Help Please - I need the impossible - a group friendly sum up of our current situation

[gardenbird48]

I wouldn't normally ask but I am seeing some friends tonight (in a covid appropriate way) and there is the possibility that one might chuck out a question 'so bird, what is all this stuff you've been posting on your facebook?'

I am rubbish at on the spot responses so I have been trying to work out what to say for days now. I had a disastrous conversation with some of the people who will be present some time ago so I know there will be an intake of breath and they will be praying for me to not ruin the evening.

If anyone is interested enough to ask me in front of the group, I just want to give a quick one-line (haha) that would enable me to offer to send them some info and then smoothly move on and say something along the lines of 'this is a huge conversation for another time'.

The question is - should I break it down to something that could directly affect them ie. allowing self-id males into hospital wards or be more general but risk them thinking I've gone bonkers over lockdown and have got into conspiracy theories because really the scale of this thing really does sound unbelievable until you start seeing things happening in real time.

Help please.

I'd say 'I'm really worried about the blind assumption that self identification of gender is progressive and should be accepted by all institutions. Many people have highlighted how this is harmful to women's sex based rights but because its women's rights they are at the bottom of the pile as usual. (for example, women have been sexually assaulted in prison by self identifying transwomen, girls have lost out on medals and sports scholarships because they are beaten by transwomen, women who challenge these issues are at the same time in receipt of threatening language, memes and doxxing, and accused of literal violence.) We should be worried when we are afraid to discuss something and that's why I have chosen to post about these issues.

@EyesOpening

What about mentioning the fully intact, non gender dysphoric but self IDed GRC holding inmate in the women’s prison, who has professed their desire to rape women? Go into prison for not being able to pay your TV license, come out a rape victim

And the fact that when these sex offenders are released, places like M&S invite everyone to use the changing rooms that reflect their preferred gender identity. How do your friends feel about sharing Youth Hostel women’s dorms, women’s 2-berth train sleeper carriages with these male-bodied female-identified transwomen? Remember, “acceptance without exception” (Stonewall): all trans identities are valid. Are your friends happy for their teenaged daughters to bunk down with them, even if they are A-OK with it? Do they feel quite as confident letting their younger children go to the women’s toilets (or gender neutral ones) unaccompanied? If not, why? You quite quickly start to see why gender-based or gender neutral facilities are a problem when you are confronted by real world examples. Before we get someone bellyaching about NATWALT, clearly some of them are & the prison system is taking their claims at face value and accommodating them in the women’s estate, so its not much of a stretch to assume that they will be afforded the same privileges by our captured public sector bodies and private sector companies once they leave prison.

thank you for that everyone - it is really good to see those top level snap summaries - sometimes I find that I get so far down the rabbit hole that it is hard to look at it with fresh eyes.

Only some of the group were involved in the previous conversation and I was anticipating one of the others bringing it up.

Learning from some of the pitfalls of the previous conversation I realised that it needs to be stuff that is directly relevant otherwise it's 'why are you bothered about women in prison?' 'you don't play sport so why are you worried' etc - not necessarily implying that no one should worry about it but why was I personally so concerned about it (if that makes sense) as it is so far removed from my life.

Obviously that doesn't address the issue that someone needs to worry about it and speak for women with no voice - but I can see how a friend would struggle to understand why I have suddenly become an advocate for safety in women's prisons for eg. when I am unlikely to go to prison (fingers crossed) and don't know anyone personally involved.

Hospitals are good but then we also get a fairly small statistical likelihood of it actually happening (hopefully - on an individual basis, we don't tend to go to hospital very much) which then puts it in the realms of 'bad and unusual things happen all the time, so why are you disproportionately worried about that' to which I realised that my response would be 'yes, but normally if bad things happen, the authorities try and prevent them happening again, they don't legislate to make them more likely to happen'.

thank you very much for your contributions - I wonder if a thread like this l as many people might be useful to others who navigate social situations and it is very helpful to have a few salient points up your sleeve.

Part of the challenge is getting the message across that this isn't just a load of random bad and weird things happening to people who potentially could have avoided it if they didn't put themselves in the public domain and say things that people took a dislike to but good will out in the end and the government will never let anything really bad or stupid happen to us and of course if it was really happening it would be all over the media and commentators would be telling us what a scandal it is.

Because people generally trust the government and people in authority (like the police and the NHS) would have our best interests at heart and the media call out bad stuff. Sadly, as I said on another thread, my world view has changed drastically over the last few months and I have realised that not all people in charge are a) grown ups and b) don't generally have our (women's) best interests at heart :¬((

And after all that, it has been cancelled due to torrential rain but I will reread this thread from time to time to keep prepared next time it comes up. Thank you.

a big theme of the previous conversation was a lot of NAMALT and if they wanted to rape you they would do it anyway and not be stopped by the door to the women's toilets etc etc.

At least now I have some ready responses.

@gardenbird48

a big theme of the previous conversation was a lot of NAMALT and if they wanted to rape you they would do it anyway and not be stopped by the door to the women's toilets etc etc.

At least now I have some ready responses.

