Where are all the trans men? An Answer.

[1955stephen]

Someone asked: I have also wondered where the trans men are in all this!

So decided to do a little of record ethnographic research and talked to a few of my 'trans men' mates about this, over my orange and soda, and their beer or two. I asked whether they would consider to contributing to an online debate., like the one on Mumsnet.
All said they really limit their online stuff to what is absolutely necessary for family and friend's purposes i.e. a bit of facebook and that's that. Though many said they used Whatsapp to talk with family quite a lot.
It seems some go onto computers when at work, but most don't even do that - they are very hands on people; a doctor, a ceo, a dentist, a teacher, a manager of a day centre, a physio, a occupational therapist, a firemen, a stable owner, a policeman.
They only go online when real life obliges them to do so - such as talking to their mum.
They said they go on to buy absolutely essential items; a sprogget needed to fix a toilet flush, bracket to fix the kid's bunk beds, or when told to change the milk order cos their partner was going to bed.
Two said they went online to get a new book on their kindle, or to find a film for their partner, their kids, their mother etc.
Most said they don't want the hassle of participating in online talking. As another put it: "by the time the evening has arrived, I have run out of words. I simply cannot carry on talking, and typing means saying the words in my head". (I understand that feeling) .
Another said "going on the computer is just too much when all I want to do is stop, eat, wash and go to sleep."
Another said "ask me to come round, and choose between 1. digging your garden, 2. print and pack 2000 newsletters, or 3. type words, I'll chose them in exactly that order: 1, 2 then 3".
And another said; "as a journalist I am online a lot - watching, but I limit my participation to when I have something worthwhile and different to say. That's not often".
It seems, therefore, from my small selection of consulted trans men, that most trans men limit computer use to work. And we just don't want to do it after that.
I understand because that is how I feel, and have no urge to change that.
There will be some who participate online (as I do to a limited extent), but if people don't want to, they don't have to - and they are probably mentally healthier for not doing so.
Has anyone counted up men's and women's use of talking chambers on the internet? I wonder what hormones have to do with it..

Im sorry

'Square' ?

Wow

Is Stephen arguing that it's fine for girls to be sleeping in tents with boys at camp, and for their parents not to be told, because they can be given contraception and MAP by guide leaders?

Is Stephen arguing that it's fine for girls to be sleeping in tents with boys at camp, and for their parents not to be told, because they can be given contraception and MAP by guide leaders?

Pretty much. But Stephen is also saying that when he says "sex", he includes the social constructionist/identity based definition in his thinking. So y'know. Who knows what he means, precisely?

Perhaps the question would be better phrased thus:

Is it a safeguarding risk for overnight accommodation to be shared between teens who can impregnate and teens who can conceive? And should parents have the right to be informed if a Guide camping trip has such arrangements?

Stephen - given that we have different definitions of "sex", would it be easier to give a simple yes or no answer to the question when it is phrased in this precise manner?

Until yesterday I thought the widening of the trans umbrella to include men with a cross dressing fetish was a recent phenomenon.

Only yesterday did I realise that the cross dressers were in there right from the start.

Until yesterday I thought the GRA was genuinely about making life better for a tiny few transsexual people with gender dysphoria. I thought the clusterfuck we now face was simply unintended consequences.

Only yesterday did I realise that the current clusterfuck is entirely deliberate and planned. The fact that the GRA has made life better for transsexual people is merely a happy side effect.

Helen Saxby said:

It’s sometimes difficult to remember, amongst all the arguments, exactly what women stand to lose here. The sex category ‘female’ is being asked to absorb the sex category ‘male’. What women are being forced to accept could literally not be any more extreme.

Thanks for the reminder, Stephen.

I laid out my position in my first post – gender isn’t real, except in the power it has when used to oppress others.

SW has explained that replacing the definition of sex with the definition of gender, the word sex simply becomes a tool of oppression too.

We now have two words that apply to anyone. Female means male and female, male means female and male.

Just like the pictures on the doors of bathroom, anyone can use any one of them.

The male version of female is more important than the female version of female however, as is the usual arrangement. Stephen has described this as deriving from feminist theory.

Ditto Pencils. I thought I'd peaked, I was only in the foothills.

