Genuinely willing to discuss in good faith

[beachcitygirl]

Hello.

This is a thread for those who are uncomfortable with black and white and less than civil discourse around self id.

I welcome those with different views but I don't on this thread welcome those who only want to state their firm settled opinion without nuance or discussion that self id is absolutely wrong.

It's my view that there is no point in discussion if mind firmly made up.
I'll respect your legal right to that view but there's not much point chatting about it and pissing each other off.

There are plenty threads of gc women hoping to create more gc women and that's fine.

I'd like this to be a different space. A place for anyone with genuine questions, discussion points and where we all try to be civil and attempt to answer each other in good faith. Anyone who is unsure, let's talk:

My views are that trans women should be treated in every aspect as women and they are our natural allies against misogyny and the patriarchy and that women are more than their biology.

Now I am sure people will point out anecdotes, individual cases, single issue concerns in prisons and sports for example, and I am sure there will be valid concerns. I am also confident personally that they can be addressed within a broader framework of self ID...safeguarding can be carried in a nuanced and precise way such that self ID does not trump safety concerns.

Nuance in safeguarding? What planet are you on? There can be NO nuance in safeguarding.

Address these concerns then, show us how it would work.

I suspect the nation's that are fairing well in those metrics that have self ID were fairing well before they introduced self ID so it not a case of self ID being some magic wand that has improved the lives of women. Scandinavia has has high living standards for women for many years - that is continuing, but now those statistics on the lives of women will contain data about some male born individuals.

"A gay man who admitted to murdering the surrogate mother he hired to have his children has told the court he identifies as a woman in what some are calling a bid to avoid a potentially lengthy sentence for femicide.
Fernando Alves Ferreira was detained in February of 2022 after admitting to the murder of Eduarda Santos, a surrogate he had hired who was living with him in the Argentinian city of Bariloche. Santos’ body was found by a tourist on the Circuito Chico Trail with 9 gunshot wounds. A later forensic examination revealed that Santos’ corpse also had injuries consistent with having been beaten prior to her death.
Two days after the killing, Ferreira turned himself into police. He repeatedly admitted to the crime while in custody, stating repeatedly “I did it. I killed her.” He was charged with femicide, premeditated murder, and use of a firearm owned without authorization, and expressed a desire in court to enter a guilty plea"

My understanding is that Argentina legalised Gender Self Id years before it legalised access to abortion - which only happened in 2020.

When equal pay is your main measure of how well women are doing and how equal they are you miss out on the dreaded "nuances"

It seems to me the fact is that for Suggestionplease the demand for self ID outweighs every other consideration, and that everything else must be retro-fit in order to accommodate Self ID. So, for example, I imagine they will argue that "there still needs to be more research" on whether TW can fairly compete in women's sporting events, and so on.

And New Zealand who has VAWG issues? Where a group of Māori women were part of those attacked at the Let Women Speak event in Auckland? That a group of Māori women were part of organising?

You mean that New Zealand?

I believe that in 2022 there were at least 2 male prisoners in female prison in NZ. Where is the consideration for the female prisoners (many of whom have experienced VAWAG) in placing those males there. Or in your mind, those silent but scared women not complaining don’t count at all?

Do they count? Do those women who are too scared to complain that a male is locked in the prison estate so that those women cannot escape contact count? Did anyone ask them?

I looked at the thread at the beginning and was struck by how quickly the OP became (what I would consider) defensive: not engaging with the questions (esp what is a woman) but going almost immediately to words like 'gotcha' and 'hate' without indicating why those terms were used.
I was impressed with her providing care for a disabled child and elderly relative plus working as cabin crew which afaik doesn't routinely offer family friendly hours, plus studying. I would have liked to know if her tutors/place of study also influenced her point of view.

Sorry maybe better informed than influenced.
Plus I meant to include this excellent point from@Igneococcus which@NotHavingIt was responding to:
I'm still entirely unclear about which sort of question OP would have found acceptable.

Of course correlation does not mean causation, but what we are certainly seeing is that policies of self ID have not lead to a collapse of society, as some people seem to be predicting.

Policies of self ID are present in countries that are performing well women.

...Well for women...

It's also interesting to see just how far down Malta (often given as an example of self id utopia) is on that list.

For readers who might be interested, it should be noted that this ‘gap’ also includes education status. Of course, the first three countries in that list have completely free university.

This measure of ‘gender gap’ is not telling people what the poster wishes to convey. If suggestions wants to stick with sex pay gaps, let’s see the gaps between the sexes specifically for those countries with Self ID before and after Self ID.

Trying to use a multi-variate measure in this way is not addressing specific issues.

@suggestionsplease1

What @OttersMayHaveShiftedInTransit said. Those figures have no relevance whatsoever to the impact of self ID on women.

