Do I have a right to be angry about this? (Trans related)

[Nc109283485]

Nc for obvious reasons. This is a very personal issue to me which I am understandably sensitive about, so this may be why I feel this way. I am perfectly happy to be told I AMBU! I believe trans people deserve love and respect and a happy life just like everyone else. So why did this concern and anger me?

I have a condition called vaginismus which has been very traumatic and caused me lots of grief over my life. In my eyes it is a very personal and female problem. (Look if up if you're not sure what it is).

I have tried to join a support group on a social media platform to really get to the bottom of it and sort it out. I wont say which one as dont want to 'out' either myself or the group involved. My request was pending and a message sent. I assumed this was to confirm I definitely suffer from this condition and to make sure I wasn't some strange pervert, but no! The administrator messaged me to say that before I was accepted I would have to answer a 'test question' as this is a gender inclusive group. Will I be addressing group members as 'ladies, men or everyone'. The tone felt quite aggressive and if I did not pass this test I would not be admitted.

My first thought was are men allowed to enter this group? Do I really have to speak about my vagina in front of 'everyone'? Why not say hello ladies (and the occasional transman who currently has issues with their vagina) no I have to address everyone? Wtf?

I honestly don't know what to think right now but this group clearly isn't for me. But maybe I just need some re-education?

I’d have no problem at all with transmen or non binary people born female from taking part, as I expect you wouldn’t OP.

I would want to be certain that no males were going to be allowed in the group.

Saying “hi everyone” wouldn’t be a problem but I’d want to make sure I was only addressing people who had and were born with vaginas I.e. female biology. I wouldn’t join a group who held that position to be offensive! It’s literally a group that only related to people who have that biology. And yes it’s a shame we just can’t say “women” but I would want to make sure we had the same definition going on!

And who is doing that insulting 'banter'.

I suspect it might be men.

^^
This exactly.

The genuine persecution of trans people has nearly all come from men, and yet it’s women who are both losing our protections as a result and being called “tramsphobes” at every turn.

I can imagine a scenario where some therapeutic techniques - such as progressive self vaginal dilation - are used by range of patients with different clinical backgrounds. Many medical conditions share clinical & treatment pathways, so no surprises there. I’d expect clinicians to see all sorts of patients, & maybe run support groups.Maybe.

You know what Buffster, I agree with you, so if you don't want me to 'bray', don't yell / lecture at me.

Trans people do get abuse and it is wrong. And it isn't always men.

Unfortunately MN and feminists get accused of being anti-trans, so it's a tedious disclaimer that no, if we believe in human rights for all, we are certainly not 'anti trans' per se.
And saying that does not mean we care less about the rights of women that are being eroded by the Transactivist agenda.

I have just spent 2 days writing to the academics who signed the letter bullying Kathleen Stock.

I am sick of people being shouted down and insulted for their opinions.

Trans people getting abuse is not something women need to worry about - we receive a LOT more abuse ourselves and not many transpeople seem to give a fuck?

It’s men who need to accept their more feminine brothers. Men who need to stop making both women and trans afraid.

Either way, women are not human defence shields for men afraid of other men.

And referring to an earlier post - NO feminist, let alone an ‘old school’ one would claim that biological is irrelevant to womanhood. Female biology is the only thing that women share, the only thing that makes us women. It’s the whole basis of our oppression.

Linking womanhood more to ladyfeelz and performance of femininity than the reality of living in a female body is grotesque. Not feminism.

If you are triggered by factual biological terminology (including the word “woman”) because you have body dysmorphia and are uncomfortable in your own sexed body, I have genuine sympathy for you but that is not a reason to compel the 99% of people who do not have that problem to change their use of language, especially as a significant proportion of that 99% will be autistic, or not have English as a first language, or will have learning differences and use of obfuscating language will exclude them from accessing healthcare and support for sex-specific issues. Being triggered to the extent of requiring (or demanding, as is often the case) everyone else to deny reality suggests a psychological disorder which should be treated with sensitive, robust and easily accessible support. How is it helpful to such an individual to perpetuate a lie? We don’t tell people with anorexia “you’re right, you’re disgustingly fat, here’s a diet plan to lose three stone” so why do we tell people with body dysmorphia “you’re right, you’re really the opposite sex, we’ll stop saying vaginas are only a female organ in case it makes you uncomfortable”?

(To the PP who said “man / woman” referred to sex and “male / female” to gender, that’s not correct. “Man / male” and “woman / female” all refer to sex; “masculine / feminine” refer to gender presentation.)