This reverses the usual legal gender attribution process where from the moment of birth, the presence or absence of a penis constitutes the baby as male or female.

www.socresonline.org.uk/12/1/whittle.html

Sorry, maybe this is off-topic but I am reading through one this link shared in a previous post. Is/was that the legal definition of female? The absence of a penis?

That's how SW describes it as you quote. I think in reality in 99.9% of cases, the midwife or whoever delivers the baby, sees the genitals and can tell what sex the baby is. If it's a girl, is the presence of the vulva etc. not the absence of a penis.

I have never met Stephen in real life and only heard of him from his days at Press for Change when he highlighted many issues that concerned me. And was involved in putting a stop to the tabloid press ability to exploit trans people horribly.

Twice I had been involved directly in this when two separate tabloids published stories about me behind my back after someone had sold them to the paper.

On both occasions I asked them to hold off whilst the consequences were dealt with within family. Then I would give them a free interview. They refused and published half truths and lies and photos secured from I know not where.

The first time I asked for this delay was because my brothers children were in primary school. They had only ever known me as their aunty because I transitioned years before they were born. All those years ago kids that age had never heard of transsexualism and we had decided to keep it that way until they were 18. As we had no desire to influence them in any way.

We had to explain far too young but happily they took it in their stride and the only thing they wanted to know was - will you still be my aunty? We left the big talk for a few years. But it could have been so different. That paper had not cared at all of anyone else they hurt.

Second time my dad had just died and my mum was seriously ill in hospital and I had travelled there to visit her daily. I told her doctor and was asked to try to defer the story as it might upset her recovery to see people reading it in adjacent beds and staring at me. They were not interested in that despite again an offer of a free exclusive in a few days and published anyway next day.

So I was really grateful to Stephen for his influence in stopping this happening to other families behind their backs and hurting innocent people in the process.

I knew he was involved in the creation of the GRA in 2004 and so wanted to hear him explain why he thinks it is in need of radical overhaul. Because I just do not understand how that is necessary or how that is taking into account the bigger picture and not just the wishes of a rising number of being self defining themselves and unwilling to pass through the protective safeguards built in.

These are there to protect not just the transitioner from making such a huge step without proper consultation. But to ensure they have no other problems that might hamper transition and should be dealt with first. And to monitor that they get through the difficult period of transition and that it cures the dysphoria they suffered.

This to me is why the act was created and clearly done so under the impression it was dealing with a few thousand people only. Not hundreds of thousands, many of whom would choose not to physically transition. I think from reading the hearings this act might not even have passed had it been thought then that the numbers would be 100 times those estimated and that not a few people unable to physically transition for age or health reasons but the majority would not make any transition other than social.

For me the GRA act was designed for a certain purpose. What is being proposed to 'amend' it is instead serving a very different purpose and a far wider group of people and I have concerns about that.

From being on here my concerns have only deepened because I can see how much it matters to most women, too, and why.

So I was hoping to hear Stephen tell us what has changed so drastically in 14 years that the original intent of the act has to be entirely altered and all the (for me totally necessary) safeguards removed. Safeguards I think not only reasonably protect women (and I expect men too) but also protect those transitioning from making a mistake.

Changing gender should in my view always be a very serious step taken after very careful assessment because it has profound implications on your life and the lives of others around you.

I am very concerned at making it something you can decide to try out by issuing a declaration as, whilst most people doing this probably would treat it responsibly, it only needs one not to for the whole act to be exposed as dangerous.

Like I said on another thread last night. The analogy I can think of is this.

Do you lock your front door at night when you go to bed? Most will say yes I am sure. Not because they think their neighbours are going to break in and rob them. But because it is a sensible precaution against the unknown people who might be out there and take advantage of your generosity.

That is what women are concerned about here. So am I. Not genuine trans people. And I do not think it is an imposition to ask them to give a little back to obtain the trust and acceptance of society than something so easy it could put those who trust them at risk from the currently imponderable.

If you want a free for all - why not create a separate act that removes the gatekeeping and is straightforward but limits the rights granted to day to day necessities and not access to anything that should have
a higher degree of protection to satisfy those welcoming in trans people. As they deserve reassurance not simple acquiescence.

A two tier system like this is not disenfranchising anyone. They will have a free choice.

Do the bare minimum and get limited access.

