Great blog about being a trans inclusive feminist

[spannablue]

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

Enjoy!

Are there rape centres and refuges for men? I don't actually know.

Several were set up I believe. A poster here commented. And said mostly closed due to lack of use. Numbers or embarrassment.

I would really like to see much better mental health services targeted at young men too, as they can be very vulnerable to abuse and coercion.

On the back of her father in law's issues Jesica Eaton and her husband set up a foundation solely dealing with men's mental health.

She says:

"My husband runs it on the day-to-day, along with his staff and volunteers. We now employ 6 people and have a further 9 volunteers. We see hundreds of men a year who benefit from completely free, lifelong support including counselling, benefits advice, food parcels, housing advocacy, legal advice, IT suite, music and band practice, employment clubs and training courses, fitness clubs, art therapy and so on. Some guys have been coming every day for years. Our clientele is between 18 and 85 years old from every walk of life you can imagine.

Why am I telling you this?

Because in those 5 years, I have NEVER received the amount of abuse and ‘whataboutery’ that I get for my work and research with women and girls."

As soon as she mentions the work she does with women, the 'what about the men' is instant.

It never happens the other way around.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/victimfocus.wordpress.com/2018/01/03/stop-asking-me-what-about-men/amp/

Ok so by this logic, you think trans men should be in our rape centres? Do you think a woman in a rape crisis centre would rather see a transwoman in a dress with a vagina that looks like a woman, or a transmen with a beard and a penis?

Why would a transman even want to access the provision? The whole premise of suggesting transwomen access refuges is the acknowledgement that it is distressing for trans people to use provision according to their natal sex.

I am flummoxed by people's apparent confusion about what single sex services are and are for. There is coherence to arguments that state a position against single sex provision but there is a distinct lack of coherence to arguments that claim some natal men and not all should access provision for natal females.

Clearly, female only refuges do not cater for all and other provision is needed. It should not be the responsibility of the female only refuges to address this shortfall.

There does seem to be a contingent amongst the TRAs who make a beeline for the relatively few female only spaces. Not because they need that space, but because of their desperation for affirmation.

I wish we could be honest about this need for affirmation.

Misgendering is literal violence. Transphobiabia the refusal to accept someone’s gender identity. Having their identity accepted is vital to the wellbeing of transpeople.

So of course accessing spaces and services that match their chosen gender identity must be deeply affirming.

Yet all we hear is a resounding “we just need to pee”

The only thing that is being asked for is language that recognises the biological state of being female and the right to provide services for people who are biologically female where necessary.

Without that right it’s really unclear what the Equalities Act is for.

Once you've seen a TRA claim being a rape counsellor should be a right for a transwoman. That the purpose of a victim of male violence is to validate a man, you can't unsee it.

This. I have seen it on multiple occasions and I don't want this type of male person anywhere near vulnerable traumatised women.

Not because they need that space, but because of their desperation for affirmation.

And control. This is often about power.

And control. This is often about power.

This.

You can't have a proper debate without acknowledging the power differential.

Many men will be using coercion to exercise control of women and their spaces (Vancouver rape relief, Hampstead women's pond, female prisons etc).

It doesn't work the other way around. Women can't control male spaces.

Do you think a woman in a rape crisis centre would rather see a transwoman in a dress with a vagina that looks like a woman, or a transmen with a beard and a penis?

Trans men don't have a penis.

Transwomen don't have a vagina.

A slightly different take on that scene with the very-knowledgeable-about-biology little boy from Kindergarten Cop

transwoman in a dress with a vagina

Transwomen do not have vaginas.

Transwomen are not women.

Women do not have penises.

Women are adult human females.

Oh, and because a man has surgically altered genitalia, it does not make him a woman.

EarlyWalker, I'm wondering if you're attempting to put forward an opposing view for the sake of debate or because these are issues which really trouble you?

In charity, I shall assume it's the second reason, and the other women here have really tried to give you clear answers about those concerns. If a male bodied but feminine presenting trans person needs a refuge, no one here would deny them that, of course not. But there is no logical reason to force current provision for women to accommodate that, and there is certainly no reason to force that provision to accept that person as a volunteer or employee.

