Disagreement with husband about trans debate

[HermioneKipper]

Had people around for dinner and somehow got on to the topic of women’s spaces, being gender critical, the current debate around JKR.

After they left was discussing further with my husband and it turns out he thinks my views are extreme and I’ve “gone too far.”

He agrees that trans women who haven’t had surgery have no place in women’s spaces but thinks that if they’ve had gender reassignment surgery then they should be allowed into women’s spaces and called women.

I disagree with this and think that people cannot change sex and no male born people should be allowed into women’s spaces under any circumstances.

He said he thinks I’m too radical and shouldn’t think this way about a marginalised group 😡

I can’t believe we disagree so fundamentally on this and I’m so upset about it.

Indeed Scully.

Are now saying that men must be allowed to watch women and girls undress otherwise they might be beaten up?

Come on girls, get yer kecks off to show the men we don't want them to suffer.

Mind-blowing.

Just commenting on this old one, trotted out upthread:
"But still impossible to police effectively."

Um, no. Human society has worked just fine for thousands of years, with female-only spaces.

It's only in the last few years that 'entitled' males have started forcing their way into female spaces. We kept them out until then just fine. We don't need the police on the door. We just need the woke wokies to shut the fuck up and let us get on with life.

If a male goes into a female changing room, all we females create merry hell until they leave. It's not complicated. No need for genital inspections. We know who men are.

Ask your husband this question; Why do women have awards/places in the boardroom that are designated for women? I assume his answer is because women have been oppressed and we need to level the playing field. Then ask if a trans woman who has had surgery deserves a place on those lists, when the trans woman has had all of the advantages of being male?

Due to the ideological capture of many institutions, many organisations are simply ignoring the single sex exemptions they can (and should use). IamSarah has written about her experience with a rape crisis service which now offers 3 choices of support groups to transwomen but none at all for those women who need single sex groups. Edinburgh Rape Crisis actually used the Occupational exemption in a job description and then completely ignored it, putting into post someone who was ineligible due to their sex. This and the 'impossible to police' comments worry me. If there is a space, or service which someone knows they are ineligible ineligible use due to their sex but does it anyway, what does that say of their consideration of the needs of the people who are eligible to use that space or how much they will acknowledge and respect other people's boundaries and needs.

That's why, in particular, self id is so problematic. A man (however he identifies) knows that they shouldn't be in a single sex space but now women are stripped of the right to object.

It may not be so much that he thinks the penis is what makes a man, as he thinks it that going to far as removing it tends to eliminate people who are just looking to take advantage.

When did women's rights become his to give away? Ask him that.

@SantaClawsServiette

It may not be so much that he thinks the penis is what makes a man, as he thinks it that going to far as removing it tends to eliminate people who are just looking to take advantage.

Now this I get, and can get on board with. If I knew it would only be those who've had the full works, well, I wouldn't be thrilled, but it's a damn sight better than the thought that any cross dresser or "gender fluid" bloke is perfectly entitled to strut in. It would keep the numbers down for sure, making it essentially a non-worry on a day-to-day basis. Of course, policing it is a different question.

It may not be so much that he thinks the penis is what makes a man, as he thinks it that going to far as removing it tends to eliminate people who are just looking to take advantage

Except men aren't just walking penises. There's a brain that controls their thoughts and their actions and a person doesn't change those thoughts and desires by removing organs.

Its completely irrelevant because we'd never know until it was too late anyway

My DH says "mmmn" & "yes" in the right places but I can see his eyes glaze over because he's just not as invested as me. I make regular gardening forays, and post & sign things all via our shared email account. He's getting the message in dribs & drabs.

Could i ask your wise husband please, next time i am in a bathroom and a 6 foot transwoman comes in, how do i politely ask if they have had gender reassignment surgery. Tia

@SapphosRock

What exactly do you both mean by womens spaces though? Because if you really object to a fully transitioned trans woman with a GRC using a ladies public toilet then I do think that is rather extreme

But the women in that toilet cannot know if a trans woman entering the space has had GRC or not. So the feelings of the women, including for some fear or for others a need to exit due to for example their religion saying they cannot share a space with a man, are unaffected by whether or not the trans woman has had surgery. Because there's no way of identifying who has had it or not.

Just as there's no way of identifying which males pose a threat and which don't. Nobody thinks all men are rapists or sexual predators, but single sex spaces exist to mitigate the risk from those who are.

So why should that different for trans women?

I thought my husband was different as he has always shared childcare as much as possible/does his share of the housework/very respectful of women’s boundaries/is very fair in his management position at work...I’m hopeful he just needs to do some more research on the issue

Coming late to this thread (I've been busy elsewhere) and wanted to say that much of what you share OP chimes with me.

I asked my DH if a man who lost his penis in a rare, freak accident 'would then become a woman'. He was silent. I wouldn't say it the meant he did a u-turn and roundly agreed with me but something shifted.

