Legal self-id - what are the problems?

[SarahAr]

Legal self-id - what are the problems?

Assuming that the government goes ahead with legal self-id in-line with its announcement that it only intends to change the Gender Recognition Act to simplify the process and demedicalise it, but it does not intend to change the Equality Act.

And also assuming the legislation is no more permissive than the legislation in Ireland, which requires a statutory declaration stating that the individual intends to live as a women for the rest of her life. This is a safe assumption given the far right government in power today.

What are the problems with legal self-id? More specifically how does it help predators to prey on women and how does it impact women's rights?

This is not intended as a goady post - I genuinely cannot see the problems.

Indeed. It's about time we bloody well corrected that anomalous state of affairs hmm

Yes. Something should be done.

I know! Lets eradicate all female only spaces, and let any man in.

Female only spaces, that have been campaigned for, and organised by women, for their protection, over many, many decades.

Keep it coming IMO. It's consistently effective.

Yep.

I know! Lets eradicate all female only spaces, and let any man in.

But that's already been done silly. You have no rights, so you might as well stop talking about it. Isn't that right, Sarah and Rat?

Oh, are we at the "women, just shut up and enjoy your erasure" stage already?

Well, that was fun. Till the next time!

AGP is the most common paraphilia in male sex offenders. We're being told to consider these people transwomen. Being told that transwomen are women, no debate. So here we are. It's not women's fault this happened.

The Swim England document has been removed from their website.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/swim-englands-advice-on-transgender-swimmers-torpedoed-bx6gwmc3z

Nggg, I do clench my teeth a little every time someone signposts people to the transwidows thread

This was in one of the most unintentionally revealing posts I've seen about trans ideology. The poster might as well said that that the transwidows thread is so incredibly inconvenient to the ideology that it's painful to read. Therefore, it must not be read.

Every now and then I wonder if I might actually be on the wrong side of history. Then I read a thread like this, see the gaslighting from the likes of SarahAr and RatRolyPoly running through it like Blackpool through a stick of rock, and I see it's definitely work taking that risk.

This was in one of the most unintentionally revealing posts I've seen about trans ideology.

Indeed. How inconvenient those women's stories are!

Can you imagine a thread in which women talk about domestic violence* being spoken about in such a way? About it being so traumatic for people to read that it would be better for it to not be read and discussed?

• and it actually is a thread about domestic violence, just of a particular kind

LOL. No sex offending goes on in changing rooms! One would suggest a quick google of voyeurism leisure centre or sexual assault leisure centre for a more than comprehensive list - with incidents very often linked to poor privacy aka we've stopped keeping the penis people away from the vagina people when they're naked.

Yes, LangCleg - and the interesting thing is, most women don't even have to google it. A lot can just cast their minds back.

For example, as a school girl, I can remember boys trying to get in to the girl's changing when we had swimming. They would do anything - take risks - sometimes doing a simple bull-charge through the door, to get a glimpse.

One hopes most grow out of this sort of thing - but unfortunately, the voyeurism and sexual harassment/assault figures show that plenty don't.

So again, men like to watch porn, men like to watch women getting undressed - some men pay good money to do this. Some men go to lengths to access/abuse women and children. Some men will abuse self ID to gain access to women's changing areas, and other female areas.

Stop trying to make out this is not a fact.

No sex offending goes on in changing rooms?
publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmwomeq/91/91.pdf

Two things I really don’t understand:

1. How a law can be designed to promote equality and reduce discrimination but also allow for exclusion on a ‘case by case basis’ for no clear reason or criteria. Surely the law has to be blind? How can the Guides include some boys but not others on the basis that they aren’t ‘trans’ enough?

2. How it’s possible to justify a sex based exception if you can’t define who it is for.

The end of the road seems to be no sex based exceptions, because, apart from anything else, the law no longer makes sense.

Can't see anyone dropping by to say "my husband is now a woman. It's been fine actually, really easy. Not to gloat or anything...

Grasping at straws. Maybe all the domestic violence victims who just love it don’t post either? Funnily enough the ones who get on fine with the MIL post often on the MIL threads and pretty much every AIBU type thread has for/against opinions. But all those happy AGP supporters stay off? Righto.

Of course women on that thread have a common experience. It appears to be very similar across the board - they are expected to be a prop in a paraphilia. Not a woman in their own right. They are expected to subsume themselves completely in the AGP, to capitulate. Their husbands are self centred, narcissistic and using them to further their own sexual proclivities.

Whether you want to read it, or want others to read it or not, it’s an eye opening read. I’m quite sure that every woman on there would be happy to have women here read it to expose what these men do.

It is NOT OK to make unwilling participants a part of your paraphilia. It’s assault.

I don't mean to be flippant, but honestly it's like some people have never shared the world with other human beings before. I can't understand the point blank refusal to believe that we might possibly, in our ingenuity, find a way to make that work.

Well, sex segregation has worked fine up until recently. Why the need for compromises to be made (including transsexual women using female areas in that too btw), now that a certain few loud misogynists have started stamping their feet?

The definition being used by policy makers is the one concerns are based on, not your outdated one.

Indeed. It changes the whole thing entirely for most people, finding out that 'trans' does not mean 'transsexual' these days, and that its not about transsexual people at all.

Well, sex segregation has worked fine up until recently(including transsexual women using female areas in that too btw). Why the need for compromises to be made, now that a certain few loud misogynists have started stamping their feet?

That should have been, the bracketed part being in the wrong place totaly changed the way that was meant

One of the obvious problems is that many women (myself for sure) and girls just do not want to have to see an adult penis during their day to day business. How hard is it for people to understand that?

Fairenuff

Apparently it's exceptionally hard to understand. Because you have to say why. Why don't you want to see a penis?

You explain, misogyny, sexual assault, discomfort, sexual harassment, #metoo, the whole nine yards.

Which is immediately met with OMG you think all transwomen are rapists.

Say you explain NAMALT, Schrodingers rapist, etc.

And are then told you cannot tar everyone with the same brush. Terf.

All because you don't want to see a penis on a day-to-day basis, when you have your knickers round your ankles or are naked.

It's exceptionally hard to understand.

It's exceptionally hard to understand

On the contrary it's very easy to understand.

I'd be offended to be called a prude. I've seen my share of penises in bedrooms, and hundreds of them on nudist beaches.

But when I am attending to private intimate bodily functions in toilets, showers, or changing rooms I do not want to see a penis or to have its owner watching me.