new (to me) trans twitter @rhysmckavanagh

[angelwithalariat]

This looks really nuanced and interesting to me - I think we need to look at the possible middle ground - I agree there are a lot of TRA where there is no middle ground but if we can find some with trans people we should. I know some of you won't agree - but - thoughts?

Eventually a.middle ground will be reached, but not for a very long time yet.

It’s not middle ground if you expect 51% of the population to shift over and give up rights for a teensy weensy minority.

In particular - I feel that we are concentrating on TRA - who often aren't trans, they are allies who are (politely) misguided or (less politely) a bit evil - and not with people who have real gender dysphoria issues - who - as feminists - we should be able to feel sympathy with. When they feel some sympathy with us. OK - sympathy might be the wrong word - a bit too female socialisation-y? A sense of fairness? I don't mean TWAW - I mean TWATW and that's OK.

Are a minority supposed to give up their rights because they're a minority?

We’re already in middle ground territory in the U.K. A few men have already been given women’s rights, with controls in place which, to some extent, prevent the abuse of that enormously privileged position.

What sex based rights should be compromised?

What do you think, angel? Are a majority supposed to give up their rights because they're a majority?

What rights do trans people not already have?

I think women's rights would still be women's rights if we were 49% or even if we were 10%.

What would you see as a middle ground angel?

And what rights do you believe trans people should have?

Do you agree that women's rights are for women, angel?

They have some interesting thoughts but it seems like their idea of compromise is to draw a line between “true trans” and the fetishists.

And I don’t think that will work. Sorry to all the “true trans” but if something like that were ever to be implemented, the fetishists would work extremely hard to erase that distinction and the problem would re-emerge. The only thing that’s going to work is a clear bright line: no men in women’s spaces, no matter how they identify. No exceptions. And a third space type infrastructure to accommodate trans people.

This is a situation where compromise just isn’t possible.

if something like that were ever to be implemented, the fetishists would work extremely hard to erase that distinction

We have that, and you are right they have.

It's the fetishists and their even worse pals who are making the biggest noise on this. And they are not welcome in women's spaces.

Which of my rights would you give away and why?
My right to representation by my own sex?
My right to exclude the other sex from my private spaces?
My right to compete amongst my own sex?
My right to accurate statistics and monitoring of my own sex, whether crime stats or health stats or achievements?
My right to say no to the opposite sex purely on the basis that they are the opposite sex to me?

What does middle ground look like?

Female/woman/girl can only mean sex.

All I would ask is that those who are NOT female, do not lay claim to those words, which explicitly mean female.

And that the law continues to recognise and protect those who are female, and does not degrade our rights.

That doesn't seem like a lot to ask, frankly.

It boils down to: please don't use our words, we need them to distinguish ourselves from you, because we are distinct from you.

What is the middle ground?
If this person is pro medicalisation of gender dysphoria (by that Rose of Dawn retweet I assume they are), are we talking about affirmative approach, hormones and surgical interventions, or treating GD as a mental health issue?

How about we go back to letting people break gender norms? Short hair, no makeup, baggy trousers on women, OK. Long hair, loads of makeup and skirts on men, OK.

How about we go back to letting people be gender non-conforming homosexuals? Butch lesbian, OK. Effeminate gay man, OK.

Then on the other "side" of the middle ground we recognise that you cannot change your sex and stop messing about with lying laws and birth certificates.

The thing is, middle ground only works with reasonable people who want to live and let live. You can't find sane middle ground with delusional people, nor with abusive people. Unfortunately it is such people driving change at the moment.

I think women did compromise - they let trans women into their spaces (who were mostly presumed to have a GRC and be making some effort to live ‘as a woman’), they quietly and politely withdrew themselves from groups when they found they weren’t actually single sex and they had empathy for people who felt unhappy in their body, particularly since as women we are encouraged to feel unhappy and wrong in ours every day.

And then the demands increased, the safeguarding disappeared, and the movement started to outlandishly claim that there was no such thing as a woman except as a feeling and that biology didn’t exist and that no trans woman ever was a threat to women.

We compromised a long time back.

And it was a massive error.

OK here's what I think.

I agree with Cloven - but when you say 'sorry to the true trans' I do feel for the people who are going to feel shafted by that. I think the red line has to be that legal definitions of sex line up with biological definitions. With a recognition that a third space always has to be there.

And before you suggest that I am just femininely conditioned to be nice - I feel no obligation to be nice. I only feel an obligation to be fair. If I am being nice to you, I am either being fair, I genuinely like you, or I am trying to manipulate you.

And of course you are right to be concerned with the fetishists. And to be concerned that trans people don't always notice the fetishists.

OP I know what you mean about compromise but I think we have given so much already, what TRAs want is not compromise.

I agree with pp saying about GNC - let's just be okay with women and men wearing whatever they want and being whoever they want. Let's have a 3rd space if necessary but to be honest, I'm not okay with enforced medicalisation at all. This should be a last resort not as a 'look in so committed to being a woman, I've mutilated my perfectly healthy body'

If white people start to want to identify as being black, would we say there needs to be a middle ground? As opposed to pointing out reality, no, you’re just not black?

Middle grounds aren’t always appropriate. If I want to build a bridge over a river, and you don’t, building half a bridge is not a sensible middle ground. Same with biology and sex based rights. Letting men take our sex based rights isn’t a middle we should expect our daughters to live in.