Trans unpeak moment

[Sunflowersforever]

Have really been tuned into the whole self-Id issue and subsequent discussions through mumsnet, and appalled at the encroachment into women spaces and the silencing of women's voices. Was so glad to have read Hadley Freeman's article and how she summed up concerns in such an articulate way that reflected my views.

Ok. Here is the unpeak trans bit.

On HFs twitter feed, someone posted about selfid saying. "It means swearing a statutory declaration that you are living as a woman (and there are legal consequences if you lie), changing your name and documents, telling friends, colleagues, family".

Is that correct? If it is, I didn't know that and it changes the whole 'any man can enter a woman's space unchallenged' argument a bit as surely documented proof can be produced if challenged?

Someone else also said Ireland had adopted this law with no consequences? Really?

Anyone aware if any of this is true?

Crispy, apologies for that long post above. I just wrote what I felt.

If I misinterpret any of your views, as I easily might as this is a long complex thread, again sorry.

But I would like your take on the issue of if the GRA needs changing and how self ID protects sex spaces and the increased problems for women of self ID females who are fully physical males in female spaces.

It was a time when journalists published articles about scientific studies only after reading the studies in detail and talking to the researchers. Do you know what happens today? Today, the PR department of the research organisation puts out a press release, sexed up to attract maximum interest. The papers and magazines, many of whom have long since stopped employing science journalists, print this verbatim.

This drives me nuts. I have self taught myself as best I can to read studies because of it. Every newspaper prints the same crap now and it rarely reflects the actual study. Left and right wing press alike and sadly often the BBC these days. It didn't used to be like this.

What a fantastic post Jayceedove

Thank you for articulating so clearly a position I entirely agree with

*What a fantastic post Jayceedove flowers

Thank you for articulating so clearly a position I entirely agree with*

Seconded

Jayceedove brilliant post

Where did the term 'transvestite' go to? Is it ever used now?
It started to disappear in 2005 with the raising of the transgender umbrella. There were quite a few Feminist and Lesbian run blogs at that time and we were still working hard for marriage rights. The raising of the transgender umbrella to cover all of the LGBT community did not go over well but the constant correcting of language taught people to stop saying anything but the accepted terms. That is why some people actually refer to LGBT people as though you could be all of those at once. It has been an interesting exercise in social control and it is still going on.

I appreciate the admission that transgender advocates make that women's rights are in direct conflict with transgender rights when they call any person or organization or blog that is advocating for women anti-trans. Stripping women of their rights to privacy and dignity has been, in my opinion, an intended consequence of transgender political advocacy.

Transactivists have worked very hard to disappear two words: transvestite and transexual. They've used continued and repeated contact with health services, media organisations, public bodies and charitable groups to do this. It isn't an accident.

Changing 'transexual' to 'transgender' meant that the whole ideology could be transferred to children. After the failure of paedophile campaigning three decades ago, the public wouldn't accept the word 'sexual' linked to children.

Stripping women of their rights to privacy and dignity has been, in my opinion, an intended consequence of transgender political advocacy

👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻

Changing 'transexual' to 'transgender' meant that the whole ideology could be transferred to children.

Very much this. I'm not sure how many people would be in favour of transexual children.

Popping back in to apologise to teacup for misunderstanding her post re anorexia a long way back.

I can't catch up with the whole thread- it's moved to fast. Some really interesting things covered.

Can I add to the list of things people here can contribute to the debate despite most of us not being dysphoric? Most of us are in some way GNC, and had miserable teens where we wished to be someone else. We got through it. In most people it doesn't persist, so drastic measures should not be rushed into.

for everyone who has exhausted themselves patiently debating on here.

Lobotomies are not done anymore because they didn't work, and were inhumane, and based on a very flawed misunderstanding.

It is my assertion that affirmation therapy for gender dysphoria does not work. The evidence is the suicide rate post transition being at the same rate as pre transition. This is a clear indication to a lay person like myself that the treatment is not effective and does not treat the disorder properly.
The 100% transgender diagnosis of patients who present at a gender clinic with depression is what is setting off the "like lobotomy" alarm bells.

@Jayceedove, I'll just reply to you rather than the other sophistry aimed at me for now, your whole premise rests on the idea that a GRC is some sort of burden of proof, and that it is required to access female spaces for trans women.

