Consquences of self-identification

[MrsKCastle]

Sorry if this has already been done. I've been doing a lot of thinking about current trans thinking in the media.

As far as I understand it, this is the predominant view:
Anyone can be man or woman, male, female or neither. It doesn't depend on your genes, appearance or potential ability to hear young. What's important is how you identify. We should always treat people as they identify, with regard to how we speak about and treat them, and what spaces/roles we allow them to access.

What I'm interested in, is how this self-identification will or could change society. I'd love to hear your thoughts as I think it will help me to get things straight in my head.

So far I'm thinking:
No more single-sex schools
No more single-sex hospital wards
No more single-sex clubs, whether that's Brownies or exclusive golf clubs
Anyone can apply for any scholarship or award, regardless of sex

What else?

Obviously you know your workplace and colleagues and roughly how you want to approach it, but if you give us a rough idea of what you're thinking of saying I'll be more than happy to make suggestions.

Thank you. I'll be back tomorrow.

transwomen ... are allowed to have a sexual preference for female bodies. Women aren't.

venus, such an important point you made.

I don't have a GRC yet. But I'll have an F on my passport when I get back from holiday and an M on my birth certificate (yes, this is pretty mad).

So I'd tick F as I have a document that proves it. But I'm not protected by the Gender Recognition Act until I get a GRC. Which takes at least 2 years, requires money and a whole pile of paper work along with some bureaucrats that have to sign off on my 'evidence' of living in role for 2 years

Interesting, ATM. So you're still very early days in your transition? My reading of your posts is that you are a very recent late transitioner with little dysphoria, who has felt sufficiently at home in your masculinity to father one or more children.

Do you at all see why women, who have been female all their lives with everything that entails, take exception to being lectured on what makes a woman by someone who feels that a few months "living as a woman" (whatever that means) is in any way an equivalent experience? Do you see how that might feel appropriative?

I honestly don't feel that you've left behind nearly as much of your male privilege as you seem to feel you have. I think if you expended a bit more energy identifying with women rather than as one, it might be very enlightening for you.

@Wanking Monkey - I'm very up front. Like my Tinder profile has 'Trans woman' as the first two words.

I'm not here to deceive people - too many trans women I know have been attacked (or worse) for not disclosing early. It's a constant risk as a trans person (irrespective of your partner).

With regards to trans women with trans partners I know loads. There is a high profile trans couple in the London scene. Quite a few of the girls in my trans group are dating trans people. I've had a trans girlfriend before.

Trans people often end up dating each other because some non-trans people are dating us for the wrong reason (fetishising usually), or want us to be secretive with us.

"I'm a trans woman."

So what is your problem with the abbreviation MTT for Male-To-Transwoman?

I think you understand now that you have not become Female (= Of the sex that can bear offspring or make eggs), so MTF is an incorrect description. You have become a Transwoman, as you freely say above, and the abbreviation describing that transition is MTT. Is it not?

I have just read this Guardian article with increasing disquiet. The main headline is "NHS study finds 12.6% of women aged 16-24 screen positive for PTSD, 19.7% self-harm and 28.2% have mental health condition" It then goes on to explain that sexual abuse, assault and rape are significant contributing factors for PTSD. It poses 3 issues for me:

1. Having male bodied persons, however well they "present", in women's sex segregated spaces is hugely triggering for a significant proportion of women (bearing in mind that not all women who have been sexually assaulted will have PTSD. This is very harmful for women (natal ones) as a class of people and will cause some to avoid public spaces and curtail their activities.
2. The massive increase in younger women - the ones growing up in a pornified sexualised culture - suggests to me that safe, sex segregated spaces are needed more than ever and increasingly so, particularly when you also consider the recent research on girls' experiences of sexual harrassment and assault in school.
3. Somewhat puts TAs constant assertion that trans women have very, very high rates of mental illness and distress (which must be ameliorated by women budging over) in context. Natal women are also hurting and at increasingly worrying rates. Where is the compassion for these women?

In E&D legislation, you can exclude certain protected groups from specified activities or settings if there is an objective justification. I think there is a case here for bio women to argue for the retention of sex (not gender!) segregated spaces (and the ability to request a natal female healthcare professional for intimate examination) to safeguard women's mental health and reduce the risk of sexual violence/harm which they are subjected to as a direct result of their biological sex. This goes tenfold where rates of mental health issues are typically higher & there are related vulnerabilities in the service user group - e.g. Prisons and refuges.

And to state for the record, I have no quarrel with transwomen having safe spaces. They just shouldn't be in natal women's spaces. I suspect a lot of the "quietly going about their business" TW are read as 'not female' by other women but qomen are generally too polite to make an issue of it, but a woman with PTSD relating to male violence in the past would find such close proximity really problematic.

