I found this slightly reassuring - re girls IDing as boys

[QueenPeary]

Until recently despite engaging in the gender debate a lot and having a VERY full-on TRA family member, I hadn't had much direct experience of trans-IDing children.

But recently 2 of my DD's female classmates (year 6), one a close friend, have started IDing as boys, have boys names etc and this is being embraced by the school. My DD knows my GC views and we discuss it, but I have agreed to be respectful in using the right names etc (though I avoid using he pronouns).

Anyway - what I found reassuring is that both have discussed it with my DD and said they know they are not actually boys, and are not interested in taking drugs or having a penis. So despite the school being captured and going along with the full TWAW/TMAM etc, the kids (sometimes) aren't. They seem to realise it's an identity to try on, akin to a fashion or music tribe, and so maybe - I hope - there's a way in which girls (and maybe boys too) can go through this without it having to involve the long-term risks to their health.

I still don't think they are a "he" and I don't think it's going down a very healthy or feminist path to ID as a boy instead of just being a girl of whatever type you want to be. But I am kind of heartened that maybe this trend could default back to something more akin to good old 80s "gender bending" and away from the idea of actually changing sex.

Of course many kids still are at risk of both harmful medicalisation and anti-science ideology and I'm not minimising that – but wondered what people thought.

Or maybe you can use the external physical characteristics. Which are, you know, malleable and not immutable in any way

oy vey

most women can spot a chap at 10 paces, regardless of what clothes he's wearing or cosmetic surgery he's had

it's survival instinct

@GreyhoundG1rl everywhere! On a case by case basis.

@BernardBlackMissesLangCleg

You people sure love to use fringe cases to justify complete exclusion of any and all trans women.

well yes, that's what risk assessment is about

what risks are we introducing by making this area mixed sex should be part of any risk assessment

no-one ever wants to tak about Jessica Winfield do they? I mean I get it, he's a disgusting child rapist. but transphobia is transphobia right?

so tell me how wrong I am for using male pronouns to describe him

For the same reason you'd be wrong to use a homophobic slur to refer to a gay child rapist, or why it would be homophobic bigotry to use the gay child rapists as a reason why gay people in general should be sequestered to seperate spaces.

[quote TheFairPrincess]@GreyhoundG1rl everywhere! On a case by case basis.[/quote]
I've asked what would make a successful case?

On a case by case basis

let's talk about your case by case basis @TheFairPrincess

Katie Dolotowski was out with his carer. They let him go off and use the women's toilets at a supermarket because it matches his gender identity

once in there he grabbed a 9 year old girl by the face, pushed her into a cubical and ordered her to take her trousers off

how would your 'case by case basis' have kept Katie in the gents and protected that little girl?

But again this is based on the assumption that trans people have some kind of belief they are biologically the opposite sex. They don't think that!

So if they don't think they are the opposite sex why do they expect to be seen as the opposite sex . Why is it transphobic to identify them as the sex they are?

@TheFairPrincess

Yah these TRAs sound crazy for sure, I can't empathise with there position at all unfortunately. We just have to be careful not to ostracise a hugely marginalised group in the name of these idiots.

The problem is that 'these idiots' are vocal and have a lot of power behind them. The chilling effect means that women can't talk about women's sex based rights without being framed as 'anti trans'. Policies and laws have been passed through without consultation (Irish Self ID) or by just ignoring public consultation (the Scottish Government are refusing to publish the results of a second GRA consultation, the first of which was ignored because they didn't get the results they wanted). Schools are socially transitioning children without the knowledge or consent of their parents as part of Governmental policy. Women are being fired or investigated by the police for voicing their opinions (see Marion Miller and Maya Forstater). Institutional capture means that organisations are Stonewalled and dissenting views are silenced.

The view that transgender people are massively marginalised is outdated - TRA groups have a massive amount of power and influence. The Denton document has been a massive influence in all this.

For the same reason you'd be wrong to use a homophobic slur

male pronouns are not a slur

We just have to be careful not to ostracise a hugely marginalised group in the name of these idiots.

• hugely marginalised group

+ women

@HexedBogie

'Excluding trans women from women's spaces is discrimination on the basis of sex. I mean, you are literally excluding someone because of their sex.'

Yes, that'd be exactly how sex based services work. For example, I'm a teacher. If we want to hire a female PE teacher, we'd use the exemptions in the EQA2010 because we need that teacher to be female.

Or if I organise a residential, I need to ensure we have teachers of both sexes, so that we can deal with supervision of students of both sexes.

You evidently don't understand UK law at all.

Would you want to take that provision away?

@GreyhoundG1rl Do I need to answer that for you?

A trans person unobtrusively receiving services with dignity and respect?

Popping to the loo without being sexually harassed for looking like a woman in the mens, or perceived as a thread because you look like a man in the ladies?

What do you want me to say? That there's no way a transgender person can ever use anything designed to be accessed by the gender they identify as, even a bloody toilet? Sounds very bigoted to me.

You people sure love to use fringe cases to justify complete exclusion of any and all trans women.

Not really fringe cases. Most men who 'identify as' women still have a penis and intend to keep it.