This is one of the responses that really gets my goat. My answer would be to ask if that's the case why any bother putting safeguards for anything are in place at all? Nothing will stop those with nefarious intentions who are determined enough, but if safeguards put just one of those people off then it's worth doing.

*why bother putting any...
Sorry, am on the Christmas sherry already!

If NAMALT then presumably all female changing rooms and other facilities should be made mixed sex with immediate effect.

If not, why not...

If not all teachers/nursery workers/carers are “like that”, no need for safeguarding at all, presumably?

Anyone with no nefarious intent doesn’t raise an eyebrow at any safeguarding measures.

a big theme of the previous conversation was a lot of NAMALT and if they wanted to rape you they would do it anyway and not be stopped by the door to the women's toilets etc etc

There are two answers to that, in my view:

1. accepting that if a man says he's a woman we have to believe him, even if he doesn't change anything about his presentation, means that women can't challenge men in their single-sex spaces, because we don't know if they're men or transwomen.

More combative:
2) How many rapes or attacks on women by non-women in single-sex spaces are acceptable? ! per day? 1 per week? What's your threshold for this being a problem we have to do something about?

@gardenbird48

a big theme of the previous conversation was a lot of NAMALT and if they wanted to rape you they would do it anyway and not be stopped by the door to the women's toilets etc etc.

At least now I have some ready responses.

I also hear the NAMALT response. Almost all males are good, almost all TW are good, almost all females are good, almost all sports coaches are good, almost all priests are good. However, the predatory males are good at seeing loopholes in systems and safeguards that have been put in place because eg. With priests, assuming that they are all good and that noone would ever go through seminary and be a risk to children left a lot of young people exposed to abuse. And unfortunately, "natal" males have a higher risk of sexually assaulting than "natal" females.

They would come in anyway? Maybe. But if it is law that there isn't even a need to transition in any way to change your legal sex, and it is the law that you cannot offend anyone by even checking; if someone with a massive beard comes in you won't even be able to say "sorry this is the ladies", without fear of them reporting you to the police. You might as well have mixed sex toilets.

Maybe not such a problem with toilets, but mix sexed open-plan changing rooms? Mix sexed prisons/ hostels/ domestic violence shelters. Maybe many people wouldn't mind these things being mixed sex, but if you make it so that you can't even ask for single sex spaces, you risk isolating and marginalising those who have experienced sexual abuse, who are from more conservative cultures (eg. The refugee Somali community where I live) etc. Ultimately the view is an acknowledgement that there is a conflict of rights, and how best to manage that.

*and by checking, I mean asking- if someone has a beard- do you know that this is the ladies?

The "they'll come in anyway" makes me think: they'll always be people who will speed no matter what the speed limit. But we still have speed limits, as most people will follow the social etiquette.

The main reason I started caring about this issue is because I have a daughter who often gets accused by (random strangers) of "not being very girly". She's 3. I didn't want a school teaching her that the things that she likes to do were "boy's games/ toys" etc. Fortunately it looks like the school teaching in this area has been adapted to remove stereotypes (thanks TT), but I care about her perception of herself and allowing her to celebrate being a girl who likes what she likes and not feel any need to put herself inside a box.

Simple facts :1. Trans women who do not have genital surgery and have fully functioning penis genitalia

1. Not the same as intersex ( or disorders of sexual development

3 clarify what is meant by trans man and trans woman which is often at odds with what a lot of terms they describe with

Simple practical examples : right to same sex intimate exams for rape victims, reference to loos changing rooms shelters and prisons or if they are into sport whether it would be fair competition.

Further to my previous reply. My best at getting a decent reaction and people thinking, only works if they have a brother, son, very close make relative not husband.

So self id means that if your brother decided to rock up to the ladies change for swimming, your ok getting naked next to him yeah?
If they say yes (wtf it does happen) say so it's ok for me to get naked with him in the same room? So it's ok for your niece/daughter/mum to get naked in the same room?
There are no outs, he either is a woman because he says so, or you are transphobic. There is no, well he wouldnt, because we aren't only talking about him. It's any man, anywhere.

Useful thread, like the OP I'm not very good at speaking when I'm 'on the spot' so it's good to have a few solid points to make. I think it's always worth saying that transwomen were born male and identify as women - I originally thought they were women who were trans, ie now identify as men so I was fine with 'transwomen are women'! Also as others have said, emphasising that the vast majority of trans women have fully intact and functioning male bodies.

@malloo

Useful thread, like the OP I'm not very good at speaking when I'm 'on the spot' so it's good to have a few solid points to make. I think it's always worth saying that transwomen were born male and identify as women - I originally thought they were women who were trans, ie now identify as men so I was fine with 'transwomen are women'! Also as others have said, emphasising that the vast majority of trans women have fully intact and functioning male bodies.

I think that’s absolutely right- most people assume a transwoman is someone who has had some kind of surgery, not someone who remains completely intact as a male and identifies as a woman half the week and a man the other half, or someone who remains and looks completely male but just states that they are not.

Re: NAMALT. I always think you could say the same about things like DBS checks. But we wouldn't advocate getting rid of them. Clearly marked boundaries have a significance, we would never approve a free-for-all just because some will always get round it.