Do the necessary safeguards and checks and obtain more trust back in return for the trust you are willing to put in.

I hope Stephen will address some of these questions.

Great post Jaycee 👍

Stephen, while I thank you for taking the time to come here and discuss self-ID with us, I do feel (as others have already said) that you’re being somewhat disingenuous.
You also appear to have a bad habit of typing a lot of words but saying very little of any value. I come from a natural sciences background, so this unclear way of communicating is a bit alien to me, but I do hear it’s quite common in the humanities (and law, particularly) to bamboozle with words instead of using them to make a clear and concise point, so I’ll let that slide… for now.

Firstly, I would like to ask your opinion on how you think self-ID will affect medical research and statistics which require a distinction to be made between the two (yes, only two) biological sexes.
My greatest fear in all this, is that we are ignoring scientific fact in favour of opinions and feelings, and then basing our laws around those subjective feelings instead of objective fact, statistics and peer reviewed studies.
While I am extremely sympathetic to people with gender dysphoria and support their right to present how they wish without discrimination or violence against them, we should not be basing our laws around the ‘feelings’ of a small minority whose view of reality is seen through the lens of their own delusions**.
This denial of reality is the thin edge of the wedge as far as I’m concerned and could have some serious consequences in medical science and in tracking statistical differences between the sexes.

Secondly, allowing self-ID to go ahead and removing the ‘gatekeeping’ and medicalisation that is currently involved with GRC obtainment opens the floodgates to cross-dressers, autogynephiles, non-binary people, and anyone else who falls under the very extensive ‘trans’ umbrella of recent years.
This de-medicalisation of trans is a dangerous road to go down. Not only will it obviously impact women in the myriad of negative ways already discussed, but it paves the way for removing mental health services for those suffering true gender dysphoria and removing funding for research into why gender dysphoria occurs in certain individuals.
Given that the rate of suicide is high in both pre- and post-transition individuals, it is imperative that we not allow ourselves to shy away from the fact that true gender dysphoria is a mental health condition requiring appropriate support and treatment.

Lastly, gender dysphoria should not be allowed to become a shield or trojan horse for any fetishist, non-conformist or predator who harbours the desire to access women’s spaces, and who wants to see their desire supported by the law at the expense of vulnerable women and/or children.

Recap:
1.) Stephen, how do you think self-ID will affect medical research and statistics which require a distinction to be made between the two biological sexes?

2.) Do you believe it is acceptable that subjective ‘feelings’ be enshrined in law over objective fact?

3.) Do you believe de-medicalisation of ‘trans’ is the way forward? Or do you accept that gender dysphoria is a mental health condition?

4.) Do you accept that the ‘trans’ descriptor now encompasses a wide variety of people, most of whom do not have gender dysphoria?

** I do not use the words delusion and deluded with the intent of causing offence. It is intended as the medical definition.

When I said YES (I was asked to answer yes, or no)
I mean: absolutely it is in the right of the Girl Guides Association (GGA), and their individual leaders to choose to have a single sex (or mixed sex) residential or camping weekend,.

As for:
"It is not a requirement - or best practice - to tell parents that a trans person will be attending a residential event." (Thank you for the link)

I do not think the language in this is at all helpful, and I would suggest that GGUK give consideration to further clarification.
I feel there is a need to distinguish between the adult volunteer and the child.

My own experience inclines me to believe that under the age of 11, I personally would have no concerns at all, and I would not wish / need to know that the child was attending a residential event,
I would assume that neither child (incl. mine) would consider any sort of sexual activity, but I understand others might have some concerns. I think that is a conversation which needs to happen separately.
I would assume that the regular discussions we had about 'wrong touches' would cover that.

I do not think parents should be told if a trans adult is attending a residential event.
I believe a trans adult working as a volunteer has a right to personal autonomy and privacy, and should therefore not be 'outed' by anyone.

If a trans leader asks me, whether they should out themselves, I would say that has to be their own decision, but I would advise them that 'keeping the secret' can become incredibly burdensome as times goes by, and fear of disclosure can make it very difficult to form close friendships.
With the welcoming policy of GGUK, they should feel able to trust other adults within GGUK to know, however, they should be aware that not all other leaders will feel kindly towards having them there. But if that happens, there are other units, and mixed sex scout troops.

