Can someone explain the feminism - transgender clash...

[Puffinity]

...in a calm, non-ranty and non-sweary manner? Until very recently, my line of thinking was 'There are some men who feel like women (and vice versa). Fortunately, we are now open-minded enough as a society to accept this, and these people can have a sex change. Their bodies will then resemble their identity more closely and they will be happier for it.' Because of this, I was quite shocked at how anti-trans some feminists are. I am inclined to think there is more to it, and it is not as straightforward a question as it may seem. Can someone explain the issue in a bit more detail to me? I obviously understand the annoyance over banning the use of the word 'clitoris' for being offensive to transwomen (MtF) and could understand why some biological women (not sure what the correct lingo is) have problems allowing transwomen (MtF) who still have a penis into women-only (safe) spaces. But how many transwomen get upset over the use of words like clitoris and uterus? Surely most would just be relieved to have addressed their gender dysphoria and would want to get on with life? And how many transwomen (MtF) decide to keep their penis? Wouldn't it be wrong to exclude transwomen (MtF) from women-only activities? Shouldn't biological women who consider themselves feminists have some sympathy for other groups that are not treated equally in society? I am not trying to create a really heated debate, these are genuine questions I have. Having them answered will help me have a more informed opinion on the matter, which does seem to crop up more and more. Your views would be much appreciated!

The clash comes as there are some people who hate transpeople and will spread misinformation to hurt them.

For example

A change in the law has been proposed (and already enacted in 4 countries) which means instead of there being any external or medical validation, you just fill in a form in the Internet and bingo your sex is changed. Also there will be no "get out" for services based n sex. That's all - fill in your form and any man can have access to any previously sex segregated space - prisons, hospital wards, showers, changing rooms, DV shelters - anything.

The government has not said that changing legal sex can be done by a form on the internet. For example, in Ireland which has a similar legal system, changing legal sex means filling out a statutory declaration in front of a solicitor or other Commissioner for Oaths. The penalty in the UK for making a false statutory declaration is up to 2 years in prison.

Changing legal sex will have minimal impact on whether people can access sex segregated spaces - and there are already safeguards in place - which the government does not intend to modify.

But go on, keep spreading the hate.

The penalty in the UK for making a false statutory declaration is up to 2 years in prison.

And how would you prove that the declaration was false?

Changing legal sex will have minimal impact on whether people can access sex segregated spaces - and there are already safeguards in place - which the government does not intend to modify.

Have you seen the girl guides policy? Have you seen what is happening in schools? Have you seen this thread? www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3240061-I-have-taken-a-stand

But go on, keep spreading the hate.

Who is spreading hate here? Hyperbole. We are raising concerns, asserting our boundaries, asking to be consulted as stakeholders, standing up for women and girls.

What exactly is your problem with that? You do seem very invested in handwaving away our concerns and feelings and portraying us as unreasonable and prejudiced and horrible. I'm not convinced.

There is a pressing need to separate women's rights and concerns from that which is regarded as being 'anti-trans/ transphobic'

The Women's and Equalities Committee must surely be asked to consider the impact of misogyny as a matter of urgency?
www.parliament.uk/womenandequalities

"The not-remotely funny thing is, it is these women and transwomen who are being removed from office, interviewed under police caution, verbally abused, threatened, intimidated, shoved, beaten and surrounded by baying mobs of these terrifying TRAs. This is not a few crazies sounding off on Twitter. This is real.

To our politicians: will you speak up now against this avalanche of violent misogyny? If not, why not?"

manfridayuk.org/2018/05/04/manfriday-the-11th-our-very-own-art-exhibition/

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/29/violent-misogyny-not-confined-to-internet-incels

Woman's Hour
'The Manosphere'
This week Alek Minassian was arrested and accused of killing 10 people in Toronto when he drove his van into them. Just before the attack, he posted praise on social media for the 'incel rebellion' - an online community of men united by their inability to convince women to have sex with them. The incel rebellion is just one of a number of men's rights groups that have been accused of vulgar sexism, under the umbrella collective of the 'manosphere'. We hear from Mike Wendling an assistant editor at BBC Trending, and Ruby Lott-Lavigna an online journalist who's spent time undercover exploring the manosphere and the people behind it.
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09zt3qq

especially in the context of the forthcoming events:
9th May Caitlin Jenner speaks on Diversity

15th May Stonewall reception for MPs

17th May Peter Kyle MP (Labour) Has secured a 3 hour debate in the Commons to mark International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia, and Biphobia

consultation period on the proposed changes to the GRA

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3237973-Commons-debate
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3223840-Parliament-hosting-Stonewall-panel-event-on-trans-issues-and-changes-to-GRA

blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/05/why-are-some-mps-trying-to-shut-down-the-transgender-debate/

@SarahAr let's take a really concrete example of the effects of self ID, shall we? The woman who went for a smear test only to be confronted with an obviously male-bodied HCP, who, on being challenged, said "but I am a woman."

