Miranda Yardley's contribution to the Woman's Place meeting on Tuesday

[LifelongVaginaOwner]

I've always tended toward using 'transwomen' and preferred pronouns - if only out of courtesy. Miranda's points though have really made me reconsider. I'd be interested to hear other people's thoughts on this.

mirandayardley.com/en/contribution-discussion-womens-place-uk-meeting-27-february-2018/

surely if Miranda Yardley believed that it was all bollocks, why transition in the first place?

I don't wish to speak for Yardley (and I'm uncomfortable with how personal this thread has gotten), but you're not making allowances for the fact that people can change their perspective and beliefs over time, often in very radical ways.

Ultimately, I think women can only rely on one another in this fight: men, whether they be trans-identified or not, always have the option of changing their minds, stepping away, deciding that women and our issues aren't worth the trouble.

Nevertheless, if men want to speak up I think that's good, we do need male voices questioning this and defending women's right to speak, and Yardley has been a consistent ally of women on this - it's just that I'm aware, as we all are I guess, that genuine solidarity from men with women is rare, and they have the option of backing out of this fight if they wish, while we don't.

I think we need to be much more direct about refusing to accept that the problem of what to do about TIMs has anything to do with us.

Transwomen are women - no, males who identify out of masculinity do so because masculinity is not accommodating their ways of being men.

Women are excluding TIMs - no, men are excluding them, that's why they have come to us in the first place

Women are bigoted because we won't accept TIMs as women - no, men are bigoted because they won't accept effeminate males as men

The only argument we can usefully make here is: this isn't about women. This is about how to define manhood and how to define masculinity. Men need to deal with it.

(TIFs reasons for transitioning obviously are about women but we've barely had a chance to think about that yet)

Everyone saying how it is important to be polite and respectful to those demanding we deny reality ... how about being respectful to the young lesbians suffering corrective rape, the children being sucked into trans beliefs, women in prisons and shelters and sports, women whose husbands have disappeared down the AGP rabbit hole, women who believe we need to be able to name men and women for what we are.

We need to be able to name reality, not to tiptoe round it for the sake of abusers and call it "respect".

You cannot hold both these at the same time apart from on an incredibly superficial level. You either respect the men driving the trans machine or you respect those harmed by it and stop pretending that men can ever be women.

The problem with this is that you are expecting the general public to understand the feminist discourse that underlines gender.

And they don't.

Feminists understand this. And many women. But the vast majority of people don't. And they're not going to devote the slightest bit of time to trying to understand it.

I completely agree with trying to move the Overton window. But, to do that, people have to listen.

And, when talking about the demands and claims that transactivists make, having an actual transwoman refute them is incredibly useful.

surely if Miranda Yardley believed that it was all bollocks, why transition in the first place?

Obviously I can only speak for myself here but, for me personally, I don’t feel I’ve ‘had a change of heart’ or have been conflicted suddenly by recent events.

My ‘transition’ was always more about getting away from my own detested body, as far from it as possible. Surgery brought some relief after years of therapy failed to (though definitely didn’t cure it either)

I don’t ‘do’ the makeup/heels/parody thing.

I never believed it made me an actual woman.

I had a lot of strong female role models growing up and thinking about it maybe I did try to emulate them.

I met my husband a long time after ‘transitioning’. He is very much a gay man and would be extremely bemused if anyone suggested to him that he was straight because I’m a transsexual.

Donkey so say: men who have the delusion that they are women

I think this is an accurate description.

Donkey its interesting that you're feeling uncomfortable and that things have gotton a bit personal. Trans people and their views are frequently discussed on here. I can't see what's uncomfortable about discussing his views that he expressed in a public meeting.

TruScum

Do you think that dismantling gender would stop gender dysphoria?

Sorry, shameless placemark as I want to reflect on this and come back when I've thought it through. There is some incredibly interesting stuff here.

What happened with Helen Heaton, btw? I thought they were an ally.

Datun - yeah I agree that we need to be circumspect in how we fight this. But some tactics come with a cost and we need to analyse that. Circumspection needs to apply to the bigger picture.

