Would you back self ID if...

[daimbars]

Once a trans women got their GRC they had to wait a period of time (say 5 years) before they were able to have the same rights as all women? For example they would only be able to apply for a job as a women’s officer, appear on a female only panel or to compete in women’s sport after five years of lived experience as a woman?

Someone I know is meeting with her MP to discuss how to propose this legislation. She thinks it will address possible repercussions from self ID and stop it being abused. I thought it was an interesting idea I could get behind.

Massively - it's been done that way. This is precisely why we are at that point.

I do hear you massively, and I get the perspective that it's not likely to affect you negatively, but surely you can see that's a pretty crappy reason to give away the farm when other women are telling you it will affect other women negatively?

Again, yes, the argument that has arisen in the last couple of days is that it's a fait accompli and we need to scrabble around for the scraps we can get now the big things have been conceded. I know those that are making it are, by and large, making it in good faith as a 'tactical shift'.

But I think most GC women here are going to say a firm no to this because it has been done, it has been the default female position for years, and it is precisely the conciliatory 'how can we help you' attitude that has meant our hand of generosity has been bitten off by the [redacted] who have never had the slightest intention of taking no for an answer.

No: we were nice very for ages. Didn't work.

Great post Floral.

In fact, I'd say the title of this thread is a very good illustration of the problem. For months and months, women have been posting their concerns and issues with self ID, sometimes politely, sometimes rudely, but extremely clearly. The general consensus, which irritates the shit out of the [redacted] observers, is that there is a sizeable amount of women saying "Yeah, thought about it and the answer is no."

And yet here we are with another thread that is saying "Ok, you say no, but what if..."

This is the problem. It's a drip drip drip negotiation when no negotiation has been invited or welcomed, and a flat out refusal to accept that women have come to a clear, well thought out conclusion about the importance of women's rights, and that is the behaviour of significantly untrustworthy people.

Just posted this on the other thread. From a Twitter page linked by Rowan. It's seemed apt.

As it happens, I would be suffragist not suffragette, but no one here has actually argued for the extreme direct action favoured by the suffragettes. Let's just remind ourselves who has actually made bomb threats against whom recently...

"This means at the very beginning of the reassignment process walking down the street wearing female clothes, using female toilets etc"

I keep hearing about female clothes etc. If we make everyone wear jeans and have unisex toilets that solves the trans issue at once yes as no one can be trans unless the stereotypes exist. Problem solved.

Now we can get back to world hunger.

Of course once the problem is solved THEN we can go back to toilets for different sexes as that is real.

Absolutely floral, drip drip drip.

the Irish one, which seems to work well people say that when there is no evidence it's true

No.

First for legal reasons. Even if I were to accept that womanhood was a social construct (which I don't, but let's entertain the thought for the purposes of the debate), self ID would still be a bad idea. Think of all the other social constructs which carry practical, legal, real-world implications. Money, marriage, nationality to name but three. All of them are subject to gate keeping. You cannot just scribble "I promise to pay the bearer on demand of the sum of 10 pounds" on an old bus ticket and expect to pay for things with it in a shop. You cannot simply self-ID as married to get a married person's tax allowance. You cannot say "I identify as British even though I was born in Russia and have no British ancestors whatsoever" and expect the home office to say "Oh, right you are then..."

All these require objective standards against which claims of their truth or falsity can be judged. Self ID, in contrast, hinges on us believing the assertion of one individual person, with no evidence whatsoever admissible to the contrary, on the naive belief that no-one would ever lie. That is no basis for law.

Second, my objections are practical. Like many others, I started as a live-and-let-live sort of person. I'm the sort of person who campaigned against clause 28 and wrote letters to the PM defending right of residency for EU citizens in Britain post Brexit. But slowly that has been eroded by the behaviour of trans extremists. Trans extremists lost some of my good will when they called me TERF and likened me to Nazis. They lost more when they invited me to "suck their dick" on International Women's Day. They lost the last vestiges of it when they punched a 60 year old woman engaging peacefully in the right to free association and political expression, at Speaker's Corner of all places. This complete loss was confirmed when they attacked a woman trade-unionist on a picket line. It was set in stone when they made bomb threats, bomb threats which led the police to the discovery of all too real bomb making materials.

These are exactly the sort of people who have demonstrated, by words and actions, that they are the very last sort of people who should be allowed into women's safe spaces in any circumstances whatsoever.

My answer is NO.

NO.

NO.

Have you got that yet?

NO.

Anyone know the background to this? Or more about the organisation...going to have a research but thought someone on here might know more..

Bloody well said Fermat.

Hear hear Fermat.

Fermat 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼

Brava Fermat!

Completely agree Fermat.

Any man demanding access to women's spaces, should be excluded purely on that basis.

Well put, Fermats.

Lovely post @FermatsTheorem but it still comes back to the TRAs, I still can't see how they have suddenly become the primary threat to women? Nobody is taking them seriously? The one proposal put to parliament by a transgender organisation was rejected?

The only people who seem to take the TRAs seriously and share the stuff they say are GC Feminists. Why are you giving the impression these people have such power?

The power they hold usually amounts to a couple of likes on Twitter.