What about the numbers of women self-excluding from formerly single sex services? What about the psychological impact on women and girls (and men and boys) of telling them that any man can be a woman simply by saying he is one? What about the trauma caused to women in prison by being forced to share cells and facilities with men? What about adolescent girls having to manage mixed sex toilets in schools? What about sexual violence survivors attending what they believe are women-only support groups only to find men there, and then told they need to 'reframe their trauma' and either deal with it or leave? What about rapists being referred to as she/her by courts and the media? What about women who've worked their tits off in their chosen sporting field, only to be shoved out by men who think they have a right to colonise women's sports because they couldn't make it against elite males?

What about all of that?

Under @suggestionsplease1 parameters for answering we aren't allow to highlight single issues or individual cases so I was left with a rather bland Norway is a nice place to be a woman because their heavily subsidized childcare narrowed the M/F pay gap decades ago.
If the statistics showed that that a country that was previously languishing in mid-table had shot to the top following the introduction of Self ID it would be worth looking at why but is happening here is countries that were always better than average for women remain better than average even when women means most women and some men.

And the top three have totally free education meaning no females are discriminated against because they don’t have the financial support to access education. They don’t have to apply for scholarships, or attempt to gain scholarships from sports - that self Id’ing males can then apply for and gain from over female people.

@suggestionsplease1 could someone summarise if there is a reasonable response to the issue of why so many countries who allow self ID are also performing the best for women in them

Its very simple. The data is not sex disaggregated, the category 'women' includes 'men who self ID as women'. They retain their privilege, higher pay etc.

Exactly. Men who self-id as women are included as women in the data gathering which makes it an absolute nonsense.

Ok, for an example.

A broad brush gender self ID based approach that considered no other issues could house dangerous transwomen alongside women in prison accommodation.

A nuanced approach would consider their individual risk level, which would incorporate a very detailed profiling of them and their history by experts to make the best decision about their accommodation.

Of course a broad brush gender / sex approach alone is not sufficient. There are of course very dangerous female prisoners who have to be accommodated carefully in accordance to their risk to others as well.

So careful individual profiling above and beyond gender/sex is appropriate when considering prison accommodation.

Nobody has suggested that "Self ID causes society to collapse" - but what it does is undermine the dignity and integrity of women and minimises offences against them; and disregards further harms and indignities caused to women as a result of males being included in the category of 'women'.

If your main measure for how welll women are supposedly doing in just on measures like equal pay - than you are missing out on most of the story.

The OP is a bit of a wuss, tbh. My thread got pretty strong blowback, but I stuck at engaging my arguments. Not her, it seems.

“self ID have not lead to a collapse of society”

You keep posting these stats as some kind of gotcha.

The very fact that NZ has a major issue with VAWAG blows your argument out of the water. That VAWAG doesn’t seem to be reflected in anyway in those statistics. And what is one of the impacts of self ID? Increased access of any male to their female victims, including in prison.

It also didn’t reflect the loss of sport’s positions for female people. Hubbard is an international example. Your stats don’t reflect those losses in anyway. They are not relevant to measure the impact on self ID on women. That need to be done looking at specific areas, not some kind of multi-variate measure such as you suggest.

When your feminism is primarily about 'equality' whereby the differences between males and females on the playing field of workplace/employment are flattened out - then you tend to ignore many other women's issues and areas of concern. That's liberal feminism for you.

In countries with good state childcare provison, for example, which permits women into the workplace - it is still primarily other women looking after those children.

I also understand that in Denmark - greater equality in terms of access to employment has actually resulted in more women now choosing traditionally female occupations and roles. so even with 'equality' differences re-assert themselves.

There are certainly lots of interesting features in the data, and again I am not stating that correlation is causation.

I am stating that policies of self ID exist in countries that are doing well for women across a broad range of measures.

They are clearly doing things right, aren't they?

After their excellent track record of doing so well for women, why do you think they have suddenly got it so wrong on just this one issue?

That seems a bit improbable, doesn't it?

And what is your evidence it is going wrong for them, when the big picture continues to show they are doing well for women?

Impossible to be done for general access to single sex spaces. Which also falls under the safeguarding remit.

And we already know that those supposed case by case safeguarding assessments don’t work! Supposedly they shouldn’t have allowed rapists such as Dolatowalski into the female shelter they lived in! (They simply changed their name) And certainly not into a female prison….

So no. Your confidence in ‘case by case’ is only supported by your passionate desire for it to be a workable solution. No supported by reality.

I am stating that policies of self ID exist in countries that are doing well for women across a broad range of measures.

They are clearly doing things right, aren't they?

That statement is so vague as to be meaningless. What I'd want to see is specific research on the various areas that women have concerns about.

But as has been pointed out - by a UN Special Rapporteur, no less - if a country has self ID then the issues may be rendered invisible - for example, if crimes are recorded according to self ID then assaults from transwomen on women in single sex female spaces will not be visible.

I'd be very concerned that self ID might paint a hugely distorted picture, based on unreliable data.