So much confusion over transgender issues

[Shockedandbefuddled]

Hello - I realise I am here under a new user name.

I am now on a feminist board, having never described myself as a feminist.

My university friends would laugh wildly to hear me described as such.

I feel strongly transgender people need to be looked after and are vulnerable. I do not believe acknowledging transgender people exist poses a threat to womanhood.

However, I am scared that there are a lot of bad men, perverts, abusers and fetishists out in the world (far more than transgender people) who could abuse self ID.

I’m afraid to post this away from Feminist boards because of the backlash but am genuinely confused how the argument has become so fractured.

I think its ok to say I want full support for transgender people but it cannot be at the expense of women, kids, those of religious belief etc?

Personally I would explain to my children that the person considered themselves trans and that would be it.

I find this really alarming. You are teaching your children not to have boundaries around naked people of the opposite sex. That's dangerous.

Also, are you going to accompany your children to changing rooms for the rest of their lives?

You know, even aside from rape victims, victims of sexual assault (at least 20% of the female population of Eng & Wales according to 2017 stats), women with a history of being subject to domestic violence, women with PTSD triggered by presence of male-bodied people, religious beliefs about male-bodied people - even aside from all of that:

What if a woman just does not want to share a changing room/toilet with a male bodied person? This is an issue of consent.

Why should the feelings of a transwoman trump the feelings of a woman?

What is my definition of gender dysphoric? Those diagnosed with gender dysphoria. The relevant study made some assumtions about those who would have been diagnosed if they had come forward, IIRC.

As Dr Debbie Hayton speaking from personal experience, discussed in a recent interview & article that some (many?) males' diagnosis of 'gender dysphoria' is driven by autogynaephilia.

'I May Have Gender Dysphoria. But I Still Prefer to Base My Life on Biology, Not Fantasy'
(extract)
"Yes, gender dysphoria is a real condition. I know, because I have it: the feeling that my male biology is at odds with my desire to have a female body. But I don’t have to invent some mystical spiritual force called gender identity to explain it.

Just as there is no single cause of chest pain or headaches, there doesn’t need to be a single cause of gender dysphoria. But there is a well-observed typology. In the 1980s, American-Canadian sexologist Ray Blanchard proposed that transsexualism (as it was then commonly called) in males generally manifested as either (1) effeminate gay men seeking to further accentuate their appeal to other men (homosexual transsexualism, or HSTS); or (2) heterosexual autogynephiles—self-attracted men who prefer to conceive of themselves as women—who typically come out as trans women later in life (and often to the great surprise of family and friends). The most vocal and aggressive proponents of trans rights—biological males who often will express themselves aggressively to women who bring up the issue of biology—appear to be drawn disproportionately from this second, autogynephilic category." (continues)

As noted above, my own experience leads me to believe that efforts to protect gender ideology from critique are most vigorously led by a specific and identifiable sub-section within the trans community. Autogynephilic males who abruptly declare themselves to be trans often experience a sense of insecurity and even shame, especially since the transitioning process can have a traumatic effect on their wives and children. Demanding that the world recognize them as actual women is a strategy for absolving them of responsibility. If gender is an innate quality, like height or sexual orientation, how can they be morally responsible? Gender ideology is the tool they use to legitimize that emotional reflex. Their sudden rejection of their old life is reimagined as a mystical journey into their own gendered soul." (continues)

I speak from experience when I say that it’s difficult for autogynephiles to admit the simple truth that they are simply heterosexual males who use the conceit of female self-identification as a means to rationalize their sexual attraction to a female version of themselves" (continues)

quillette.com/2020/02/02/i-may-have-gender-dysphoria-but-i-still-prefer-to-base-my-life-on-biology-not-fantasy/
thread:
quillette.com/2020/02/02/i-may-have-gender-dysphoria-but-i-still-prefer-to-base-my-life-on-biology-not-fantasy/

Is it because you're worried your children will see a penis in a female changing room?

Actually I'd be more worried about a woman who'd been raped, and believed herself in a safe single sex space, being retraumatised by having a penis in her space without her consent. A place where she herself could be naked.

Women get to choose who sees them naked, and whom they see naked. And women using a women's changing space don't consent to seeing dicks. Why is an unsolicited dick pick abusive, and a dick next door to you in a communal women's space okay? Both ignore consent around sex organs. Both exist in a world where women have to live with constant consideration of personal safety. A dick in a single sex women's changing room would freak most women out. It would also mean many never returned. Because of male wants. That's not okay.

Personally I would explain to my children that the person considered themselves trans and that would be it.

