T

[DonnaBe]

Mumsnet has been invaded by a small group of people who are giving out wrong information about the proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act.

They claim that women’s spaces are being invaded and women are being silenced. Please read this and make up your own minds!

A gender Self ID law – like the one proposed in the UK - was recently introduced in Ireland. To change your gender on government records, you need to sign a Statutory Declaration in front of a solicitor and declare that you are living in your acquired gender and intend to stay that way. This is a legal document.

Self ID has not caused problems in Ireland. This is the kind of thing that is being proposed in the UK. It's about making a statement under oath about your acquired gender.

It has been claimed that anyone will be able to claim to be the opposite gender whenever they want. Not true. Nobody is proposing that big blokes with beards can say “I am a woman today” and have legal protection to use women’s loos. If they were, I would be campaigning against it. That is absolutely not what is being proposed

The group behind this campaign are not new. They have been conducting anti-trans campaigns for many years. I don’t think their agenda is women’s welfare so much as expressing their hatred for trans people. The self id proposals have given them an opportunity to attack trans people. Again. They claim they are being silenced, but their views are regularly aired on TV and in the newspapers. And on Mumsnet. They have a right to speak, but I wish they’d tell the truth.

Believe it or not, this all starts with a discussion about marriage. Before 2004, trans people could not marry or stay married because there was no legal way to change the gender on their birth certificates. There was no same sex marriage back then.

The Gender Recognition Act of 2004 introduced the ability to stand in front of a Gender Recognition Panel (cost £140) and get a Gender Recognition Certificate which allowed you to change your birth certificate and get married! This is a bureaucratic arrangement that involves an element of body policing which is not nice.

The proposal now is to replace the GRP / GRC arrangement with a legally binding statutory declaration. Or something like that. That’s all. No whimsical notions like “It’s Friday. I’m a woman today.”

In fact, you can now get married if your transgendered under same sex marriage legislation. So getting a GRC is less relevant. I don’t know if there’s any research on this, but my feeling is most trans people don’t bother getting a GRC anyway.

So this is how things stand today:

There is no law banning men from women’s toilets and changing rooms. There’s only an unwritten rule. The recent Man Friday campaign where women invaded men’s toilets could have the contradictory effect of weakening this rule and end up harming women. The logical conclusion of their campaign is body policing with guards on women’s toilets and women will have to prove their gender before having a pee.

Trans women already use women’s toilets and changing rooms. I do. Nobody notices. I don’t make a song and dance about it. There is no slackening of the law defending women’s spaces because there is no such law. We get on fine without it.

The Gender Recognition Act makes exceptions for things like women’s refuges. These exceptions should be used where appropriate. Already law. Not changing.

You can live in your non-birth gender already. If you pass as that gender well enough, you just do it. You don’t need a law or certificate to do it. Thousands of people live this way and nobody is harmed by it.

I think TIMs have as much to fear as gay men ie not much compared with women.

Gay men are able to use male bathrooms with little problems and are not asking women to put themselves at real risk to solve their problems.

Clicked the twitter links, Donna thinks we are "hysterical". (Assuming not funny haha ).

And that tells you all you need to know, I think.

As a PP said, it is a different kind of violence, I think. Less one on one and hidden, more overt and perhaps involving more aggressors. That is beside the point though. Any violence is more than any of us should have to fear.

Yet, Jaycee, if there is a violent backlash against trans people, and you need support, do tell us. We will back you up where we can.

Gay men are able to use male bathrooms with little problems

Do you think that there might be a difference between a gay man in a toilet and a transwoman?

Men can't tell if a man is gay.
They can tell if someone is a transwoman.

Clicked the twitter links, Donna thinks we are "hysterical".

Wombs are such a bother.

Lots of gay men are obviously gay. Lots of TIMs are obviously men.

"They can tell if someone is a transwoman."

And you are expecting women to pretend they can't tell. All because of male violence?

Lots of gay men are obviously gay

In a toilet?

Lost art, a transwoman in a Male toilet will stand out more than a gay man.

Let's not get into a contest about who has more to fear from men. That's lily madigan's thing.

And you are expecting women to pretend they can't tell

No - But Florafox seems to have dismissed the very real experience and fear that transwomen have of male violence because 'gay men seem to be ok in the toilet'.

A man can't tell usually if someone is gay. They can tell if someone is a transwoman.

Thanks, pickleme but I am not phased by any words. They can think and say what they like I will just say what I believe back as calmly as I can.

I am not part of any trans organisation or going to demos or meetings - never have done - so probably not under that kind of direct threat.

