Confused

[PeakedinthePeaks]

Hi, I'm new to all the current debates around feminism and feminism itself and have lurked a lot and posted a little.
I'm confused over a conversation I had with a colleague last week discussing self ID and the concerns women are raising. Is it possible to be a feminist and have no issue with all inclusive toilets and changing rooms and to believe that trans women are women? I didn't think so but like I said, I'm new to the subject and realise the answers are probably in other posts somewhere but couldn't find a title to match my question.
I am very uncomfortable with all inclusive toilets and have been following GRA discussions.
Can you be a feminist and support the GRA?

OK, Dakinis, if you disagree there is a problem due to there not being "enough" (sorry for the poor English but hopefully you know what I mean) infiltrating (as in affecting women's lives through harassment attack or other reason), at what point does it become enough?

1 woman?
10?
100?

Does there need to be proof of harassment or assault? What if it's just women being prevented from accessing a facility for cultural or religious reasons?

Basically I'm asking where your line in the sand is, because you have one, just as much as I do.

Basically I'm asking where your line in the sand is, because you have one, just as much as I do.

I wouldn't bank on it

Still want to know who throws the rapist out of the toilet or changing room. My 13 year old niece who is 5ft tall and 7 stone would like the answer too - she also wants to know if Dakinis thinks it's right that she may have to run against boys a foot taller and several stone heavier in future.

There is no upper limit to the amount of raped, abused and murdered women who people are willing to sacrifice.

Look at how the prison debate plays out.

"So what if they're rapists - women rape as well! Shall we build separate prisons for lesbians now!?"

As soon as you accept TWAW then the issue of sex segregation becomes null and void - this is yet another violent female rapist/paedophile - who deserves to me managed like any other female paedophile!

...and we see you

Going back to the OP, as you can see a lot of rad fems try and claim the only alternative to radical feminism is welcoming rapists into changing rooms and championing boys competing in girls' sports etc etc which very few feminists are advocating.

In reality there is a big piece of middle ground that most women (including trans women) are sitting on where nobody wants to see women hurt or disadvantaged in any way. At the same time these middle ground women are willing to make the lives of trans women easier when there is no detriment to anyone involved. Welcoming a trans woman into an all female reading group if all members are in agreement, calling her 'she' and treating her with kindness and respect. Small stuff like that is no big deal.

And when rad fems say 'We see you...' as if we us middle ground women have a sinister ulterior motive. Well it's just a bit creepy.

Aspie You can think whatever you like but publicly rejecting the GRA (for example at work) by calling a trans woman 'he' is very radical

Not radical, just brave. The fact that trans ideology has support among HR departments and that openly questioning it will cost you your job doesn't negate the fact that hardly anyone truly believes that TWAW. It is, at best, a polite fiction.

A radical belief is one held by a minority and is revolutionary. It may become established fact, like the heliocentric model of the solar system, at which point it just becomes common sense. The belief that TWANotW is already at this stage.

What's the 'middle ground' re: trans inmates in women's prison and and trans women competing in women's sport?

No, what we're saying is that there WILL be (and ARE) men piggybacking on the changes being proposed for nefarious means.

What we're saying is that if we can't separate "nice person A" from "nasty person B" (because they both say they are trans), we lose control of the safe segregated spaces that were put in place specifically to protect us from from person B.

But if you are saying you genuinely, honestly can't see any scenario where person B wouldn't do that in order to get closer to their intended victims, then I am sorry you are hopelessly naive and denying reality.

In reality there is a big piece of middle ground that most women (including trans women) are sitting on where nobody wants to see women hurt or disadvantaged in any way. At the same time these middle ground women are willing to make the lives of trans women easier when there is no detriment to anyone involved. Welcoming a trans woman into an all female reading group if all members are in agreement, calling her 'she' and treating her with kindness and respect. Small stuff like that is no big deal.

Most if not all of us started out from that POV but I'm afraid it's a death by 1000 cuts.

No, a reading group or joining the WI doesn't seem like a massive deal on the face of it and in that scenario most women, even the rad fems would be polite and respectful.

That's how they get us though, how we ended up in such a mess that male rapists are put in women's prisons because they chip away at women's socialisation to be nice, put others first, not to make a fuss etc...until all the boundaries are eroded and females are left with nowhere a man cannot intrude or control.

At the same time these middle ground women are willing to make the lives of trans women easier when there is no detriment to anyone involved. Welcoming a trans woman into an all female reading group if all members are in agreement, calling her 'she' and treating her with kindness and respect. Small stuff like that is no big deal.

This is a false distinction. Most radfems are willing to make such compromises. These are things we can choose to do. We have a problem when the state compels us to do such things (as in HR departments forcing us to use preferred pronouns) Isn't liberal feminism about freedom of choice? Where is my freedom of choice in these situations? Where are female prisoners freedom of choice not to be housed with violent males?