Let us assume that the HCP was completely genuine in their claim to be trans (I have not seen any suggestions anywhere to doubt this). So their self-declaration would not be false under proposed self ID legislation. They would be, for legal purposes, entirely truthful (having signed on the dotted line) when they retorted "but I am a woman." What would you like to see happen in that situation? How would it play out under self-ID.

Obviously the woman would still be free to do what she actually did, which is walk out without getting her smear. But what next?

Could she phone the surgery and ask for a biologically female practitioner? Or could the surgery just say "but Ms X is female and that's all we can offer you", meaning the woman had to go without potentially life-saving screening?

Would the woman patient be guilty of discrimination and thus possibly open to being struck off the doctor's list?

What happens next in that situation. We have a stand-off. HCP says "I have a right to practise my profession without my gender being questioned." Patient says "I only want biological females touching my body." Who wins? There is no middle ground here.

published in The Guardian
"We are transsexual people deeply concerned about the proposed removal of safeguards from the Gender Recognition Act. Replacing the evidenced-based process for obtaining a gender recognition certificate with an over-the-counter style self-declaration blurs the distinction between us and transgender people who remain physically intact. This is problematic when such male-bodied people, including sexual fetishists, demand the rights afforded to women as a protected sex, including access to their private spaces.

Transsexual people undergo a meaningful transition, including hormone therapy and surgery. We fear that these proposals will not only put women’s rights at risk but also damage our credibility in society. We are already seeing our right to define as “transsexual” being challenged by transgender activists who seek to remove this distinction. We call on politicians to show courage and facilitate dialogue valuing all affected groups. We absolutely condemn all attempts to suppress this debate."

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/may/04/standing-up-for-transsexual-rights

@jayceedove thanks for signing that letter to the Guardian (also the other signatories obviously - can't name check ' cos I'm not sure if they're on here - I know Miranda is sometimes). I really appreciate this.

"The clash comes as there are some people who hate transpeople and will spread misinformation to hurt them."

And thanks to this poster for showing in one sentence where the clash is - questioning TRAs, regardless about what, is "hate"

The clash comes as there are some people who hate transpeople and will spread misinformation to hurt them."

There are sadly people within society who hate people on the basis that they are transgender. They will be more easily found on other forums than this.

The greatest source of 'misinformation' has been spread by some TRAs about some women, especially feminists.

This site states:
This site is dedicated to exposing the lies and distortions propagated by some transactivists to cause division and hatred. Some are outright untruths, some are deliberate attempts to mislead, and some are just plain stupidity. Trans people, like everyone else, deserve to be listened to and respected. The discussions around trans issues are complex and nuanced, covering biology, psychology, law, medicine, ethics, even philosophy. How can we possibly find the answers to all of those questions when people are demonised for even asking them? When we reject their lies, we might all get the peace, freedom and respect we deserve.
liesoftransactivists.com/?page_id=5

Questions need to be asked of how the descriptions of women as being baseball bat-wielding, child-doxxing, book-burning, rape-inciting, Nazis who seek the eradication of people who are transgender came into being and how they were spread and absorbed as truths.

Fermat's Theorem. Thank you. I hope it reassures some who think otherwise that I was not playing games on here but actually meant what I said.

And I will say it again in public if asked to comment on the letter.

Thank you Jaycee

Thanks Jaycee

I think the conflict is that feminists are trying to fight for women and girls who are oppressed because of their biological sex, regardless of their sexual orientation or presentation. This fight to rid women of oppression involves getting rid of socially constructed patriarchal gender. Encouraging women to be their authentic selves.

Whereas, transgenderism is about reinforcing gender stereotypes. Saying that if a man doesn’t feel manly then he must be a woman rather than just a man who doesn’t conform to the stereotype.

Doing away with biological sex means that sexism will be impossible to recognise. Statistics showing the differences is pay, employment, crime statistics will be impossible to collate. Women’s single sex provisions will no longer be solely for people oppressed because of their biological sex.

Women's rights have been declared by trans advocates to be anti trans just as women's rights were declared to be anti men 100 years ago.

That is the conflict. Women refuse to be driven out or the public sphere.
Can you mandate belief?
Can you codify into law the idea that some people can mind over matter themselves out of material reality and into the opposite sex, and must be treated accordingly?
It is like transubstantiation. A belief that only the true believer actually believes.
Will you allow people to drug and mutilate children based on this belief that no one believes?
How will non believers be punished?

