Transinclusive feminists, please help me understand.

[thinkingaboutLangCleg]

Genuine question. I recognise that some men suffer from gender dysphoria or truly believe they were meant to be women, and some want to live out their fantasies. So I understand why they want access to women’s single-sex spaces and facilities, to validate themselves.

I understand why they want language and culture changed to include them in the category of women.

Some men will take advantage for personal gain (eg taking ‘women’s officer’ roles or sports prizes), or to harass women and girls in intimate spaces eg toilets, or to be transferred from a male to a female prison. Women and girls lose out, obviously, with no corresponding gains to compensate.

I can understand that women who aren’t feminists may not be concerned about the effects on women and girls.

But how does a feminist reconcile her feminism — centring women’s rights and needs, including the right to privacy and safety —with supporting transwomen’s actions that necessarily impinge on these?

This is a genuine question, as I wonder if I’m missing or misunderstanding something.

It's clearly nonsense. Until a few years ago, there was no push for all males with a self declared identity as a woman to use women's facilities. Some transsexuals, yes.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

I'm aware of one incident.

Come now, you're usually so well informed about matters GC!

Jj KNOWs everything. jj monitors libfem twitter for total submission.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

It's clearly nonsense. Until a few years ago, there was no push for all males with a self declared identity as a woman to use women's facilities. Some transsexuals, yes.

I'm blaming it on the D,&I people hired to shut up whiners but with no actual productive purpose in society.

GAMPs is an acronym that's new to me, but the behaviour I'm familiar with.

I don't class it as part of the hetero/homo/bi system; it looks more like (and I base this on my understanding of agp courtesy of my ex) an obsessive predilection for particular heavily-sexualised body parts - the more the merrier! It's basically tacking on the bits that the brain has filed under =sexytimes.

They still fit under homo/hetero/bi, with the reminder that having a sexual orientation doesn't mean you fancy everyone of that sex class.

Some of these gamps will prefer a medley of sex organs on a female body, some will prefer it on a male body, and some won't mind either way.

Similar to those on MN who shut down any discussion they disagree with. Patriarchy at its finest.

@Joswis

Similar to those on MN who shut down any discussion they disagree with. Patriarchy at its finest.

You are having a larf if you think discussion is shut down here.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Indeed, in women's spaces overall. 5 incidents, on a planet of 7 billion people and a timespan of decades.

I don't accept that all MTF trans people have been using female spaces at will for decades, sorry. Maybe a few who pass, and so few do.

They really have. As someone whose spent my life usually using male toilets I can't ever remember seeing a trans women in there. Where do you think people were going?

@Butterer

I'm aware of some which state trans woman inclusive but trans man exclusive policies for service users - is this partly funding driven? I do wonder whether it was suggested and fully supported by non trans/not nb women service users.

I by no means want to stop trans people accessing refuges, but I don't think it's safe for traumatized women to HAVE to be helped alongside males - I'd rather have an option of single sex for women and trans men AND services for men and trans women, or separate trans specific services

OR/AND (if there's still space and money) a space for whoever wants to use it if they call themselves a woman, and/or dont mind who else does in shared space (which is the most common set up).

If wishes were horses...

Totally.

Stonewall do supported housing for LGBT youth, so it wouldn’t be much of a stretch for them to expand into specialist domestic violence services and support after sexual violence services. Presumably this would result in more effective, tailored support for those accessing it, rather than trying to shoehorn transwomen into the provision for female people? L’s and female B’s and T’s would be able to pick from VAWG or LGBT provision and Gs and male B’s would have refuge options for the first time. If transwomen are statistically more likely to experience male violence than other males then they would benefit from provision that they don’t have to queue up with straight female people to access, (seeing as there aren’t enough places for everyone who presently needs it and the vast majority of women in refuge are escaping heterosexual relationships because a) male violence and b) heterosexuals are the majority)

More provision for all vulnerable groups is absolutely something I support.

I cant believe one would assume the gender of all those in said mens loos.

Some could have been very early on in their transition, so how would you know there were no transwomen?

Joswis

Have you really convinced yourself that the women here talk under the patriarchy?

Every thing said is what men want us to say?
None of us have ever done anything to make a difference to women's lives?

Joswis, I get this, in that it's a political no no to actually want women to win , because socialism doesn't like winning. However I live in a capitalist world where your subservience drags women down. You are promoting the idea that we don't stand up,we sit down and take it.

