Kier shows his colours

[averylongtimeago]

From Facebook, I guess he has picked a side.
51% of the population just don't count.

@longestlurkerever

I don't think it's as straightforward as that because I think the supreme court see part of the protection of the characteristic as being a right to have your gender recognised. Lady Hale: . “We lead women’s lives: we have no choice”. Thus has the Chief Justice of Canada, the Rt Hon Beverley McLachlin, summed up the basic truth that women and men do indeed lead different lives. How much of this is down to unquestionable biological differences, how much to social conditioning, and how much to other people’s views of what it means to be a woman or a man, is all debateable and the accepted wisdom is perpetually changing. But what does not change is the importance, even the centrality, of gender in any individual’s sense of self. Over the centuries many people, but particularly women, have bitterly resented and fought against the roles which society has assigned to their gender. Genuine equality between the sexes is still a work in progress. But that does not mean that such women or men have not felt entirely confident that they are indeed a woman or a man. Gender dysphoria is something completely different - the overwhelming sense that one has been born into the wrong body, with the wrong anatomy and the wrong physiology. Those of us who, whatever our occasional frustrations with the expectations of society or our own biology, are nevertheless quite secure in the gender identities with which we were born, can scarcely begin to understand how it must be to grow up in the wrong body and then to go through the long and complex process of adapting that body to match the real self. But it does not take much imagination to understand that this is a deeply personal and private matter; that a person who has undergone gender reassignment will need the whole world to recognise and relate to her or to him in the reassigned gender; and will want to keep to an absolute minimum any unwanted disclosure of the history. This is not only because other people can be insensitive and even cruel; the evidence is that transphobic incidents are increasing and that transgender people experience high levels of anxiety about this. It is also because of their deep need to live successfully and peacefully in their reassigned gender, something which non-transgender people can take for granted."

I'm not sure why you have posted the first paragraph from here:

www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2017/72.html

That is the opinion of Lady Hale (and the four men who agreed with her). Is it also written into law somewhere?

It's quite clear from this quote that she thinks that transgenderism is all to do with a mismatch between the mind and the body, so she doesn't seem to be a believer in the ladypenis, so she possibly hasn't caught up with the modern transgender movement.

She also talks about 'gender identity'. If 'gender identity' is to become enshrined in law, I would like to see a clear and objective definition of what it is and why we should all have one.

But it does not take much imagination to understand that this is a deeply personal and private matter; that a person who has undergone gender reassignment will need the whole world to recognise and relate to her or to him in the reassigned gender; and will want to keep
to an absolute minimum any unwanted disclosure of the history. This is not only because other people can be insensitive and even cruel; the evidence is that transphobic incidents are increasing and that transgender people experience high levels of anxiety about this. It is also because of their deep need to live successfully and peacefully in their reassigned gender, something which non-transgender people can take for granted.

evidence of actual transphobia (rather than being offended and recording it in the Hate Crime database)? Many transsexuals I have been following report not experiencing any adverse behaviour?

I'm afraid I can't really work out what point you are making, please could you sum up for me? Many people's experience of life has challenges so is this just another's experience of life challenges?

For me it boils down to this - what do you recommend that I tell my teenage daughter to do when she enters the toilets and a man is in there? How does she decide in an instant if he is a predator or a non-predatory transwoman? Or does she wait to find out??

It's the unanimous judgment of the supreme court. That makes it law in a common law system. What it doesn't say is whether there are any qualifications to that right - the equalities act doesn't totally prohibit discrimination. I think that is where fruitful discussion can lie

a non-predatory transwoman who has chosen not to transition their appearance before I get deleted.

Gender dysphoria is something completely different - the overwhelming sense that
one has been born into the wrong body, with the wrong anatomy and the wrong
physiology. Those of us who, whatever our occasional frustrations with the
expectations of society or our own biology, are nevertheless quite secure in the
gender identities with which we were born, can scarcely begin to understand how it
must be to grow up in the wrong body and then to go through the long and complex
process of adapting that body to match the real self."

I used to believe this too, and the reality is that this viewpoint is now really out of date - this hasn't been the mainstream view since around 2010. Firstly, the concept of 'born into the wrong body' has now been thoroughly debunked and disowned by trans activists - even Mermaids, the charity for supposed trans children, recently came out and said that no one is 'born in the wrong body' in any meaningful sense.

