Need to vent work training- transgender talk

[AlwaysAWoman]

Today we had virtual training through work (Social Worker). We had some amazingly brilliant speakers, including a female doctor who raised very important issues relating to women and victim blame, mental health etc.

Following directly from this was a speaker on transgender issues. The speaker was listed as having female name and I was not surprised upon seeing them that they were, as they defined themselves, a 'transwoman'. (Although they did refer to themselves as woman as well).

This speaker consistently spoke about the rights of trans people, the importantance of being kind but it is protected by law etc. How NO ONE should feel scared to go in the toilet as trans people do.

Well, what the fuck about girls and womens rights to go to a toilet without a man in it? What about the girls and women who are survivors of rape and make violence and need female only spaces? Yet get called transphobic for calling this out?

What about OUR rights?

The speaker then went on to talk about how hormone intervention had been increased to 16 instead of 12 which was 'appalling' but 'luckily' it was back to being 12. Also little subtle sparky hints I imagine aimed at people who dislike the term 'cisgender'- 'it's Latin if you don't know'.

I can't really speak to my colleagues about this as have not yet identifies anyone like minded. I just feel angry.

suit those ok.

Oops.

Suit those who believed it was all ok.

Meh - the ageism, sexism and racism happen because there's adherents of this ideology produce no intellectual or ethical reasoning to support their demands. Therefore it can only be enforced by threats, shaming, intimidation, abuse and the use of lies.

That's why people can only engage by being offensive to women on here - there's never any coherent argument. The difference between us and those poor young women in the Girls Night In group as that we have all experienced the sexism and discrimination relating to being women and have gathered together our courage to say enough. It also helps that we have ethics, a robust political analysis and a desire to ensure that children and women are protected.

Tut - that should read the adherents

Oh dear. I do care who is pissing in the cubicle next to me. And I don't see that as anti trans.

@PurgatoryOfPotholes great speech, thanks for sharing

Luckily the world is changing, despite the attitudes displayed here.
OMG yes the world is changing but for the worse!!!! You really think a generation of males spending their evenings on violent porn are going to be friendly and kind to trans women? Yea, right. Women are in trouble - trans women in bigger trouble. But keep up with the demands for special treatment- aggravate a few more ordinary humans, lose a few more supporters.

@MamsellMarie

Luckily the world is changing, despite the attitudes displayed here. OMG yes the world is changing but for the worse!!!! You really think a generation of males spending their evenings on violent porn are going to be friendly and kind to trans women? Yea, right. Women are in trouble - trans women in bigger trouble. But keep up with the demands for special treatment- aggravate a few more ordinary humans, lose a few more supporters.

I don't think anyone is asking for special treatment, - just equality.

I don't think anyone is asking for special treatment, - just equality.
But women don't have equality -what is this you speak of?

Nobody should feel unsafe. I also think it is essential that everyone is treated with fairness and equality.

If transwomen are in danger in changing rooms or toilets there should be third spaces.

But this is what really confuses me. When women here argue against letting every selfID male into girls’ and women’s changing rooms and toilets we are told that we are being silly and that there is no risk.

But then poster talk about the risk to transwomen in toilets and changing rooms. A transwoman is biologically male and can defend themselves better than women and girls.

So

1. is there a risk or no risk from men?
2. if there is a risk, how do we identify which male in a dress that poses a threat?

Given that I am seeing places that have "men's" and "unisex", it seems to me that it's females who don't have equality.

@MishyJDI but trans people already have equal rights.

They are asking for the rights of women to have single sex spaces to be changed to include them in addition to their own rights as a trans women.

That's not equality and is a direct issue where the rights they are requesting disadvantage women.

You can't disadvantage another protected characteristic and be surprised that the group feels disgruntled and seeks to protect their rights.

I can't understand why you think bringing trans women into female prisons could be described as equality for either group

@DialSquare

"Don't bother slating this reply. I don't have a coherent argument in response!"

And its much better to state a position without reading or understanding any of the issues!

So. Someone persuade me. Why is it better to have transwomen using historically female-only facilities, than it is to create additional unisex provision in buildings up and down the land?

Why is it better to risk excluding an unknown number of women? A past poster has suggested that the women affected are disproportionately over 40, so we're going to be indirectly discriminating against people on the basis of age.

Age is a Protected Characteristic in the Equality Act 2010.

How can you be in favour of that?

Other protected characteristics under the same legislation include race and religion. This is going to impact women from minority faiths, who are also members of ethnic minorities.

