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?

But the facts are allowing trans people to enter sex-segregated spaces as we have already discussed, as according to the equality act, causes no problems. And hasn't since 2010.

That's entirely your opinion. And I know of incidences where that has not been the case.

Teacup I have tried to explain it in a way I understand and the best I can, gender identity does exist, and there is an increasing understanding of it. There are lots of elements to gender, some have a innate aspect to them, some don't.
It is said that to experience your gender identity, the innate building block, in a tangible way, you need to experience incongruence.
Whilst I totally understand this seems like a convenient argument against those that fail to accept a gender identity, it is what it is.

As the endocrine society amongst other point to... there are some very illuminating cases in science.
Forinstance des babies, whose mothers were given anti-sickness drugs in the 70's turned out to be hormone disruptors, when they were followed up huge increases in the number of trans identities existed in these children.

Some people are dersperate to differentiate between trans and intersex, and I agree with that distinction, however intersex people are likely to have a predictable gender identity depending on which dsd they have. ANd the twin studies already mentioned, where identical twins are far more likely to both be trans than non-identical twins.

So gender identity is not totally subjective and is in fact measurable and accountable in the right situations.

But none of those studies show proof of a gender identity. They are showing things that might contribute to gender dysphoria or a more feminine or masculine personality.
Maybe hormones in the womb contribute to a more feminine personality which when you’re a boy living in our society may make you more likely to transition.
It’s a pretty big conclusion to jump to that it must mean we have innate gender identities and can be female on the inside but Male on the outside.

And actually even if they could, what would that matter? We still wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between someone who was female on the inside and a pervert. That’s why we have gatekeeping so that we know the people wit h a GRC are committed and not a chancer.
How would that in any way make a difference to how to protect female bodied people?

There are neurological findings that correlate with anorexia, too, and that too is more common in one twin if the other has it, etc. It's an interesting fact that may conceivably be helpful in researching treatments. We'd never dream, though, of concluding that this means there's a fixed anorexic or non-anorexic "identity", let alone that it should be affirmed.

Serious question: what is the key difference?

Good question okMaybeIamATerf

My questions are serious too.
Do you distinguish between sex and gender?
How does a trans person without dysphoria differ from a gender non-conforming person?

So gender identity is not totally subjective and is in fact measurable and accountable in the right situations.

I don’t want to be classified according to an even slightly subjective identity that is only measurable in the right situations.

I have a human identity and that is it.

(didn't mean to imply that anyone else's questions weren't serious, sorry if I gave that impression! It's just that people sometimes respond to any trans/ED comparison as though it were rhetorical, whereas here, I really do want to know what crisp thinks.)

Serious question: what is the key difference?

The key difference is that if transgenderism is indulged, affirmed and followed to it's fullest possible conclusion by the individual experiencing it there is a strong likelihood that they will be "cured"; in that they seem to be able to go on there living an otherwise normal life no longer troubled by their transgenderism.

If anorexia is indulged, affirmed and followed to it's fullest possible conclusion you die.

*to go on FROM there

How does ‘gender identity’ in any way protect women.
How can any laws that are there to protect female bodies stand up to the re classifation of the legal definition of woman to include self identifed woman.
How could a woman claim she was overlooked for a promotion because of her sex if men can get pregnant too.
How can we address sex based inequalities and representation if we include male bodied people in the counting of women ceos.
When violent sexual crime committed by male bodied people is recorded as committed by women how can we name male violence?

And if you don't believe in souls, which many of us don't, the idea that a conscious experience, such as a sense of identity, is 'biological' is absolutely unsurprising. All our experiences occur, or are caused, at a biological level. The whole premise of neuroscience is based on this.

The argument that being trans isn’t a mental health issue, or medical issue in that there is no reason for gender identity to be coupled with natal sex. Gender identity and sex can exist entirely independently from each other. There are 2 sexes and infinite gender identities. If people have gender dysphoria, and are distressed by their sexed bodies, this is a medical issue and treatment should be provided.
It is a fact that some people want sex segregated spaces to be based on people’s sexed bodies. It is a fact that having male-bodied people in spaces made available for female-bodied people is very upsetting for many non-bigoted, kind and compassionate people. Suggesting otherwise is callous.

This is still different entirely to gender identity.
Trans people are totally seperate to GNC people, but when trans people have a gender identity, their gender expression can still be anything else. And those trans people who have a female gender identity, if they choose to have a more GNC gender expression, they are targeted as not being true trans etc etc

I’m happy to accept that some people have gender identities I just don’t understand why this matters to anyone but themselves. It doesn’t change their sex.

How could a woman claim she was overlooked for a promotion because of her sex if men can get pregnant too.

Or if people can latch onto a vaguely understood notion that women just have female gender identities - maybe it’s their oestrogen?

*@Teacuphiccup
*
I have the gender that is inflicted on me by society, I have my sex and then I have a personality. The end.

That's such an interesting statement.

For my own education, is it that one view Is we can have feminine aspects when male (to the point of looking stereotype of woman with support of drugs and surgery) and masculine aspects when female (same principle) but our birth sex is man or woman for life and remains unchangeable.

If that is the case, then what the trans community require are additional safe spaces from male violence. Some might be within women spaces if appropriate and negotiated, some not.

But those in trans community who are experiencing all this disagree and have a different view and think basic sex recognition can be altered when using the term gender to identify, even though all male tackle etc remains in place.

So, we need compromise,

Why can't we have man, woman, transman, transwoman and then settle how to protect all from male violence?

Am I going to get flamed for this?

So, we need compromise,

But the only people who are being asked to compromise are women. Men don't have to compromise.

subflowers no flame retardant needed. That’s what I think too.

I have zero issue with transwomen being transwomen.

"Why can't we have man, woman, transman, transwoman and then settle how to protect all from male violence? "

If thats what the trans community wanted, they would be campaigning for it.

Why can't we have man, woman, transman, transwoman and then settle how to protect all from male violence?

That would fine with me, as long as it involved a third (or fourth, in contexts where disabled people also require special provision) space

@Juells

That's why this needs to be better led overall so compromise can be negotiated and developed in a way that it is minimal and respectful.

From what I can see on here, most have clearly articulated their position and won't change much. So what now? It can't keep going round and round in circles as it's the same conversation over and over.

For my own education, is it that one view Is we can have feminine aspects when male (to the point of looking stereotype of woman with support of drugs and surgery) and masculine aspects when female (same principle) but our birth sex is man or woman for life and remains unchangeable.

Yes. You could only change sex if your body could change from the type that produces eggs to the type that produces sperm.

However, I don’t think most people on either side of the debate believe you can change sex - just that you can change your body so that it more closely matched your identity.

The difference is that some people think the difference between men and women is biological sex (I think this).

Others seem to think the difference is identity based? ( I don’t understand this so can’t elaborate further).

crispbuttyfan

I know this a really fast moving thread with lots of posters replying to you, but I was wondering if you could answer my question from a few pages back:

Do you think that there are any situations/places that should be single sex? If so, what are those situations/places.

I promise, I'm not trying to be goady. I'm genuinely interested what your position on this is. I would like to see if there is some common ground here.

Transwomen keep on telling us that self id is no problem, that no man who claims to be a woman is a danger in women's safe spaces. But at the same time they say they need access to our safe spaces because men are dangerous.

So...are men dangerous or not?

From what I can see on here, most have clearly articulated their position and won't change much. So what now? It can't keep going round and round in circles as it's the same conversation over and over.

Another wacky idea...how about listening to what women are saying rather than trying to force us to agree with what men want? Nobody objects, AFAICS, to transexuals. The objections are to self-id.