UK not polarised over trans equality

[SlouchingTowardsBethlehemAgain]

The British public are not bitterly polarised over trans equality, according to new research, which found a majority agreed schools should talk to pupils about transgender issues and that one in four knows a trans person personally.
Thought to be the most in-depth UK study to date of public attitudes to what has become a notoriously toxic discourse in politics and on social media, the report from More in Common identifies a radically different attitude among ordinary people, who approach issues of gender identity from a position of compassion and fairness, often informed by their own relationships with trans people. www.theguardian.com/society/2022/jun/16/britons-not-bitterly-polarised-over-trans-equality-research-finds

Another survey that never asks or defines what a trans person is.

It is always deliberate ambiguity that sways these polls, and time and time again it is shown that when trans is defined to someone their opinion changes.

Seems they are determined to contain it within one small, designated space. Damned difficult women, actually daring to talk openly about their concerns. They must be restricted as soon as may be.

The word woman is defined in the Equality Act as a female of any age and a man is defined as a male of any age. Our right no to be discriminated against of the basis of sex depends on us being able to define what that is. I do not think its unreasonable to ask politicians questions to establish what they mean when they use the words man and woman. To characterise such a question as a "gotcha" suggests we are not being given information from an impartial source here.

The "debate" is about the implications of self ID, not trans rights, unless you believe we should all have the right to change legal documentation to match our internal sense of self, but it is important for those who want to force through changes to legislation to frame it in such a way so that they can claim the morally righteous side.

If you establish, in law, the principle that individuals have a right to legal recognition for however they perceive themselves then you need to think through exactly what the might mean. Would you be OK with a middle aged man claiming to be a toddler and attending play group with your children? How would you feel if your bank manager humped your leg because they identify as a dog? They can't help it, it's just canine instinct!

Of course this sounds ridiculous but self ID literally means legal recognition of identity based on nothing more than someone's say so, at the moment the issue is around gender but if you agree with the principle of self ID then you need to make a good case for why it should be limited to gender and explain how you will achieve that.

It does not follow that you hate a group, wish them harm or want to "erase their existence" by asking whether that's a good idea and if it could have unintended consequences.

the report reveals widespread acceptance that a trans woman is a woman and a trans man is a man, with 46% agreeing, 32% disagreeing

That sounds fairly polarised to me. "Widespread acceptance" is pushing it.

I don't know about the numbers of people with trans friends - probably more common among younger people. The Stonewall estimate (provided courtesy of a recent tweet by Nancy Kelley) of the proportion of people who are trans is 0.6%.

It moved whilst I was typing! FFS

Why was this thread moved?

I think most people who don't have a strong opinion either way are the ones who think it's all about being kind and haven't really twigged that trans women are physically indistinguishable from men, and being housed in women's prisons and competing in women's sports.

a radically different attitude among ordinary people

'ordinary people'?

Stonewall would brand all those people who don’t want TW in women’s sports or changing rooms as “transphobes”, and shout “acceptance without exception” at them.

Less than 50% of the population agree that TWAW, and for the vast majority that falls apart in real world situations (sports, changing rooms). None of the stats suggest “widespread acceptance” that TWAW to me.

The results are far more in line with what feminists/GC people say than what Stonewall seeks to impose.

The Equality Act says that public authorities have a duty to foster good relations between groups with different protected characteristics. IDK if The Guardian counts as a public authority but I think they should bear it in mind, and leave women's sex based rights alone.

Well, we have various surveys on the issue, don't we?

Here's one carried out by Panelbase, consulting 1,000 people.

wingsoverscotland.com/voting-for-people-who-hate-you/

I think trans issues should be taught at school.
Kids need to know that surgery and hormones can only change superficial features, and have serious health complications as standard.
Kids need to know that wearing various items of clothing and styling your hair in any given way does not affect your sex.
Kids need to know that biological sex is binary, and though there are a tiny proportion of people who have some complexity in their DNA they still fall under one sex or the other.