That's a worry. A huge part of safeguarding is teaching children to have solid boundaries and recognise truth and reality on the one hand, and grooming, gaslighting and manipulation on the other. If you teach your kids that a penis in a space designated penis free is fine, especially one where they themselves are naked, then that's immediately against all safeguarding practice. You are teaching them to ignore the boundaries that keep them safe, and teaching them that males have the right to display penises to non-consenting women and children.

If the fear of a penis is rape then people can still rape without having a penis.

There were just 128 women jailed for sex offences in 2018, and more than 13500 men. Sex offenders are overwhelmingly likely to be men. Men, and not women. And if you really can't see that flashers might very much like to turn up at communal spaces, claim to self ID, and saunter on in where they can lawfully flash naked women, then you might need to have a little think.

And while in some jurisdictions rape can be with objects or digits, in this country that's assault by penetration. By statutory definition, rape involves a penis.

During transition I could be said to have been self-IDing to gain access to those spaces. Your position would be that I should then (and still) should be excluded?

Well that's the other thing, of course Robin.

Do you think that men with autogynephilia, transvestites, cross dressing fetishists, etc, should also 'self id' into those spaces?

Rowantrees I was sexually abused as a teen so unfortunately I do understand the long term effects of that. I have massive empathy for anyone who suffers abuse. I just don't think society can function in fear especially as it is the minority who abuse.

Also, don't most leisure centres, pools etc provide lockable changing booths (some family ones too) if you would prefer to change in private? Maybe that's the way we need to go. Then women, children and transpeople could choose to change in private.

release “ I just don't think society can function in fear especially as it is the minority who abuse.”

So you’re happy to drop safeguarding?

Do you think systems of segregated sexes in hospitals, toilets, etc are “living in fear”?

Then women, children and transpeople could choose to change in private.

Which is a concept that many women will accept.

Unfortunately, many transwomen don't accept it. Because it doesn't provide any validation.

Also, don't most leisure centres, pools etc provide lockable changing booths (some family ones too) if you would prefer to change in private?

Many do; most aren't floor to ceiling and are vulnerable to voyeurism. Which unsurprisingly happens a lot more in mixed sex facilities.

If society can't function in fear, remove the fear

Option 1 some kind of minority report system
Option 2 bully and brainwash any victims of crime until they are sufficiently docile and compliant
Option 3 listen to those who fear, acknowledge that fear, and find ways to design society to remove that fear..hum...I don't know ...perhaps we could have ( this is radical sorry, but listening to the victims of fear it seems a viable solution ) perhaps we could have sex based rights to protect the privacy and dignity of all.

I just don't think society can function in fear especially as it is the minority who abuse.

Society has Safeguarding frameworks which identify risks & implement measures to reduce known risks. Of course risks can never be completely eradicated.
There are many & various Safeguards based on the recognition that a minority percentage (of predominantly but not exclusively) adult males are predatory abusers of particular risk to children & women.
Identifying the importance of re-establishing sex-based safeguards is not about 'living in fear' and denying or undermining Safeguards will always increase risk to those most vulnerable.

Also, don't most leisure centres, pools etc provide lockable changing booths (some family ones too) if you would prefer to change in private? Maybe that's the way we need to go.

The vast majority of swimming pool sexual assaults take place in mixed-sex changing villages. I don't have time to find the reference here, but search the feminist board for a link to the study.

Since becoming aware of the prevalence of spy cameras I feel very uncomfortable about using mixed-sex changing booths and mixed-sex self-contained cubicle toilets.

I'm familiar with safeguarding as it's the main part of my job and if course we need to put it into place wherever possible. If private cubicles are not the answer then what can we do?

I think a significant part of the problem is that many people believe that all the Transwomen have had surgery
If the general populace understood that people like Caitlin my kids call me dad Jenner still has male genitalia
it might change the debate and make more people realise why safeguarding is such an issue.

See, the real point is that transwomen have absolutely no desire for sex segregated spaces to be abolished, and for both sexes to get naked, sleep, and receive intimate care in completely mixed environments. It’s very specific. Males who identify as trans don’t want mixed spaces. They want unfettered access to women’s spaces. Which (completely coincidentally) is what a whole lot of pervy blokes want.
So, do males have an inherent right to access naked and vulnerable females? Or not?
I have zero truck with attempting to categorize subsets of males. Do males belong in female sex segregated spaces? Should sex segregated spaces exist?
I mean, no problem, right? Who gives a fuck about women with a history of abuse, women with cultural or religious needs, teenage girls going through that point where they have to hide behind a towel even in a female only space? They can just stay at home. Why sex segregate? How prudish. Get everyone in together and stop being so exclusionary. Poor men, not being allowed access to naked women. How unkind.

