Trans and losing my mind...

[bluepetergeneration]

Posting here in good faith. And I'll leave that at that.

I'm a TS. I was born male. I don't normally post on mumsnet but I started using it as I have a 1 year old DD. I won't tell my whole life story, that would be self indulgent, so I'll just say what I came here to say.

I'm sick to death of my community. I'm sick of the misogyny. I'm under no illusion that I'm a woman or ever will be. I transitioned when I was very young so I pass, but I still now only use female bathrooms when there's no other option (such as a disabled bathroom- I would feel unsafe in the mens). What I have is a disorder- it was crippling- and now I live my life so that I can actually enjoy it and not feel 'wrong'.

The idea of self-ID sickens me, and I'm tired of having to have the same conversations over and over again with other trans people who accuse me of being some kind of self hating transsexual just because I care about the safety of women. I also care about the safety of my kid. Partly because I'm worried she'll be in danger because I'm trans, and also because I don't want her to get caught up in all these weird messages that being trans isn't a disorder around dysphoria (which it is).

I guess I'm posting this to say that in this fight, trans people with genuine dysphoria who aren't delusional will be standing right beside you.

Also a plea to not paint all of us with the same brush. You can fight for the rights of trans people (like me, I should be able to present female and not get attacked, and when I was in my late teens and still looked a bit male I did get attacked) and also be gender critical

"Doctors have tried to stop trans people from transitioning for a very long time they tried talk therapy and conversion therapy and electric shock therapy etc etc and it didn't work, All we know is when you have gender dysphoria the only proven way is the transition."

How do you explain the many people who still feel awful after all of the surgeries and hormones? The detransitioners?
If transitioning was a panacea for the problem of gender dysphoria, how can there be people who are still desperately unhappy (look for example at Shape Shifter (YouTube), Keira Bell, The Honesty Project (YouTube) and many many more. Their stories would suggest that MORE therapy beforehand would have prevented them from making terrible decisions.

And how can you justify letting CHILDREN transition? I believe you said something upthread regarding the fact that you think if someone says they are trans that should be enough etc. What do you feel about young transitioners?

@scratchedbymycat
... because I suggested finding away to talk? Seriously...?

Either we allow males in women's single sex spaces or we don't. It's not possible to compromise - it's males or no males. You have said you don't want males in women's single sex spaces. So what is it you want to talk about? Genuine question.

I think the point of difference is that women here mean no male people in female spaces, regardless of whether they are legally female or not.

Some posters believe that a legal document of being female means an entitlement to turn a single sex space mixed sex regardless of impact on biological females. So when they say they do not agree with males in female spaces they are counting themselves as female. And Bryson and White and anyone else who feels so inclined can easily get the same document and freedoms - if the Scots bill goes through, three months'll do it.

And even if every male who gets granted the legal document fiction of being female is absolutely lovely and safe, there are still females who cannot use mixed sex spaces who those male people will displace from their only available space.

We still haven't heard what the plans are for those female people who are excluded to allow male people to commandeer more suitable options to meet their own needs.

It's wild to me that you read that line and somehow made it sinister.

It's lovely that it works for you.

Women are saying that there are aspects of this really not working for them.

I don't care, bathy. Use the gents.

I do see it got deleted, so someone thought it was a point of view that shouldn't be talked about. Hit a nerve probably..

Bathy, lots of things are seemingly "wild" to you, I believe you've reiterated that three times across this thread at least.

Women find it "wild" that men are allowed into their spaces.

I didn't report it.

I do wonder why you read into my post and came out with a sinister tone from it.

Do you really believe that trans people are tricking and deceiving and lying to everyone if they don't disclose their trans.

an eating disorder where you can find the root cause and address the root cause and then hopefully recover.

that is not what many of the people with eating disorders that I know describe. Like your dysphoria, it's innate and lifelong - they learn strategies and their bodies recover it they're lucky, but it never stops haunting them. And some people don't recover. Anorexia, particularly, can kill.

I get that you didn't like being accused of being emotionally manipulative when you have used emotionally laden language like 'ripping into'?

Did you or did you not post this sentence below earlier at 14.35?

"It's fair enough to point out where the OP's own behaviour, based on an assumption of a right or need , is contributing to the problem, without ripping into them."

I don't believe posters 'ripped into' the OP. And I am surprised that you cannot see 'ripping into' as emotional hyperbole. So, yes. It was dishonest.

And yes, this board is not an echo chamber because it allows differences of opinion.

"including your rather nasty suggestions"

I merely pointed out the tactics that you used were the same as those posters who seek to shame others for disagreeing.

How strange that you seemed to have found my suggestion that you were mirroring other's tactics 'rather nasty'?

When you were pretty actively admonishing the majority of posters on this thread.

You were asked many questions. Because your posts were confusing in their intention. I don't really know what your intention was even now, except that you seem to think that the OP should in some way have been welcomed warmly as an 'ally' to women. And I and other women have pointed out that we disagree with you. Some explained in depth why this has been proposed before and either has not worked, or needs to be rejected.

