Break it down for me?

[TortiousTortoise]

Hi all, I am fairly new to the discussion on the impact that transwomen are having on women generally and I want to more fully understand the issues (been trying to talk to my husband about it and am struggling to articulate it).

I feel so awkward writing about this as I definitely don't want to come across as sounding horrible about transpeople, I just want to understand.

Also there are a lot of acronyms being thrown about. Can anyone help me out?

Important article about autogynaephilia and its impact on the LGBT community:

'The Elephant In The Room' by Sue Donym
(extract)
"That name is ‘autogynephilia’.

I can hear you now, ‘auto-whata-philia?’. The word is difficult to get your mouth around. It is also a verboten word. People whisper it in dark alleys level verboten. Like ‘Voldemort’ in Harry Potter. The Elephant That Must Not Be Named. If you say it out loud, someone will arrive at your door and brand the four scarlet letters on your forehead ‘TERF’. I guarantee it. Even I avoided saying the word in my original article, Inauthentic Selves, which had a section on autogynephilia end up on the cutting room floor, because I wanted the broader LGBT community to be able to read about the way that LGBT activism has been austroturfed.

But I bet you’re thinking ‘I’ve never heard of these autoawhataphias’.

Are you a member of the LGBT community? If you are, surely you know a male to female transitioner. They are in their late thirties to their early fifties, they call themselves a ‘lesbian’, and they wear clothing that’s inappropriate for their age. They’re ex-cop, military, or most often, work in something involving computers.

I can see your head nodding behind the screen. Congratulations, you’ve seen autogynephilia.

But what is autogynephilia? What is the elephant? How is it relevant to the LGBT community? And why is no one pointing it out? (continues)

concludes:
‘Queer’, and autogynephilia have provided a method for heterosexuals, particularly heterosexual males, to colonize the LGBT community, erase our struggles, and tells us we’re all bigots for not wanting heterosexual sex.

Sounds crazy. But true.

Please Discuss The Elephant
If there’s one thing you ought to do, it’s discuss the elephant. Please discuss the elephant. Don’t leave it rampaging around the room, destroying everything in its path.

Autogynephilia is a weird concept. It can be inaccessible. But it needs to be discussed in the LGBT community, and openly. Not talking about it is causing way too much damage — we have had our organizations taken over, our spaces colonized, and our sexuality redefined. Thanks to these men, you can no longer say ‘I am, gay, meaning exclusively same-sex attracted’ without being labelled a TERF. That’s not a good thing.

Dancing around the subject isn’t helpful. While the ultimate result of autogynephilia is homophobic rhetoric, is important to remember that a sexual fantasy, not homophobia, motivates such rhetoric. That is the root cause of the problem.

Worse is the effect on autogynephiles themselves. ‘Transgender’ is not an umbrella. It is a term that erases the very different motivations and causes of various forms of gender dysphoria. It does people who claim the label absolutely no favors. The original inclusion of the ‘T’ was designed for homosexual transsexuals, and include them with other same-sex attracted individuals. It was not designed to include autogynephiles, who are heterosexual males, or ‘queer’ individuals who are heterosexual but believe dying their hair some variation of neon should mean they are included. Making ‘transgender’ an umbrella not only erases the very different causes and struggles associated with homosexual transsexuality, it also obscures the causes of, and struggles associated with autogynephilia. Autogynephilia is not a condition I would wish on anyone. It is a unique, somewhat bizarre struggle, and reading through many of the accounts of it was quite sad. It can make its sufferers lonely and unable to connect with intimate partners. But enabling it, and on a grand scale, has caused immense damage to homosexuals, particularly lesbians, who have lost almost all their spaces and communities to colonization.

Please discuss the elephant."

medium.com/@sue.donym1984/the-elephant-in-the-room-dc822144a81b

thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3473261-The-Elephant-in-the-Room-is-male-autogynephilia-by-Sue-Donym

previous article by Sue Donym (recommended on thead above)

