to think that we could have a different sort of discussion on trans issues that might be helpful?

[BertrandRussell]

We can discuss the nature of womanhood endlessly. Philosophical discussions are always absorbing and interesting and very necessary and there should be plenty of space for them. However, it seems to me that there are practical discussions that need to happen which always get subsumed into the theoretical. There always have and always will be transpeople, and for the vast majority of the time it’s not an issue. Or shouldn’t be- there are transphobes in the world who should be treated with the contempt they deserve. Of course trans people deserve all the rights and protections that everyone has. However, there are some areas where the rights of transpeople are in direct conflict with those of non transpeople, and the conflict looks unresolvable. But we need to find resolution- and quickly. Could this thread concentrate on how we do that, and not be sidetracked?
To me, the urgent issues are-

1. How do we make it possible to preserve spaces where women who have been hurt or traumatised by a man can be sure they won’t meet a male bodied person?
2. How do we record crime so that it does not look as if there is a rise in violent crime-including rape- committed by women?
3. How do we preserve women’s sport so that it is not taken over by male bodied people who have an automatic physical advantage over people who were born female?
4. How do we make it possible for people to want to form relationships based on genital preference without being considered bigoted?

1-3 are good questions. 4 is a matter of opinion that won’t be changed and isn’t worth the effort tbh. If someone only wants to have a sexual relationship with a black/ginger/christian/vag owner they are free to do so and other people are free to think them bigoted.

I don’t think a lesbian wanting sex with a female bodied woman is bigoted?!

Good post betrand.

I don’t think it’s bigoted either! People are attracted to whatever they are attracted to. I just don’t think it matters as much as the other issues.

The obvious answer to all those questions is creating a third and fourth space. Women’s spaces aren’t compromised and trans people don’t have to suffer the indignity (and in some cases potential danger) of being grouped with their sex. However, given how small a minority they are, this may not be cost effective. The other alternative is to make everything gender nuetral. But this can be harmful in that it makes it difficult to provided sex segregated services when they are required and can make it difficult to identify sex related disadvantages and addressthem.

You are probably, absolutely right, Bertrand.

But I am not sure that we can do any of that without having an agreed upon definition of what is a woman.

Imagine the scene: Meeting place, 50:50 TRA and GCFems. Nobody leaves until an answer is found, a mutually agreeable law is drafted.

Hey! Why don't we just say that only women can use female safe spaces. You know, people born with a female body?

And then why don't only record crimes that are committed by those same pople as female crimes

Of course we'll only let those same female bodied people compete in female sports

And it is ludicrous to shame a lesbian to have a sexual relationship with any male bodies person.

All agree and leave happy, only 10 minutes have elapsed

GC Feminists know that now all human females, large gametes, XX chromosomes, etc etc are protected

TRAs leave knowing that everyone who identifies as a woman can be a woman as they choose

The problem is that both sides are entrenched, won't or can't give an inch. Women because, well we have seen the upshot of TWAW being enacted. And TRAs because they have gained so much ground they can almost see their end goal in sight - as confirmed by Stonewall that is all sex based provision being removed, sex as a protected characteristic being removed.

So there cannot be a meeting of minds, a mutually agreed resolution that will end up as a law.

As you say, there have always been trans people. Taking transwomen, as I am not a man and don't know how they feel about transmen (still hoping a male poster will discuss this with us).

I, like many, have historically taken a breath and looked away when a transwoman has entered a female space. That was the polite, informal, unspoken way to deal with it. THAT could still be the reality... the problem is someone messed with that and many posts here discuss the birth of this. That has to be undone, rethought, scoured away and started again... this time with plenty of sunlight.

But of course that won't happen. So we seem to be stuck in a deadlock. And I doubt women will give ground... or that husband, fathers will once they realise what the realities are.

NOT that all transwomen are dangerous, violent etc etc. But they are men... and we had sex segregation for a reason... not that all men are dangerous, violent etc etc.

I think the only way is for trans-people to accept they are trans-people. That way lies societal stigma but one I am willing to fight as a biological woman. Trans-women cannot be women but they can be trans-women....and there is nothing wrong with that.....

This would mean

1. Retaining sex segregated spaces and introducing trans or non binary spaces where necessary
2. Recording medical history, crimes, census data including the categories trans-woman, trans-man and non-binary
3. Again a third category
4. Sexual preference (within the law) should never be dictated, it’s personal and dictating is akin to assault

I suppose the answer to the other questions is to identify either one or two additional categories for sports/toilets/prisons. Either nonbinary or transmen and trans women.

