Letter in The Guardian from Transexuals saying self ID not the answer

[invisibleoldwoman]

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/may/04/standing-up-for-transsexual-rights?CMP=share_btn_fb

LM came out as having a diagnosis of schizophrenia yesterday (initially whilst drunk on twitter). I work in mental health and know many people with this diagnosis (including family members) so I am not dissing LM for that but I'm wondering at the sense in someone so vulnerable being thrust into the centre of this debate by the Labour Party.

t.co/CjvqrGDWfL

I thought I saw something like that cis.

I don't really want to bring LM into this for those reasons. I can't see how even this letter is being used as another baseball bat towards a woman. But perhaps best to leave that here.

LM came out as having a diagnosis of schizophrenia yesterday (initially whilst drunk on twitter). I work in mental health and know many people with this diagnosis (including family members) so I am not dissing LM for that but I'm wondering at the sense in someone so vulnerable being thrust into the centre of this debate by the Labour Party.

LM has come out with several, mutually exclusive, diagnoses. I think our only conclusion can be that - whatever the accuracy of whatever pronouncement made - they are a vulnerable person and the Labour Party has a duty of care it is not exercising. This is terribly wrong and I am disgusted by Labour in this.

(Also - vulnerable and malicious are not mutually exclusive characteristics.)

I don't know why the signatories are getting thanked on here.

Because whatever you think and whatever their motivation it is helpful to the cause of stopping self-ID and some people WANT to say thank you for that. You don't, I'm unsure and others don't and that's fine. Some posters here will be grateful that people have put themselves into precarious positions just to write their truth and regardless of why it is helpful to our mutual cause.

I'm not saying women be nice because we know that is bullshit but lets not turn on one another because some people feel thankful. I think for one I agree with Lass (actually it is more than once)

And people keep alluding to things and expecting everyone to know what it means and to just go along with it. I have no clue - I'm not here all the time. My instinct is to believe women but I prefer to judge myself. Like this LangCleg - I think you are a great poster and I enjoy your posts immensely but what is all this about? I find it all confusing (not your fault btw - just me being out of the loop I guess)

However, I'm going to be honest with you. I don't appreciate that you've been all over this forum for a while now, giving the impression that you're not trans but a trans ally and trying to persuade the feminists here into pro-trans positions. This is quite deceitful behaviour and not the way to win allies among feminists. It's certainly not solidarity.

Sigh. I don't want to be at odds with everyone. I want there to be a common ground - although I accept that may not be possible.

My thanks to the signatories of the letter are because we have been saying for some time 'why don't members of the trans community speak up?'. Now that some have they are getting flack from both sides.

We (as in women) have been saying over and over that this will hurt members of the trans community as well as women. We've been told by TRAs that isn't the case or else they would be speaking up to. Well now they have and, yes, I am thanking them for doing so.

Our reasons for protesting the proposed changes to the GRA are different but that doesn't mean we can't work together to achieve the same aims.

Labour Party has a duty of care it is not exercising. Agreed.

I agree with Kitty. I hate all this talk of 'sides' as if we're in a battle. It just encourages people to entrench into their views defensively and attack people who disagree. Finding common ground and acceptable compromise has to be the way forward, surely.

Langcleg; You are quite right. It did feel dishonest, and was. I apologise. The "examples" I gave ( a young transman, etc) are genuine. I told no actual "lies", but was aware that I was being misleading. My reason was lack of courage. I was working myself up to leaving a certain transgender website, because I profoundly disagreed with the beliefs of the most prolific posters, and I had seen the force of some of the committed people in the feminist threads here. Although I agree with much, most even, of what they say, and 100% see why they say it, I was reluctant to put myself in a position where I was being shot at from both sides. And then, when Debbie told me about the letter, I thought, am I a transsexual or a mouse? So apologies from me. I wish I have been braver.

Drat; it was Kittyclaws, not Langcleg my post was to.

I think you should feel free to be yourself, and will be accepted as such. And yes, people will robustly disagree on occasion. But you don't have to pretend here.

Actually the reason why women might feel like thanking the signatories is due to the 'sides' in this - it's been painted as TRA v women (bigots, transphobes etc). This is a group of people who are (to the uneducated outside world) on the "trans side" disagreeing with the whole TRA gender unicorn umbrella ideology being used.

To the naive, this letter triggers the need to do a bit of critical thinking. Which politicians aren't doing.

OMG - I'm laughing my socks off here. I told someone in DM to watch out for this post from Ceinwen2 and here it is. The script at it's finest.

God, I'm confused now.Who was it that said I was a lair? Anyway; I was. Apologies for being dishonest about my background.Christ I'm bad at social media. I need a lie down.

