Is MH just an echo chamber on FWR?

[NarcissasMumintheDoghouse]

Article in the New Statesman shows women's rights not a voter priority (and elsewhere in the publication they predict Labour would get more votes that the Tories).
sotn.newstatesman.com/2022/03/sotn-what-issues-matter-most-to-voters/

As a special interest group ( as most mn boards ) the people involved tend to educate themselves about the field

If you find you are being " shouted down " it's not evidence of echo chamber, it's evidence that when people educate themselves they almost all come to the same conclusions

A few years ago I'd have agreed this was an echo chamber, but the issues discussed here are now very much mainstream, eg the big right-of-centre papers like the Times, Telegraph and Daily Mail, and the Guardian most days too. Most people simply don't support mixed-sex hospital wards or sports (to name but two recent flashpoints) and no amount of "Bekiiiind" or imposing arcane queer theory terminology is going to shift that.

I'm not the previous poster but I will try and put my two cents in as a 'trans inclusive' feminist. I have tried to engage in good faith in some discussions previously and been accused of being a man, a handmaiden, a sealion, a troll, a sockpuppet and more - open debate is certainly not what I've experienced but here we go. I am a woman, of the born with a vagina kind, and I am aware of Glinner, Maya F, Karen White, Yaniv, queer theory, self ID, and other issues often discussed here - I have read a lot of discussions here without participating out of interest, so I don't believe I'm coming from a place of ignorance. I'm active on Twitter and see the conversations that take place around this on there, too.

OK, first off: I don't think that unisex/mixed facilities are a problem. I do think that cubicles and private spaces should be provided for those that do. The single sex exemption exists in the equality act to deal with this on a case by case basis. But I don't think the Staniland question is the gotcha people think it is. Does a man have a right to show his penis to people who don't want to see it? No, of course not, sexual harassment/assault/abuse is wrong whoever is doing it, be they trans or natal male. But in a situation where nudity is par for the course and expected/accepted, such as a communal changing room or gym, I do not think seeing a penis in and of itself is problematic. I think, in my opinion, that much of the opinion that is is comes from entrenched ideas in society around sex, bodies and shame, and I think non-sexual nudity makes people uncomfortable in a way that really, it shouldn't. I don't like British attitudes to it, or agree with any religious/cultural sexualisation of the body and nudity in situations where it isn't that. However, like I said, private facilities should be on offer for people who need and want them in addition to mixed spaces.

That leads to self ID: trans people have been using changing rooms/toilets etc of their chosen gender FOR DECADES, without a GRC or surgery. It's only now that a term has been coined for this, and, in my opinion, a bogeyman created. The vast majority of sex crimes are done by men - natal men, not trans women with penises. Yes, some trans women with penises have committed sex crimes and mistakes have been made under this policy e.g. Karen White. You'd be hard pressed to find a trans person who agrees with the handling of that case, or thinks being trans is a hall pass to sexually harass or attack anyone.

What is a woman? I believe a woman is someone born female or who transitions. I do not think trans people LITERALLY change sex and morph into women like a pokemon, and neither do most trans people. They are aware of their bodies and biology. Some choose to alter this any way they can/want to, others do not. I am happy for trans people to be treated as women in public policy and life. What about people like Danielle Muscato? OK, this is where I do feel there are outliers that it is harder to sympathise with, but I think these are largely vocal extremists than representative of the general trans population who just want to live their lives.

Medicalisation and detransition: detransitioners clearly deserve and need far more support - trans people generally agree with this too (Charlie Craggs says so herself in a documentary she made for BBC Three in which she meets a detransitioner). But I don't think they are a reason to ban all medical trans healthcare. Given the waiting lists and requirements needed to even access this healthcare, I don't believe young people are being fast-tracked into it - how can that be the case when even getting a first appointment takes years? I accept some people feel they were pushed into making the wrong decision and this is absolutely valid. But so are feelings of young people who believe they are trans. More support for EVERYONE to ensure the right decisions are made is what is needed here. The current system is clearly not functioning properly.

Is it transphobic to not want to have sex with trans people? No. Lesbians who've never been with male-bodied people, I understand exactly why they wouldn't be attracted to a trans body. But I equally don't think it's wrong to examine whether prejudice has led to any sexual preference - this could be about race, weight, hair colour etc. Nothing happens in a vaccuum, and examining this is not the same as pressuring people into sleeping with someone they don't want to (which is clearly wrong).

Non-gendered language: I think much of this (people with periods etc) is done by organisations falling over themselves to be inclusive, rather than trans people directly asking for it, but equally I don't see a problem with phrases like 'women and people who have periods' or 'women and others with a cervix'. The word 'woman' is not transphobic and again, I don't think the vast majority of trans women are clamouring for it to be removed from public information, but it is a minor change to make such literature inclusive of trans men as well. They might be a minority but these are also issues that affect them. I do think it is odd that we don't see 'people with penises' or 'people with prostates' in the same way, and literature aimed at men should be updated to match.

