And so it begins: Transwoman is running for women's officer of NUS

[PosieReturningParker]

Some of her aims:

Gender neutral sex ed
Women in leadership making room for transwomen (because you know how many women are in leadership roles)
BUS accepting transwomen to compete as women in sports

Anna Lee is not a wind up (I know Anna, not that well but she def isn't on a wind up).

I'm gobsmacked at the gender neutral toilets in the Sugarhouse though, after this happened not so long ago:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-24398038

I've decided to self-identify as Japanese

Although other people may regard me as white european, that is due to their racist stereotyping. I'm going to attend my local Asian women's project and take part in the Japanese culture festival. I'll be holding a Japanese language workshop on the history of tea ceremonies. I don't speak Japanese but I refuse to bow down to prejudices that tell me that my biology and experiences define who I am.

I think they have standard toilets as well. So basically they've just spent money on a private toilet(s) for Anna Lee.

It is a fetish that needs to constantly push past women's boundaries, hence the obsession with finding and punishing 'TERFs'. Forcing validation from women is central to all the main trans campaigns afaics.

Anna Lee is in his fifth year as a student, how many of the candidates for nus positions are in their fifth year? I'm guessing Anna Lee's political career takes more of their time than their studies do. How old is Anna Lee? They look late thirties minimum to me.

I was a mature student. Women mature students, in my experience, don't have a lot of time for student politics. They usually have caring responsibilities, they often have paid employment as well.

I have no issue with people living as they see fit, as long as it doesn't impinge upon the rights of others. If someone who is biologically male would be happier adopting a feminine guise and a feminine name then that is none of my business and I would be pleased that they were able to express themselves in that way. I would support transgender people in having shelters and services specifically for transgender victims of domestic or sexual abuse. Having non-gendered facilities alongside gendered ones would seem appropriate to me- a unisex toilet as well as male and female toilets, for example.

What I find troublesome is saying that it is transphobic to question whether trans women should be welcome in female-only spaces, and denying that there is any difference between them and biological women. Their life experiences are very different, their physiology is very different.

Thankyou for this thread, everyone.

I don't speak Japanese but I refuse to bow down to prejudices that tell me that my biology and experiences define who I am.

You go girl! Some trans-Asians make much better Asians than cis-Asian women anyway. It's all about clothes and identity!

Katy Perry does some lovely trans looks.....

But a problem with "live as they please" is that they don't live in isolation, so their lifestyle choices can impact others. And trans activism makes impacting other people's lives central.

So, sure they can change their names, anyone can change their name and I'm all for people inventing names and making gendered names gender neutral for babies etc. Anna Lee wants to call themselves Anna Lee, doesn't bother me none. But when they want to force me to say they are a woman, that conflicts with my right to a) not tell lies if I don't want to and b) to be allowed to have a say, as a woman, in what the boundaries of 'woman' are. Denying me the right as a woman to be clear about what woman means - that has a huge impact on me and it will have an impact on all the other female people who come after me.

I don't care if a dude wants to wear a dress, go him! Really don't care. But if he is combining it with an itinerary of gestures and weird lady voice then it is offensive to me, ladyface is at best a mimicking mockery of women and at worst is the public demonstration of a fetish. Both come into conflict with my own personal and political struggles for women to be (culturally speaking) fully human, not fetish objects, not inferior due to not being male.

I am an atheist. I don't go round berating religious people. I believe that they have a right to follow their own beliefs, and I have a right not to follow them. I also have the right, if they are discussing their views, to be clear (in a civil way!) that I don't share them and why. 'Transgender' is a belief and a lifestyle, but it is being treated by the NUS, the media, and other orgs and groups including some within our government, like The One True Religion, like it should be illegal to express any disbelief. Why?

So agree, Vincent.

Gender as 'what you identify as' is one belief about what it means to be a woman. But it isn't the most persuasive, it isn't the most relevant to the lives of 90%+ of the women on earth, and it isn't even the most politically usable definition when it comes to making women's lives better.
So who has decided that suddenly we all have to sign up to this definition?
It is a crock of shit.

What's wrong with it?
They're a transwoman so would run as a woman not man. And unless you're also running for it why do you care?

With so few leadership roles for women I don't think a transwoman should represent us.

What's wrong with it? They are not putting women's issues first. They are conflating women's issues and trans issues. They are openly saying that women in positions of power and influence should cede to trans women. Women's officers should be there to represent women, and should understand the needs of women.

I don't mind people wearing the clothes they want and using the names and pronouns they want. But I won't agree that a man who wants to be a woman is a woman, or that that person understands fully what it is to be a woman.

Thanks posie and snow for the inspiration. Don't understand these cis-Asian women who can't even be bothered to wear a kimono and carry a parasol every day.

What's wrong with it?
They're a transwoman so would run as a woman not man. And unless you're also running for it why do you care?

There's a whole thread detailing what's wrong with it.
Try reading it, instead of just answering the OP and expecting people to summarise for you.

HOWEVER, on balance, I've decided that I think this is a wind up. The name Anally clinched it for me.
I mean why? Why pick a name like that unless you're being goady?

I think why we care has been explained pretty comprehensively if you can be bothered to read the thread.

Is there a men's officer?

