Gender argument - caught in the middle

[Baggingarea]

I feel totally caught in the middle in this brave new world of gender ID and I guess I’m just looking for somewhere to vent without getting piled on.

I just think the argument has become so unbelievably divided that there’s no room for mediation any more.

On the one hand I see a mean girls club basically bullying trans women online and selectively finding examples of criminals etc to prove a point.

On the other I think the sports industry / politicians are so scared to put a foot wrong they are throwing trans women to the wolves. Like surely there should be some debate and policy making going on. You can’t have trans women dominating womens sports as they have an unfair advantage. Professional bodies should be having serious conversations about this.

In terms of changing rooms etc we need to make sure everyone is happy and feels comfortable. Personally I hate changing in front of others regardless of their gender at birth - why can’t we more provision for individual changing rooms for both men and women?

Like I get how women are so protective of their rights but it’s not like trans people haven’t faced discrimination and prejudice too.

I just hate how I can’t feel like I can’t say these things publicly without being branded a terf or a gender traitor. Stifling debate like this is not healthy!

I don't understand where you're getting the "bimbo" thing from, op? You're the first person to use the word in this thread.

Generally it's good practice to respond directly to posts made and quote them, using either the quote function or bolding the text, so people don't have to go searching to see the context you're talking about. It also avoids misrepresenting others' views (so much).

I assume this will get ignored, too, though...

Also rather curious as to why the OP uses the misogynistic and abusive term "bimbo". Does seem like a "bad faith" term to use.

I'd further add that the reason this appalling outrage on female equality in the UK has got as far as it has is that female people in general have been much, much too understanding, too willing to compromise, too generous, too patient, too willing to believe the best of people, too hopeful and too bloody kind.

We have enabled this to happen by lack of basic good boundaries. This is most certainly the point to stand up and be very clear not to fuck any further with women or their rights.

@rumred

Hi *@Baggingarea* I am more in the middle also and have stopped posting on here about trans because the opposing sides are too extreme for me and I haven't found many discussions helpful. It's complicated and currently it seems impossible to reach a balance. I've almost fallen out with friends about it - at both extremes - but I know I don't know everything so I now avoid any discussion. I just watch and listen now. With obvious exceptions

Genuinely, what is the middle ground between "you can change sex" and "you can't change sex"? Or between "sex is always secondary to gender feelings" and "in a few situations, sex is important"?

Have you actually tried articulating your views in the ways I've suggested in this thread? Are you able to defend them or do you avoid and ignore questions you don't know how to answer? (This is a common tactic - pretending one is participating in good faith but ignoring key questions.)

It's fine to say you don't know or aren't sure where exactly you'd draw a line. That's to be explored. Just ignoring, or changing topic to post about what one thinks FWR posters are like, isn't engaging in good faith.

@DomesticatedZombie

Oh and just to add in sports the power certainly doesn't come from the penis.

Mind jumps to consider potential added powerboost from penis-helicoptering underwater versus extra drag factor.

Someone always has to lower the tone.

Usually it's me so 🤷‍♀️

As you were.

Here's a reply from a SNP Councillor in response to an invitation to a public meeting to discuss women's rights in Motherwell -

'Good afternoon,

I am delighted to advise that I will not be attending your meeting where you state you will discuss Gender Recognition reform but do not advertise any transgender speakers, just as I would not attend a meeting about disabled issues where none of the invited speakers had lived experience of disability.

As Gender Recognition reform is a matter for UK and Scottish Parliament legislation in which local councils have no locus, I can only assume that the purpose of your email is to identify those who support trans rights and add them to one of your wee lists – Hi!

You know very well that the proposed reforms to the GRA do not offer new rights to trans people nor do they remove rights from any women. “The potential effect on children and young people from the proposed gender recognition reform” is very emotive isn’t it? Especially when you consider that the proposed legislation does not include any changes to the rights of children.

You do not speak for me. I support the rights of all women.

To be clear, please feel free to add me to your so-called ‘women’s rights campaign’s’ list of women candidates that you intend to encourage your ‘gender critical’ associates not to vote for in the council elections.

Wishing you the day you deserve

Councillor Janine Calikes (She/her)'

This is an elected representative.

@PrelateChuckles I’ve been ignoring you because you are quite antagonistic and quite quick to twist my words. You are also wildly leaping to conclusions about me which is tiresome.

I believe if someone wants to change gender they should be respected while they transition. I also believe all genders should have access to the privacy they want. In terms of competing with sport I think professional bodies need to sort this out. I’m not sure how else I can say this!

@PrelateChuckles it was the “doe-eyed” comment. So patronising.

Sorry if it appears that way @Baggingarea - it's the way i type, it's genuinely all meant well although i do feel some frustration which obviously comes across.

