Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Team Smash The Patriarchy needs Mumsnet input/representation

605 replies

JenniferJames · 14/02/2018 18:13

We are hoping to have someone familiar with Mumsnet liaising with you on what the majority feeling is here and getting a list of your priorities for the outcome of GRA changes. The crowdfunder women are all Labour women, so any representations organised by us will take place within the confines of the Labour party.

However as this affects all women and is such a cross-party issue, we hope that people will lobby within their own parties, or their own factions within their own parties... and we can compare notes!

This is part of a piece on self-id from Bella Caledonia, it represents a good starting point for debate... bear in mind the debate has to end up with solutions and it's up to us to work that out together.

This is early days and we are all building this movement organically... let's see where it takes us.

Will check back and keep you posted Mighty Mumsnet.

Jennifer xx

----
CONSULTATION RESPONSES
So how do we address all of this?
Below I will outline my suggestions for consultation responses and I contend that these are all absolutely necessary if we are to protect women and girls. Not one of these suggestions threatens trans rights. Equal does not mean identical. Trans women are not female. Trans people have their rights to live as they wish, love who they wish, and have the same legal protections as everyone else. And they should have the spaces and services they need; everyone supports that.
None of this requires women and girls to lose our rights.
Our rights are only threatened because trans activists don’t want any distinction made between trans women and women. But we are not the same and pretending otherwise erases the female sex class, preventing us from addressing our sex based oppression, and what could possibly be a more heinous act of misogyny than that? Surely no-one in the Scottish government believes that women don’t suffer as a result of our female bodies.
So firstly I suggest we call on the government to establish the following principles as an underpinning to any legislation affecting women and girls:
• Females suffer exploitation, discrimination, injustice, oppression and male violence due to their reproductive sex. And as such, female bodies have a political significance that they need to be able to talk about, organise around and address as a distinct reproductive class of people.
• Females deserve equality, to participate in society, to be safe, and to have their welfare valued. The government should monitor and address females as a sex class on all of these measures, however ‘woman’ is defined in legislation.
• Trans equality should be based on trans as a characteristic, and not on erasing the female sex as a characteristic.
• Females are not to blame for the climate of male violence they live in or for the effects. Victim blaming is never acceptable, and legislation should reflect this.
• Females should be able to set their own boundaries around their own bodies; understanding that anything less is in direct contravention of the principle of consent.
• Females should not be forced to adopt trans ideology/biological essentialism/genderism. There can be no assumption that women as a group identify as the feminine gender that is coercively imposed on them to subjugate them; and women who do not subscribe to genderism and instead contend that for them a woman is simply an adult female, must be able to assert this (that’d be most of us).
• The government should not work with any LGBT/Trans organisation that deems exclusive same sex attraction as inherently objectionable.
In order to work with the above principles, the government should identify and pursue the necessary Scotland specific exemptions/amendments to the Equality Act before making any changes to the GRA.
In addition, before moving to a system of self ID the government should do the following:
• Carry out Equality Impact Assessments (EQIAs) on how the proposed changes to the GRA will potentially affect the equality, participation, safety and welfare of women and girls, understanding that trans inclusion has already had an unmeasured impact.
• Inform and consult with women on sex segregation and male bodied trans inclusion to properly gauge how to protect women and girls on the aforementioned measures. Most women don’t realise what is already happening, and a recent Panelbase poll found that women in Scotland are 3:1 against male bodied trans people having access to female only spaces.
• Draw up the necessary Scotland specific exemptions/amendments in response to these assessments and consultations, in order to ensure women and girls are protected, and secure these with the UK government before moving forward with self ID. FAILURE TO DO THIS IS ABANDONING WOMEN AND GIRLS ENTIRELY.
• Draw up guidelines on how to implement Equality Act exemptions, so businesses and providers can do so without fear of legal action.
• Be aware that the Engender led women’s organisations’ joint statement saying that these changes posed no threat to women’s equality, was released without any of these organisations consulting their members regarding the GRA beforehand, and indeed without conducting and concluding their own research on how these changes will specifically impact on women’s equality. Not only this, they have not consulted with women at all despite being asked to do so and choosing to speak for us, and nor have they carried out any other work in order to gauge how women and girls are already self-excluding/are otherwise affected. Furthermore, when approached by victims in relation to this proposed legislation, they refused to engage with their concerns. I know – I am one of them. Therefore we should call on the government to understand that these organisations cannot possibly represent women in this, and since they came to their position before carrying out the work necessary to come to said position, the government should assess any cited research/data itself, rather than rely on the interpretation of women’s organisations.
Lastly, there are a few additional suggestions for steps the government should take in relation to other parts of their proposals:
• Carry out its own research on dysphoria in young people and on desistance, not least because – as the NHS notes – studies show that most children diagnosed as transgender grow out of it, with all of the studies undertaken on this showing anywhere from a 63% to 88% desistance rate. Within this the government should properly research suicidality; follow up interviews usually halve the percentage for suicide in studies, and controls are used to filter out other factors so results can be instructive as to the causes. The study referenced in the consultation was neither followed up nor controlled. The government also needs to be clear on how transition affects mental health, including for the majority who desist, and who – due to affirmation – didn’t receive the right support when they needed it. Only then can the government assess the potential impact of reducing the age limit for a GRC.
• Unless the government wants to assert that a woman is someone who identifies with being submissive, and a man is someone who identifies with male supremacy, they should not introduce a third legal gender. It is reactionary in the extreme to uphold the idea that women and men identify as/actually are the gender imposed on them, and this should not be assigned to people as part of any legislation, and providing trans services does not necessitate this either.
• Immediately move to introduce misogyny as a hate crime. Women are being targeted for violence and abuse at unprecedented levels, just for being women. We are even becoming targets of hate for talking about the meaning of our bodies, and naming male violence. We are an oppressed and marginalised group and deserve the same protections all other such groups have.
The Scottish government consultation has been written with a very clear bias, and the fact they haven’t carried out a single EQIA regarding how these proposals could potentially impact on the equality of women and girls is simply indefensible. Surely it’s in no-one’s interests that the government moves forward with legislation without understanding how to protect the largest marginalised group in our society. So let’s make sure that happens.

