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.

Yes, the lurkers do see, well, this one does. It's so obvious where the bullying and threats come from.

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.

So utterly, utterly telling.

Is Detroit irked??? Is that why she had to be deleted? Ffs. Clueless.

Self-congratulation over accessing women's spaces by (imaginary) stealth, and gleeful satisfaction over what was it? 'making it nearly impossible to keep us out'.

But we're not like those other men...the TGs, the cross-dressers...

Ugh.

Bespin's arguments do not stand up to scrutiny, that's why they are panicking and calling us out as bullies.
But it's a good thing that they stand, as nothing shows louder and clearer the knots they tie themselves up in when tryinh to argue their case.
They have no case, and women are pointing this out calmly and intelligently and obviously this is causing some squirming.
Great thead. One of the best.
detroit (I'm also a Joni Mitchell fan though I hadn't heard that particular song. But her album Clouds is one of most favourite ever!)

Bullies just got to bully I guess

Oh don't be so silly. Disagreement and pointing out issues in a post is not bullying or attacking; the interesting thing is why it should be perceived as such.

Go to AIBU and look at how women talk to women. How much shit women are prepared to take from other women. How much behaviour gets called out. How faulty arguments are taken apart. Women expect a lot of other women (and mostly women are very capable of rising to those expectations) and more importantly, women aren't allowed to behave badly, wave the sympathy flag or flounce. That behaviour is only indulged by women when it's in children or in men.

Again it's the wanting the word but definitely not parity, while expecting and being able to identify out of the inconvenient bits. I wish I could. I really wish Detroit could. But this is the reality: women are being expected to care for feelings of male born people over and above their own feelings and even their actual physical needs like not sleeping out on the streets. Do you understand why to many women this is an outrage?

Great thread. One of the best

Agreed, it's always good when someone one new comes onto the board and proves a different perspective. It helps us break down how we feel about what they say.

I think that to bespin, the "bullying" is simply women defining themselves, but not males, as women. Odd that it should come to this. That women are not allowed to call females, and only females, women anymore. Try it, and you just get "TWAW" chanted at you.

Women talking about their rights, their biology, is basically being re-shaped by powerful males as "hate speech".

WPUK and lesbian marches are being called "hate groups" - and councils, advertising agencies, even the police, are believing this lie.

When the Mayor of Liverpool, and Edward Lord, and Leeds council have voted and instigated policy that erases women's single sex facilities (and called women bigots for good measure) - and shut down women's meetings and women's advertising spaces - like Posie, like the Lesbian March - like the WPUK Leeds meeting - this is an attack on women's rights. (The fact that some women have been involved in this is neither here nor there - groups of women have always colluded with men - groups of women colluded against the Suffragettes.)

Defining "transphobia" as the TRAs currently are - is a direct attack on women's rights to assemble together, to organise, to talk even, without males. Women only spaces like rape crisis centres (see Vancouver) are being denied funding because they will only accept women. We should all be seriously fucking worried about this. Because women wanting space away from all males is being framed as a hate crime.

Provides not proves

Sigh autocorrect

This is what irks them most as it makes it near impossible to keep us out

Ok.

Spot the them and us thinking. It's as if there's an actual difference between the two groups that everyone recognises.

Spot the total lack of respect for women, women's feelings, women's boundaries - those boundaries are something to be smashed, stolen, sneaked under, you can almost hear the tee hee.

No, I don't want to be used by any man. I don't care what surgery, what cosmentic changes or what agenda, because that tee hee and total lack of respect for women and that belief in male superiority and primary right is there every single time .

I am done arguing that women matter too as if we had to apologise for pointing out that we exist and it would be really nice if our overlords wouldn't mind just letting us have a voice in this discussion pretty please while they decide who we are and what we can have and how we shall be used and how we shall be punished if we disobey.

Fuck off with that. Seriously. Grow up and get over your walloping great unacceptable sexist male supremacy issues and issues with respecting other humans' rights when that means someone says 'no' to you. Own your own issues, take responsibility for yourself.

In a few short years of transactivism, women's spaces have been all but erased.

