Is the trans lobby a force for good for XX women?

[PosieReturningParker]

I'll set out my stall for any new posters or visitors to this topic.

Transgender individuals, I'm sure, have a very tough time, suicide rates are high (although there's no conclusive reasons as to why, some are compounded with other mental health issues, some need validation, sometimes transition doesn't provide answers and so on, it's hugely complex). We owe it to the individuals and those close to them to find out why.

Bottom line transgender individuals deserve the same human rights and respect as all human beings.

The trans lobby does not represent most transgender people who want to live their lives in peace and happiness, without harm.

Here's some things to be aware of:

If there's a trans child at school who wishes to change in the opposite sex changing room, if your child feels uncomfortable your child will be asked to move.

There are numerous support groups for women whose husbands transition late in life due to a high rate of misogynistic mental/physical abuse once these men decide they want to be/are trans.

A transwoman without any surgery can compete as a woman at the olympics, there are already late transitioned trans in women's college teams in the USA.

At the moment in parliament a trans bill is about to go through that legally recognises transwomen as women, woman becomes meaningless. So diversity in companies that require women to be employed can employ a transwoman, refuge and rape crisis centres will have to accept transwomen. Transwomen will have access to all women's space.

Remember transwoman can be someone who simply says I'm a woman, self identity.

It's worthwhile noting that sexual and violent crime rates do not alter with transition, studies in both Europe and USA confirm this. Studies also show transgender women commit sexual violence 6% more than men, according to a Californian study of inmates.

Children who are not taught about homosexuality will/can be taught about transgender at primary school.

Now you know.

Feminists are routinely being silenced with accusations of bigotry or transphobia for asking that women only safe spaces remain for women only, obviously if transwomen are recognised legally as women there won't be any.

Are the trans lobby hell bent on erasing women?

Well yes it's meant to be segregated but I've shared toliets with gay men and male cleaners.

Theres nothing stopping a man going in there. At most it's a theoretical safe space not an actual safe space.

*And anyway, the toilet attendant couldn't refuse anyone entry, because how is the attendant meant to know who is a man^

And you might get it wrong. I guessed the wrong sex of our lollipop lady (I was rushing with the kids).
It was only when she spoke I did a double take and realised she wasn't a bloke.

Does it matter if users of the toilet are men, women or trans persons if there is a toilet attendant present? It's the presence of the attendant which adds the safe element.

Anna Lee claimed credit for introducing an unisex toilet in a student night club - after there had been an attack on a female student by a male person in a segregated female toilet.
Or are you suggesting a man will pretend to be a trans woman and will overpower the attendant?

I read (via a link here?) a tumblr post from a queer activist complaining that the interests of amab (assigned male at birth) people seem always to be centred over those of afab (assigned female at birth) people in queer activism. It was heartening to see. It makes me think that even if the word 'woman' is lost in those circles, people might still be willing to push back against 'amab' entitlement. Maybe a trans ally 'feminist' will eventually reinvent the wheel radical feminism using amab and afab as the names for the different groups.

lass. Research into crime rates showed that men do not decrease rates of sexual violence or person violence with transition, ie proportional percentages of each population commit crime at the same rate. (It actually showed transwomen committed sexual crime with a 6% increase in one of the studies) with that in mind why not allow men everywhere and have no sex segregation?

Another one not willing to give up the word woman. Don't fucking redefine me!

That should be our slogan Rhonda don't fucking redefine us I'll paint it on my placard, when's the march?

Well I'm marching round the kitchen at the moment, Anna - does that count?

As long as you have your placard, yes it counts .

I saw a picture on Twitter (I wont post it here because it shows a trans teen). It's two feminine looking teenagers stood outside a woman's toilet. The caption says -
"Which one should use the male bathroom?". One of them is trans, it's impossible to tell which.

I also saw a video (can't find it now) showing an androgynous looking person using the female toilet's. A female in the toilets does a double take and tries to figure out their gender. The caption at the end is "Don't worry about it". The female shrugs and walks off.

What disturbs me about this is the examples used. The teen is pretty and feminine, the other person is androgynous and entirely nonthreatening. What if the teen didn't 'pass' as well? Are the trans lobby saying that only pretty dainty trans teens should be allowed their 'rights'? It's easy not to worry about an androgynous looking person who seems like they would be 6 stone piss wet through but what about a 6 foot tall beefcake? Are we entitled to worry then? Are they not entitled to use the toilets because they aren't dressed like a hipster? It's such dishonest bullshit.

