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?

Also could you provide a link to where the judge said that their argument was faith based or like a faith based argument?

Mad wrote: "She was making a poorly thought out attempt to force her way into a born women only space, to vindicate her womanhood and to effect a change in the law. That ain't bullying."

My bold and italics. If that isn't bullying then can you explain to me what is? And what change in the law did Nixon want to bring about?

I also think it a bit rich to suggest that Nixon was an oppressor for taking direct action. It my have been ill judged action, and indeed somewhat provocative, but that is the point. Or would we all agreew that the greenham common women who cost the tax payers thousands of pounds were also oppressors. The again one womans freedom fighter is another womans oppressor it seems.

Come now madwoman don't get tired, if you can say how KN saw KN's behaviour (not bullying), I can certainly say how VRR and a whole lot of other women also viewed it. There was outrage about it in many feminist circles, and they definitely saw it bullying women.

I like the idea of a rape relief centre being likened to an American Airbase with nuclear weapons.

A rape relief centre is an anti-oppression organisation. It stands against male violence and on behalf of female victims. By attacking a rape relief centre and diverting their funds a person is working on behalf of the interests of rapists and oppressors, who do not want victims to be helped.

I thought the expression was birth women was considered offensive, because trans women often considered themselves to have been born women but incorrectly assigned. I can't see what is wrong with the term 'group formerly known as women' because historically that group did exist and no longer has a name which would be considered inoffensive.

There are many studies ongoing in regards to transgender. Whilst non have concluded a definite reason behind transgender, many of the studies have found that a transgendered person have totally different structures to male or female brains and pathways, some have found chromosonal differences and similarities to gender of birth and gender chosen

Male and female brains are very different and so much is unknown, I believe that some people are 'born to the wrong body' and I really don't understand the threat some people feel.

As a survivor of two rapes, one stranger, one 'date' - I personally would have no issue what gender a counsillor was, as long as they were kind, understanding and listened

SeeHouses, I was suggesting that what Nyac said at 12.23.43 was somewhat insulting to women, I think we are agreeing as you say people do not judge intelligence by xx or xy. I agree absolutly, so they would not or at least should not judge how a woman ought to feel or think as a result of dna either.

Moo Trans is not solely based on MtF, there are WtM's as well. Until xx born women receive throughout their lives, from the start, the same equality as xy born men, including infancy, childhood, teenage, youth, middle years and beyond, only then can we look upon MtF's as being treated equally. Can you define this equality? Equally within xymen as a group/sex class or within xxwomen as a group/sex class?

Well yes, LL, I hope that people are not assuming that I have a core gender identity just because some other people claim to have one, because we shouldn't make judgements about what we assume other people feel or think.

MsC, As this is a feminist section, I may quote the wonderful Simone de Beauvoir:

"A woman is made, not born".

When I gave birth to two females I didn't think of them as women until they reached the age of 16.

If and I have no direct experience so I apologise for getting this wrong, if I had been raped and went to any service offerd to help me get my life back on track. How am I going to know what gender the person I speak to is other than what is presented to me by them. So a M to F post op, might look female, am I supposed to worry about if they are female as well as trying to deal with my own stuff. If they either looked like a man in drag or outed themselves would that not be a cadse of the organisation failing to protect me.

No, LL, it would not be failing to protect you in a legal sense, because the law doesn't claim that people have to look a certain way to get a job in a rape centre.

It would be bizarre if it did. I have held a job that was advertised legally as being open to women only because it was working with vulnerable women. How feminine I appear to be should not be a part of the interview process. Why should women have to look a certain way?

Tired?
Er, no. Dance run for dd2 and then I need to cook dinner.

No argument from me that KN had a specific agenda, but i love that I can't say what it was, but it's ok for others to say definitively that it was x, y or z ( bullying, whatever). It's kind of funny.

I love that I've become the KN poster girl in your imagination, but it's really not the case. Just trying to sort out what the actual incidence of transactivists involvement in women only refuges and rape crisis centres is, as started on the other thread. Out of curiosity, as it is always brought up as a particularly sensitive topic. And so far we have one incident in 2002. In Vancouver.

I'm not saying that that one incident wasn't a landmark, or particularly disturbing, but given that the final judgement was 5 years ago I assumed there were more recent and ongoing provocative actions by current transactivists.

But I've missed loads whilst herding dd2 into the car, so I'll try and catch up. Then I must go and get the dinner on.

Leith, the original claim by KN was upheld by the judge as it was solely based on RR's belief that she looked too masculine.

Moo I like to fight one fight at a time and to see born xxwomen as being seen immediately as equal in all respects to born xymen.

Then when this is achieved, and only then, will I treat those who change as equal. How can I treat someone as my equal when I, as a born xywoman human being, is treated as unequal to a born xyman. How?

Mad link to that please?

Do I think VRR had science and logic on their side? Hadn't really considered it. Just thought it was notable that the judge stated they hadn't.

Madwoman, if you go to the Press For Change website, they have a section on case law. In that, they have all the documents related to the case of the transgender woman applying to be a police officer. The whole issue of taking evidence from female victims and suspects and who can be present is discussed there. That would perhaps be the most relevant UK case.

Ok I admit I phrased that badly I am sorry, I was trying to think my way through this debate about a M to F invading women only spaces. The example that seems to be the only one being looked at is the rape crises thing. I was just thinking how and why am I even going to know what who is across the coffe table from me. My default is to take everyone on face value and to trust them till they prove that they are not who or what they say they are. If I was to go to womens book club I would do the same, so in the end why am I adding to a long list of potential things to worry about. Plus even if I was made aware I do not share the fear that others have, or at least I would reserve all judgement till I get a sense of what that person is about. Not sure this is helping.

Mad you brought up the ishoo of bullying. You are conflating different arguments to augment a loose idea based on the sole premise that Nixon was right to sue a Rape Crisis Centre due to loss of dignity.

Oil, re your bold and italics. Not sure you can bully an organisation? Yep, force could be bullying if it was directed against an individual, but i'm struggling to explain trying to get into an organisation as bullying.

The individual members who were to receive counselling from her if she got in might feel that way, but to force an organisation to reconsider their employment practice can't really be described as bullying. Just an administrative exercise to make a point.