Gender reassignment surgery... Would you then be happy with them in female spaces?

[TurquoiseChevrotain]

I don't have an issue with transgender individuals, etc.

However, I know there are feminism issues. Jus curious if a biological male has his penis removed, do you still have an issue?

There's also the issue about whether religions like .Muslims would then be able to use toilets etc

That seems to be a viewpoint that having surgery, somehow decreases the risk, or feelings of discomfort that women go through.

And whilst no penis means they can't rape you with one, I disagree in any way, that it makes them any less male.

Autogynephilia is certainly not precluded by surgery. It can be the ultimate goal, in fact.

A man who fetishises women and their biology is unwelcome on that basis, not the fact that he has a penis.

There is no framework to distinguish between a pre-op and post-op transwoman. So it's moot and pointless.

Are far more effective distinction would be to separate men with gender dysphoria from men with autogynephilia. But only in terms of the direct threat they pose. Participating unwittingly in someone's fetish is a huge boundary violation.

Men without AGP, but with gender dysphoria, don't tend to want to violate boundaries, for the sake of it.

Having said that, the presence of a male, (from either camp), certainly alters the dynamic.

Expecting women to ignore their socialisation and experience of men in general, is, in itself, a boundary violation.

A third option would be far more preferable. Segregation on the basis of sex for those who want it, and a third option for those who are gender variant.

That I would campaign for.

Do you not believe in biology then @tocas?

I'm not sure what you mean by this OP?

Today 01:28 TurquoiseChevrotain

I suppose I'm talking about same sex dorm rooms, etc.

You can't have surgery until you are over 18. So what dorm rooms would this be?

Titchy - yes I do believe in biology. But gender dysphoria is a recognised medical condition

tocas

Transitioning from male to female is no easy task, it's not like people can just decide to do it and it's done within the week and without due consideration to their reasons for doing so.

I genuinely don't understand this argument. What has the difficulty of surgery got to do with it?

All it demonstrates is a commitment to cosmetically alter your body.

I don't think anyone doubts that there are certainly many trans people who are utterly committed to being trans.

Their conviction is immaterial to women's privacy and protecting women's boundaries.

You don't give people something that is damaging to others, just because they really, really want it.

Today 08:43 tocas

Titchy - yes I do believe in biology. But gender dysphoria is a recognised medical condition

Yes it is. Of course. But why is that more important than women's rights and privacy?

Datun

Sorry that wasn't clear. What I mean by that is that in order to qualify for gender re-assignment surgery you have to go through a great deal of counselling, have lived as the sex you are wanting to transition to and have already started hormonal therapy for the transition. These are not things you would be able to do if your wish to transition was not born of genuine need

And I'm not saying it is more important than women's right to privacy, but I certainly believe it is equally as important

And I'm not saying it is more important than women's right to privacy, but I certainly believe it is equally as important

Then how do you balance these scales? If someone has been through all that, is it fair that they compete in professional women's sports? They're still biologically male, with all the advantage that entails, penis or no.

The problem has never (well, rarely) been with transexuals - who just want to go on and live their life, who have taken this huge step with re-assignment surgery in a final attempt to be at peace with themselves, who don't want to encroach on women's spaces etc.

The problem comes with the new breed of transgender person, who feels they have the right to women's spaces, who believe that they actually are women - who feel that it's not just about being at peace with themselves, but about bullying me into saying what they want to hear too.

I don't want these boundary breakers anywhere near me, let alone having the right to be near me and my only recourse is to get back in my house like it's the 1800s. The old type, just quietly living their lives like the rest of us? Really not the issue here.

tocas

Ah ok. Yes I agree, anyone who has the surgery certainly is driven by a need. Although there are many cases of post surgery regret. So it's not always a need that can be relied upon.

I think, from what you're saying, that you want to be able to accommodate them because their need to so great. And I totally understand that. It's a very human emotion.

Unfortunately, this entire issue rests upon the fact that needs are in direct conflict. The needs of women and girls versus the needs of men who want to be women.

I originally assumed that this could be resolved by having third options for trans-people. To accommodate their specific requirements. A post op man will have entirely different biological and medical needs to a woman, for example. None of which will involve the particular issues specific to women, like pregnancy, menstruation, etc. Likewise, women don't need to be in a position where they have to regularly dilate a neo vagina. (I never see transwomen asking for special accommodation to do this, during the day. So I don't know how that works when they are working).

So the third option would seem preferable.

Unfortunately, the question of validation gets in the way (that and autogynephilia). Transwomen don't want a third option. Otherwise, we could all pack up and go home.

Because the two issues clash so spectacularly, one ends up having to pick a side.

