My daughter was assaulted tonight - why I'm against self ID

[JudgeFlounceRedRugBlah]

Been around since it was all fields etc. but name changed as this concerns my children.

So, one of my children is transgender. My child is wonderful, kind and strong. I've struggled with the transgender debate because of this. They have no obvious signs of wanting to pervert womanhood just to emulate it. Imho as transgenderism should be.

I've also got daughters and, as a women, am well aware of how vulnerable a girl or woman can be when singled out and this has been borne out today. My (underage) daughter was working at her first workplace taking orders at tables in a restaurant. The staff have known her since she was born. They care for and look out for her - thank goodness. Tonight a man followed her to the toilets, pinned her and told her "he knew he shouldn't but he couldn't help himself.." sadly too many women know how this goes.

Luckily another person in the restaurant noticed a man go into the womens toilet and that neither of them came out in a reasonable amount of time. Instead of being scared that the man was a woman and they'd be in trouble with the police for hate crimes they alerted staff who got to my daughter before much more than clammy mauling had happened.

I'm angry at the sleaze who did this to my CHILD. But more I'm scared that we are fast approaching a world where that person could have felt uncomfortable raising their concerns. Perhaps they'd have hesitated just a bit longer, a bit too long. Perhaps the staff would have had a training course about jelly babies.

As it is they did say something, staff did react and my daughter is shocked, a bit scared but mostly disgusted. I can't tell you how thankful I am that she lives in a world where people are, currently, free to say "erm... that doesn't seem right".

My transgender child is going through hell in so many ways, they are battling on a frontier - I can see that - but, much as I support them, I am not prepared to sell my daughters out for it.

I'm aware I may get some backlash from posting this so I apologise now if I have to ask hq to remove. I really just wanted to say thank you to those who are not against trans people but also recognise that not against doesn't mean they have to drink the kool aid. Those who are fighting so hard just to have a proper discussion about it all. Thank you

'Do you agree that transwomen are women?

No I don't. I think transgender people are transgender people. A "feeling" is very different to "being" imo.

So what I want to ask next is why are they not a woman?

Sorry woman, I'm not sure which bit you're referring to, I'll try and find it and expand.

What is this being that makes your child "genuinely" transgender, OP?

As I said above, birth sex is a fact of biology that exists in every cell. At present this cannot be changed and I, personally, cant envisage a way that can change. Admittedly I'm not a scientist but I cant imagine this is something that is likely to happen.

Lang, I'm sorry I'm not sure what you mean, could you expand?

And there is no situation in which I will allow society to forfeit my boundaries, and my daughters privacy, to benefit boys and men, no matter how physically harmless they may be.

Me neither, Barracker. My DF and my DBs are all absolutely lovely men. They pose no risk to women. That doesn't mean they should be sharing women's spaces. Not that they would. Decent men wouldn't want to intrude.

OP, I wonder if you're so partial to your "wonderful, kind and strong" trans child that you see them as a special case? And that they are different from the TRAs?

If your child is so different they should perhaps take a leaf out of Miranda Yardley's book. Miranda is a transsexual who refuses to use women's loos etc because he does respect women and our spaces. He goes by male pronouns because he accepts that he's male.

You are not GC.

Fine, that's ok. Just don't pretend you are.

This in a nutshell.

That was the bit that really stuck in my throat. The denail of this or straight up dishonesty of it.

Admit you don't mind gender stereotypes and sexism as it suits you as it helps you ultimately keep the peace in your family.

Cos this is the bottom line.

A "feeling" is very different to "being" imo.

A 'feeling' that gender stereotypes are what everyone should adhere to or at least tolerate for the sake of 'being nice' even if its at their own expense. Whilst pretending that 'being' is irrelevant and comes second to feelings of those who do not identify as trans at the expense of their reality which may also be crucial to both their identity and well-being.

As I've said through out, it's the cognitive dissonance that is a major part of the problem and what I really dislike as its this that silences and controls others in the family through holding them emotional prisoners to the ideology.

Ah, sorry. I see you answered already.

FWIW, I can imagine an intra-family appreciation in my household that a family member has dysphoria and a desire to understand and ameliorate the distress it causes.

I cannot imagine a situation where I ever affirmed to one of my children that it could ever be possible to be or live as the opposite sex or ever transgress any boundaries set out for women and girls.

Do you think he should be in male resources dressed in a skirt or dress? Isn't that a huge risk?

There's no evidence that I'm aware of - at least in the UK - that there's any real risk. However women and girls have been assaulted by transgender males in women's facilities.

Gay men are sometimes assaulted in men's toilets. There's no push from them to be allowed to share with the ladies even though they probably pose far less of a risk than heterosexual men who identify as women.

