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?

@Juells

I would think for that one Juells, I'd imagine that the perspective might be that those who seek to be transwoman are so far on the feminine spectrum (just made that term up ) that they are less likely to be the male violent sort.

Go no evidence that's true, just I'd imagine that's the thinking.

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.

I think the sticking point is agreeing that transwomen are women.

I would think for that one Juells, I'd imagine that the perspective might be that those who seek to be transwoman are so far on the feminine spectrum (just made that term up wink) that they are less likely to be the male violent sort.

Yes that is the thinking. Which is nonsense. Male patterned violence has nothing to do with how feminine the Male is and all to do with how Male the Male is.

@Juells I'm a woman! Im expressing some views for debate as a woman. But the conversation is quite polarised and circular on here with little room for moving forward. That doesn't equate to doing what men want.

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

Quite. Male violence is the problem. It was ever thus...

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.

Again, quite.

But apparently differentiating between transsexual people and other random GNC 'identities' is horrific I would say that transsexual people on the whole will disagree that its horrific to think that they are different to a transvestite tbh.

For me this has far less to do with toilets and far more to do with the definition of what is a woman.
TRAs don’t want a third space because that doesn’t validate them as a woman. For them ‘woman’ is a feeling, you’re a woman because you feel like a woman and that should be enough.
If we lived in a world free of sexism and it was just a word then what would be the harm in changing the definition, it’s just a word after all.

But that’s not how we live, we have a situation where female bodied people are at a disadvantage because of their biology, we have finally got to the place where we are allowed to talk about this and it’s all going to be taken away with the stroke of a pen.
When we can no longer name our sex how can we fight sexism. We already had a situation where it’s commonplace for young feminists to be told to be more ‘inclusive’ when talking about the female experience and what that translates to is ‘shut up about your biology’.
Well I’m sorry but no.

how do you suggest we ‘move forward’ sunflower?

TRAs won’t be satisfied until we say womanhood is an identity and we won’t budge on it being a biological fact.

Do you think we should compromise? I mean we already compromise now with the honour system we’ve had for years and the GRC but do you think we should compromise more?

Teacup

I agree. It's just bloody annoying

I am quite amazed at how certain many posters are on here that their viewpoint is right and solid. I suppose I'm more jelly wobble on all this as there are compelling arguments from all 'sides'.

To throw an extra in, I'm not sure of the age demographic on here, but many young women appear to have a different and more flexible opinion. Their voices are the future and may yet redefine what happens more than someone of my age.

Interesting times.

For me this has far less to do with toilets and far more to do with the definition of what is a woman.

Agree. If it were just about toilets, the solution would be better designed toilets.

crispbuttyfan Mon 09-Apr-18 12:11:08
merrymouse trans is someone who's gender identity does not match their biological sex.

The confusion is between the terms 'gender identity' and the understanding of gender that prevails without the existence of trans people.

The term gender you are referring to I think, is the expectations and behaviours associated with being a certain gender, such as toxic stereotypes etc, which is something almost all trans people I am aware of also mostly resist.

Trans people express themselves in a way they are naturally drawn to, this is then judged and policed by others, as I said above, they are deemed either to be embracing stereotypes merely through their gender expression, or too masculine.

Gender expression, gender identity, gendered behaviours, etc etc
and the interplay between these are deeply complex
Some people try to frame these terms as absolutes.

Let's make this the law. Great idea. No-one knows what it means but who cares.

@Teacuphiccup

I don't know the way forward, but I'm willing to listen and work with others to find it, and ask they do the same.

If only there were better leaders around to do that, but alas ...

I am quite amazed at how certain many posters are on here that their viewpoint is right and solid

That's the same about many things though. Try going onto a Brexit thread (here or elsewhere) and saying that you can see both sides.

I am quite amazed at how certain many posters are on here that their viewpoint is right and solid.

I recognise when women are yet again under threat. Now we're not even women, we're an idea or a feeling that anyone can have, no matter what their biology.

but many young women appear to have a different and more flexible opinion.

I’m 30. I think it’s true that many young women are more flexible on this but many women don’t start to see their biological disadvantages until they get older and/or have a baby.

I work with pregnant women and new mothers and it’s a conversation I have again and again and again that they never saw sexism until they had a baby and suddenly it was like their bodies had only been loaned to them and their careers and autonomy were only on loan and now they have a baby they need to take a back seat and get on with what they were always supposed to be doing, the shit women work.

‘
I don't know the way forward, but I'm willing to listen and work with others to find it, and ask they do the same. ’

I think many women in here feel like that but unfortunately the view of the TRA’s is ‘give us everything we ask for and agree with us 100% or you’re a nasty transphobe’

"To throw an extra in, I'm not sure of the age demographic on here, but many young women appear to have a different and more flexible opinion."

Or old women have seen male behaviour in many guises and a happy to say no to men.

Sunflowersforever
You are essentially saying 'why can't everyone just be nice to each other?'

That's all very well and good. I came to these boards completely open-minded. I have also read other sources, including those that would deem themselves 'pro-trans'.

The problem is, all they talk about is their own interests. They have no interest in compromise or 'being nice'.

They think if you want separate sex spaces you are a bigot.

If you determine sex based on physicality, you are a bigot.

I am really struggling to see how women can compromise with that position without losing sex as a protected characeteristic.

@Ereshkigal

What I was meaning is that there seems such little doubt. Why I started the post was due to doubt from uncovering new information (or was it accurate... still not sure). ----

I have friends with all sorts of unshakable views (Big Pharna, vaccination etc) and they are so definite they are right. I think they are wrong, but understand what drives their fear but that's a whole other thread!

I'm not that person who thinks they are the wrong sex. I don't know what that's like. They also seem so sure. Logically, I can't see how you can be a woman if born a man but maybe that's cause I don't live with those feelings and have that dilemma.

I tell my daughter to question everything. Don't just take it at face value. I'm doing a bit of that here I suppose to also challenge myself.

Characteristic ffs

*@flowersonthepiano
*
Sunflowersforever
You are essentially saying 'why can't everyone just be nice to each other?'

Yes, that is fair comment.

So if we're nice and those who disagree with us don't want to be nice, what happens then?

*@flowersonthepiano
*
So if we're nice and those who disagree with us don't want to be nice, what happens then?

Eh, the naughty ones gets sent home and told to think about what they've done and not allowed back out until they can be nice?