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?

Making transmen with high testosterone compete against men doesn't mean you have to let transwomen with low testosterone compete against women - because they still have advantages over women.

What I was trying to convey is that you can't simply segregate along the lines of sex - as the discussion is showing.

In the case of sport what people are suggesting is segregating based on something else, what though?

So trans men will be segregated based on testosterone? But how does it work? If they've been on T for a while do they develop greater muscle mass that they retain even if they stop T? So even if T is at normal levels for a female do they still have advantage over women who have never taken it?

If they don't, then using your example, we will have women pus trans men not taking T in one category and men, trans women and trans men on T in añother - so not segregated based only on sex then.

A transman who is pre-op and pre-T will be as easily recognisable as they will look no different to a non-feminine or butch woman

And a post op or trans man on T? How will we tell the difference between them and a natal man?

Ive been asked my opinion

Ive given it

At no point have i offered to sort anything, at no point have i done wife work, same as most of the gc women on here

Obviously the TRAs aren’t going to listen to my opinions, obviously there isnt going to be marches for third spaces, doesnt mean we cant say what a good idea it may or may not be

I've assumed that a transman who passes would be more comfortable using the male spaces.

But how can you have law for one group of people but the other group be allowed to choose what they feel more comfortable with?

I can't believe equality laws would allow that. Surely that is an example of discrimination?

Whatever laws are passed will have to apply equally, how can they not?

With regards to sport, it’s simple. Keep it sex segregated. If you’re a trans man who wants to use testosterone, you will be doping, gaining an unfair advantage so won’t be able to compete. A trans man who comes off testosterone reverts quickly back to norms in terms of strength, muscle etc. I would suggest a year’s grace, plus proof of periods returning.

You see I've tried to have a few of these practical conversations with tras but it always ends up with penises Areeeeee women & there is no such thing as a male bodied person .

In the case of sport what people are suggesting is segregating based on something else, what though?

Bollocks we are

The vast vast majority have said segregate by sex and have a third category

plus proof of periods returning

I dont think this is fair on those women who have dodgy periods or who train so hard that their periods stop which happens with some athletes

Rufusthebewilderedreindeer

I agree with you - I see no point in starting a discussion on here only for people to march on telling us we're doing wife work.

As regards TRAs, sorry but at the end of the day, so long as a fair and inclusive provision is made then authorities need to stand up to them.

I have a problem with people who don't care about alternative provision and think just saying ban them from the ladies is enough. I don't agree with that. If we want to keep women's spaces as women only then we do have a social responsibility to ensure that everyone is provided for.

It would only apply to tran men, as proof they have stopped testosterone treatment but you’re right, a female who is training hard might have secondary amenorrhoea from that so it could be hard to tell. Most female athletes however have to deal with periods as part of their training, which is why the sex of people who have periods should be its own category.

The vast vast majority have said segregate by sex and have a third category

Others have said segregate by sex plus testosterone levels. Not a third category but two categories - one for women and trans men not on T and another for men, trans women and trans men on T. Only two categories. That's one option that has been suggested.

As regards TRAs, sorry but at the end of the day, so long as a fair and inclusive provision is made then authorities need to stand up to them.

Yes i agree with this

I dont agree with the rest

There is a point to the discussion

And no its not my responsibility to sort out an alternative for those people who struggle with the word no

Well that option isn’t going to work. Segregation by sex. By chromosomes in particular. And this view is unpopular but that includes CAIS. There is evidence they are over represented in elite sport, suggesting an unfair advantage of XY chromosomes that doesn’t include testosterone, as well as never having the effects of periods on their training.

Do none of you have an issue with men and trans women being able to compete in whatever they want but trans men being effectively banned? That and almost every other issue... the answer is probably going to be NO... if an individual chooses to change their body, take drugs, modify their physiology then they have then chosen to remove themselves from some areas of life, like competitive sport UNTIL they organise a new category for themselves, as women did and are still doing today!

If there was an open and respectful debate, not attempt to remove, or inhabit, women's spaces then the chances are very high that all of the GC Feminist posters here would be marching shoulder to shoulder in solidarity with TRAs. Over time all the questions being asked here would be sorted, respectfully, mutually.

But that isn't happening. Which is why there is a seeming stalemate... although as a woman who is TERF, I don't see that, I see continued incursions, crimes etc.

The more we get hung up on the minutia here, like testosterone, specifics about sport etc, we won't get anywhere. Because we cannot solve that issue. We can discuss it. But demanding "What ifs" and stalling the discussion on them is pointless, and counter to Betrand's OP.

Sadly, as we know from various other threads, 3rd spaces have never been an option that TRAs will accept. Later thrads have illustrated why women are also experiencing issues with some of them!

Common ground is receding...

Most female athletes however have to deal with periods as part of their training, which is why the sex of people who have periods should be its own category

Absolutely agree

Its just i come from a family of dodgy periods

Actually many female athletes don't. They train hard and reduce their body fat, often to levels low enough to cause amenorrhea, others use various contraception methids to prevent them too! Sorry.. didn't mean to add to the minutia

1. a separate unisex option in addition to female spaces 2/3) authorities need to be honest and recognise sex. Gender identity is irrelevant to them.
2. people should not be required to justify not being sexually attracted to another person. A 'no' is enough. It is homophobic to deny that homosexuals are same sex attracted.

Its not minutiae curious

Its important

Do none of you have an issue with men and trans women being able to compete in whatever they want but trans men being effectively banned?

Transmen are banned anyway if they take testosterone so the argument is moot.

We cant solve it because it is a premise that is impossible to solve. You are asking women to solve something that is beyond our reach. If you tell people that you can change sex and then say oh but not in these instances obviously, then you have been unfair and unkind. It is the first lie that is the problem.

Sorrry Rufus I meant as in it doesn't further this debate, it focusses it, narrows it down and causes log jams in the surprisingly pleasant flow of ideas.

I'd never say periods weren't important - mine caused far too many issues for that!!!

I dont think much will further this debate

We had it all sorted last night...just needed to send a link to the government so they could sort it out and then it went off again

(Plus im the queen of minutiae and pointless comments so if they arent allowed on a thread then im fucked)

Actually I don’t think THAT’S true!

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/48243310

Even a lean, low body fat, long distance runner like McColgan still has to deal with it. I think it’s likely most elite athletes are not amenorrhoeic.

No but some are notbad

And as we know some women dont get periods or they are very infrequent

I would just be wary of ‘needs to have had a period’ as a rule

Having said that obviously it would be a very small amount of women it would affect

Plus how would you prove it

You’d have to have an internal wouldnt you?

Dunno