Secondly, your analysis relies very heavily on seeing transgenderism as a mental condition of which gender dysphoria is the main, central component. To be trans is to have crippling dysphoria and a sense that one's body is wrong. But again, this view is out of date and also regarded by many to be actively transphobic. There is a massive push by Stonewall and even the world health organisation to detach transness from gender dysphoria, so dysphoria is neither necessary nor sufficient for being trans. The current most popular idea is that being trans is nothing to do with a condition, or an illness, but is all about an identity - in some cases, a consciously chosen identity (see for example the work of Andrea Chu who admits they transitioned mostly for sexual purposes, but sees this as a bold, autonomous choice.)

Thirdly, even 'dysphoria' has changed. It used to be that gender dysphoria necessitated, in particular, surgery to alter the genitals. The dysphoria stemmed from being a woman with male parts, which was obviously deeply distressing, and so the male parts had to go. But now genital surgery is incredibly rare among trans people. Most trans women keep their penises and are perfectly happy with them - the current rhetoric is to say that the penis is a female body part, because it's attached to a female. Most gender confirming surgeries are now facial, or breast implants. In fact the Guardian last week published an article about facial feminisation surgery admitting that this should be now regarded as THE gender conforming surgery as it is increasingly becoming the most popular and only surgery that trans women have.

Ultimately, this entire story that there is a real womanly self trapped in a beastly male shell is now totally rejected by mainstream transactivism. Now they don't 'alter the body to match the real self'. `Rather, the real self is whatever they say it is and society has to adjust accordingly. So if I go on a dating site for women and I see a young man with stubble and some eyeliner, I must accept him as a woman if he says he's one.

I'd also like to push back a bit that women are 'secure' in our gender identities. Ultimately our gender identity is something that is externally imposed on us, that causes a great deal of strife and anxiety, and represses us from being our real selves. It's a big glib to say that we only 'occasionally' get frustrated with gendered expectations. I for one am deeply discontent with the 'gender identity' that has been thrust on me, and this is why I reject gender in all its forms. The solution is not for me to transition to try to simulate a man - the solution is to change society so women are seen as fully human as men. I'm not a fan of this constant rhetoric that trans people's struggles are the absolute apex of human suffering and women don't have it so bad because we are nevertheless "content" with our gender.

I agree that safe spaces are needed in some contexts

Which particular safe spaces do you mean? Prisons? Too late. School toilets? Too late. Heslth care (like cervical smear) too late

I agree that there is something quite problematic about the narrative that if one doesn't fit a particular gender norm then one must be trans, and any attempt to change that perception must be transphobic. I do have a lot of concerns about treatment and the lack of proper scrutiny and debate about that
Please do expand on this, I'm curious what you think may be problematic.

I do though think that in many instances an inclusive definition of woman can coexist with women's rights, and that not to explore what this territory is is "anti trans" in that it fundamentally denies the experience of gender dysphoria

Please tell me what definition includes trans. I'm not trying to be funny, women have long asked for a simple way to include trans and women that doesn't leave women worse off. So if you have the answer this board can go back to very dry (well over my head) topics.

There is imo space for discussion and debate about what the respective needs are and where the balance of harms lies. I don't always think this board fosters that discussion
You first, you start the discussion about whatever aspect you want. If we reply then you can tell us how we are wrong or right, if we dont reply then that says something too.

Thirdly, even 'dysphoria' has changed. It used to be that gender dysphoria necessitated, in particular, surgery to alter the genitals. The dysphoria stemmed from being a woman with male parts, which was obviously deeply distressing, and so the male parts had to go. But now genital surgery is incredibly rare among trans people. Most trans women keep their penises and are perfectly happy with them

Which is why gender dysphoria has moved from something that used to be a medical diagnosis to something looking more like a self-declared identity and has effectively split conceptually to include something called "gender euphoria".

If you've spent enough time reading about this issue eventually you realise that you need to take seriously what many trans activists are saying and that the only qualification required for someone to be trans, and thus to be a transwoman or a transman, is for them to say "I am a woman/I am a man/I am trans". Once they say those words, then, according to many, they must have complete freedom to access all opposite sex single sex spaces. All this talk about gender dysphoria, presentation, and medical interventions is a distraction.

I agree with a lot of what you say. I was quoting the supreme court, in answer to a specific question about what the law requires here, rather than necessarily my own views on the matter. My intention was only to say that none of this is easy imo, there are overlapping rights at play and issues of gender and sex are interlinked.

longestlurkerever

It wasn't clear from the way you wrote that post that it was just a c&p of the judgment. I suspected that you had copied and pasted (from the formatting of your post and the slightly odd, stilted language), so I did a search for the original document and posted the link that you could have posted.