The questions arise for me for residential events for 11 to 15 year olds. And many female leaders in scouting.

As once a parent of three 11-15 daughters, I have given serious thought to what I think are my rights, and my daughters rights, if a trans identified child would be attending a residential event.
I think,personally, my issues I would address would be:

1. the age of my daughter attending,
2. their understanding of sexual acts, and
3. what they understand about the age when sex is legal, and the age whensex might be acceptable,
4. how confident I was that they would tell my partner or I if they engaged in sexual activity with another person,
5. the extent to which they understood that sexual acts of any sort, from masturbation through to intercourse were not appropriate when not in private, and certainly not at guide residential events
6. how comfortable my daughter felt about talking to us, her parents, about intimate matters,
7. how well she understood about transgender identities (I accept our daughters had a lifetime to learn about that, which would give them an insight others might not have)
8. whether my daughter knew who the child was (they often do), and
9. how comfortable she is with the idea of that child attending, or possibly sharing accommodation,

10. I would then consider whether I wanted to discuss the following with the unit leaders, a. Whether the child is attending the Tavistock under the child and adolescent programme. b. whether the child is taking pubertal postponement treatment, c. whether consideration had been given to separate accommodation or shower facilities (or times). d. Whether the leaders would carry barrier or emergency contraception (accepting that as young teens a lot of us would have found it difficult to control our own sexual urges), or whether I should provide my daughter with barrier contraception. I would also consider whether she was old enough to be told what emergency contraception does, and how it is not neutral, but will cause often excess bleeding and what feels like really bad period pains,

Other parents might well have other ways of making their decision.

Now - having gone through all of that, I would slightly amend my statement from above:

I do and will support the rights of the GG to determine what that they mean when they say they are holding a single sex event, but

if girls aged 11 to 15, are to attend a residential event, and if the Unit leaders are aware that a trans child is attending, then I think:

(1) consideration should be given to the unit leaders speaking to the trans child (age 11 to 15) and their parents,
They should reassure them that the child should not feel any pressure to out themselves, and they should assure them that they would not be outed.
However, the leaders may suggest, that organising the residential could be easier, for example, if the trans child chose to share accommodation with particular friends who knew their history, with parents who knew their history
and it would help if they were willing for those friends and their parents to be part of an open conversation. about safeguarding and risk at the residential.

If that is not possible then I would move to (2)
(2). the trans child and their parents should be informed, that the PARENTS of the girls attending an event, and the GIRLS themselves, will be told (bearing in mind the leaders safeguarding duties to all of the girls), that a trans child will be attending the event,.
The child will not be identified to the girls or parents.

The leaders would then advise all parents that a gender variant child who identifies and is known to them as a girl will be attending the residential.
That they will not be told the child's identity.
A. This will mean
- that in order to protect all of the girls attending, including the trans child, certain provisions would be put in place
e.g. (to be completed according to the residential accommodation and if available), this might include;
-- girls will not be placed randomly in shared accommodation,
--- some girls will have single room / tent accommodation
--- there will be a private shower, which will be made accessible at set times to all girls, on a first come first service basis.

All children and parents (including trans child plus parent) are then reminded (as they should always be reminded before any residential event) that:

1. Barrier/emergency contraception is carried by the leaders, and girls who request it, will not be told off, or considered wrong or bad, but:

1a. . a GG residential event is not a private event, and sexual activity of any sort is not considered appropriate,.

1. sexual activity (of any sort involving two or more parties) involving a child under the age of 13 would always mean parents will be informed, and that all parents would be reminded that they a right to involve the police,

1. sexual activity between two children aged 13 or over, whilst illegal, will not be considered a matter to engage reporting to parents, unless

-- their is a lack of consent, or -- suspected to be a lack of consent, or -- a significant age difference, between the children e.g. 13 and 16. 3a. Otherwise all parents and girls are reminded that 3a. . a GG residential event is not a private event, and sexual activity of any sort is not considered appropriate, and 3b. if they need contraception, either barrier or emergency, whilst at the residential XX leader will be able to provide it in complete confidence,

1. Finally If one of the parties to any sexual activity is a leader, then the GG Unit will promptly inform both the parents and the police;

Supplementary:
Would parents ensure their girls are fully informed about
-- periods (especially if they haven't started them) and provide them with the appropriate equipment;
-- contraception, and consider whether they should provide their girls with barrier contraception;
-- emergency contraception, and would parents consider whether they should tell their girl - in an age appropriate manner - about the effects of emergency contraception. (it would be appropriate to get and give guidance on this, as many parents might have no experience of it).