I think I've covered some of the main points of discussion there but if there's anything I've missed I'll try and answer more.

That's not the Staniland Question. The question is if women and girls have a right to be naked and vulnerable without a male being in their presence. And they most certainly DO and it matters nought if you are ok with mixed spaces. We haven't given OUR consent.

"The vast majority of sex crimes are done by men - natal men, not trans women with penises." This makes no sense because transwomen are natal men.

I want a definition in law of what a trans person is. And self ID is where it all falls down.

OK, well I don't agree that the mere presence of "a male" suddenly makes it more dangerous or traumatising to be naked in the situations mentioned above where nudity would be an accepted thing.

A trans person is not a male who would pretend to be female for the purposes of sexually assaulting someone. Trans people are always trans, they don't just dip in and out of it for fun.

Trans people are always trans, they don't just dip in and out of it for fun.

They do if they're gender fluid though? This is where I get totally confused tbh!
On the subject of nudity, I think culturally in the UK there are very few places where people get naked around others. I suppose in some changing rooms, but for example when I go swimming there are individual cubicles and there are both men and women around, and it's fine. I wouldn't be overly comfortable stripping off in front of anyone regardless of their sex but I don't really ever find myself in that situation. Maybe it's more common than I realise though.

Non-gendered language: I think much of this (people with periods etc) is done by organisations falling over themselves to be inclusive, rather than trans people directly asking for it, but equally I don't see a problem with phrases like 'women and people who have periods' or 'women and others with a cervix'. The word 'woman' is not transphobic and again, I don't think the vast majority of trans women are clamouring for it to be removed from public information, but it is a minor change to make such literature inclusive of trans men as well. They might be a minority but these are also issues that affect them. I do think it is odd that we don't see 'people with penises' or 'people with prostates' in the same way, and literature aimed at men should be updated to match.

It's not really non-gendered language but de-sexed language, right? If we say 'women and people who have periods' then within the new gender-identity classification we would presumably be addressing a group consisting of all who identify as women, whether biologically male or female, and then also the group which can have periods (which is not an identity).

So we would be adding an identity-based group (now) 'women' to a group which is biology-based (people who have periods). That would double-count many.

If we write that more carefully as 'women and other people who have periods', then we are making it very clear that 'women' no longer is based on the biological sex of the body. And that is part and parcel of the erasure of all names for the female sex. It also forces on every woman an abstract gender identity not based on her body but perhaps just 'happening' to correlate with its sex.

That isn't quite meaningful as it double-counts all who are both 'women' and 'people who have periods'

As to the scarcity of terms turning the male sex into 'ejaculators' or 'impregnators' or 'prostate-carriers', it is not just odd to me, but smells of sex differences in kindness and probably also of sexist expectations of who it is who is to be inclusive and who doesn't have to care at all.

What us the difference between a natal man and a transwoman? Are you suggesting that because a transwoman says they are a woman they become less if a risk to women than a man? Why? Why are you so happy to throw away women’s right for males if you say you are a feminist? You say you see no problem with a penis in women’s spaces. Can you understand other women do see a problem with it and their feelings matter

@CrossPurposes

"The vast majority of sex crimes are done by men - natal men, not trans women with penises." This makes no sense because transwomen are natal men.

I want a definition in law of what a trans person is. And self ID is where it all falls down.

The real question here is if transitioning changes a male person's likelihood of committing sexual crimes or sexual harassment. There is no recent data on that, but what there is suggests that the overall criminality differences are more linked to biological sex than gender identity.

Until and unless we start recording gender identity and sex separately of the perpetrators of sex crimes we cannot possibly say with confidence that trans women are of the same risk as men. The majority of male sex criminals are men who identify as and present as men. Statistically, trans women do not carry the same risk. I don't think trans women are the same as men or that allowing them into female spaces is throwing away rights. I accept some women have a problem with it, and I think they're wrong.

Hey, Ted, could you please explain why my sexual preferences are your or anyone else's business, apart from my sexual partners'. So what if they come from the the place you call 'prejudice'? If I don't fancy black people, any black people, I'm not a racist. I don't believe the Equality Act was written for use in the bedroom, do you?

@TedMullins

OK, well I don't agree that the mere presence of "a male" suddenly makes it more dangerous or traumatising to be naked in the situations mentioned above where nudity would be an accepted thing.

A trans person is not a male who would pretend to be female for the purposes of sexually assaulting someone. Trans people are always trans, they don't just dip in and out of it for fun.

Pip bunch does. Eddie izzard. That’s two. What about gender fluid people? How do you know men would not pretend to be transwomen to attack women?

@TedMullins

Until and unless we start recording gender identity and sex separately of the perpetrators of sex crimes we cannot possibly say with confidence that trans women are of the same risk as men. The majority of male sex criminals are men who identify as and present as men. Statistically, trans women do not carry the same risk. I don't think trans women are the same as men or that allowing them into female spaces is throwing away rights. I accept some women have a problem with it, and I think they're wrong.

