We need to talk about the GRA - Glasgow

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

www.eventbrite.com/e/we-need-to-talk-about-the-gra-glasgow-tickets-39786635899?utm-medium

I may actually try and go to this if I am feeling brave.

Heather BL thought the language was straight out of the TRA handbook and really we should tackle the language before we could answer the questions, because it was loaded to make any opposition look like bigotry.

Wow, this is such a crucial point. Language is everything in this debate. Heather is right that deconstructing trans Newspeak is THE first task of anyone wanting to challenge policy in this area. The TRA use of suicide threats as a rhetorical strategy also needs to be exposed as the abusive tactic that it is.

Wish I'd seen this earlier. I'd have loved to come along!

Assigned I'm still breastfeeding so that may have been me...!

Ah, Hi Ruby

Definitely Donkey

This was released yesterday by Nicola Williams of Fair Play for Women and it can assist in completing the consultation.

fairplayforwomen.com/gender-recognition-act-2004-explained

Can people on FB share and ask friends / family who you would think are supportive to complete the consultation. Closing date is 1 March

www.gov.scot/Publications/2017/11/5459/347286

Getting behind in the conversation ... I was at the discussion about a code word - had to run off for the train. I met several MNers - I think we were a large proportion of the group! I asked the question to Stuart about whether he also thought the Black Lives Matter campaign should shut up about violence. I kind of see where he's coming from, but essentially he seemed to be saying 'sweep it under the carpet and don't go on about it' which I don't think is good enough - naming it, recording and measuring it and trying to protect against is so important.

By the way I def gave the wrong MN name to someone - I seem to have reverted back to a really old one somehow - not sure when/how that happened. But the names are related.

iismum- I could see Stuart’s point too, sadly I think the reality is that any talk about sexual violence is unpalatable and not persuasive to men. I think it would behoove Stuart to reflect on why that is though, why it is considered ‘hysterical’ rather than a legitimate argument.

I made the point that rightly or wrongly, it is useful to know that argument doesn’t work.

Hello Terry!

Hello Sonic

I'm completely confused now after meeting so many folk last night and trying to remember all the usernames, I'm afraid my menopausal brain can't deal with all the excitement!

I wish I'd had the guts to get up at the end and shout "who are the mumsnetters?" but I didn't know if that would be bad form and/or outing. Also I was still quite jittery after the "contretemps" at the beginning.

Myself and Seeing were speaking to Venice outside the venue and she said that's the first event where activists had actually managed to get inside the venue to cause trouble, let's hope it's the last.

I have been thinking a lot about what Heather said about the Barbican toilets (how they used to have male and female toilets, but they now only have male and gender neutral!!!)

If I was there, I think I'd rather use the men's than the gender neutral. Because the sort of men who would go out of their way to not use the designated men's loos, and instead use the ones where women would be, are the epitomy of the type of men I'd wish to avoid.

And no, not purely because of rape, but because I think men who would choice to use GN toilets instead of men's are doing it to prove some sort of point to women, and that's bad enough, and makes me feel uncomfortable enough in itself.

Ds' school now has Male, Female and 2 "Gender Neutral" loos (they were the "Visitors loos). That seems to be an equitable way to do it.

Yes pretty. I agree, I think everyone does. A third set of GN toilets is the clear solution.

Except that transwomen (the loud, lobbying type who seem to have so much power) don't want to use the GN toilets. They specifically want into the women's.

Hello Lemon!

I can also see Stuart's point as I thought he was arguing that saying women's spaces should only be for women and that should be enough on its own is a good one - kind of like how "No" is a complete sentence and there doesn't need to be an explanation.
However if it's actually coming from a place of just not wanting to hear about MVAW because NAMALT then that's different.

I found what he had to say about the bigger picture in regards to identity and focussing on the self at the expense of examining class structures really interersting. It was beautifully illustrated by Joanna trying to make the Q&A about them and their individual experience as a TIM and then Heather BE trying to explain that it's not about individuals it's about classes and the wider implications for society as a whole.

I'm trying to work today, and keep breaking into ranting out loud about various aspects of the trans narrative. Fortunately, I work from home!

