If this thread was started today it would have very different responses

[Earlywalker]

Having a look through old threads, trying to decide where I stand on the GC debate. I’m still solely against Self ID but still have no issues at all with someone holding a GRC under the current criteria accessing facilities of their desired sex. I do not agree with some of the views regarding trans people that are so obvious on here.

Anyway, I came accross this old thread - www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/1591015-Which-toilets-a-F-to-M-transgender-student-should-use?pg=1&order=

And looking at the responses, they are so ‘tolerant’ staying that ‘in the 21st century this should not be an issue’ nearly every response says a transgender person should use their desired facilities and now, over 5 years later.. I believe the responses would be VERY different on mumsnet.

When did it change? Why did GC start objecting to all transpeople using their desired facilities?

Disclaimer - I do NOT want a fight, I want a discussion. Every time I try to discuss I get jumped on by posters, so without saying ‘ladies please be nice’ I will address now that I am not a man, a spy or a TRA.

No women should have to share a communal dorm or shower with someone who has a penis; no one who has a penis should use women only spaces and services.

How did it reach the point where women can be vilified for saying this?

Within the last five years or so the trans movement has been the very definition of the term 'scope creep'.

Exactly this. I've no particular desire to throw old school transsexuals under the bus but I'm afraid they've been used as much as women have. Third spaces is the only compromise I will even consider now.

Don't blame feminists, OP: as I do keep saying - blame Stonewall.

Also in response to the question in the OP, trans now covers pretty much anyone who doesn't strictly gender conform. So whereas before there were (not many) medically diagnosed people whose mental angst was alleviated by transitioning, now we are in the ridiculous situation where anyone can declare they are trans without changing a single thing about their behaviour or appearance. So how the hell are we meant to know who is genuine and who wants to do us harm?

Seriously, what? Are you saying we should open all spaces to being mixed sex then?

I think it’s best you read before you speak, as you keep trying to say that I’ve said things that I quite obviously haven’t.

So in terms of the dangerous trans umbrella, I definitely agree. Bad people have taken advantage of a minority group and have used them as scapegoats to enable themselves to get access to women easier.

But surely, the answer is not to dismiss all trans people as a danger to woman (unless in the case of women’s sport, which sadly I don’t think there’s any way around tbh)

If Self ID is rejected (fingers crossed!) then legally, you can only access woman’s space with a GRC is that correct?

I'm another person who didn't have any problem with dysphoric, post-op transsexuals sharing women's spaces.

I'd always have objected to a transvestite using those spaces. Now we aren't allowed to make those distinctions. Now anyone who claims to be a woman at that moment is supposed to be allowed access. I find that horrifying. A line has to be drawn, and that line ought to be no penises in women's spaces, regardless of how the owner of that penis feels or identifies.

If you had asked me five years ago I'd have said of course there isn't anyone who believes themselves to be a woman but wants to keep their penis. It's a logical absurdity. Since then I have been proven wrong so many times.

I think the change for me came when I realised the difference between transsexual and transgender. I don't see how a person can claim dysmorphia and yet remain intact.

Women don't have penises.

May I suggest, politely, that you spend an hour or two searching existing threads?

The best way to get a feel for this is really to read what is already there.
Posters are generally extremely helpful, but in essence they are constantly retyping and re-explaining to new poster after new poster and there are multiple threads all duplicating effort and time.

You will of course get answers on your own thread, because posters are generous.

But it's a good idea to do some legwork yourself also.

My personal feeling is that women were inclined to pretend 5 years ago that they were comfortable with men (when they often were not)
That women thought this was a few hundred men (when it is now in the millions)
That women thought that these were men with surgery (and we now know they are not)
That women thought this was a concession they could give OR NOT (and now we know it is not)
That women thought these transgressions would stop at Marks&Sparks loos, not include men claiming changing rooms, showers, all female only spaces
That women thought sports would be exempt
That women thought that this would just be imposed upon grown women, not little girls
That women thought that they could still assert their own sex over a man's declared gender

So much has changed

Women have realised that being of the female sex no longer has legal protections or legal meaning, and that gender has utterly replaced it.

That wasn't what women were signing up for when they uncomfortably agreed to pretend it was OK for a man to be in their toilets.

Women are just no longer prepared to lie and pretend to benefit men at our own expense.

but if a man wants to train as a midwife, most would have no issue with this?

