Please can someone who thinks that TWAW..

[BertrandRussell]

...explain to me the intellectual process that got you there? I promise -and as far as I can I promise on behalf of other people - not to challenge or argue and only ask clarification questuons. I just want to understand, even if I don't agree.

And we're back to "it's so difficult to tell what sex people are".

No I'm not asking for any of those things. Being "trans" and having a GRC are not the same thing in any way shape or form. Disingenuous straw man.

Please don't @ me.

Teddy

I don't agree with women's spaces being eroded or taken over. Equally I don't agree with trans people being pushed out of society either. I hope that a way can be found that does both

I think third spaces would work well for many, especially because of the growing number of people who are non binary etc. For some, they would never be enough as they think gender identity should trump sexed bodies in all situations.

It sounds to me as though you are of the view that where sexed bodies are significant, sexed bodies should determine access to single sex provision/ sport etc.

In addition to facilities it is important to consider whether/ when people's sex should be recorded accurately regardless of their identity. For example, when monitoring pay at work, crimes committed etc......For example, a natal male who transitions in his 40s - should their pay be recorded as that of a female employee or a male employee? What if they have a Gender Recognition Certificate - does this change anything? If this person goes on to commit a crime - should this be recorded as male or female crime. Perhaps this is another case where a third category is useful?

One of the things I find upsetting is when questions such as the above are dismissed as transphobic or hate fuelled. I think this is a silencing technique used by some to try and stop solutions that they would feel are unpalatable, but would appeal to many, being discussed.

PS what about "trans men" who don't want to use male spaces? Would you insist they did? What about butch lesbians? They are women in women's spaces. If it's so difficult, that's going to be a problem isn't it?

That in an ideal world the GRA would be repealed. No more GRCs. A new legal framework would be worked out. It would have to be decided what happened with current GRC holders. Probably we'd have to maintain the legal fiction for this tiny group but we'd need to dispense with the idea that they are entitled to absolute privacy. Because you can't change sex. It's a nonsense.

No I'm not asking for any of those things. Being "trans" and having a GRC are not the same thing in any way shape or form. Disingenuous straw man.

Then I have no idea what you were saying in the first statement if it's not suggesting

What?

Brown I do see what you mean! I think it's trickier to draw the line for TM. We know that TW are generally bigger, stronger, and retain male patterns of violence - easy to say "no male-born bodies in here". TM are often smaller and tend to have female patterns of violence - testosterone really complicates matters, though, because we do see a rise in violence. So it might be possible to say "no male bodies or testosterone taken for the purpose of transition", perhaps?

On third spaces, I do think this will eventually be the way forward and obviously not at the cost of single-sex or disabled facilities. It's incredibly costly (particularly here in the UK where we already have resistance to fitting appropriate disabled facilities into listed buildings); but what really grinds my gears is the "no compromise, we want access to female space" attitude. This was really typified for me by - I think it's Hope aka gncmaninpink on Twitter? - who raised wads of money for a transgender shelter and found it was outright rejected. It's self-defeating, shows no respect to people who need single-sex facilities, and shows that these demands are about validation, not actual tailored services.

Being trans is not contingent on having a gender recognition certificate. The overwhelming majority of trans people don't have a gender recognition certificate.

PS what about "trans men" who don't want to use male spaces? Would you insist they did? What about butch lesbians? They are women in women's spaces. If it's so difficult, that's going to be a problem isn't it?

Yes a massive problem.

And are you engaging in whataboutery?

So do You think that women should have to accept a person that looks like a man into their space? Even if those women are triggered by men being in there or, in the case of women who for religious reasons have to be segregated are then excluded from that place? Does that even work - this person looks like a man and acts like a man but he was born a woman and so it's ok for me to undress in front of him?

And are you engaging in whataboutery?

Since your entire argument is whataboutery that's a bit rich!

I asked you first, I think.

@silentcrow

What you say there makes a lot of sense.

And I agree absolutely - single sex spaces should not be sacrificed at all.

The only reason "Trans woman are women" is a thing is because it is the only way to avoid the requirement for a third space.

Trans people support it because their need for validation is everything to them and politicians/business people support it because it saves them the cost of having to provide that safe space.

It might seem cynical, but I can't find any other logic.

Good work Bertrand and Rat both.

It might seem cynical, but I can't find any other logic.

Cynical but entirely plausible.

Sorry, haven't caught up on the thread but I felt bad skipping out on your questions Bert, so I've come back to them. I realise the thread has moved on...

