What would it look like?

[Bewilderednow]

First in the hope of clear answers, and so I'm not viewed with suspicion, I am transgender. My question is what would legislation look like if you could pass every law regarding transgender issues tomorrow? Thank you for reading and for any response.

You get offended by any access for transpeople. Any. So discussion over.

MTP same I guess that does make me an activist. If it comes to it I'll go the civil disobedience route. You do realize that is an issue right? Transfolk won't stop should you win. Nor will they go gently into that goodnight. So vote for more jails they will be full with transwomen booked for peeing lol

What do you mean by 'access'?

And MTP great name. I named my cat Greebo.

I mean shared space. Period.

I think the OP made it clear when they said they would allow Lesbians the right to gather in private spaces.

No I said they could exclude transpeople on private spaces. They can gather where they want just like everyone. Exclusion = private

And nice job misquoting me again.

Ah, it's all clear now. OP means that they want access to female spaces. Also, they will make a thing of peeing.

OK then.

I did not quote you at all, OP.
Had I done so it would have been bolded.

It appears to be the traditional misogynist position. If women don't want to submit to male dominance they can stay home and leave the public sphere to the males and the transgender identified males.

Reductio ad absurdum wonderful

It is just ridiculous though.

Asking a question, getting valid an reasoned and thought out responses, explaining not only why but potentially how the law could be written to protect the rights of both women and trans people, and that’s not good enough.

And then calling intolerance because women are not willing to roll over and say yes, shared access to women’s resources is absolutely fine, when the reasons that it benefits no one and for the clearly outlined reasons, you get angry. You have not offered a single reason as to why you reject what posters have said, just that they’re wrong and offensive.

So what would it look like to you then? What laws to do with sex and identity would you like to see come into play? And why should we be happy to support this a women with our own established needs for segregated resources?

@Bewilderednow

I haven't been on here since page 1

You never answered what you think the law should be on this topic? I am very interested in your point of view.

Should any AMAB be able to use the AFAB facilities whenever they want? Should we get rid of sex segregation and any recognition of sex in law? What should be required for someone to change their sex according to the law? in what circumstances should that apply/not apply?

I hope you will reply as I am asking honestly and openly just as you did.

Please feel free to use and define whatever terms you need to properly explain your position. I won't be offended :)

@bloodmagic thank you for not piling on, but I'm not willing to provide more content for derision by this sites orthodoxy. I'm heading back to my cat and book.

I'm not willing to provide more content for derision by this sites orthodoxy.

Which is absolutely your choice. But the issue here is that we are very very often told, "DIE IN A FIRE TERF, YOU'RE WRONG AND BAD AND TERRIBLE NO DEBATE". And no one ever actually seems to tell us what they think is a rational, fair, proportional response. The women here have given you their time and labour, explaining their position. And you haven't. You're the person who started the thread.

I'd love a solution that meets everyone's needs. But if there isn't one 51% of the humans on earth are women. Sheer utilitarianism means we get safe space.

So stop being hypocritical. Tell the world that transpeople are not valid. Stop telling us TERF is a slur while using TIM for transwomen. Stop refering to a medical procedure as mutilation. Realize that your position erases our lived identity. You claim to fight against female erasure by erasing transfolk. There that's how you sound. Fun isn't it.

I don't use TIM and I haven't said mutilation. I was debating in good faith but not now. I'm out. What a shame.

Yeah I know not all terfs. I don't hear you offering any objection to their language.

I have asked this question a number of times.
Can you mandate belief?
Can you codify into law the idea that some people can mind over matter themselves out of material reality and into the opposite sex, and must be treated accordingly?
It is like transubstantiation. A belief that only the true believer actually believes.
Will you allow people to drug and mutilate children based on this belief that no one believes?

I have no idea why so many young males like OP think women should make an exception in our safeguarding efforts to accommodate them. It is an absurd demand for males to make given the lessons of human history and yet here they are day after day.

And there you have it. You just reduced us to a cult. Yeah like there is compromise possible. I'm a buffoon to have considered otherwise.

I'm a buffoon to have considered otherwise.

I think you a fool to expect women to disregard the needs of women and children to affirm beliefs that they do not share.

It appears from these threads that there are TIM who don't see women and girls as people who deserve to be safe and have human rights, they just see us as a means to validate TIM existence.

It's clear from these threads that they don't see women and girls as equals, but at the bottom of a hierarchy, with them at the top, dictating terms and conditions.

I wonder how many TIM think this way? How many TIM use facilities that they know have been set up exclusively for women and girls because they want to assert their dominance. How many times have TIM used female spaces and services, not because they need to, but because they want to?

It does come across that way, Baroque. We are variously sources of validation, role models to copy, rivals in the femininity game and, in many cases, a direct threat to the narcissistic supply. Not people with our own thoughts and feelings and needs.

It’s a shame the way this thread has gone. Plenty of good faith responses to the OP, most of them explicitly stating how we’d codify protection for gender non-conformity into law, and OP seems to have just been looking for a mean TERF bus to jump under all along.

So this was a 'tell me what you want but not really because you'll upset me' thread?