My apologies for not updating my language re GGUK. It is 43 years since I was a guide, (I left when 19) . Since then I spent 12 years as a Scout leader, but it is 25 since I was in scouting. I think it is called old age!
Guiding gave so much to me, that it is really hard to explain what I feel about it.
Sadly our daughters enjoyed brownies, but chose (like too many) not to remain at guides after an initial trial period. Consequently I really didn't update my knowledge and language.

But nor, for that matter did I think we were discussing my poor language use. I thought we were discussing whether GGUK (sorry -not the GGA) had a right to hold single sex residential events - and I hope I have clarified that I do think they are but I also think that safeguarding must be an active, priority, process. especially when mixed sex events are being considered, whether by that we mean the inclusion of a gender variant child, or boys.

The Gender Recognition Act 2004, (as I frequently say to trans people) was never intended to afford a right to secrecy, merely a right to privacy. The two things are different.
What I am clear on is that the Act ensures that a person's medical history is a private matter for them, and their health care team, but even then there may be exceptions.

I also advise trans people that they will have to give serious consideration to disclosing their status as a person with a trans history in some circumstances.
These will be circumstances in which, if they choose not to disclose, then they will have to give consideration to not doing whatever it was they wanted to do, or risk certain consequences e.g.
-- if considering a (more than casual) sexual relationship with a third party,
--- if contemplating getting married,
--- if seeking high level security clearance,
--- if wishing to adopt; etc.

The Gender Recognition Act 2004 which came about as the result of campaigning by the Trans community is concerned only with the recognition of a person's preferred gender role , for all legal purposes.
The Act had nothing to say about children, they were not under consideration.

The consideration for change in the UK has come about as a general consequence of the campaign to

1. de-psychopathologise trans/gender identities,
2. the work of the Council of Europe, and the UN to end gender identit(ies) discrimination
3. the implementation of non-medical gender identity recognition systems in other states;
4. the feedback from those states, ngos, and other bodies, is that problems have been minimal - and almost non-existent in terms of complaints about men dressing up and pretending to be women (I am aware that some of you will really object to my saying that)

the feedback from those states, ngos, and other bodies, is that problems have been minimal - and almost non-existent in terms of complaints about men dressing up and pretending to be women (I am aware that some of you will really object to my saying that)

Yes. I suspect that when rape wasn't illegal in marriage there was probably "feedback that problems have been minimal". Even now very few report rape because they're not supported or believed. As women we are socialised to shut up, and we also shut up from fear of male bodied people who are stronger and can hurt us. In real life I am not openly GC because I am genuinely scared that a violent TRA might target me or my children. I have not attended a public meeting because I would have to bring a baby and the violence against Maria maclachlan (which left her bruised) could easily kill a baby. Not angering someone bigger than you is basic survival. Thank you mumsnet for allowing me not to be totally silenced.

Stephen
I would like to hear more about the campaign to "de-psychopathologise trans/gender identities". This is something that I struggle to understand.

My understanding of gender dysphoria was, until recently, that it was a feeling that one's body was somehow 'wrong', or a sense of revulsion with one's sexual organs.

I now hear of it being applied to children who like to dress in clothes normally associated with the opposite sex, or play with toys normally associated with the opposite sex. It seems they are being told their bodies are wrong because of one particular aspect of their personality.

My original understanding of gender dysphoria is clearly a mental disorder (I think, but I am not a doctor or psychiatrist), since a feeling that one's healthy body is 'wrong' is not a mentally healthy state. I cannot see how anyone benefits from the de-psychopathologising (if that's a word) of such a state. People who suffer from such feelings should receive sympathetic therapeutic treatments, and I understand from some of the transgender posters on here that sometimes surgery and hormonal treatment to resemble the opposite sex is the only thing that relieves their suffering.