I would be worried about transmen who suffer rape - I have been haunted for months by the story of the transman who was raped and kept saying "I'm a man!" as though that was protection against the act. But as Datun pointed out, even if you had to sit down and work out a solution for this, it still wouldn't follow in any logic to say that you should let male bodied people in, because a transman is a woman.

I know these issues seem complicated, and the desire to accommodate everyone is strong, but please, remember wisdom. Don't look at what you think are intemperate posts here, and ignore the very, very clear evidence that the transactivists are no friends to women, however smooth some of their words are.

Someone here being rude and cross with you for seeming to promote the end of certain women's rights does not mean they are wrong about the issues. You have to step back and assess beyond personal offense.

I think it’s interesting that the idea of inclusive feminism that includes transwomen as women excludes other groups of women whether through their religious beliefs, cultural beliefs, genuine fears around male bodies etc. It actually epitomises while, middle class feminism to include transwomen over other groups of biological women because their issues don’t necessarily effect white, middle class women.

Twaw feminism in its rush to prove that biology has nothing to do with being female or feminism excludes us from doing anything about or even discussing sex selective abortion, femicide, FGM, girls’ schooling, period poverty, sexual abuse and rape, sexual harassment, gynaecology, birth control, abortion, arranged marriages, ‘honour’ killings, domestic violence, maternity care, maternity pay, the pay gap etc etc because all these things throughout the world and throughout history and right now, today, for millions of women and girls are done to them because of their biology.

You cannot possibly have a movement for the liberation of women that does not accept that women’s biology is what is used to hurt us and keep us in our place. It’s not possible.

Being forced to be nice to transwomen and pretending that biology is meaningless is a massive slap in the face to every girl and woman who has been raped, abused, assaulted, belittled and marginalised by her biology. Its upsetting that people will say repeatedly and consistently that being nice to transwomen is more important that the reality of life for most women and girls. Would you really say to a girl who’s had FGM that her biology is irrelevant and it’s her intenal gender identity that is relevant? No you would not, but you cannot have biology when it suits, it’s there all the time whether you like it or not.

Twaw feminism in its rush to prove that biology has nothing to do with being female or feminism excludes us from doing anything about or even discussing sex selective abortion, femicide, FGM, girls’ schooling, period poverty, sexual abuse and rape, sexual harassment, gynaecology, birth control, abortion, arranged marriages, ‘honour’ killings, domestic violence, maternity care, maternity pay, the pay gap etc etc because all these things throughout the world and throughout history and right now, today, for millions of women and girls are done to them because of their biology.

You cannot possibly have a movement for the liberation of women that does not accept that women’s biology is what is used to hurt us and keep us in our place. It’s not possible.

Being forced to be nice to transwomen and pretending that biology is meaningless is a massive slap in the face to every girl and woman who has been raped, abused, assaulted, belittled and marginalised by her biology. Its upsetting that people will say repeatedly and consistently that being nice to transwomen is more important that the reality of life for most women and girls. Would you really say to a girl who’s had FGM that her biology is irrelevant and it’s her intenal gender identity that is relevant? No you would not, but you cannot have biology when it suits, it’s there all the time whether you like it or not.

THIS.

OP, your life must be very sad that the only relish you can find in it is well done cookies from men.

I don’t understand how including trans women in feminism stops the discussion of sex abortions, FGM etc.. how is a transwoman asking to be seen as a woman stopping us fighting against period poverty? It seems like clutching at straws to me.

I agree there are lots of issues around this, Self ID is not currently law - yet you all talk as if it is. If it comes into effect, then I agree we are on dangerous territory.

However, right now a legally recognised transwoman is someone who has been diagnosed with gender dysphoria, lives as a women for more than 2 years and plans to for the rest of their lives.

I personally believe they should be able to access services when needed.

The stonewall umbrella is ridiculous, I also think the TRA’s that act as if they speak for trans people are equally ridiculous but if we punished everyone by the views of their self appointed leaders then well... where would we be today?

There are woman’s issues here, I agree. Woman’s organisations do not have to hire anybody, even if they’re legally defined as a woman, just like me as an employer do not have to hire anyone I don’t want too hire.