But that judgment shows just how out of touch the lawmakers are regarding transgenderism. They're still back in 2004 when a law had to be made to allow a marriage between two men, one of whom had had surgery to make himself resemble a woman.

All the talk of wrong bodies and gender dysphoria is hopelessly out of date now, when a man is a woman if he says he is (despite the stubble and the penis).

hi longestlurker, thanks for sticking around - it is useful when people with opposing points speak up - there isn't always enthusiatic agreement but at least useful dialogue (which is so sadly lacking elsewhere).

I hear what you are saying re. 'overlapping rights' - what are your thoughts on my question?

What do you recommend that I tell my teenage daughter to do when she enters the toilets and a man is in there? How does she judge in that instant if he is a predator or a non-predatory transwoman who has decided not to transition their appearance?

I'm not quite sure of the point that you are making

The point I was making is because the comparitor was wrong.

My intention was only to say that none of this is easy imo, there are overlapping rights at play and issues of gender and sex are interlinked.

I suppose many here have already gone through the stage of thinking it's not easy and out of the other side. It is and should be easy to apply the sex exemptions in the Equality Act. The "overlapping rights" playbook can actually simply be described as the original intention of sex exemptions being interpreted as mixed sex through the deliberate obfuscation with gender identity.

Long term posters here have absolute clarity on this which is why it seems like the board does not foster discussion.

The discussion in general has moved on to how we regain the exemptions, and so this may be interpreted as one view. You would be right. We are not operating in stasis. We are in the middle of a move to shift things back to female oriented policy.
The debate about whether we should or shouldn't is over: we are.

The legal actions that are being supported financially by women and men both here and elsewhere are a major indicator of where the debate is. The direction of travel is completely clear if you familiarise yourself with them.

Interesting how trans people = transwomen in this context (eschewing surgery). We know that a great many young transmen are in fact undergoing double mastectomies. I know that's not technically genital surgery but it's pretty radical.

gardenbird thank you. And thank you to others who have patiently gone over points that I know are tedious to go over and over. I took issue with some of the posts yesterday which seemed to belittle or deny rights, and i should have been clearer about which ones.

I could have posted a link to the judgment yes but it was specifically that paragraph i thought was relevant. I thought I was clear i was quoting the supreme court and lady Hale but my cut and paste skills are a bit rubbish on my phone.

Gardenbird the truth is I don't know what you should tell your daughter. I don't personally view loos as safe spaces in that way - that particular issue seems more one of privacy than safe spaces such as a women's refuge and I suppose I'd tell my daughter to use the same judgment as she'd use about any situation where she felt someone could pose a threat to her - in the street, say, but it's clear you do see it as a safe space issue and I don't want to say you are wrong to do so.

Thing is though it doesn't matter what someone's personal opinion of what counts as a safe space. If something is segregated as men/women its reasonable to assume that is the case

You cant put the onus on a chikd/teen to assess a situation like that, its all very well telling them to leave the situation but freezing is a perfectly natural response .

Great post Escapeplanning (and appropriate name for this part of the topic) - I do feel that we have thoroughly examined the arguments and have achieved clarity.

Gardenbird the truth is I don't know what you should tell your daughter. I don't personally view loos as safe spaces in that way - that particular issue seems more one of privacy than safe spaces such as a women's refuge and I suppose I'd tell my daughter to use the same judgment as she'd use about any situation where she felt someone could pose a threat to her - in the street, say, but it's clear you do see it as a safe space issue and I don't want to say you are wrong to do so.

Thanks for your response Longestlurker. Obviously I don’t regard anywhere in public as 100% safe but I do need to be able to give my daughters fairly succinct and consistent rules to help them risk assess a situation that they may be walking into.

I need to give them a fairly general, top level guide with simple rules so that a) they find it easy to apply quickly in potentially stressful situation and b) so we refuge andclear you do see it as a safe space issue and I don't have to spend hours focusing on every possible permutation of male behaviour.
So: ‘DD 11 if you walk into an enclosed space like toilets and there is a man in there - get out quick and raise the alarm because a man shouldn’t be in the girls toilets.’ Sort of thing.

Not: ‘DD11, if you walk into the ladies and see a man in there, ignore him and carry on your business and keep an eye out for him attempting to corner you and block your exist because it may be a man who identifies as a woman and is no harm to you or it may be a man who is identifying as a woman in order to harm you or it may be a n MB an who just walked into the ladies because he saw you go in there in your own.

Remember, we are talking about a confined space with one exit.