The 'new' definition, where someone likes things normally associated with the opposite sex is not, and never has been a mental disorder. It is a perfectly healthy mental state, and needs no treatment. People do not need to be hormonally and surgically modified just because they do not conform to gender stereotypes.

So when you talk about the campaign to "de-psychopathologise trans/gender identities" are you talking about people who feel that their bodies are 'wrong', or people who are simply gender non-conforming? Or something else entirely?

Stephen, do you think the solution is to abandon same-sex sleeping arrangements altogether.
Why should one male-bodied individual be allowed to sleep in accommodation designated for female-bodied people and another not? Why not all?

SpartacusAutisticus said:
but instead of subverting sex-role expectations (what we call gender) and arguing for anyone of any sex to adopt any 'gender identity' they choose (or is innate if that's what you believe), you seem to think that gender is the fixed point and sex is mutable, and that just feels a bit topsy-turvy to me.

In much my academic work that is exactly what I write about.
In campaigning and lobbying with the Council of Europe, the UN< and when contributing to the Yogyakarta Principles, I hope that that is what we embodied.

I accept that in those terms, I might be said to have failed, because I did change my gender role presentation, and took medical assistance to enable that.
But we can’t all live up to all of our high ideals, all of the time.

And maybe things would be different now, the 1970s were a very strange time after all.
I needed to be able to see myself in a future, that was all.

When I achieved that, I realised the world suddenly thought it had carte blanche to treat me, and those I loved, as badly as they wished.

Have you ever watch those horrible 'Purge ' films (don't) where every year there is a 12-hour period during which all crime, including murder, can be done with complete impunity.
It felt I was living in that world, but the 12 hours was 365 days a year.

Being dismissed from my job just for being was nothing.
I could be stolen from, robbed with menaces, and beaten up - with complete impunity.
They could section me - with complete impunity (thank you Mum for the rescue).
They could rape me - and they had complete impunity
The Police could pick me up and detain me and threaten me in ways I would rather not discuss- with complete impunity.

And you wonder why I fought back?

I however, decided that rather than get angry and get punished more,
Instead I would get educated and be cleverer than them,
Make sure I had a truly thick skin which water (abuse) flowed off,
and then I made sure I only fought the battles once I knew we could win them.

the feedback from those states, ngos, and other bodies, is that problems have been minimal - and almost non-existent in terms of complaints about men dressing up and pretending to be women

The feedback from whom? I have heard of a number of instances from one such country of TIMs in halfway houses and shelters who have stalked and harassed women residents but the organisations are powerless to stop or remove the TIMs because of the legislation and fear of being labelled transphobic. It’s the women who have been removed or, in the case of the halfway house, have to put up with it or go back to jail.

Oldcrone - I hope some of the other transsexuals on here speak up, but I can personally say this.

Even when still at school I knew that the depths of dysphoria which I felt about my body that it was not the sex I felt the rest of me was represented an anomaly.

I recall in biology class when I was about 12 a teacher describing a case in which a young girl had felt 'odd' not 'comfortable' with being a girl and one day when jumping over a river, or something like that, her testes descended and she cried with joy realising she was right and all those who had said otherwise were wrong.

I recall that story vividly so many years later because in those days there was no talk about these matters. I had never heard of transsexuals. But I knew what was wrong with me - this really deep sense of mismatch. And had already expressed it to several people asking for help and a doctor had been dismissively involved as they insisted it was 'just a phase' and a 'natural part of growing up'. My parents were so relived. I was just in despair because I somehow knew that was not right.

My point is that from the very start I was aware of biological reality. I was aware what my body was not. This was always focused through the body and at first in childish ways tried magic spells and praying to God to put it right. Then, of course, as I got a little older I knew the only hope was through medicine. Hence I went to doctor after doctor and eventually clinics and so on.

Reality, of course, kicked in too. That you cannot actually change biology. That it has to be an accommodation. But every step along the way here from childhood onward in increasing levels of awareness I saw this as a malfunction of some sort that needed doctors to assess and help me to put right.

Now I can accept that it may or may not actually be caused this way. Though I had then no concept and today not much better concept of gender identity and how and why that might have created such a depth of certainty something was literally wrong with me inside.

But it undeniably felt like that - which is why you hear, what I know you all treat as nonsense, understandably, so many tales of being 'trapped in the wrong body'. Not because we are saying that actually happens but because that is how it manifests.

