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?

@Dommina So I can see that there is something, a feeling, that TW might have that I don't understand. So I'm mindful of being respectful of their feelings. I will call any one who wants to be called a woman a woman. I might question it privately, but I think it's respectful to honour pronouns

Thing about that is, no man or woman can "feel" like the opposite purely because a state of being that just is does not come with a factual 'recipe card' that can be recreated.

All that can be achieved is what one person of one sex thinks the other sex might be like, which itself is through their own lens of life.

Even in the same sex groupings (assuming you are female sex like me), my "feeling like a man" could be polar opposite to yours, too. Who's 'right' then?

I call them women because they are genuine people and I have no reason to believe that they would make something up about themselves that they didn't EARNESTLY believe.

Again, the people you know may well believe they are the opposite sex, but there is no objective measure of that - so all it can ever be, at absolute best, is their facsimile of what they reckon it is like, but based on a whole previous lifetime of being the other one.

It makes them trans, but it still does not make a man a woman (or vice versa). And what's wrong with being in the category trans anyway? It is their own unique journey which IS different so why not accept it as such, instead of trying to shoehorn into something that isn't accurate?

(It also does not make a woman a non-man, as we have been labelled, but I think that is a slightly different debate.)

Why is it that transwomen have such a large platform? They have been given this platform by organisations like Stonewall...

I was listening to a radio item earlier which had Peter Tatchell on as a "human rights campaigner".

I believe he has accepted the current stonewall definitions and practice, so he really needs a * after his self-appointed title because his understanding of the term is one which excludes female human rights.

@BrownPaperTeddy so I personally wouldn't worry about a male dr examining me for example.

This is oft-cited. There is a big difference between knowing you are seeing a male HCP (or might be) and being ok with that; to having specifically asked for a female and then being confronted with a man in whatever guise (such as was publicised some time ago ref a smear). Our social conditioning can make it incredibly hard to speak up so then what? An "enforced" examination or treatment because the patient was or felt unable to say no?

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.

Nobody here is trying to make people feel upset for no reason. We're trying to stick up for women and girls who can't do it themselves for various reasons. But unfortunately these demands are being made so aggressively and widely we are having to say "no" and that is now including the "genuine" people you refer to - because we can't safely identify who is and isn't.

Brilliant "Swiss cheese" explanation @FloralBunting - thank you for mentioning it here, I'd not seen it before.

It makes them trans, but it still does not make a man a woman (or vice versa). And what's wrong with being in the category trans anyway? It is their own unique journey which IS different so why not accept it as such, instead of trying to shoehorn into something that isn't accurate?

I agree, and so do most TW. I've already acknowledged that. What most TW object to is the everyday 'deadnaming' and people using the wrong pronouns deliberately and maliciously. It is of course silly to believe that there are no differences in actuality. But I'm not going to disrespect the people in the trans community I know by calling them a man to their face. What am I expected to do?

'hi Domina'
'Oh hey Cindy'
'I got a new dress today'
'oh wow its lovely! But you know you're still a male right?'
'oh yah, I know'

Is that better?

Oldcrones Fascinating article which I my really agree with..

I think I've made myself clear and will get off the thread here. It comes down to whether or not you a are willing to broaden the definition of woman. I am, you're not. Fine.

But I'm not going to disrespect the people in the trans community I know by calling them a man to their face. What am I expected to do?

When do you think you would have to do that?

It comes down to whether or not you a are willing to broaden the definition of woman. I am, you're not. Before you go... have a think about it this way...

Transwomen are broadening the definition of man

What is wrong with that statement?

Re transmen wjo pass wanting to join the women only book club, use women's toilet etc

They're not likely to as they pass and they want to be seen as men.

Was a thread recently where a transman joined a men's choir,

Same as transwomen, I suspect they seek either mixed or the sex that matches their chosen gender.

Transmen aren't statistically anything like as risky to women and girls as transwomen though (and more to the point all the perves who will come with them) nor are they as pushy, entitled, aggressive, that I've seen.

There are obvious reasons for this :D

As for prisons clearly in such close quarters, shared showers cells etc its going to be very difficult to pass.

Plus most people don't actually believe anyone can change sex and they rightly see the risk as similar/ same as putting a woman in a man's prison. Which is of course what you are doing.

'hi Domina'
'Oh hey Cindy'
'I got a new dress today'
'oh wow its lovely! But you know you're still a male right?'
'oh yah, I know'

why would that be the response to the new dress comment? Are men not allowed to wear dresses? I'd personally like to live in a world where a man can talk about his new dress without raising an eyebrow from anyone. I'm interested in broadening the definition of men. You're not-that's fine.

