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.

@ellenripleysalienbaby

Is that how you greet people when you first meet them? "Hey have you ever had a penis?"

I don't. I treat people as thinking feeling human beings.

You have a very narrow definition of categories of people in society. Nobody really thinks like you. We don't check out what organs people have all the time. I don't anyway.

Firstly I want to say I respect you @DonnaBe for not shouting bigot, terf, or (as far as I could see) using the word cis, and for discussing and debating respectfully. This is what we need, I'm reading and trying to understand your POV.

The following rant is directed at the particular view that "The way society views gender is changing" and talking about biological difference is reductive and harms women.

About bloody time! Gender is stuff, things, roles etc. Any sex can adopt any gender role/ objects except those related directly to their sex - meaning their reproductive role. Eg tampons.

^this isn't reductive. This is honest. This is being factual. This is saying, yes, actually it's a physical disadvantage in some workplaces to be a pregnant woman, suffer from endometriosis, deal with menopause, breastfeed a baby (Alex from the One Show describes attempting to bf while going back to work at 3 mo pp, found it impossible as yes, it can affect milk production so chose to ff) And economic adjustments for sex, which must take into account how a person's sex can hold them back economically - sometimes temporarily, sometimes long term (my spd never went away and I had to reduce my hours.)

I felt very equal to my male peers till I had a child, then it got bloody complicated.

My childless friend deals with sexism in her STEM career thanks to society's crap ideas about 'gender'.

Acknowledging sex and biology is simply a way to be respectful to the fact that male biology gives a level of privilege they don't need to deal with. And yes some women don't have periods; I have a friend who does not. That disadvantaged her as she had to have 7 rounds of IVF to have one child. I'm grateful I never had period pain, other friends are grateful they don't suffer with spd.

I'm grateful I started my periods very late (though I wasn't at the time as I felt defective) and never had to worry about changing for periods during PE.

Do not, ever tell me that aknowledging these biological differences is reductive.

Walk a mile in my shoes and then tell me what it is to be a woman.

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.

So if I see a male bodied person in a female only space, I can ask to see this legal document then can I? And will there be a central phoneline which I can phone to check their credentials or what?

Otherwise, how do I know whether they have signed a Statutory Declaration in front of a solicitor and declared that they are living in their acquired gender and intend to stay that way?

Or whether they are just, you know, a big bloke with a beard.

Are you one of the people spreading lies everywhere?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Christ on a bike.

Are you now, or have you ever been, a woman with an opinion? If so, report to reeducation camp now. It's on the Isle of Wight. We've renamed it Gilead and sent a lot of (not) very nice Aunties there. They'll put you straight.

But when I meet people, they treat me as female.

I don’t know what that means. Unless it’s a situation where my ovaries, vagina etc. are relevant I just want to be treated as a fellow human being.

This has been me. On AIBU. A lone poster talking about AGP. A year or so back.

Datun, I have an awful lot of respect for you and I think you put your points across well and without invective. I understand your passion and some points you've made I agree with.

Me, I'm a run of the mill person who's somewhere in the middle. A typical floating voter if you like. The tone of a lot of the debate though turns me off and makes me head towards a liberalish standpoint.

"Is that how you greet people when you first meet them? "Hey have you ever had a penis?""

Oh come on, this isn't a casual meeting on the street, this is a thread where we're discussing sex, gender, and biology. The question has relevance here, in this context.

@DonnaBe

You post isn't quite factual with there being no law protecting womens spaces

The Equalities Act outlines circumstances in law where being discriminating on grounds of sex is allowed

Being a particular sex is essential for a job. This is called an occupational requirement. This includes some jobs which require someone of a particular sex for reasons of privacy and decency or where personal services are provided. For example: a gym could employ a changing room attendant that is the same sex as the users of that room. Similarly a women's refuge that only provides services to women could require its staff to be women.

An organisation is taking positive action to encourage or develop people of a sex that is under-represented or disadvantaged in a role or activity. For example: An engineering firm places a job advert for a trainee engineer stating that applications from women are welcome.

The armed forces can refuse to employ a woman, or limit her access to training or promotion if it means they can ensure the combat effectiveness of the armed forces.

In competitive sports the organisers can hold separate events for men and women because the differences in stamina, strength and physique would otherwise make the competition unfair.

There are several situations in which an organisation can lawfully provide single sex services. In all circumstances they must be able to justify it.

