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

I've spent over five years intensively researching this issue; I worked as a political activist for 15 years dealing with some seriously intractable issues in contexts far more serious than even the gender issue; I attend the GC protests; I hand out flyers at events; I do my best to mobilise women in my area. I even have a PhD in an appropriate related topic.

Well, I don't have a PhD. Maybe that's the issue. Might I suggest you pitch your posts so lowly people like me can understand them then?

Did you pass your viva by simply repeating yourself over and over whenever someone questioned you? Did you call them odd, or say the fault was with their comprehension of English/the language you were presenting in? I doubt it.

If someone doesn't understand you, you have to rephrase.

Did you accuse people at your viva of not having read your thesis?

This is a genuine question, not vexatious:
What do you hand out flyers for?
What do you mobilise women for?

Is it single-sex spaces? Or not? If not, what are you hoping for? What do you think is the compromise that is not single-sex spaces but which will keep trans people and women (women of all stripes inc different religions etc) happy?

Its the bottom line, isnt it?

Trans people will keep the focus on toilets because the solution is obvious- self contained facilities. Although we know that would take years to implement, cost a fortune and remove the number of toilets for women. But its the solution - remove the womens toilet.

We could theoretically do it for toilets and changing rooms, but what about refuges, prisons, womens support groups? Is the compromise, the working together, seeing both sides, ensuring we are all happy, removing womens ability and right to have space for only women?

Nailed it again, @RedToothBrush.
Also, incidentally, why TRAs use phrases like "gatekeeping womanhood" with its connotations of unfairly controlling access to a resource. And "oppressed", "marginalised" and of course "cis", which they claim is merely descriptive but which turns women into an oppressive majority.
The list is endless.

Wading in here as I've just read this whole thread and find myself taking a bit of an observer stance, as I have found it too tense o engage directly, and fascinating as someone who has grown up around group conflict; My own internal responses to the debated issue (I experienced as a kind of mind tennis) and the dynamics of online exchange is what struck me most. This led me to find this:

www-usr.rider.edu/~suler/psycyber/conflict.html

Have you ever noticed how conflict can get blown out of proportion online? What may begin as a small difference of opinion, or misunderstanding, becomes a major issue very quickly. Conflict can be difficult at the best of times, but what is it about online communication that seems to ignite "flaming" and make conflicts more difficult to resolve?

There are a number of reasons to explain why conflict may be heightened online. One is the absence of visual and auditory cues. When we talk to someone in person, we see their facial expressions, their body language, and hear their tone of voice. Someone can say the exact same thing in a number of different ways, and that usually effects how we respond.

For example, someone could shout and shake their finger at you, or they could speak gently and with kindness. They could stand up and tower over you, or they could sit down beside you. How you feel, interpret, and respond to someone's message often depends on how they speak to you, even when it's a difficult message to hear.

In online communications, we have no visual or auditory cues to help us to decipher the intent, meaning, and tone of the messenger. All we have are the words on a computer screen, and how we hear those words in our head. While people who know each other have a better chance at accurately understanding each others? meaning and intentions, even they can have arguments online that they would not have in-person.

@scratchedbymycat and @NotHavingIt

I can be very diplomatic when I want to be.

Can we just assume that I'm diplomatic, compromising, and cooperative, and I'm having a conversation with transactivists. What is the exact solution we end up with? That doesn't involve men in women's spaces.

you both appear to agree that women should retain their own spaces and that diplomacy towards TRAs is the way to do it.

Could you please explain, even loosely, what kind of diplomatic argument we could offer them to achieve that.

Bearing in mind women have been doing this for the best part of 10 years. Involving numerous petitions, writing umpteen times to every single MP in the country, the police, their schools, every single government department, lobbying parliament, forming numerous groups, writing and publishing books about the issue, raising hundreds of thousands of pounds for court cases, and typing millions of words.

Merailing the thread about your hurt feelings when you've been politely but robustly challenged, is an appeal to female socialisation which stopped being very effective on most of us here long ago.

I don't have a PhD either but I have lived through exactly the dynamics and the demand for compromise that have been reproduced on this thread.

What I did think though, is somewhere in the back of my mind, I think I've seen you do this to other posters before. I'm making a mental note to watch out for it in future so if I see it, I can jump in and tell them not to waste the time I have.

@scratchedbymycat nailed it. Exact same picking at non existent nit from same poster.

It’s a tactic for chasing off even mildly dissenting posters from the echo chamber.

It runs on an endless loop, and the hypocrisy knows no bounds when it comes to what counts as inflammatory language.

Not "diplomacy towards TRAS" specifically, but a generally more diplomatic approach overall. As noted, diplomacy only works in talks when someone is open to a similar approach.

The issue, for me, is that it is not trans activists we have to court favour with so much as public opinion. And to do that you have to show resillience in the face of unreasonable and even abusive behaviour; and you have to continue to show you are open to conciliation. You have to show reasonableness and an ability to emapathise whilst still holding firm to your principles.