Anyone who does the "why aren't you bothered about transmen?" thing immediately makes me wonder what is the basis of their feminism.

Even the reading group comment is designed to elicit the feminists are mean trope without even considering why a woman's group may be desired.

I'm at the point where if someone signs off with what's basically "smugly smug smug, look how much more virtuous than you I am" it just makes me roll my eyes.

Transmen tend to pass much better than transwomen in posed photos, but irl, where you can gauge overall size, see shoulder to waist to hip proportions, hear their voice, etc? Not so much. There's also the whole female socialization thing preventing them from trying to take up as much space as possible and leading to them being aware of and sensitive to other women's reactions.

Anyone who does the "why aren't you bothered about transmen?" thing immediately makes me wonder what is the basis of their feminism.

I'm usually waiting for the next question to be "well what about lesbians, aren't you scared of them too?"

No, no we are not.

@howlsmovingcastle84's response to Dommina's somewhat strange scenario is exactly my reaction too.

Let the men broaden their own definition, not colonise ours.

It all starts to get a bit Green Eggs and Ham after a while. What about if they're in a box? What if they're holding a fox?

I'm at the point where if someone signs off with what's basically "smugly smug smug, look how much more virtuous than you I am" it just makes me roll my eyes.

Precisely what I did.

Just to clear up a point - transmen start to commit crimes at the same rate as men after a while. But as they remain physically closer to women even with testosterone (same height, still not as strong etc) they are easier to fight off and remain less of a threat than men. Although they can commit sexual assault I understand they cannot commit rape as their penises (in the rare cases they have them) are non functioning. Objecting to them is like objecting to a strong lesbian - yes it's possible you'll be attackef but unlikely.

Incidently if you doubt that this is a gentle illness that should be treated as such, rather than affirmed with surgery, look up the operation to get the fake penis. It is horrific. Make sure there are no kids about, seriously.

"It all starts to get a bit Green Eggs and Ham after a while. What about if they're in a box? What if they're holding a fox?"

lolololololol

MipMipMip

Would love to know the source of that.
There arent many transmen about (yet!)

Do transmen who have no treatment (hormones etc) start to commit crime at the same rate as men or is this only with drugs etc?
Do transmen start to commit sex offences at the same rate and of teh same type as men (voyerism, public masturbation, exhibitionism, sexual grooming of teenagers, street harrassment, and so on to penetration with an object (rape as per UK law not usually possible) and CSA, viewing images of CSA etc and so on)

How many transmen are highly active on teh UK furry and adult baby scene?
Stuff like that.
This is men's shit.
Would be fascinating if women start to do all that stuff with / without testosterone & "social transition"

'hi Domina'
'Oh hey Cindy'
'I got a new dress today'
'oh wow its lovely! But you know you're still a male right?'
'oh yah, I know'

@Dommina That's a really odd exchange. In this context, why would you mention that the person was male? It's irrelevant. You said yourself, earlier in the thread:

So I'm mindful of being respectful of their feelings. I will call any one who wants to be called a woman a woman. I might question it privately, but I think it's respectful to honour pronouns.

So you also don't believe that everyone who calls themselves a woman actually is one. I think your position is closer to most others on this thread than you realise. You can be polite to genuine transsexuals without believing that they are actual women, or that any man who declares himself to be a woman belongs in women's spaces.

You want to broaden the definition of 'woman' to include gender non conforming men. I would prefer to broaden the definition of man to include gender non conforming men. 'Woman' already includes gender non conforming women.

It all starts to get a bit Green Eggs and Ham after a while. What about if they're in a box? What if they're holding a fox?

This one's just for you @AngryAttackKittens

Thanks for the inspiration x

irischild.blogspot.com/2018/09/i-will-not-say-it-tran-i-am.html

That's just what I was thinking of!

Well, happy to oblige.
Dedicated to you, then.

Dommina

I think I've made myself clear and will get off the thread here. It comes down to whether or not you a are willing to broaden the definition of woman. I am, you're not. Fine.

Translation: now that I've said my piece I'll leave before anyone gets a chance to refute it, and I'll put a sting in the tail for good measure 😂

Transparent.

It's kind of hilarious how convinced so many males are that if they word their special case just the right way it will change our minds. Whether the male in question is wearing workboots or lippy makes no apparent difference.