There is no 'middle ground' if you believe that TWAW.
I'm a woman.
If I commit a crime, I will be sent to a woman's prison
I can put my name down on an all woman shortlist
I can compete in any female sport I choose
No middle ground

If TWAW, then the same applies. No middle ground.

Women are women. There is no 'but', 'however', 'except' at the end of that sentence.

Going back to the OP

By which you mean 'putting aside all those facts and arguments that can't be rebutted'. I wish proponents of self ID would have the courage to honestly stand behind what they're trying to inflict on women and admit it. Not looking at the nasty realities doesn't make them go away or solve the problem, and trying to compare concerns of women about their actual physical safety, privacy and right to be recognised as a biological sex independent of the presence of men to not welcoming a transwoman into a reading group.... for goodness sake. How much can you not get it?

And incidentally why do you think a group of women would create an all female reading group?

Are you aware of how many lesbian groups have gone under ground because the presence of male born, male socialised people - however unintentionally - created the same dynamic female born and female socialised people sometimes need to get away from in order to be themselves. It's not all about the transwoman and their wants and needs, and inclusion being a wonderful experience; sometimes for the women it isn't.

trying to compare concerns of women about their actual physical safety, privacy and right to be recognised as a biological sex independent of the presence of men to not welcoming a transwoman into a reading group.... for goodness sake. How much can you not get it?

Correct. How many times do we discuss genuine fears - rapists in women's prisons, paedophiles like David Challoner being a Scout Leader, gym coach and influencing policy on safeguarding in such organisations, etc etc - and all we get back is this sort of crap and 'if a rapist attacks you in the women's changing room, call the police'.

This is scary. I agree that we can't stand for women and support self id. I believe that sex is not changeable. I believe penises do not belong in female only spaces. We can't assess on a case by case basis. It's not feasible and would allow for manipulations of the system. I don't agree with unisex toilets or facilities and know we have protected single sex facilities for a reason and that the GRA is a threat to that.

I think those that support self id only look at the issue very simplistically whilst those of us who oppose it are looking at the bigger picture and implications to society. "I don't mind it and neither should you. Stop making a fuss." Kind of attitude.

I get why people might have no problem with allowing transwomen (or men) into the ladies loos. There are plenty of times when I wouldn't care too much, though I understand why for many women the boundary starts and stops with that facility.

But if toilets are OK, why aren't mixed changing rooms with some cubicles OK?

And why not open mixed cubicles?

And why not mixed hospital wards?

And why not pot luck - rather than patient choice - for which HCPs are able to perform intimate examinations on you?

And if OK for you, why not for your elderly mother? Young daughter? Disabled sister?

I think a lot of those that oppose 'self ID' are jumping on a bandwagon without understanding the law.

Amendments to the GRA has no bearing on single sex services at all. None. That is all Equality Act and there are no proposed amendments to the EA.

When you drill down into what the proposed amendments to the GRA really mean (as I did up thread) it makes no difference to the current legal position.

Trans women, both pre and post op, have been legally using single sex services as women since 2004 on the basis they 'self ID' as women. Ironically.

Dakinis I asked about sport and who is kicking the rapist out earlier - I'd love your thoughts on these issues.

I said Still want to know who throws the rapist out of the toilet or changing room. My 13 year old niece who is 5ft tall and 7 stone would like the answer too - she also wants to know if Dakinis thinks it's right that she may have to run against boys a foot taller and several stone heavier in future.

People have repeatedly explained why this isn't the case Dakinis . Ignoring it and repeating that there isn't an issue doesn't make it true.

Vicky an amendment to the GRA is going to make zero difference to women's sport and predatory males.

The existing laws in place (it is illegal to be a rapist, the EA states it is perfectly legal to exclude trans women from female sports) will still apply whether or not the amendment to the GRA is passed.

The two have absolutely no bearing on one another.

Dakinis

I don't believe you actually believe any of this nonsense you keep repeating.

You know perfectly well that self-id opens up women's safe spaces, provisions, etc etc to anyone who self-ids as a woman and no amount of reference to existing legislation can stop them accessing it.

You also know that boys and men are already identifying as female and taking women's places in sports. You know that's happening.

You know that trans activists are demanding the right for penis-holders to be able to use women's gym changing rooms, etc (add in all the other places) - that an additional half million of these people are included under the self-id umbrella (and Stonewall include fetishists and all manner of people, as recent high profile cases have demonstrated) and there will be many more of them invading women's spaces.

Saying "rape is illegal" proves - actually proves - that you don't care what women fear.

That is all Equality Act and there are no proposed amendments to the EA.

Not for the want of trying by Stonewall and other orgs who tried very hard to get them removed.

I absolutely believe they will try again via other means.

womansplaceuk.org/references-to-removal-of-single-sex-exemptions/

Ah, yes, rape is illegal, therefore rape hardly ever happens.

It would be illegal for a man to pretend to be a transwoman if the GRC was updated to self ID, therefore it just wouldn't happen.