'Inauthentic Selves: The modern LGBTQ+ Movement Is Run By Philanthropic Astroturf And Based On Junk Science'
concludes:
The influence these large foundations and their funders have on our politics cannot be underestimated, and it needs to be questioned. The transgender civil rights movement consists of (i) large numbers of astroturf organizations funded by billionaires with financial interest in its success, (ii) medical professionals who stand to gain from ‘selling’ transgenderism to the public (and who are happy to lie to the public about their treatments) and (iii) pharmaceutical companies that appear to be engaging in illegal off-label marketing with said medical professionals. The question of what came first-the foundations, the pharmaceutical companies, or the medical professionals -is like asking whether the chicken or the egg came first. But the fact of the matter is, all three groups stand to benefit from the transgender civil rights movement. No transgender person does. With no unbiased research, they cannot get the answers they need to treat their condition effectively. They are left stranded and marooned, with an entire movement dedicated to foisting drugs upon them, instead of finding an actual cure or treatment for gender dysphoria. When ‘transition’ is complete and they are left a castrated eunuch, with no more steps up the Bridge To Total Freedom, their suicidality does not decrease. With an incomplete path to salvation, they are told they can chase after something they can never realize. They are obliterated as a distinct legal class of people by self-identification legislation — the legal ramifications of which could set trans rights back years, which has been raised by gender critical trans activists such as Miranda Yardley.

The modern transgender movement is an astroturf tiger. It is not grassroots, it is not organic, and it serves the purposes of no one beyond homophobes and pharmaceutical companies. It is a menace, it has hollowed out the LGBT community, it threatens women’s legal gains for the past hundred years, and it is going to destroy people’s lives. An entire generation of gender non-conforming children that may have otherwise grown up gay are going to grow up to be brain damaged, weakened eunuchs with a medical malpractice lawyer on retainer. This ‘movement’ needs to end before that happens. The LGBT community needs to wake up and start talking back to the fox in the hen house."

medium.com/@sue.donym1984/inauthentic-selves-the-modern-lgbtq-movement-is-run-by-philanthropic-astroturf-and-based-on-junk-d08eb6aa1a4b

thread
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3328210-Follow-the-money-who-is-funding-the-US-transborg

The absolutely amazing PencilsinSpace (thank you!!) has transcribed the story of a transwidow on this thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3473080-Powerful-R4Womans-Hour-transwidow-interview-with-a-woman-describing-the-devastating-impact-of-her-husbands-transition-on-her-their-marriage-and-children

Reproducing in full:
Transcript part 1:

Jane Garvey: Now, as I mentioned, we are looking at the impact of transitioning on marriage and family relationships. Now yesterday if you heard the show, you'll have heard Stephanie Jones, a former fire officer and parent who, when she transitioned from male to female, became as she describes it, a stranger in her own home.

Today, the experience of a woman we're calling 'Michelle'. Now she has chosen to be anonymous and her words have been voiced up by an actor. Her ex-husband transitioned after they'd been married for 16 years. I asked her why she wanted to talk about what had happened.

Michelle: I really wanted to talk about it because women in my position currently are not heard and we're not really allowed to say how this feels. This blows our life apart and there doesn't seem to be any voice for the collateral damage. Some transactivists are frightening, aggressive. Women have been threatened for just saying that this is not a positive experience for us. I have no problem with people wanting to rewrite their own history, to relabel themselves as they wish. I don't know they have the right to rewrite my ... my life, my history.

There's a very articulate transwidow, as a lot of us call ourselves, because really, the man we knew has gone. It's a sort of living bereavement. He's gone but he's still walking around. A woman called Shannon Thrace has a TED Talk and she said, 'you know, I experienced my life with this heterosexual man, I wasn't a lesbian, and I was expected overnight to change my sexuality and rewrite my own story.' That's why I refer to my husband as 'he'. It's not to be controversial or political, but that's what I know, that's my lived experience. His feelings and experiences are valid and true and worthy of respect but I think mine should be too.

This is really equal rights. It isn't talked about. Most of the media coverage of families is about successful transitions where families stay together and there are lots and lots of us where that hasn't happened and actually, women and children are estranged from people who have done this.

JG: And you feel you have to stay anonymous?

M: Absolutely. It is terrifying that I couldn't possibly give my identity. I have had to be very careful about the details that I share. To me, that seems quite absurd that we are in a situation where I've experienced a really - and my children have - a really traumatic life event and we're not allowed to talk about it for fear of retribution, for fear of physical violence. Ironically, you know, transgender people were silenced for years and years, generations, decades, and it's strange really that now, people close to them who don't feel great about the experience, are silenced too.

JG: Just tell me a little bit Michelle about your marriage, how was it?

M: Well, I thought it was OK. It had its usual ups and downs, it was about 16 years long and at times things were difficult but I don't think that was unusual. I thought we were fairly close, we talked about quite personal things, you know, what we wanted for the future, our vulnerabilities, our childhoods. My husband wasn't a particularly macho bloke but at no point in my marriage did I see any signs at all of what was to come. And we had children, when he dropped the bombshell they were all in their early teens. So, we met in our thirties, we were very much in love, he was a kind, gentle, funny, clever man.

JG: What did happen then?