And yes I agree with SpaghettiAndMeatballs about the two types of trans.

They may have certain things in common, but a determination to violate women's boundaries, I don't think is one of them.

Unfortunately, as genuine transsexuals predicted, this new breed of transactivist is ruining it for them.

Genuinely gobsmacked by "transwomen are not women, transmen are not men" yes they are. That is the whole point.

In what sense of the word?

You can't have surgery until you are over 18. So what dorm rooms would this be?

Halls of residence. American term

People get their bodies modified to suit their mental illness all the time.

It doesn't make them actually a cat. Actually a natural 36Z. I suppose trans able people can make themselves disabled but that's about it.

They just need a doctor to perform the surgery here or abroad if they can afford it. Doctors are just as at risk of being in it for the money or because they've been blinded by the trans ideology themselves as any other person

Tocas I was referring to your 'transwomen are women' comment. No they are not. They are transwomen. Not women.

And the question yet to be answered is that if it's so inherently dangerous to use the mens loos, why be in favour of things that allow men into the ladies area.

Everyone has the right to be treated with kindness and compassion and to not be the subject of ridicule or violence.

But if we have to pick sides as datan has pointed out,

Why can't it be the side of the people who haven't agreed by the very action of having surgery, that they won't always be permitted to be somewhere.

It is certainly no secret this issue would arise.

Biology is not a belief system - it is like saying do you believe in maths, or physics. It is a continuous exploration of the world, piling evidence on evidence and thoroughly testing that evidence from many angles.

To be fair, I spent 5 years of O level physics denying the existence of atoms, because you cannot actually physically see them, but that was not rational in retrospect. It is easily done

Personally I would have no issue in the likes of loos or changing rooms.

However, there would have to be something that worked across the board really. So I acknowledge that many many females would not be comfortable with males of any nature in their loos or changing rooms, so I would accept my view means not much, its the collective view of female people...and we cannot ignore the many female people who have been raped, abused, and so on.

I would always disagree with even post-op transwomen in female prisons, or crisis centres and such.

Hm. This thread is helping to crystallise my thinking on this issue.

In theory, I would be happy for some post op TW to be present in some female spaces. But this would be impossible to police and unacceptable to many females. So in practice, I don't think that TW of any kind should have access to any female spaces.

I don't know what the solution for TW should be. Happy to support whatever consensus they come to, so long as it doesn't involve the use of or reduction of female spaces.

Though with the loos and changing rooms issue..it has been noted upthread that in some cases people realistically could not know unless someone was flashing their bits around anyway. So my suggestion...is that we stick to the honour system that has been in place for many many years, where transwomen use female loos and such. We do not need laws to say this.

It would be nice if transwomen who know they look very much like men in dresses...were to simply use the male areas. Whether this upsets them personally or not. Rather than intimidate and scare females. Decent transwomen would do this anyway without it being said, I think.

While I fully support anyone's wish to live how they want to, including 'as a woman' (whatever that might mean - I think in practice it usually means wearing clothes usually thought of as female, a female name etc), lack of penis does not equal Woman, and nor does 'how you feel inside your head'.

Therefore I don't support MTT in women's loos, changing rooms etc (although I realise the law is going to override the discomfort and wishes of women) but I'd really get behind a campaign to make men's loos etc safe for everyone male to use, even if presenting as female, or more provision of trans/neutral facilities.

I get the feeling though that some transpeople talk about 'just wanting a pee in safety' but that actually it's more about being validated in their delusion of being female and wanting everyone else to agree they are - and would therefore resist the neutral or safe male loo option.

This is a womens cycling event. The winner states that cycling is a very lucrative sport for her.
Men talk over women, its one reason why womens trauma therapy groups are women only.
The Korean 2018 Winter Olympics have no entry standards for women.Anyone can enter on a self declaration.
Womens events and spaces are for women. A soldier who lost his penis in conflict does not become a woman.

I don't see it as being able to pee in safety...as there are vanishingly few instances where males wearing dresses have been reported as attacked in male facilities. And given our press and their seemingly unanimous support for all of this, and TAs who would be shouting from the rooftops...this doesn't seem to happen?

Whilst yes, if you felt you did not belong in there it would be uncomfortable for you of course...it doesn't seem to be a safety issue. And the exact same arguments used against women who protest (there are laws against assault, you are behind a door etc) can be used the other way around. So why is it female people are told that laws exist to protect you from any male person who would want to attack you, that the people in the loo simply want to pee not attack you and so on? WHY do not many people seem to 'get' this?!

And even if there were many cases of transwomen being attacked in male loos, the answer is obviously to make loos safer, not fucking open up the female loos to these same males who are attacking transwomen!