But what you are talking about are extra rights, not human rights. Rights that trample all over women.

Like the original erasure of women. Why not 'women and transmen?'
Well for a start I doubt there are actually trans men in that group. They're probably just going for woke points.
It's just appalling for a women's help group to gatekeep against women.
Especially as men's group are doing no such thing for transwomen.

is not a reason to compel the 99% of people who do not have that problem to change their use of language, especially as a significant proportion of that 99% will be autistic,

Can you explain your thinking re; this autism reference?
I would usually think those with disabilities / impairments that affect their social function might be exempt (or held less accountable) for "getting it wrong" when it comes to gender identity / pronouns etc.

Are we going to have little exemption cards now? Like those joke 'I don't have to wear a mask' cards from the government.

Woke Exemption cards. Free to all men .

Like those joke 'I don't have to wear a mask' cards from the government.

Joke how?

As in anyone can apply for them. You don't need to be medically exempt at all to procure one.

As in anyone can apply for them. You don't need to be medically exempt at all to procure one.

That's true, you don't technically need one at all. Still you also don't need to disclose your medical info to anyone publicly, so I think the exemption cards are OK - those who abuse the system are putting themselves at risk anyway.

@coolitcathy

is not a reason to compel the 99% of people who do not have that problem to change their use of language, especially as a significant proportion of that 99% will be autistic,

Can you explain your thinking re; this autism reference?
I would usually think those with disabilities / impairments that affect their social function might be exempt (or held less accountable) for "getting it wrong" when it comes to gender identity / pronouns etc.

Many people with autism see the world in purely factual terms and are incapable of telling or participating in a lie.

The case of an autistic boy who was found guilty of a “hate crime” for “misgendering” a trans police officer sadly demonstrates that no, there is no exemption or understanding extended to the neurodiverse if they get it “wrong”.

The point is that you've suggested some people are exempt from woke speak.
But there's no criteria.
Children? How old is too old?
Autism? Where on the spectrum?
Drunk people? Senile people?

Most people are happy to use preferred pronouns but erasing the word women is not the same thing. Being forced to use another word is not being inclusive.

Many people with autism see the world in purely factual terms and are incapable of telling or participating in a lie.

I debate your use of the word "lie" but I can understand how there may be a blurred line in certain androgynous cases, for example.

The case of an autistic boy who was found guilty of a “hate crime” for “misgendering” a trans police officer sadly demonstrates that no, there is no exemption or understanding extended to the neurodiverse if they get it “wrong”.

(Unless the autistic boy did it intentionally maliciously, e.g. had the capacity to use preferred pronouns and chose not to in order to cause harm) then I agree, that's a complete miscarriage of justice. I think the strong-arming that can occur on both sides of this debate is immoral, including the persecution of people who couldn't have made an alternate choice (if that was the case).

The point is that you've suggested some people are exempt from woke speak.

I don't think people should be criminally culpable for intentionally using the wrong pronouns, I think it just makes you a dick.

For social consequences, I think that should probably be assessed on a case-by-case basis. So there's no "one-size-fits-all" when it comes to who gets "exemption".

Whether you think it should be a criminal act or not, it is.
Thus the case of the autistic teenager above.
I know you are trying to be the voice of reason, but reason isn't actually good enough for some people.
The law is at present scewed very much to protect everyone but women.
Which is why it's such a sore subject for many women.

The law is at present scewed very much to protect everyone but women.

And it seems autistic individuals. I do hear that and I think it's a major concern, I agree. I'm not sure what would be an efficient way of helping autistic individuals (or those with similarly affecting disorders) minimise the risk of committing a crime unintentionally.
As I've said upthread, I think extreme positions on either side usually do more harm than good, IMO.

I certainly feel very sorry for autistic children having to navigate the world right now. And I do worry about the effect gender stereotypes have on them. I can guarantee I fall more on the male side than female.
And I'm not even really a tomboy.
I'm just not a cartoon character.

If that makes me transphobic, so be it.

I would message and say you won’t be joining their group and you feel excluded because of the tone of the messaging.

The point is that you don't have the right to tell someone else that they are NOT a woman, or to request that they be excluded based on your own terms.

Yes, I do. And my "own terms" are defined in the Equality Act 2010. The gaslighting is real.

Posted on another thread, I think this is a useful read for some people.

legalfeminist.org.uk/2020/07/17/does-the-law-say-that-trans-women-are-women/

YANBU as someone who has had vaginismus for years, I would feel the same. X