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?

But how would you know all members were actually in agreement? If you present it as "this is what I think we should do to be kind" you've already made it clear that you think not doing so would be unkind, and thus made it difficult for other members to object.

@BrownPaperTeddy

To answer your question about the lack of discussion about transmen and why the focus is on transwomen.

For myself I would ask the question. Where are the prominent transmen in this discussion? They haven't been excluded by the radfems. Why is it that transwomen have such a large platform? They have been given this platform by organisations like Stonewall and political parties - Green Party, LibDems, Labour. You should ask yourself why the political class is still overwhelmingly male. It is my contention that transwomen retain their male privilege.

In a prison situation transmen are housed on the female estate? Why is that? Why do we not have similar campaigns arguing that they should be housed with the men? Surely of transwomen are women then transmen are men.

The reason is that everybody knows they remain at risk of sexual assault - by males, because they are female. It doesn't matter how you present in reality sexual assault is something done by males against females.

What you end up with in a mantra like TWAW is two classes. Men and non-men. That's patriarchy incarnate

^Excuse my grammar btw I get forgetful when I think!

But will they really be comfortable or just saying they are because to say no labels you as a bigot? Assuming they are actually asked that is, I'm sure the answer would usually be "they'll be fine with it" unless all new members are routinly vetted.

Again though an all female book group could then include a trans man, who looked exactly like a man but who would be considered female because you can't change sex?

Where am I getting confused?

Am I focusing on appearance too much?

I think in my head I'm thinking what would I be uncomfortable with and in truth, not that much - so I personally wouldn't worry about a male dr examining me for example. Have had it many times and it isn't a problem for me though I totally understand it will be for others.

In a changing room I would try to go in a cubicle if not would try and stay covered anyway even if all women in there. I think that I would be uncomfortable if someone looked male - but then they could be a trans woman or a trans man, who is actually biological female so would I be wrong to view them as a man?

The worst case would definitely be someone behaving inappropriately regardless of how they appeared - so whether they passed as female, looked male, looked male but dressed as a female, or male - if they were being inappropriate I would have a problem.

It's so difficult to actually unpick the scenarios and then work out how you feel about it and I would not want to upset anyone whose feelings and motivation was genuine. My issue is with anyone who is doing this for dubious reasons or for the sole reason of attacking or abusing women and girls and I do get the fear of not knowing who is a threat.

Thank you if you have tried to answer my questions.

I would be really interested to read any more answers.

Here's the thing though - even if you're comfortable other women may not be, and the standard should aim at making sure no women are uncomfortable.

If your friend has found a way for humans to actually change sex, and thus TWAW, then this is an earth shattering discovery which would net them scientific fame and probably a Nobel.

So i would be asking if they think humans can actually change sex. Go from there. The whole illogical house of cards falls

In a prison situation transmen are housed on the female estate? Why is that? Why do we not have similar campaigns arguing that they should be housed with the men? Surely of transwomen are women then transmen are men.

So I didn't know that. Would that also include trans men that had full surgery? They may have a surgically created penis but still be in a female prison? If they had a GRC would they still be in a female prison?

How was that decision made? Surely if legally someone is male they go into a male prison, in a segregated area for their own protection if necessary?

Would a post op trans man be allowed to work in a woman's refuge because they are biologically female? Or to intimately examine a woman? Are there rules covering this?

I totally understand the issues with women's sport.

Even with data collection - so breast cancer statistics could be skewed if trans women and trans men are included? So female breast cancer figures might appear to drop whilst male breast cancer figures could rise if women and men that had self ID 'd appear in the statistics for their chosen sex rather than their biological sense?

Do I have this right?

It's too late for me to take this in I think and for every answer I get 10 more questions.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this though.

Again though an all female book group could then include a trans man, who looked exactly like a man but who would be considered female because you can't change sex?

In my opinion being a man or a woman is more than just appearance. Transmen behave more like women than men.

As far as I am aware there has only been one longitudinal study which analyses the behavior of MtF and FtM transgender people and how this is affected by transition. This showed that it had no impact on the behavior of those involved. i.e MtF tended to commit more 'male' crimes - those that were violent or sexual. For example, men commit 98% of all sexual assaults (in the UK) and 90% of violent crimes (globally)

In prisons, recent evidence shows that TG women are incarcerate for sexual assaults (48%, compared to cis-males of 16%) This would illustrate that despite making outward changes to their appearance they still behaved like males.

