Transsexual women face erasure

[joannegosling2]

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.

Struggling with masculinity does not confer a connection with women.

It's sexist in the extreme to pretend that it does.

End. Fucking. Of.

I’ve read before of (some) TW feeling oppressed, ill-at-ease while growing up male. Judged as wanting by men and other boys. Hating it.

I can fully understand how such TW felt more comfortable around girls. I can sympathise.

But, with gentle respect, these inner feelings do not mean you are literally a woman and thus entitled (eg) to join a woman’s cricket team.

... because women are people in their own right, too. When male persons - no matter how nice - self-ID into women’s spaces, sports and services, it impacts on women.

These impacts on women are being ignored, minimised, hand waved away (including by some women - thanks, socialisation!).

This has to stop, because girls and women matter too.

I'm transgendered, at a certain point I worked out what was wrong and corrected it. at the time I related to the girls around me in a number of ways far more than the boys I had to try to relate to or get a good kicking called names.

The wording of that comment is most interesting as it does allude to this idea of corrective behaviour which betrays a very authoritarian thought process going on in which contains the concept of 'right behaviour and wrong behaviour' black and white thinking, rather than a genuine idea of being free to be whatever you want.

It's telling.

Strangely enough, my friends growing up were all male. I lived and worked in a largely all male environment until my late 20s. I didn't get women. I didn't like women's company. I couldn't relate to women. And there were times I actively didn't want to be a woman. Yet I never came to the conclusion that I was trans and my body must be wrong because of what I liked and who I hung out with.

Why?

Apart from the fact that material reality is most definitely a bitch.

I've said for a while that men are not allowed to be feminine by society. And in a culture which has increasing toxic masculinity this has helped pushed 'the solution' to feminine men getting a kicking is for them to be 'corrected' by becoming women. The old insult of 'don't be such a girl' perhaps is more potent than we thought.

Who I relate to and what I might want to be don't change what I am. I can't change that through the magic phrase of 'I identify as'. It's a meaningless phrase. I will always be female, no matter how I identity and that has ramifications that can't be ignored by pronouns and politically corrective language policing. I can never escape this - women KNOW this because they live it every day.

I find it strange in the lexicography of this idea that being trans makes you the most oppressed in society but there's nothing about how being a feminine man is an oppressed role - especially when someone actively admits one of the reasons they became trans was to avoid getting a kicking.

Its fascinating to spot the huge number of tells.

I thought the mantra was that being trans was what got you a target for violence... There's no talk of suicides or violence against feminine men in trans ideology.

Why?

At best that implies that its a survival strategy, which is actually obscuring where the oppression is in this dynamic - you are allowed to be trans but not to be a non conforming man. I can see why this might arise, but again it doesn't mean you are a woman. It means you hide amongst women and behind women.

Saying you must conform to those around you by camouflaging yourself as looking feminine and using what you perceive as feminine mannerisms, is just good old fashioned sexism I'm afraid though. Just manifesting in a different way. It is enforcing the power of gender roles on society which oppress feminine men and prevent them for getting a kicking. It's passing on the crap for not fitting in onto weaker members of society, whilst creating a justification for doing so and the cover of being 'oh so oppressed'.

It's actively enabling abuse of other women and on other feminine men.

Nowhere do I see a narrative about fighting for rights and dignity as a feminine men. This non binary crap, isn't breaking that down either. That's just another label in which you conform to certain rules and try and force others to dance around those rules.

This is about trying to pass on the harm that conformity did to you, on to others by forcing their conformity in a different way. This is why it's ALWAYS about power and control at its core. It's about power over others not giving people their own power and freedom on their own terms.

It's never recognising the freedom people have to be themselves. Being trans or non binary can not exist without the underlying admission of sex and the importance of biology as part of the trans or non binary identity. The active denial of sex is the central feature of the identity!

It's ALWAYS the elephant in the room, and you can never escape it. And indeed there is the admission of how important that facet of self is - "I am woman, but not just any woman, I'm a transwoman" that comes out time and again.

Woman can't hide away from it. Ever. As underneath it all, they don't have the same physical features as men and have extra vulnerability because of bodies. The most able and privileged women can offer up more vulnerable women to it instead of themselves, hiding amongst and behind other women with the transwomen.

