What does your network think about trans people?

[deeter]

Immediate family think it's all a bit silly, trans people should be treated well but you cannot change sex. Women's spaces should be protected etc.

But interestingly all of my university friends think trans women are women (did go to a London uni with well to do sorts).

I'm 31 btw.

@StolenCookie
Any chance you could respond to my comment above? It directly touches on the point you’ve just referenced about sex/gender. It also addresses the name-calling…

I thought I made my point rather clear right back when I posted a bank of links.

There is no evidence that supported your claim that 'The overwhelming majority of trans people who transition are happy with their decision and are able to live more fulfilling lives as a result." That was the claim that you made.

The point is, there is no evidence that the current protocols are working for the current cohort of adolescent transitioners. Did you bother reading any further? Did you read the statements by Cass, by different countries health agencies, and by the World Health Organisation all sayiing that they have conducted deep reviews and found the evidence 'weak' for the use of puberty blockers, hormones and surgeries for children . ie. those under 18.

Did you then read that current reviews of the Dutch Protocol, which has been around for decades, has pointed out major flaws in the research that were never questioned before? Did you watch the documentary I linked where even one of the authors of the original study, de Vries, pointed out there was some inconsistencies. In fact, a few years ago, another author of that same protocol, Dr Steensma bluntly stated that he had concerns that the protocol was not suitable for the current cohort of adolescent transitioners and needed to be studied extensively to make sure it was appropriate. Because he had doubts.

You dismiss this all now with 'an evidence base takes time to build'? There has been plenty of time to build that base. The original GIDs reviews were never published because they also showed issues. So, again. There has been plenty of time to do significant peer reviewed studies or peer reviewed reviews from hospital records around the world. There is very little evidence of any improvement.

So, your assertion of "The overwhelming majority of trans people who transition are happy with their decision and are able to live more fulfilling lives as a result." seems rather like wishful thinking on your behalf. It not only ignores the lack of a pattern of mental health improvement from peer reviewed studies that have been done.

Just like there has been ample time to study, a peer reviewed study, the sex offending patterns of a particular sub-group of male people vs the rest of the UK population to see if there was any reduction in that pattern at all. But all we have are the prison records that show they don't have any reduction. At all. That and the constant reporting stream of male people with trans identities committing sex offenses in the UK. So my point is, you are demanding that women and girls have lower safeguarding without any evidence to support your claims at all.

Plenty of time to do reviews, and there is nothing.

My point is, and has been for pages and pages, that there are issues.

You seem determined to keep dismissing them. You have framed people pointing out issues as transphobic and effectively stuck your fingers in your ears in refusing to engage. You have framed even engaging in these discussions as transphobic.

So, what point was I making with the Cass Report? The point that Dr Cass has made about there being a lack of clear evidence that the current treatments are effective.

cookies input has been useful and I think has helped clarify things in my mind, though I imagine there still will be a massive gulf in opinions.

So we have women (sex) and women (gender). Sometimes it is fine to classify women by gender (which section of the clothes shop you go to) other times it is necessary to classify women by sex (the fitting room in the shops, prisons, sports)

I know that cookies has tried desperately to avoid the Barbie K, Isla B and Karen W situation but if they want to call themselves women (gender) then crack on, but when it comes to the law they need to be kept out of women (sex) spaces.

I get it, if you are full on TWAW you cannot allow any doubts or concessions. You can't allow your self to consider the implications of TW in female prisons, or a TW in sport when their female opponent is lying on the floor seriously injured. You have to continue to convince yourself that women sexually assault other women in prisons or women injury their opponents on a regular basis, because any chink in the thought process will mean it all comes crashing down.

If you start doubting the Barbies, Islas and Karens and saying that they are not tru-trans and need to have different rules applied to them, then you start to allow those questions and doubts to creep in.

That is why there is nothing that cannot and will not be criticised.

Sometimes it is fine to classify women by gender (which section of the clothes shop you go to)
??

It was just a random example, I couldn't think of anything deeper.

Sorry, I was just wondering why it was fine (male bodied people in women's changing areas). It isn't.

I didn't say that. I said the absolute opposite.

I've re read it. You did . So sorry.

I think it's a good example. There are situations where someone expressing their 'female gender', while nonsensical, is harmless. That's one of them.

We just need to be crystal clear where only sex is relevant and protect those boundaries

It is, yes. Too much wine...

Trans women want to use the bathroom that corresponds to their gender identity. They identify as women. They belong in a women's bathroom.

This was a helpful read for me: https://www.gendergp.com/transgender-bathrooms-discrimination-2022/

"The apparent fear, stoked by bad faith actors online and in the media, is that if people are simply allowed to self-identify as trans, non-trans cis males will start using this as an opportunity to disguise themselves as women in order to access women’s spaces, such as public bathrooms. That no data or body of real-world examples supports this theory, which seems to step out of the pages of fantasy fiction, has not deterred the narrative taking hold. Nor indeed the clear fallacy of assuming that predators disguise themselves or are deterred by signposted gender-defined areas, a belief again unsupported by evidence.

It appears, just as with the homophobia and racism that dictated who could access public spaces in the 20th century, that we are seeing a return to discrimination and control of public spaces dictated by fear that has its origins in prejudice and ignorance. That trans people’s access to their public spaces, and to use the bathroom, is up for ‘debate’ is a regressive step.

