Another women's college changes trans policy

[Spartacus002244]

Last year Lucy Cavendish College in Cambridge announced their position that they would accept male-born students who had a GRC and were legally recognised as female (www.lucy-cav.cam.ac.uk/news-blog/latest-news/statement-on-transgender-students)

Less than a year later, this has changed to include both these individuals and anyone who 'has taken steps to live in the female gender' (www.lucy-cav.cam.ac.uk/news-blog/latest-news/statement-on-transgender-students-update )

What on earth does this mean? Saying 'I am a woman?' Wearing a dress? Considering that until about 1947 being a woman would have meant being ineligible to receive a Cambridge degree, it's very disheartening. I'd have thought that female academics would recognise the harm that 'gender' does to women.

Note also that this college is for students aged 21+ so it isn't out of concern for 17-year-old trans applicants who haven't yet been able to apply for a GRC.

I know also that there are young women from very conservative countries who have been able to come to study in the UK precisely because of the existence of the women's colleges. But I suppose they're acceptable casualties of identity politics.

Well this is a dream come true isn't it. I mean there's not even a men's changing room or toilet is there...

It's demoralising that an institution made up of intelligent people would make this decision. Being female isn't about wearing skirts and having long hair.

Depressing. Women's history being railroaded.

This is the OPPOSITE of being inclusive! FFS. It’s wrong and EXCLUDES several groups of women.

A women’s college that subscribes to, and enforces, gender stereotypes. How utterly depressing.

If this is the level of critical thinking at a Cambridge college then I am seriously worried.

The college grew out of a women's Dining Group which formed in the 1950s because female academics at Cambridge weren't allowed to become Fellows and so had no college membership.

...I suppose they should have just identified as men instead.

anyone who has taken steps to live in the female gender
So men then

I could understand the change in policy by Murray Edwards last year, because their intake is of an age where they couldn't yet have a GRC but that doesn't apply to Lucy Cavendish, as you note.

I wonder what kind of pressure they've been under. I know some Cambridge colleges are richer than Croesus but I doubt whether Lucy Cavandish is one of them. I think I'd rather hear that they've given in to lobbying than that they really don't know the difference between sex and gender.

Can't remember where I read this but I recently saw a comment from a woman who had attended a women's college. She said while she was there it was inspirational to see the long list of women who had served as Dean, Master or whatever the title was. Not long after she left the college went co-ed. She went back recently and now those honour boards show all male names since the change. Depressing.

If I had a daughter with Oxbridge aspirations, she wouldn't be applying here.

I know some Cambridge colleges are richer than Croesus but I doubt whether Lucy Cavandish is one of them

Yes... I know ME is cash-strapped. There's data easily available on college assets but that is presumably mostly the land and buildings, doesn't give any clue to their solvency.

I don't see the point, they may as well just go mixed sex.

If I had a daughter with Oxbridge aspirations, she wouldn't be applying here.

If you had a daughter with Oxbridge aspirations you'd probably find she would make up her own mind.

Truth is, the female colleges take more than average from the 'pool' - they're not the first choice for very many girls/women.

I don't see the point, they may as well just go mixed sex.

That's hyperbole. There will in practice be very few trans applicants of sufficient calibre, and the interview process would hopefully filter out any who weren't actually dysphoric (Cambridge rejects most applicants and doesn't have to justify why). So these colleges will remain overwhelmingly female environments, places where being female is the norm.

Was that Girton, Gaspode? I think I remember reading something similar about them.

I agree that going mixed-sex would be better. It would still exclude the women who would only attend a women's college, but at least it wouldn't be suggesting that 'gender' is what makes a person a woman.

What's the chance that even this announcement will be met with 'but what about non-binary people who are only women sometimes?' or something similar. No concession is ever enough.

I agree that going mixed-sex would be better.
And then they'd almost certainly end up being male dominated, like the case Gaspode mentioned or the formerly female Oxford college with an all male university challenge team. Sorry, but I think that would be throwing away something of value on a point of principle which is unlikely to have much actual impact.

I don't agree with these changes in policy and am also pretty appalled at the evident confusion over sex v gender, but I think some of the responses are disproportionate.

errol

With no separate facilities for men wouldn't you worry about even one man who's in the toilet with the women?

Can you imagine the kind of person who would take advantage of this policy?

They should just go mixed. At least that would be honest.

I very much doubt they have no toilet facilities for males. I don't know about LC, but ME has male fellows and a lot of ensuite accommodation (all the first year rooms, I'm not sure about the rest). And these places aren't convents - again don't know about LC but ME certainly allows male visitors.

Errol I do see your point. I'm inclined to think that by saying that the college is open to women and anyone who 'lives as the female gender' the founding values of the college are compromised. Principles are important, and when notable institutions like this one take the self-ID TWAW line it's really bad for actual women. How can there be a women's college when nobody can say what a woman is?

Practically, of course, you're absolutely right. The college becoming mixed would have a negative impact on women's representation. But allowing male people in women's spaces is also a negative outcome. It's a question of the least worst option overall.

The best outcome is of course for women's colleges to be unafraid to state that a woman is an adult human female. I'd have more sympathy for trans students if every college was solely either male or female but I think that Cambridge's three women's colleges (out of 31) are the only ones left in the country. The rest are all mixed and open to anyone of any sex and/or gender. Any male person applying to a women's college is doing so just for validation.

The best outcome is of course for women's colleges to be unafraid to state that a woman is an adult human female.

Yes, ITA (the exception for those with GRC under current rules not self ID is imo ok).

It will be interesting to see if (a) they do get many trans applicants and (b) if they're accepted. TBH anyone who was just trying it on wanting to join a college mostly populated by intelligent, confident and assertive young women (not all of whom are Pomo-addled handmaidens, and at LC older with more life experience) might not find it quite as validating an experience as they would hope.

Tbh, while I find this appalling in terms of the message it sends out about "Woman" means, I suspect the safety issue is not so pronounced here. It's not as though anyone can just waltz into a Cambridge college - there's a rigorous interview process and ample opportunity to test someone's commitment to wearing high heels and makeup living is a woman.

I think it's rather depressing that a Cambridge college doesn't understand the difference between sex and gender, nor how oppressive the concept of gender is and has been for women throughout history.

I hope some of their students ask them to define what 'living as a woman' means. After all, if they're letting students in on this basis they should be clear what the criteria for entry are.