OP posts:
GuardianLions · 15/02/2018 22:04

What are we trying to achieve with the survey?

A mumsnet survey would be around defining a viewpoint for mumsnetters - to prove a groundswell of people all feeling the same way.

A survey of donors on the crowdfunder, should surely be along the lines of:

  1. Why is this issue important to you?
  2. What made you feel so strongly you decided to donate?
  3. What would you like the money to be used for if any is left over:
  • Ensuring the Women's Officer post is female only?
  • Ensuring the Jo Cox fund is female only?
  • Supporting the women who have been ousted from the labour party?
  • Raising awareness of the 'Labour Against Transphobia' group?
  • Challenging the GRA in a cross-party campaign?

etc, etc..

Cascade220 · 15/02/2018 22:04

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

fishdogpancakes · 15/02/2018 22:04

It's not really opinions we need. Its the facts getting out to everyone who so far is sweetly oblivious and thinks "yeah I'm cool with men wearing dresses an' all. Where's the harm?

Hit 'em with the reality - Your Mum, Your Gran, Your Sister, Your Daughters will have NO right to stop ANY man coming into their spaces.

Hell can you imagine walking into a public toilet and finding 5 men sitting there waiting...?

Cascade220 · 15/02/2018 22:06

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

fishdogpancakes · 15/02/2018 22:08

I think it needs to be through adverts and art. Bill boards.

We've been neglected and shut down by the BBC but some of the newspapers are sitting up and noticing us. I think we need journalists to highlight the realities.

GuardianLions · 15/02/2018 22:09

Agreed Spartacus - I think others could get on board with that too - MNHQ, universities, individual politicians, etc.

GuardianLions · 15/02/2018 22:10

Great PR for MN as the stronghold for free speech!

RedToothBrush · 15/02/2018 22:11

So many situations are not propaganda. If you have misfortune to be arrested and sent to prison you could be sharing cell with a bloke. This is happening now. While they are not happening to every female prisoner dosnt make it less real

I do agree but if you load it too heavily it will be percieved as biased.

I think emotive stuff DOES have its place but it should be used wisely and not by every group/ individual pursuing this.

fishdogpancakes · 15/02/2018 22:11

I think Boycotting campaigning would work to some extent. Topshop will not want to lose the teenage trade but I'll be damned if I'll fund my daughters spending money in there unless they guarantee a girl only changing room. Absolutely NO biological man is slithering in there for a crafty peek and wank over my girls.

Akire · 15/02/2018 22:12

MN are not going put their name or brand to anything either that would be bad business sense. We know what would happen by activists.

The best will/can happen is the space for chat. A person off the street isn’t going look up blogs by people who are worried. But they would be happy to read MN thread from “normal” people.

Akire · 15/02/2018 22:14

Thanks redtoothbrush that makes sense I guess you have to have proper qualified people to male it all scientifically fair.

But after reading the Scottish one I’ve no idea how that got through!

fishdogpancakes · 15/02/2018 22:17

Where do Vogue and the Womens magazines stand on all this?

I can't imagine Womans Weekly publishing a free knitted transgender doll with detachable parts just yet? Along with an advert for the local girls rugby team looking to strengthen their Back Row with a few burly players called Ruby at the weekend.

fishdogpancakes · 15/02/2018 22:19

Take a Break crossword clue

5 letters beginning with p and ending with s. Male and female body part.