No from me.

Still waiting for evidence that transwomen are not as likely as other males to be sex offenders or violent criminals?

Betty thanks for sharing that medium article - I agree entirely with Duncan and it's lovely to see it so clearly expressed!

I think he missed one angle though, which I struggle with and suspect most people don't. He says that when his sexuality clocks something as not unambiguously male, it's very much a no thanks. When mine clocks myself as unambiguously female it does that.

Which sounds like a sort of negative-arousal erotic target location error.

Most interesting.

Stonewall do supported housing for LGBT youth, so it wouldn’t be much of a stretch for them to expand into specialist domestic violence services and support after sexual violence services.

You're thinking of Stonewall Housing, its a different, and much smaller organisation.

They really have. As someone whose spent my life usually using male toilets I can't ever remember seeing a trans women in there. Where do you think people were going?

You can make your assertion that all these people were using women's spaces, and I'll feel free to trust my own experience as a woman using these facilities all over the world for decades.

@jj1968

Stonewall do supported housing for LGBT youth, so it wouldn’t be much of a stretch for them to expand into specialist domestic violence services and support after sexual violence services.

You're thinking of Stonewall Housing, its a different, and much smaller organisation.

Well, Stonewall U.K. have plenty of dosh and Stonewall Housing have relevant experience so why not campaign for LGBT refuges using that as the start point? Encourage the big rich one to fund the little, materially useful one.

Women had to build their own provision from the ground up, so this is a much better start point. This fantastic documentary charts the work of British women who made it all happen. Lots to learn from:

Loads to catch up on again!

I'm a bit taken aback at the idea that it's 'quaint' to recognise that female biology is at the root of our oppression, globally and as far back as anyone knows, and still causing us all sorts of massive problems around the world.

The conversation here is so sanitised.

Is it really 'quaint' to understand why cunty sorts of people have been picked to do stuff like. Be bought and sold as literal sex slaves by Isis. Be imprisoned due to miscarrying in El Salvador. Be married off young and die in childbirth as their body is too young. And on and on and on.

But no this and everything else is 'essentialist'.

Let's be clear. Certain people do not give 2 single fucks about this. They really don't.

This intellectual wanking over words and chromosomes and straw men and what the fuck else. These people don't give a toss about women or girls. They really really don't. At the bottom of this is that fact. And yet we sit here being nice and polite and trying to engage and what have you.

I suppose for the lurkers :)

Well, Stonewall U.K. have plenty of dosh and Stonewall Housing have relevant experience so why not campaign for LGBT refuges using that as the start point? Encourage the big rich one to fund the little, materially useful one.

Great idea. Put that money to good use for their community rather than advocating to remove the rights of others to privacy and dignity and a suitable environment conducive to recovery from trauma.

@Butterer

^ unless you have literally spent your entire life in every mens toilet in Britain witbessing who does and doesn't use them, I don't know that that your experience is necessarily universal - just that it's your own experience.

In this case I question using it as evidence of the generalisation that all trans women go in the womens loos and it's always been accepted or unnoticed/trans women don't use men's toilets.

Lesbian and bisexual women are already accommodated within the VAWG sector, and gay men could use one of the very few male only refuges.

The problem is it's unlikely more than a handful of trans women a year need a refuge, so it would be very difficult to establish one that was trans only as it wouldn't attract enough rent payments to be viable under the current system. Any additional funding would be likely to be perceived to come from the VAWG budget, as would staff, who are a pretty vital resource, not many people can or want to do this kind of work. So the women's sector by and large has been opposed to it. They think they can manage trans inclusion, and in fact have been doing for many years. Given the extensive risk assessment processes and the fact the refuge sector contains a range of provision, including self contained units, then they don't seem to feel it is a problem.

I suppose for the lurkers :)

Always.

Have you really convinced yourself that the women here talk under the patriarchy?

Every thing said is what men want us to say?

Clearly Joswis skipped the multiple pages on this very thread where male people have attempted to take over and redirect the conversation because us bloody awkward women keep talking about the wrong things (daring to centre ourselves and our sisters, mostly ✊🏻)

@Ereshkigalangcleg

It's clearly nonsense. Until a few years ago, there was no push for all males with a self declared identity as a woman to use women's facilities. Some transsexuals, yes.

How do you think 'transsexuals' used to identify if not by self identification?