Grey area on trans rights

[Spyrothedragon23]

Reasonably new and learning about be trans issues / community. Happy to learn more but my request as it’s a hot topic for people to keep it adult and polite.

Just wondering if it possible to be a bit grey on the area rather than black and white? Alot of people on these boards feel very strongly about the movement and in some ways I understand.

This is where I am a bit grey:

I don’t agree with anyone with the sex they are born with being in the opposite sex sports / jails etc it’s just wrong and not fair. There’s a biological advantage if some is male and moves to female for sports.

However I don’t have an issue with someone wanting to be the opposite gender if it makes them happy. As long as it doesn’t affect or
impact others (see above statement about sports / jails etc). If it was a friend I would happily call them by a different pronouns or name.

Is there another area of this movement I’m missing? Are some people a little more grey rather than black and white?

Women's fear, disgust, anger, for some males it is all a part of the thrill. "You're beautiful when you're angry darling" has been the gleeful call of abusive men for years when a woman reacts to their sexual harassment.

Yes, exactly. They love it. They don't care that we find them repellent. It's a power trip.

What gets lost in all the discussion is how hard women have fought for equal rights and how the current debate undermines the gains we've made.

If statistics continue to count males as females we get lost. Our arguments for equal pay, equal opportunities and more are undone. Equally, statistics on crimes committed by women are tarnished and as throughout HIStory, women's voices are silenced.

When I grew up it was great that women could be masculine if they wished and men could be feminine if they wished. Now we have gone backwards so any teen who doesn't fit a narrow stereotype of what a girl or boy should be is encouraged to be trans rather than supported to be just who they are.

last summer I was in my nearest big city on a lovely summer day. we passed a man in the park in his 60s wearing tiny daisy dukes, a red lace vest top, fishnet tights and high heeled sandals.

I didn't like seeing him and heartily disapproved of what he was wearing.

but on reflection, I feel quite pleased that he was able to wander around without being bothered by people. I think it says a lot about how well people in that city tolerate those who present differently to the norm.

do I want him in the ladies loos? fuck no

I suppose it would be in the realms of ‘fetish gear’ for me. If someone wore rubber or leather fetish gear, etc, I would say it was crossing the line in the work place.

However, some leathers are used eg- for motorcyclists, so they have a practical purpose.

I agree it would be hard to police, but a general ban on fetish gear would be good, then if someone complains that they feel sexually harassed/by someone’s outfit, then the onus is on the individual to justify a practical, non-fetishy reason for dressing in that way.

And most men absolutely know what makes a woman in certain situations. I don't believe that most men want to have sex with trans women. And certain men absolutely know what makes a woman when they need a surrogate. Or when they want children generally. The whole TWAW thing falls like a pack of cards and they have to acknowledge that biology matters. I admit that I found it laughable when a certain actress showed mock surprise when asked if TWAW. Not good acting there Emma.

I agree - it is the policing and practicalities that I think are tricky. I think the "norms"have been so skewed on so many levels that it drawing the line is almost impossible.

It is, for sex offenders at all levels of offending, about power.

That writer in the Guardian who talked about how much he (had not transitioned, just enjoyed cross dressing at this time) liked to involve the youngest female assistant he could find in a lingerie outlet in his purchases and trying things on, and he actually wrote without shame, that he liked to give this young woman a smile as he paid that said (and I quote) "I know you're not enjoying this, but I am".

Her embarrassment, his power over her, his control, was flat out sexual harassment. And indecent exposure, flashing, sexual harassment, the 'low level' stuff is all about a message to a woman of 'I could rape you if I chose. I might. I'm just letting you know you can't stop me'. These paraphilias are well known gateway offenses. Almost every serious convicted serious sex offender (and worse) has a history going back to low level sex based offending.

This movement calls for women to be willfully naive, to willingly believe the best, and just not mention the increasing lists of incidents and offenses against women and girls. Because doing so benefits males. And enables them. Whatever their agenda.

To go with the line currently being spun by some politicians: well you can't stop all males having the privilege and enjoyment of being in female spaces with non consenting females just because some of those males have caused those women lifetime physical and mental injuries for happy penis reasons.