I'm familiar with safeguarding as it's the main part of my job
And yet your advice to a young girl who sees a penis in a place they believed to be women-only would be 'oh, they consider themselves to be trans'?!
Jesus.

release I’d much rather private cubicles

But as long as we don’t have those, it sounds like you’re not okay with single sex spaces and I don’t understand why. Especially as you say you’re familiar with safeguarding. What’s wrong with the systems we have had working well for years now?

And what about places like prisons where cubicles aren’t the issue?

Part of the answer to that question about what is the answer has to be respect for others.

Well designed fully private facilities would be an answer. What people seem to me to be saying is that you rarely get well designed fully private facilities. Probably because it's a lot more expensive than open plan areas

So i would suggest greater provision of well designed private facilities to augment the current single sex set up. Would that work for you also?

I'm familiar with safeguarding as it's the main part of my job and if course we need to put it into place wherever possible

Then its bizarre that you seem not to recognise the basis for single sex intimate spaces.

We dont 'put safeguarding into place where possible' this isnt how Safeguarding frameworks work.

release, you are responsible for safeguarding in your job?!!!!!!!! I am even more worried now that you've admitted it's not just your own daughters who are left without any boundaries, especially as you've said you have been abused yourself.

Of course third spaces are the way forward. Women are perfectly happy for single sex spaces for men, women and a third space for those who cannot or will not use the space that is correct for their sex. Could you describe the people who don't want to use third spaces or will you, yet again, ignore my questions?

You seem to be in denial on so many levels and to think that you are responsible for 'safeguarding' other vulnerable people makes me shudder with fear for them.

@releasethehounds 90% of sexual assaults in leisure centres happen in mixed sex changing facilities, despite only a third of such facilities being mixed sex. What that means is that women and girls exist today who have been raped and sexually assaulted who would not have been, had they had women only provision.

Some women have been raped in prisons and homelessness shelters by transwomen. They exist. There are convictions. It's not a theoretical risk - it has happened. Why is that not seen as important?

I just don't think society can function in fear especially as it is the minority who abuse.

No DBS checks on anyone working with kids? No teaching children that their bodies are their own? No PANTS campaigns? Women shouldn't think twice before accepting lifts from strange men, and children should wander off with any man who asks them to? All based on fear of harm. Fear stops us from jumping from high bridges without a bungy cord attached. Fear is an evolutionary response, and in proportion, it's an essential one.

Women very sensibly live in less fear when we have single sex provision. If fear reduction is the aim, then that's another argument in favour - not against.

Midge on the button! It's about having the choice to privacy and the best facilities would allow for that. Down to money and government spend again.

Oh and I'm not against single sex spaces, particularly in hospital wards where patients are vulnerable, but where would transpeople be advised to go?

So lets be lead by an objective view of evidence, not fear and prejudice.

Or how about we're led by respect for females as equal humans with a right to define themselves as a sex class and respect their spaces as needed by them instead of available to any males that feel so entitled. Because, you know, respecting people's identity, consent and boundaries applies to females too, they're not a subspecies.

And then provide additional resources for males who need something different to or additional from what has traditionally been provided.

Support humans. The patronising, paternalistic tone is oh so familiar and grating, because it just shows how utterly irrelevant and stupid females are seen as, and how naughty they are perceived as being when they won't do as they are told by their betters.

Fuck that.

Add spaces. Add all the spaces. Gold plate them if you want to. I'm all for meeting all people's needs. Not bullying, nagging, coercing and 'reasoning' some people into giving up their needs and being excluded so that other people can be happy.

Anyone who understands & is committed to Safeguarding will recognise the truth & implications of this statement:

LangCleg wrote Thu 21-Feb-19

"How did the scandal of TV entertainers grooming and exploiting children get so bad before anything was done?

How did the scandal of Catholic priests grooming and exploiting children get so bad before anything was done?

How did the scandal of on-street gangs grooming and exploiting children get so bad before anything was done?

Because if you create a sacred caste of any group and silence anyone asking questions about individuals on behalf of the sacred caste, abusers will see, infiltrate, and groom and exploit children. That''s how."

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3512177-Julia-Long-asking-Munro-Bergdorf-about-child-exploitation?pg=12

Still just jaw dropped at the arrogance of someone telling women 'now lets look objectively at the evidence' meaning (and then I'll tell you what you're allowed to worry your little heads about and what you need to just get over.)

Honestly. Do you really expect to get a positive response?

And how often have you told anyone trans to 'just get over' their feelings or wishes about dignity, privacy and spaces? The misogyny is so blatant its jaw dropping.