Thanks for actually being honest though (not sarky) - the ignoring is a general sign of trolls so you've done yourself a small favour by actually putting it out there!

I do think text isn't the best way of communicating sometimes, as clearly a tone has been inferred where in my case it's not intended.

[quote Baggingarea]@PrelateChuckles it was the “doe-eyed” comment. So patronising.[/quote]
Sorry, i don't know what you mean- could you please quote what you're talking about?

@PrelateChuckles ok thanks for clarifying. It’s the picking apart and assuming bad faith that is making me assume a tone. Also the sheer volume of posts mean I’m missing a lot rather than ignoring.

@Baggingarea what about women's prisons? Where would you draw the line (if it were in you power to do so). No male born people at all to be housed in womens prisons? TW who have had bottom surgery (i.e. have no penis) can be housed in female prisons but no other male born people? TW on hormone treatment as long as it rendered them impotent? TW on hormones regardless of their sexual function? Any male born person who "lives as a woman" for a few years prior to arrest? Any male born person who identifies as female after their arrest? Any man who asks that has committed non violent/non sexual crimes? Any gay man? Any smaller than average man who identifies as trans? Any man who asks to be moved to the female estate? There is acres of middle ground there between never and always so where would you propose the right balance would be?

I didn't ever say "doe-eyed". I assume you're confusing me with another poster. I'm the one whose first post in this thread was saying I consider myself to be a middle-ground opinion-haver...

And I honestly don't know why you think I'm assuming bad faith - out of all posters on here I'm usually the one to give people benefitof the doubt. I'm genuinely interested as to what I've said that made you think this, as you use other words.

As for picking apart - isn't that the point of all this? No point just talking in vague general terms - doesn't get anywhere.

professional bodies need to sort this out
Well again, you won't find anyone disagreeing with you on that op.

So far from your posts I gather that you think a moderate view or halfway would be

Facilities and services to meet all needs
Sports sex segregated
Everyone uses the faculties they are comfortable with

The first two are views that have been expressed numerous times on this thread alone.

The last is incompatible with the first two.

I imagine the 'doe eyed' comment was prompted by your patronising tone and assumption that you have all the answers, despite being unable to articulate your view.

And that's not an education dig btw. I find the most coherent posters on here tend to be the most down to earth, who use simple language for direct ideas.

as you use other words.
Typo in my previous post - should say "as I'll use other words".

@Artichokeleaves

is it realistic to think we can ever get our rights back?

What is the alternative?

Giving up and going along with female people with inconvenient needs that used to be protected just being excluded from society, shunned, without accessible health care or rape crisis care or refuge from dangerous relationships? Having a two tier society that includes Untouchables that have to pay the same tax but pay it for other people to have things denied to them?

A society in which female people's safety, needs, reality comes second to the freedom of self expression of male people? And where any male person is entitled to use female people and their spaces as resources to meet their own needs with, regardless of impact? For females to be a kind of lower status group in law to males?

Would you mind if your right to vote went next or would you say we all just need to realistically accept that and know our places too? Your right not be raped by your husband? Your right to own property? Which rights are your red line? You're probably going to need to know, because you would be nuts to think that this agenda has all it wants now and this is as much as it will try to take from women.

And are you ok with BAME rights being rolled back? Disabled rights? Children's rights? Animal rights? Whose rights are disposable once a fashionable group makes sufficient noise and we're stuck in a rotten decade with politicians lacking a single grownup or principle anywhere amongst them?

This is not a world I'm willing to live in. Or to hand on to the girls growing up in this mess.

TBF your first 2 paragraphs are already representative of women's status in the world. My point is more, I see (and agree) with women on here and all they are willing to accept is men completely out of women's spaces, but seeing as legal fiction (grc) and stealth self id exists, is it realistic to think we can get back to that, or will it end up that we will have to compromise? Again I don't agree that we should have to, but I also realistically don't see us getting our rights back as we would all like.

@Waitwhat23

Here's a reply from a SNP Councillor in response to an invitation to a public meeting to discuss women's rights in Motherwell -

'Good afternoon,

I am delighted to advise that I will not be attending your meeting where you state you will discuss Gender Recognition reform but do not advertise any transgender speakers, just as I would not attend a meeting about disabled issues where none of the invited speakers had lived experience of disability.

As Gender Recognition reform is a matter for UK and Scottish Parliament legislation in which local councils have no locus, I can only assume that the purpose of your email is to identify those who support trans rights and add them to one of your wee lists – Hi!

You know very well that the proposed reforms to the GRA do not offer new rights to trans people nor do they remove rights from any women. “The potential effect on children and young people from the proposed gender recognition reform” is very emotive isn’t it? Especially when you consider that the proposed legislation does not include any changes to the rights of children.

