"

In the past there existed generally a happy coexistence between transsexual women and women.

Unfortunately the goalposts moved and we now have this broad umbrella of transgenderism which I will be the first to say is completely ridiculous. It is this new label that campaigns for cross dressers rights and acceptance of those who are sexual motivated. And of course self id is a dangerous and foolish idea.

Please remember there is still a quiet minority of transsexual women who do want to live their life in peace and who are as much against this as any woman. These TRAs do not represent me.

Being a woman for me is who I am. It's how society sees me because it cannot accept the way I am as permissible as a man. I am castrated and hormonally transitioned and awaiting surgery. I live every day as a woman and i am treated as one in many ways including misogyny, oppressed by male privilege, sexualisation....For some transition was the only way to have a life.

Those who cross dress and are sexual motivated are making a choice. Those with gender dysphoria are not.

There needs to be compromise on both sides, probably more so on the TRA side.
As transsexual I would like to have seen the following...

1. No self id. All those identifying as women to be psychologically evaluated and screened. Gender Dysphoria is no joke.
2. Any rights given to trans women go to dysphoric transsexual women who are in physical transition. No rights at all to other groups eg cross dressers....in other words is transsexual rights not transgender rights.
3. Access to some women's spaces permitted after X months of HRT and testosterone blocking therapy ie when Oestrogen and Testosterone levels are that of a natal female.

Unfortunately I think too much has been conceded already to revert.
I am fed up having my identity hijacked and turned into something it's not. I wouldn't wish gender dysphoria on my worst enemy. People with GD are damaged people who struggle considerably with gender identity and face daily abuse, ridicule and violence.

I absolutely do believe it is possible to born in the wrong body.....to have a brain chemistry of one gender and a body of another. Indeed we know of one generic condition called Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome which does exactly that. The idea though that it's ok to mix this up with sexual fetishism is sooooo wrong.

Can you think of any other medical condition where it would be accepted for someone else to claim that condition because they like to pretend they have it ? If I applied to the Council for a Blue Badge because it turns me on to sometimes pretend I am disabled I would be told, rightly so, where to go. Why oh why would the Government capitulate that with gender dysphoria ? You were born in the wrong body, have significant mental health issues ? Yes, we will help you. You like to pretend you are a woman because it turns you on ? Of course, jump in there too.....

As I said Weetabix do you believe that it's about whether a male person can imitate a female sufficiently well?

No. For a start it isn't just about transwomen it's about transmen too. Secondly, I find it offensive to describe transwomen as "a male person imitating a female".

I would like to see strict guidelines drawn up and a process that someone goes through that enables a person to be officially recognised as transgender. At that point I would be happy for them to access the toilets that match their identity.

That's currently my view. I am open to see what new research or suggestions come out during the consultation though. Maybe there are much better solutions in the pipeline.

I'm certainly not about to vilify an entire group of people because of the actions of a tiny minority.

Luckily, I came out the other side and now refuse to be manipulated.

Same.

it would show that you’ve not really listened to anything I’ve said and have instead chosen to ignore it I logged off for the afternoon and I have found it difficult to catch up with what you, and others, have actually said! But in general you do seem to be saying that women who say "No" loudly, often and even a little aggressively are wrong and should accommodate men who wish to have society accept they are women!

If that isn't what you are saying then why are you all still arguing about it?

They are a third space, they are not only used by the disabled, they also offer baby changing. They are already a multi-functional space.

Women with babies don't feel ashamed or singled out, because they are baby'd.
They are different, they need different facilities,clearly lack of clarity and also the need to feel safe for trans people makes this a perfect choice also.
Embrace it

Secondly, I find it offensive to describe transwomen as "a male person imitating a female".

Which has no bearing on the point being discussed.

Are we all supposed to blindly accept stuff as facts without asking or thinking more deeply? I'm not up for that.

Interesting.

Proper lolled at this...

me too, believe me.

If she looks like a bloke though, some on here wouldn't believe that she was bio female and would demand proof or not want her in there in the first place as she was too butch.

I think you underestimate women (adult human females) especially Debbie.
It's rather distasteful that you are using her situation to try to score points.

It is a free country, the problem arises when people that hold exclusionary views start announcing that everyone must also hold this view or you’re less worthy or intelligent. This then turns it into a sort of dictatorship

I agree, it's telling others how to think and how to live to fit their view of the world, which is kind of ironic as that's exactly what they're against extreme TRAs doing

I'm certainly not about to vilify an entire group of people because of the actions of a tiny minority.

Not vilifying them. But any male who doesn't respect women's boundaries is automatically red flagged for me.

Embrace it

So now you are telling me how I should feel about my disability? So not only am I womanning wrong I am also doing disabled wrong too?

Wow!

You have no right to tell me how to feel.

I have a disability. I am "othered" because of it and no, I won't be embracing it if it's quite alright with you.

Why, sackrifice? Elaborate? Or are we just back out to throwing lols and ridiculing other views?