I totally agree that one lesbian being attacked for 'refusing' a trans woman is one too many and I'm just as horrified by that story. No-one should ever react in that way to someone refusing consent, irrespective of gender or sexuality.

I have a lot of LGBT friends and the subject of dating trans people comes up a lot. There is a division within lesbian and gay circles around trans people - some gay people (of either gender) are attracted to the same gender and others are attracted to the genitalia. For some it is definitely both. I have been hit on by gay guys (clearly attracted to the contents of my knickers) and by lesbian girls (attracted to my femininity).

I wouldn't like to offer any indications what the percentages were though.

I had a very interesting conversation with a trans male friends who said certain gay guys were after trans man with 'original plumbing' (I think you can google that one...).

As a slight aside, there is a very interesting legal dilemma around consent and trans people. Whilst attacking someone for finding out they are trans is illegal, if a trans people doesn't disclose their gender status and ends up having sex with someone that didn't know they were trans it's not clear where that fits in a legal sense.

For instance saying 'I'll only have sex with you if you use a condom' and then you not using a condom is technically conditional consent and therefore rape. But on the other side of the coin saying 'I'm a millionaire, come sleep with me' when you aren't a millionaire isn't conditional consent (it's still possibly fraud, but that doesn't have any cover in a sexual sense). Trans status is somewhere between those two(!)

I don't want to be that landmark case so I'm up front about my trans (and genital) status!

"Ohh...you tricked me into saying the penis is a male part!"

Er nobody tricked you. It is not a secret that if you question someone long enough and and in different ways, sooner or later their guard comes down and they tell the truth

"But is it male if it's attached to a trans woman?"

Of course it is. Penis is a male organ. Y is a male chromosome. Transwomen are male, with Y chromosomes in every cell and male genitals between their legs (unless surgically removed).

You know it, I know it, everyone knows it.

@FreshwaterSelkie

Nope, not in the early days of my transition at all. Been doing it for over 2 years now (actual transition), but working up to it a long time before then.

Everyone does stuff in a different order. I've socially transitioned without realising it pretty much, mid-way through medical transition (almost a year on feminising hormones, 18 months on t-blockers) and just starting the legal stuff due to my ex-wife's wishes (kids didn't know until she randomly outed me a few months back - not going there on that one).

But there was a lot of build up, counselling and a whole childhood of experiences that factor into that.

"some gay people (of either gender) are attracted to the same gender and others are attracted to the genitalia."

Nobody is "attracted to the genitalia". People are attracted to people.

The word you are looking for (avoiding?) is sex. Lesbians attracted to the female sex, i.e. other females, which I imagine would be the vast majority of them.

@CoteDAzur - If MTT stood for male to transwoman I'd be fine with it.

But it doesn't. It's a derogatory term used by TERFs to other trans women so I don't like it.

It's pretty much how some of you feel about cis (notice how I haven't used it?).

With regards to primary sex characteristics, it's not always quite so black and white.

You do realise that XY people can (albeit rarely) have vaginas right? And you aren't even considering gender mosaics in that mix either.

Primary and secondary sex characteristics develop from hormones, not chromosomes. Those hormones are usually dependent on the chromosomes to signal which quantities to release but sometimes that goes a bit awry.

This is one of the arguments for the existence of trans people (brain development and primary sex characteristic development occur at different times during foetal growth in the womb - any hormonal imbalance then can cause differences in development).

Sadly there is no realistic way to prove this theory until we get some new groundbreaking technology, as monitoring that kind of stuff in the womb is incredibly risky to the foetus.

"I've socially transitioned without realising it pretty much, mid-way through medical transition (almost a year on feminising hormones, 18 months on t-blockers)"

So you have "socially transitioned" about 9 months ago?

As Freshwater said, it is quite surprising that you feel you have the authority to tell us what a woman is and what female means, after an entire life lived with male privilege, fathering children the old-fashioned way (during which I dare assume you were feeling rather manly?) and less than a year on artificial hormones and "living as a woman".

You're not listening, you know. You're just talking talking talking about yourself yourself yourself. Don't you ever get tired of talking about yourself? Even my teenage kids have never talked about themselves this much.

We do know about primary and secondary sexual characteristics, you know. And hormones, and intersex conditions, and even chromosomal mosaicism.

None of it seems much to the point in arguing the issue of having men, with willies, in sex-segregated female spaces and competitions.

I take it your principle is one of 'mind over matter' at all costs.

As a slight aside, there is a very interesting legal dilemma around consent and trans people. Whilst attacking someone for finding out they are trans is illegal, if a trans people doesn't disclose their gender status and ends up having sex with someone that didn't know they were trans it's not clear where that fits in a legal sense.

