I am Janice Turner's No 1 fan - another excellent article

[Stopmakingsense]

This one picks up in particular the huge rise in women identifying as men, and the increasing inability of anyone being able to question it:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/even-asking-questions-is-now-transphobic-ztk3rlrfk?shareToken=1f64a5116171eb54a9a866590e6432ec

Not having a go at you Selma but it's interesting how often the 'it's their body' defence does not apply to women. In labour for instance. I've just left hospital and it was a major faff to get the high strength painkillers I'm on at the moment prescribed for me at home. The system can be very paternalistic about women and their medical needs/preferences, yet seems to have moved quickly to prescribing trans patients whatever they ask for.

"We know that certain parts of male brains and certain parts of female brains do behave differently....."
You see, this the the sneaky assumption coming in yet again. Which people think they will get away with because it is a commonly-held belief that men and women are different in the head (and that matters and is a good thing), as well as being different in the body (and that being a good thing too, innies and outies fitting as god designed them kind of thing and ignore the bonobos!).
Even if it were true (male brains and female brains that is), and even if the trans-brain hypothesis were true, why do we care? It is, let's face it, instead just a belief that we are our brains (and our bodies are mutable and reconfigurable), but that our brains, our essential selves are not mutable or reconfigurable.
That transwomen are 'real' women, and that physical differences or experiences don't matter. Because we don't need the trans-brain evidence, AFAIK for diagnostic purposes, or therapeutic purposes.
If TRAs weren't so focused on colonizing the 'real woman' territory and disappearing the significance of female non-brain biology, we wouldn't have an issue. If TRAs were instead happy to establish their own areas, we wouldn't really be that interested in why anyone was trans, but be fully behind any calls that people should not be discriminated against on the basis of their gender beliefs or how they chose to present, or that anyone who suffered distress or dysmorphia should receive relevant assistance.

It's the attempted disappearance of the significance of known female biology and genetics that is the problem, and this required belief in hidden aspects of supposed female biology, and 'innate gender'.

The system can be very paternalistic about women and their medical needs/preferences, yet seems to have moved quickly to prescribing trans patients whatever they ask for

Totally agree and am not defending that for a moment.

For certain issues, I couldn't care less if they discover the reason for trans. The fact that a transwoman has male pattern violence, a penis, and male socialisation is enough.

Some fantastic posts here. The prescribing of drugs, the hierarchy where women will still come at the bottom, because they cannot have anything if a man wants it first, however mediocre he is. And the mental health issue. Either they're suicidal and therefore have mental health issues. Or they're not, don't, and shouldn't require treatment.

Cake and eating it is the strapline for trans.

As an aside, I've just come back from the meeting in Brighton. All fine, no trouble. Heavily armed guards everywhere because of the Labour party conference.

But Stephanie Davis Arai raised something that I wonder if anyone here can help with? I've posted this on another thread, so cutting and pasting below:

Stephanie Davies Arai runs Transgendertrend and is particularly concerned over the effect on children.

She raised a chilling aspect of this is that hadn't occurred to me.

Currently, under the criteria to obtain a gender recognition certificate, you have to be over 18.

This part of the criteria, along with all the rest, will be dispensed with if they change the law. And they are wanting to change the protected characteristic from gender reassignment, to gender identity.

The effect of this will be that there is no lower age to identifying as the opposite sex. And it's protected.

She sees a situation where a five-year-old claims they are the opposite sex and the school have to affirm that, despite what the parents say. Because it's a protected characteristic.

I'll let that sink in.

Parental control over whether your child is viewed as transgender or not will be eliminated.

She also sees it as being used as a massive stick in a custody battle.

Women being blackmailed by a partner who can use this against them.

Stephanie is very switched on about everything to do with children and trans. Her website was set up to help parents of children who have gender dysphoria.

But if there is anyone who can unravel the legal implications of this aspect, I'd be really glad if they can analyse this.

Oh, please someone explain what the hell 'transmasculine' is?

Shon Faye has just tweeted that at me

@Datun
Is it worth starting a new thread - transgender issues and children ?There are specific issues wrt parents, schools, consent, drugs etc? Just a thought.

theendisnotnigh

Good thinking. I'll do it tomorrow. I don't have the time to pay 100% attention to it tonight.