Anyone who thinks men should be allowed in women's spaces holds "exclusionary views". I have worked with women who have been trafficked, drugged and assaulted and forced into marriages, repeatedly impregnated by their father, had family members murdered, had children murdered, had guns or knives held to them and forced to commit crimes, as well as the more mundane rape, sexual abuse and domestic violence. They have PTSD, schizophrenia, personality disorders, addiction, self harm etc. etc. It is by being in safe female-only spaces that these women start to live some sort of "normal" life. It is these women that I am fighting for women only spaces for, I think the conversation about toilets is important but mostly missing the point. These women are largely invisible because many of them rarely leave the house and no one listens to them because they appear drunk or aggressive or don't speak. Does anyone really think that female only spaces for these women shouldn't be preserved?

If she looks like a bloke though, some on here wouldn't believe that she was bio female and would demand proof or not want her in there in the first place as she was too butch.

Think you should ask your friend Weetabix about what she thinks about this.

R0wantrees

Yet it was ok to use Debbie to illustrate a previous point was it? It wasn't me who introduced her story into this argument.

But it literally is that. You cannot be a female, you can only imitate it, no matter how much you want it to be real.
If you have a penis you value your right to be a man, if you lose your sexual ability to act as a man, through sexual transition, that's different. You are then castrated as a male and lose your penis. These genuine cases, which are relatively uncommon are different to male fetishists. Therefore protections are vital to avoid any confusion, clear lines need to be drawn

Firstly, there is no evidence that transwoman holding a GRC pose a threat to woman that is significant enough to have bearing on these kind of things. More woman have been attacked by girl gangs in toilets than transwoman ever have. (I believe the current number is 0 for attacks on woman by transwoman in the facilities)

Secondly, by refusing to accept any transwoman into the toilets, whether they have no penis or have lived as a woman for 50 years or whatever, you are deliberately excluding a whole group of people, with no evidence, out of your own prejudice.

The fact some people here achknoledge them only as ‘males’ and refuse to use the correct pronouns, shows that really you just don’t believe them or care about their identity.

The fact that the FWR boards have threads critiquing trans rememberance days or similar, that have no impact on woman, shows again that this is not just about woman.

The constant ‘what is a woman’ questions, show that you don’t really have any desire to understand them, you just want to invalidate them.

The ignoring of any comparison or direct question that way take away from something you’ve previously said, also shows that actually you don’t want a debate - you want everyone to conform and when we don’t we are not womaning right.

Sorry Shriek. I can't get past you telling me how to feel about being disabled.

If she looks like a bloke though, some on here wouldn't believe that she was bio female and would demand proof or not want her in there in the first place as she was too butch

If she doesn't have a penis she would pose no threat, in a penis free environment. Or is that too difficult for you to understand?

You can campaign for transwomen, who have undergone surgery to remove their penis all you want. How do you distinguish from those "women" who still have a penis and those who dont? The wearing of a dress does not a woman make.

Thank you EarlyWalker

My friend weetabix? I don't know weetabix. Leetle patronising, no?
Asking you. And weetabix if she wants to answer too lol

Firstly, there is no evidence that transwoman holding a GRC pose a threat to woman that is significant enough to have bearing on these kind of things.

Oh? So this group of under 3000 people has been scientifically assessed for whether they pose a risk to women?

They pose exactly the same risk as any other male person.

I watched an inspirational documentary the other day, about a man who's had both his legs blown off, lost sifhtbin both eyes, through war. This was his expression, it is the learning process of embracing his disability, he is truly an inspiration. He was in a team of like, but differently, abled men and women, who were all on those journeys trying to embrace their varied abilities and benefit from that.
It wasn't meant as an insult, but in the main, I don't see any 'othering' going on. Actually I have witnessed any. This is not about varied abilities. Its about women having safe space.

Why, sackrifice? Elaborate? Or are we just back out to throwing lols and ridiculing other views?

Rad fems don't blindly accept stuff as facts without asking or thinking more deeply, that's why we keep asking for this non-circular definition of woman, and why there is suddenly zero risk to women after a man transitions, even when there are hundreds of cases of trans women attacking, harassing, raping and murdering women.

And you say YOU are not 'blindly accepting facts'? You couldn't make it up.

Ok, I have to start with an apology, because the point I want to make refers to points made way, way upthread; I am a very slow reader with limited time for reading on here and every time I get to the end of the latest arguments, I refresh the page and there are 50 or more new posts and then I have to go and do other stuff so it feels like I can never join in at the point where the discussion I want to contribute to is happening because it’s always moved on so quickly! So I hope you’ll bear with me.

That said, and very late to the party, the bit I can’t get past is those who say that it’s “reducing women to our biology” to define “woman” in terms of being adult human females.

It’s completely the opposite! Saying there is any other definition of woman apart from biology is what is reductionist. Any other definition of woman would reduce us to a particular feeling, or a stereotype, or a set of preferences. Any woman that didn’t fit or subscribe to or experience that feeling/stereotype/set of preferences would no longer be a woman in those terms, or would not be “womaning correctly”.

Saying that a group of people share a class defining characteristic is not reducing those people to only that charactersitic. It’s just saying that in order to belong to that particular class of people, you must possess that characteristic. You can possess an infinite number of other characteristics on top of that, but if you don’t possess the particular charactersitic that differentiates this group from other humans, then you’re clearly not a member of this group.

Women are the adult humans who are female. That’s all we are. No special essence, no need to like or dislike certain things. Infinitely varied human beings who share ONE common denominating factor, that of belonging to the sex that can produce ova and bear offspring, whether we actually do that or not, whether our reproductive system is functioning or not.