I don't think you could say that as a blanket statement. There are quite a few women who think that midwives should be women (therefore, not men), so that women in labour aren't in a position where they have to explicitly ask for a female midwife instead of the male who has turned up to discuss checking dilation, or put up with a situation where they are extremely vulnerable and unhappy with their care provider because they think they'll be branded a trouble maker for requesting a woman.

Which then leads on to the whole "Under Self ID, would women be allowed to refuse medical treatment from a trans HCP on the basis of them being male bodied, or would that be transphobic? If women aren't allowed to request a female (vice versa for men) when presented with a trans HCP, why are they allowed to refuse the opposite sex who don't have a trans identity?" can of worms.

Not all men are a danger to women but we still sex segregate. And what evidence we have suggests transwomen commit crimes in the same pattern and to the same magnitude as other biological men.

Exactly. It's not women who have thrown transsexuals under the bus. It's stonewall and transactivists.

You're targeting the wrong people. In fact you're blaming the very people who predicted this.

You might search the threads where the feminists on here are telling the transwomen on the thread to speak out, because they are going to get caught in the backlash.

It was as plain as a pikestaff.

Transsexuals are getting thrown under the bus. But not by women.

Back then the two transwomen I knew never claimed they were women. They were transwomen, they knew their experiences were not mine and vice versa. They were both aware they were being treated as women out of courtesy and knew that while they had had surgery to remove male sex organs, they had been raised and socialised as men and would never have formative female experiences as girls and young women like being afraid of rape and sexual assault and getting pregnant. I have no problems with transwomen like them using bathrooms, changing rooms etc. But neither of them would ever have dreamed of putting themselves forward for women's awards, scholarships, sports, that kind of thing - because they are not women, they are transwomen.

When activists started insisting that transwomen ARE women, that anyone who disagreed was transphobic and should be hounded out of their jobs, and pushing for self-ID, that's when I feel the shift in opinion really occurred.

I think it all needs to go back to biological sex.

So if we are to be accepting of transgendered people in our female space then I would far prefer to be accepting of trans identified females than males.

All female spaces to be female only.

It's very easy to measure this in sports, prisons, hospitals etc.

You might also wonder why transactivists were so determined to lie and be sneaky.

It's because they knew people would not accept it otherwise.

The protected characteristic gender realignment, is an example. Most people think that means surgery, because of the word realignment. Or something a little more concrete than saying it out loud.

And when it says in articles they have had surgery, often it actually means they've had breasts put on or had facial feminising surgery. It is misleading.

Exactly. It's not women who have thrown transsexuals under the bus. It's stonewall and transactivists.

You're targeting the wrong people. In fact you're blaming the very people who predicted this.

Yep. Not our problem. We didn't fuck it up massively by putting a load of dodgy non-dysphoric paraphiliacs under the trans umbrella: Stonewall did.

I have always considered myself a friend of the LGBT movement, have had trans friends etc. One friend who used to call herself trans but who was actually intersex (Klinefelter) told me in the 90s the TRA movement was full of freaks and weirdos (her words) and at the time I thought that was indicative of self-loathing. How things have moved on since then. Academics, lesbians and feminists have been raising this as a problem for many years and I guess just waiting for the penny to drop for everyone else.

I have absolutely no issue with folk who get on with it and transition without incident. There are feminist allies who are trans and their accounts of their lived experience are valuable. There isn't automatically enmity between feminists and transpeople, but I won't be told to shut up and go to the back of the bus because I have a vagina and it doesn't much matter to me who is saying it or if they're wearing a dress.

Something else that has changed for me is that I'm in my 50s now and I'm just not prepared to acquiesce or give positive attention to this kind of bullshit. Maybe it's the menopause.

If Self ID is rejected (fingers crossed!) then legally, you can only access woman’s space with a GRC is that correct?

No, because it appears that the exemptions under the Equality Act 2010 are very difficult to invoke, and can only be done so on a case by case basis. Most spaces don't try to use them.

Self-ID is not currently law (so what we have currently is not based on a self-ID GRA), but yet most women's spaces, including prisons, hospital wards, sports, and changing rooms, are already open to penis-waggling transwomen.

The exemptions under the EA are a chocolate teapot.

I think it’s best you read before you speak, as you keep trying to say that I’ve said things that I quite obviously haven’t.

It’s the logical conclusion of what you were saying. I was asking you, is that what you are suggesting?