Not all Trans identified people are activists or self publicists such as Willoughby. It can useful and helpful be able to understand people's under-lying drives and motives when it comes to furthering the cause. And also just to be human and to recognise that humanity in others.

Who wants to be like Owen Jones, forever flaming and inflaming and de-humanising those he disagrees with. Wilfully misrepresenting their position and perspective? (Not suggesting that is what people are necessarily doing here).

I will be open to conciliation. As soon as every gender ideologist who has issued a threat to women, committed or encourages violence against women, been instrumental in silencing women, harassed women apologises sincerely and changes their ways, then we can discuss conciliation. Until then… nope. Go tell the TRA to be conciliatory and kind. I dare you.

Bearing in mind women have been doing this for the best part of 10 years.

It doesn't matter how many years women have tried and failed. Or how tired or frustrated we are. For me, it's about how serious we are.

In my previous job, I used to say to people who could not understand why I did what I did, that I had to see myself as a 'soldier' - it's a 'job', not an opt out choice. In doing it, I accepted I had no choice but to keep walking and pushing through no matter what was chucked at me, because the alternative was dire.

The context itself is fluid, and progress will be painfully incremental, maybe not even discernible.

Clear example, what was said about prisons two months ago, now has more weight post Isla Bryson. Some (I suspect most) trans women will have been genuinely horrified at that, and that's a new opportunity to talk and reach understanding. So I don't see it as the same thing over and over again at all.

Not all Trans identified people are activists or self publicists such as Willoughby. It can useful and helpful be able to understand people's under-lying drives and motives when it comes to furthering the cause. And also just to be human and to recognise that humanity in others.

But as I said upthread, if they are males using female single sex spaces, it makes them no better than the TRAs. How can they say they agree with us and then use our spaces knowing we are totally against it?

*I think I've had a taste of what critics refer to.

I can't speak here without having my words turned against me in the most bizarre ways, The response was - and still relentlessly is - to cast me as the kind of person this thread can't abide, and to do so in terms ( quoted twice in previous posts) that are offensive to anyone engaged in this topic. I think they are calculatedly offensive, with the intention of silencing and ridiculing. *

The only surprise here is that it’s a surprise to you that this happened.

This board is dogmatic. Stray from the dogma in any way and it will turn on you.

The sort of compromise I'm talking about liess in having to accept, in the relatively short term to medium term, that transgender ideology and all of its manifestations and consequences is not going to disappear over-night, or just by saying " No". That is a long term project.

In order to effectively push back I believe you have to truly understand what it is that you are pushing back against (sort of 'knowing your enemy'). How it works; how it operates; the perspectives of those caught up in it - they are human too; how we got here; how has it been operating so far.......and so on

I've done quite a lot of careful, patient arguing over the past few years.

Now I'm going to try just saying 'no' and see what happens.

I don't expect that from trans activists. Their behaviour simly cretaes the polarisation whereby people see each other as enemies. It is not about them, it is about how you conduct yourself.

Not all Trans identified people are activists or self publicists such as Willoughby. It can useful and helpful be able to understand people's under-lying drives and motives when it comes to furthering the cause. And also just to be human and to recognise that humanity in others.

Loads of us have teens in our own families who identify as trans. We are living this everyday.
We can recognise the humanity in vulnerable people without letting blokes in the ladies bogs.

Clear example, what was said about prisons two months ago, now has more weight post Isla Bryson. Some (I suspect most) trans women will have been genuinely horrified at that, and that's a new opportunity to talk and reach understanding. So I don't see it as the same thing over and over again at all.

so what understanding do you want reached? If TW refuse to accept women saying no to them using their spaces, what compromise can be reached that will involve women retaining single sex spaces? Why do you think they hadn’t thought that their making all spaces mixed sex and therefore not welcoming to some women hadn’t occurred to them? What makes you think they care about women? If they did, they wouldn’t co opt our spaces would they?

simply creates

Snap.

(pun intended!)

The really crazy thing is I'm not dissenting. And I've repeated that fact multiple times to no avail. It's not enough to be 100% in agreement with the issue. Some of these reactions have felt like a hyper-sensitivity to perceived criticism or judgement.

@NotHavingIt do you don’t expect TRAs to be kind but you expect women to? Why? Seriously why? I thought you wanted kindness all round? Why are you only telling women to be kind and nice? Like I said. Them first.

To be clear: I've no desire to be rude to anyone. I just am done dancing around trying to please everyone. I have as much right to say a simple 'no, thank you', as a man does.

In order to effectively push back I believe you have to truly understand what it is that you are pushing back against (sort of 'knowing your enemy'). How it works; how it operates; the perspectives of those caught up in it - they are human too; how we got here; how has it been operating so far.......and so on

This is precisely why people should listen to trans widows, but many people seem unwilling to as our "lived experience" is inconvenient.

FWIW @NotHavingIt , I am in complete agreement with you.