Still you continued to admonish us.

"What I'm reading from this, is although I'm firmly gender critical, ACTIVELY GC, I'm not properly gender critical, or the right kind of gender critical for this space."

Has someone accused you of not being 'gender critical' in your beliefs? I certainly haven't. I don't care if you are or if you are not. If you seek to shame a majority of posters for their views, I don't see why you would expect anyone to not push back on that.

I accused you of using emotionally manipulative tactics. And even in this post you have continued.

Do you deny that you used hyperbole to shame the majority of posters on this board with those 'ripping into' and 'echo chamber' comments?

And again, once you started posting censuring posts, using these words and tactics, what did you believe the response would be?

An honest answer would be nice.

Well you are just wild people to be around

When people lie about their characteristics and deceive people so that they can do what they want when other people ask them not to, how can someone see this differently?

There you go. It's always only a question of time.

If I had a penny for every transwoman who says absolutely women's spaces should be for women only, except me of course.

For loads of different reasons too, but all claiming theirs is the only exception. From 'passing' to surgery, to possession of a GRC.

I know I'm quoting myself, but it really is too, too predictable. It happens with monotonous regularity.

This is just another in a relentlessly longgg line insisting that they are the exception. And only them, of course. Just them. Because of their particular and specific criteria. And it has to be 'woman only' still. Cos if it was officially mixed sex, it wouldn't have the 'woman only' appeal.

Tediously predictable.

And the answer's still no.

"Cos if it was officially mixed sex, it wouldn't have the 'woman only' appeal."

And THIS is why third spaces will never be the solution people seem to think it will be.

And yet you have admitted you know you are not really a woman. Is it not enough just to be recognised by your nerest and dearest for who you are; you surely don't need external validation from anyone else?

The roots of dysphoria can definitely be traced in many cases. The prefix 'dys' suggests a maladaptation of some sort, or an inability to come to terms with one's sex - usually related to rigid seteotyping enforced ( knowingly or unknowingly) by close family or by wider society.

There are many detransitioners who can look back and trace their path to transition and who in retrospect develop a greater understanding of its compelling forces.

No child is born literally in the wrong body or the wrong sex They just are their inherent self. There should be nothing to stop them expressing that self - in an ideal world.

Sex is real and has consequences beyond the gender stereotypes attached to it; especially for women and girls.

Of course. And it's not the actual space they're after. It's the women in them. The space is just four walls and a floor. If all the women upped and left for a new space, the old space would lose its appeal and the new one would become the focus.

It's utilisation of the women, not the room.

@Bathhy so why do you believe women are not entitled to single sex spaces. You say ‘trans people with genuine dysphoria will be standing right beside you’, but that doesn’t include respecting womens when they say they need single sex spaces? You do realise once you enter that space it is no longer a ‘female space’. It is now mixed sex, and that may exclude women from using it? So how are you ‘standing with us’?

Indeed.
In fact, I believe there is a well documented case online of a TW who, facing this very situation, tried to take legal action to FORCE the women who had fled the space (and created a new one), to come back to the space and share it with the TW. They were trying to enlist help from lawyers etc to take legal action.

It proves something, one might say.

I believe that anyone ignoring women's needs, wants, preferences, desires and requests is not acting in the best interests of women.

Indeed. And India Willoughby posting on Twitter that they walked miles out of their way, deliberately avoiding a gender neutral space, in order to access the women's space. Accessing it knowing women are uncomfortable, then bragging about it making even more women uncomfortable!

I can't remember if Willoughby has a GRC, but the usual justification is, well look at me. Despite the fact that India makes a living out of everyone knowing they're not a woman, 'so look at me' doesn't really work, which ever way you cut it up.

So there you have it. Is it passing? Is it entitlement? Is a GRC? Is it being 5 foot seven?

Entirely depends on who's doing the talking, doesn't it.

This very thread as a case in point. Two transwomen, both claiming access based on different criteria. And one of them, actually changing their criteria as they went along!

And India Willoughby posting on Twitter that they walked miles out of their way, deliberately avoiding a gender neutral space, in order to access the women's space. Accessing it knowing women are uncomfortable, then bragging about it making even more women uncomfortable!

Indeed. The tweet is worth finding. It was a group of people tee heeing about having successfully prevented women having any space of their own, in full knowledge that those intentionally seeking out a female only space have done so due to not being able or willing to be in that space with males.

The males are determined that they submit either to the males dominating and breaking their consent, or submit to the males excluding them.

It is a relationship devoid of respect or mutuality, or any care for inclusion. It is an abusive relationship. And the fact that some abusers are polite and gentle in explaining their dominance does not make it any nicer for the females on the receiving end. Or lessen the harm to them.

You could not make your derision for women and their needs in this much more obvious. The mask always slips. Always.

I am not providing care and consideration for those who have none to give in return, who are takers and not givers, who feel wholly entitled to sex based service while denying that sex exists.