And please, you claimed earlier that people didn’t want transgender people as teachers etc when that has not been said at MN. Cut out the passive aggressive behaviour.

But surely, the answer is not to dismiss all trans people as a danger to woman

NOBODY has said that. We exclude all men, is anyone using that defence for them? That not all men are a danger to women so why do we keep them all out? That’s not how it works is it? The fact is, if any male is a threat, all males must be excluded.

Until very recently I thought a transwoman was a person who had undergone some pretty serious operations as well as counselling and hormone therapy etc. Genetically not female but a woman for all intents and purposes.

Now a transwoman can apparently be a man who has woken up one day and decided to wear a dress and make up.

That’s why my mind has changed

That’s not how it works is it? The fact is, if any male is a threat, all males must be excluded.

This.

It's really not that difficult to get your head around.

Male people, as a class, are a danger to female people, as a class. Therefore, we keep out all males, icluding the nice ones, and the gay ones, and the ones who are disabled, from female spaces even though they might be "less of a risk" to women.

This means that, not only that women are statistically safer (18 times safer, as the recent FOI request to councils showed), but also and almost as importantly, women feel safer.

Bad people have taken advantage of a minority group and have used them as scapegoats to enable themselves to get access to women easier

This false dichotomy between "good trans" and "bad trans" (aka "not true trans") is gaslighting.

Quite frankly there is no way for a woman to tell the difference, from looking at or talking to and asking them, which males are genuinely suffering from dysphoria and have a GRC from someone who has no GRC and is just a cross dressing flasher, or any old dude in a wig saying "I am a woman"
So why are you pressurising us to determine the difference when we can't?

Enough is enough. Just NO. To all of them.

No is a complete sentence.

I think it’s best you read before you speak

Oh, the irony. Have you done any research at all as to why men forcing themselves into female spaces is so concerning ? You are coming across like you expect the rest of us to do it for you. Like that hasn't before many times over on these boards.

You were doing a reasonable (ish) job of hiding your agenda until that little gem popped out.

When organisations like LGBT YOUTH Scotland submitted responses to the Women and Equalities commission staing their support for:

• cross dressers to be included in the definition of transgender
• de medicalisation of the process, while at the same time....
• promoting transisition for under 16s
• promoting the use of binders and puberty blockers in children
• advising schools that parents need not be informed when a male child with gender ID issues share sleeping accomodation with girls
• advises schools to reeducate children who object to males with gender ID issues in their changing room.

LGBT Youth says that it is concerned with young people aged 13-25, yet in the last year it has been actively targetting primary schools in Scotland.

Interestingly, ALL the schools they have adopted their 'LGBT Schools Charter' are non-denominational schools. They have not yet found a way in to the many Catholic schools. That would indeed be a coup.

I’m not blaming feminists for this! I’m saying that people took advantage of the transgender title, i do however think that grouping all people together as one is not healthy. And that goes for stonewall and those opposing transgender people

And please, you claimed earlier that people didn’t want transgender people as teachers etc when that has not been said at MN. Cut out the passive aggressive behaviour.

Not true. And I will call you out every time you make something up, as this is the third time. My exact statement was - ‘There is so cut off or distinction.. I can’t get my head around the thinking? Men are rapists, and groomers and statistically you’re far more likely to be abused by a man... but we don’t say that men can’t be in positions of trust? Such as teachers or doctors or gynachologists? So why do some people place all transsexuals under the same umbrella as dangerous and not allowed to do as they please’
Please don’t twist things, and make up things in your head. I never said transpeople can’t be teachers.

No, because it appears that the exemptions under the Equality Act 2010 are very difficult to invoke, and can only be done so on a case by case basis. Most spaces don't try to use them.

So what is the process currently? If a man comes into a women’s toilet, not even claiming to be a transgender person. Say a percent just walks in, what protection is there to say you cannot do this? If we put trans to the side for a moment?

That’s not how it works is it? The fact is, if any male is a threat, all males must be excluded.

This is the thinking I don’t understand. And was my points about the teacher scenario. I’ve been beaten up by women in a toilet at a nightclub, we can’t exclude all women because I now feel unsafe going to a toilet at a club on my own after that? I completely understand we should do everything in our power to prevent dangerous predators having easy access to women. But for me personally, I don’t see all trans people as that and would be happy for someone with a GRC to share space.