Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Transsexual women face erasure

999 replies

joannegosling2 · 16/08/2019 22:45

It's a fine state of affairs isn't it?

Please - before the administrators axe this post, at least hear me out.

August 2019 - Transsexual women (not the self ID-seeking transgender - I refer to those of us who surgically transition lock, stock and barrel under strict medical supervision but whose narratives have been appropriated by the TG activists and advertised as their own) now being clobbered by feminists, not only here but every where else on the internet too, whether it be on TGN or this new Spinster group I've heard about. I understand the voice of feminism on the latter has reached unseen heights of extremism.

In fact, if I may say, equally as extreme as the trans activists whom feminists have been resisting for quite some time now. But what a difference a week makes. It seems they are now mounting a full-on attack on their own allies - we transsexuals (who are no less
appalled by the behaviour of the transgenderists and feel equally threatened by them), suggesting we are exactly like those same people with no respect at all for women. AND IT IS CATCHING ON.

They insult us further by calling us men and insisting we submit to male pronouns and acknowledge the absurd assumption that we benefit from male privilege (whatever that is, I surely never realized there was any).

For the zillionth time WE are NOT the problem. This entire farce was started by the self ID demands of the TG crowd. It is true - and we recognise - that women are fighting for their rights as never before. But regrettably there are certain feminist agitators who now see this as a golden opportunity to rid the streets and social life of not only
cross-dressing men who seek to enter their spaces but transsexuals too. To this end they have petitioned MPs to scrap the Gender Recognition Act which affords some legal protection to us...which by happy coincidence (though for different reasons) is exactly what their enemies demand also.

So here the two opposing sides have found common ground, and the politicians, having had the wool pulled over their eyes by the TRAs using narratives stolen from us, are joyfully legislating to bring peace and harmony to our troubled society. Cross-dressers will have their self ID on condition they respect segregated spaces and women will be safe from men in their toilets. And we will all live happily ever after.

Not so for us transsexuals. Someone somewhere has decided that we must be the sacrificial lamb to enable this to happen. We must cease to exist as a group. And not existing together with self ID being in place means it will be deemed no longer appropriate to transition via surgical means. Consequently all such treatment, once tailored purely for he needs of transsexuals, will vanish forever.

I hear women repeat over and over that they were never consulted about 'old-school' transsexuals using their spaces like we have done for years. Since in all probability many of you here weren't even born when I had my operation some 30 years ago that would have been rather difficult. And besides I don't recall being consulted about these outrageous proposals to erase me and my compatriots from society. There are certain well-known individuals on social media claiming to be transsexual but who eagerly cow to feminist insistence that they be labelled men. If they are happy to be blokes, fine. But they
certainly do NOT speak for most of us. I will NOT degrade myself in that way just to please others - nor to seek validation.

Personally it matters little whether women accept me or not. They never did when I was trying my best to present myself in the male role either. That used to hurt me a lot. But now I've grown harder. If the feminists treat their allies worse than they do their enemies, then they do not deserve allies. Whilst still supporting women's concerns in general, transsexuals are also entitled to fight for their existence - especially in the face of so many seeking their total erasure.

I believe feminists have singled us out for one simple reason. Thanks to our years of serious and medicated transitioning (unlike the TG community) many of us pass so well women cannot tell should they brush by us in their toilets. (If you have they're most probably cross-dressers). This I feel is what irks them most as it makes it near impossible to keep us out. So the fewer transsexuals enabled to transition, the less will be in their spaces.

I refuse to pay atonement for the sins of transgender activists. I'm sorry but I just cannot accept that from now on we be barred from women's toilets and hospital wards. For I can tell you it will not stop there. Next it will be parks, libraries, shopping centres and schools -
indeed any place where there are children. Apartheid sound familiar?

So know this Mumsnetters. I shall go on using women's toilets as I've done for half my life now. Not because I'm some misogynistic, foul-mouthed lager-drinking bloke who seeks to undermine or abuse women as many feminists seem to relish believing these days, but to
quietly assert my right to exist; you see I do it in the context of the time when black people once sat at segregated lunch counters enduring terrible abuse and violence from bigots.

Feminists can so do their worst. We few transsexuals who are left have nothing to lose now.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
AllNaturalWoman · 20/08/2019 17:06

Bespin Grin re OP I don't think they are ready for MN

I think clownfish not withstanding here on FWR we're all agreed it is scientifically impossible for someone to change sex.