Body, not mind. This is where you feel the problem lies. This is what you seek to resolve.

In either case it is very obvious to you that something is not right and that what you are experiencing is not a normal part of life. And I struggle to see how anyone in these circumstances could not desperately want medical help to be assessed, to find out what might be going on and to establish the best way forward to deal with it.

Like I say this might now be viewed differently and there could be good reason, I do not know. But what I do know is that if other transsexuals had in any way similar experiences to mine - and from posts on here from others like justaothertranswoman - I think they do.

Then I consider depathologising this into some kind of self expression perhaps useful for those for whom this is not an actual pathology.

But potentially disastrous for those who really do have something so deep and pervasive that it clearly needs medical assessment and support.

So in my suggestions I am not looking to claim that all trans people are the same as transsexuals. Quite clearly that is not true. But I am saying that some of us are and that our needs seem to be a little too complex to simply dismiss as a free choice that you can do on your own and cure yourself.

It may not be an illness. It may not as yet have a known cause. That cause could be within biology or psychology. I don't know.

But there is a common cause here for transsexuality by the looks of it and not engaging doctors is like suggesting that because some people get a headache from stressing themselves out that if we give everyone the chance to take the day off and relax without the rest of society complaining that will cure all headaches.

It might help a lot of them.

But some headaches are caused by brain tumours. And if you depathologise all headaches people will die.

Questions from BrazenHussy0

1.) Stephen, how do you think self-ID will affect medical research and statistics which require a distinction to be made between the two biological sexes?

I do not think it should affect it. I don’t think trans people should pretend to be something they are not.

As I said,
“I am not pretending I was born male-bodied, and I do accept that I was raised as a girl with all the familial expectations, cultural weight and social control that came with that”
I later said: “I was a deeply unhappy child, before becoming a suicidal teenager, but then I grew up into ‘a Stephen’. Whatever you might think ‘a Stephen’ is, (and I am not sure myself) “

In other words, I am a Stephen, a Stephen was born female bodied, and when that person grew up being unhappy with how black their future looked, they took testosterone under medical supervision, and had various surgeries so as to feel like he inhabited myself – a Stephen.

Legal gender role recognition under the law, for certain benefits and responsibilities, is not the same as biology.

I would advise any trans person thinking about taking part in a research activity where ‘biology of the body’ was a factor, should either be frank about their history, or not take part. And it seems to me, from the endless scientific stuff being pushed out about trans bodies, that most people must be being frank.

2.) Do you believe it is acceptable that subjective ‘feelings’ be enshrined in law over objective fact?

I am not sure. That is a complex question.
Is being a mother or father an objective matter, or is it subjective, or does it contain both?
And if it contains both, which of those is enshrined upon a birth certificate – after all, for centuries men have been named as fathers on birth certificates, and then become fathers to the children, but another person was the biological fecundator.

The Gender Recognition Act 2004 does not enshrine subjective feelings, it allows the state to acknowledge the gender role the person permanently presents to the world, and recognises that without placing them in the other male/female category, the person and their families can face severe disadvantage.

There were several reasons why I lobbied and campaigned for the Gender Recognition Act 2004.
However, my primary reason was that without it, I could have no legal relationship to the children I raised with my partner, and to whom I was ‘dad’ (nb. from a young age our kids gradually learnt about my history and biology in an age appropriate way – but that’s another story).

If my partner – the biological mother of our children had died, social services would have taken the children into foster care and then spent time determining if I was good enough person to care for them – I could not think of anything worse that could be done to our children if such a terrible thing happened as their mother dying.

When we did a step parent adoption, after the law changed, that took 2 years of assessments before I could become a step-parent.

Two years - i wonder how long the kids would have been in foster care whilst we waited an assessment to see if I was a 'good enough' human to care for them.

3.) Do you believe de-medicalisation of ‘trans’ is the way forward? Or do you accept that gender dysphoria is a mental health condition?
Generally yes I do – but depsychopathologisation of trans, is not the same as refusing gender dysphoria as a mental health problem.

I think Gender dysphoria (confusion, distress and deep unhappiness) which causes severe distress is a medical condition which can benefit from intervention, whether that is counselling, therapy, or in some cases, gender reassignment.