JudgeFlounceRedRugBlah can I ask what you mean when you say transgender people?

It means different things to different people.
It seems to me that when GC people use the phrase they are mostly using it as a euphemism for "man (or woman) who wrongly believes xyz" or "person with sex stereotype dysphoria" or possibly "person with body dysmorphia".
Each time I use the phrase myself I am making a concession to communicate with someone using their terms, at the expense of clarity.

It feels like saying "Sally is a reincarnated person" rather than what I want to say: "Sally believes she's been reincarnated". I feel dishonest, and as if I'm lending credibility to a concept I don't believe in.

Sally's preference would definitely be for me to say she IS reincarnated. A reincarnated person.
But this isn't actually true.
Noone IS reincarnated.

My head spins when people talk of distinguishing between self-ID reincarnates, vs real reincarnates; those with an official reincarnation certificate.
Or, for that matter, ensuring we are not anti-reincarnation, or that we have reincarnation friendly policies.

Perhaps my analogy seems odd to some.
But when I hear a gender critical person use the phrase 'a transgender person' it rings EXACTLY like 'a reincarnated person' to my ears would from the lips of an atheist.

None of which is to denigrate or dehumanise the person who genuinely believes they are reincarnated. I just cannot validate their belief by describing them as they prefer.

*There's no evidence that I'm aware of - at least in the UK - that there's any real risk. However women and girls have been assaulted by transgender males in women's facilities.

Gay men are sometimes assaulted in men's toilets. There's no push from them to be allowed to share with the ladies even though they probably pose far less of a risk than heterosexual men who identify as women.*

No, but the fact is they could be beaten up.

I don't want men in women's rest rooms. I know how abuse can and does happen. I just wouldn't think a boy dressed up as a girl and using the men's room would be something a mother would want either, so wondered if that pushed the OP to either side.

I totally get your point, Barracker. However due to the Talk Guidelines none of us can be as direct as we might like.

I use the phrase transgender person because it's descriptive. It's like calling someone a Seventh Day Adventist. They may believe in it. Doesn't mean I do.

No, but the fact is they could be beaten up.

As could gay men, particularly slight, very effeminate ones, but they're not asking women to offer them sanctuary in the ladies.

I'm not certain if this really answers the question Lang but I think it's an important point.

I don't actually think my child is transgender. They believe they are so that's what we work with. However I've always been of the opinion that, eventually, we will arrive at a point where they find they are actually a gay person who enjoys presenting themselves in a certain way - a way that is fairly main stream for some gay people ime.

I have pushed counselling, research and experimentation over drugs and surgery. They still haven't moved into drugs or surgery bit themselves but I don't know what the future holds obviously.

Pawn, who do you believe that a transgender person has to be a TRA? Why can't they be a person who believes they feel a certain way but also doesn't want to encroach on others?

It's not a case of "being nice" or "being direct" or telling "home truths" it's about being adults and talking to each other.

You are surely aware the TRAs refuse to discuss any of the issues we explore here? Mumsnet is monitored obsessively because they would like nothing more than to silence us - and all dissenting voices - completely.

Before this TRA explosion transsexuals used women's loos on a sort of honour system. There were very few of them and they were keen to fit in. That's all gone now, thanks to the TRAs who I suspect are largely a product of the avalanches of porn the internet has made available.

If we cant even talk to each other on a forum where we largely agree how on earth are we going to talk to the people on the other side of the fence?

I think - at least for me - it's your lack of transparency that's the main problem on this thread. Does your son who identifies as a woman use women's loos or not? If you're not prepared to answer that you'll encounter pushback.

You have every right not to answer but in view of your OP it's absolutely key information. If you're opposed to Self ID but support your child who hasn't got a GRC using women only spaces then you do in fact support Self ID.

I don't want men in women's rest rooms. I know how abuse can and does happen. I just wouldn't think a boy dressed up as a girl and using the men's room would be something a mother would want either, so wondered if that pushed the OP to either side.

The problem then needs to be shouted loud and clear that it's men who are violent not women who are literally violent and we need to talk about the need to protect feminine men rather than framing the whole debate as someone being a transwoman.

Its just fine to be a feminine presenting man. It's not find to go through the whole charade of paradodying a woman, putting on a fake voice, potential body mutilation and all the other sexist crap that goes with it.

But. We. Are. Not. Having. This. Conversation.

Instead it's all about blaming women for not sucking it up and telling women they have to be endangered to 'be nice' to all the 'lovely transwomen' (you know the ones who don't give a shit about how this might trigger a traumatic reaction or enable abuse of women by men and 'not so nice transwomen').