From my own personal experience when I have interacted with MtFs on Twitter they still 'talk' like men. For example - they talk for 70% of the time. i.e for every 1 tweet I send they often send 3x tweets. Meanwhile FtM still 'talk' like women. i.e more hesitant and less combative. I know this isn't science and it's a subjective account but that's my experience.

The vast majority of feminists are focused on equality of the sexes and don't have any beef with treating trans people as the gender with which they identify.
But the sexes are not the same. Equality does not mean the same. Some people have different needs to others and it would be unfair to treat them the same. Women are entitled to time off for pregnancy & birth, men are not. Men and women compete in different sporting competitions as it would be unfair for them to compete against each other.

If you believe that TWAW, do you think that an elderly woman who needs help bathing and dressing should be forced into that help being provided by a man who has recently come out as trans but will not be taking any hormones or surgical treatment?

@AngryAttackKittens

I understand that and I did say that in my post.

I'm trying to understand the whole issue.

For me it is too confusing when the focus is only on trans women being in female spaces because it blocks my thinking. I get stuck thinking on the physical appearance - so how would I feel if someone who looks like a man comes into the female toilet.

I am still very confused about the fact that they could be a trans man so entitled, I'm guessing, to be in a female space?

I am not trying to say what should or shouldn't happen. I'm trying to get answers to my questions so that I an clarify it in my own head.

@DJLippy

Thank you. It's been so much more helpful to me reading your answers than some of the very combative threads I've seen here where I can't get past the tone of the post to actually "see" what is being said.

'Woman' is not broadening. 'Woman' means adult female human. It does not include men. It is a word which refers to sex not gender.

There's a lot I could say, but it is late and I'm tired too! I'll address this, in that I slightly disagree. I'm, 'Woman' is attached to gender, and 'female' to sex. I think there is room for it to change, while retaining the distinction between natal/born/cis (sorry but I just don't mind that c word, I know and understand some people don't like it)

It doesn't take away my right to call myself a woman. I think in some ways it contributes to a dissection of gender based expectations and the eventual removal of them. IMHO basically, gender is largely meaningless unless studying sociological patterns. So it's a point I would be willing to move on. I know not everyone feels the same,and I thank you for the respectful reply.

To end, I think the reason I sympathise and in some ways empathise with TW is because I have kind of been there with the changing room thing. At school, they found out I was gay. A group of girls made my life a living hell. In PE I would get a torrent of abuse every single time. They destroyed my things, threatened sexual abuse, called me every homophobic slur you could think of. It was insipid. When I told the teacher she told me to 'ignore it' and no action was taken. When they complained that I was a lesbian and was therefore a threat, the teacher ordered that I get changed in the back, in a separate area. I was even more visibly excluded, and It suprisingly didn't stop the bullying.

I just can't justify making someone else feel that way. In theory, sure there are risks. Maybe a transwoman is taking a sneaky peek at me. I have never felt it if they have. I'm in theory as much of a threat as they are. But I'm not. I just wanted to get changed. Just like the majority of TW.

If they had a GRC would they still be in a female prison?

Yes. As far as I am aware all transmen are housed on the female estate.

In a similar manner re the risk of women to other women. Should the MoJ deem that a female rapist is a risk to female inmates they will be moved onto the male estate. This is because all female prions are a lower category so they are unable to manage the risk in this environment.

There are 0 female inmates deemed such a risk that they must be housed on the male estate. IMO this is the perfect example of the difference between male and female offending patterns.

Due to the terrible health outcomes of the surgeries most transmen do not have genital surgery. If you want more information this thread is very informative.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3366542-MNHQ-Id-like-to-start-a-thread-about-the-reality-of-phalloplasty-without-it-being-deleted

Hope this helps!

@Dommina

I think you have summed up exactly how I feel too. I am a straight woman so haven't faced what you have but when I think about this whole picture I am seeing the more human side I guess. I worry that trans people will be viewed with suspicion or as a threat.

