Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

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:
OrderOnline · 20/02/2018 09:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

OrderOnline · 20/02/2018 09:08

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Elletorro · 20/02/2018 09:37

Hi Order.

I saw the first of your withdrawn posts. Are you saying it’s a bad idea?

That’s fine if that’s what you mean. That’s the reason why I posted, I don’t want to go full Katie Hopkins and do more harm than good.

Ereshkigal · 20/02/2018 15:52

Setting your own agenda is pushing for women only spaces without mentioning trans or trans aims.

While I agree broadly with this very good point, transactivists will consider TIMs should be included in that because "transwomen are women". And so will policy makers unless it's explicitly stated that it is female only.

GuardianLions · 22/02/2018 01:29

Evening Smile regarding the document I've been working on, here is the latest version

I've really appreciated everyone's input and if it isn't too much of a pain would be v grateful for more of the same. - Apologies I've sat on it but this evening has been the first opportunity for me to look at it.

I have real hope if we push for what we want, rather than 'react' to what 'they' do...

Mouthandtrousersall · 22/02/2018 01:36

Thanks!

There was good debate today about the legal position in workplaces, I will read this with that in mind as it seems many employers have already removed sex segregation......

You may want to post this in the tribunal thread as there are several lawyers posting there, and a few HR people, including me

GuardianLions · 22/02/2018 01:43

Thanks I'll take a look at the thread

TheGoalIsToStayOutOfTheHole · 22/02/2018 13:43

Guardian, that document is fantastic.

Ereshkigal · 22/02/2018 14:36

I think so too.

LittleLebowski · 22/02/2018 15:03

That's fantastic - well done Guardian Lions. I'm going to memorise some of the key points to make the argument to friends and family. Most of my current conversations are usually spent explaining that a transwoman is a man who wants to be a woman and not the other way round; any actual reasons get lost!

whitehandledkitchenknife · 22/02/2018 15:12

Thank you Guardian Lions for doing this. It's brilliant.

GuardianLions · 22/02/2018 15:16

Thank you for your encouraging comments! Flowers

terryleather · 22/02/2018 15:26

Clear, fair and to the point - I think it's excellent Guardian Lions

GuardianLions · 22/02/2018 15:58

Thanks Terry.
Writing the document - it has been really satisfying getting to chew over all your brilliant and incisive contributions - also DoctorW really helping to clear a bit of murk - so you all deserve credit!

I feel so much clearer about it all after going through the process. What an Star amazing Star bunch Star you Star all Star are Flowers

Ouchbirthhurted · 22/02/2018 16:35

Most of my current conversations are usually spent explaining that a transwoman is a man who wants to be a woman and not the other way round; any actual reasons get lost!

@littlelebowski

I have found this to work well:

Obviously, no politician in Britain would propose a law that means a man can legally become a woman on his say so, right? Because that would mean any man could, just by saying he is female, go into communal swimming room changing rooms with your daughter, a sex offender could be housed in a female prison, men could go on all women shortlists etc. So no one would pass this law right?

Well, have you heard of the GRA and self-Id? These are proposals being made that the law should be changed so that any man - eg our mate Gareth or whoever you both know - could just declare he was a man on his say so and be legally recognised as a woman.

Then I ask them what they would assume the definition of a trans person is.

Then I show them a picture of Danielle Muscato.

Ouchbirthhurted · 22/02/2018 16:38

I also make sure I mention there are people who just want to quietly live their lives as though they are the opposite sex, and that many of them are speaking out against this and the way the current debate/shutting down/concealment is going isn't going to be conducive to that.

And I mention current law.

Ouchbirthhurted · 22/02/2018 16:40

I also usually start by saying I will focus on men wanting to trans to women, not the other way round, and that it will become clear why as the conversation goes on.

mirialis · 22/02/2018 16:53

Well done Guardian Lions - what is the plan with that document now? Sorry if I missed it.

Datun · 22/02/2018 17:35

GuardianLions

It's an excellent document.

I've posted a thread about the equality act and how we can, and must, invoke the exemptions

Because they are there for the taking.

A multi pronged approach is vital.

People have no idea about this. When you tell them, they think you're nuts. That you can't possibly be right.

Well we are bloody right. And yes, it is an absolute disgrace.

The more people who shout this from the rooftops, the better.

Get in touch with a Woman's Place UK and Fair Play for Women.

I'm sure they would welcome a collaboration.

GuardianLions · 22/02/2018 17:53

Thank you Datun

DoctorW · 22/02/2018 18:05

GuardianLions I'd be very happy to publish your document on the Fair Play For Women website. It's very good.

GuardianLions · 22/02/2018 18:16

Thanks so much you are fab!

LittleLebowski · 22/02/2018 19:06

Good suggestions ouchbirthhurted - I have been reading threads here for a while, with a growing gut feeling that self-ID is totally wrong, but I'm only now trying to put these feelings in to arguments to engage with the people I know. I get flummoxed easily and don't want to diminish the sensible points of the gender- critical view by coming across as a scare-mongering/phobic/feminist purist or whatever is thrown our way, so these types of clear points are really helpful.

mirialis · 22/02/2018 19:58

If Doctor W publishes it, is it feasible to approach The Times or someone else with it?

Last night I accidentally posted on the wrong thread but I don't suppose it was necessarily out of place - was the only female in a small group of blokes who don't really get the thing about having men in women's spaces (genuine transsexuals not being a threat after all and shouldn't portray them or any man as potential rapists etc.) but the sport issue seemed to really speak to them (to be honest not even from a women's sport will suffer perspective but from the gut instinct of "that's unfair"). And as said before, for others the any men being able to self ID and enter a changing room with children really speaks to them. And for others, the absolutely 100% sincere message that transpeople need unisex spaces that everyone can opt into but provision must be maintained for those who need single sex spaces really speaks to them. It is not the idea that transpeople shouldn't have inclusive spaces that everyone else is free to use too but that single sex provisions were put in for very good reasons and those reasons haven't changed.