Follow on thread III - Feeling sad and weary that feminists and trans-women are constantly pitted against one another.

[SophoclesTheFox]

I don't know if it has the legs to sustain a third thread, but kudos to perfectly for the impeccable timing of finally answering a question on the second to last post before the thread filled up. Genius.

here is the second thread

As I am now the OP, I wonder if this gives me the right of veto over the resolutions that we apparently made in the Great Accords of 2017?

Perfectly. The context of that post was entirely about MTF trans people whether gay or straight (agp). Everyone knows how disingenuous you are being.

perfectly Either you have trouble processing information, or you are not posting in good faith. And you twisted my words to try to make me look homophobic.

So I demand an apology from you.

Will people stop telling me what RogueBiscuit was 'trying' to say when what she actually said is there to see and completely indefensible.

I'm waiting for an apology, perfectly. You know you misrepresented my post.

Irkthepurist this is what you said:

People should be aware of the history of the Pedophile Information Exchange, understand why people associate paedophilia with the gay community, and so understand why MRA's are able to use this smear tactic.

There is simply no defending people who associate pedophilia with the gay community under any circumstances so while we're at it I'll have an apology from you too.

Any homophobia is jumped on immediately on these boards. It's never tolerated, perfectly.

You have either genuinely misinterpreted that remark, or you are being disingenuous.

If you spend any time around here, you will know that mumsnet is fully supportive of homosexuality. Apart from anything else, many lesbians use these boards, all the time.

No it isnt.
Understanding how people think is not defending the way they think. If you has your way we'd never study the way any group thinks or operates for fear of agreeing with them.

Datun I thought that too which is why I found the posts from SpartonDregs and RogueBiscuits so shocking.

Tagging me to say 'happy now everyone is equal?' In a post claiming those who support LGBT equality support pedophilia.

I have said I am gay many times in these threads so how else is that to be interpreted?

Irk apologies if I did misunderstand your post, it just came across as 'don't be hard on SpartonDregs for believing gay people are happy to accept 'peodophile' as a type of sexual preference, it was an easy mistake to make. Here's why.'

There is simply no defending people who associate pedophilia with the gay community under any circumstances so while we're at it I'll have an apology from you too.

The reason people associate paedophiles with the gay community, is because PIE specifically attached themselves to the gay community. Same as the 'transgeder' community are piggybacking on the LGB community too.

I did not actually know this until fairly recently when it was a gay friend of mine who first introduced PIE to me. During a conversation where he revealed someone had called him a paedophile for being gay. I asked him why on earth people associate pedophilia with gay people, and he got me to search up on PIE. I was utterly disgusted tbh that the government went along with the whole thing too.

I was around when PIE associated themselves very publicly with the gay community.

Understanding why some people make the connection is not the same as excusing the connection.

I have been alerting all my friends to the issues of the GRA for a while now and it all started here reading the trans posts. What really caught my attention was the following;

• hit and run postings like 'AIBU about feminists being so homophobic' followed by a total failure to engage with the responses.
• the tag team approach demonstrated on these three threads
• failure to respond to direct questions
• deliberately misconstruing a posters comments
• refusal to accept FACTS
• ignoring 100's of patient, logical, balanced and neutral responses only to latch onto one ambiguous word, statement or god forbid / (slash)

Thank you, ladies* most people in our society will have no idea how grateful they should be for your efforts. Keep on keeping on!

Peak-trans Steve(M)

*real ladies

Anyway, crime statistics, sport and the privision of intimate care in hospitals and care homes?

i think what made me wake up to the issues regarding the GRA/transgender etc is when i have come across transactivist articles in social media accusing lesbians of being transphobic for not wanting to enter into sexual relationships with a male who self identifies as female who still has all his biologically male anatomy. Aside from this raising questions sex/gender/sexual identity which always seem to go around in circles in my head as I the only way i know i am female is because I have female sexual characteristics / female hormones, experience menstruation/childbirth etc and have been socialised as a female. For me biological sex and gender are hard to separate completely as the things i have experienced in life and continue to experience have been because i was born biologically female and i know no other way of being. So this leads me to question why a such a small minority of individuals who have a psychological disconnect between sex and gender are being enabled to bully their way into all female domains including lesbian relationships is misogny of the highest degree surely

Anyway-is anyone up for considering the issues of crime statistics and sport and intimate care in hospitals and care homes?

Has there been any debate around how the self id amendments and how this would affect groups of women who are usually prohibited by their religion/culture to be seen/ attended to by a biological male. Having worked in healthcare it is still fairly standard for some women to strongly request female carers only and up until very recently this would have accommodated as it would be adhering to respecting a persons religious / cultural practices as well as respecting their right to be treated with dignity

You'll get no takers BertrandRussell & iamawoman. These are the issues where the activists and allies can't begin to engage. If they did, they'd have to admit that they are throwing legions of women under buses.

I'm happy to engage while I wait for my apology.