Said no one sane.

FirstShinyRobe · 15/02/2018 22:29

If everyone started being brave enough to start speaking up in their daily lives, the safety in numbers effect starts to apply. Doesn't need to be Facebook rows and one doesn't even have to show their entire hand in one go, tempting though it seems. Innocent questions are quite powerful Wink. Whilst one might feel their job is at risk, there will be others men who may not and might react like one does in response to a 14 year old who wants to go to Ibiza with their mates on holiday. Which is how TA demands should be dealt with.

Seriously, this elevation of gender over sex is a niche activity, disproportionate though its effect has been. Most people get it when they think about it. It's just that they haven't had cause or alternatively feel isolated. Make them think more or feel less isolated. (which has been the power of all of these discussions on mumsnet, of course )

This is bigger than the suffragette cause because it is about the wholesale erasure of the means of women to define their oppression. It's not about progression, it's about halting regression. Time to stand up and defend.

birdsdestiny · 15/02/2018 22:32

To be fair I am not sure that MNHQ could take a stronger stance than the position they currently hold. It is utterly amazing that they have stood with women in this way.
I am beginning to feel hope. We need to be so careful at this stage. The right allies are so important.

mirialis · 15/02/2018 22:32

Where do Vogue and the Womens magazines stand on all this?

They are putting transwomen on their covers and celebrating them

RedToothBrush · 15/02/2018 22:36

Its not necessarily about making it 'scientifically fair' just make it harder to throw the accusation that its leading or its purpose is simply for the pursuit of propaganda.

You want to show strength of feeling and concern about certain issues. But the language you use is important it how those results are perceived by others.

Anyway, im off to bed now. I shall ponder more in the morning.

And Jennifer, if you come checking this thread after 1am GET THE FUCK TO BED. For your own sanity.

GuardianLions · 15/02/2018 22:37

So I think we have 3 different prongs emerging:

  1. Mumsnet spearheading the right to free speech
  • Involving politicians & public figures to support but not 'take sides'
  1. The Labour party spearheading legal challenges to self-ID
  • shaping labour party policy
  • involving the unions
  1. A cross-party campaign for the right to sex-segregation
  • possible boycotts
  • testimony/anecdotes
  • Using the word 'sex', avoiding the word 'gender',
  • speaking in plain language,

What am I missing?

mirialis · 15/02/2018 22:44

As a non-clued up person you are trying to attract I would suggest considerations might be:

a) actively support the "right wing press" who cover this even if it makes you feel sick
b) keep talking to people in RL
c) keep the language plain and simple and not talk about class analysis and the like
d) keep writing to MPs of all sides and reminding them it will be a game changer in terms of voting for many people. Keep linking to critical discussions. The vote they are trying to attract is the least likely to actually vote.
e) won't somebody think of the children stance (it's sincere)
f) keep stressing that the "third", in terms of sex, space is the kindest option for all who just want to live life in peace and are not looking for confrontation and that self-ID will lead to more upset and humiliation than the third space (disability space being ring-fenced from all of this)

OlennasWimple · 15/02/2018 22:47

Guardian - we can ask, but I doubt MNHQ will want to be involved quite so directly in this. It has the potential to be very toxic for them, and I'd rather not jeopardise the platform that they give us to debate this stuff

The third prong is perhaps a general PR offensive - producing things like that leaflet (from SAGE?) that explains things simply and carefully, along with a couple of calls to action such as contacting MPs, contacting school heads, voting with our feet / wallets with businesses that are acting as if self-ID is already law

GuardianLions · 15/02/2018 22:53

Of course about MNHQ don't want to give MN any shit

I just pictured something like a journalist who is interested in free speech writing an article on it and getting a statement from MN about how much they value free speech and the challenges they face upholding it. MN wouldn't need to mention the trans issue at all.

I thought it could be a kind of starting point.

Perhaps it could go onto Maria Maclachlan and her documenting the ridiculous lengths you have to do to, in order to exercise freedom of assembly and freedom of speech.

fishdogpancakes · 15/02/2018 22:54

Why isn't Maria Maclachlan being interviewed by Nick Robinson or Jenni Murray?

fishdogpancakes · 15/02/2018 22:56

Perhaps Maria would be our poster girl. A nice close up of that big purple bruise on her face combined with the sheer amount of intelligent prose she can turn out.

fishdogpancakes · 15/02/2018 22:58

Has Theresa May been asked to come on MN? Maybe she might say yes unlike Jeremy who seems to be silent on this.

Good publicity stunt for May and a chance for us to get her on side.

GuardianLions · 15/02/2018 22:58

I think we could also get Orthodox Jews and Muslims on board if we make it explicitly about the right to sex segregated spaces.

They would be horrified about the dicks in the changing rooms (as am I of course)