Great blog about being a trans inclusive feminist

[spannablue]

Here: alicenuttallbooks.wordpress.com/2018/11/04/why-i-am-a-trans-inclusive-feminist/

Enjoy!

You ask what the alternative to self ID is? The current GRC rules are it, the rules that many trans people support and that are currently law.

Please could you identify the trans organisation campaigning to keep the status quo and MPs who are supporting them.

Please identify any MP who has openly said that they are against self ID without being accused of being transphobic. Please identify any cabinet minister or member of the labour front bench who has openly opposed self ID

Look at the campaigns to de-platform or sack academics who question self-ID. Look at attempts to block reasearch funding. Again, look at what happened when the Guardian wrote an editorial that wasn’t unquestioningly supportive of self ID.

Look at all the local authorities and charities taking advice from Stonewall. Look how many of the groups giving questionable legal advice to schools receive funding from large establishment charities like Children in Need. Look how often Mermaids is referred to as the voice of authority.

Whether or not people supporting self ID represent a minority or majority of trans people, they are very much the only trans people with a political voice.

To be fair, journalists on the Spectator and the Times have questioned self ID (which has opened them up to huge amounts of abuse), but only one or two politicians are prepared to admit that there are problems with self ID.

Everyone else just talks vaguely about ‘being kind’ and waffles about the apparently chocolate teapot like EA not being affected.

So organisations such as stonewall are using these TRA as advisors, that is not the fault of trans people and it is stonewall whom you should be angry at.

It is organisations like Stonewall, government bodies and media outlets that we are angry at. We are well aware that they created this situation by allowing a group of people who, in any other debate, would be considered ridiculous or even dangerous, to set an agenda which has to all intents and purposes been officially endorsed.

No one (as far as I am aware) is angry about Louise, the pleasant transwoman who works in their office, because we know that Louise is unlikely to have engineered this situation, is likely to disagree with it, and will also be disadvantaged by self-id. In fact, there are many Louises on this side of the debate, they receive absolutely awful abuse from TRAs/MRAs.

TLDR, TRAs are not a trans rights movement, they are about reclaiming ground they think straight, white men have lost. They couldn't give a shot about transpeople, or any of the other groups whose issues they hijack. And they have been assisted in that by official bodies who really should know better.

And BTW, much of what you have posted here would be considered hugely transphobic by TRAs.

Some women (many women) don't know what a cervix is or are unaware they need a smear test. Some women who need a smear test do not speak English and may require their husband to read and translate any letters from the doctor. If he doesn't understand what a cervix is he might tell his wife (who also may not know what a cervix is) that she doesn't need to worry about the letter.

Clear, plain, easily understood language MATTERS.

Great post. I tried to explain this exact point on AIBU to some of MN's resident FWR haters. They refused to listen or engage with it and handwaved it away. That by trying to be "inclusive" of a tiny section of the population you are excluding or alienating a wider group.

It was one cancer research campaign. Doctors letters still clearly highlight what a smear test is and the need for it and are sent to all women telling them to come. The reason they did the campaign was because drs surgery’s may have people with a cervix listed as Male (FTM trans) so they will not receive the usual letter and know to get tested.

You’re creating a whole scenario in your head that does not exist.

So how come its cervix havers when it comes to smears

And

Men when it comes to prostate exams

I honestly dont give a shiny shit about most of this subject, ive made my views clear on multiple threads

Im pissed off completely with fuckwits deciding that the word women shouldnt be used

Im even more pissed off with the appropriation of 'female'

So yeah, i guess you could say i was outraged at the cancer society muddying the waters when it comes to vital medical information...for women only you understand, cant tit around with the word man. that would never fucking do.

Oh and dont get me started on the womxn shit...did we see any suggestions of mxn?

Course we fucking didnt

Anyone wants to call it faux outrage...do feel free. Ill just add you to the posters to avoid list in my head, its not very big at the moment so im happy to remember a few more names

My machine is about to run out of gas

So if i dont come back to the thread for a while thats why

The reason they did the campaign was because drs surgery’s may have people with a cervix listed as Male (FTM trans) so they will not receive the usual letter and know to get tested.

But those people know they are biologically female, and that they have female body parts, so a campaign aimed at women also means them. But what you have said highlights the lunacy of listing biological females as 'male' when it comes to healthcare.

On the other hand, as has been pointed out to you, some women whose first language is not English, or even some native English speakers who are not that well educated, may not understand what a cervix is, and whether they have one.

But I don’t get it, they didn’t say it with men - so they didn’t include transwomen in the Male campaign, so it’s fair to assume no one there really cared/considered their need to get tested, but someone cared enough about transmen. Why is that bad for woman if a transman is a woman and that was the purpose of the campaign?

Absolutely agree the world woman should not be erased, womxn I’ve not heard of but seems ridiculous to me - how do you pronounce it? Is this just in the UK? Surely woman is a worldwide word that is translated as appropriate, no one can just erase a common word. A few specific campaigns may avoid using it at some points as they see fit but accross the board I just don’t see it, unless you are a TRA or a GC, you wouldn’t even notice and would continue as before.

These issues are only prominent when you’re looking for them. I’m not saying we shouldn’t be, but people are acting as if it’s a huge movement against woman and I don’t buy into it. A few TRA, yes, UK wide movement - sorry, no.

but someone cared enough about transmen

Oh good lord

early you are a total sweetheart

Perhaps you could tell me how many specific instances of mysogeny in how many different locations we need to report before you would consider it a uk wide movement?

The reason they did the campaign was because drs surgery’s may have people with a cervix listed as Male (FTM trans) so they will not receive the usual letter and know to get tested.

So the letters went out to everyone, male and female alike?