Generally this is how it goes:

Person A: "I support trans rights, trans women are women"
A: "Wait a minute, why is there a bearded male in a suit in the women's toilets?"
Person B: "Well you said you support trans rights, and that person is a trans woman".
A: "I thought trans women were men who actually had sex changes".
B: "No a trans woman is anyone who identifies as being a woman".
A: "What?"
B: "And don't call yourself a woman now because it's discriminatory, you are a bleeder now".

It's the same old slippery slope. And we have to ask why no one is upfront about their definition of a trans person.

Why aren’t readers on AIBU allowed to see this?

It's hard to take a survey seriously that categorised it's respondents as gen z, Gen X etc then have to explain this in each diagram that it refers to age brackets. Why not just use age brackets? And of course the word cis to refer to women.

I don't think these answers mean anything at all, tbh.

If you'd asked me a few years ago whether a trans woman is a woman, I'd have said yes without really thinking about it.

Then this whole toxic debate kicked off, people started saying JK Rowling was a hateful bigot which I found so unlikely that I wanted to read for myself what she had said, and I became aware of things like trans women competing in women's sport, the prison issue, the rape therapy issue, Maya Forstater, Allison Bailey and James Esses.

When you become aware of these issues you have to engage with them. And you can't really engage with it all without giving some real thought to the question "what is a woman?"

It sounds stupid but I'd never really thought about it before.

Most people don't.

I think we all instinctively understand that a woman is a female person and a man is a male person but some people believe they were born in the wrong body and want to "live as" the opposite sex. For most of us, our first instinct is to be kind and say they should be allowed to do that and everyone should be free to live their lives as they want.

Most of us don't really give it any thought beyond that until we are forced to.

But when you are forced to ask yourself "what actually is a woman?" it's very difficult to conclude that a male person is one. Unless you are willing to define a woman as a person who has a particular feeling that no one can describe, or someone who wears dresses and makeup. Which I'm not.

The Equality Act is clear, a protected characteristic is "sex reassignment". That is the definition of transsexual. It is not self-ID or gender identity.

It's interesting the spin different media puts on this. This is exactly the same survey that the Times is quoting saying that most people don't support transwomen in women's sports and don't think men who have penises belong in women only space.

Question up thread as to if 1 in 4 knew a trans person - it's quite likely, if you know any teenagers or work in a school, yes.

Also - at what point will we be allowed to discuss this topic in AIBU do you think?
This was a report which appeared in The Guardian and also in The Times so hardly niche.

It was, however, the case that support for trans women using women’s changing rooms doubled when it was specified they had undergone gender reassignment surgery, rising from 24% to 48%; the same pattern emerged for toilet use, rising from 29% to 53%.

So, the public want 99% of all transwomen kept out of female toilets and female changing rooms and how does this hilarious excuse for a journalist report it?

On single-sex spaces, one of the flashpoints in the debate around transgender rights, the public were broadly relaxed about the provision of unisex toilets,

It's just the usual isn't it, people are happy to chant the mantras but when it comes to the practicalities, they agree that women should have single-sex spaces and sports. And they are fine with schools teaching that "trans people exist" but they weren't asked if schools should teach kids that they can choose their own gender identity.

A challenge to the organisation that conducted this poll: show the public the Gender Unicorn and poll them on that. I double-dog dare you.

I really like the way they're presenting the 'public' versus 'the elite' (shades of Brexit ). I assume mumsnet is part of the elite.

The report calls for a coalition of the willing to build on this public consensus as a way to defuse the elite debate – making the following ten recommendations:

Emphasise the public’s shared starting points
Build upon areas of consensus
Embrace case by case approach? ? ?
Magnify experiences of those finding a way through
Acknowledge the progress made
Put elite sport in perspective ? ? ?
Create space for discussion
Listen to those worried about the pace of change
Stop bad faith actors framing the discussion ? ? ?
Remember this is a debate about people

"Remember this is a debate about people"

Do women count as people, do we think?

It's not just kids that need to know this stuff!

That's a very dodgy way of separating things. Normally for decent surveys you would want the age range to be the same in each group, wouldn't you?

(by age range I mean including say 15 years in each section, not 8 in one, 15 in another.)