LM came out as having a diagnosis of schizophrenia yesterday (initially whilst drunk on twitter).
LM claimed he identified as autistic until about a week ago.

I also think the people who put their name to this letter have been brave to do so. It’s important to make the distinction between transexual and transgender and I think many people are unaware of the difference and assume anyone who is transgender is on the route to becoming transexual or already is.
I don’t know anything about the disagreements between Jaycee and sweary so can’t make any comment on that.

It was LangCleg not me. I just quoted her as I wasn't understanding the allusion in her post.

Which brings me to this:

OMG - I'm laughing my socks off here. I told someone in DM to watch out for this post from Ceinwen2 and here it is. The script at it's finest.

Ok, can you tell us more spontaneousgiventime? otherwise it is just a random statement flung out into the thread which goes over my head (and the heads of some others no doubt).

Like this LangCleg - I think you are a great poster and I enjoy your posts immensely but what is all this about?

I'm not on a side! Honest! If I have a view on something, I just say it.

Here, I appreciate that someone has signed a letter that indicates transsexual persons agree with me on self-ID - and so I say so.

Here, I also unappreciate that the same someone has been posting on the forum presenting themselves as a woman ally of trans people but now tells me that they've actually been a trans person all along - and so I say so.

For good or for ill, I also have a particular beef with people who make emotive appeals to female socialisation on feminist messageboards and, when I see that playing out, draw attention to it. I realise that it makes some people feel uncomfortable and I also realise that I can be a bit of a hardliner about it so many here might agree when it's particularly egregious but also disagree other times and think I put too high a priority on it.

Therefore, I try to point out it in plain language but without being abusive and I don't mind in the least if I get any push back. Always feel free to push back on anything I say!

Here, I also unappreciate that the same someone has been posting on the forum presenting themselves as a woman ally of trans people but now tells me that they've actually been a trans person all along - and so I say so.

Ah - my fog is clearing - thank you for the reply.

For good or for ill, I also have a particular beef with people who make emotive appeals to female socialisation on feminist messageboards and, when I see that playing out, draw attention to it. I realise that it makes some people feel uncomfortable and I also realise that I can be a bit of a hardliner about it so many here might agree when it's particularly egregious but also disagree other times and think I put too high a priority on it.

I can see this - this is possibly what spontaneousgiventime is writing about too?

I don't think you are a hardliner or maybe you are and I am too as I agree with you the majority of the time. It wasn't a criticism anyway I just wanted to understand more so thanks for clarifying.

I'm not adverse to pushing back don't worry. I'm quite comfortable with expressing my position too (but also open to changing it if the evidence is compelling enough). I think that is thinking critically - accepting your position (or my position) isn't always as right as I think.

Langcleg; You are quite right. It did feel dishonest, and was. I apologise. The "examples" I gave ( a young transman, etc) are genuine. I told no actual "lies", but was aware that I was being misleading. My reason was lack of courage. I was working myself up to leaving a certain transgender website, because I profoundly disagreed with the beliefs of the most prolific posters, and I had seen the force of some of the committed people in the feminist threads here. Although I agree with much, most even, of what they say, and 100% see why they say it, I was reluctant to put myself in a position where I was being shot at from both sides. And then, when Debbie told me about the letter, I thought, am I a transsexual or a mouse? So apologies from me. I wish I have been braver.

Thank you for seeing my point and the apology. I appreciate it.

My beef remains with the appeal to female socialisation that follows your apology in this post. I hope you see my point about this dynamic too, and why I object to it. Because, I have to be honest, I'm unlikely to stop pointing it out.

Generally speaking, I am glad to see transsexuals advocating for themselves as a distinct group. I don't wish to conflate this with women organising as a different distinct group but I do believe there will be areas of agreement that we can work together on.

Thanks for the clarification spontaneous I cross posted with you.

Wow - well done.

That took guts for sure.

I'm sad to read this thread. It reads bitter when I had hoped it would be positive. I have no idea about what's gone on with various posters. Sweary was amazing putting herself out there for Man Friday. I have appreciated reading Jayceedove's posts from a different perspective. I'd thank them both.

I'm pleased that all the signatories to that letter have stood up to be counted, and that The Guardian published it.

Their voices will be listened to where ours are not

And? Self ID is "their" fight to be won. A group standing up to say "no thanks" from within that community is powerful.

"Our" fight is for women and girls' rights not be to compromised.

These things intersect on Self ID. So if a group from within the trans community can help in a common cause, what is the problem there?

If trans people were being listened to on the issue of FGM when women's groups were not - that would be different. But on this issue they are within the community being campaigned for, so they bloody well should be listened to.

KittyKlaws No problem. Like LangCleg posted, in DM's today it has been noted Ceinwen2 was posting as a woman trans ally rather than a TIM. I call out deception when I see it.