Passing

[leafinthewind]

After listening to Ed Davey on the Today programme I was thinking about passing. For a trans person who truly passes, there has never really been a problem accessing the spaces they prefer, right? No one questions a man in the Gents or a woman in the Ladies if they have no doubt that the individual in question is in the 'correct' toilet.

Biological men have been able to enter women's spaces as long as they pass as women. In addition, women have generally ignored access to women's spaces by biological men who don't quite pass but are clearly make a good faith attempt to pass because we are generally polite and trained to be non-confrontational. Finally, women are unlikely to challenge men making a clearly bad faith attempt to pass, because those men are outside the social boundaries we're used to, so we choose not to provoke them for our own safety.

So when Davey says that there should be no spaces for women and girls that transwomen can't access, he's taking a political position, but also describing the world as it is; as it has been all my adult life. We've only ever excluded men who are beyond the pale, and then only when we've had an organisation behind us e.g. a prison. So the key difference between the world-as-it-is and the world-as-he-wants-it-to-be is that men who are beyond the pale in terms of their social behaviour now cannot be excluded, even by organisations. Do you think I've got that right?

Short of having a beard I couldn't be more GNC - short hair, jeans and XL men's hoodie, men's shoes, no makeup or earrings or handbags. Feels naff even listing the stereotypes but I assume that's the sort of thing people mean by GNC?
I don't get challenged in loos. Maybe a couple of times, possibly, someone looked at me oddly then looked relieved when I turned my face towards them or said 'morning', but that might just be me being paranoid from reading comments like the pp's. Occasional "excuse me sir - oh sorry, madam" in shops. Not that it would offend me in the least if someone did ask to check I was in the right loos/changing. I'd like people to do that. What if you had accidentally gone in the wrong door, you'd want to be told wouldn't you.

In female provision people assume female unless proved otherwise, someone who just looks a bit gender nonconforming really doesn't have anything to worry about.

By and large people don't query in toilets they just scuttle off if they think someone shouldn't be there and it's not busy enough to feel safe. In changing rooms though it would be normal to go back to reception and ask for assistance. I don't want that option taken away from women.

No, passing isn't a possible measure. Too subjective, too much potential for hurt on both sides if you think you pass and you don't. And not fair on trans people to have to be in disguise. Third spaces are the way to go.

@CatherinaJTV

the number of NGC cis women is probably much larger than that of "non passing" trans women. This whole idea of "passing" leads to more "challenges" to them.

This rather desperate point always seems to come up. Interestingly, it's never the women referred to who make it; on the contrary, those women say it doesn't bother them, they appreciate that a challenge is about keeping women safe, & the sound of their voice always convinces of their sex.

They don't pass. Women are too polite or afraid to challenge them.

They are distinctly men, no matter how they are dressed.

I 100% know 3 women who do get challenged and who are assumed to be men. They all hate it. 1 is a radical feminist and 2 are big fans of transactivism. They are all tall and slim. And lesbians.

Straight women are entirely capable of being homophobic and of not clocking lesbian women as women.
It does happen.

Glossing over it isn't helpful.

The point is that lesbian women are women and if someone challenges them, the challenger is in the wrong.
Changing single sex spaces to gendered spaces just means there is no way of resolving disputes like that.

Why wouldn't you think lesbian women are women? When I look at women I have no idea what their sexuality is nor do I care.

@Tibtom

Why wouldn't you think lesbian women are women? When I look at women I have no idea what their sexuality is nor do I care.

Same, don’t really understand the post but i assume that supers friends are more stereotypically male presenting

I think it is more that some women are simply same sex attracted. Not that people have to actively work to classify same sex attracted women into the sex class of women.

Maybe it is some men's dearest wish to be regarded as more of a woman (by who, I can't think) than a woman who is same sex attracted. We really have to acknowledge that someone's sex class does not change because of their sexuality.

It is not someone's sexuality that would be my issue in single sex spaces. Has homophobia become fashionable or something?

straight women are entirely capable of being homophobic and of not clocking lesbian women as women
This makes no sense. I think perhaps you are misusing phobic in this sentence?
Are you saying sometimes straight women think these women are men because of their presentation?
That's a mistake not homophobia.
Behaving in a hostile way because they can tell they're women, but from presentation assume they're lesbian - that's homophobic surely?

It's a load of nonsense that TW have been in women's spaces for years with no problems. Toilets, maybe very occasionally, but they weren't in the lesbian spaces of the 90s nor SV/DV services.

And who's doing the noticing anyway? Having experienced a couple or so decades of male abuse and violence, I'm pretty sure I've got a good sense of what a man is much quicker than my conscious mind registers it.

This rather desperate point always seems to come up. Interestingly, it's never the women referred to who make it; on the contrary, those women say it doesn't bother them, they appreciate that a challenge is about keeping women safe, & the sound of their voice always convinces of their sex.

that's not my experience and there are plenty of women online who post about their regular misgendering. They might get used to it, it's still not ok and I am sure they'd prefer it didn't happen.

Point taken on the awfulness of "passing". Not sure I have a great alternative in my head right now, so I'm going to push on. I want to talk about the issues around 'being' and 'appearing to be'.

I'm not sure I buy into any of the extremes. I know some women are challenged in the loos for not looking woman-y. I think some trans people (mostly trans men to be fair...) do appear to match their target gender. I think it's interesting that when we're shown a picture of a trans person who passes and are asked which bathroom they should use, it's mostly a picture of a transman.

I think it's because people know that women don't want anyone who looks like a man to pop up in women's spaces. We want women's spaces to be for women and we don't want to have to think too hard about it. Sometimes we screw up and identify gender non-conforming women as men. It's shite, and we shouldn't do it, and maybe we'll do it less in the free-and-fair future where there is less gender-policing in society.