Relating the the genital sexual preference issue I think the current language is sufficient. Heterosexuals like to have seceith people who have different genitals. Homosexuals like to have sex with people who have the same genitals and bisexuals like both. Gender really doesn’t come into sex.

1) How do we make it possible to preserve spaces where women who have been hurt or traumatised by a man can be sure they won’t meet a male bodied person?

It’s worth looking at what rape crisis centres etc are already doing, as the majority have been supporting trans women for years and clearly have appropriate procedures in place for this.

2) How do we record crime so that it does not look as if there is a rise in violent crime-including rape- committed by women?

Would be interested in knowing how much of a problem this is before rushing to find a solution. What numbers are we talking about? Are there enough rapes by transwomen to make a statistically significant difference for recording purposes? What about crimes by trans men, what are the stats for those?

3) How do we preserve women’s sport so that it is not taken over by male bodied people who have an automatic physical advantage over people who were born female?

Along side this I would like to see how sports bodies will address the issue of natal women who happen to have very high levels of testosterone (like Caster Semenya). If the solution for her is that she is allowed to compete if she takes medication to change her hormonal balance, could this not also be a solution for trans women? Correspondingly, could trans men take testosterone to enable them to compete?

With Semenya, sports bodies have already opened the door to artificial interference with natural advantages like excessive testosterone to even the playing field. While I don’t think Semenya has been treated fairly, it might actually indicate a workable solution here.

4) How do we make it possible for people to want to form relationships based on genital preference without being considered bigoted?

This is already ‘possible’ - nobody should be forced to be in a relationship with anybody.

As for the accusations of bigotry - I think it’s nuanced. If someone said ‘I absolutely refuse to have sex with black people’ I would think they were a bigot, but I still wouldn’t insist that they somehow be forced to have relationships they weren’t interested in. I would still defend with absolute conviction their right to have absolute autonomy over who they have relationships with.

If someone said ‘I absolutely refuse to have sex with trans men’ I might also think they were a bigot, on the basis that they are excluding people from consideration purely because they’re trans. But, once again, I would defend with full conviction their right to decide entirely who they would or wouldn’t have a relationship with.

And fwiw - I think you can say ‘I don’t want to have sex with anyone who has a penis’ and that isn’t bigoted, in my view. But I also think that is different to saying ‘I don’t want to have sex with anyone who is trans’. So having a genital preference is fine - it doesn’t need to be a trans thing.

I think you can say ‘I don’t want to have sex with anyone who has a penis’ and that isn’t bigoted, in my view. But I also think that is different to saying ‘I don’t want to have sex with anyone who is trans’ I really don't get how that is possible. Or why I should be anything if I don't want to have a sexual relationship woth anyone who is trans.

• and I say that as one who was just a guest at a wedding where the groom was a transman and long term and friend source of support in both stages of his life!

Because excluding someone from consideration because they have a penis and you have no interest in penises is different to excluding someone because they are trans.

In the vast majority of circumstances you won’t actually know what a trans person has between their legs, so you would be excluding them on the basis of their belonging to a particular ‘identity’. I don’t see how that can be anything other than bigotry? If a lesbian refused on principle to have sex with any bisexual because they were bisexual, that would be biphobia. If a straight man refused on principle to have sex with any black women because they were black that would be racism.

But saying ‘no interest in anyone with a penis / no interest in anyone with a vagina’ is different, because it’s not exclusion on the basis of a persons identity.

And again, because it’s important, none of this means that any person should feel pressured into any particular relationship whatsoever - a person’s autonomy of their personal life and sex life is absolute, whatever the motivations behind it.

Re sports, perhaps women's sports could be for women with testosterone in a female range AND who haven't been through a male puberty - so women would compete with other women, CAIS women and very early transitioned transwomen who did not go through male puberty, and whose testosterone is suppressed to female levels. It's not entirely fair, and I'd prefer women's sports were kept for women, but to me the 'No T, No V (irilization)' rule minimises the unfairness.

Re refuges/rape crisis - that does seem impossible to solve so long as people keep insisting TW are literally women. Amplify the voices of TW who identify WITH women and who have empathy for women in prisons and refuges and show that empathy by not using those spaces ? Men to help TW's set up TW specific spaces to escape violence ?

Crimes - crimes should simply be recorded by natal sex. I can't see any justification here to keep data on crime by gender. Maybe an optional for gender to be recorded in addition to sex, if required by the person accused of, or guilty of the crime ?

