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).
LM claimed he identified as autistic until about a week ago.

It's a whole other thread to talk about mental health diagnosis - different psychiatrists would give different diagnoses for the same person. I speak from direct personal experience there as someone who ended up with an autism diagnosis myself. There is lots of overlap and the categories are largely arbitrary.

However, this cuts to the same argument really - whether self-identification is a better approach than an expert medical opinion. The medic is an expert in the categorisation system but can never be an expert in how it feels to be that person - has to rely on observation and subjective report. The person can easily mis-identify themselves as belonging in a category because they only have their own subjective experience to go on and it is easy to exaggerate similarities.

Anyway...

I think the letter is important for mentioning the sexual fetishists. This is something that bothers me. I've been in a sexual relationship with a man who gets a sexual thrill from dressing in women's clothes and from forced feminisation fantasies. I would not want people like him to have easier access to women's spaces under any change in legislation. He is not trans in the sense that most of the 'transwomen are women' general public believe it to be. Despite protestations by the TRAs, people like that do exist.

Yes, things have changed a bit.

But things have not changed to the point where the average person buys the views of ..."what makes a person a woman"

"We change; it takes time "

" Doing it all in a few weeks is nonsense."

Never mind the fact that to expect to be accepted and acceptable to natal females overnight is a triumph of blind faith over reality.

Ceinwen
You just don't get it.
Womanhood isn't a superachievement level in a computer game that you reach after serving your time, overcoming obstacles and acquiring points

"Womanhood level :achievement unlocked"

It isn't a matter of proving your motivation and biding your time and demonstrating your harmlessness, and showing your commitment with hormones and surgery and sartorial choices. It isn't about steadfastness until you've worn women down into saying they'll pretend for you because you in particular seem to deserve it. It's not a numbers game where a select few can join as long as the percentages are kept low.

We're not 'natal females' like circles aren't circley circles and water isn't watery water.

Please acknowledge that this is about my right to distinguish myself from you. Not because I hate you, not because you're dangerous, not because I fear you.
But because I am fundamentally different from you and it is critical that this is recognised. You are not part of a common group with me, insofar as sex OR gender is concerned.

Every word I have that distinguishes me from you has been claimed and adapted.

Woman was taken; "she is a woman and I am a woman, she is ciswoman I am transwoman. We are both women,"

Female was taken "she is a natal female, I am a trans female, we are both female"

What word exists to describe ME and my biology that you will agree not to claim or adapt with a prefix?

This conflict will never end. Wherever I plant my flag you will follow to plant yours too.
It makes no difference that you magnanimously agree to prefix us both so that we can be distinguished when you allow it.
What we both know is that you are still forcing me into a common group with you without any objective grounds to explain WHY we belong together and what our common characteristics are or whether indeed I agree with you categorising me with characteristics I don't possess.
And you're using my name to do this.

Your existence depends upon denying mine.

I'm on the edge of this debate as I dont really follow all the parties involved and find the language used beyond comprehension at times. But that letter is fabulous. It summarises so well the concerns that have been expressed on here for months.

As an aside, has anyone tweeted this letter to Owen Jones? He must be furious that his pet cause has been undermined by members of the community he claims to be top bezzies with.

I didn't say the letter shouldn't have been written, and I don't think anyone else has said that either. Just that, to me the letter reads as the TS definition of women is the correct one, not the new self id, and not the 'adult human female' one.

@cistersofterfy

Oh I know that, you know that, the world knows that but LM said he 'identified 'as autistic. Not that he'd been through the process of diagnosis

Beautifully put as always Barracker.

terryleather - Beautifully put as always Barracker.

From me too. TIM's will never get what it is to be a woman - ever!

I'm not sure what there is to be sad or embarrassed about. You often see posters say disagreement isn't tolerated on FWR so here it is for all to see. Good. We're not a cult.

I've applauded rather than thanked because I realise the signatories didn't send the letter for our benefit, and why should they - they have a battle of their own on their hands. But it was still a brave thing to do.

And whether this was the intention or not, I don't see how it can be anything but helpful to have voices other than our own arguing against self ID.

"Why is the category transexual being challenged? and what is the difference between transgender and transexual?"

Transsexual refers to someone who has medically and (but not always) surgically transitioned from M2F or F2M e.g. They take hormones of the opposite sex, maybe had breast implants or breasts removed and surgery down below (again not always)

The trans activists want to do away with the word transsexual or make you think it's not PC

Transgender seems to have become a catch all term which includes transsexuals, transvestites (again they want to classify transvestite as un PC and ignore the fact that transvestitism can be sexually/fetish related) as well as new gender identities like non binary, gender fluid etc

Thus we have the situation where a transsexual like Paris Lees is held up as the first trans person to appear on Question Time, and a non binary person Jack Monroe says "hang on, I was the first trans person to go on QT!"

