Looking for a neutral summary on trans issues

[catkind]

I won't pretend I don't hold strong (GC) views myself, but I would find it really useful to have a neutral summary of the positions both sides (and subcamps) are taking. I want to be able to explain to friends who have no idea about trans politics what this is about and what the disagreements are, in terms that friends who are on the transactivist side of the debate won't disagree with. Anyone got any good links for me?

And what does a trans woman do with her breasts and / or vagina?

I also agree with the point re appropriation of body terms.

But, upthread you made a big deal of saying that women’s bodies were totally irrelevant re vulnerability in intimate spaces.... in fact you wouldn’t even admit these spaces are intimate spaces!

If transwomen have had medical intervention to hide their sex characteristics and to give the impression that they have the sex characteristics of the opposite sex, which is not the majority especially re the penis (for which facilities provided are better in the men’s toilets) then the expression of their gender identity and sex = trans status cannot ever really be hidden. They may be at risk of violence from other males who can identify their sex + gender expression = trans. GC feminists, because we are GC, understand this because we are critical of the gender caste system, violence being perpetrated against us because of our biology + the gender caste system that places us as low status (lesbians are the lowest of the low, transwomen are higher than any biological woman).

However, why are transwomen’s bodies relevant but women’s bodies aren’t? You just spent some time saying that women’s vulnerability is all gender and not sex at all and this means concerns are invalid... surely this means the concerns of transwomen are also all gender, not sex at all and invalid too?

However, why are transwomen’s bodies relevant but women’s bodies aren’t? You just spent some time saying that women’s vulnerability is all gender and not sex at all and this means concerns are invalid... surely this means the concerns of transwomen are also all gender, not sex at all and invalid too?

No. I didn't say that sex was invalid. I said that gender is how we understand sex when interacting in a group.

which is not the majority especially re the penis (for which facilities provided are better in the men’s toilets)

Can you please provide the source for this sweeping claim?

Ok well whatever weasel words you want to use... why are transwomen’s gendered bodies relevant re intimate spaces but women’s bodies are not?

Ok well whatever weasel words you want to use... why are transwomen’s gendered bodies relevant re intimate spaces but women’s bodies are not

Both are relevant. I haven't said otherwise.

Can you please post the source for your claim?

Oh Snappity - of 'blind canal' fame - so sensitive about Barracker's post.
Give over.

Teen

I thought your explanations were spot on.....and if Snappity is picking holes in your reasoning, it's because your rational approach has got them worried

Can you please provide the source for this sweeping claim?

Ah ha ha ha ha ha! As soon as you provide sources for all of the sweeping claims you have made all over the thread and which you have been asked to provide a source for many times...

Both are relevant. I haven't said otherwise.

Yes you have. You have said functions of biology are actually functions of gender identity and that sex is not relevant re women because all the things are about gender identity which means women should and do see transwomen’s gender identity as relevant re sex segregation.

It is us that were saying ‘both are relevant’ and you repeatedly disputed this arguing that only gender identity is relevant...

This is why I keep saying re trans people it is dangerous to ignore sex and replace it with gender identity... Because we all know the combination of sex and not conforming to gendered expectations re expression is what is behind oppression and discrimination of trans people

Every 'issue' here comes down to conflating sex and gender. Not actually anything to do with trans people!
Yes absolutely.

*as the only relevant thing

So I’ll ask again why are women’s bodies irrelevant but when transwomen do have surgeries and other medical interventions to give the impression they have a female body this is relevant?

Could it be to help others identify them as the opposite sex? Because humans do primarily identify people by sex characteristics? Do you think?

Women’s bodies that they didn’t choose, that say nothing about any part of their identity, that are used by the gender caste system to oppress us by imposing identities we don’t have on us against our will, that are so because of our biological sex...

I agree, but the vulnerability is based on their ingrained sense of a) who is male and who is female and b) how males may behave in contrast to how women will react. That's gender.The whole point is that our sense of gender is what informs how we think someone will behave based on our assessment of sex.
There's also how someone is statistically more likely to behave based on their biological sex. We should also collect data on how gender identity (for those who declare one) and sex interact on this one. Which is something the trans-activist position makes it hard to do at all because they want transwomen in the women category not a separate category.

But my main problem with the above is that if gender is male/femaleness and is something in people's heads, we can't reasonably expect to be able to sense another person's gender. Only they can say what their gender is. If it's about how they present themselves - well, I know a lot of non-binary people who don't know they are. What they say is little help too because people sometimes tell untruths.

Sorry, didn't mean to get into debating positions on this particular thread, it's been done so many times over.

Much better, thank you but the correct verso is "Trans women want access to female spaces because they are women and their need for such spaces is undifferentiated to any other woman's need"
Okay you've slipped into asserting a position rather than describing a position there. How about:
Transwomen want access to female spaces because they perceive themselves as women and feel their need for such spaces is undifferentiated to any other woman's need.

Snappity I repeat, i understand what someone's sex looks like, sounds like.. i have never knowlingly got that wrong. How do I tell what your gender Is?

If I and many others can reliably tell sex but not gender, how can you claim that self id is no threat To Women? because if we can't tell then it's down to someone's word and , as many women know, that's not to be trusted.

How many women see a red flag at phrases such as " I won't hurt you" " I'll look after you" " men who would do that are monsters"

Which is something the trans-activist position makes it hard to do at all because they want transwomen in the women category not a separate category.

Necessary for rights under the Equality Act.

I know people say that the protected characteristic of gender reassignment protects them, but it does not. If they are paid less than their male colleagues, for instance, they need to be able to bring a sex discrimination claim as women. Gender reassignment does not help.

Perhaps we could add a similar clause to Teen's next sentence to make the difference in beliefs clearer.
"Gender critical people want transwomen (in particular the high % or pre-op trans), who they consider to be male, to not have access to these spaces."

Transwomen want access to female spaces because they perceive themselves as women and feel their need for such spaces is undifferentiated to any other woman's need.

No because you are changing a fact to a view

I thought under the equality act you could bring a case for being perceived as belonging to a protected group as well as actually belonging to it? Will have to check that one...

If I and many others can reliably tell sex but not gender, how can you claim that self id is no threat To Women? because if we can't tell then it's down to someone's word and , as many women know, that's not to be trusted.

If people are so good at telling sex, why do we have this thread?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3303233-Misgendering-How-do-biological-women-handle-it

Ah this is where we come up against being unable to conceive of other people's beliefs as different to yours. Yes, that's going to make describing your beliefs without asserting them difficult. I consider that TWAM is a fact, but I'm still able to understand that other people don't agree with me and frame it as a statement of what I believe rather than fact.

I thought under the equality act you could bring a case for being perceived as belonging to a protected group as well as actually belonging to it? Will have to check that one...

For direct discrimination you can, so anyone excluded because they are wrongly perceived to be a trans woman will have exactly the same rights as a trans woman.

A religious person thinks god is a fact, but is still able to frame "Christians believe..." sentences.

I thought under the equality act you could bring a case for being perceived as belonging to a protected group as well as actually belonging to it? Will have to check that one...

Yes that's right.