So many different thoughts in my head today, but just wanted to pick up on what terry (hello again!) mentions there about this not being about individuals but about classes and wider society. Stuart spoke about a similar change in the way we think about political issues, and he referred specifically to the push to change the voting age to 16.

Many years ago, I saw a young Charlotte Church on the Wogan chat show. She was 16 at the time, and she spoke about how it wasn't right that she paid tax (lots of it) and had no vote. She said that there should be no taxation without representation, and that if she was required to contribute financially to the state, then she should have a say in how the state used and distributed financial resources. She was looking outward.

Contrast that with some comments I heard a few months ago on a radio discussion about changing the voting age. There was no mention of taxation, no mention of having a stake in wider society and an interest in political decisions about resources. Instead, the comment was that if 16 years were old enough to have sex, they were old enough to vote.

It's not a trans issue, but it's a clear illustration, I think, of what was being said last night about people being turned inward towards themselves rather than outward to society, and the focus on the body rather than society.

the sort of men who would go out of their way to not use the designated men's loos, and instead use the ones where women would be, are the epitomy of the type of men I'd wish to avoid.

YY.

STATEMENT FROM ACQUEE SCOTLAND ON THE EMERGENCY COUNTERDEMO

On the 10th January 2018, a large group of Trans Exclusionary Reactionary Feminists met in Glasgow at the Grand Hotel under the name of the ‘We Need To Talk’ tour. They met to discuss the Gender Recognition Act as well as other ‘issues’.

ACQuee Scotland organised against them, first by putting pressure on their first booked venue to the point of cancellation. A couple of us then infiltrated the meeting itself. One of our activists were violently pushed by one of the TERFs speaking on the panel and another had water thrown on her. We then joined the small but loud emergency and last minute publicised protest outside where we stayed for three hours chanting and leafleting. We had a lot of good chat with passers by who were mostly on our side and believed that trans bodily autonomy should be respected. Despite coming close to it, there were no arrests.

We did attempt to get the booking at Grand Central Hotel cancelled, however the managers remained complicit in their transphobia and took to hanging up the phone on people calling in.

We, the transfemme members of ACQuee, took this action alongside allies both from ACQuee and from other friendly groups, because we believe that it is neither possible nor desirable to compromise with those forces that would deny our existence as women. In taking such a stance, the “Gender Critical” or Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists (TERFs) ally themselves with all the reactionary forces that would deny us rights and freedoms, and as such they must be opposed.

We do not intend to enter into civil discussion with any institution or person that proclaims our erasure, because to entertain such a discussion is to put our existence, and therefore our annihilation, up for debate. We have no kind words for the system of ideology and repression that aims daily to throttle us, only the defiant assertion that we are here, and that we too, are women. TERFs are servants of oppression, for they privilege a rigid and oppressive gender binary over the simple demands of transgender people for the dignity and compassion that we have been denied by the world. We have nothing to justify or apologise for in our determined opposition to TERFism.

We have a right to identify and exist as women. It is as simple as that.

m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=196042887615552&id=161109534442221

and believed that trans bodily autonomy should be respected.

What did they tell them? How was anyone proposing that "trans bodily autonomy" shouldn't be respected?

It's an odd statement isn't it? I would have thought most of us would respect trans bodily autonomy?

It's like what that speaker said (I can't remember which one) about randomly flicking through a dictionary and chucking words together. It all sounds very lovely, but is meaningless

Does anyone have further info on the assaults they are claiming?

There was a bit of fronting up to each other from both sides but I didn't see any physical contact, except when they were removed by security.

The water thrown was literally drops. I think someone was dipping their fingers in a glass and flicking.

TERFs are servants of oppression, for they privilege a rigid and oppressive gender binary...

sigh.

The three shouty TRAs were very aggressive. They had a hanger on who seemed pretty normal and a bit shocked , and then "Joanna" who stayed for the talk, and only interrupted several times.

It's like what that speaker said (I can't remember which one) about randomly flicking through a dictionary and chucking words together. It all sounds very lovely, but is meaningless

I think so. I think they imagine "bodily autonomy" means the right to go in whichever spaces they feel are appropriate. When I would use it to mean the freedom to refuse medical treatment etc. Which they, like everyone in the country, have.