We need basic rules that can be quickly used to make split second decisions (in some cases, I am not saying that this will happen every time but it can happen so we must prepare to avoid because the consequences of not avoiding can be bad and life changing if not life ending)

My DD14 has the kindest heart and worries about misgendering the competitors on Drag Race as RuPaul uses both he and she. She needs clear rules to help her react quickly if she is at risk (and help to avoid her freezing) because otherwise she would spend too much time worrying about the feelings of the male facing her and not enough time thinking about her personal safety.

We know these cases happen and are being made less avoidable by blurring the lines of social behaviour. Rapists do not go around with a tattoo on their forehead. Men are generally stronger than women and have a ready made weapon about their person.

When you have had children I think it awakes a fierce protective instinct (that I wish I’d been better at using for myself) that means I’d we perceive a threat to our children we will move mountains. The mountain is shifting.

How do you feel about unisex loos? We have some of those at work, with enclosed cubicles you can't see under. I suppose that's why I don't see it as a safe space - safe space is something that to me needs to exist in order for women to be safe. Sex segregated loos, I'm not so sure we need.

Btw I have daughters too. They're a bit younger than yours.

Sadly, people - especially women - are very skilled at judging a stranger's sex (not gender or sexual orientation, just plain old m/f sex) and intuitively pick up a thousand clues and cues in the blink of an eye without any intent except for our own safety in the case of women. Tiny children do it without being taught and as soon as they can talk coherently they are embarrassing their parents in public with pointed questions!

In light of that, it is virtually impossible for a imab person with a body shaped by testosterone to pass unremarked as a woman. And I think most trans people are hypersensitive to being clocked, even if nobody says anything.

I don't know what we're meant to do except pretend we haven't noticed! Trans people are people and they do it too, so expecting everyone to politely collude in not noticing - or concealing the subtle signs that they've noticed - is pretty pointless, isn't it?

Sex segregated loos, I'm not so sure we need.

Unisex loos are supposed to be self contained rooms, floor to ceiling with sink inside. They're frequently just the women's multi cubicle open facilities with a new sign.

There are women mostly from vulnerable groups who cannot use mixed sex spaces full stop: many women are privileged enough not to mind that much or see the problem and I'm very pleased for them that their circumstances have been that safe and that fortunate. But we need to plan for all women, including those with the disabilities, trauma, cultures and faiths and other reasons who often have much less confidence and much less voice, and who will just lose access to any public toilet so that male people can have take their full preferred choice in the moment from all the available ones.

The obvious solution is to add more. Addition not subtraction, so all needs are met and no one loses. Single sex womens, men can fight for single sex mens if they want it, mixed sex gender neutral which can be unisex whole rooms. Put the requirement into law for all new builds and conversion of existing as with disabled loos, the government organise a couple of years of grants, appoint LA officers to go around and harass to make it happen, the whopping charities with their huge pockets can help, in about 3 years the job's a goodun nationally. I'd campaign gladly for that.

But that isn't what it's about. It's not about wanting accessible spaces for all. It's about being in a female space with females and females either accept this or are punished for their intransigence by exclusion. And that is wrong. It's morally, ethically wrong, it is not inclusion and it's deeply sexist and prejudiced in many ways.

I believe no one should have to use a space where they feel unsafe, vulnerable, or where their privacy and dignity is compromised when they are needing to undress. No one. And no one includes people born female.

I never understood why they didn't make the men's unisex and leave the women's toilet single sex.

Trans men and women wouldn't need to worry about passing, those virtuously claiming unisex doesn't bother them can put it into practice, and those who need or desire a single sex female lavatory would have it.

Theoretically, everyone should be happy.

@Tanith

I never understood why they didn't make the men's unisex and leave the women's toilet single sex.

Trans men and women wouldn't need to worry about passing, those virtuously claiming unisex doesn't bother them can put it into practice, and those who need or desire a single sex female lavatory would have it.

Theoretically, everyone should be happy.

It is not considered good enough to recategorise the men’s as unisex ie men plus men, who identify as women, plus natal women. They want women’s spaces. They want not only to be seen as but just as. Not all transwomen of course. TRAs want to erase women as a sex class. We become cis women, transwomen become just women. Therefore why on Earth would they reappropriate the men’s? Women should just “be kind” because they’re all the most vulnerable people in the world and unsafe in the men’s.

Unisex loos are supposed to be self contained rooms, floor to ceiling with sink inside. They're frequently just the women's multi cubicle open facilities with a new sign.

Not forgetting that even when they're floor to ceiling cubicles, men have previously hidden spy cameras in toilets and uploaded the footage of women using them to porn sites. So I don't feel entirely comfortable with floor to ceiling cubicles either if men have access to them, unfortunately.