That requires another blunt question: why are female injuries seen as a justifiable price for male happiness? Why are females expendable in this way and males seen as so much more valuable on a sex based basis, particularly when we're all talking about 'changing sex' and 'sex isn't binary'?

And how many women exactly are 'ok' to sacrifice on this altar to male benefit?

And why are male people who do not want to use men's spaces for reasons of gender not interested in any solution that meets female people's needs equally?

I agree with this. I feel that this does not apply outside the workplace.

Men may enjoy certain ‘phallic’ displays, parading around and showing off, but when it crosses the line into law breaking something should be done.

We should, as a public, to be able to shout “urgh you fucking pervert” or “you dirty nonce”, in situations like this, that are within the law but against public morals and decency, imo.

There doesn't seem to be any grey area for the media (here and abroad) calling women who stand up for women " anti- trans". This is disingenuous as well as being all kinds of wrong. Unbiased reporting doesn't seem to exist.
Absolutely sick of it

I used to be in the grey area until it became clear that accepting trans people but not actually believing them to be the opposite sex was seen as terrible transphobia.

As previous posters have pointed out, the middle ground beliefs that you hold are considered to be exclusionary, bigoted and phobic. Often by people who are not themselves trans.

I’m fairly neutral about pronouns- but i can see using preferred pronouns changes how a scenario is viewed.

“The girls refused to undress after football while another girl was in there.”

vs

”The girls refused to undress after football while a boy was in there.”

For years posters here have called for third spaces for intimate or vulnerable situations. They are always rejected. Doesn’t matter how many solutions are offered unless it’s mixed sex it’s a no.

The grey area doesn’t really exist, TRAs have switched the lights off and forced women into the dark.

If we accept that gender is a social construct and every person relates to that construct differently then we can move on from the idea that society is segregated in gender categories. All segregation is sex based. Aex cannot change. So wear what you like but a man is always a man. Pronouns are sex based and a TW (subset of man) has no place in any female space. But TRAs don't want that reality. They won't accept that logical solution. They want it to be black and white but in an antibreality anti female protection way. Identity can be individual. Biological reality is not. Women's oppression is on the basis of biology not identity so the protections also need to be in the basis or reality. Have you seen 'pronouns are rohipnol'?

Some people think everyone has a soul (or spirit, whatever) which is separate from their body and in some strange but inexplicable way lives on after they are dead. I don't think this makes any sense, but, well, live and let live.

Please, though, people who believe this: don't get teachers to tell my children or grandchildren it is true: 'Some people believe ...' will do nicely ('cos that is true, however nonsensical those beliefs seem to me). I think such beliefs have had - and continue to have - bad effects, but we have to live together, after all.

[Oh, and don't expect me to call you 'Father', or 'Brother' or 'Sister' because of some aspect of your (to my mind foolish) beliefs. You have a name and I'll use that, but I won't call you 'sister' unless you are my sister. And so on and so forth.]

OK, now also some people think everyone has a gender (or identity, whatever) which is separate from their body and is in some strange but inexplicable way both like and unlike their sex. I don't think this makes any sense, but, again, live and let live.

Please, though, people who believe this: don't get teachers to tell children it's true: 'Some people believe ...' will do, again. I think such beliefs have had - continue to have - bad effects, but we have to live together somehow.

[And don't expect me to alter my use of language to accommodate these (to my mind foolish) beliefs. And so on.]

Is this a 'grey area'? I'm not sure. It seems to me normal tolerance, necessary for living in society. And just as I tolerate people's beliefs and don't discriminate against people on account of their beliefs, I ask for the same tolerance in return.

... Or, well, no, on reflection it's more than that: I demand such tolerance in return. If we are to live together peaceably, I require that you desist from telling children (other than your own, perhaps) nonsensical crap about 'born in the wrong body', 'sex assigned at birth', 'transwomen are women' and so on. That is straightforward; black-and-white you might say. You have a right to believe whatever you like: you don't have the right to try to instill your beliefs in other people's children.

I've become a lot less strident than I once was on the matter. I've rowed back, pretty much all the way to the boat house. I think most people deserve to be treated with respect and humanity, if you want to go from James to Jenny I'll happily oblige but I don't think people can change sex and I don't agree with the TWAW #NoDebate mantra. All that said, I'm extremely cautious of aligning myself with women so vociferously in the latter camp for many reasons.