Lesbians - people should stop being so bloody lesbophobic. Lesbians are same sex attracted; they are homosexuals, they don't have to be bi or pan. Loving only other natal females is FINE. Basically, leave lesbians alone to be same sex attracted, and accept they don't EVER have to consider including penis in their sex life.

Loos are the most solvable problem because you can throw money at it and get a good design. Large (big enough for a pram), lockable single loos with a handbasin inside, sanitary disposal and floor to ceiling doors. Regular cleaning scheduled. Not at the end of some long, grim corridor. No gender neutral stalls in a single room.

That's all I've got.

“Are there enough rapes by transwomen to make a statistically significant difference for recording purposes?”

Well, more than zero would make a difference.

And considering that 98% of violent crime is committed by men, it really wouldn’t take many convictions of trans women (who offend according to male patterns) to make a difference.

And considering that 98% of violent crime is committed by men, it really wouldn’t take many convictions of trans women (who offend according to male patterns) to make a difference.

But that’s what I am saying - I need the stats on this. I want to see the difference you say it’s making before I decide what a proportionate resolution would be.

“But that’s what I am saying - I need the stats on this. I want to see the difference you say it’s making before I decide what a proportionate resolution would be.”
Not sure I quite understand. The figures for women convicted of violent crimes are so tiny that any increase is significant. And when it comes to rape, anything above zero is significant.

Thank you so much for this thread Bertrand. It's the first time I've seen a thread where GC feminists and trans-inclusive feminists can have a discussion without it descending into madness. Fingers crossed it stays that way.

I agree with everything Aphid has posted so I don't really have anything to add but it's very refreshing to be able to read a thread on MN about trans issues without feeling entirely alienated and thoroughly depressed!

Because excluding someone from consideration because they have a penis and you have no interest in penises is different to excluding someone because they are trans. No! I don't see it like that at all. What you are saying, whilst avowing you don't believe any pressure should be brought to bear, is that I would be wrong for not wanting to sleep with any trans person. How can the 2 be squared? I won't sleep with anyone with criminal record, an existing wife, a nasal voice, a long nose, brown eyes either! Not my preference!

I need the stats on this. That's the point! You won't get the stats because transwomens crimes are already being collated as female crimes... and we can't know how many because they are recorded as female! That's why tit's on Bertrand's list!

“In the vast majority of circumstances you won’t actually know what a trans person has between their legs, so you would be excluding them on the basis of their belonging to a particular ‘identity’. I don’t see how that can be anything other than bigotry?”
It seems to me that a lesbian should be able to say “I do not what to have sex with somebody with a penis or someone with a constructed vagina”.Which are the only two options in the circumstances. As I’m sure you know, a prominent TRA has said that once lesbians “get over their genital hangups” they “cope well” with sexual with a penis. That strikes me as deeply shocking.

“If the solution for her is that she is allowed to compete if she takes medication to change her hormonal balance, could this not also be a solution for trans women? Correspondingly, could trans men take testosterone to enable them to compete?”
I’m not sure how this would sit with self ID? And it would really only apply to professional and elite sport- how far down the sporting tree would sophisticated testing have to go? I’ve said before that my son, who is a good all round teenage sportsman but by no means exceptional, could easily beat all the girls in his age group. It really is hypothetical at the moment, but I don’t want teenage girls being put in a position where they are beaten by trans girls. As I said, it’s hypothetical- but we need solutions before it actually happens, if you see what I mean.

Meanwhile the NHS Scotland give safe sex advice to women who sleep with women - use a condom if the woman in your life has a penis!

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3607761-NHS-Guide-for-Women-who-have-sex-with-other-women

Another sporting option is to allow transwomen to compete, but also allow natal women to dope up to the top of the male T range.

allow natal women to dope up to the top of the male T range. Have you any idea why drug testing was intoroduced in the first place? How much long lasting damage that could do to women?

NHS Scotland are lesbophobic then. Re lesbians, it's simple. Leave them the bloody hell alone.

Create a new word to celebrate same gender relationships between heterosexuals.

“Another sporting option is to allow transwomen to compete, but also allow natal women to dope up to the top of the male T range.“

But that won’t change male training and height difference, for two. And why should women risk damaging their bodies to accommodate tranwomen?

If women can't dope, but have to race male bodied people with T in a male range and a virilized body, what do you suggest to even out the competitive disadvantage then ?

Of course doping with T is terrible - although no-one seems terribly fussed with transmen do it, so....