For example, offering a women-only support service to women victims of domestic violence is likely to be justifiable even if there is no parallel service for men due to insufficient demand.

For example, offering a women-only support service to women victims of domestic violence is likely to be justifiable even if there is no parallel service for men due to insufficient demand.

@HarryLovesDraco

Yes there should be a debate. But telling lies and starting scares will not help that.

The people doing this are long term anti-trans campaigners. They are not interested in women's welfare. They'll harm women as long as they can eradicate trans women.

As you say, there is de facto self id already. The GRA 2004 act makes it partly de jure also.

The sky hasn't fallen.

DonnaBe

You're going to have to be more specific. What lies? Explicitly.

Because vague accusation doesn't cut the mustard here.

We drill down. We analyse.

So start with stating, clearly, A Lie.

And yes I agree with others, people use your preferred pronouns out of courtesy, there is not a single slightly educated person on this planet who genuinely believes you can change your sex from a man to a woman. But it is lovely you have people around you who make you feel comfortable I guess.

My bullimic friend used to try and get me to agree that she was fat. It didn't feel right to go along with her belief that her illness caused. I suppose if I had a TIM friend it wouldn't do much harm to go along with it but we'd both know the truth. That's what I find so sad, that trans people can't just be who they are, they have to try and be something they cannot.

Biological difference matters: asthmatics need different references ranges for treatment based on sex from the mid teen years and even earlier.

@grasspigeons

May I introduce you to the Boomerang Effect:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boomerang_effect_(psychology)#Political_beliefs

In social psychology, the boomerang effect refers to the unintended consequences of an attempt to persuade resulting in the adoption of an opposing position instead. It is sometimes also referred to "the theory of psychological reactance", stating that attempts to restrict a person's freedom often produce an "anticonformity boomerang effect".

Women do feel their freedom is restricted. It actually is when they are no longer allowed to use commonly used words in situations they have been always used in; eg mother in maternity settings, women in settings which relate to their biological health and the enforced use of 'cis' against their will and when they find it offensive.

This isn't far right infiltration. Its a consequence of not being involved in conversations, a deliberate attempt to refuse to debate, telling women it will be ok without properly listening to each and every single little concern.

Instead what they see is an aggressive, rude and arrogant attitude which does not value what they value.

They see people saying their right to identify as they wish is important, but at the same time, women's own ability to identify as they wish is being taken away from them.

The failure to even attempt to try and find compromise solutions in any of the situations is the problem. The failure to acknowledge that at least some concerns have validity rather than dismissing all in collective manner.

Trans Rights Activists need to be self aware of how they are projecting themselves rather than blaming women for this, if they are actually serious about wanting to achieve the goals they want.

I fear for the future, not because I have some irrational fear of trans people, but because of the breakdown in communication and the lack of interest in finding compromises in society. The implications in a great many areas of life, in the long term are horrendous. The trans argument is but part of that.

From wiki:
Political beliefs
Nyhan & Reifler conducted experiments in which subjects read mock news articles including a misleading claim from a politician, or such a claim followed by a correction. They found that the corrections frequently fail to reduce misconceptions for the ideological group targeted by the misinformation. They also found cases of what they called a "backfire effect" (i.e. a boomerang effect) in which the corrections strengthened belief in the misinformation. They attribute this to motivated reasoning on the part of the affected participants.

You can not reason against this, when positions are entrenched. Unless someone decides to take a middle ground approach and force the situation there will be an issue.

A lot of feminists are trying to do exactly this. The moderate trans voices are trying to do this.

The politicians are aggravating this and deliberately trying to use it to their advantage. The trouble is that any real consequences on the ground which are the result of ignoring this warning about potential unintended consequences by trans supporters, in the long run will work against them.

This is not some far right conspiracy nonsense. Its a spontaneous psychological effect, which I believe ultimately WILL be exploited by the far right.

Its not to late.

Listen. Women are not the enemy.

Are you one of the people spreading lies everywhere

Let's talk about lies.

Men cannot change into women.

Women cannot change into men.

If this truth upsets people then to be honest, they will have to sell with it.

Lots of things upset people. Life is bout dealing with upset.

We need to stop this lie that people can become something they are not.

I do like the idea that as other people use preferred pronouns it somehow means something other than they are polite.

People do lie in order to spare feelings, people are generally keen on being nice to people. Personally I've had many people tell me blatant lies in order to not hurt my feelings, eg. I'm fat, there's no way around it, but people will go out of their way to say, "oh no, you're not fat!" They are doing it to be nice, but it doesn't make it true. I still won't fit in a size 8 dress.