Firstly the GRC is not required at all to enter public toilets or changing rooms, of any gender.

A grc is convoluted, time consuming, and expensive for some, however it has very few uses except changing gender marker on a birth certificate. With is extremely important to some trans people, trans men and women, for their own safety should they be travelling abroad etc and a handful of other things.

To repeat, a GRC is not required for a trans person to use the facilities of their gender.

So self-id GRA with the result being a self-id GRC, will have no bearing on public facilities.

I know I can repeat this endlessly and it will be ignored on here, but that is a fact, the amount of misinformation around self-id GRA is bizarre and ridiculous, and is almost always mentioned with regards to female spaces, even though the Equality Act states clearly a GRC is not required.

@crispbuttyfan

Could you please stop insulting people?

Sophistry: the use of clever but false arguments, especially with the intention of deceiving

bewilderness...Suicide post transition is NOT the same rate as pre-transition whatsoever. There are some studies that show overall suicide ideation for various factors, there are no significant studies with any decent sample size that even separate between pre-treatment, and post treatment. Also It would be unethical to run a study somehow finding a group and refusing treatment, to compare.

From a 2012 study..
"the vast majority of participants reported that recognising their gender identity or transitioning had improved their quality of life (78 per cent; n¼520) – McNeil et al. (2012). In addition, for those who accessed it, surgical intervention also helped to put respondents back into their bodies and, in the process, alleviated some of the effects of physical and, by turns, social dissonance, 88 per cent of respondents were more satisfied with their lives after having non-genital surgery (n¼182) and 83 per cent after genital surgery (n¼131) – McNeil et al. (2012). In addition, 74 per cent felt that their mental health had improved as a result of transitioning (n¼520; McNeil et al., 2012

Charley, you seem to think it is aimed at you? why would that be?.......

No I don't feel it was aimed at me. I don't honestly care if you insult me but I find it reprehensible that you aimed it at Jaycee who wrote a long considered post which you brushed aside by putting it with "the other sophistry". You accused others of speaking for trans people when they aren't trans and of dismissing the views of trans people. None of us are dismissing trans views. You are.

Stop insulting people.

Because it WAS sophistry, it was a false argument based on a false premise that a GRC was required for a trans woman to enter female spaces, which has never been the case, and the opposite was enshrined in law in 2010.

Maybe Jaycee misunderstands the law, and may not be intending to decieve, in which case, you are right it is not quite sophistry and I apologise to jaycee for the benefit of doubt. :-)

A grc is convoluted, time consuming, and expensive for some, however it has very few uses except changing gender marker on a birth certificate.
Self ID will simplify the process of getting a GRC, as the politicians have clearly stated is the intent, so that also simplifies change of sex on birth certificates, so that acquiring proof of ID that males who say they intend to live as females are now legally females.
The argument that all it does is change the marker on the birth certificate is so specious that it is absurd. What do people use birth certificates for? We are adults. We know.

Crispy, you might want to look into the conflict over the interpretation of the 2010 EA. Legal scholars do not agree, though transgender advocates are using your interpretation to tell schools that boys must be permitted in the girls changing rooms if the boys identify as transgender.

@Crispbuttyfan
The problem isn’t a legal protection issue though. The problem is how things work in practice. Where anyone can self-ID, a culture arises where you cannot challenge those who do not have legal status to be somewhere out of fear of being labelled bigoted. So reasonable challenges become viewed as unacceptable.

Nefarious individuals, most likely a few men with nothing to do with trans people, will be able to exploit that. Women will fear challenging them. If they do, their complaints will not be taken seriously and they are treated as transphobic. This is already happening.

bewilderness that argument you called absurd is the truth.
How many times have you used a birth certificate in your life?
They are the only times a trans woman or trans man will either.

It is very rare.

Also too and besides, Crispy, your name calling of anyone who does not share your beliefs undermines everything you say here.

flowers that is a projection based argument, not evidence led, we can look to the original effects of the EA in 2010, and we can look at the evidence from other countries that have self-id.
There is no evidence that anyone has exploited these laws.

Crisp is certainly getting a little personal here but remember everyone, WTGLWGH

Just want to add my thanks to Jaycee for a couple of really generous and illuminating posts on this thread