And since we have a massive religion build up around someone alleged to have had a virgin birth if they'd even been a suspicion this was possible in the past they'd be an established religion around it now. I chose the word established carefully there as the belief system, Social pressure to comply by calling it the moral position and framing of anyone who doesn't agree as heretics feels like religion in the Middle Ages and of course religions do like to control women

Bespin · 20/08/2019 18:43

AllNaturalWoman

No I don't think they were that or they were drunk at the time of posting and have forgotten they had even done it lol. oh well would have been interesting to hear there replys.

Bespin · 20/08/2019 18:45

also totally agree no one can change sex, I wish the papers would stop using the term, also why I don't like the term transexual it as never really fitted who we are. but again it was a term imposed on us by professionals.

PencilsInSpace · 20/08/2019 18:47

I assume that ruling is very significant, it's a test case surely and now others can do the same.

It's potentially very significant, however at this stage all that has happened is a court in Alaska has granted a preliminary injunction against Anchorage Equal Rights Commission. This means that while the Hope Center's case against AERC is ongoing, AERC are not permitted to attempt to enforce the parts of Anchorage Municipal Code that are in dispute - i.e. until the full case is heard, the Hope Center can continue to have a female only admissions policy and can also publish and advertise their admissions policy.

What is very hopeful is that in granting the injunction, the court has decided that the shelter are likely to succeed on the merits of their case. Also, while this case has been smeared as religious bigotry in some quarters, the judge did not mention religious freedom in her arguments, it was all to do with the parts of local law that are akin to the UK single sex exceptions and whether they apply to homeless shelters or not.

But the case concerns Anchorage Municipal Code, not federal law, so I don't know whether it just has the potential to be a significant test case for Anchorage or whether it could be more widely useful.

Full judgment here:

www.documentcloud.org/documents/6267474-Order-on-PI-Downtown-Hope-Center-v-AERC.html

Datun · 20/08/2019 19:16

We can say transwomen are men. We say it all the time.

I'm pretty sure you can even say a specific tw is a man or male, if it is in the context of discussing why their sex is important. And doesn't stray into doing it deliberately to vex.

What you can't do, is keep referring to a specific tw as a man, generally, (unless they are a sex offender), as it makes 'the environment' hostile for them (even if they'll never read it).

Hamster doesn't feel this is a hostile environment, even if people refer to them as he. Because hamster gets it and isn't trying to bully women.

birdsdestiny · 20/08/2019 19:20

Thanks pencils.

NotAtMyAge · 20/08/2019 20:27

also totally agree no one can change sex, I wish the papers would stop using the term, also why I don't like the term transexual it as never really fitted who we are. but again it was a term imposed on us by professionals.

So what term would you prefer, Bespin?

NeurotrashWarrior · 20/08/2019 20:54

I was musing over some things earlier today as have been discussing a few things with a friend who's been doing a bit of devils advocacy.

Those who think they can change sex have been lied to. Those who think we are assigned a sex at birth are being lied to and are lying. Children are being lied to. It's all lies.

Excellent point hamster.

DuMondeB · 20/08/2019 20:57

Surely every medical condition has it’s name (and therefore, those diagnosed with it) imposed by professionals?

Including a great number named after doctors (my daughter recently had ‘Henoch–Schönlein purpura’ - what kind of man that names a rash after himself?)-

EmpressLesbianInChair · 20/08/2019 20:57

Those who think they can change sex have been lied to. Those who think we are assigned a sex at birth are being lied to and are lying. Children are being lied to. It's all lies.

Exactly. If you’re born with a penis, you’re a boy who grows into a man. Whatever alterations you might make to your body, that’s the truth.

PencilsInSpace · 20/08/2019 21:24

Blatantly cross-posting for traffic -

Interesting difference between Anchorage Municipal Code and the UK equality act and the way the single-sex exceptions work -

UK EA - you first decide whether discriminating on the grounds of sex is lawful (proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim). If it is, only then do you decide whether it is also lawful to discriminate on the grounds of 'gender reassignment'*

Anchorage Municipal Code (I've only read the snippets and arguments in this judgment, I'm sure it's more complicated than this) - it looks like you decide whether it's lawful to discriminate on the grounds of 'sex or gender identity' at the same time.

I wonder if we're missing a trick here - I know we're all understandably hypervigilant about the conflation of sex and gender, especially where the law is concerned, but what struck me reading this judgment is the argument that 'TWAW' was not used. Everything hinged on whether it was legal for the shelter to discriminate on the grounds of 'sex or gender identity' - or not. Either/or.