JustABrokenDoll

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.

I agree. How often has the view been expressed on FWR that extremist trans rights activists are harming transsexual men and women? And how often has it been asked why doesn't the transexual community speak out? Yet when they do, they get the reaction on here from posters like sweary.

Lily Madigan is angry about this letter

twitter.com/LilyTMadigan/status/992583398748311552?s=19

I'm not sure what there is to be sad or embarrassed about. You often see posters say disagreement isn't tolerated on FWR so here it is for all to see. Good. We're not a cult.

Exactly.

I think it’s a good letter. I agree with all of what it said. It seems obvious that a lot of peaceful trans people are being fucked over by these ‘activists’ and their chilling effect on public debate now and they will be further if gender self ID comes in.

More importantly actually this being a guardian letter makes a really strategically important point IN THE GUARDIAN of all places, as a virtue signalling HQ for well meaning people who don’t really follow or want to follow this debate and who might think that trans people are one group with one need (to be legally permitted gender self ID) and that it’s ‘transphobic’ to want to talk about gender self ID or criticise it.

I’m not really worried that it comes from people who don’t share exactly the same motivation as me. I’m sure the signatories to the letter don’t really worry that a lot of gender critical women want to talk about their own stuff. Doesn’t take away from the power of trans people says this is ‘not in my name’ and clearly demonstrating in the Guardian that it’s not transphobic to call for a debate. In their real names. It’s brave and it’s a really great thing. Same as WP UK is a really great thing and ManFriday is a really great thing.

And at least we're not deliberately making seriously libellous smears about a list of only 13 specific people. Tweet in response to Ann Sinnott retweet.

importantly actually this being a guardian letter makes a really strategically important point IN THE GUARDIAN of all places, as a virtue signalling HQ for well meaning people who don’t really follow or want to follow this debate and who might think that trans people are one group with one need (to be legally permitted gender self ID) and that it’s ‘transphobic’ to want to talk about gender self ID or criticise it.

YY. That is an excellent point in terms of the wider issue.

Lass why are you singling me out? I was brought up on this thread and gaslighted when I hadn’t contributed to it. To robustly defend myself (again) to crap from JC is perfectly reasonable.

I’ve not passed comment on the letter here, just on JC’s behaviour.

I'm not sure what there is to be sad or embarrassed about. You often see posters say disagreement isn't tolerated on FWR so here it is for all to see. Good. We're not a cult.

Indeed.

I'm not sure what there is to be sad or embarrassed about

There are some appalling posts on this thread. I think I mentioned embarrassed- perhaps the correct words are there are posts which I do not want myself associated with or want any one to think that because I am posting here that I agree with or endorse.

"I've been in a sexual relationship with a man who gets a sexual thrill from dressing in women's clothes and from forced feminisation fantasies"

Go on any pro Dominatrix website and they will list "forced feminization" as a fetish they cater for.

The first Wachowski brother (Matrix directors) to transition did so after starting a relationship with a famous Hollywood dominatrix

But it seems the transgender lobby want to suppress the notion that some men get off sexually from wearing women's clothes or identifying as a woman

Good response from Rose

https://twitter.com/RoseOff_Dawn/status/992710390386712579?s=20

There are some appalling posts on this thread. Oh do behave. All I've said on this thread is provable. Unless the appalling posts are from the TIM's?

Lass why are you singling me out

Your name is all over the few trans threads which I haven't hidden . I couldn't be bothered going back over the thread and checking all the names but happy to add Uterati and spontaneousgiventime to the posters making awful posts on this thread (and other threads)

Your name is all over the few trans threads which I haven't hidden . I couldn't be bothered going back over the thread and checking all the names but happy to add Uterati and spontaneousgiventime to the posters making awful posts on this thread (and other threads)

The truth is appalling now folks. Let that sink in!

LM had a strange reaction to this on Twitter - the newly elected Labour Counsellor Ann Sinnott (who displaced LibDem Sarah Brown- the presumed control-freak behind the bizarre LibDemLGBT twitter account who has been giving Brian Paddick shit) shared it.

LM's hostile reaction makes it seem that LM's loyalty is to the unimpeded advance of transgenderism, way above any duty to the most of Women's Officer or loyalty to the Labour Party.

It is quite weird.

twitter.com/davessidekick/status/992657957224579072