M: Well, with hindsight I now realise that he was someone who was always restless and dissatisfied and quite introspective. He didn't really settle to careers and hobbies and things like that and I did wonder why that was, and I think as a spouse you often wonder if you're the problem and you're deficient in some way. As an example, when I turned 40 I felt I'd arrived in my life, I had everything I needed and wanted, but I never had a sense that he had really reached a point of being contented. And then, I realise now that he started to detach himself from the family a bit, about six months before he came out, if you like. He started sleeping in the spare room, saying he was tired and we were disrupting each other's sleep. I didn't see it as a big deal.

The first thing that happened that caused me to wonder what was going on was on my own iPad, and I do wonder now if he deliberately did this so that I'd find it, I used to have a history bar that shows you all the sites you've visited and I was looking for a booking I had made and I found a very odd page advertising a dress that men could buy that would shape them to look like a woman. Now I only have daughters so there was only really one person who could have been looking at that, and at no point did I think, 'goodness, he must be transgender.'

I brought up with him how he was generally and he said he was very unsure about his identity. He was very vague and I didn't want to deal with that at the time, I didn't take it seriously, I'm not proud of that. So I said maybe you should go and talk to somebody different from me, you know, go and see a counsellor, which he did, and I'm an optimist and I know a lot about trans issues because of my career, I work often with transgender people.

JG: What do you do Michelle?

M: I work in the health service and it's worth saying that because I am in no way transphobic. I fear this interview will cause people to be very offended or angry, you know, I work with trans people quite regularly. So, I had a sort of list really, I thought maybe he's a cross-dresser, maybe he's a man who finds it erotic to dress up in women's clothing. There are lots of those men, it's also known as autogynaephilia. It's not much talked about and I thought, what would I do as a spouse if he was somebody who wanted to go away in private and dress up as a woman, or go to a special club or go for the odd weekend - would I tolerate that? I don't know. What would I do as a spouse if he came to me and said, 'actually this is something I find arousing and I want to do it with you involved.' Would I tolerate that? Probably not. Right at the bottom of my list was him being transgender and I disregarded it entirely. So, for a couple of months he went to counselling and again, I just got on with it. I have kids, I have a job.

JG: Can I ask, in that period of your marriage, were you intimate in any way? I don't just mean sexually, although I suppose I do also mean that, I mean were you affectionate? Were you still talking?

M: We were, and I don't think it was for the sake of the kids. We were very good at covering all of this up from our kids when it was going on. I still felt that we - I mean actually - well, into the beginning of our divorce - we were kind to each other, we were supportive, we interacted, but there was this secret thing going on in his life which, yeah, was the elephant in the room really and I was just biding my time, waiting for him to come back to me with what this all meant.

JG: And how were the children during this time?

M: Well I don't think they noticed anything. When it came to the moment where we told them, my husband said, 'It's OK, I think they'll have guessed that something's very wrong.'

Transcript part 2:

JG: Told them what? That he was -

M: That he was - wanted to become a woman. So when that moment came later on down the line he thought they would - well, would have guessed, that the atmosphere was problematic. I didn't and I was right, the children had no idea. So I think we did a really good job - and I think so many women can relate to this - a really good job of carrying on as usual when something like this is going on in your marriage.

JG: So did your husband tell them himself, or did you tell them?

M: So, after he told me we did agree that we should tell them. So his family didn't believe it, they thought this was a fad, a mid-life crisis, mental illness, and they strongly wanted us not to tell the kids. They wanted us just to say that we were having a temporary separation, and actually we agreed together that we needed to tell them the full story. I think children fill in the gaps and they worry it's something to do with them, so we sat them down and told them two things, which may have been overload. We told them we were separating and then he told them that he - he believed he was a woman.

JG: And at that point did he leave or was he still living with you?

M: He stayed for a few weeks and we had a fairly difficult family holiday, which I thought again, we covered up very well [laughs] and now my children have said, 'Mum, it was really obvious, you'd go out of the cottage and come back and you'd been crying.' And then he moved out.

JG: Because he wanted to or because you wanted him to?

M: Because I wanted him to. So the way he told me - he handed me a letter. I was leaving for work and he said, 'I haven't found a way of telling you this so I've written it down,' and it said, 'I'm a woman. I'm going to seek medical intervention soon. I want to stay with you, I want to continue our marriage. I think it'll be OK for the kids in the current climate.' This was 2015 so the trans media coverage was exploding at this time.

I felt that letter had a strong sense of entitlement. He rather assumed that this would be OK, it wouldn't be that big a deal, he's only changing his outward self. And I think it's something that people don't understand, is that when your partner does this, it should just be that it's your partner wearing different clothes but it really isn't. There are so many women talking on the web about their experiences of this, and actually, you get a whole new person. People's whole characters change often and they behave in ways that the previous person never did, and that's certainly what happened to me.