I found Rebecca Reilly-Cooper's questions very helpful:

rebeccarc.com/2018/01/14/some-basic-questions-about-sex-and-gender-for-progressives/

Some basic questions about sex and gender for progressives

1. Do you believe that being born with the kind of body that has the potential to gestate children – a body with a uterus, ovaries, and a vagina – is of any political significance? Does having that kind of body have any bearing on a person’s likely opportunities and outcomes?

1. Do you believe that people born with those kinds of bodies have historically been subject to any distinct forms of injustice, oppression, exploitation or discrimination? Have they historically been subordinated to the people with penises and testes?

1. Do you believe that people born with those kinds of bodies continue to be subject to any distinct forms of injustice, oppression, exploitation or discrimination?

1. Do you believe that people born with those kinds of bodies often suffer physical and sexual violence, abuse and harassment perpetrated by the people with penises and testes?

1. Do you believe that people born with those kinds of bodies ought to have a label with which to define themselves? Does our language need a word to refer to the people with uteruses and ovaries?

1. Do you believe that people born with those kinds of bodies have a right to organise politically around their shared experiences, and to campaign and work for policies to secure their own interests?

1. Do you believe that people born with those kinds of bodies have a right to associate freely with other people with those kinds of bodies, and to have some separate spaces for their safety, privacy and dignity? Do people with those kinds of bodies have a right to some spaces where people with penises and testes are not permitted to enter?

1. Do you believe that people born with those kinds of bodies sometimes have a right to policies and resources designated towards rectifying their historical and continued marginalisation and oppression?

If your answer to any of these questions is “yes”, you should reject the ideology of gender identity, and policy proposals based on that ideology such as the self-declaration of legal gender.

I have recently been researching the same question. As I understand it there are some radical feminists who will do everything to make transgender women feel marginalised. Transgender women are a vulnerable group but some radical feminists demonise them with bogus statistics and false claims. I have a transgender daughter and it is doing her great harm. She just wants to e accepted and not treated like a criminal.

Jeez this is zombie thread. Ffs 🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️🧐🧐🤨

So what if it is an older thread?

The discussion and information in it is still highly relevant and helpful to anyone who is just now getting to grips with transgender issues.

In fact, I may go an resurrect a few more of them. Then all the new to MN posters will find them more easily!

Feminist4 Excuse me wile I dissect your post. It always seems rude, but I don't want to miss anything:

As I understand it there are some radical feminists who will do everything to make transgender women feel marginalised. It might seem that way but as you read more posts here you will see a lot of posters saying very clearly that their objections are against the trans activist ideology, not individual trans people. That's why they use/use to use the acronym TRA, to make that point very clear.

Transgender women are a vulnerable group but some radical feminists demonise them with bogus statistics and false claims. Well you see the vulnerability of trans women (and I note you don't include trans men) has been over reported. There are many threads here including real statistics. That ONS data is what is widely referred to by TRAs as 'bogus/false/fearmongering'

I have a transgender daughter and it is doing her great harm. She just wants to e accepted and not treated like a criminal. Then you need to explain to her very clearly that everything she reads about transgender hatred is hyperbole and TRA propaganda aimed at women with transwomen like her as collateral damage.

There are many transwomen posters here, maybe you could chat to them and get your daughter some supportive help to overcome the fear raised by TRA rhetoric!

I can assure you it is not hyperbole. It is distressing and disgraceful.

Jeez feminst4
Haha you keep trying don’t you
Hahaha 😂😂😂😂

Yes, trying to show how hateful and anti- transgender many posters here are.

And discounting all the posts, like mine, that show quite the opposite?

OK! If you do have a trans daughter I can understand your wish to protect her.

But that does not mean that women should stop pointing to real life issues caused by proposed changes to the GRA... ones that are happening now, in this country, in advance of any changes to that law!

Not all trans women are dangerous, nobody here has said so (except people trying to impute that to MN posters)

But when Karen White is a reality women have every right to object.

We are refusing to be collateral damage to appease a vocal and aggressive minority. Many trans people, men and women, also disagee with TRA ideology! They too do not believe that trans women can ever be women and that they should stop trying to insist that they are!

Well op if you feel that some men who feel much happier having surgery and hormones should be allowed to do so then you must stand against the self id bill.

The self id bill means gender identity disorder is no longer a medical condition so no longer requires any medical treatment, so zero mental health help to come to terms with their identity and zero hormones or surgery on the nhs.

Currently GRC is a protected characteristic under the law, but the self id law will remove that protection.

If all it takes for a man to be a woman is to sign a piece of paper then the needs of transsexuals are not at all met. All while eroding the legal protections of women and girls.