In terms of accessing services, yes it would be great if trans services are set up. AFAIK some refuges already have segregated units such as units only for black people, so adding a trans unit may work well but if not, if someone is feeling desperate enough to pack up their lives and run, I don’t think it’s the time to be telling them they are not a real woman, ditto rape centres.

Toilets - there is no law to stop men coming in anyway. All woman’s toilets are individual cubicle (unlike men) and I don’t think it’s really that much of an issue in the real world, however if someone has statistics of woman being abused by trans women in toilets then I’m sure I’ll be proved wrong.

Prisons - I think there should be seperate trans wings. I think this would also be necessary to protect transmen as well as of course women.

I think in these incidents, biology is effectively meaningless. Vaginas do not define you - sports is a seperate issue, and I would support a trans olympics.

I’ve experienced misogony, I’ve been stalked, in an abusive relationship, I’ve been sexually assaulted, mugged, beaten up by a group of girls, I’ve had two children, breastfed, had woman’s issues ignored and dismissed by several doctors and left to bleed uncontrollably for 10 weeks, been ignored by my employer because the men should do the speaking and told to my face I was declined a job because I may have childcare issues in the future. I understand perfectly well that my biology puts me as a disadvantage to men and has done since I started puberty.

However, I do not believe that everything needs to be separated based on biology, I think it’s a case of picking battles and turning everything into a ‘what makes a woman’ womb-centred battle is actually damaging to the cause. There are many cases where transwomen and women can live similtaniously without the need for segregation.

I know transpeople (as I’m sure many of you do) and some things on this board really do sadden me. You’re all entitled to your opinion, I’m entitled to mine and I will not stop speaking my mind because I’m shut down constantly - despite my biology telling me that’s probably what I should do.

Self ID is not currently law - yet you all talk as if it is

Organisations are being told that it is by TRAs.

I don’t understand how including trans women in feminism stops the discussion of sex abortions, FGM etc..

Ask top feminist Munroe Bergdorf? And other prominent TRAs who think feminism should centre males.

If being a woman has nothing to do with female biology (which it cannot if twaw) then logically it follows that things like period poverty aren’t to do with women because not all women have periods and having periods doesn’t make you a woman. Period poverty is not a women’s issue, it’s a people issue. It ceases to be a sexed based issue and is now a disadvantaged people’s issue.

Picking and choosing where transwomen are women and where transwomen are transwomen is transphobic if a non trans person does it. You may feel your a pragmatic realist early, looking for common ground, but I would say we’ve all been there and been rounded informed how awful and bigoted we are.

Well if that was monroes Aim I’m very surprised that most of the women here have bowed down to her command. 99% of posts on the feminist boards now appear to be about men, not about period poverty or similar.

I don’t understand how including trans women in feminism stops the discussion of sex abortions, FGM etc..

Munroe can answer that for you Don't want to be 'exclusionary' now do we?

Sorry I forgot the tweet!

Haven’t called anyone a bigot. If that really is the case [period poverty no longer being a woman’s issue] which frankly, seems ridiculous but let’s say it is... why does it matter? As long as it’s still recognised as an issue and people are still fighting to prevent it, why does it need a label anyway?

Not a label in general, I mean a label in the eyes of TRAs. Why do we care what they think anyway? Do they think people will no longer donate pads to the food bank because it’s no longer a woman’s issue?

It's not just Munroe though is it? We are hearing this shit from everywhere, unless it's 'inclusive' of transwomen, its not feminism apparently. Even sexual preferences are 'exclusionary'.

EarlyWalker, I care what AWAs think in so far as so many of them have the ear of or are members of the powerful groups in our society. That's important because it affects the way things will run and in whose favour.

You have not been shut down here. The last two posts I have made have encouraged you to put your case. As GoldenWonderwall has said, I'm quite sure you think you're pushing for the reasonable compromise, but I'm afraid you're chasing after a phantasm.

Even if I was willing to cede some rights to men who identify as women, which I don't because they aren't exclusively my rights to give away - the people who are in the positions of influence and power in the transgender movement are not willing to consider any of the things which you are suggesting as compromise positions.

There is no push for third spaces. The idea itself is transphobic.