You do not speak for me. I support the rights of all women.

To be clear, please feel free to add me to your so-called ‘women’s rights campaign’s’ list of women candidates that you intend to encourage your ‘gender critical’ associates not to vote for in the council elections.

Wishing you the day you deserve

Councillor Janine Calikes (She/her)'

This is an elected representative.

What struck me about that letter from the councillor is that I bet there are loads of meetings at the council that cover disability access or needs that don't have any disabled representatives involved!

"It’s the picking apart and assuming bad faith that is making me assume a tone. "

Code for "how dare people debate this with me. They are the reason I'm using odd language "?

As for picking apart - isn't that the point of all this?

For me it was the constant challenging between posters that allowed me to learn to articulate many things that I had never actually articulated before. I had some very solid foundations from study of discrimination but I was very vague on other aspects of feminism.

It was this picking apart that really helped with that articulation.

People WILL pick apart what you say. That is the nature of this forum. All of this forum. From discussing parking to anything, this forum will challenge your thoughts about yourself, your preconceptions and what you know and actually don't know.

You obviously wanted to discuss things. You started a thread.

You acknowledged that maybe you didn't realise just how your first post could be construed and the deep history that this board has of very similar posts that seek to admonish the regular posters.

So if you are really interested in that discussion, have at it.

We are all here.

And despite what you seem to think, you probably have a great deal in common with many posters here already communicating with you.

Sports should definitely be segregated by sex not gender identity.

Ideally there should be single sex facilities available, along with mixed sex / gender neutral for all those people who are uncomfortable using the correct facilities for their sex and are unwelcome in the opposite sex facilities. This wouldn't be 'outing' because all the women who say they don't care who is in the cubicle next to them will want to use them, surely? Non binary is a ridiculous notion to me - you can identify as neither male or female if you want to, but the reality is that you are male or female! Use the third space or the correct space for your sex.

As for a third space being 'othering' I read a comment that it is not the world at large that others people with a trans identity. It is more that they have othered themselves - by taking steps to distance themselves from their sex category in whatever way they see fit.

I will not be told to ignore the evidence of my own eyes, though. You can identify as whatever you want, but you don't get to tell me how I see you.

@Robinni

Commenting on this as I had a very disturbing experience in a leisure centre yesterday.

I walked into the changing room and immediately walked into a big burly bearded bloke, not a trans woman, but a biological male who identified as male. Then noticed two other men dotted around.
My response was to say “Oh! Excuse me, I’m so sorry have I walked into the wrong side?”
The big burly bearded bloke said
“We’re allowed in everywhere now love.”
With a massive grin and a chuckle.

I felt enormously sorry for the young mother with a towel around her trying to change her baby post swim. She was at the changer in the middle, she had a towel around her and her backside wasn’t properly covered. She hadn’t realised it was mixed until this point either.

Apparently the leisure centre have had to make the changing rooms mixed to appease trans people.

I recognise ty hat trans people have a right to identify however they chose, to dress however they chose and do whatever they want to their bodies.

But right now a man who identifies as a woman has more rights than a biological woman. If this doesn’t define a patriarchal system then what does?

I didn’t feel comfortable at all having men wafting in and out of the changing room. I certainly wouldn’t shower there anymore. And I felt my child was being put at risk too.

Did you see this post @Baggingarea? Previously sex segregated changing room now mixed sex. This doesn’t make women safer.

@PrelateChuckles it was the “doe-eyed” comment. So patronising.

I imagine that it was meant to imply faux innocence, not that you were a "bimbo".

Then noticed two other men dotted around.
My response was to say “Oh! Excuse me, I’m so sorry have I walked into the wrong side?”
The big burly bearded bloke said
“We’re allowed in everywhere now love.”
With a massive grin and a chuckle
Isn't it just telling that given the option of continuing to use the male and respect female privacy and dignity or unnecessarily invade a female space these, presumably not trans males chose to go into the women's.

So three males chose to purposefully put themselves in that situation (assuming that they weren't new visitors) that's actually shocking as I would assume none of the men in my life would do that and would be horrified at the idea.

It just goes to show we can't base policy on the people we know. If we did, there'd be no me for safeguarding as everyone I know is lovely.

I've been safeguarding trained though so don't assume my experience reflects the reality. Which is of course the place all safeguarding should start from.

How and why would someone abuse this.

This is hard to listen to, but I think it might clarify why women are so stubborn in wanting to hang onto our rights. It's a YouTube video linked in the thread.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4518170--USA-vid-interview-with-male-prison-officer-regarding-male-trans-prisoners-Shocking