I felt terribly betrayed. I think anyone that's lived with someone that's had a secret or told lies - it throws the whole marriage, your whole history into doubt. You wonder, how long did they know? I mean, he said he'd known as a child and then buried it until recent years. And over time I started to feel angry, which I'm not proud of, but I was really angry with him that he had put his own wishes before the children. It felt very self indulgent. I think anger was helpful and it was very galvanising. It helped me to be very practical in breaking up and in making decisions.

I also felt very ashamed and embarrassed. I thought that people would somehow think I should have known all along. And it's very isolating, I didn't know anyone else this had happened to, and this is the position that my teenagers find themselves in. They don't know anybody with this, I mean lots of other people's dads have left to go off with other women, but nobody's dad has done this. I should have been a really good candidate for staying with a man who did this, I'm a paid up, Guardian reading leftie, I work in this kind of field, but I now unfortunately doubt pretty much everything he said and were I to ask him, frankly I don't know if I would believe what he told me. So you do feel terribly betrayed, not helped by the fact that he wasn't himself distressed.

Since then, the notion that all people that come out as trans are heroic and brave, I'm afraid doesn't really wash with me. I didn't really feel it was brave to write me a letter and run away. He didn't sit with me and talk to me, listen to my questions, I was entirely alone processing that piece of information. I've asked him about how he felt, was he depressed? Was this a dealbreaker? Would he be suicidal if he couldn't transition? I'm well aware that trans have a high suicide risk. He was truly ... calm. Fairly cheerful, not distressed, didn't show really any empathy or regard for my distress, it was fairly extraordinary. Crucially, he never apologised, he didn't feel he should because then he would be apologising for who he really is. He was beyond dealing with me and my distress. I think probably he was elated that he was now liberated to do this. He was in a completely different place and probably had sort of mentally accepted that he might well have to leave.

JG: What about your children and their relationship with their father now?

M: It is completely, sadly, estranged. So they didn't talk a lot, I think anyone with teenagers will know how difficult it is to make them talk. They started to have contact with him at weekends and very quickly they started to erode their time with him, so they would say, 'Oh maybe we'll go late or come home early and I don't really want to stay the night.' They just made excuses and I didn't want to interfere. I think a lot of women whose kids visit non-resident fathers will know that we are often blamed for disrupting contact, controlling - alienating children, and I was very keen not to do that.

JG: Have you spoken to his family about this?

M: His parents were very opposed to me divorcing. They again, I think, didn't think it would really happen. I needed to bide my time. I knew, I knew this would happen. I knew he was hell bent on doing it so I initiated a very rapid divorce and I think his family were very angry with that. And I tried very hard to keep my kids' relationship with their grandparents and cousins going. I fully have great intentions on that front and that's absolutely the right thing to do, as also with their father, but it's been very awkward - been very awkward for the kids because allegiances are struck, aren't they, when people divorce.

JG: Do you have contact with your ex-husband now?

M: I have virtually none, occasional emails I used to have about money, things like that. I haven't spoken to him for about two years but I see him in the street as his new incarnation, I see him at close range.

JG: Has he transitioned?

M: He has, he has. I don't know how fully but I know he's - you know, was fully intending to pursue that process, and he certainly is entirely dressed that way and has changed his name and so on. And as a feminist, I had a lot of problems with it, I had a problem with his sort of excitement at wearing skirts and removing all his body hair [laughs] I'm the sort of woman that puts the bins out and goes into pubs on my own. It doesn't make any sense to me and we raised our daughters not to have that stereotypical view of what it means to be a woman. It's blown my life apart, you know, I think that's my real, lived experience. None of us are telling lies about this, we have no reason to.

JG: That's Michelle - not her real name, not her voice - describing her experiences when her ex-husband wanted to transition. Go to BBC Sounds, you can hear yesterday's show which includes the piece by Stephanie Jones, voiced by an actor, where she describes the impact her transition had on her and her family. There is another side of course, Avril says, 'I'm still with my husband, who's now my wife. She's three years into her transition, I love her dearly and not all relationships fail. Would be nice if you could include positive stories too, I'm not alone.' I'm sure you're not Avril and we want all shades of opinion and all experiences. Email the programme via the website if you have stayed happily with a partner who's transitioned.

There's a very articulate transwidow, as a lot of us call ourselves, because really, the man we knew has gone. It's a sort of living bereavement. He's gone but he's still walking around. A woman called Shannon Thrace has a TED Talk and she said, 'you know, I experienced my life with this heterosexual man, I wasn't a lesbian, and I was expected overnight to change my sexuality and rewrite my own story.'

