Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Jo Brand on transgender debate in the Guardian

222 replies

kesstrel · 10/10/2018 16:45

www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/10/women-avoid-transgender-debate-fear-reaction-jo-brand-germaine-greer-feminism

OP posts:
VickyEadie · 10/10/2018 21:16

This "compromise on self id" - I haven't seen any sign from Stonewall that they're willing to compromise one iota.

MorrisZapp · 10/10/2018 21:17

Jo Brand and Carol Thatcher rings a bell, what happened again?

Seafret · 10/10/2018 21:21

Ah, sure Noname*.. women are to blame for all this. For saying no and taking back the compromise granted to trojan horse litiation that we did not consent to.

Nothing at all to do with decades some have spent planning and growing an ideology.

Would you teach your daughter that her saying No to sexual acts is merely the start of a negotiation?

I have deleted what I was going to write to refute your arguments, because all you do is prove our points - women on here are engaging with you calmly, clearly, assertively and you are the one wanting more and more concessions from us and giving no quarter or solutions.

Perhaps you would like to volunteer as a go between and get back to us in a week with your progress. Because no one is stopping you from doing whatever you think will help

VickyEadie · 10/10/2018 21:22

MorrisZapp

Dunno, but that would be a hell of a sitcom.

Barracker · 10/10/2018 21:22

barrack Fair enough but I disagree

What do you disagree with?
My second X chromosome?
My ovaries?
My uterus?

Which part of my biology that I share with half of humanity and not with the other half do you 'disagree' with?

I'm literally claiming that my ovaries are not like testicles....and you 'disagree'?

I can provide evidence for my claim that I'm different from all men because of my sex.
If you disagree can you explain what you mean? Do you think I'm truly the same as some men, and not others? Am I somehow wrong here?

It's such a bewildering comment to make.

Hi, I'm Barracker, I have ovaries and a uterus and XX chromosomes like 3.7 billion other humans.

"I disagree"

MIdgebabe · 10/10/2018 21:28

I. Think that a good way to protect the none aggressive trans people is to avoid self id which open up the trans label to misuse. I think efforts would be better spent trying to help people who have dysmorphia, which may not be through transistioning, and trying to build a society where everyone has equal opportunities to participate in society by identifying where those opportunities are currently limited.

So perhaps the whole transwomen are women ( which is as much a hive mind mantra as twanw) is a red herring. Not accepting that they are women does not automatically stop them from participating in society. What needs to be looked at on a case by case basis is what they are being excluded from and why.

I would guess that typically the exclusion arises because they are biologically Male ( transwomen focus her because they are more scary and I can imagine wanting to be a transman) yet are not comfortable in male spaces. Ergo transspaces are needed. I would then say that, under the assumption that transwomen may suffer transphobic abuse from some people, these spaces should be designated unisex as opposed to trans spaces. These unisex spaces should be designed to avoid anyone telling that a person is using them because they are trans to avoid the transphobic abuse . So very private facilities.

I am not bothered that they will be excluded from a small range of jobs such as a smear taker. Because every body has jobs that their body excluded them from taking

silentcrow · 10/10/2018 21:36

Did I hear that Jo Brand is going to be on Women's Hour this week? I'm stuck in work on days when I shouldn't be - someone keep an ear out, please?

LangCleg · 10/10/2018 22:34

Absolute bullshit is it a tiny number of loud activists. Bollocks. It's the massive majority. There are a tiny number of old school transsexuals and all the rest are intent on abolishing women's rights and shredding child protection.

End fucking of.

wacademia · 10/10/2018 22:42

it was a consensus that this invasive policy had to stop and disability self id should be allowed.

Having been through the disability adjustment process at work, I can authoritatively tell you that you are talking shite. There is no self-id for this. Even though my working conditions were aggravating my disability so much that I needed time off and was falling foul of the "if you are off sick too many times we will fire you" policy, I could not self-id as disabled. I had to be seen by a doctor appointed by my employer before they would make adjustments to the working conditions that they had unilaterally imposed upon me after I had already been in post for some time.

Despite this, my employer were right to require that I be seen by their doctor and their Occupational Health team. Firstly, their doctor suggested a long-term treatment that my own GP had not suggested, and this has helped me enormously to manage my disability, reducing the sick time I need and improving my life outside work. Secondly, without going into outing levels of detail, the adjustments they had to make for me have permanently affected everyone else in my shared office*. That's over twenty people. It's not OK for me to self-id into inconveniencing over twenty people. Thirdly, my employer needed to be sure that they understood my condition properly in order to make helpful adjustments.

