research on trans inclusion in abuse support services in the NE

[GCMM]

Has anyone seen this report? www.ncl.ac.uk/mediav8/gps/files/One%20of%20the%20Lasses%20Report.pdf

I haven't had a chance to read it properly yet, but as I skimmed it, this quote jumped out at me: "We make it really clear to all women when they access [the service] that there is the potential for trans women to be in that group and that that’s just how it is.” (Staff, women-only service) ... in other words, like it or lump it, ladies!

"cis women" they lost me at first mention.

That title is ridiculous. No, they are not.

Ah. So female-exclusion in abuse support services in the NE, in actual fact.

@Artichokeleaves

Ah. So female-exclusion in abuse support services in the NE, in actual fact.

Bingo.

'One case of a male perpetrator seeking access by identifying as a women had been dealt with using procedures that are now widespread'

So this is happening just as we said it would.

This never happens, but in any case if you're assaulted you can go to the police.

And: why would any man go to the trouble of transitioning just to get near to xyz?

@DomesticatedZombie

'One case of a male perpetrator seeking access by identifying as a women had been dealt with using procedures that are now widespread'

So this is happening just as we said it would.

Not the only procedures that are now widespread.

'We want to make everybody inclusive but we don’t want to exclude, but in making everyone
inclusive do we exclude?...There definitely needs to
be some very open, honest discussion that involves staff, service users, everybody like that… You’re in a bit of a balance because if you’ve got an established group that are safe and feel safe and then you’ve got somebody who might not be welcomed.”'

Quote from staff member at a woman only service.

'Most cis service users said they were happy for trans women to use their service, and also that they would welcome trans women joining their women-only groups.'

And the service users that weren't happy?

Three service users expressed negative views towards the idea of trans women using their service, and these women were not familiar with trans women either inside or outside the service:
“It may not be appropriate for that person to be in a group of women-only, certainly not. I agree with that staying a safe, women-only environment.”
“I don’t think I could view somebody any differently.
It wouldn’t be because they’re transgender that I don’t want them there, it would be because I would still view them as being a man.” (Service users, mixed gender service)
“I think my issue would be… I would just close up; I would be so conscious of saying the wrong thing
in front of that person or the way I was saying
something, the way I was articulating and
communicating, that I think I would just not be
very open in case I offended anybody.”
(Service user, mixed gender service)

sorry, forgot the quote marks. That is a direct quote from the report.

And the service users that weren't happy?

Who cares they're only women!

'“There’s numerous cases of trans women entering refuge, identifying as trans women. I’ll take that
back, I’m sorry, not trans women - men identifying as trans women entering refuge. I’m not saying they’re not escaping trauma or domestic violence, and then going on to walk around women and
children with a morning erection.” (Service user,
women-only service)

This last service user is referring to a widely shared story on Twitter from the US, and was concerned about men posing as trans women, rather than trans women.'

This is also worrying:

'“The women-only drop-in had someone…I asked them to leave because they had transitioned and were now trans male. The group didn’t have a problem. They wanted them to stay, ‘no, they can stay, we don’t mind, he’s fine’. But we stuck with, ‘this is a women’s only space now. You’re a trans man now’.” (Staff, women-only service)'

So a transman is expected to access help, how?!

'(One of the things that you might read on social media is that somebody could pretend to be trans in order to get into this group and pose a threat to the girls in the group.)
“If he came and he was just pretending to be a girl, and he wasn’t posing a threat, then maybe there’s not an issue. Unless we can figure out like he’s not actually a female and he is actually just pretending to do this just to sit in the group. Then we’d probably have a conversation to say, ‘what kind of support do you need? Do you want to transition?’”'

'One case of a cis male perpetrator seeking access by identifying as a
women had been safely dealt with using procedures that are now
widespread among the services.
Staff in one women-only service reported this case to the research. The perpetrator’s ex-wife had been an existing service user at the women-only service at the time, and staff felt that he pretended to identify as woman in order to gain access to her. However, the
service deployed risk assessment procedures to keep the original service user and other service users safe. The dilemma around the case that staff discussed was not so much about the principle of admitting trans women, which was already their practice, but about
the motivations of the ex-husband:'

Oh, but surely that could never happen, eh?

'“People don’t make you feel very comfortable using women-only spaces. I know that from, just as an example, I never use the women’s toilets, because I went in once and I was made to feel absolutely awful by the women. I refused to use the men’s for my own safety, but I felt as if I was unsafe in the women’s.”' - a transwoman quoted.

Interestingly, another transwoman seems to suggest they'd be most comfortable in a mixed gender group specifically for trans people:

'“I do a group setting like I’m doing with [name of LGBT service], it can be a mixed group trans men and trans women and non-binary…I would just go there straight off because the fact that they’re all transgender, I wouldn’t feel uncomfortable walking into that room.”
(Trans women)'

Conclusion goes on to state:

'There is no evidence that trans inclusion has negatively impacted, diminished or erased these services, or the women-only spaces within them'

• conveniently dismissing the women who said they weren't comfortable with males in their spaces: 'A small minority of staff and service users are more cautious about trans inclusion, and these

services and individuals are often those who have had less contact with trans people.'

A teeny tiny small insignificant minority of women who probably don't even know what they're talking about really.

'In addition, from trans women’s accounts of past service use, there are incidents of transphobia and other negative experiences in mixed and women-only services.'

Odd, really, that the report takes such care to minimise any concerns women or staff may have and yet transwomen recount 'negative experiences'.

this report suggested a few things to me:

1. Transmen have virtually no support available at all. This is unacceptable.
2. Third spaces sound like they'd not only avoid any distress for female service users, but they'd also allow trans service users to feel more comfortable.
3. There is an agenda here to push services to accept transwomen, dismiss concerns, minimise disagreement and 'educate' women to the 'correct' responses. This isn't fair. It isn't supporting and centring women; the whole report seems to be using women and services as some kind of validation service for transwomen that even the transwomen themselves aren't asking for.

The report says that most transwomen don't access support services for fear of their reception and that only a small sample of transwomen survivors are represented. The report's suggested solution is to aggressively make services 'more trans friendly'.

I'd suggest third spaces, mixed sex, mixed gender, would avoid all potential issues and instantly help improve provision for both transmen and transwomen.

I don't think their sample size is big enough to form actual evidence... 43 staff/trustees and 23 service users

You're quite right, Potato. But they seem keen to use it to extrapolate to all services in the area.

@DomesticatedZombie

You're quite right, Potato. But they seem keen to use it to extrapolate to all services in the area.

And to only use selected bits that affirm and support their wanted conclusion.

Which incidentally as usual involves wholly ignoring, disregarding and derogating the voices of female people in order to boost male interests, but on this occasion also involves ignoring inconvenient TQ+ male people's voices too.

I just love this new selective reality in consultations and writing where you post the whole thing but just pretend that you can't see the bits that mess with your personal agenda and expect everyone else to join in and not upset you by pointing at evidence you don't like.