We don't ban discussions about AGP - but suggestions that it's the main motivation for transition does not sit within our guidelines.
It is, however uncomfortable, a matter of fact that for some TW it is the motivation for transition. Debbie Hayton, who is a MNetter and has engaged on the boards many times to share their views as (in their own chosen terms for themselves) a transsexual male, has explained that this is how they view their motivation for transition.
So we have two points here. Yes, there are those very keen to prevent AGP being mentioned or discussed at all in threads and to report them for deletion quickly. I can well understand this is an uncomfortable aspect to face. But there are two things relevant:
- When we're told we must listen to trans voices (which we would not mind if there was reciprocal listening to women's voices and women's voices given equal airtime when laws and policies were being drafted and advised on) are we going to listen to Debbie and to other people who are trans, define themselves as male and specifically talk about AGP using those terms to describe their experiences? Or are they the 'wrong' kind of trans whose voices mustn't be heard either and whose experiences and evidence should be suppressed? Essentially is there an actual value of 'listening' to voices and lived experiences, or is this a nice veneer over 'only one narrative is permitted and non compliant ones will be suppressed and kept out of public knowledge as much as possible'?
and 2) On a women's rights board, it is absolutely appropriate for women to be discussing should they be compelled to provide non consensual participation in any male person's sexual experience if they wish to use a single sex space where they are in a state of undress and vulnerability?
It always comes back to: there is no way to separate the many different motives and behaviours out to gatekeep who may enter a single sex space: either access is granted to all male people or none. And so to discuss the range of motives and the impact upon female people is absolutely relevant on a board focused on women's rights, women's needs, women's voices and women's issues. This is cannot be all about trans people; women have an equal if not larger stake in this because its about what women must lose in order for trans people to gain wanted rights.
I will mention again for the record: even if it was possible to place someone on the door of every single sex space for women with either Layla Moran to check their soul, or someone to do a Vulcan mind meld to check intentions, there are still females who would be excluded from the only space available to them in order for male people to be able to have their preferred choice of spaces .
That is exclusion, not inclusion. It prioritises one sex class over another. It restricts women's access to public spaces, resources and services, particularly impacting upon vulnerable women often with other protected characteristics. This is not acceptable.