Trans women are women answers to Terfmore's questions

[SupermatchGame]

Terfmore. I don't want to override the ASD discussion that's developed...
but SupermacthGame: you gave your explanation why "trans women are women". I was hoping for a coherent argument.
Could you respond to my request that you clarify your position; I found it difficult to understand tbh I found it incoherent.
You could start a new thread if you like.

Ok, as you suggest:

upthread you say -
"Trans women are women because 'woman' (or female) is not only a legal designation but having a gender identity of 'woman' is a legitimate female gender identity with some basis in biology and physiology. No-one said this is an exact science. It's pragmatic." -
Could you break this down -

1. what do you mean "woman" is a legal designation? what law are you referring to? do you mean "adult human female"?

I mean the category ‘female’ not only has a biological definition, but it is also a legal category that can be conferred to a person following GRC. I’m using ‘woman’ and ‘female’ interchangeably here. Eg as specified in the Royal College of Psychiatrist’s Guidance on gender dysphoria:
"Once a Gender Regulation [sic] Certificate has been issued, the applicant must, in accordance with the provisions of that certificate, be identified as a man or a woman and not a ‘trans man’ or ‘trans woman’. "

Quoting the Gender Recognition Act 2004:
"Where a full gender recognition certificate is issued to a person, the person’s gender becomes for all purposes the acquired gender (so that, if the acquired gender is the male gender, the person’s sex becomes that of a man and, if it is the female gender, the person’s sex becomes that of a woman)." (my bold)

2. what does "gender identity of woman is a legitimate female gender identity" mean.

It means that regardless of natal sex, if a person identifies as a woman, and they have been diagnosed or confirmed as having a ‘female gender identity’ then to all intents and purposes they are classed as having a female gender identity that legitimises medical and legal transition. I’m not sure taken in isolation this clause makes much sense because it is part of a larger sentence.

3. in what way is an identity legitimate (and presumably there will be non or illegitimate identity?)

Legitimate as in confirmed by psychiatrists and/ or psychologists. As in a (cross sex) gender identity that is not caused by some co-morbidity or underlying pathology. (Not caused by anything other than GID/ or 'transgenderism'). An identity that can then be further legitimised by changing legal status.

4. do you mean identity "has some basis in biology and physiology"? what do you mean by identity? (it means different things to different people).

I mean gender identity (the sex with which an individual identifies with or feels they are) has genetic, biological, environmental and societal causes. (Although you could say that about most aspects of identity - using the biopsychosocial model). What evidence there is points to this. I’ve highlighted a lot of it on the other thread. I was abbreviating my language and focusing on the non environmental causes - by biology I meant genes and biochemistry including hormonal influences. By physiology I meant the physiology of the brain as in brain structure. Is There Something Unique about the Transgender Brain? www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-there-something-unique-about-the-transgender-brain/

5. What is "pragmatic"? I think you are referring to "trans women are women" not being exact but we just have to live with it. but I may have that wrong?

Not 100% perfect solution. No-one has yet found a way to ‘cure’ transsexualism. Treatment alleviates dysphoria. In many cases it supports the person to lead a happier life in which they can function better psychologically, emotionally, socially and occupationally. Sometimes also in terms of sexual relationships. It’s not a perfect transition - trans women do not acquire wombs, trans men do not have real testicles (not that they all want to?) Not all trans people can resemble their new sex as much as they would ideally like. But it can be good enough. It can support improved health outcomes for some individuals. It is also a solution that most of society (and it’s main organisations) seems to accept. Hence pragmatic, not perfect, solution.

So we are back to the circular answer that a man can say he is a woman because he feels like one, and that's good enough authority.
That erases the category 'women'.

There is why the Equality Act actually lists the protected characteristic as 'transgender'.
The EA states that in most instances someone with a GRC should be treated as if they had the protected characteristic 'female'. Someone with a GRC is treated as if they are female.
They do not actually become female.

Oh, interesting OP! I haven't seen the other thread that's sparked this off though; do you think you could link it so I can have a read tomorrow when I have more time?

Is it just possible that there is confusion here between your traditional transsexual who ( based on my exoerience) has gender dysmorphia, has had severe mental health problems all their life, who lives as a woman , typically with surgery or hormonal treatment or both but if asked will call themselves trans. we have all rubbed along together, although perhaps with these trans people still feeling like they always need to be careful, which is not a nice way to have to live

And the modern trans person, who may make no effort to lose their male body but will literally die if you refuse to let them see you get changed in the women's changing room? Who can not recognis that gender does not equal sex? Who thinks that if they like physics they must be a boy? Who wants to self id as a woman one day and a man the next ( I know that is unlikely to be legal, but it would be pretty hard to challenge without being seen to.be transphobic)

It's the Transing Children thread Rat

A lot of effort you went to there to clarify your position. For that, thank you.

However, your explanation only applies to a maximum 5% of transidentified men.

The following is based on written evidence submitted by GIRES to the Transgender Equality Inquiry of the House of Commons Women's and Equality Committee and the existing research on prevalence of transsexualism.

GIRES estimates 1% of the UK population is trans. That's 650,000 people. Of which so far GIRES says only 30,000 have sought any medical help whatsoever (this includes therapy) and just under 5,000 have a GRC.

We know from a large body of research that 1 in 14,000 men are transsexual and 1 in 38,000 women.

If we extrapolate these numbers we get:

1,000 out of 100,000 are trans identified
of those
50 have sought medical help
of those
8 have a GRC
of those
about 5 are (post-op) transsexuals

and in total the above numbers on the prevalence of transsexualism in the general population give us just over

2300 M2F transsexuals
and just over
850 F2M transsexuals

However, as I said above, the entire trans population of the UK is estimated at 650,000. So your reasoning applies only to about 5 trans people out of every thousand in the strictest sense (being transsexual) and 50 out of every thousand in the wider sense of having sought medical help.

