Operation Peak Trans my MP!

[goodyzoe]

I'm going to see my MP about women's rights and trans issues.

He's agreed to a meeting and asked for me to email some stuff. I want to put together a pack of articles to give him an overview.

What should go in it?

I think this is too long to use but might give you some ideas. I think the best strategy is to frame it as preserving women's rights.

1. Does he beleive women exist as a distinct, biological group with specific healthcare and other needs?
   Should women have the right to ask for female staff to perform intimate body searches and medical procedures?
   Should women have the right to women only hospital wards, psychiatric units, and prisons?
   Should female staff be forced to search male bodied people? Most men who 'transition' retain their male genitals.

2. Why cant there be 3 groups, women, men and all inclusive? that way we can choose based ion our needs.

3. The Equality Act.
   Until trans rights were re written so that men can access spaces and services reserved for women, there were no competing rights. No one could claim discrimination because they were barred from an adjustment given to another group. If they needed a similar adjustment they could obtain one.

4. Rape crisis and DV shelters are the most obvious examples of trauma therapy groups that should be single sex, but they aren't the only ones. there is now nothing to stop women with dysphoria joining groups for men with prostate or penile cancer cancer

5. Prisons. The female estate is not built to take male sex offenders;

More than half of female prisoners are victims of domestic violence, and a high percentage have a traumatic brain injury as a result.
Nearly half ghave attempted suicide.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/female-prisoners-women-prison-domestic-violence-victims-more-than-half-prison-reform-trust-report-a8089841.html

Marie Dean is an example of a man who will use self ID to get one over on the system, and women will pay as a result of men like him.

www.newstatesman.com/politics/feminism/2018/01/marie-dean-story-shows-there-s-no-simple-answer-how-we-treat-transgender?amp&__twitter_impression=true

I forgot sports

There are different types of trans people. Some don't have gender dysphoria. Only a small group have the surgery. The risks to women follow from this.

Transing children and what it involves. The lack of informed consent.

The cotton ceiling. This shows that some people have very unpleasant motivations.

If you refer to sport, mention Fallon Fox kicking the absolute shit out of Tamikka Brents and causing considerable damage in the process.

I think this is a good overview of the basics:

sages.org.uk/publications/sages-factsheet.html

I just wanted post something @Datun said in another thread, because she summarises the issue so succinctly and clearly. If Datun is OK with it, I would type that out and send it to him (below):

It's not about transitioning or the lives of trans people. It's about women's rights.

Trans people should have the right to work, housing, access to medical services and wear what they like without fear of discrimination.

Non conformity to gender stereotypes should be acceptable on all levels.

Trans people are protected under the equality law, and the gender recognition act.

Men who self identify as women (without a gender recognition certificate) are campaigning to be ceded women's rights. Specifically for women. So all women shortlists and the right to be transferred to a female prison, irrespective of whether or not they are a sex offender.

It's also about dismantling the current protocols of sex segregation in the female spaces such as toilets, locker rooms, changing rooms, sport etc.

It's not about feminists. It's about the legal definition of the word woman. And whether the legal definition should include any man.

The campaign is for self identification, which is merely downloading and completing an administrative form.

Also since he's asked you for material, it would really be worth informing him that children are being sterilised in the name of 'gender identity'. Most people have no idea about what the expanding paediatric transition industry is getting up to, and most would be horrified if they knew.

Mention that adult transgender activists have pushed for this by persecuting doctors who have reservations about sterilising minors, and note the incongruence between what the adult trans activists want for themselves - change of legal sex with NO requirement for any medical transition - and what they are pushing for children: extreme medical inventions that stunt their bones and shrivel their gonads. The website 4th wave now has done excellent journalism on this:

4thwavenow.com/2017/01/26/shriveled-raisins-the-bitter-harvest-of-affirmative-care/

As MPs don't have a lot of time to read, you might want to go through the article with a highlighter, to draw attention to the most relevant parts.

Things that peak-transed me:

1. Most transwomen have penises.

1. Transwomen retain male pattern offending, including sex offending.

1. Self-ID means that anyone (ANYONE) can simply say that they are a women and walk into any woman's services and nothing can be said.

That means that self-ID means that there can and will be male-bodied sex offenders in women's refuges, shelters, prisons, rape crisis centres. MH and general health facilities can have male-bodied staff and I cannot challenge them. It will be a hate crime to say, "you're a man and I asked for a woman to do my smear/toileting/intimate care."

Does your MP have any elderly female relatives he likes? A teenage daughter who will have to have smears?

What a great idea! Maybe we should all put a pack together and them post them to our local MPs?

One other thing: avoid the word 'gender', and use 'sex' instead. Gender is an ambiguous word that has no standing in law - sex is what is relevant here.

I posted the below three paragraphs on another thread as an explanation of the crux of the issue. I used an analogy with the category of 'age', since both age and sex are objective biological states that you can't change. I think it's useful to get people to think about what would happen if we allowed other biologically based categories to become a matter of self declaration:

The very existence of 'sex' as a legal category depends on that category having an objective meaning. Self-ID of legal sex makes sex meaningless under the law, which means all sex-based protections are rendered useless. If any man can declare himself a 'woman' with no medical transition or diagnosis needed, then any man can enter women's change rooms, transfer to a women's prison, play women's sports, etc. Lawmakers need to consider the impact on the whole of society of this change, not just the feelings of individual trans-identified people.

An analogy would be if we allowed everyone to 'self declare' their age: all our laws which depend on age as a coherent category would be rendered useless (age of consent, pension age etc). Would people be happy with that? Does that sound like good law? Why do it then for sex? There is no benefit to women or society by rendering sex a subjective 'identity' which can only be determined by the individual. It's bad law.

It's possible to support trans-identified people's right to live free from discrimination, without supporting gender identity ideology, which is sexist and incoherent, and unworkable in law and policy.