There was a recent case and conviction about a woman who presented as male and hadpenetrative sex with her unknowing, blindfolded female partner. The consent given wNot valid because of the offendant's deceit. I'd say the law is very clear, despite your wavy grasp of it.

In arelated note, where does this leave us with medical consent?

Matt is male to trans surely? What else'?

Mtt obviously

There may be an mtt bloke called Matt but that's his business

"If MTT stood for male to transwoman I'd be fine with it"

That's exactly what it stands for.

"It's a derogatory term used by TERFs to other trans women so I don't like it"

I don't see how you can hold us responsible for how other people use a perfectly correct term in a derogatory way to other people. MTT means Male-To-Transwoman and it is, as you accept, a perfectly fine acronym.

"It's pretty much how some of you feel about cis"

Er no, because "cis" is actually incorrect for many of us. It assumes us females are totally fine with the gender bullshit imposed on us by society. We are not.

@CharlieSierra - I'd advocate a little caution with HR as their hands are probably quite tied at the moment, and I suspect they are checking up on the relevant legislation (I do know quite a bit about this as it's one of the things I advise on with my charity work).

I wasn't impressed to hear that your trans person at work was heard peeing 'standing up' as that shows a complete lack of respect (and makes the situation worse rather than improving it). HR might wish to discuss this with them although it is a smidgen delicate(!)

The standard guidance is that someone who is transitioning or has transitioned can use the toilet of their assumed gender. But there should equally be the potential for people uncomfortable with sharing with the trans person to use an alternative facility, or to upgrade the standard facility with better isolation (e.g. floor to ceiling cubicles). Ideally both.

There isn't a hierarchy in terms of protected characteristics or beliefs (religious or otherwise) so you can't 'force' the trans person out of your bathroom currently (and if your HR does this then it could end up in a discrimination case). But your HR team should be accommodating to your wishes as well in finding an alternative for you.

I know this probably isn't what you wanted to hear, but that is the current legal situation in this country.

I am sorry that you feel this way, and your trans colleague has not really started this off on the right foot. Being allowed access to a female space as a trans person I see as a significant privilege and is something that should be treated with the correct level of respect, not only for that facility but also for other users of it.

ATM - "You do realise that XY people can (albeit rarely) have vaginas right?"

And those are genetic disorders, caused by defective genes.

Some people are born without legs and that is very sad, but human beings are still a bipedal species.

Similarly, some people are sadly born with abnormal genital phenotype wrt their karyotype, and human beings are still a sexually dimorphic species.

ATM. I'm impressed that you have stuck around, actually (the time difference notwithstanding). But, despite you imagining there is a compromise to be had I fear we have reached an impasse. You have said that some transpeople (you) are of the 'we just need to pee' group, have no interest in sexualising women's spaces for your own benefit and have a deep compassion for the distressing journey that transpeople face. You have distanced yourself from the other group - the transvestite kink and the people with AGP. You have said there is no real way to tell which is which. You have suggested that transwomen who 'complete the process' are probably demonstrating more affinity with the first group, but we can't use that because at best it's expensive/traumatic and at worst it's castration for the benefit of women.

So of all the transpeople on the spectrum, the widely varying degree of transition and the huge variety of motives, there is no solution to the 'you can come in, but you can't' scenario.

You may agree with our dilemma, but even you, who mentors transpeople, is a transwoman , has a scientific background, sounds reasonable, rational, logical and even sympathetic, you can't provide a solution other than women - go in the corner, pick up the revolver and play Russian roulette.

That's because there isn't a solution. Unless a third space is created. Oh, there is a solution. Oh, but that invalidates your womanhood and/or requires too much remodelling of existing infrastructure. So there isn't.

MTT

CoteDAzur has it down as Male to Transwoman (I'm happy with that description, although can't speak for other trans people).

WinchesterWomen has it down as Male to Trans (which is a very different version).

You can see why I don't like the term. MTTW perhaps?

Trans woman is completely fine for me - my birth assigned gender is still pretty obvious from the term.

I am listening and responding. It's very hard to show that you are actively listening in a forum - I could nod several times or repeat what other people are saying?

Also there are a lot of questions being thrown at me by different people.

I don't know what everyone else knows about hormones, gender, chromosomes etc. etc. so I might be teaching some people to suck eggs (for which I apologise). But some people might also learn something.

If everything was perfectly black and white then it would be easier. But also boring. I find life in the little grey areas much more interesting.

Charlie's hr should be finding an alternative for the man who wants to pee in the women's. Except if I'm right there already is one - a gender neutral toilet. So problem solved, unless the transwoman decides to get entitled, narcissistic and difficult.

Oh mtt is fine.