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

I see the points but respect the letter writers for sticking to their own agenda and not claiming to speak for women.

But I honestly don't see how we stop the gender zealots while continuing to accommodate transsexuals

Keep the GRC -maybe it needs updating, maybe it doesn't but a process which is not open to abuse must be retained. Push for evidenced based research and an end to the bigotry of #nodebate. Insist that 'sex' and 'gender' must stop being conflated. Ending any discrimination based on 'gender' is right and proper; it has nothing to do with retaining the right to retaining distinct spaces and services and statistics for biological women and biological men. It has to be up to women to decide who (if anyone) should be exceptions.

What’s happening now with TRAs is he equivalent of my Christian friend going from politely not really discussing religion when we meet up to her campaigning for blasphemy to be a crime, and theocratic laws to be brought in, legislating belief.

Agreed. But the people who signed the letter this thread is about are equivalent to those among the Christians in your analogy who are standing up and saying that making blasphemy a crime is wrong and potentially harmful to them, when society is about to strengthen them. I am pleased they are doing it.

good list ErrolTheDragon. I think I'd be happy with that.

right, let's do that!

One extra thing - where a person is requesting access to single sex provision, it should be legal to ask to see a GRC. Otherwise how do you know someone's got one

Agree with everything Errol said

I am one of those people who doesn't like the 'honour system' I don't feel comfortable and I don't want other more cool, groovy and right-on women to speak on my behalf in saying that males can be accepted in women's facilities.

I am not cool and groovy with it. I feel really uncomfortable. A particular memory that stands out was in the toilets of a theatre, the TIM knew (although definitely post op - I knew that for a fact) they didn't belong. The excess muttering, flamboyant body language. I felt a bit of adrenalin pumping. In retrospect I realise I felt threatened having them in a space I only feel safe knowing it is for females.

People with dysphoria need their own unisex facilities (not taking disabled peoples) and it is no cool-chick's business to say I am groovy with it. I am not.

PermissionToSpeakSir

If you are referring to me I am not cool chicken. I am a very fat middle aged woman currently wearing crocs and a 20 year old dressing gown-. I never presume to speak for anyone else.

'Chick' even

at flowers

Yes, PTSS - to clarify, the women who should decide on access or otherwise to women's spaces are those women who would be affected by it.

Flowers yes I am pleased they have done it. I also understand the reasoning behind some of the stronger opinions here and I have sympathy with that too. I’d be aware that religious people doing similarbwouldnt be doing it forbthe rights of atheists but I’d be pleased to see it nonetheless- because it creates another opinion on the same side

I also think there is room for both the more radical stance of some posters on here and the less radical. Feminism is not one monolithic block, and despite this place being accused of being an echo chamber I think this shows that.

When an argument /request is made and you have only one point/stance to refute I actually think that can be easier to dismiss than having a range of opinions all broadly similar but varying in how strong they are - more opinions on the same side

To me the difference of opinion here is not a weakness but a strength.

One extra thing - where a person is requesting access to single sex provision, it should be legal to ask to see a GRC. Otherwise how do you know someone's got one

This will probably depends on the situation and the women and girls involved. I don't want any human male giving me a cervical screening test, for example. A GRC will not give me any reassurance in that situation.

The GRC was supposed to be a 'little white lie'.
Always the wrong choice.
'Protecting' a group of people by giving them the right to lie leads to enforcing others to collude in a lie.

And the little white lie is growing at an exponential rate as thousands want a piece of that action, without the gatekeeping too.
The little white lie was never 'white' and it sure as hell isn't little. It's a whopper.

The little white lie of legally changing sex has reached the end of its shelf life. It's time for a better solution.
In perpetuating the lie we are creating generation after generation of people harmed by it.

Sex never changes. The law must reflect reality. It's time to create legal protections for people who want to change sex that do not affirm their false belief that they can. But that instead protect people who can't accept reality easily from being affirmed in their false beliefs.

The only people we should be affirming in false beliefs are end stage dementia patients and people who lack capacity.

I agree with lang about 11 posts back.