However, here in the UK, gender reassignment is only available to those people who can demonstrate they will no longer be dysphoric i.e. they can settle into a resilient personal gender identity in which they are happy to present to the world. Gender reassignment is about encouraging successful adaption to living in the preferred gender role, minimising distress.

They used to ask us this: If I could give you a pill which would enable you to become completely happy as you are would you take it?
My answer “If you could give me a pill to make me completely happy, even if the side effect was that I became a mouse, or a tree fungus, yes – of course I would take it? But where is it?”

So they are different things. For example, between 1965 and 1975 I had gender dysphoria. Since then I have no longer had gender dysphoria. I am content in my gender identity and present a gender role in which I am extremely comfortable. The fact that I cannot clarify exactly what ‘a Stephen’ is, is not really anything I am concerned about. I can’t clarify lots of things in life; quantum mechanics for a start, but that doesn’t distress me or cause me any mental disturbance.

The fact that other people may judge me differently, is of no concern to me, unless they sack me, thump me, or harm me in any way. I really don’t mind not having them as friends, but actually I also often don’t mind having them as friends. I don’t expect the world to understand me, I just wanted respect and rights whereby I could protect my family.

4.) Do you accept that the ‘trans’ descriptor now encompasses a wide variety of people, most of whom do not have gender dysphoria?

I do.

Barrier/emergency contraception is carried by the leaders, and girls who request it, will not be told off, or considered wrong or bad, but:

What !!!!! seriously, I had to read your comments several times to check i'd read it correctly and i'm still not sure .....

Having run many residential trips with students aged 13 - 18 (schools not guiding) I would in no way be carrying barrier/emergency contraception. I did and always would ensure to the very best of my ability that they didn't get a chance to shag and trust me, as I've always taken mixed groups away the chance is always there.

I would be hauled in front of the governers/head and my job be on the line if one of our students became pregnant on a trip and quite rightly so.

I expect the same standard of any girl guiding trip and as my 12 year is due to go camping in May I'm glad that her leaders have plenty of common sense and I can assure you they will be completely prepared but barrier contraception will not be on their equipment list.

The same would apply with or without a transgender child. I don't know of a parent that would be happy for a leader/adult to provide contraception to their underage child on a camping trip. Totally insane.

FloraFox
If you know of "instances from one such country of TIMs in halfway houses and shelters who have stalked and harassed women residents but the organisations are powerless to stop or remove the TIMs because of the legislation and fear of being labelled transphobic."

Can I suggest you ask those organisations to write their experience down, and if possible evidence it, and send it to the Government Equality Office. It will be received and added tp the work that is being done.
No one is trying to do this yet, but there will be a consultation I am certain, we just don't know when.

whathaveiforgottentoday

The comments I made in relation to contraception, are based entirely on the GGUK guidance.

The same would apply with or without a transgender child. I don't know of a parent that would be happy for a leader/adult to provide contraception to their underage child on a camping trip.

Me either.

I suspect there are absolutely incompatible world views here and that the vast majority of parents, were they to realise Stephen's position on this, would be horrified.

Thanks very much for continuing to respond, Stephen. But I have to say that I suspect you have no idea how out-of-step you are in asserting that the best solution to trans-identified boys sharing overnight accommodation with girls on overnight Guide trips is to provide the Leaders with a stock of emergency contraception. I think most parental eyes would boggle.

whathaveiforgottentoday

And - of course - Like you I have worked with kids over the years (I used to run a TEFL school) as well as be a scout leader, and I must admit times have changed.

I can imagine what would have happened if one of those kids went home pregnant - my bankruptcy, and possibly worse - an Italian father arriving on my door step.

As a parent with my partner we took it upon ourselves to make sure our children were informed, and that they had appropriate contraceptive advice and access at an appropriate age
(note of humour: my threat in cases of future irresponsibility was a fruit bowl by the door containing brightly coloured condoms, there for all to see, when friends came round.
I did suggest their friends would also be able to take from the bowl if it ever came to that. It was light hearted, but got the message over.
Of course I bought my son's first condoms when he was 15, and he had been in a steady relationship for two years, and I though sex might be in the offing. . My partner did whatever was the equivalent for the girls).