This prejudiced discourse is predominantly in relation to trans women as they are seen as a threat to cis women’s safety when using public toilets. However, this notion is incredibly discriminatory as it portrays trans women as predatory men, misgendering them, stigmatising them, as well as dehumanising them for asking to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity and within which they feel most comfortable."

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13178-018-0335-z

This study found no link between nondiscriminatory laws (i.e. allowing trans people to use appropriate bathrooms) and increased incidents of sexual assaults and other crimes.

But public toilets (they aren't bathrooms) have always been separated by sex. Why do the "wants" of transwomen mean that's no longer the case? What about the women (as in biological women) who want single sex toilets? Don't they matter?

I want lots of things. But I'm not allowed them for various reasons. They aren't mine, I can't afford them etc.

@StolenCookie
Trans women want to use the bathroom that corresponds to their gender identity. They identify as women. They belong in a women's bathroom.

You see, this is why people think you’re posting in bad faith.

The women’s bathroom is for women. Sex-based. Not for those who identify as women but are actually men.

Do you think sex and gender are different? You’ve claimed to, but your words above say otherwise.

There aren’t really any other ways to say it. I’m not calling you thick but you’re sure pretending to be.

The category of woman is defined by sex-based characteristics. It’s literally impossible for someone whose identity is defined by wanting to be a woman but not being one (which is what a trans woman is, otherwise what does the ‘trans‘ bit mean??)to be a woman. It defies the most basic logic.

It’s a bit like, say, a triangle being defined by having three sides. It’s the ‘having 3 sides’ that makes it a triangle. You can’t have a 4-sided triangle; if it’s got four sides, it’s not able to be categorised as a triangle.

If someone has a penis they can’t be categorised as a woman in the same way that a shape with 4 sides can’t be a triangle. You can’t be a woman with a penis any more than you can have a triangle with 4 sides; the fourth side means it’s not a triangle because that’s how definitions work.

I’m now thinking that you probably do think you can have a triangle with 4 sides…

I certainly haven't avoided discussing those individuals. I specifically said that the actions of a few cannot be used as justification of punishment of the whole. It's disproportionate to ban trans women from women's bathrooms because of 3 individuals.

Those individuals have committed a crime. If a trans woman commits a crime that makes her a danger to other vulnerable women, they should be separated from those women. I think it was correct for one of those women to be removed to a male prison.

Even cis-women who pose a danger to other vulnerable women in prison can be moved to a male prison. If someone has demonstrated a propensity towards sexual violence then those people should be removed from spaces that put other vulnerable people in danger. This goes for trans and cis women and anyone of any identity.

It doesn't follow that isolated cases of trans women criminality justifies a global ban on trans women accessing women's spaces. There is no evidence that allowing trans women into women's spaces increases incidents of sexual violence in those spaces.

Yes exactly. Exactly.

It's safe to say that the physical appearance of a tiger is defined by it's stripes, yes? And the physical appearance of an elephant is defined by the large ears and tusks, yes?

So, why can't we say that the physical appearance of a man is defined by the penis?

There's been many times in history where people have wanted segregation. If cis-women want single sex toilets on the basis of fears for their safety, this is discriminatory towards trans women as there is absolutely no evidence that allowing trans women into these spaces increases risk to cis-women.

Because some men are born without penises?

What about non cis women? Aka women?
AFAIK there is evidence that women are at more risk in mixed sex toilets. And allowing transwomen in makes them mixed sex.
What about privacy and dignity?
What about religious and cultural reasons? My Muslim friends can't remove and adjust their head scarves in the sink area of public toilets if there are males in the room.

StolenCookie

The apparent fear, stoked by bad faith actors online and in the media, is that if people are simply allowed to self-identify as trans, non-trans cis males will start using this as an opportunity to disguise themselves as women in order to access women’s spaces, such as public bathrooms.

So the trans women that have assaulted women is women's spaces are the wrong kind of trans? in fact they are not trans at all!

Which makes a mockery of your assertion that in order to be a woman all a man has to do is self ID as a woman

I think you're confused.

There is no 'wrong' or 'real' trans. Trans women are not above the law. If they commit a crime, they are a criminal.

The article referenced above is describing a fear that some cis-women hold that men will invade their bathrooms if nondiscriminatory laws allow self-identifying trans people to access their preferred bathrooms.

Are we having a Sturgeon moment?

The only confusion is yours.

The article refers to the belief that that some men will pretend to be trans, where as this conflicts with your belief that if a man says he is a woman then he is a woman.

Either you believe that a man who says that he is a woman or you do not.
Your posts regularly conflict and contradict themselves.

You have even said that you cannot define what a woman is yet a man that says they are a woman are a woman. If you cannot define a thing then you cannot be whatever that thing is.

@StolenCookie
Please stop using the term cis-women. I find it very offensive. The word 'women' is all you need

I identify as a cis woman. It describes me as a person who was assigned female at birth and has a corresponding gender identity. It's used in professional and academic contexts. You may not like it but I'm afraid that's not an imperative for me to stop using it.

But you have to understand a lot of women find it offensive. We aren’t a subset. Just women.

If I said it was ‘literal violence’ would that help?