During this disability adjustment process, I talked to my union shop steward as well as a disability rep from another union. Both told me that only a tribunal can decide in a legally-binding way whether someone is disabled for the purposes of employment law. No one else will nor can tell you conclusively whether your condition constitutes a disability or not. This is because each person is unique, as is their condition and the effects of their condition, so you can't use previous tribunal cases as a reliable guide. So when I say there is no self-identification into disability, I'm not kidding: it takes a tribunal to decide.

Information over, start rant.

I am sick to death of trans activists using disabled people as comparators for analogies. I'm sick of you claiming that our struggle for justice and inclusion is exactly like your demands for dominance. I've had enough of you co-opting our hard-won toilets instead of fighting for your own. I'm sick of you refusing to understand the meaning of the phrase "reasonable adjustment". I rightly have to prove my need for workplace changes that will inconvenience fewer than thirty people, you want to self-id into the single-sex safe spaces of 51% of the population and you refuse, purposefully, to acknowledge how this is a problem. I am not your human shield. Stop co-opting me.

  • If you think we all get single offices in universities, you are mistaken. Postdocs and support staff are expected to share and some institutions expect lecturers to share. The biggest battery farm shared office I've seen to date had over 80 people in it.
AspieAndProud · 10/10/2018 22:53

Yes of course i know it’s already happening. And there will be no solution because each side is too busy shouting & refusing to move from their extreme position.

Can you give us any indication of what an acceptable compromise would be concerning male-bodied rapists in women’s prisons?

What is the Golden Mean here?

Because I don’t see any middle ground here between the ‘extremes’ of yes and no.

FloralBunting · 10/10/2018 23:48

This is what I genuinely don't get in this critique on MN and the nasty extreme feminists here. What exactly is the compromise proposed? Noname99 has suggested that sport should retain sex segregation because of physical disadvantage and safety, but they don't think women should be able to require a female HCP.

So the line seems to be hovering around some level of physical safety in specific situations.

I am really trying to understand the mindset behind the rationale. If, for argument's sake, the extreme feminists made that compromise, what would be the compromise the other side were making? How are they meeting us in the middle? By conceding that many sporting transwomen could break their opponents limbs and not doing it, as long as they can still override the comfort of a woman who would prefer a female to do an intimate medical exam?

There's a reason many of us have come to the 'extreme' position of saying no, it's not right to coerce women into allowing broken limbs, emotional distress, and any boundary they put in place thoroughly disregarded to be accomodating to the male-born. We usually started by thinking a compromise was possible, and then we realized that it's just not possible to barter basic rights away for the sake of compromise, especially when those rights belong to all women, not just the ones willing to give them up.

bd67th · 11/10/2018 00:28

noname99

You've just complained that I named 3-4 activists, then a few posts later said that "Stonewall are dominating everything". It's not just a few noisy activists, it's Stonewall and noisy violent dangerous activists who have the Govt ear. That frightens me.

observed/assigned at birth (for m not getting into that semantic and utterly pointless argument)

Actually, it's a vitally important distinction. Assignment indicates a choice on the part of the midwife, observation indicates no choice. I didn't assign the sky blue this morning, I observed that it was blue. Core to gender essentialist beliefs is the tenet that the midwife somehow chose your sex and might have got it wrong.

Why is the HCP such an issue?

Read the following very very carefully because it hurts me emotionally every time I have to type this out:

  • As a child aged eight, I was sexually assaulted, cornered in a mixed changing room by two older boys who groped my vulva.
  • In my twenties, my then-bf raped me, leaving me with a tear that healed badly and acts as a reservoir for thrush and other microbes. This has permanent effects on my sexual health.
  • All three of my sexual assailants and every sexual harasser in my life have been male. Male = threat. When a HCP inserts a speculum for a smear test, she is hurting me where my rapist hurt me.* When a gynaecologist inserts a speculum, then clamps my cervix, then dilates my cervix to insert a IUS or IUD, she is hurting me where my rapist hurt me* so much that my screams of pain can be heard from the waiting room outside.

If you have a shred of empathy, you will understand why having a male-bodied person inflict that kind of pain would be extremely bad for me psychologically. If not, read on.

When I went abroad for my not-available-in-the-UK frameless IUS as a last-ditch attempt to manage my endometriosis and dysmenorrhea because the NHS will not hysterectomise a childless woman unless it's to save her life, I had to see a male gyn because he invented the IUS and was the only gyn I could find who would fit it. This man has devoted his life to improving women's health, his wife was staffing the reception desk outside, he wasn't going to abuse me. Knowing that didn't stop my rising anxiety as I took off my trousers behind the curtain, nor did it stop my vagina from clamping shut involuntarily when I felt the speculum, nor did it stop me from suffering a brief dissociative episode when he injected my cervix with lidocaine (why don't the NHS offer pain relief like that?), nor did it stop me from collapsing into shaking and tears the moment I stepped out onto the street afterwards. If I had had any option to see a woman gyn for that IUS, I would have seen one. I very nearly bottled out when I came to walk in, it was only the thought that I had to face the insertion "now or never" that gave me the mental strength to go ahead with it. If I bottled out I would have had to go home and it would be terrible to travel so far only to give up and still have agonising pain every month forever, so I steeled myself to stay and it was the single scariest thing I have ever opted into.