Yes 'trans' people exist in that there exists a group of men who are deluded that they are women, and a group of women who are deluded that they are men.

But how we refer to these people matters. It matters to the discourse 'out there' and it matters to how we react and how we see the issues.

I am not trying to police anybody, and it is a shame that Donkey feels she is just repeating the same things - I see as a discussion where we are unpacking the issues at stake.

However, when in a meeting to discuss these issues, when a man says: I am a transwoman and gets met with rapturous applause; but when a woman says: there is no such thing as a transwoman and any man claiming to be any sort of woman is acting out of male entitlement is met with negativity. When THAT happens, we have a problem.

I was really pleased to see Michael Conroy announce the meetings for GC men LangCleg

Me too. I think DH is planning to go to the Birmingham one.

Sophocles - nope Helen went 'transwomen are women'. Removed all RFs and Gender Critical Types from FB friends list.

No idea where he is now.

In all honestly Datun I’m unsure if it would in my case.

I had/have an intense hatred of my body. It wasn’t so much a hatred of any stereotypes I wasn’t fulfilling, or that I wanted to fulfil, just my actual physical body.

However I’ve got say that I believe it would definitely 100% help those that are ‘transitioning’ now that don’t actually seem to hate their body, but just don’t feel they fit their own expected stereotypes.

I think gettinh message out there that ‘erm, you don’t have to be a boy to have short hair and like girls’ etc. is very important right now.

And I’m a bit baffled as to where that ‘message’ went as for a brief time (80’s/90’s) I thought that was the way things were happily heading.

However, when in a meeting to discuss these issues, when a man says: I am a transwoman and gets met with rapturous applause; but when a woman says: there is no such thing as a transwoman and any man claiming to be any sort of woman is acting out of male entitlement is met with negativity. When THAT happens, we have a problem.

I completely agree.

But from what I have seen happening on mumsnet there is an evolution to the thought processing.

It's goes in stages.

You're all bigots.

Okay, I get self ID will benefit predators.

Okay I understand AGP.

Well, ok, they're not really women then.

Yes, but what about my best friend who's trans?

Yes, I understand, but I don't want to be mean.

I realise that I'm not being mean I'm shooting myself in the foot. But there are some really nice ones.

Okay, it's not about being nice. I get it.

< uncomfortable shuffle >

Transwomen are men. Sorry if you don't like to hear it, I'm done being screwed over.

But that is after a lot of chat, exchange of views, evidence, links etc. If you go straight to the last bullet point, you lose people along the way.

But only because they stop listening.

That's all it takes. Ears.

wot Datun sed

Truscum

Sorry, I missed your answer to me. I wasn't ignoring you!

Where do you think the gender dysphoria comes from?

Is there anything you can recall that might have triggered it?

That’s alright I didn’t think you were

I’m unsure where it comes from exactly, but if I had to guess based on my support group and personal experiences, I believe it can be caused by going through some form of trauma during childhood. There seems to be a common theme of a variety of abuse suffered as young children perpetrated either by family members or close friends of the family. But that may just be my group.

I know that’s where my intense hatred for myself came from, at some point I concluded that my hatred for my father somehow transferred to my own body. It can’t be a hatred for male bodies generally as I love my husband,it’s definitely a very personal thing.

I am quite open about these things now but never spoke of them for a very long time.

It does upset me greatly when the ‘nu trans’ movement try to say gender dysmorphia isn’t really a mental illness. It absolutely is and I believe the only reason they don’t care that support will be withdrawn if it is no longer seen as such is that they are fully aware that they do not have it at all.

Yes 'trans' people exist in that there exists a group of men who are deluded that they are women, and a group of women who are deluded that they are men.

There is also a group of men who have gone through some process that has brought relief to them in ways that most of us will never understand, but they in no way believe that they are actually women.

I do think it was problematic having MY speak at the last meeting. Maybe during QA invite him to answer a question, but not a main speaker. Otherwise it man-centres again - despite everyone's best intentions.