Some others might be, though, and I am sure they will appreciate your support.

And the reason you don't hear much about transwomen being attacked in male toilets is because they tend to use female ones - or avoid going altogether.

But the solution to male violence in male toilets is to let a subset of man into women toilets? And women are supposed to be fine with this? Why does it become women's problem?

There’s not contest. Women have much more to fear for male violence and sexual assault than TIMs. This goes back to the question of why TIMs are not directing their attention to violent men and why they don’t see the harm of allowing self ID’d TIMs to use women’s toilets.

OP says on twitter:

“my OP was factual, I wanted to debate, I got back hysterical abuse and dogma. Times change. We need to adapt. I stand in defense of women AND trans people and for EVERY class of disadvantaged and oppressed.”

Dripping with misogyny. Didn’t even bother to reply to most of the points made. Even those raised by other transwomen. I think I know who is dogmatic and I don’t think they actually wanted a debate at all.

Jayceedove

I’ve been thinking about your points about whether you’re out of touch and whether transitioning is different now.

I wonder whether a lot of the heat in this debate comes down to the current trend of people effectively living in bubbles, both online and in real life, where their views are constantly reinforced and they can block anything and anyone that challenges their worldview. It’s a massive problem in politics (and one which we all need to be vigilant about), and it’s why people are vulnerable to propaganda and the likes of Cambridge Analytica.

The current generation of middle class, educated young people is largely extremely tolerant and open minded, which is wonderful. That they feel comfortable subverting gender norms is also great. However, in their bubble they are pretty safe to do so, and I can understand why they’re misinterpreting the concerns of radical feminists as bigotry (I’m not including the MRA trolls in this btw, I’m talking about the sincere young people). To them, it’s madness to be worried about transwomen in sexually segregated spaces - they don’t see the need for segregation at all.

It’s a lack of empathy and experience - as the Deptford People’s Project wrote, the student activists are not even considering the impact of their demands on poor, uneducated women, for all their claims to be intersectional.

I am educated and middle class, and would be very unlikely to be impacted by self-ID. Hopefully I won’t need to use a women’s refuge or go to prison (but who knows? I’d want to feel safe in those places if I did), and I don’t personally feel threatened by mixed sex toilets and changing rooms (largely because I don’t use them much). But I know that there are thousands, millions of other women who are not as privileged as me, who experience male violence every day, and who need these protections.

To those in the glittery rainbow bubble, the rest of the world needs to catch up, but they are not seeing their privilege. The liberal feminist narrative doesn’t recognise that women have always been oppressed because of their biology, and that there is no way to identify out of that.

Life outside their bubble in most of the world is at best structurally more difficult for women, at worst downright dangerous. They need to recognise this and see how self-centred and flawed their philosophy is.

About half way through this thread DonnaBe said; "This is about my life". While feminists are concerned about the impact and consequences self id has on society, on all women, girls and trans women, the op is only concerned with how it can be better for them. We have used inclusive language - we/our/us etc. Op has used me/my/I. How can we debate with that level of conceit?

To them, it’s madness to be worried about transwomen in sexually segregated spaces - they don’t see the need for segregation at all.

YY and that’s why the ‘men’s rights’ knobheads love it. All women shortlists? Should never have had those in the first place, love.

And most of us stand by our opinion about you, OP.

YY and that’s why the ‘men’s rights’ knobheads love it. All women shortlists? Should never have had those in the first place, love.

That's all the comments you have to wade through from men before you can even begin to discuss the trans issue.

Hi all

Since this thread is getting near its end, this seems like a good moment to make a really serious point.

We've just made some more deletions on this thread, and we're pretty exasperated tbh - we feel we're running out of ways to say 'please stick within the TGs or risk losing MN as a place to discuss this issue.'

We're really proud of our commitment to free speech, and we put a huge amount of time and resources to enabling this debate to take place - as many of you have pointed out, it's one of the few places left.

To those who haven't yet been able to stop and look at things from our end of the barrel - please understand that you're risking this space for everyone; if you really can't debate civilly with those you disagree with, it might be time to consider that MN is no longer the place for you. We're sorry to have to say this - we don't like it one bit - but tbh nothing else seems to have got through so far: we're at a point of last resort.

Thanks to all those who modify their first instincts and manage to make their points in a calm, considered and civilised manner - even in the face of goadiness. We appreciate it (and so would Michelle.)

Thanks all

MNHQ

Thank you MNHQ
We dont pay to use MN and taking the piss with the guidelines isn't on.

electric shock needles poked in my face

AKA laser hair removal treatment.