Rat- I realize that this is reductio ad absurdam- but do you think that people can identify as anything they want to? If not, why not?

I mean obviously they can, but I'm quite sure it would carry the same weight without the decades of evidenced incidences of transgenderism, the psychological assessments, the way we develop physiologically and develop our sexual characteristics, and the nature of the concept of gender. So I can't see it being a useful comparison.

And in your example of the room full of people, what leads a person born a man to decide that he is actually a woman?

I don't know I'm afraid, I only have the same third person accounts to go on as you do I think. But I'm not convinced that they might not usually be right, in some capacity.

Do I, a person born a woman, have any right to query someone who says they are also a woman? It’s not something I would do at a drinks party, obviously, but in other circumstances?

I can't imagine a situation outside of a professional context where you would. Or at least not one where there would be any point.

Why do I have to acknowledge that? Who made the decision?

No-one made that decision, its just the way it is, isn't it?

That is patently not true.

Lass, I didn't mean to suggest we don't know the difference without any degree of certainty. I meant we don't know it with absolute certainty. Which patently is true, most of the time. I read back my wording and it's my fault; I meant "certainty" in absolute terms, but it reads like we couldn't have any degree of certainty. Which, as you say, is patently untrue.

Sorry Rat but even with the qualification that is still patently untrue. I know with absolute certainty that my husband, my son, my brother are men. I can say with absolute certainty my mother and my mother in law

If I were to say to the men I work with I can't be absolutely certain you are a man

Sorry - posted too soon - they would look at me as if I taken leave of my senses.

Of course transgender people exist but to extrapolate from that that we can't know if anyone is really a man or woman is not reality.

Can't be arsed to read back but I'm pretty sure i was careful not to say we can't ever know, Lass. One's parents were the exact example I was thinking of. Yeah, your workmate might look at you like you're nuts for saying you can't be sure, but... well... you aren't sure, in the very strictest sense of the word.

Anyway, I've thoroughly enjoyed catching up on the thread : Fermats and BrownPaperTeddy I've found particularly interesting so far

Rat: you have to acknowledge that "woman" in everyday life is not used to describe those with the confirmed characteristic of being of the female sex. It just isn't.

Bert: Why do I have to acknowledge that? Who made the decision?

Rat: No-one made that decision, its just the way it is, isn't it?

Who told you that is just the way it is?

Q - And in your example of the room full of people, what leads a person born a man to decide that he is actually a woman?

Rat: I don't know I'm afraid, I only have the same third person accounts to go on as you do I think. But I'm not convinced that they might not usually be right, in some capacity.

Rat you said that you could help and now you are saying you actually have no idea. Your 'help' consists of 'a man said it so it must be true'.

Yeah, your workmate might look at you like you're nuts for saying you can't be sure, but... well... you aren't sure, in the very strictest sense of the word

In the strictest sense of the word I am 100% sure.

Of course we know. It ridiculous to pretend otherwise. It's why we have descriptive terms, including the term 'androgynous'.

I should have written "certain". I don't think we're going to agree!

If we are talking about knowing, then as 'knowing' is a true belief, that means feminists are on the winning side of the argument every time. What Rat and others have is a false belief, which is not knowledge at all.

BrownPaperTeddy glad we agree on much.

"I think a male presenting, testoterone-filled, beardy woman would traumatise women in a rape crisis centre, yes. That is a muddy area."

Yes, it might well traumatize women so it's not a muddy area, it's s no.

Children are not allowed to serve alcohol in pubs. But that doesn't mean all adults are suitable to serve alcohol in pubs.

Children are not allowed to serve alcohol in pubs doesn't automatically tell you about what adults can do in relation to the sale of alcohol.

Before her death from dementia my mum was (of course) an adult but not employable in a pub.

"And this is where the "you can't change your sex. You are your natal sex" argument loses me."

It shouldn't really because it is really only in relation to sex, women who make themselves artificially look like males should not be surprised if that affects things but it still doesn't change their sex.

"I chose to only have a female conduct my smear test. In walks "Brian" who used to be Daphne and my argument would be what?"

Then you say you are not comfortable with that person. You do need to say why or anything. You can ask to see someone else. Brian should realise why and should be thinking of the patient not themselves. IMHO.

HubrisComicGhoul just to be clear I am arguing for unisex gender neutral spaces in addition to single sex spaces and not instead of them.

Who mentiond Blaire White? Have you seen the interview with the men's rights movement?

What was the Eddie Izzard photo?