And of course it's legal, homeless shelters are listed as a specific exception under the most relevant bit of the code. So they can do both, they can say 'we admit anybody born female including those who say they are men; we don't admit anybody born male even those who say they are women.'

By contrast, the UK EA is structured in such a way that you first have to justify why something is single sex and then face an additional fight about what that means. An example of getting this badly wrong is Kairos Women's Space's recent advert for a project worker, to work with women who 'may have experienced struggles with mental wellbeing, addictions, involvement in the criminal justice system and domestic/sexual abuse.' -

Please note that this post is open to women only under the Equality Act 2010, Schedule 9, Part 1 (inclusive of non-binary people, trans and intersex women.)

goodmoves.com/vacancy/a4s0N000000H3CPQA0/kairos-womens-space-project-worker

So they went to the trouble of invoking the single-sex exception but then rendered it completely meaningless. How is it possible for this to be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim regarding sex, but not regarding gender reassignment? Doesn't the inclusion of some male people negate the claim that making this job women only is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim in the first place? What is the aim? How is this a proportionate means?

As soon as something is announced as 'women only' or 'for women', certain male people who enjoy trampling on women's boundaries will flock like moths to a flame and the two stage process in the UK EA gives them an 'in' to argue that of course a service etc. should be single-sex but TWAW so they should be included.

The Anchorage Municipal Code conflates 'sex or gender identity' into a single category which looks scary as fuck but it appears to mean that if it is lawful to discriminate on the grounds of sex then it is also lawful to discriminate on the grounds of gender identity.

I think this case is worth watching, as well as any other cases where the law puts 'sex or gender identity' into a single category.
-----
*UK Equality Act says - A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/7

S1naidSucks · 20/08/2019 22:16

also totally agree no one can change sex, I wish the papers would stop using the term, also why I don't like the term transexual it as never really fitted who we are. but again it was a term imposed on us by professionals.

Wow! Careful Bespin! you’ll end up peaking yourself! 😁

Bespin · 20/08/2019 22:33

I have been consistent that no one can change sex in any post I have made. Because that is the reason why I am trans otherwise I would not be as my gender does not match my sex. I prefer the term trans woman, or transgendered.

other conditions like aspergers which we tend not to use now due to historical links. lots of groups of patents over time campaign to change the labels that are given to there conditions if they become stigmatised or problematic. some transexuals are happy with the term but I've never liked it as it does do what you all complain about in mixing sex and gender.

AyeRobot · 20/08/2019 22:42

Bespin, would you prefer the term transmen? So, men who wish to present as the opposite sex? It would solve a lot of problems...

AyeRobot · 20/08/2019 22:44

Oh. No, then.

Why have you rendered gender as more important than sex?

Bespin · 20/08/2019 22:55

transmen exsist already, so no. the reason I feel that my gender is importent to me is that it does not match my sex as yours probably does. when it's like that it tends to make you think about it a lot and after years of trying to get my gender to match my sex it was easier to match my sexual chsricteristics to my gender and elevate my dysphoria.

Cascade220 · 20/08/2019 22:59

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

littlbrowndog · 20/08/2019 23:01

How does your gender show itself to you bespin ?

OldCrone · 20/08/2019 23:02

Bespin When you talk about your 'gender', can you explain exactly what you mean?

Cascade220 · 20/08/2019 23:03

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Bespin · 20/08/2019 23:04

Why would you want to elevate your dysphoria?

imagine living with the breaks on all your life or having a rock weighing you down and you not being able to deal with stuff becuse the rock is always in the way that's what it feels like knowing something is wrong and not dealing with it. once you deal with that then you have the chance to deal with everything else people have.

Bespin · 20/08/2019 23:05

OldCrone

can you?

AnotherAdultHumanFemale · 20/08/2019 23:05

It looks like this thread has changed course to be talking about shelters. Which has got me thinking, the end game is to close them isn't it? See the poster above who said she'll no longer support them (and I can see why). That's what people will do, they'll stop donating. All the places will be taken up by men identifying as women. Until there are no places left, then no funding, then no shelters. So nowhere for women escaping abusers to go.

The more I see what is happening, the more I think, we're going to have to start again the way women in the past did. Most shelters and women's organisations have been taken over by the ideology now and will soon be predominantly run by and for men if the people running them don't wake up. So if we want shelters and other services for women only, we'll have start again and create them, like they did in the 70s.

Cascade220 · 20/08/2019 23:06

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

AnotherAdultHumanFemale · 20/08/2019 23:08

Oh it looks like the thread went back onto the original topic (I think I was reading the penultimate page of replies rather than the last page), oops.