@Cailleach1

I dunno. I wonder if it is males who look at a NCG woman and think she is manly. Women may be way more attuned to clock who is male and who is female. Simply because we know we are more vulnerable to the thread of violence from males and it is a survival instinct.

not in my experience - it was mostly women and girls who misgendered me and my classmate for example.

Misgendered? Sexed?

This "Women don't challenge men because they are afraid."

Anyway, my initial thought was that only men who are completely outside social norms get challenged, and even then only when an organisation is strong enough to do so. Is there scope for a pushback on those men - the ones who are clearly outside the tent pissing in. Can they be defined well enough to be recognised and excluded? My feeling is no, they can't. Because we can't exclude people from otherwise public spaces just for being twats. So we're back to the justification for women-only spaces - that they are (mostly) there to protect the safety and dignity of women as a sex-class, and to help women access public life in a way they couldn't if all public space were mixed-sex.

When ive been missexed its been by men

I did have a dr receptionist call me sir a few weeks ago but to be fair I don’t think the mask was helping

So if some people genuinely can't tell a woman from a man what are our options? Going by self identified gender is basically giving up on single sex spaces as far as women's safety or privacy goes. Any man with ill intent will self ID in. We /know/ unisex facilities aren't an acceptable option for women. Self ID facilities give zero advantage over unisex, the only people excluded are men without present ill intent, the ones who might help us if there was a problem.

So back to third space provision. Women who frequently get mis-sexed and are bothered by that would also have the option to use third spaces, as would anyone who wants extra privacy. Definitely the model to aspire to.

In the meantime I think a few people being annoyed by being mis-sexed is a lesser evil than women not having single sex provision at all.

I was asked a few years ago if I was a male or female: short hair, shorts/t-shirt.
I wasn't offended but I guess you might call it misgendering
I hate the concept of 'passing' : I saw a transwoman on TV and knew by build, stance and walk that this wasn't a natal female. Be assured, women "know" because we have to. And if we don't challenge it's because we dare not risk it
I wouldn't

Third spaces would get my vote

So if some people genuinely can't tell a woman from a man what are our options? Going by self identified gender is basically giving up on single sex spaces as far as women's safety or privacy goes. Any man with ill intent will self ID in.

Yes, to a genderist that is the only way. Their logic goes "if X is true for 99% of the population but unclear for 1%, X is meaningless so we must act as if it is never true of anyone and throw away all laws or rights based on X"

When a rational person would say X is meaningful and useful 99% of the time, how do we handle the exceptional 1% scenarios so that we can keep the usefulness of X?

It's another of the genderist logical errors (to be charitable) or deliberate misrepresentations (to be less charitable)... to reduce everything to all or nothing.

So if some people genuinely can't tell a woman from a man what are our options?

Why is this a question in the first place? It is because men are ignoring women's boundaries and transgressing on our safe spaces. They shouldn't be there and the law should be upheld. We don't say 'burglars have alwaya been breaking into houses so we should leave doors unlocked'.

@Blibbyblobby

So if some people genuinely can't tell a woman from a man what are our options? Going by self identified gender is basically giving up on single sex spaces as far as women's safety or privacy goes. Any man with ill intent will self ID in.

Yes, to a genderist that is the only way. Their logic goes "if X is true for 99% of the population but unclear for 1%, X is meaningless so we must act as if it is never true of anyone and throw away all laws or rights based on X"

When a rational person would say X is meaningful and useful 99% of the time, how do we handle the exceptional 1% scenarios so that we can keep the usefulness of X?

It's another of the genderist logical errors (to be charitable) or deliberate misrepresentations (to be less charitable)... to reduce everything to all or nothing.

Exactly this.

It’s some bizarre category error to effectively say “some women might occasionally get “misgendered”” in the loos, therefore women shouldn’t be allowed single sex loos at all”.

Surely the fact that the odd woman might get “misgendered” accidentally in the loos (and like others, I’m sceptical that this happens very often), is an indication that women really don’t want potential men in their loos?

I’m yet to be convinced that being “misgendered” is any sort of a serious insult to anyone, frankly, or should be considered so by anyone, whatever “dysphoria” they have.

The whole “but GNC women get misgendered too!” argument is not the gotcha that some TRAs think it is, because AFAIK not many GNC women are going about shouting about how dreadfully violent and hurtful it is to be accidentally misgendered in the toilets and how this must be immediately stamped out by letting all the men in as well.

Just thinking about power plays/oppression. I presume it is considered worse for a man to be mistaken for a woman as women are below them in the power structure. When women are mistaken for men, eg at work by email, then it can be advantageous to be treated as a man rather than a woman. We are also more used to it generally as the default is often male: guys, chairman, dear sir, etc. So it doesn't tend to affect women as much.

Of course for transwomen it matters because it shows we see they are men. We are decieved and have not pretended we are.

@Tibtom

Just thinking about power plays/oppression. I presume it is considered worse for a man to be mistaken for a woman as women are below them in the power structure. When women are mistaken for men, eg at work by email, then it can be advantageous to be treated as a man rather than a woman. We are also more used to it generally as the default is often male: guys, chairman, dear sir, etc. So it doesn't tend to affect women as much.

Of course for transwomen it matters because it shows we see they are men. We are decieved and have not pretended we are.

well, if you want to change in a communal changing room, or pee in peace in the women's toilets and you get aggressively challenged because you are taken for a man, then that is hardly "adventageous".

@Tibtom

Men don't pass as women.

Women don't challenge men because they are afraid.

Agree.