Glad that today was such a successful meeting - at last!

I don't know if anyone has posted a link to the campaign Woman's Place UK, which has the 'bio': " Violence against women and sex discrimination still exist. Women need reserved places, separate spaces and distinct services. Join our campaign to keep them." They are running a letter writing campaign about the gender identity legislation/consultation that women here might be interested in. www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=498012153886309&id=494295627591295

I had naively assumed the age limit would stay in place, and that would at least protect children.

PlonitbatPlonit

I believe that campaign is being headed by Ruth Serwatka, who was speaking today.

I haven't looked at it enough yet. But I think there is a swelling consensus that this is the group to back.

Part of the problem with all this is that women everywhere are certainly worried and wanting to do something, but there is not a cohesive, centred group behind whom they can get.

I get the feeling, that this one is it.

I will have more of a look tomorrow, but in the meantime, take a look.

So glad meeting went well.

Just came across this and thought it might be of interest on this thread or the next one you discuss so leaving it here before I forget and go offline "Autism and Trans Identity (Part 1: personal experience + social factors)" :

Today 19:06 Albadross

Oh, please someone explain what the hell 'transmasculine' is?

Shon Faye has just tweeted that at me

I can't be certain, because there is a new word every day.

But is it a transwoman who exhibits masculine characteristics?

Neatly cutting off at the pass any attempt to accuse transwomen of acting like men?

Shon blocked me, so we may never know

AFAIR it was a reference to children...

Blocked me too. Must be the Terf blocker. If you log and post the @handle into the search box, you can see his account. Or create another one. I'm sure it's nothing much interesting though

She sees a situation where a five-year-old claims they are the opposite sex and the school have to affirm that, despite what the parents say. Because it's a protected characteristic

It was this that brought me here a year ago now, not in relation to the Act, but but in respect to what the TRAs want, which is for parental non-recognition of 'trans' children to become a protection issue with SS getting involved to 'protect' the child from parents who disallow blockers in particular.

Is there now a text for the Act? I haven't seen it.

YetAnotherSpartacus

And how far does that go? Given puberty blockers have to be given before puberty. Can we see them being administered by the state? Against a parent's wishes?

I'm thinking it could never be.
But take a look at one of these threads two years ago and what many people thought would never come to anything.

Datun I think that is exactly what they want, but with the child removed from the parents on the grounds that parents are failing to provide adequate medical care. This is only what the TRAs want, mind, it's not what he government wants.

YetAnotherSpartacus

Puberty blockers, followed by cross sex hormones, ensuring life long medical reliance and permanent sterility?

It's not the first time I've heard that.

But why?

Transmasculine is an overarching umbrella descriptor of females (I am loathsome to have to preface that with biological..) who identify with masculinity but do not necessarily identify as being men. I think it can describe transmen as well specifically, as well as those who do not have gender dysphoria or are trans.

I didn't see the thread with Shon, myself, but if it was in regards to children, then I would think transmasculine refers to girls once upon a time referred to as tomboys.

Crap, someone will be labelling me as that. I am a woman: ovaries, uterus, xx chromosomes, all the rest of it. I wear quite a lot of 'men's' clothes (literally - handmedowns from dad and brother; men's coats and jackets because they have enough pockets, sometimes buy men's shoes because they are cheaper and I have size 8 feet.)
Sometimes I get called Sir. It doesn't bother me in the least, because it's just random passers by, shop staff etc. In the past, I have 'dressed as a man' (once in an amateur film, along with some other crossdressers and a couple of transpeople - we were all playing characters, having fun and everyone was nice to each other.)

I actually have some concerns for those people who, like me, sometimes like to 'be' another person but are perfectly comfortable with our actual selves. I would hate to be categorized as 'trans' and/or pressured to choose between hormones/surgery/namechange and lipstick/deference/high heels...

hingedspeculum

You're kidding?

So they've actually managed to get a trans into a description of someone who isn't? And apply it to a woman who doesn't conform to their idea of what a woman should be?

Bloody hell. More effing liberties.

Do they apply to transfeminine to men who don't conform to their idea of masculinity?