Yes, you'll probably get a female nurse if you ask for one. But you may get a male-bodied transwoman with stubble. And if you complain/ask for a woman - they will get offended. Because they are women, because they say they are. www.express.co.uk/news/uk/898458/NHS-transgender-latest-news-Justine-Greening-NHS-cervical-smear-male-nurse Sorry for the Express link, it was the only one a google search brought up - but I think it was reported in the Telegraph first.

That woman ^ got an apology, I believe. But how long before the act of asking for a female nurse - and for her to actually female - no, thanks not a transsexual with stubble - how long before that's considered a hate crime?

Right. First of all. Sex does not change (aside from a hermaphrodite of course..) and gender is chosen.

I can see why a post op trans man would not want to use the men's toilets due to other men judging them on their appearance. However, they would be using a cubicle not urinals, so this is largely negated and just lead to slight awkwardness at the sink. Slight awkwardness should not trump the risk to girls and women of them using the womens toilets.

Despite a post op trans woman not having a penis (obviously) this does not remove the threat. The post op transwoman developed biologically as a male: broader shoulders, larger muscles, larger bones and a willy..) therefore, even following surgery as an adult to remove their willy they will still have the stature of a male. Though I don't doubt that psychologically and helped by female hormones too, their gender is female.

This brings us to the complicated issue of which toilets do they use? There could be a seperate trans cubicle like the disabled loos but it would be astronomically expensive and would trans people want to use it? Also, would the picture be a person in trousers and a dress?! Perhaps a single cubicle with male/female on it would be a solution but also would be crazily expensive. Another solution is using the disabled loos. (I've done this with my son in the pram when we can't get into the women's and I don't - always - fancy a risky wee! Also at work at night when it's quiet..I know, shoot me). However, disabled people may not like this, or me using the loos haha, but then how many trans people are there??

If there were a few loos for transpeople in a room, would there need to be seperate ones for pre op men, post op men, pre op women and post op women?! The mind boggles. That would be unlikely because there can't be that many trans people, but interesting to think about.

My heads battered now. I'm out!!

Should have said "but" not "and" at the beginning. "but gender is chosen".

The complicated issue of toilets:

Not as complicated as it might appear. When the Disability Discrimination Act came in and insisted on wheelchair accessible toilets in public provisions, there was a lot of moaning about cost and inconvenience. However the act took into account the concept of reasonable adjustments which included budget size, building size, number of clients being provided for, etc. So a large, well off leisure centre with dozens of toilets and hundreds of clients got little sympathy but a village hall got more lee way in terms of time and expectations. There were grants smaller places could apply to, there was a general timeframe - it was accepted this wouldn't happen in six months, there was time needed to roll it out - and all new builds had to make provisions in the plans. 15-20 years later accessible loos are standard in most places. This would be the way forward with accessible third spaces, it's very doable and if written into Equality Law and local authorities standing behind it with grants and advice it happens quite quickly.

What those third spaces should look like isn't for women to sort out, but from the many discussions on the board here the most accessible versions appear to be single contained rooms with sink inside, and either labelled inclusive or gender neutral, to be used by anyone who prefers an alternative to using the provision for their sex. Many also mention that if they are 'inclusive' toilets as opposed to specifically gender neutral, then they could also be designed to become useful family toilets or example, or provide safer spaces for other vulnerable people, which meet other issues encountered in group toilets.

The issues for women on making all provision gender neutral with males and females using the same space often includes the necessary labour for women of having to clean urine spattered toilet seats before use, and the vulnerabilities around males with tampon/ sanitary towel fetishes stalking the bins to retrieve and use them as soon as possible after disposal. Again there are ways to deal with this.

The real issue in the way of third spaces is that it does not provide validation and there would remain a women's single sex space. This is always the bottom line. It isn't about possibilities or ways to meet everyone's needs fairly, which third spaces would do. It's about removing ability for biological women to be anywhere biological males can't be too. The only way to achieve this in law is to relegate all protected characteristics and the rights of all women to be subordinate to the rights of males to self identify without boundaries.

JY's working this one through in Canada at the moment.

The solution you suggested seems the most viable and money is available like you say. When you consider how much council tax we pay etc but would people want to fund it? It's a question of where it would come from. Perhaps tax recouped for the government from businesses? Or one less bonus for high up (not hard up ) council workers?!

I'm with you all the way until the final paragraph where I got very confused and lost your point? Also the tampon fetish is disgusting..is that a thing?! Wow.