'Getting real - a transgender experience | Shannon Thrace' tedtalk

Front page of The Telegraph: in NHS hospitals it appears that any man can get access to female-only wards as long as he claims to identify as a woman....

Discussed here:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3475792-Telegraph-article-NHS-trans-row-as-men-get-access-to-womens-wards-if-they-identify-as-female

Another Telegraph piece, this time about ignoring parental consent for "trans children" even if the child is assessed to have an incomplete understanding of issues (not medically competent).

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/01/11/nhs-staff-advised-ignore-parents-wishes-children-self-declare/

NHS staff are being advised to ignore parents’ wishes if they conflict with those of a child who identifies as transgender - even if the child is not considered to have the understanding and intelligence to consent.

A Telegraph investigation has found that one NHS trust is even willing to allow adolescents to share sleeping space with members of the opposite sex upon admission to single sex wards.

Responses to more than 100 Freedom of Information requests revealed that some NHS trusts in England are allowing the rights of transgender children to override those of their parents, even if the children are not “Gillick competent” - a medical assessment to determine they can be considered mature enough to make decisions for themselves.

The policy of Rotherham NHS Foundation Trust states: “Where appropriate the wishes of the parents must be considered, but in the case of young people their preference should prevail.” It adds: “In some instances, parents or those with parental responsibility may have a view that is not consistent with the child’s view. If possible, the child’s preference should prevail even if the child is not Gillick competent.”

At Homerton University Hospitals Trust, staff are told to defer to teenagers regarding the pronouns by which they wish to be known even if parents object.

And in its policy referring to Transgender People (including Children and Young People), North Lincolnshire and Goole NHS Foundation Trust states: “The views of the transgender person must take precedence over family members where these are not the same.”

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3477104-NHS-say-ignore-parents-even-if-child-is-not-Gillick-competent

This story (alongside the Telegraph article on self-declaration being all men need to access female-only hospital areas) was originally broken back in October by Anne Harper-Wright (super MNer) who extensively investigated the subject and wrote it up on Medium.
Thank you .

Part 1
medium.com/@anneharperwright/sex-gender-the-nhs-1e8f4e6363a6
Part 2
medium.com/@anneharperwright/sex-gender-the-nhs-bb86b0c3ebb

Discussed on these threads:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3396859-Weve-been-lied-to-about-Single-SEX-wards-since-2010
and
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3422736-My-NHS-Medical-Record-has-deleted-my-sex-And-added-a-ladybrain

Jean Hatchet on CPS guidance:
"The “misgendering” thing ... there is no specific reference in Crown Prosecution Service guidance on transphobic hate crime. However - what is there is quite terrifyingly Orwellian. Of course first a crime of “substantive nature” must be committed.
The CPS then suggest an uplift in sentencing should be sought with reference to s146 of Criminal Justice Act. This must suggest there was a level of “hostility” demonstrated due to the witness’s transgender or perceived transgender identity.
“Hostility is not defined in the Act. Consideration should be given to ordinary dictionary definitions, which include ill-will, ill-feeling, spite, prejudice, unfriendliness, antagonism, resentment, and dislike.” .... dislike is a bloody loose term. I dislike celery. Also -
How can you not define something which directly affects the application of law? This allows for a massive twisting of what the witness perceives as “dislike”. Not believing a man is a woman ... that for me isn’t “hostility” it’s my right to philosophical belief.
When looking for “evidence” of hostility in order to achieve the uplift in sentencing ... it becomes even more insane. It includes “words whether contemporaneous or not”... so if you ever said anything that a trans person may consider as “dislike” or “unfriendly” you’re stuffed.
These words don’t have to be used at the time of the offence. They can be randomly harvested. Where from you might ask? “Social Media” is the answer my friends. Or “writings” .... or “insignia” ... so I’m assuming that wearing that t-shirt counts. Or putting up that sticker
will mean that there is an immediate uplift in the sentence of a woman committing a crime because she doesn’t believe a man is a woman and says so. Or wore it on a T-shirt. Or put a penis sticker on a statue at ANY POINT IN HER LIFE.
There is also this little worry ...if you have ever been in “presence with others promoting such hostility or association with them” .... been to a We Need To Talk speech? Seen one of us say we don’t believe a man is a woman. That’s you getting a heftier sentence then.
Liked a tweet on Twitter by me or one of the many other outspoken women? .... that’s you getting a tougher sentence then.

So what if you never commit a crime so there can be no uplift? Why are we worried?