That's the bottom line is there's always women - as in actual biological women - on the front line of oppression on the basis of sex and gender stereotypes. As it comes down to economic, political and physical power not being as great.

Those who are currently professing to be 'standing up for rights' are actively pushing other women under the bus whilst they do it in the most cowardly of ways.

I don't have time for those who give the game away and are so utterly transparent in their disregard for the autonomy of women to protect themselves and to express their own freedom.

Fantastic post RedToothBrush.

Yes excellent post Red. It’s been awful to see privileged women pushing less privileged women under the bus. Not only ignoring their concerns but actively mocking them - calling them bigots etc.

to you it does not to others it does and is true to them. are they wrong do they not have the right also to beleive that?

You, and they, can believe what you want to believe. However, your 'feeling wrong inside' does not trump facts about sexual violence and physical violence against women on a daily basis all around the world, and these women (like Detroit) needing access to a shelter and being unable to access one because there are men present and their 'belief' has been deemed more important than her needs.

in all the point scoring every time you post a signed letter we post one with 10 times as many names. in the end it should it just come down to numbers who as the most on there side and what they beleive is right?

And this ^^ is just gross and thinly veiled threats. 'We have more on our side so sit down, women, and be quiet because we will win and take what we want from you'. No, your belief does not 'win'. This isn't actually a competition to see who has the most supporters - this is about women having access to women-only spaces. Your '10 letters more' does not overrule one woman needing access. That just sounds like bullying.

For all your talk of relating more to girls, you come across like a man - bullying and threatening and 'I don't care what women want - you will submit to me'.

The tells say everything don't they?

in all the point scoring every time you post a signed letter we post one with 10 times as many names

So? What do you expect in such a deeply sexist and misogynistic society, where male feelings are pandered to and women's are dismissed without a second thought?

All it proves is that.

Appealing to numbers to exert power over women is no different to appealing to strength to over power women. It's not a good look.

Also what Spartacus said.

I do have fundamental problems with Labour's current slogan of 'for the many not the few'.

It plays to the tyranny of the majority and forgets the essence of the vulnerabilities of minorities. And more importantly why rights were created to protect vulnerable minority groups in the first place.

Funny to see it manifest in the idea that just because you have more signatures that you are right especially with the concept of being the most oppressed minority group known to mankind.

Ironically it was those who held office on the left who were supposed to uphold and protect the rights of minorities and vulnerable groups who otherwise lacked political voice against the tyranny and intimidation of the majority which might seek to oppress them, erase them and exploit them.

It's therefore no surprise that we see this betrayal of vulnerable women in the face of intimidation happening at the exact moment the Labour Party adopts a slogan like that.

It highlights how far they have come from what they were supposed to represent and how politics have flipped with the Labour Party having a predominantly educated middle class voter base and more conservative types being the ones seeking to protect vulnerable women and girls from poorer backgrounds. Of course leftist working class voters and feminists are just invisible in this because of this shift.

Plus which extreme pressure is bought to bear on a lots of people to sign - it’s hardly a signature free of duress.

Opps my reply was to Spartacus, and Eresh.

Detroit I replied to your PM, with my email address

Barracker, Datun, RedToothBrush, so much clarity in your words (no shock there, I mean it is the norm).

I can't add anything that hasn't been said more clearly by PPs.

SpartacusAutisticus it's not lost on me that when Ash Sakar had the communism row her definition of communism was describing classic liberalism not communism.

I find it almost disturbing tbh.

At the last GE the Labour manifesto also played to this idea of benefits scroungers too. The institute of fiscal studies analysed each economic plan and the Labour Party plan almost mirrored the Conservative one albeit with a 'punishment' for everyone on over 80k. It was marginally better, than the Conservative plan but offered least to those in the bottom 10 centiles of households.

That was the thing that really opened my eyes as to what was happening to the Labour Party and our society.

Those at the bottom economically having been demonised and little thought given to the social consequences to that even though they were standing on an anti austerity platform.

Ironically the LDs did much better, but they fail on their understanding of social dynamics in other ways.

Anyone with real socialist ideas and ideas which understand how rights work and need to be protected really aren't being represented at the moment regardless of the slogans parties are putting out.