That would be hard midge considering I commented on a post on FWR saying I would like misogony to be a hate crime but unfortunalty the post was filled with people saying it shouldn’t be as it’s similar to transphobia being a hate crime.

I don’t understand your question anyway. There are huge issues surrounding Self ID but that is not currently law. Karen white abused people in prisons, that needs to be addressed and provented and has had a lot of coverage so hopefully more steps will be put in place to prevent it happening again. Afaik no woman has been assaulted in a female space in the UK by a transwoman.
Also from my own research, the number of aggressive mysogonistic folk coming under the ‘stonewall umbrella’ is a very small minority compared to the trans people who want to get by in peace, they are just the ones shouting.

AspieAndProud no letters routinely only go out to those registered as females. The campaign was made in order to reach transmen who are registered as male at their surgery, to let them know that they need to get tested - as they will not receive the routine letter.

Afaik no woman has been assaulted in a female space in the UK by a transwoman.

You've just contradicted yourself within a few words.

You seem to be trying to minimise what others feel is a real threat. It’s not law yet but going “don’t worry “ is a great way to get bad laws passed.

However nice any transwomen seem, There is no evidence at all that their offending pattern is any less than that of other men, therefore any restrictions we place around men should apply to all men.

And once you make allowance for transwomen you have made allowances for all men

What is your personal experiance of sexual offenders? Mine is ( sample size 3) that they seem charming and are highly manipulative

It was one cancer research campaign

Yes. And one instance of “womxn” by the wellcome trust. Which were both vociferously objected to. What do you think would happen if we didn’t object? They would do it again, and keep doing it, and do it more, in different contexts.

That’s what we are fighting. To stop that happening.

So organisations such as stonewall are using these TRA as advisors, that is not the fault of trans people and it is stonewall whom you should be angry at.

I am

I meant toilets/changing rooms. I know Karen white offended in prisons. I believe Karen went into prison as a Male and transitioned while in prison/already an offender? From what I’ve read, trans offenders get a lot of special privilidges in prison so that is one situation I can really understand why one would lie to get ahead and this needs policing better. (The irony)

There is no evidence to suggest that crimes against woman increase when toilets are based on gender rather than sex as per a link on another thread.

You are entitled to feel scared about anything you wish, no one can tell you what to feel. But likewise no ones feelings trump another, and if study’s and statistics show that gender defined bathrooms do not increase risks to woman, then the exclusionary aspect is essentially unfounded and to exclude trans people would be based on prejudice rather than real risk.

I’m not saying we shouldn’t be, but people are acting as if it’s a huge movement against woman and I don’t buy into it. A few TRA, yes, UK wide movement - sorry, no.

This is advice being distributed by Councils and education authorities such as Brighton and Hove City Council. It is from the 'Allsorts' toolkit:

"Parent to school: ‘It’s not fair that he enters the 100 metres race for girls when he is a boy’ or ‘Won’t she get injured playing rugby with boys?’"

Underpinning this scenario is the idea that all boys or all girls share the same physical attributes and fails to acknowledge that there is a range of differences in physical strength and ability within single gender groups. Trans boys are boys, not girls, and therefore entitled to play rugby with boys and in consultation with relevant sporting bodies. Teachers already differentiate according to ability."

Whether or not you agree with this statement, it's not just arguing that a few trans children should be included, or that there should be more mixed sex sport, its arguing against the very idea of single sex sporting events. No more Venus Williams winning trophies at Grand Slam tournaments, no more Paula Radcliffe breaking records, because sport is just a matter of segregating by ability. Who cares that women would then be relegated to 7th division teams.

It vaguely refers to professional bodies, but what practical advice are they going to give to schools? Drug test standards?

Why on earth they think sports should be segregated according to 'gender' is anyone's guess.

Again, this is not just some strange fringe organisation. Allsorts' biggest funders are Brighton and Hove Council, Children in Need, Comic Relief and a Government funded public health grant. They also received NHS funding.

There are huge issues surrounding Self ID but that is not currently law.

Why worry about passing laws when all you need to do is convince enough people that that already exist?

I genuinely don't understand why you think Self ID is only supported by a few irrelevant extremists with no power.

There is no evidence to suggest that crimes against woman increase when toilets are based on gender rather than sex as per a link on another thread.

www.independent.co.uk/life-style/women/sexual-assault-unisex-changing-rooms-sunday-times-women-risk-a8519086.html

These issues are only prominent when you’re looking for them.

The 'womxn' thing was on Newsnight the other week, pretty mainstream. With some TRA seeming to imply that 'womxn' can include both transwomen and black women because black women aren't included in 'woman' apparently?

You are entitled to feel scared about anything you wish, no one can tell you what to feel. But likewise no ones feelings trump another, and if study’s and statistics show that gender defined bathrooms do not increase risks to woman, then the exclusionary aspect is essentially unfounded and to exclude trans people would be based on prejudice rather than real risk.

So you think that toilets and changing rooms should just be mixed sex then?

But likewise no ones feelings trump another, and if study’s and statistics show that gender defined bathrooms do not increase risks to woman, then the exclusionary aspect is essentially unfounded and to exclude trans people would be based on prejudice rather than real risk.

Privacy? Dignity? Those are fundamental rights too.

So you think that toilets and changing rooms should just be mixed sex then?

Gender defined, not mixed sex.

Privacy? Dignity?

All female toilets have their own cubicle that is sealed off. That’s more privacy than men have?

I am happy to discuss the pros and cons of single sex and mixed sex toilets and don't have a strong opinion either way.

The issue for me is that clearly some women do have a strong opinion, and rather than listening to their concerns, their fears are being brushed aside because 'trans women are women'.

Even having the conversation is labelled as transphobic. It's a form of gaslighting.

Gender defined

Why should toilets be defined by gender? Why should I have to define my gender to use the loo?