Because the trans community are frequently crying harassment when ...
In fact women are simply saying they will not submit to an ideology which harms women. What about the women who refuse to wax male genitalia? What about them? What about the lesbian who pushes off a man saying he’s a lesbian?
Think of crimes where the perceived element of hate crime might give an uplift in sentence. What I want to know is ...

Who the hell got to the @cpsuk and embedded this stuff so deeply and effectively? Which pressure group “consulted”?
Because most of this legislation was designed to protect gay people from serious attacks based on sexual identity which is right and proper. But when applied to “perceived gender identity” it is much less concrete and even nonsensical.
At the point where “transgender” is defined you have of course the key. The @cpsuk have zero idea.

Trans or transgender are terms for people whose gender identity does not correspond with their birth gender.

No one has a “birth gender”. They have a sex class observed.
And subsequently “The terms 'transgender' and 'transgender identity' are used in the hate crime legislation and include references to being transsexual, or undergoing, proposing to undergo, or having undergone a process or part of a process of gender reassignment.”
So in law if you “dislike” a man who is “maybe thinking about becoming a woman at some point” coming into your toilet and you say so. You once went to a @WomansPlaceUK meeting or wore a #standingforwomen t-shirt .... you’d better not commit a crime. Or you’re doing time sister.
Back to misgendering”.... easily seen as “unfriendly” I would imagine.

Women .... the law does not have your back. Because being “unfriendly” to women isn’t a crime at all.

So women .... be “friendly” to those men now.

“BE KIND!” Is the new misogyny.
Here’s the law .... see for yourself. And “be friendly” now
www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/homophobic-biphobic-and-transphobic-hate-crime-prosecution-guidance

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1080374861132980224.html

users.ox.ac.uk/~sfos0060/LGBT_figures.shtml

Michal Biggs of Oxford Uni has analysed the times that the words lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender appear in the annual reports of Stonewall, HRC and GLAAD as well as the funding for different elements of the LGBT community and the shift over the years towards funding/focus on the trans community

Could someone provide some details on the meaning and practical implementation of the term 'gender recognition' as a protected characteristic please? I do understand the basics in that it's about protecting rights when transitioning so that transitioners won't be sacked or lose housing accommodation etc

However, gender recognition is something that I do not understand fully, but that's probably more down to activists and allies on Twitter who gaslight in their interpretation of the term and how wide it's impact is. If someone could explain it's limitations, that would be really helpful thank you.

Defined here, Hedgehog

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/7

It protects people as soon as they decide to transition. And the protected characteristic is 'gender reassignment', not 'gender recognition'.

Thank you OldCrone, that's what I was intending to write but as I've just been in a spat with someone about it, they have managed to fry my menopausal brain with their gaslighting. It kind of proves exactly what my post was explaining!
Thanks again.

Bump

Radio 4 More or less important debunking of claims made by many TRAs and misinformation about people.

Bittermints Summary,
"The endocrinologist said he didn't like the intersex term and would prefer to use disorders of sexual development. As a non-medic with no personal experience of this I was pleased to hear him say this, as I've never understood why all disorders of sexual development are bundled together when the symptoms and treatment needed are very different. He talked about Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia. Women suffering from this have been described as intersex and he said he didn't think that was merited. From what I can make out there is no doubt whatsoever that women with CAH are female. If they are removed from the total, the estimate of prevalence goes right down and he said he thought it might be 1 in 1000, so 0.1%. Rather different from 1.7%. He didn't explicitly say there are two sexes, male and female, but he certainly didn't suggest that there were more."

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3482851-More-or-Less-Radio-4-now-prevalence-of-intersex

I'm a newbie here, so forgive me if I sound naive.
I work with children, some of them might be struggling with gender identity and going through all this - I would be a professional helping them and those around them.
I looked at stonewall's website today and noted the phrase in the FAQs ''trans women are women''. I don't believe that is true. I'm struggling to see how I can reconcile my legal responsibility and my political beliefs as a feminist.

Transgendertrend do a well balanced pack for schools.
www.transgendertrend.com/transgender-schools-guidance/

I definitely would agree that Transgender Trend is a valuable site. They've looked into the issues around gender dysphoria in children, and I believe their schools pack has been checked against available scientific evidence plus had legal review?