This leaves a very worrying political void in British politics which concerns me and is open to exploitation by just about any lobbying group.

I think it's dead important to understand this and know why all this is happening now and what's happening with who is championing certain things in politics right now.

The tells say everything don't they?

They certainly do and your insight is razor sharp red. The use of the word 'corrective' stood out for me too. I'm always quite surprised at the highly gendered background a lot of these people come from, where non-compliance is punished.

And yes to the lack of support for feminine men! Despite the slip of acknowledging one would get a good kicking.

Interesting that to escape a good kicking, they maintain they are adopting the persona of a group further down the hierarchy.

Everyone knows they're not. They are actually climbing above effeminate men and throwing them under the bus in the process.

Also, it has to be said, the level of discourse, analysis and intelligence is far higher in women than men over this issue! Is that a known thing, are women smarter than men? Much smarter? Like loads...

Also, it has to be said, the level of discourse, analysis and intelligence is far higher in women than men over this issue! Is that a known thing, are women smarter than men? Much smarter? Like loads...

I think it's more that its not an important issue to intelligent men to analyse and debate. It's just not on the radar for them whereas for intelligent women it's becoming increasingly unavoidable.

And its a reflection that our current crop of politicians (both male and female) are in many cases rather more average in that department than they should be and they make out.

I think it's more that its not an important issue to intelligent men to analyse and debate. It's just not on the radar for them whereas for intelligent women it's becoming increasingly unavoidable.

I agree with that. I wonder if, also, there is any correlation between intelligence, or lack of, and identifying as trans in men.

Or certainly, the ones who claim they are actually women.

I can't imagine the conflict between identifying as trans, and understanding how gender is a hierarchy and what you're doing to reinforce it, even though it harms you.

For intelligent people, that is.

For instance, I can't imagine the number of people who happily signed off during the 12 year campaign to allow an obvious fetishist to counsel women in a rape refuge.

Or give a convicted rapist and a paedophile access to women in prison.

Or allow a murdering sex offender to address the House of Lords on how his prison sentence could be made more comfortable amongst the women.

Or maintaining you can tell people's motives by soul gazing.

Or deciding there is no physical advantage to being born male. And whilst promoting women's sport with one hand, making absolutely certain it's going to be fucked, with the other.

Like Corbyn identifying a need for all-female train carriages, and at the same time enacting laws that means any man can enter them.

Like every political party knowing that their power relies on female votes, but throwing women under the bus.

I don't generally think that calling someone's IQ into question is a good debating tactic, but for ffs, it's difficult to avoid.

I agree with that. I wonder if, also, there is any correlation between intelligence, or lack of, and identifying as trans in men.

Absolutely disagree with this.

My brother was always very bright. Cults are attractive to both intelligent and unintelligent people. It's a myth that only stupid people end up in them. What is common is that cults prey on insecurities and vulnerabilities in people, and when they echo what people want to hear they resonant so seducing people without them thinking. This then engulfs their understanding of their identity so they can not separate themselves from the ideology. An attack on the group is an attack on them personally.

Cults try to suppress and demonise critical thought via repetition of mantras and by providing a missing sense of belonging.

I am very cautious of links between intelligence and identity politics for this reason. We are talking about rationality versus emotion rather than intelligence versus stupidity.

Again this is very much a political dynamic of our age which isn't restricted to this subject.

Important to note it because going around calling people stupid tends to alienate them and fuel the siege mentality of these politic identities rather than neutralise them. Direct challenges to cults rarely work. It has to be a slow drip drip of encouraging critical thought instead which allows the penny to drop in individuals on their own terms.

Politicians on the other hand... I can give you a whole pile of reasons why the best and brightest are not going into politics and why we are left with idiots leading and representing us instead to the detriment of the quality of debate and law making.

But that's an entirely different thread.

No its about belonging.

And a missing sense of it which has increased because of technology and displacement of traditional communities with long historical ties to a place. And bonds between families as we've splintered from large close knit extended family networks to isolated individuals who live miles from any family or live very separate lives even under the same roof.

(The politics of 'somewheres' v 'anywheres' is relevant to this debate and the wider culture war if anyone wants further googling for political trends)