Your contributions are enabling to have this house. Do you have Dcs?

Wrong thread

The problem is that when you raise girls in fear of schrodingers rapist, they become women who have and will always fear Schrodingers rapist. Particularly, Schrodingers rapists in places where you expect not to meet a Schrodingers rapist. The very genuine concern is that should I come across a Schrodingers rapist, say in a female-only facility, I know cannot question the reason they are there. So what am I supposed to do? Avoid such places due to fear? Take the risk and be blamed for putting myself in danger? And if, as so often stated, there is no risk, why have I been told this all my life?

My other point is that perhaps Glittery is seeing women's shelters from a female viewpoint (can't blame her for that ), however, my DH has a very different story to tell, having done work in one as a plumbers mate. Obviously he was meant and authorised to be there. He says the experience of meeting those women will stay with him forever, they were petrified of him (he's a big bloke). The look in their eyes, haunted and afraid, he says it made him feel ashamed to be male. I can't see how allowing MTT persons to use women's shelters would be good for anyone who has cause to use them.

*now, not know lol

The very genuine concern is that should I come across a Schrodingers rapist, say in a female-only facility, I know cannot question the reason they are there. So what am I supposed to do? Avoid such places due to fear? Take the risk and be blamed for putting myself in danger? And if, as so often stated, there is no risk, why have I been told this all my life?

Indeed. Also the argument (I've heard) goes "Trans women are not safe in male bathrooms and are safe in women's bathrooms".

So many questions -
Are women inherently safer or just more accepting?
If they are 'safer' why is this? Is it physical?
If they are more accepting why are they fighting the 'terfs'? Why not the men?

Or the other argument that says that trans women don't feel comfortable in men's bathrooms and do feel comfortable in women's...

Again -
Why is this? Because as 'women' they don't feel comfortable around men?
What about trans women who don't 'pass'? Do they not matter? Or do the women they encounter not matter? Or hell let's go to the extreme, if a 'passing' trans woman encounters Clare Derbyshire in the toilet does this not bother her? Why not use the mens then?

I can't get my head around it.

From my point of view, the emphasis needs to be on the fact that regardless of past experience (please hear me out) we've all been raised to understand that men are potentially predatory, and it's up to us to protect ourselves against that. If we don't do a good enough job, we run the risk of abuse (and subsequent ripping apart of our life, including how many times we've had ax in the past and what kind of underwear we prefer if the perpetrator is ever brought to court). And of course, the unspoken issue of impregnation, with the impossible three options if that were to happen (I believe that this would cross the mind of every woman, regardless of birth control options or known fertility status).

TW : "I feel unsafe in men's toilets dos should use the women's"
W: "I feel unsafe in mens' and am delighted we have sex segregated toilets, I don't want TWs in my safe space as that makes my safe space unsafe"
TW: "transphobe"

I've read too much research that says men's sexual assault and violent assault rates do not alter with transition, so why not just let men in?

In fact that is exactly how it should be framed. If we are safe with TW, then we're safe with men. Let's see how that pans out.

I get the impression feminists don't like trans women very much?

so why not just let men in?

This is the conclusion I keep coming back to. If we are saying that regardless of how a man acts/looks/dresses he can be allowed into women's only spaces my saying the magic words "I am a woman" why stop there? Why is somebody saying this more trustworthy than somebody saying "I wont harm women"?

Well yes. Maybe we should just abolish sex-segregation altogether since it's becoming meaningless?

Well yes. Maybe we should just abolish sex-segregation altogether since it's becoming meaningless?

I have a feeling the translobby wouldn't like that at all.

I’m not sure why whatever discomfort (dismissive much?) may arise from a cis woman’s hang-ups (Silly women's problems) about the thought of a trans woman in the same bathroom or changing room or whatever, and the perceived risk, (It's all in your head!) should take precedence over the extreme discomfort (Wait why aren't yours just 'hang ups'?) and actual physical risk (As opposed to our imaginary risk) that a trans woman would be forced to endure (WTF?) in using men’s facilities.

From EDF (Thank you to the other thread). Italics are mine.

Guess this person didn't have their male privilege removed when they transistioned.

I know that's what you meant slugs I honestly don't want to sound dismissive of your lived experience, it's just that I feel like the argument needs to be spelled out in such a way as to get across the conditioned response women have😘 I'm just trying to get to grips with how to say it effectively!