Stephanie Davies-Arai of Transgender Trend speaks here:

and

GIDS (the UK medical people dealing with trans issues in children) have written about their view of medical studies. The link is here:
gids.nhs.uk/evidence-base

When it comes to "social transition" GIDS writes:
However, quantitative and qualitative follow-up studies by Steensma et al (2011; 2013) present evidence to strongly suggest that early social transition does not necessarily equate to an adult transgender identity. The qualitative study reports on two girls who had transitioned when they were in elementary school and struggled with the desire to return to their original gender role. Fear of teasing and feeling ashamed resulted in a prolonged period of stress. One girl even struggled to go back to her previous gender role for two years.

As such, in our approach, we would encourage exploration of gender roles in this younger cohort, with a view to keeping options open and not having any pre-conceived ideas as the longer term outcome.

GIDS also discuss links with autism and internalizing problems.

When it comes to interventions, they write:
Safety concerns remain regarding the impact of physical interventions. Although puberty suppression, cross-sex hormones and gender reassignment are generally considered safe treatments in the short term, the long-term effects regarding bone health and cardiovascular risks are still unknown (Cohen-Kettenis & Klink, 2015; Klink et al., 2015,).

In addition, self harm is talked about like this:

Young people who are well supported by their family and receiving ongoing psychological support, seem to cope well with their gender incongruence (de Vries et al, 2015). Similarly, suicide is extremely rare.

Their discussion on continuation and non-continuation of trans-identifying children:
gids.nhs.uk/continuing-and-not-continuing-studies :
Across all studies approximately 16% continue with their gender identification (Steensma et al, 2013). The way gender identity develops and how gender identification is expressed seems to be influenced by biological, environmental and psychological factors (De Cuypere et al., 2013; de Vries et. al., 2014; Steensma & Cohen-Kettenis 2015).

(So this means that about 84% of young children stop identifying as trans according to GIDS?)
....

Gender questioning children who do not continue with a cross-gender identification may be more likely to later identify as gay or lesbian than non-gender-questioning children (Drescher, 2013; Wallien & Cohen Kettenis, 2008).

Another good site is 4thwavenow.com/ which has many resources including input from some experts.

@heresyandwitchcraft thank you, lots to explore there. I'm familiar with some of that research and will pass on to colleagues.

Amazing actions by women throughout the UK:
Resisters gallery here: resistersunited.org/gallery/

Woman Adult Human Female is #StandingForWomen
#WomenStandUp
#ReSistersUnited

see threads:
OP Doobigetta wrote:
'ReSisters groups in Manchester, Sheffield, Birmingham, Cambridge, Cardiff and across the country were out standing for women last night and did an amazing job. Please share your photos here!'

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3492065-ReSisters-stand-up-for-adult-human-females

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3492261-Statues-throughout-the-UK-wearing-Woman-Adult-Human-Female-StandingForWomen-WomenStandUp-ReSistersUnited

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3470743-The-ReSisters-movement-is-growing

maniacmagpie

"I have had an epiphany, courtesy of Women's March London.

I believe the proper thing to do now is to show as many people as I can their words, so that we know better than to call menstruators by such an excluding, nasty, divisive term as 'women'.

To show that I know my place I will be wearing the red robe and white bonnet of the handmaid.

To show doubly that I have learned my lesson about speaking out, as does not befit my station, I will have my mouth taped shut."

report:
"A lot of people took pictures. Crowds gathered to read it. Here are a few snippets of things I overheard.

"Ooh a handmaid! Wait, what? ... ... ... She has a point actually." (a group of men)
"Why not just say women?" [indistinct explanation about inclusivity from someone else] (woman with a pram, who after a few more moments thought while her friends continued, took a picture)
"Are you protesting because you are angry our language is being stolen? A lot of us are angry too."

So many of us are out here and so many of us know what's up. We are scattered across the country and so many of us believe ourselves isolated and alone.

Thank you all for your support and your concern for my wellbeing (heartfelt, I know it can sound accidentally sarcastic online!). My wish is that what I am doing gives you hope.

As to what you can do for me: I am gathering resources, and my most recent thought is that we could do with a map for speedy reference. I am inspired by a radfem map I saw on tumblr.

maphub.net/maniacmagpie/gendercriticaluk

As you can see it is a little sparse, with just me and the Cambridge Radical Feminists here in Cambridge...I am aware of the location and meetup threads and will cross-post to them, but I would appreciate if people could help spreading this for me.

Contact via DM on mumsnet, Twitter, or post it here."

important thread by maniacmagpie:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3374728-Call-for-gender-critical-people-in-Cambridge-UK

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3491136-amazing-woman-carries-out-one-woman-protest-against-women-s-march-menstruators

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3483242-Womens-March-London-says-trans-voices-should-be-elevated-over-womens-voices

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3486548-Not-all-menstruators-are-women-This-madness-has-to-stop-Julie-Bindel

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3485599-Menstruators

Really important panel discussion in Washington today. Especially with regards the harm being done to children.

link to the event:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3Zh-j243Mg

powerful & important speeches by panel.
Hopefully people will watch and react to the content.