If you're in favour of that, you're not the nice, progressive person you think you are. And I find it ironic that trans activists claim keeping female-only spaces is like keeping white-only spaces, when they are supporting policies that will push brown and black women out of public spaces! Is it okay so long as you don't admit what you're doing? Or do you not know?

Statistics show that 99% of sexual offenders are male.

88% of victims are female. Public provision that excludes sexual assault survivors disproportionately affects women. This is discrimination on the basis of sex, another Protected Characteristic in the Equality Act 2010.

So why is making single-sex areas mixed-sex fairer than creating additional provision?

@BilindaB

I meant they haven't been using them already, unlike toilets and changing rooms. But they are welcome to use them as far as I'm concerned. Christ this really sounds like saying black people should be able to use white people's facilities. 'But some women are scared of them' wouldn't wash would it?

What an offensive remark. There is little difference between a black woman and a white woman, only superficial things like skin tone.

There are conversely many differences between a male and a female, not least muscle mass, height, skeleton and most importantly (with very few exceptions) an intact and functional penis.

I don't think anyone is asking for special treatment, - just equality

But it's not equality to open women's spaces up to those who are not born women. Why do you think that's equality? I'm happy for trans women to share the male spaces. They are more than welcome. Trans women are one of the safest groups out there. You rarely hear of trans women being attacked by men in men's toilets and changing rooms. Sadly though you do hear of women being attacked by males and transwomen in women's spaces. Why would you want to make women less safe? When trans women are already safe using the male toilets. Far safer than cis men.

When you believe that the inclusion of males into female spaces is more important than the access and inclusion of females into female spaces, you're not interested in equality. You're interested in the primacy of male interests over female ones.

Women of various faiths, traveller and Roma women, women of other cultures, women with disabilities in particular with Autism, women who have PTSD, women with a history of trauma and abuse? All protected under the Equality Act and all to take second place to the one characteristic of gender identity? To be denied any access, resource or service to provide males with their prefered choice of resource and service? That isn't equality is it? That's most certainly special treatment, incidentally sex based special treatment.

Equality does include females too. And the inconvenient characteristics it involves. It does involve intersectional thinking. It does include tolerance of diversity.

I don't think anyone is asking for special treatment, - just equality.

I think you need to explain just who this access is equality for. And why removing equality for one group is desirable to allow supposed equity for the other group?

These are males demanding special treatment. That you choose to be blind to that is your business, but I think if you are here to shame others who do see it, you should at least explain why women should give away their rights.

Ahhhh I see the ol’ this is like stopping black women from the using the women’s loos has been wheeled out. No.

1. Black women are women.
2. Black women are women.
3. Do you realise how offensive it is to liken the experience of violent and horrific extensive segregation and degradation of black ppl to the experience of men who want to use the ladies without the consent of females
4. Urgh

Incidentally, male services and resources are inclusive of all males. They are not allowed to refuse males entry based on any protected characteristic, so we are talking about male people who want an alternative space for reasons of choice, feelings about privacy, dignity, safety, identity, bodily consent.

You cannot say that these feelings matter and should be supported in males when at the same time you say that females with the exact same feelings should shut up and be ignored or have to self exclude. Not and expect to be taken seriously.

I’m a children’s SW too - and many of us are quietly worried about this, though not able to speak up at work due to SWE’s stance. I find it outrageous that our profession has an ‘affirmational’ stance and I truly worry about the huge numbers of children who are looked after who are presenting as trans.

Yes but in forty to fifty years there will be significantly fewer of you

But by then you will have grown up (at least that is the idea, anyway) and after having discovered just what a sexist world we live in, will realise why protections against it are needed.

I am also a children's social worker I think there are a lot more cautious child protection focused workers than people would imagine.

This will not be an issue in 20 years.

I believe that the many trans children were providing extra sympathy from people. But the push for affirmation only and the disregard for girls have brought this to the attention of parents. The U.K. is quite culturally diverse with many people from Indian and Pakistani heritage. We also have many Middle Eastern families where I live.

The working class is not buying this. Neither is middle class Indian, Pakistani and Middle Eastern families. After recent talks in the school parents are fuming about this at the school gates. I have never seen this as openly discussed before. And this is in real life, not the Internet.

I think we will see some woke journalists pushing this for a while. And some Stonewalled companies may still provide training for a couple of years. But the tide is turning.

@Waitwhat23

And the argument now being put forward by TRA's appears to be 'you'll all die soon'. I mean, really? Has the door slamming and shouts of 'I hate you!' started yet 🙄

I think that’s the argument Nicola Sturgeon put forward in a newspaper article last week actually.