As sexual violence survivors go, I'm lucky to be relatively unaffected when it comes to gynae health procedures. Despite this a man, a good man who genuinely cares about women's quality of life and proves this with deeds but a man nonetheless, fitting me with an IUS was still traumatic. There are women out there who do not attend smear tests at all because they've been sexually assaulted or raped. These women are in danger of developing undetected cervical cancer, just as Jade Goody did. There are other women survivors who can cope with a smear test performed by a female person but would not cope with one performed by a male person. I wouldn't go for my smear if I thought a male would perform it: without the urgency of "I must do this now or get the Eurostar home without the IUS", I woulf keep putting off making the appointment, and putting it off, and putting it off. And, frankly, I shouldn't have to put myself through dissociative episodes, anxiety, panic attacks, flashbacks, shaking, and sobbing for routine NHS healthcare. (Ideally, I shouldn't have to go through that for exotic IUSes either, but NICE suck.) I should not have to put myself through that distress for the sake of a male person who wants to validate their womanliness by turning up to do a smear when the patient has requested a female HCP. I want my HCP to have had smears and know how it feels, so she knows what she is putting me through.

It is not acceptable to endanger women's lives by making it harder for women who have been raped and sexually assaulted to access vital gynecological health care, just because a tiny number of male-born people want their womanhood validated. Trans rights don't exist in isolation, female people still have, and need to retain, sex-based rights, and gynae care is one of the cases where that matters.

AspieAndProud · 11/10/2018 00:35

Why is the HCP such an issue?

If it’s not an issue why do transwomen want it so bad?

What’s the point of HCPs?

Is it to benefit their clients - or are clients just there to validate the HCP’s ‘identity’?

Because if you think it’s the latter then you have no right to be a HCP.

WeeBisom · 11/10/2018 00:41

Here's something noname 99 said:

"we didn’t find the moderates and engage in meaningful debate but instead retreated behind the barracades and refused to discuss any element whatsoever of their concerns thus entrenching everyone in their position."

This just isn't true. People on this board are perfectly willing (even desperate) to engage in debate - especially meaningful debate. No one here has shied away from, or retreated from critical examination. No one here has refused to discuss their concerns.

The reason there's a 'hive mind' here is because the trans activist side, quite frankly, has very weak arguments. No one comes to this board with well prepared, solid arguments about the central issues. Now, this isn't surprising to be honest because the thesis that 'trans women are women' is highly controversial and requires a lot of assumptions that many people simply can't accept. To put it bluntly, it's a very difficult thing to argue for. It's not surprising that the majority of people find it hard to swallow.

I've seen a lot of newcomers come to this board and moan things like "oh you lot are obsessed with your definitions! You're aways asking 'what's a woman!". This is the new tactic, it seems to me. The circular/self referential/nonsensical definition of woman hasn't been accepted here. Calling us bigots and meanies for not accepting the definition hasn't worked. So now it seems the new thing is to claim that the very request for a definition is somehow wrong.

FloralBunting · 11/10/2018 00:50

It does very much seem to be that a certain contingent clocks a regular answer that goes unanswered and works out a way of trying to dismiss it.

So Bowl and others will ask the central, pertinent question 'what is a woman?' and it is left hanging in the air like a great big unignorable floating elephant.

Instead of actually getting to grips with it, we now have this utterly bonkers sidestep that it's just not even an important question ask and the more important thing to do is work out a compromise. Not entirely sure that it's possible to 'compromise' if you can't even define the terms under discussion. But tbh, since when did basic logic bother AWAs?

auldcraw · 11/10/2018 01:26

www.theguardian.com/media/2009/feb/03/bbc-drops-carol-thatcher

My point being if anyone knows how quickly you can lose your job in tv. it will be Jo Brand - hence it's hardly surprising if she is extremely circumspect in her comments.

ohello · 11/10/2018 01:59

This has probably been addressed already but really irks me...

What kind of "common ground" does she think it's possible to have? I'm allowed to set my own sexual boundaries and that def includes saying NO to penises -- so what kind of compromise is she suggesting between me and transpeoplewithdicks who insist I need to see their dick in order to make them happy?