Julia Beck
Writer, Producer at Women's Liberation Radio News, and Former Member of the Law and Policy Committee of Baltimore City's LGBTQ Commission

Jennifer Chavez
Lawyer and Board Member of the Women's Liberation Front

Kara Dansky
Board Member of the Women's Liberation Front

Hacsi Horvath
Adjunct Lecturer in the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco and Formerly Identified as Transgender

Hosted by
Ryan T. Anderson Ph.D.
Senior Research Fellow in American Principles and Public Policy

Posie Parker who attended provides important context:

www.facebook.com/theposieparker/videos/2369584096494890/?notif_id=1548694852085872¬if_t=live_video

Both videos are so important and need watching.

Women (including UK women) have been taking action in Washington DC, trying to get a conversation around sex-based rights going in the USA:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3490776-Women-Stand-Up-in-Washington-D-C

They held a pro-women event in a library in Washington DC.
Here are the speeches they made:
Brie Jontry
www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TTgnfLSz1k
Meghan Murphy

Lierre Keith Kara Dansky Full video including questions here: www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=_twaEEStWUw

In case anyone ever wants to read "answers" from transactivists when they are asked about women's concerns, this thread is worth perusing:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3493207-Hi-Im-Liz-the-Glitch-Ask-me-anything

The OP is someone called Liz the Glitch, a transactivist who attended the event on women's rights in the USA depicted in the linked videos.
Liz then posted on Twitter a picture of themselves in underwear and holding a baseball bat decked out in trans colours.
When Liz drew attention, they came onto FWR.

To give you an idea:

The question from MN:
If this is a woman, what is the name for someone born of the sex class that gestate the young? Do they have a right to organise themselves as a distinct group away from the sex class who impregnate them, for issues that affect only them?

The answer from Liz:
Well, women with uteruses and trans men/non-binary people who have them, or had them, can absolutely band together to argue for better protections around reproductive rights, period poverty, etc. I'm not going to name that group because I'm not in it. 'Woman' isn't an accurate descriptor for that, though, and you'd also find a lot of people who never had uteruses who'd join in that fight, too.

(TLDR: there are no coherent arguments, and according to Liz, females just need to come up with a new name for themselves and their biological sex now?)

The Royal College of General Practitioners has scrapped an online training course developed by transactivists to "train" doctors.

Raises important issues including labelling children as transgender, who is writing the "guidance" given to medics, and sex versus gender in the NHS.

Training guide ‘pushed GPs to endorse gender swaps’ by Nicholas Hellen

www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/training-guide-pushed-gps-to-endorse-gender-swaps-0v28x07v8

Extract:

The professional body for family doctors has dropped a course provided by a transgender activist charity because GPs felt it pushed them to guide patients towards gender reassignment.

The course on gender variance, which the Royal College of General Practitioners had hosted on its website since 2015, has been withdrawn.

The college’s decision represents a significant response by the medical establishment at a time of growing disquiet about the surging number of children who are transitioning.

Dr Jonathan Leach, honorary secretary, said the online module, developed and paid for by the Gender Identity Research and Education Society (Gires) “risked creating unrealistic expectations for patients regarding the role of the GP in initiating treatment”.

Thread here:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3497770-RC-for-GPs-scraps-GIRES-developed-course

Bump

My sis let me know they were using a careers advice website for students/graduates that let's you answer questions and then tells you which career you are suited to and advises you the steps to achieve it. You had to sign up to view results and when signing up, instead of it asking gender, or sex, it asked "To which gender identity do you most identify?" , then options man, woman, custom (write own). This is asked to everyone remember, not just trans kids, so this is asking everyone to think about themselves in this way and decide what they are. My sis was confused and wondered how she would know what she identified with, what was this based on? and then she was annoyed, as she realised it makes it sound like there is a list of attributes/likes/dislikes/personality traits etc etc that we are supposed to know and follow that are different for men and women and everyone has to choose which one we most identify with to know if we are a man, woman or other, and therefore we can find out if we've been born wrong if we girls/women like things, or whatever, that society is conditioned to say is for boys/men, and vice versa. I think my sister peak transed then. she said it's seems sexist and this is like socially conditioning people to stay in their stereotypical boxes and if they deviate they are born wrong have to transition. She also said trans kid was offended by how this question was worded too as it trivialized who they were. Prospects, I think. This sort of stuff is going to confuse kids. It's not fair on them. No wonder there are so many suicidal.