Who is happy with the law as it stands now? The current law legally recognises trans women as women who have been through the GRC process. So if you request a female carer or nurse you could get a trans woman who was assigned male at birth but is now legally female. At the moment you could sleep next to a trans woman in a single sex hospital ward and share a prison cell, hostel or changing room etc

Is this acceptable to most folk on here as these women have been through the GRC process and are therefore 'genuine'?

Do you want to repeal the current law so trans women aren't legally recognised as women?

Or is it the new self ID proposal you have the problem with rather than the existing law?

iamawoman it is considered that asking for a woman (of the bucunty type) to do personal / intimate stuff is akin to saying that you don't want a non white person doing it, and should not be tolerated. On the things I've seen.

It's part of this idea about "cis privilege" which puts women in the same type of group as white, and men in the same type of group as black. So women saying they don't want people with dicks doing whatever is the same a white people and segregation.

How they have the gall to say that women in the world are in an equivalent power position to white people in a racist society is beyond me buy hey-ho.

Initially I did support most of those things (not prison, sport and a couple of others, though).

But now, given trans women with gender dysphoria like yourself (as you called yourself truscum earlier, i see this is what you are) have allowed sexual fetishists to hijack the movement. So trans now means something much broader to the point where women's rights and dignity are threatened. So I say be non-conforming men with legal protections.

People aren't assigned male or female at birth perfectly as you well know, it isn't done on a whim. Honestly I don't know why you persist on spouting rubbish on thread after thread. And you seriously call yourself a feminist when you are happy to see the erosion of women's rights, that makes absolutely no sense.

“I'm happy to engage while I wait for my apology.“

I,d quite like you to apologize for calling me a Nazi. Obviously you didn’t actually call me a Nazi but the implication was definitely there. And you have definitely called me transphobic and said I hate trans people.

Nobody has called you a padophile supporter or whatever it is you want an apology for.

perfectly

'Going through the GRC process.'

Whilst it shows a level of commitment, it doesn't reveal motive.

Many AGP individuals have a GRC. And full genital surgery. It still means the motivation is a fetish.

Dividing the genuinely gender dysphoric from the AGP would, indeed, be useful. But a GRC isn't it.

A better determinant is sexual orientation, in favour of homosexuals. But I doubt that could fly.

If you have any suggestions how to otherwise to make a distinction, I'd be glad to hear it.

Alittlebitofbutter let me clear something up, I am not trans. I jokingly referred to myself as ‘truscum’ in the last thread as this is what trans activists call people who only believe in ‘genuine’ gender dysphoria. I do not support extreme trans activists but I do support trans people with genuine gender dysphoria.

lostplot of course people are assigned male or female at birth, hence all the greetings cards and balloons the shops ‘it’s a boy!’ ‘It’s a girl’ that people give when babies are born.

BertrandRussell I have never called you transphobic? Point me to a place where I said that.

Datun my suggestion would be trans women are given an enhanced DBS / CRB check as part of the GRC process and if anything shows up they should be banned from using female facilities or having access to vulnerable women.

Sorry this has turned out quite long -

There is an exception in the Equality Act (schedule 3, Part 7, para 28) that permits female only services and spaces to exclude transwomen, even those with a GRC, where this is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

There is another exception (schedule 9, part 1, para 1) that permits a female only employment role to exclude transwomen, even those with a GRC, where this is a genuine occupational requirement.

The trouble is, guidance is being written as if these exceptions did not exist. Hence all the situations outlined by perfectly. We don't need to repeal any laws to safeguard women's spaces and services, we just need to get orgs to exercise the law that we already have.

I've been considering what the GRA is actually for these days, ever since I found the original hansard debates from 2004. It seems to have mostly been about marriage rights and pension age. One of those aims is now obsolete because we have equal marriage. The other will be obsolete in just a few years as pension age is equalised. All documents except your birth certificate can be changed without a GRC. Increasingly I am failing to see the point of the GRA in its current form.

I don't think it should be scrapped simply because that would raise tricky questions about the status of people who currently have a GRC.

I most definitely do not think the process should be changed to self-ID. As I said above, all documents except birth certificate can be changed without a GRC but you need a letter from a doctor, at least to change your passport, confirming your change of gender is likely to be permanent. If you have a GRC you can use that instead.

So at the moment, a GRC is not worth the bother. Change to self-ID and a GRC will be really useful - but only for those who can't even get a doctor's letter currently. No thanks.

I'd prefer to just let the GRA dwindle into obsolescence and instead make some changes to the Equality Act:

• change 'gender reassignment' to 'gender non-conformity' - this would mean trans people would continue to be protected from actual discrimination and also GNC women, men, boys and girls, non-binary people ... it would eliminate gendered uniform policies and dress codes. It would be a step towards eliminating gender itself (in the feminist sense of the word). It would do away with the nonsense of treating transwomen 'as women' which will be contentious but wtf does it mean to be 'treated as a woman' anyway? The only situations where being treated as a woman actually matters for actual women are those where our biological sex matters and those are the exact situations we should be applying the exceptions in any case.

• strengthen the sex-based exceptions and write proper guidance around them such that every organisation knows they are there and why they are important, and knows they can legally use them without fear of litigation.

Have you now worked out what self-ID means perfectly or are you still confused?