I'm not going to apologize for being crude occasionally on these boards but I will explain... sometimes it's too easy for some people to pretend that this debate is about something other than what it is. At heart, it's about whether or not women must tolerate dicks being swung in our face while we're trying to get changed, on a hospital ward, sports team etc. And if anybody wants to pretend that a dick in my face is just a small price to pay for satisfying the happiness of some biological male who believes that all women have a Universal Lady Personality then I hope it's brutally obvious to people that they are a raging full on misogynist.

And why exactly am I supposed to be nice to someone who clearly hates me, wishes me harm and would gleefully force me into a subservient status? They can go fuck themselves. Sorry, this topic just makes me FURIOUS.

ohello · 11/10/2018 03:02

Apparently I am not done yet. Grin Although I am calmer.

They like to say that NO transpersonwithdick would ever want to expose themselves to a female, that ALL trans are shy, submissive, and cooperative with women. Where do they get off expecting anyone with a brain to believe that peoplewithpenises all have the same Universal Personality?

Of course different people will have different personalities! Of course there is some percentage of peoplewithpenises who are predatory and most definitely NOT shy and would take advantage of loopholes. For them to say otherwise and expect anyone to believe it is just....

Don't want to type the word and get banned!

ohello · 11/10/2018 06:27

we need the extremists in both sides to be shunted to one side so the moderates can find some solutions.

Noname, at the risk of offending you to clarify your terms, what types of behaviors would qualify as "extremist" in your opinion for a woman whose basic position is "no dicks near me while I'm naked"?

I believe trans people should be free to express themselves however they want, and suffer no discrimination for it. And no discrimination in employment, education, and when buying a house or apartment -- yet I'm quite firm about no dicks near me while I'm naked. And I get really really snippy when peoplewithpenises continually badger me to relax my sexual boundaries. Some might even call my refusal to accept their dick in my face, as me being "aggressive" when they're just innocently asking me for the thousandth time in a row if maybe I'd like to change my mind since they're so unhappy when I reject their dick in my face.

Would you say that I'm an "extremist" whose voice should be shunted off to the side and ignored?

SSmith5 · 11/10/2018 06:42

whilst being put on the spot and worried about being split open and stamped on by activists --

Yes true. I'm stating some opinions on facebook about how I don't think it's right people can change genders at whim. Such as when they want to use female changing rooms

SSmith5 · 11/10/2018 06:45

Seems as if men are always telling women how awful we are. Such as saying we're finished if we go through menopause or have too much body hair, but if a hairy man who still has testosterone wants to be a woman then we have to accept they're the most fabulous woman. We can't be happy and confident being women unless we're a man who wants to be a woman

VickyEadie · 11/10/2018 07:06

There are several people over on AIBU arguing that if only we were more open to seeing penises- and to letting his and men see us naked a lot - there would be no more sexual assault. Yes women, it's our fault for being so prudish.

pennydrew · 11/10/2018 07:40

It really disturbs me to see women gaslighted, demeaned and insulted repeatedly on MN, by a poster who thinks we are all so unreasonable for not compromising. Because women can never set their own boundaries when it comes to their privacy, their bodies and their comfort.

I am enraged at the comments around HCP
Do women retain a legal right to ask for an HCP of the same sex, not gender, for intimate exams?
No. Risk assessment should show that all medical personnel are safe and appropriate people. You do have the right to have a second person in too if you feel you need one. I never get this?? If you are women and the intimate exam means you need a consultant, do you refuse the male gynae? Refuse a male gynae when giving birth? Why is the HCP such an issue?

I find it so deeply shocking that a woman can’t possibly understand why other women would want a female HCP. None of us should have to explain that, but here we are. How utterly gross and offensive this comment was.

Women don’t need to compromise. You can continually repeat ‘hive mind’ all you want, it’s called setting boundaries, and we are allowed to say NO to anyone. Particularly males. We know we’ll get abused when we do. It’s always been the way for women. We have had to compromise our entire lives and now we are expected to pretend humans can change sex and agree to getting undressed next to males or else we are ‘unreasonable’.

Do your worst ‘noname’. We’ve heard the insults before. You won’t pressure us into agreeing by repeating the same insult a million times.

Badstyley · 11/10/2018 08:31

God, this thread. Noname is saying it’s all our fault for the no debate because... Yeah, women are responsible for what men do, and the only thing about male violence is it makes men look bad. Which rules of misogyny are they again? Noname seems not to realise how blatant they are. The complete lack of self awareness is staggering.

DisrespectfulAdultFemale · 11/10/2018 08:33

I just ignore goady posters, Badstyley. There's no point engaging with them as they don't have a point to make; they just want to be goady.