I think most people deserve to be treated with respect and humanity, if you want to go from James to Jenny I'll happily oblige but I don't think people can change sex and I don't agree with the TWAW #NoDebate mantra.

What do you mean by oblige in this context?

I lived in the grey area before slowly moving into a much more well defined, gender non-believing position as the insanity and authoritarianism of the trans movement unfolded.

Certain things have become clearer to me : such as the need for sex based language (regardless of if it hurts someones feelz)

As an example for the necessity of correct language to convey a situation -

'women in prison were uncomfortable showering naked with a transwoman'

'woman in prison were uncomfortable showering naked with a man'

The second sentence, which describes the situation, reflects the seriousness of the situation.

Another -

'A transwoman is disappointed she cannot compete in the female athletic category'

'A man is disappointed he cannot compete in the female athletic category'

Again, correct language is necessary to truly describe the situation.

With regards to calling someone a 'she', initially I tried to 'be kind', but in all honesty I always stuttered before saying the wrong pronoun, because deep down instinctively, I knew it was wrong.

Now I use the correct sexed pronouns, because I do not believe in the gender religion, and I will not capitulate to it.

And with my children, I am utterly black and white. For safeguarding purposes and their own grip on reality they must always know who is actually a man and who is actually a woman.

I do not believe in the gender religion, and I will not capitulate to it.

Hear! Hear!

and despite mass reporting that comment remained up for ten hours before it was deleted this morning. The person who posted it hasn't been though I don't think.

For a long time I have been planning to send money to Sussex Rape Surivors' Network after Sarah Summers' case is settled, to match the money I have sent to Sarah Summers to bring her case for discrimination against them. So that I can help cover the costs of the case and continue their good work for women (mostly) and others who have been raped.

Only this time, if the case goes as I hope, as well as their existing men's and LGBT groups, Sussex Rape Surivors' Network will run women-only groups that don't welcome any male people, and if they also run single-gender / mixed sex groups then they will be honest about it. Not say "yes it's a women's group" and leave a rape victim to guess what kind of "women" they mean.

Yes, there is still part of me that does hope Sussex Rape Surivors' Network can apologise for a well-meaning mistake and we can all move on. Is that an extreme view? Sussex Survivors Network might think so.

In the 1940s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s it was common to see trouser-wearing short-haired makeupless females and (especially in the later of those decades) effeminate-looking males.

These days, they would all be considered to be transitioning.

It's tragic to see these people being medicated and operated on, many of them too young to realise the consequences of their choice.

I am baffled by the amount of debate given to the whole topic given the number of people identifying as trans is c 0.1% each way (2021 census figures).

My view is that people can of course live their life as they want, with the important caveat that that doesn’t give them the right to harm anyone else. And there’s the rub.

The grey area for me is where people feel uncomfortable. Women’s changing rooms and toilets etc.

What I do struggle with is the state telling people that they must say black is white, even where doing that flies in the face of science. You can feel like “the other” gender, dress like the other gender, act like the other gender. But you’re factually / scientifically not the other gender. If you go to the doctor with severe abdomen pain, for example, they are going to want to look for very different things based on your scientific gender.

But I still come back to questioning how we’ve got ourselves into all this bother in respect of just 0.2% of the population.

I don’t mean this to sound patronising so advance apologies if it does but you are where I was when I started lurking here (2017) and posting here (2018).

I was sure there must be a middle ground.

Turns out, there isn’t.

Women (the old fashioned, biologically female kind) need to have their sex based rights ringfenced.

Then we might be able to repair the interpersonal relationships between those of us who know that sex is immutable and those of us who desperately wish it wasn’t.

Those who refuse to see female people as whole people (rather than plug and play bits and pieces, vagina-havers, uterus-holders, ovary-owners) or bodily functions (menstruators, birthing bodies, gestational surrogates) are a lost cause.

Apologies, I’ve not RTFT so if this is a repost sorry (not sorry)!

Because of the insistence that TWAW it means that 50% of the population is negatively impacted.

What is TWAW?

I think we are saying the same thing - I struggle to think of another 0.2% who expect society to bend so much (no pun intended).

TWAW - Transwomen are women