The reason why I suppose it's helpful for women (repeating myself) is simply that the TRAs have been so very set on labelling any of the concerns set out by WPUK, which over lap with the concerns on angry bird's thread and in this letter. This letter included some of the points that WPUK make.

Of course it's transsexuals speaking up for themselves but as I said before in this very apparently polarised debate on twitter, it shows that the Rad Fems and the TSW are able to act as allies. It calls for reasoned debate.

I for one actually feel less scared to speak about my newly acquired rad fem ideals in relation to anything linked to trans simply because I know many trans people have this view and aren't into the batshit crazy crap of the woke unicorn umbrella spectrum lot. And are querying self ID from their own perspective.

They didn't have to speak up, so loudly, in a publication that has been trashing women bar a few of its contributors attempting to occasionally try to redress the balance. So I do say thank you.

You sound lovely flowers - I wasn't singling you or anyone out.

I just don't agree with the point of view in an 'honours systems' for males (whether pre or post op) to be allowed in women's single-sex facilities.

A hypothetical scenario - women in the ladies, TIM pops head around door, asks "is it alright if I pop in for a wizz" women near the door say - "no, fine, come in - thanks for asking", while a woman like me is in the cubicle feeling massively uncomfortable that those women had said it was okay without consulting everyone. Even if they had asked all the women who said they didn't mind - what about the next woman walking it? They didn't ask if she was okay with it - they couldn't have.

An honours system is not okay, if everyone is not okay with it, is my point.

Thanks PermissionToSpeakSir i'm glad i'm not being considered a cool chicken and I understand your point.

One extra thing - where a person is requesting access to single sex provision, it should be legal to ask to see a GRC. Otherwise how do you know someone's got one

I was thinking that might be a way to get around the problem of having someone standing in front of you who is clearly male, claiming to be female. As asking to see a GRC is illegal, there is no way to challenge this claim.

In certain circumstances it should be reasonable to ask to see either an original birth certificate (which will have the birth name and sex), or if the individual can only produce a copy birth certificate then it will need to be accompanied by a GRC.

In the example of a trans identifying male HCP it is obviously the responsibility of the practice / hospital where they work to understand that that member of staff is male and not field them in scenarios where a service user would legitimately expect a female, unless they have agreed to a male by prior consultation.

Rose of Dawn was one of the signatories of the letter, this is her most recent video. She discusses the power of non-binary ideology in relation to NUStrans18.

MNHQ can you please reinstate my post of 19:21 on Friday 04 May 2018? You have deleted it in error.

My entire post was as follows. The words in quotes are where I quoted The Guardian letter. I am not responsible for the content of The Guardian. Thank you.

"This is problematic when such male-bodied people, including sexual fetishists, demand the rights afforded to women as a protected sex, including access to their private spaces."

That reference to sexual fetishists is really important.

Gets it right out into the open.

Well done to everyone involved.

There's a petition now been started to counter this letter. They're looking for trans-identified people to sign to rebut it.

twitter.com/radfemangrybird/status/993128340788785152?s=21

Rose of Dawn is in Whitehall for the DOF march at the moment according to their twitter. I've been following some of it on twitter to see what's what and seen tweets from 3 trans people attending.

Mumsnet have reinstated my post.

Because there was nothing wrong with it.

Mumsnet have reinstated my post.

:)

But MNHQ has now deleted another post of mine (which says exactly the same thing as in the first post) after MumsnetTransphobia Twitter reported the second post as well.

Seems like MNHQ go into automatic deletion mode when reported by MumsnetTransphobia.

Even when MNHQ have reinstated the initial post, they will still automatically delete the second post SAYING EXACTLY THE SAME THING. Even though there is nothing wrong with the post (according to MNHQ).

And of course I wouldn't have needed to write the second post if MNHQ hadn't wrongly deleted the first one.

It does seem that automatic deletion (from reports from MumsnetTranspobia) is at work here.

@MNHQ coercive control training for moderators - please.

Also: algorithmic prejudice may well be illegal after May 25th.

Also: being able to take reports via Twitter was a bad move. It’s open to abuse and mobbing.