If you're pro Self ID for trans people please could you explain it to me?

[ReluctantCamper]

I have never debated with anyone who's pro self ID because they invariably post 'transwomen are women' on threads and never return.

When I have arrived at a thought out position I'm keen to debate it with others who think differently to test my reasoning - that's how I feel now.

I know we have a number of pro self ID lurkers - anyone feel like explaining to me why it's a good idea?

I promise to carefully read what you say and take it seriously, I don't promise to agree.

Come on, it's my birthday, someone treat me!

Myunicornfliessideways I've met transwomen that you definitely wouldn't know. When I worked for Vice Squad it was something that caused great hilarity with new officers who didn't realise they were dealing with men.

What about butch women, I used to work with a woman who was regularly identified as male. Very embarrassing for all concerned.

That's helpful chambini, thanks

Then you're clearly talking about people with gender dysphoria who have had extensive treatment. And what do you mean what about butch women? There's been plenty of them in the lesbian community for years, I'm related to two of them, often mistaken for men.

What does that have to do with self ID and piss taking men who intend to access women using it?

Welcome chambeni

I do understand the frustration that people with gender dysphoria feel about gatekeeping and the length of time it takes but puberty blockers, hormones and surgery are irreversible procedures and not to be taken lightly. It would be highly unethical for people to be rushed into these decisions with disastrous consequences.

I would also like to point out that other groups of people in society are subject to far worse timescales of gatekeeping. For example it's taken me 8 years to get extra education funding for my disabled child.

However the timescales of getting a GRC are a bit of a moot point in the face of self ID becoming law. Because then literally anyone will be able to identify as any sex with nothing more than a signature or maybe just their say so.

You say you are already gender critical so I'm sure you can see the massive implications of that.

Yes, ova. After a Lot of thinking I've come to the same view as most of the posters on this board. I believe trans people should be accepted but I don't agree with self ID and TRA ideology. Its not only harmful to woman, but the overall trans movement

so we have to fight to preserve clarity of meaning

Not only this, we have to fight for more clarity than we have currently. Both the GRA and the EA make a total fudge of sex and gender, using them interchangeably as if they meant the same thing. Maybe they did in 2004 and possibly too in 2010? In both Acts 'gender' seems to be just being used as a politer word for 'sex'.

Did anybody have a 'gender identity' in 2004?

There is a proposal to change 'gender reassignment' to 'gender identity' in the EA. Gender identity is how someone thinks about themselves in their own mind. It's purely subjective.

The Scottish consultation includes a proposal to give people a GRC for being 'non-binary'. How would this work exactly? What would it be for? Will we still have 'non-binary' people in 5 years time or will the term have become outdated and discriminatory?

When language and meanings are in this much flux it's a very bad time to pin them down in law. Imagine if adding 'cowabunga' to the dictionary had had major life impacts for half the population.

And thanks for the welcome :)

No problem, do stick around. We have a few GC men posting on Fem Chat.

@flamingo sorry for what you went through and I completely agree you should have a female counsellor (not a trans gender woman).

My point is I don't believe that allowing people to self identify will change this. There should be a way to allow people who feel they are the wrong gender to correct that feeling while still keeping victims safe.

I think the number of people who pretend to be TIM for this reason will be small and there will be ways to keep everyone comfortable.

Who would employ a man claiming to be a self identified woman as a rape counsellor?

And if you don't gel with a counsellor for any reason I would assume you can request a swap.

Yes let's put the onus for requesting a different counsellor on the woman who has just been raped. She doesn't know which way is up but let's put it on her to make a fuss (because it would be a fuss) and risk being marked down as a difficult bigot when she should have just been given a female counsellor in the first place because basic human decency.

Sex is a protected characteristic and there are exceptions specifically to deal with these situations in the equality act.

@pencils of course that is unfair on the victim but this would only happen if it occurs to a pervert to fake being a TIM with qualifications/experience to get an interview as a counsellor. THEN they were undeniably the best candidate so the employer had to take them.