@BernardBlackMissesLangCleg

Or maybe you can use the external physical characteristics. Which are, you know, malleable and not immutable in any way

oy vey

most women can spot a chap at 10 paces, regardless of what clothes he's wearing or cosmetic surgery he's had

it's survival instinct

Ah yes, the idea that "you can always tell". But guess what, you wouldn't be able to tell if we were to let trans women were transition in their childhood. Which is precisely why we should let trans kids medically transition. So that once they grow into trans adults, people like you can't use the disfigurement caused by going through the wrong puberty to dehumanize them and justify discrimination against them.

Trans people are opposed to discrimination on the basis of sex. In fact, we also oppose the sex-based discrimination that you consider to be part of your "sex-based rights".

Do you also oppose the sex based discrimination applied when people choose sexual partners?

What do you want me to say? That there's no way a transgender person can ever use anything designed to be accessed by the gender they identify as, even a bloody toilet? Sounds very bigoted to me.

She asked quite a simple question, not sure why the reaction?

@Waitwhat23 we can still address those individuals without for example calling into question "trans identity", reducing trans people to a theoretical concept, or automatically excluding all trans people from anything designed for their actual gender.

Hexed, a large part of the reason women have sex-segregated spaces is for safety and privacy and to give us a place where men don't dominate the conversation. If transwomen are allowed in, ie males, socialised as males from birth on, those spaces are now mixed sex. They are less safe, less private, not because the transwomen are trans, but because they are male. Why do women not deserve privacy and safety? It was very hard to achieve these spaces and services and protections. The women and male allies who campaigned for them were not doing this for the same reasons white people designated some places as whites only. Women are the group needing protection and a leg up here, just like people of colour or people with disabilities, or LGB people.

The word you're looking for OP is 'lesbian'.

Not necessarily, although it's often the case. Like many other GC feminists (though it's another thing that it's apparently "transphobic" to say, although I actually think it's very important and relevant), I wanted to be a boy at about age 8/9 - for good reasons. Sexual abuse, feeling like I didn't fit in as a girl, and that girls couldn't do stuff boys could. I'm straight and have always felt straight.

If adults including teachers had told me I could be a boy - and celebrated my special transness in the process as well – I could easily have been drawn into that as GNC girls are now.

Excluding trans women from women's spaces is discrimination on the basis of sex. I mean, you are literally excluding someone because of their sex.'
If their sex is male and they're being excluded from a women only space, then yes, of course they're literally being excluded on the basis of their sex.
That's literally the point. A space can only be considered women only if men are excluded, the clue is in the word.
What didn't you understand about sex segregated spaces?

@Ereshkigalangcleg granted tone is hard to read on the internet but it came across to me as blunt and rude. Perhaps I was wrong. I don't feel like my answer was that bad though, and actually it's valid as genuinely, why would I have to answer that? What does that even mean? There is something dehumanising about that question that got my back up.

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

But again this is based on the assumption that trans people have some kind of belief they are biologically the opposite sex. They don't think that!

So if they don't think they are the opposite sex why do they expect to be seen as the opposite sex . Why is it transphobic to identify them as the sex they are?

Because we simply do not consider the labels of "man" and "woman" to be biological sex.

But again this is based on the assumption that trans people have some kind of belief they are biologically the opposite sex. They don't think that!

OK. the provisions for women are to help us operate equally in society despite having the kind of bodies that can grow babies inside them

Specifically, we need spaces to deal privately with the nuts and bolts of being female, notably breast feeding and menstruation, and also being generally smaller and weaker than males and subject to the threat of violence and sexual harassment from males.

if a male understands that they do not have the kind of body that can grow babies inside it, why would they try to access those provisions? after all they don't suffer any disadvantage on that basis

How can I tell the biological sex of complete strangers?

Oddly enough I, like most people, have no problem doing just that.

Over the phone? Nope, not much of a problem.

At a distance? Nope, the human gait is easily recognised at a distance

Close too? Nope. Not really.

Like many I may hesitate, especially if a person is being very still, but movement usually removes doubt.

And that has been true forever. Even in the 70s and 80s when transwomen used women's facilities. Women noticed but chose to be polite, whether through fear, surprise or acceptance. No matter what the motivation, women noticed.

Given the change in TRA actions many of us are now choosing to say no, enough is enough. Mostly because we can clearly see the ramifications, the court cases, the legal challenges, the dismantling of women's rights.

As you yourself so persistently point out on this thread, women cannot even define themselves as women without challenge. We are required to accept that woman can be anyone who chooses to be!

When you can no longer define a thing you can no longer protect it.

So no, you won't find much acceptance of such circular illogic here.

Here be women!

Are external physical characteristics not part of biological sex? if not, how can you possibly tell the biological sex of strangers?

Were you born with female gametes @HexedBoogie? If you were, I’m struggling to understand why you are asking this question. Women are able to distinguish between men and women. We just are. Our very survival depends upon it: women’s faces and men’s faces are different, the brow, the cheekbones, the jaw size and so forth. Then there’s the musculoskeletal structure, the gait, the way a man walks, his height and so forth.

Are you seriously suggesting that facial hair on a transman is a component of biological sex? It’s not, it’s a result of increased testosterone. Women with PCOS have increased facial hair. Does that make them part man?!

If you told me a transman such as Freddy McConnell has started to grow a penis since going back on testosterone, then I’d say you’d have a point. FMcC btw had to come off T to get pregnant then gave birth to a son in 2018. Note a son. Sex male as observed at birth.

But guess what, you wouldn't be able to tell if we were to let trans women were transition in their childhood

mmm, sterilising children is totally the solution here