He had insinuated that I was bigoted rather that calling me a bigot outright, but it was a key moment, along with some really silly comparisons he made with racism in sport and some other text-book TRA examples (he was reading the Guardian at the time, and donating to them at the time 🙄).

It hurt and I was raging, disappointed and seriously considering how this would work if he had that opinion of me. I pushed a bit too hard at times and we came to an agreement that I would only focus big news stories or key steps forward in the wider feminism movement.

We have since discussed things that come up. He's listened to the Nolan podcast. Sport remains a key are and he has slowly but surely come to realise how his view of me, based on what others think, rather than who he knows me to be, was unjust and simply wrong. He has never supported Self ID but was/is in the BeKind camp. He now longer considered himself a labour supporter and listens more. It has taken time.

It's not over yet but he supports me quietly and mildly celebrates wins as and when they come.

I share this to, without being patronising, give you hope. I hope you find your way through. It may not be one question, one news story, one argument, it may be a slow build. I think you are quite right to be furious and horribly hurt. Really sorry this happened

I mean, I am not sure that sharing childcare is really that relevant. Lots of women share his view, or are even more extreme supporters of trans activism, so I am not convinced the issue is that he is a closet sexist.

Interesting that he thinks that a man without a penis loses physical advantages such as being on average 30 pounds heavier and six inches taller than women. That his heavier bones, lower muscle-to=fat ratio, greater punch power and hand grasp will not be a threat to almost any woman if he chooses to be aggressive. Men don't need a penis to be angry and violent. Their fists can still punch and their legs can still kick.

OP, the post above by OhHolyJesus is helpful I think, and was along the lines of what I was thinking when I read your first post.
This is your life partner and it can be really hurtful when they have a different position to you in something that's important to you, and they infer that you are the one who is morally wrong.
Tbh, I would have said and thought what he thinks, once upon a time. Just because I hadn't really explored it and thought about it much. Once I did, I changed my mind. Try not to feel too personally hurt, if you can. When the time's right, try to discuss specific points or news stories, women's sports or medicalising young people for example. Or send him an article or comment piece and say youd wondered what he'd think. Chip away. You are married to him, so hopefully you will have common ground in the end.

In what way are they marginalised?

If DH or one of his buddies lost his penis in an accident would that make them a woman?

If he wasn't married to you would he be happy with a TW partner?

What's wrong with third spaces?

Like I said earlier, men essentially, pretty much all of them, and globally and through millennia of history.

Have major cases of Penis Worship. Their own obviously, but also in general.

There's loads been written about this obsession with the Power of the Mighty cock and how pretty much all men are followers of this belief.

I suspect not as much as has been written about penises and how fascinating, important, impressive and awesome they are.

Mainstream het porn is essentially pretty much essentially dick worship.

It's THE organ that means you are a MAN.

No penis- not a man.
Women- no penis- not a man.

Women are depressingly still seen by most men, really deep down and generally not consciously known- that men are people and everything else is in relation to men.

Women are not people who are different but a thing in themselves.

We are not men.
All the non men obviously go together.
The end. No more to it.

Just read thread.
Toilets AGAIN? Really?

Too Tired

'Some Trans people may feel marginalised, some women may feel unsafe, some women may feel like women’s rights have been pushed aside for trans rights….. the list can go on.'

Out of interest, and noting feeling is not the same as being. Feeling is an interesting word to use in that post. Anyway.

Given you believe feeling marginalised is same level of discomfort as feeling unsafe.

It follows surely that being marginalised and being unsafe are equally unpleasant things to experience?

Being unsafe obviously means that whatever means a person is not safe, could well happen.

We all know In these conversations it's as good as always risk of sex offence being committed.
Against women AND GIRLS.

Just to follow this through (let's talk bogs again as seems to be inevitable!).

That statement says, logically.

That a male with a gender ID of woman.

Experiencing marginalisation due to being unable to use public toilets with ladies on the door.

Is equivalent in impact/ harm etc.

To a woman/ girl being sexually assaulted by a male in the ladies.

It's just a fact that we can't tell a TW who just wants to pee, from from a male with dodgy ideas.

Obviously.

We are REALLY good at noticing when anyone is male though.

So.

10 yo girl seriously sexually assaulted

Same level of 'badness' (sorry can't think of another word!

As a male who is a TW who is not allowed to pee in the ladies.

I'm pretty sure that follows. Let me know if not.

But still impossible to police effectively.

What you're saying is that trans people are uniquely incapable of respecting the law and are inherently disrespectful of other people's boundaries and completely untrustworthy. Why do you think trans people can't be decent human beings?

A man without a penis is still a man.

It's surely not tricky to 'police' when it comes to prisons, hosp wards, sports etc...

That's dangerous dinner party talk

But at least one person is fine with that, as long as the violence is male-on-male.

No one said male/male violence is ok. It happens all the time, male violence is a societal problem. Not sure why you think it's for women to tackle though.

Yes, because most tyre fitters have £20k+ sitting round to pursue an ET claim, haven't they? Would you say this to a black or gay person?

You do realise they'd have to sue as well? Or a woman?