What I find really invidious about the merging of transwomen and women is that it totally erases women. Statistically, if men are allowed gone counted as women whenever they choose then that impacts on our representation in positions of power. It impacts resources that are specifically targeted at women - healthcare, recreational facilities, support services.

And as long as young neo-liberals want to sell our daughters' rights down the river for the sake of feeling warm and fuzzy and inclusive, I'm going to question and complain and object. I'm not standing by silently and letting them do that

^HOWEVER, on balance, I've decided that I think this is a wind up. The name Anally clinched it for me.
I mean why? Why pick a name like that unless you're being goady?^

Since the poster on this thread who knows him IRL thinks he is serious, it could simply be a fetish thing. Thanks to the general trans thread I learned that there is a famous trans woman - or girl, he identifies as a sexualized 6-year old - called Stephonknee. Yes, Steph on knee.

Whats wrong with it is that you have an individual running for women's officer who wants to use that role to further trans rights, not women's right but trans rights.

That would be like a white person running for black officer so that they could secure more rights for white people, who feel black.

They are male so they run as a male.

If they are male but they run as a woman, women have a right to discuss, resist and/or protest that. We have a right to examine their manifesto and discuss how it will impact on women in what it prioritises and what it makes invisible or ignores.

We care because it affects us, and where it doesn't seem to directly affect us we use our ability to empathise. It may seem to 'only' affect women who are current uni students, and some have commented here to express their concerns about that. Those of us not in uni care about the impact on these women because we empathise with them and feel a connection with them, as women. This also has broader impact, and will not just impact girls who will go to uni in the future, but may have a knock on effect in schools, etc. Cultural influence is like dominoes. So - We care because we are women who empathise with women, as women.

I think you could call this being female identified. As opposed to being male identified, meaning, always putting the men first.

For example, in a situation where a dude wants to stand as a woman to push his own interests, and a whole bunch of women discuss how this causes them difficulties - does one listen to the many women and try to understand their situation, or does one insult those women and defend the man's right to do whatever he wants? Do we identify with the males position, or the females?

reminds me of those I met in Goa who wore sari's and spoke a little Hindi and felt the spirit in India within them

They took on Indian mannerisms and were basically laughed at but seemed oblivious that feeling their inner Indian spirit was baffling to locals

When I was growing up, the word gender meant the same as sex. So when did it get appropriated as meaning ones chosen identity? The idea that you can be a woman just by saying "I identify as a woman", that all a woman is, all her experience is, can just be put on like a new dress, is extremely offensive.
As a young woman I worked in a vintage clothes shop, we often had transvestites in, they were fairly easy to spot "I'm looking for something for my wife.." "what size is she?" "oh about my size, maybe I should try it on to see if it would fit her"..etc. Fine, I have no issue with anyone wearing whatever they like. But we also had a man in who clearly had a disturbing fetish about feminine clothing, he would stroke and feel the clothing, and ask to try it on. I'd been told about him by my boss, and apparently he was harmless, so I was polite and let him try on various items. Something about my complete acceptance of him clearly pushed him further and he started coming out in increasingly skimpy outfits asking me what I thought of how he looked. I was young, and terribly British in my manners- I felt sorry for him actually- and remained polite. So...eventually he came out of the dressing room in nothing but a 1930's pink satin bias-cut nightdress, with a huge erection, and stood there in front of me, in full view of a group of horrified Italian schoolgirls. Saying "Does this suit me?" This is the sort of man who would take full advantage of self identifying, who could put on a frock and hang around women only spaces, who has a fetish about feminine identity and pushing that onto real women. There are so few transwomen out there, how many will realistically use the loos on any given day? Far more likely that men with dodgy motivations will abuse the fact that they can have a penis and still use a woman only space- getting off on the fact that they can't be challenged by the women in there. Shops could have unisex loos that are parent friendly, for fathers out with young daughters, as well as trans people. But not at the expense of safe women only spaces, because that leaves women very vulnerable. Any man using a woman's loo or women only space could say "I identify as female", he wouldn't even need to adopt feminine clothing, as obviously he can wear what he likes, it is madness. I have met a few transwomen, but I've met an awful lot more abusive, or perverse, or predatory men.

SirVix - I would say that is Autogynephilia, which is a different thing altogether to those who feel they are in the 'wrong body' and suffer enormously before possibly deciding they wish to become the opposite sex. I have seen a lot of examples in recent discussions of men who say that are Trans/women but clearly are getting off on the whole thing (Stephonknee, that girl who wanted to use the girls' changing rooms, the guy in the shop above).

I do feel for people who suffering just from being inside their own body, and am happy to do things to help them overcome this. But not at the expense of others. And I would not want my children sharing private spaces with people like Stephonknee.

I will have to ask mutual friends/acquaintances to be sure, but I think that Lee is Anna's original surname, and the previous forename was something similar to 'Anna'. But don't quote me on that as I am not 100% sure I was told correctly. I don't think it is all a great 'hilarious' hoax by a man who is laughing at us all... I think Anna is just utterly, embarrassingly lacking in insight and focussed entirely on what Anna wants, not how this affects women in theory and practice. But many of you are right, it's like an episode of Brass Eye and you couldn't make it look any more like a hoax.

Roomba - I agree there is a difference between autogynophiles and transwomen. Unfortunately, very few people even discuss that or how many men who are actually autogynophiles (autogynophiliac?) are now choosing to ride the trans train.