I truly believe that the government is responsible for this though. There must have been a way to make life easier for trans men and women without creating loopholes a mile wide for abusers to exploit.

BrownPaperTeddy, if it's any help, this isn't about transwomen at all really. This is about biological males and a culture shift that will have women (like yourself, trying very hard to understand) suddenly unsure of boundaries that were very clear before.

I can't recall which poster it was talked about the Swiss cheese layers of security that we have around things, but it's a good analogy.

There are holes in every layer of security, so we have a number, and together, they work to protect.

So on a broad scale, it is socially taboo for a male bodied individual to go into spaces designated female. This taboo alone will keep most men out. One layer. The taboo will mean that if others seeing a male try to enter a female space, they will challenge them. Another layer. If they get inside a female space, women understand that they can challenge the male individual.

The point GC people are trying to make is that Self ID removes all those layers, because if all a man has to do is say he is female then the taboo will fade for the first two, and women will find themselves socially unable to do the third.

This matters because male bodies belong to make people who are statistically very dangerous to women. The only reason this is an issue involvng trans people right now is because the TRA movement is the one pushing for male bodies to have access to female spaces.

@FloralBunting

Thank you for explaining that. That makes sense.

Thank you all for actually explaining this in a way that can I can understand.

I've found it too daunting to really ask questions on other threads which actually is quite sad - a woman afraid to speak because of how some other women will react but you've all been really tolerant and helped me understand so thank you.

^I second everything @FloralBunting just said.

There must have been a way to make life easier for trans men and women without creating loopholes a mile wide for abusers to exploit.

This is why I think it's really important for everyone to fill in the current survey relating to plans to update the GRA. What we have in place now is already a mess in terms of addressing privacy and safety concerns, and proposed changes would make it far worse. We can't assume that the government will get this right - they need input from a wide range of citizens reminding them that they need to address these concerns.

(Can someone link to the consultation online thingy? I don't have a link handy.)

BrownPaperTeddy, yes, I get that it can be daunting. There are some fearsome warrior women here for sure. And a lot of them have been at the coal face for a long time, and are seeing women's right treated as though they genuinely don't matter at all.
I think sometimes there is a lot of frustration with people just discovering it all, because once you've seen the danger (and many women are personally experienced in how vulnerable women can be) you wonder how others don't get it. Plus, a lot of us are very weary because we're dealing with the real life fallout from the TRA movement itself too, be it trolls or doxxing or children being groomed or husbands destroying their families with their private obsession.

So, stick around, keep reading, keep learning, don't be put off by gobby women who genuinely have the best interests of women and girls at heart.

Amendments to the GRA has no bearing on single sex services at all

Except that they do.

REPEAL THE GRA

(sorry but I just don't mind that c word, I know and understand some people don't like it)

It's against talk guidelines because many women find it offensive and goady when it refers to all women who aren't FTM trans. There is no need to define women as an absence of being male.

Dommina
This is quite long, but worth a read.
janeclarejones.com/2018/09/09/gay-rights-and-trans-rights-a-compare-and-contrast/

BrownPaperTeddy lots of us were where you are quite recently - just everyday women with no involvement in politics - I'd certainly let my feminism drift from the girl I used to be. I was ambivalent too, until a combination of the online abuse from TRAs, passive acceptance of TWAW from young women, safeguarding issues and denial of biology pushed me over the edge. That was only a few months ago. I lurked here for ages (Mumsnet as a whole has always intimidated me!), and then I absolutely had to ask my questions, puzzle my way through legalities and doublespeak...and here I am, wiser, sadder, and bloody furious. It is a journey. You'll encounter all sorts of batshit stuff. Keep asking. It really is ok and you'll get a radar for dishonest posters after a while.

Apropos of various posts in this thread I feel it might be worth posting Schrödinger's Rapist again, just in case newer posters or lurkers aren't familiar with the concept. I'm sure you can see how it applies to the bathroom/changing rooms issue. For me this is the very core of safeguarding - we have no possible way of knowing a bad actor in advance, so we make sure the probability of them slipping through is as low as possible. kateharding.net/2009/10/08/guest-blogger-starling-schrodinger%E2%80%99s-rapist-or-a-guy%E2%80%99s-guide-to-approaching-strange-women-without-being-maced/