New Trans thread as requested by HQs.

[oilfilledlamp]

Please forgive the intrusion but I've been out tonight and only recently got back. I wanted to respond to MadWomanintheattic earlier when she posted

"If I were an mtf trans (pre op or post op) the last place I'd want to fetch up is in a women's refuge, because of the potential for making other people feel ill at ease. But nothing is clear cut, really.

How often does this happen, really? Has there been any research into prevalence and motivation?

Actually, even being concerned that the legal status of trans would violate your ability to meet your friends in your living room to discuss a book is faintly hysterical.

I don't know any formal women's book clubs. Do other people?

And I use hysterical in a non gendered sense, obv, what with all the history that loads that term.

Yup. Went to two. They were really boring. Who wants to sit in a library when you can be on the sofa with a glass of wine?

Sorry, not women's. Public.

I assume the women's book club thing was part of a discussion about feminist book clubs? I don't think I saw the thread where the book club target of evil trans legislation was discussed.

I didn't read that. Was that a formal women only book club?

Only ones I have belonged to are glass of wine on the couch type.

I don't know. Celestina said upthread that it had been discussed over the last few days that book clubs could be targeted under the Equalities act. As well as ladies nights at the pub. (in my experience ladies nights are mainly an advertising ploy to get women drunk and provide an easy opportunity for blokes to leer, but that's a personal foible). I may have attributed the book club strand to you in error...! So I'm not sure if Celestina wants to answer what the original discussion about book clubs being in danger was about. It seemed utterly bizarre...

She also mentioned rape crisis centres, but as that's been done to death on the back of a single case ten years ago, I didn't bring it up again.

No I did not start a thread about a book club.

I think if it involves public places, or involves public funds, the nthere is a responsibility under legislation. Pubs are private spaces, owned by the brewery or the 'owners'. ( hence they can 'bar' people entirely privately). Same goes for book clubs as has been said. I think. Golf clubs and some football clubs have come under criticism in the past for ahving a misogynist attitude, and I am thinking they have changed their policies for commercial reasons.

The more you legislate to preserve single sex spaces, the more solid you make the binary, and oppression and against women.

I agree with your entire post there, madwoman. I respect the need for segregated private spaces but oppose legal/official segregation of all types.

While I'm being gender neutral: there's been much mention of rape crisis services on this thread. Do they only serve raped women? Are there parallel services for male and trans rape victims? (Don't know, nor do I know which google results to consult.)

Yes there are of course garlic. Google support for male/transsexual rape victims. That brings up a whole load of support services, fairly obviously I would have thought.

The rape crisis thing refers solely to one 2002 case in Canada. She had been working as a rape crisis counsellor in one centre, and applied to work in another (where she was refused due to her mtf background)

It all looks really messy, in no small part due to the fact that it was a political decision to target a 'born woman' space, and not motivated by a desire to help. So it's become a bit of a trope about trans invading all woman spaces. She had been working as a rape counsellor prior to applying for a new job.

Support does exist for male rape victims and trans, of course. But this was really about employment as a counsellor dealing with (born) female rape victims. A job which she had been doing already, but was forbidden to do in another space.

None of it is clear cut. And given that her interest was not altruistic, it's difficult to argue that it wasn't misguided. But as I said before, all oppressed groups need their more extreme members to provoke change for the better. I might personally be viscerally opposed to KN, or to the more radical feminists, but it doesn't mean that they don't do sterling work on behalf of the vulnerable of their own group. (women, trans, disabled, whatever)

"The more you legislate to preserve single sex spaces, the more solid you make the binary, and oppression and against women."

The problem with that idea is that many women find great support in women only spaces. Either to deal with trauma or to understand/have a respite from sexism.

Radical feminists aren't extreme. We want male violence against women to end.

It wasn't "messy" what KN did, it was a bully tactic to intimidate women who were supporting extremely vulnerable women and whose own existence was precarious in itself. Rape crisis centres aren't exactly overstaffed or overfunded.

It is not a coincidence that trans activists have focused their activism not on mainstream issues, but rather have gone after lesbian centres, women's festivals, rape crisis centres etc. This is because those are the front line in the fight against male violence against women and for female only political organising - therefore they must be neutralised.

The case was clear cut in the end. The Canadian Supreme Court ruled that the Vancouver Rape Relief Centre had the right to offer XX services to XX women. Not sure why you're presenting it otherwise.

Are you seriously viscerally opposed to radical feminists?

That post was to madwoman, editing removed name.

Only read the first page so far, ugly depressing thread.

Nyac - I don't think anyone on this thread doesn't want to make violence to women to end. At all. But that isn't the sole preserve of radfems, so to ask 'are you viscerally opposed to radical feminism' implies that to not support the position of radfems is a support of male violence.

The bit that sticks quite a lot on this thread, and the previous ones, I think, is the radfem position that transgendered MTF 'can't' be women, and so are not allowed the advocacy forces and 'protection' of feminism. And to point to the very rare legal cases ( which are very in dispute) as a source of radfem theory appears fairly weak, when most/most other transgendered people just want to get on with their lives.

Those two sentences are completely unconnected Pan. Please don't draw inferences that aren't there.

I'm sure if I said something like that about someone's post it would be deleted.

Radfem theory about trans isn't based on legal cases, it's based on basic biology.

Well, which ever two sentences you are referring to, out of the few making up my last post, I'd say aren't unconnected as my post was consistent in itself. But we wildly disagree it seems on some things. < and do report the post if it is outside Guidelines, though I don't think it is.>

Well I say they are, and given that it's my post I know what meaning I was making.

You don't have to be a radical feminist to be against male violence towards women, and I never implied that that was the case.

I feel like you're needling me.

Can someone clarify something for me, please? Possibly being really dense, here.

But with the trans community, is it body parts they feel are wrongly aligned?

Or is it the gender role itself they feel is wrongly aligned?

I've always understood it to be the latter, which to me serves to show how the patriarchy has constructed these social roles so well, that people associate them with body parts, thus more work needs to be done to tackle gender roles.

From what I understand, the suicide rate in the Trans community is pretty high as it is, but I'm not sure if this is post or pre alignment. If it's post alignment, then to me, that's a big indication that, even on a personal level, realignment doesn't work. Were there no gender roles, would we even see a trans community?

You're feelings are up to you. I am simply disagreeing with you.
This is a real shame, imo. I suspect in the bigger picture of life we have a lot more in common in 'whats fair and what isn't' than is apparent on these threads, and previous ones. But you may see things differently.

Trophy, sadly the suicide rate in the Trans community is high both pre and post op. And there are a number of Trans people who regret surgery including some who have further surgery to reverse the surgery.

I read a peer review of the evidence base for suregery and hormone traetment for Trans people. The conclusion was that most Trasn peopel were happy they had gone ahead with the surgery or hormone treatment, However, psychological well being was not in general improved by the treatment and the suicide rate was still extremely high.

The conclusion was that the medical fraternity needed to find more effective methods of treatment for transgendered people than simply surgery and hormones.

And trophy, it is body parts they feel are wrongly aligned hence surgery and hormone treatment.

You didn't disagree with me. You decided on a misinterpretation of a post I made and then decided to claim it as a fact.

My feelings are up to me, your behaviour is up to you, now you know how I feel about it.

Please have the last word, because I can't stand this.