Name a lie.

This isn't hard.
Copy and paste it. Source it.
Explain it.

And regarding the difference in peak flow for asthmatics between the sexes, I find it quite astonishing this hasn't been noted in sports regarding trans gender people, not least following the hoo har over Sir Bradley's use of asthmatic medication recently.

Most of the time we relate to people socially. Not biologically. It's the social presentation that maintains 99% of our interactions with other people not the biological

I have to be blunt when I say that only a man could write this. I'm afraid it's not true, not for most people anyway.

When you first meet someone, the first thing you clock is their sex. We're mammals. Everything revolves around our sex, fundamentally. Sex, size and, weight tells you a lot about someone. First of all if someone is a threat (a man might be - taller, broader men are noticeable when you meet them. They register in a different way, I think), then if someone is a potential partner/mate (even if you're coupled up: I'm talking sexual attraction or lack of it). This all goes on fairly unconsciously but if you have ever been a victim of assault (many women have been) then the former will all be quite a loud process in your head.

I am going to speak for myself but when I meet a man, I'm trying to judge as they speak if they're nice or not, if I have anything to be worried about or not, if I am attracted to them or not.

If I meet a woman, I'm thinking more about what we might have in common - is she wearing similar clothing to me (little make up, jeans, mud under her finger nails means we might be kindred spirits)? Is she friendly and chatty? Is she talking about a job or hobby I might find interesting?

It's completely different. I don't tend to be friends with men. I know many women manage to be but for me in the past that's either ended with married men trying it on with me or me not feeling completely relaxed in their company because I've been assaulted in the past and I can't quite relax. That's just my issue but most of my female friends have mainly female friends too so it's not unique to me.

You have a very narrow definition of categories of people in society. Nobody really thinks like you. We don't check out what organs people have all the time. I don't anyway.

That's because you don't have to!

Are you not listening, here?

Women are programmed from childhood, identify and assess risk.

Men commit 98% of sexually violent crime. The victims are largely women.

You might well claim also that transwomen are victims of sexual assault. But it is sexual assault by men.

One in five women will suffer from some form of sexual violence in their life. From men.

85,000 women are year are raped. By men.

Two women a week are killed. By men.

And transitioning does not alter these stats. Transwomen conform to male pattern violence. You only have to look at the behaviour of TRAs, the very men campaigning for access to women. to see it in action.

Everyone understands that transwomen can be abused. Which is why they require safety.

A third space is the logical solution. Do you agree with that?

I've been on here 11 years under different names, so not new or invading either.

I have a friend who issues birth certificates etc so have had the discussion before with her years ago that it is madness to rewrite history.

In fact, changing birth certificates is the fallacy which has led us to the ridiculous self-ID proposal.

All needs a re-think and women should be centre stage to explain how men self-identifying as women will impact them and their children.

Please sign petition for women's views to be considered:

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/214118

The sky hasn't fallen

Mainly because very few people are trans.

But nonsense legislation is still nonsense legislation.

How can anybody talk about a gender pay gap if it’s transphobic to talk about female biology? Why is it sexist for somebody to make assumptions about me based on gender if legislation differentiates according to identity?

What on earth is it that I am supposed to have in common with trans women that I don’t share with trans men or men?

As I understand it, the aims of the new law are to demedicalise the process and for the process to not be demeaning.
The reason for requiring a diagnosis of gender dysphoria for a GRC is to stop the autogynophiles from being eligible. A few chats with a doctor or psychiatrist is hardly a demeaning process. As I understand it, the process for proving disability is worse. But we don't allow self-id there either.

Welcome to mumsnet op . I do hope you find the time to read further around the issue whilst you are here, as your op indicates you haven't really done a lot of thinking about this issue at all.

The people doing this are long term anti-trans campaigners. They are not interested in women's welfare. They'll harm women as long as they can eradicate trans women

I have never come across anyone here who wants to eradicate trans women.

I've never come across a rad fem on here who has no care about harming women.

Quite frankly, you are speaking a lot of shit.

I have come across pages and pages and pages of considered, intelligent debate about how Trans Rights Activists are impacting on women's safety and well-being.

I did have a very brief look at '4chan' yesterday where people (men!) were joking very offensively about 'trans faggots' and wanting to eradicate them.

I think possibly you've landed on the wrong forum.