Biological SEX MATTERS. How many mumsnetters say "aye" to this campaign?

[SexMatters]

This document and campaign called 'Sex Matters' is a collaborative effort by amazing and knowledgeable mumsnetters on a couple of threads in FWR.

To move forward with the campaign, the organisations and individuals approached will need to know who is behind it, and the honest truth, is that mumsnetters have spearheaded it.

That does not mean that other campaigners can't get involved or even take greater ownership of it. But it needs a bio in order to introduce it to people and organisations to get started and I need your consent to describe the campaign this way: 'mumsnetter led' (and maybe even some suggestions for writing a bio on this thread).

So, you amazing gender-critical mumsnetters, do you say 'aye'?

Rhu. Only excluding biological males. I know they don't get quite the coverage but there are trans identifying females too.

Thanks for your comments rhu

When you say:

It think it is awful to exclude people like this.

What in the document suggests the 'exclusion' of people?

Aye all the way

Minor problem: lose link xxv, it's the same as xxiv.

Aye

The updated version is much better I think.

I’m now at the ay stage.....just hesitating about the final “e”.

Ha ha jane

Exclusion is the main theme of this paper. You can turn it around and say it's a call for "single sex" facilities, it means though that it is for only people who were born as women. It is discriminatory, it is meant to be this way I realise that but it does not 'not exclude'.
When you take into account that there is no way in hell there are going to be trans prisons, rape crisis shelters, mental hospitals, safe houses (DV), toilets at work, schools, etc you are excluding people from a range a facilities, as a result of this people can be seriously harmed. That is the consequence of what you ask. There are other ways of dealing with this than going the way you are.

There are other ways of dealing with this than going the way you are.

Can you suggest some alternatives which ensures female safety?

no way in hell there are going to be trans prisons, rape crisis shelters, mental hospitals, safe houses (DV),

That's a strong assertion - if the need is there why wouldn't these facilities exist in the future? No one even acknowledged male rape a few years ago but there are now specialist rape support for male rape survivors, and I think one or two for trans victims.

Aye.

I think the section about why people want to access our spaces is unnecessary and would backfire so I can't say aye to it as it stands, much as I'd like to.
Put me down as conflicted.

There are other ways of dealing with this than going the way you are.

Two points.

Firstly, no political party is putting forward any kind of sane or rational scheme for making sure EVERYONE is safe. That’s sort of the point - self ID as it is now is a zero sum game, one side has to lose. Is that going to be the tiny number of transwomen or half the population? If any political party was tackling this issue from a point of view of ‘how can we keep everyone safe?’ Eg by legislating for third spaces, then people wouldn’t be having this debate.

Secondly, yes it is exclusionary. Because women’s spaces exclude men for very valid, evidence based safety reasons. And trans women are biological men. They commit violent sexual offences against women at the same rate as men. So they are, and must be, excluded, because the only thing that separates them from men is feelings, not any objective evidence of greater safety towards women. It’s totally illogical to say ‘ah but THESE men can go in’ when those men pose exactly the same level of danger to women.

womens safety, women’s right to exist in public without violence, without fear of rape or assault, trounces anyone’s feelings on anything. Feelings are not objective reality.

I agree with the basic tenets here. I do think you are underplaying the amount of people that are born intersex to make your point though. I don't think 'rare anomolies' is the right term really.

You can start by not assuming that any trans sharing a changing room with you is a danger.
For places where vulnerable people are who cannot chose not to be there, hospitals, prisons, shelters and the like, it works to assess cases on an individual basis.

Aye

1 in 1500-2000 of the population is pretty rare for intersex conditions.

It's pretty rare yes. But not so rare that the clearcut binary presented isn't a little undermined.

So, time is pressing and you can't win em all, so the doc is pretty much done.

Now, on to actions to take!

I'm not sure about the reference list either.

Never mind newdocket - time to move on.

You can start by not assuming that any trans sharing a changing room with you is a danger.

I don’t think you can make that assumption. biologically intact trans Males have the same rate of violent sexual offending against women as any biological males.

Which is why they shouldn’t be there. It sucks for the genuine ‘old school’ transsexuals who are generally just trying to live quietly and fit in, but women’s safety is paramount.

Perhaps we do need third spaces. It’s worked OK for stuff like disabled loos.

Aye

clearcut binary presented isn't a little undermined.

Intersex (irrelevant to the debate btw) does NOT undermine the binary as it's an abnormality.

Humans are a sighted species - the presence of those with visual impairments does not change that.

A statement from Scottish Women's Aid, Rape Crisis Scotland, Zero Tolerance, Equate Scotland, Close the Gap and the Women 5050 Campaign:
"What difference will the proposed change to gender recognition make to women-only spaces and services delivered by your organisations?
None. We are not aware that any women’s organisation or group currently in our networks requires sight of a birth certificate in order to grant access to services or membership. All access to membership and services is based on self-identification. This will continue.

All violence against women organisations that receive Scottish Government funding provide trans-inclusive services. The requirement for trans inclusion plans has been in place for six years, and has not given rise to any concerns or challenges of which we are currently aware. Rather, trans women have added to our movements through their support, through volunteering, and as staff members of our organisations. In order to provide a definitive statement on this in our consultation response(s), national umbrella violence against women organisations will be systematically gathering data on how well these plans are working at the frontline.

The social media discussion on the proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act has included concerns that victim-survivors of sexual violence and domestic abuse may be placed at risk. Rape crisis and women’s aid services prioritise women’s safety, confidentiality, privacy, dignity, and wellbeing above all else. Over decades of practice, services have developed ways of managing any risk to individual women’s wellbeing that may arise from interacting with other service users.

All of our organisations have processes in place to respond to the small numbers of perpetrators and so-called men’s rights activists who attempt to disrupt services or women-only space, or harass or hurt service users or women participating in our events.

This discussion has thrown up some misconceptions about what it is like to access violence against women support and advocacy services, and our organisations will be thinking about ways we can share more information about how rape crisis and women’s aid does its work."

www.engender.org.uk/news/blog/frequently-asked-questions-womens-equality-and-the-gender-recognition-act/