What do you think self-ID means LML83?

When you say things like 'while still keeping victims safe' and 'there will be ways to keep everyone comfortable' what are you basing this on? Is this just something you're hoping will happen or have you read any concrete proposals?

8th rule of misogyny: Men are whatever men say they are and women are whatever men say they are.
Only males can be transwomen, which is how we know they are men.

I think the number of people who pretend to be TIM for this reason will be small and there will be ways to keep everyone comfortable.
Abusive predatory males are already flocking to self ID to get unrestricted access to women.
Half the trans identified males in prison are there for sex offenses. Many now identify as women and are demanding transfer into the women's institutions.

Well you've been given the example of Vancouver Rape Relief who were tied up in an incredibly lengthy and costly legal battle because a TIM decided his need to be validated as a woman came above the rights of all the women who needed single sex rape crisis services.

Transactivists are spoiling for a fight over this and in the UK these sorts of services for women are struggling to keep the lights on as it is.

There'll just be no women's services. Fuck this shit.

a pervert to fake being a TIM with qualifications/experience to get an interview as a counsellor. THEN they were undeniably the best candidate so the employer had to take them.

No, different situation. The pervert faking being a TIM is an issue in women's spaces like toilets, changing rooms, psychiatric wards, hospital wards.

In those very few specific situations such as women's refuges, smear tests and rape counselling it doesn't matter if the TIM is a pervert or a sainted Bishop with 9 PhDs in counselling. The issue is that however lovely, a TIM is biologically male, and that some women do not feel comfortable with receiving that care from someone not same sex.

It doesn't simply 'occur' to perverts. They share information and ideas with each other. Have you not had a look at the twitter feeds and reddit threads?

Last year it wouldn't have occurred to me that Lilly madigan would get the job she's in.

Last year, it didn't occur to me a woman would lose her job or be suspended from a political party for saying women do not have penises.

Last year it didn't occur to me that an intact Male sex offender would be housed in a women's prison.

More fool me.

I will have a read at those links. Thanks.

Maybe it is naive, I just think there should be a way to protect people like you without stopping genuine people self identifying. Struggle to see ideal solution though.

Anyway, it's all been said. Multiple times. And still people can't see.

Interesting thread, but the pro self ID people are repeating the words "believe" and "hope" quite a lot.

The gatekeeping involved is for a VERY small number of spaces and situations, yet those are unacceptable to TRAs.

There is not a way to allow self ID as a blanket policy with no exemptions and still protect women and girls. If you support self ID then it's accepting there is going to be collateral damage that women have to endure so men can be validated by being in spaces that they really don't need to be in. A TIM's life is not going to be blighted by the fact that some women don't want them to administer their smear test.

I asked earlier on the thread:

How many women and girls is it acceptable to throw under the bus to the increase in sexual harassment, voyeuristic crime and assault (bearing in mind in the Target stores trialling self ID these crimes against women and girls between double and tripled as a result) ?

How many women is an acceptable number to see no longer able to use gyms or changing rooms in a western world country in 2018 because they are biologically female?

How many women is an acceptable number to see no longer able to access smear tests? And to suffer higher rates of cervical cancer deaths?

How many women is an acceptable number to see discharge themselves from hospitals and psychiatric care because they are afraid to be there - and certainly afraid to sleep?

What percentage of women is it ok to put under the bus to validate the feelings of a tiny percentage of the 0.3% of the population who are TRAs? There is no way to disguise that this is nakedly valuing male born people more highly than female born people, and believing that it is right and acceptable for female born people to suffer harm if it benefits male born people.

Much the same belief that drives FGM and rape really.

My unanswered question remains:
Can you mandate belief?
Can you codify into law the idea that some people can mind over matter themselves out of material reality and into the opposite sex, and must be treated accordingly?
It is like transubstantiation. A belief that no one actually believes.
Will you allow people to drug and mutilate children based on this belief that no one believes?