According to your explanation, the other 950 to 995 out of every 1000 trans people cannot lay claim to being the other sex. But self-id will give them the same rights as if they were.

So what about women and girls? Why should we give up our rights to people who in the vast, overwhelming majority cannot lay any claim to womanhood? Who are - in their own words - not sick and therefore do not need medical treatment, who reject any requirement to actually transitioning medically.

Can you explain what makes a non-med, non-op transwoman a woman?

Thanks Supermatch. Thankfully I've read most of that thread so hopefully a quick catch up tomorrow will fill me in!

Charlie, interesting. I'm on the GIRES website, can you point me in the direction of those figures please? I'm keen to see too what they mean by "trans". I always wonder about that.

I know it's a small point and not necessarily key, but I suspect that 1% figure is to the nearest integer, so the actual number could be anything from half that to 50% more! Probably not the best starting point for any sort of extrapolation. But interesting none the less.

Thank you CharlieParley, those are interesting stats. If I was transsexual I'd be really annoyed to be grouped with people who are gender non conforming, as though it's comparative.

Someone with a GRC is treated as if they are female.
They do not actually become female.

Interestingly, the wording of the GRA 2004 does refer to becoming female -

Where a full gender recognition certificate is issued to a person, the person’s gender becomes for all purposes the acquired gender (so that, if the acquired gender is the male gender, the person’s sex becomes that of a man and, if it is the female gender, the person’s sex becomes that of a woman).

But obviously in real terms I agree it means they should be treated as if they were female, because it's an Act of Parliament, not magic and it's impossible for someone born a man to literally become a woman.

I don't have time to answer I full.
I understand what you are saying but I can't see how it makes sense.

What is "female gender identity"?

Maybe female gender identity is an innate feeling and sense that you are female? I know people on here constantly deny that they feel female but I can’t see how it can have no impact whatsoever on a person’s sense of identity. If I woke up tomorrow in a man’s body, my mind would feel out of place and wrong. I imagine that is what it’s like for someone with gender dysphoria- a sense that they are in the wrong body. That’s what trans people describe so why not take them at their word? If you haven’t experienced that yourself, great, but that doesn’t mean that others don’t have a sense of gender identity.

If I woke up tomorrow in a man’s body, my mind would feel out of place and wrong

This is such a ridiculous statement. This is not actually possible is it, and yet you are suggesting we imagine this is happening because it's true for some people. Magical thinking.

Great username OP, and thanks for setting out the detail.

Yip, although I don't have a clear gender identity, some people do. That's fine. Possibly. I still worry about the relationship between gender identification and gender stereotyping.

It's not the same as their sex though

RatRolyPoly It's on the UK parliament's website, not GIRES. The link is here

And if the actual number of the total trans population is higher, it just further weakens the argument of needing self-id to help vulnerable transsexuals who have too long to wait for treatment (this is essentially the point GIRES makes in its submission).

To be honest, if trans people say that is how they feel, that is how they feel. You might not think it's possible, but why should your version be accepted over theirs?

You can still have your protections without outright denying the reality of trans people and their feelings.

Apologies, just realised I used a completely inappropriate name. Changed it now.

I would be so delighted if I woke up tomorrow in a man's body. How liberating that would be. I've never felt particularly feminine. Still a biological woman though.

You can still have your protections

Really? It seems not though doesn't it, because the feelings you refer to are taking legal precedence over biological reality.

Charlie the media seems to have been saying there is 5000 transsexuals in the UK for the last 30 years ! Does anyone truly know the numbers?

That 1% is an estimate. This whole 'trans' umbrella includes crossdressers, drag queens etc. They also estimate that only one fifth of that 650,000 will seek medical help for gender dysphoria.

But self-id will give them the same rights as if they were.

I didn't say I was pro self id?

So what about women and girls? Why should we give up our rights to people who in the vast, overwhelming majority cannot lay any claim to womanhood?

We shouldn't.

Can you explain what makes a non-med, non-op transwoman a woman?

No.

Just as an aside the Equality and Human Rights Commission say this:

"No major Government or administrative surveys have collected data by including a question where trans people can choose to identify themselves. Publicly collected data on trans people is virtually non-existent, though there is some evidence on attitudes towards trans people, for example in the 2006 Scottish Social Attitudes Survey 50 per cent of people said they would be unhappy if a close relative formed a relationship with a transsexual person (Bromley et al., 2007) and in the Commission's Who Do You See? attitudinal survey in Wales, the figure was 47 per cent (EHRC, 2008)."

"At present, there is no official estimate of the trans population. The England/Wales Census and Scottish Census have not asked if people identify as trans and do not plan to include such a question in 2010. GIRES, in their Home Office funded study estimate the number of trans people in the UK to be between 300,000 - 500,000, defined as ‘..a large reservoir of transgender people who experience some degree of gender variance’ (Reed et al 2009)"

I understand about gender dysphoria, and I can the need for recognition of gender change for people with that condition. What I struggle with is the data outlined by Charlie above, indicating that the vast majority of those covered by the trans umbrella do not have gender dysphoria. Can someone explain to me how trans people who don't have gender dysphoria differ from anyone else who is simply gender non-conforming? I don't get it.

So the way forward is to deny that trans people exist and get rid of their existing rights then?

As far as I am aware the 1% uk population figure is based on a Dutch study that one percent of all people are gender incongruent, and then this was extrapolated to the UK pop estimated in 2009 as 65m. So that is 650k.

Not having a GRC doesn’t mean not having gender dysphoria