And I think you’re wrong. So there you go.

@TedMullins

OK, well I don't agree that the mere presence of "a male" suddenly makes it more dangerous or traumatising to be naked in the situations mentioned above where nudity would be an accepted thing.

A trans person is not a male who would pretend to be female for the purposes of sexually assaulting someone. Trans people are always trans, they don't just dip in and out of it for fun.

OK, well I don't agree that the mere presence of "a male" suddenly makes it more dangerous or traumatising to be naked in the situations mentioned above where nudity would be an accepted thing.

You're telling me that if you walked into a changing room to find yourself alone with a naked male you wouldn't react in any different way than if there was a naked female? I don't believe you. You know exactly what the dangers are if you've read on here.

A trans person is not a male who would pretend to be female for the purposes of sexually assaulting someone. Trans people are always trans, they don't just dip in and out of it for fun.

So when does the magic happen then? Pretending isn't the point as none of it can be proved anyway. It's literally the feeling in someone's head. How do you tell the difference between someone pretending and someone not pretending? I mean an actual material difference.

My husband can go to bed tonight having been to the gym and using the men's changing room, tomorrow morning he can wake up declare he's a woman, and go to that same gym and use the women's changing room.
How on earth does that make any sense?

A trans person is not a male who would pretend to be female for the purposes of sexually assaulting someone.

But some males do pretend to be female, or go to other lengths, for these purposes. How would you tell the difference between those males, and the true transpeople that you describe?

But in a situation where nudity is par for the course and expected/accepted, such as a communal changing room or gym, I do not think seeing a penis in and of itself is problematic.

I'm not sure that merely seeing it is what some people object to. It's the fact that it's there that does increase the physical risk for everyone, not to mention the issues of privacy and dignity of women being seen by a person with one, in a situation where they would not have expected this.

Moreover, the transperson who competed on the women's swim team changed in the female changing room whilst being physically aroused. That is something that the women had to put up with whether they liked it or not, no matter how it made them feel. It's a very visible reminder of who has the power in the situation.

@TedMullins

Until and unless we start recording gender identity and sex separately of the perpetrators of sex crimes we cannot possibly say with confidence that trans women are of the same risk as men. The majority of male sex criminals are men who identify as and present as men. Statistically, trans women do not carry the same risk. I don't think trans women are the same as men or that allowing them into female spaces is throwing away rights. I accept some women have a problem with it, and I think they're wrong.

But we don't have the data to state that "statistically, trans women do not carry the same risk."

That data would require to be recorded for both identity and sex, and in the UK, for instance, this has not been done.

The majority of male sex criminals are men who identify as and present as men. Statistically, trans women do not carry the same risk.

but proportionately, are trans women any less likely to commit a crime than men are? I thought the current stats showed that the offending rate was pretty much the same?
There may be a majority of male sex criminals who identify as men, but there are aslo a majority of men compared to men who identify as women. The safeguarding rules are there for the minority of men who do commit the crimes, and the majority who don't will generally understand why those rules are in place.

@LauriePartridge4Eva

That's not the Staniland Question. The question is if women and girls have a right to be naked and vulnerable without a male being in their presence. And they most certainly DO and it matters nought if you are ok with mixed spaces. We haven't given OUR consent.

It literally is

Do you believe that male-sex people should have the right to undress and shower in a communal changing room with teenage girls?”

grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/the-staniland-question-has-been-answered?s=r

OK, you can disbelieve me if you like, but no, I wouldn't care. I have used many a unisex/mixed toilet without issue. This is what I mean about reasonable debate – I've given my views, I accept people will disagree, but accusing me of lying isn't really having a rational discussion, is it?

I don't think MN is just an echo chamber, but I also think many women aren't voting on a single issue. It's an important issue for me but not the only deciding factor when I vote.

Another question if I may Ted, really appreciate your willingness to discuss! Your position appears to be that if I see an obvious male on my overnight hospital ward and get told that that's a trans woman, not a man, I should be able to control my PTSD-induced panic and go to sleep, or I'm 'wrong'. How many rapes to I need to detail before I'm allowed to complain and ask for that person to be provided with a separate room. Or shall I be given a stern talking to and grudgingly provided with a private room? Do we need to poll the women on the ward first, see if they also want privacy from this specific male, how do you envisage it working?

@TedMullins why are you so in favour of making all spaces mixed sex even though that will exclude many women through religious beliefs, trauma or other reasons? Are those women not worthy of consideration or is only male women who matter?

Given the waiting lists and requirements needed to even access this healthcare, I don't believe young people are being fast-tracked into it - how can that be the case when even getting a first appointment takes years?

Not if they use private services like GenderGP.

But I equally don't think it's wrong to examine whether prejudice has led to any sexual preference - this could be about race, weight, hair colour etc.

This is homophobic, Ted. It's not prejudiced for a lesbian to not want to sleep with a male. It's literally what being a lesbian is. It's disgusting to accuse lesbians of bigotry for being lesbians. Please stop that.