Having women only speakers should not cause angst. Friendly men can be invited in during Q n A or can ask their own questions then. The whataboutery is very real - even with best friends.

I sent quite believe some of what I've read in this thread. Bordering on exclusionary and even transphobic.

As far as I know, Miranda, Kristina, Debbie and others were quietly living their lives as trans women. They didn't have to get involved. They didn't have to subject themselves to the abuse they are getting. But they agree with us, they are our allies and dogmatic trans activism is harmful to them too.

Sure I agree we shouldn't put anyone on a pedestal, but I'm not sure that's happening anyway.

What next, are we going to say the men who are waking up and speaking out can't get involved either?

The "feminists are angry man haters who complain about trivial things" trope is still very much alive. I'm not sure we can win this one alone.

I am wary that online we can't really see who is who so there may be some well hidden stirring here from unfriendly forces. Transphobia as a word is being used by Labour and others to include silencing any reasonable concerns about anything someone who says they are trans does or says. Let's be very clear on what we mean if we use it.

1. Yes, this is exclusionary and it is entirely appropriate that it is. Go back to the Black/White analogy. If you believe that these men should be invited to have a place in this fight, do you also believe that a White person who dons Blackface, but says I know I am White, should have a place in BAME campaigns and antiracism? If you do, I simply don't believe you. If you do not, there is no good reason to make the distinction here.

1. That there are some men who have gained benefit and relief in ways I cannot imagine from surgically and medically altering their bodies to create a facsimile of a woman's body is irrelevant. Substitute a different descriptor for delusional if you will, but they are still men and reifying 'trans' is harmful.

1. Consciously excluding these men from OUR campaign will not silence them. They will write whatever it is that they will write and do whatever it is that they will do with or without our invitation. They are men - of course they will and of course they will not need our invitation and permission to do so.

1. This is not 'ideological purity'. It matters. The fact that this thread has now ended up with accusations of transphobia, attempting to understand the 'nice transwoman' here on this thread, exhorting us to be understanding of these poor tortured men in general, and hints that I may be a troll shows that we, including here, need more peak trans not less, and more consciousness raising, not less.

1. I am not a bloody troll. FFS.

1. By using 'trans' anything you have adopted TRA chosen language. You have agreed to use that concept. You are reifying it. Even in your opposition you have given them a victory. Think about that. What it means for communication 'out there' and what it means for our own thought processes.

I don't think anyone is trolling and I understand the point, but Miranda/Debbie/Kristina were not invited speakers, they were attendees and put their hands up like anyone else. What are we saying? Only put your hand up if you have a vagina?
I don't think anyone reified them. I can admire them as I admired anyone willing to take a stand on this issue and put up with shit loads of criticism. I'm not a labour supporter, but I still donated to the crowdfunding. I'm not a lesbian, but I still care deeply about their experiences on this issue.
If this is a war on women, then the battle has to be in the centre ground; getting men/women/ everyone on board not dissolving into infighting and ideological battle.

Consciously excluding these men from OUR campaign will not silence them.

But this refers to the WPUK campaign, which is not an exclusively feminist campaign and explicitly states debate inclusive of all parties as one of its aims. It's not our campaign and it's not your campaign.

And Miranda was not an invited speaker at this event but spoke from the floor as did many others.

I really like Miranda. I am very interested in the journey Miranda is on and the honesty Miranda brings about it.

I entirely take the point that Miranda was cheered for saying the same thing that Julia was tutted at for saying and that this is not good. I entirely take the point that women's spaces must at the very least prioritise female voices and often exclude male voices.

But WPUK is explicitly setting out to build a wide coalition.

I don't think the blackface analogy altogether holds.

With respect to gender presentation: it's impossible to ever imagine a situation in which someone 'expressing' a different skin colour would be a reasonable thing to do, but surely no one here has problem with men wearing skirts and lippy

With respect to body modifications and surgery: if someone has taken these steps in response to trauma or mh issues and is making no claims to have changed their actual sex, I really don't feel that is any of my business and certainly not a choice I have any grounds to judge them on.