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.

Well apparently there is some confusion about transpeople

According to rat

I keep hoping Trump doesn't exist...

Thats unfair

peakpants may having been the one inferring that posters don't believe that transpeople exist

Fuck me its confusing

You can't feel female or male because they are not a feeling states.

You can feel a sense of recognition and contentment at the thought of yourself being female or male.

Dysphoria is not recognising yourself as the sex you are and feeling discomfort when you think of yourself as the sex you are. That discomfort is not synonymous with feeling female or male. If an individual's schema regarding their sex has become skewd for some reason, this can cause intense dissonance leading to psychological disturbance and low mood.

To some degree, it is a logical conclusion (especially for children) that you must be the opposite sex because you do not feel content at the thought of yourself as the sex you. However this is a problem with cognition and an individual's ability to process dissonance not evidence of someone being "born in the wrong body".

I can't feel like a horse or a cat or a dolphin because they are biological states that I have no access to. I could imagine what it would be like but those imaginings would be firmly rooted from my human body's perspective and highly unlikely to be anything like the actual experience of being another species.

I've seen ppl saying the GRA should be repealed and can agree with some of those arguments, this is not saying transpeople should not have any rights or transpeople don't exist.
The EA and EU human rights laws all cover transpeople and these rights should not be removed just for them at all, ever. No one would want that.

I don't believe transwomen are women but I do believe transwomen exist. They make enough bloody noise.

This not about beliefs. Beliefs are what has got us into this mess.

Absolutely ophelia

People can exist and also be wrong about many things.

I dont know what rat means by 'transpeople dont exist'

Er, I think you're confused, I don't think I've ever said that.

Oh wait, you just said it wasn't me - it wasn't me!

Quick to denial there rat

No someone was saying that posters on here were denying transpeople exist...

Cant remember who and cant be arsed to check ...doesn't matter anyway

By existing I meant legal visibility. Recognition that they are a distinct group. I didn’t mean they literally do not exist. Gay people didn’t used to exist in law either until they got specific rights.
Anyway it’s a bit of a silly debate because not even the most ardent Tories would reverse the GRA and remove the rights that were implemented after the European Court of Human Rights said that the UK was not compliant with the Convention. A moot point if you like.

Oh we want them to exist as a distinct group believe me!

Gotcha Peakpants! (I also don't think the GRA is going anywhere any time soon.)

not even the most ardent Tories would reverse the GRA and remove the rights that were implemented after the European Court of Human Rights said that the UK was not compliant with the Convention

It doesn't need to mean what it means now. It went further than it needed to. That is shored up by the EA. Ireland for instance has full self ID but prisons are sex not gender segregated. So both could be changed/rolled back if it was recognised that other groups also had rights.

There are already provisions in the EA allowing for same sex segregation. The reforms of the GRA will not impact on the EA.

You say the GRA goes too far but the case that led to the GRA, Goodwin v UK concerned the right to prevent your employer from finding out your birth gender. So unless you want us to leave the ECHR (which I would hope not) then the possibility of legally changing gender is here to stay.

Yes, and I'd like to seem then strengthened. I'd like a clear understanding that women need sex segregation in certain circumstances for their privacy and dignity. And for it to be considered discrimination on the grounds of sex not to provide it.

I certainly don't want them to be further weakened by legitimising and normalising the idea of men in women's spaces and making women feel they can't ask for help, as with self ID. Gender dysphoria is a medical condition. There is no reason other than that basis (and I don't personally believe even then) for legal rights for men to invade women's privacy.

PeakPants I suggest you read what the actual recommendations are that the government has agreed with. They go far beyond merely reforming the GRA and they will most definitely impact the EA. It's in black and white you know, on the government website. We aren't dreaming this up.

Interesting OP.

I agree that it might be helpful and kind to treat a transwoman as a woman in many circumstances.

Saying "Transwomen are women" is an entirely different, false and thus divisive statement. It damages the debate.

"Treat transwomen like women" is a statement I could happily support. Kind, inclusive, not denying reality, not denying anyone's feelings, live and let live. From that basis we can start to talk about when it is appropriate and inappropriate to treat transwomen as women and when as men.

@peakpants
There are already provisions in the EA allowing for same sex segregation. The reforms of the GRA will not impact on the EA.

The report (copy at stephaniedaviesarai.com/cwc/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/390-1.pdf) recommends on p32 that the EA be amended to disallow the exclusion of GRC-holding trans people from services that are currently to allowed to be single-sex. Combine that with self-id (a GRC for anyone who applies for one) and you have a situation where any male, trans or not, can gain legal right of access to female spaces and services by filling in a form and possibly paying an admin fee.

People send phishing emails every week in which they lie to try to get my mail account details. Men pay pimps to be able to rape and beat prostituted women. Why wouldn't men lie on a form and pay an admin fee to get access to vulnerable women?

I'm in the men can't be women camp - they can be a semblance of a woman- fair enough if that's your thing. That's been around for a long time. Live and let live.

However sequestration of a sex is another thing altogether. They are still men to my eyes. And asking me to lie about what I see and experience is coercion - and that's illegal.

Many women don't want men in any form around them in certain situations for good reasons - which has been accepted in law for many years now. The question I have is why is that need disrespected, dismissed and ignored by many TRAs? Some seem to want to erase women's needs - to pretend they don't exist - that's the problem that many seek to cover up by obfuscation and overwhelming by detail #wawag

And great illustration Bloodmagic

And I relate to Ereskigal's comments - her common sense clarity is informative especially around ill thought legislation when the parliamentary push is on clearing out confusing and /or unnecessary laws not adding to it

bd67th the Tories have categorically started that they will not be updating the Equality Act as per that recommendation.

If you look through any of the threads on replies to letters to MPs (FWR board) you'll see it in black and white. Happy to link one if that's easier.

It is disingenuous to suggest, as I keep hearing, that the recommended GRA amendments would impact on nobody other than those seeking a GRC.

It would significantly change the classification of 'woman', and there are many repercussions for this.

As it stands, from a legal perspective, woman means natal females who do not have a GRC and natal males who have a GRC and diagnosed gender dysphoria.

If the suggested amendments go through, from a legal perspective, the term woman would refer to anyone who chooses this label.

The term woman would simply be a self selected label, removing all of key defining features of the category.

It doesn't mean Labour won't if they got in.
It's what the most powerful TRA lobbyists want. It's not going to go away.

*that was about removing the cremations in the EA