Despite a post op trans woman not having a penis (obviously)

I understand what you mean, but for the benefit of lurkers, the words "post-op" do not necessarily mean no penis, or even genital surgery.

I'm with you all the way until the final paragraph where I got very confused and lost your point? Also the tampon fetish is disgusting..is that a thing?! Wow.

It's a thing, and JY in the last paragraph is an example. JY stands for Jessica Yaniv. Google is your friend!

Another problem is the placing of tiny spy cameras in female loos and changing rooms. That too is a thing.

Plenty of evidence out there that all female spaces are safer for women and girls. As well as for comfort and privacy, and of course, safety, voyeurism is a big (and growing) problem.

Women are better off if no males at all have access to spaces where they are in a state of undress or vulnerable.

And no woman wants to think of the sanitary bin being raided by physiological autogynephiles - unbelievable fetish. Do we have to have locking sanitary bins to stop this??

Despite a post op trans woman not having a penis (obviously)

Not obviously at all, in many cases 'post op' means boob job. Not removal of their penis.

Indeed many are quite proud of the boob and penis combo.

When you consider how much council tax we pay etc but would people want to fund it?

People weren't asked to fund disabled loos and they're certainly not being asked if they want to fund TRA lobby groups, but that's govt money too! There was complaining and pleas of poverty when the disabled loos became required, but it wasn't expected to be instant, especially in the case of smaller provisions it was proportional to budget and size, the LA funded the updates to their own buildings and had grants for those in need of financial help, and it went into all new builds.

If third spaces are the strongest solution for meeting all needs - (and I honestly think they are, while my primary concern if for women and girls I agree that TS or TW people should have safe alternatives to male single sex spaces because I believe in respecting everyone's privacy, dignity and needs) - then it gets written into law, the LA diverts the money for necessary grants and it becomes an expectation that public places must fulfil. In proportion to their size, their budget and reasonable time scales.

To summarise my last paragraph if I can explain better, if you read around you'll find plenty of rebuttal on third spaces because the existence of a third space places a separation or a limit around male born people as to how far into womanhood they can be recognised. Their focus is on the total inclusion of male born people into womanhood with no women's space or provision closed to them. The total validation of woman as their choice of identity. That some women will be excluded as a result is seen by this group as a fair price. GC Women's focus is on the necessity of meeting the needs of all women based on the fact of their biology and aspects of womanhood that they can't identify out of, and that needs of trans people can be met in other ways than removing all single sex spaces from women.

Indeed many are quite proud of the boob and penis combo.

I've also seen photos of penis, plus a 'vagina' which has been medically created below the ballsack; with boobs.

Sorry.

Still trying to catch up generally and with this - mostly! - excellent thread.

I'm still reeling that anyone would report a woman fleeing abuse, traumatised by male bodies and sleeping in a tent, for language not sufficiently compliant to males.

And that MNHQ regard her post, not the reporting of it, as not in the spirit.

Reporter, whoever you are: step too far, you rotten, awful person, step too far. And give your bloody heads a wobble, MNHQ.

Reporter, whoever you are: step too far, you rotten, awful person, step too far. And give your bloody heads a wobble, MNHQ.

Yes. This. How can MNHQ prioritise some woman-hating bastard bloke over an abused woman?

Reposting this because auto correct has destroyed the sense of it

brush by us

There is something very wrong in that phrasing, that you saying women are being touched by you without them knowing, even though you know women wouldn't be happy about this or give permission for this, you boast about this on a women's forum?!

Horrible, urrgh, rapey speak. We're getting one by you, women, we're touching you when you dont know. I see this.

Its a threat.

aside from a hermaphrodite of course

Which don't actually exist. There are various disorders of sexual development, but no-one has ever been discovered to have both sets of functioning genitalia, despite what lies certain waxing enthusiasts tell.

Yes. This. How can MNHQ prioritise some woman-hating bastard bloke over an abused woman?

How indeed did it get to this

Intersex.

Is there anyone with both ovaries and testicles?

I.e. the organs of sex based reproduction for female and male respectively.

There are variations in genitalia as a result of the over or under functioning of either one, or other effects, but this does not change the sex of the individual, its binary, only ever one or the other.