This is why the language really matters. It changes the entire narrative and who has to deal with the problem.

'Transwomen' as a word shifts the issue to being something women have to deal with and address not men. It's slight of hand to shift social responsibility and abdicate any responsibility for men to do anything about sexist behaviour or sexual violence. It's almost a 'I just don't want to see the issue' response from male power circles.

Admit you don't mind gender stereotypes and sexism as it suits you as it helps you ultimately keep the peace in your family.

No. The fact that you want me to be that person doesn't mean I am. You shouting the same things at me isn't going to turn me into that person either.

Sadly faire this is why people who have their own views rarely stick around. I am trying very hard to engage and respond honestly and openly but the response to that is, as always, abusive. Some people do not want to hear another view, they just want us to stick around long enough to give them more sticks to brandish.

Pawn, I answered that in the first or second page of this thread.

I absolutely agree that the TRA movement not only endangered women but also trans people. I actually think the extremism is highly damaging.

Redtoothbrush, no where have I blamed women or suggested they should suck it up. As I have already said my gut instinct is that we should be looking at third spaces.

Someone earlier asked why I said third spaces aren't perfect, sorry I don't remember who now, its because the infrastructure is not there already so a lot if places would have to spend a lot of money and time making big changes for a relatively minute number of people to benefit.

JudgeFlounce, I'm getting the impression from your posts that your trans-ID child is older? I can certainly see how navigating those dynamics with older child is challenging. My daughter was 13 initially and therefore it was more straightforward, but if your child is, say, a much older teen or early twenties, then I can certainly see the difficulty. I know of a mum of a girl who ID'd as a boy, and she is currently completely estranged from both daughters over the issue.

I'm saying this because while I understand Red's perspective here, and I broadly agree, I know that I am really quite lucky that my children have engaged and that my daughter seems to be moving past her trans ID troubles, so that puts me in a position of privilege (It worked for me! etc) and I don't want to do that because I genuinely have empathy with families for whom firm GC beliefs have not stopped estrangement.

I don't know what I'm saying except perhaps the splinters in my arse from fence sitting hurt!!

How are third spaces going to solve the problem?

It still isn't addressing the problem.

And all that does is say 'disabled people you need to budge up now...'

It still allows the sexism inherent here to be legitimised and doesn't tackle the gender stereotypes which are driving the issue.

Not to mention the opposition from TRAs to the idea of third spaces anyway.

Once again its following the narrative that effeminate men have something that they should be ashamed of and shouldnt be regarded as men of equal value and status within our society. It just rewards toxic masculinity ultimately.

It's really a continuation of homophobia via other means which then become entrenched in our society.

It always comes back to male violence and male power. Trying to ignore the root of this and pretend that's not it, let's those in power off the hook to address it in our society across the board.

It might seem like it's a conversation about toilets but actually it's a conversation about power of men over those they perceive to be weak and how they can control them in one way or another.

This conversation is ALWAYS about social power dynamics when you break it down.

Sadly faire this is why people who have their own views rarely stick around. I am trying very hard to engage and respond honestly and openly but the response to that is, as always, abusive.

It's not abusive. It's challenging and difficult, yes. But not abusive. You're doing ok.

I totally get your point, Barracker. However due to the Talk Guidelines none of us can be as direct as we might like.

Oh I know!

Where an individual grants special 'permission' to speak the truth the talk guidelines have no power. Like D Hayton permitting male pronouns means that no more posts should be deleted for calling him he.
On a thread like this, we almost need the OPs permission to be able to refer to her child as he is, lest we break those guidelines. And thankfully, she has confirmed that she herself doesn't believe him to be transgender, which confers freedom to the rest of us (per guidelines) to be allowed to freely refer to him as such.

Talk guidelines have conferred upon certain individuals special status in granting or withholding permission for others to state facts truthfully.

I don't really judge those posting within those restrictions. I do resent other people withholding their permission for me to speak the truth though!

The problem with your approach redtoothbrush is that you are wanting to fix a deep seated societal problem that is not, in its entirety, about the trans movement, although it definitely highlights it I agree, by pegging it at transgenderisms door.

Male violence is connected to all of the problems feminism trys to address not just this one. We could as easily say that we shouldn't have female spaces because the problem isn't women its men so let's stop hiding women away and instead force the patriarchy to address male violence. That won't work, we know that. Neither will laying it at the door of trans people.

They have to be addressed separately because the problem of male violence is too big and entwined into society to change just like that. We know that because women have been trying for how long now?

You are right about third spaces from the pov of disabled provision, I see that as separate to abled provision and therefore off limits in terms of any changes. Disabled provision should not be lessened to create this extra space. If it reads more easily then a fourth space.