Biological sex

[fromtheshires]

Ive been reading a lot of posts on the main boards where FWR keeps coming up about trans women are men and have a question so thought I'd ask it on here.

I am fully aware I'm going to get flamed before I ask it but it's a question that i actually think is important to help me understand this topic.

It usually ends up an argument about toilets and safe spaces on the main boards so my question is if a biological female to male trans person was to use the women's toilets what would the reaction be at seeing someone with muscles, tattoos and a beard in the female toilets because they are biologically female but look like a man? What about someone who was raped but attends a female only SA support group because they are biologically female?

And before you all begin, I'm no guardian journo, just interested in the responses to broaden my understanding

I suppose the next logical question would be if they had genital surgery would it be an issue to anyone

A man is still a man even without a penis and balls.

If not of

Ok. However, you may or may not realise that the information that you are gathering is considered anti-trans. Hence my question. Because so much of what we discuss is considered anti-trans when it is material reality and the impacts of a conflict of where the demands of a minority groups conflict with the needs of women and girls- ie all female people.

So calling things anti-trans is either a misrepresentation of what is discussed or it is coming from a purely ideological belief or maybe even just someone repeating a term they have heard people they respect or look to for opinion use without realising it is actually very offensive to feminists to label them or their activities ‘anti-trans’.

And it is fucking offensive.

If you want information at your fingertips, may I suggest you visit this thread. From around half way through on, it has links galore that you might find interesting original source material. And we always recommend people read, read and read. And read original source to formulate your own opinions based on evidence.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3145470-Break-it-down-for-me?latest=0

Filters.

"No one else's business what is in my pants"

"Why are TERFS obsessed with what is in someone's pants" etc
Distraction techniques. They don't want you to know that the vast majority of transwomen retain their dicks.

And as for (usually) Labour politicians claiming that some women have a penis... FYI, many on this board are left wing. Don't fall for the line that we are a bunch of hard-right fascists.

Serves me right for typing when distracted. Wide hips!!!

As others have said the hips don't lie.

Most women will still read a man who has had genital surgery as a man, because his whole body shape (height, shoulder width, foot and hand size etc) will still look male.

An obviously male-bodied person in any situation where women feel vulnerable will make many if not most of those women feel wary, nervous or threatened.

There is not only the fear of sexual harassment or assault, there is also the factor of male aggression and male violence. Statistically, as a group transwomen are just as likely as any other males to behave aggressively or violently, hormone medicalisation and/or surgery notwithstanding

Have posted this before. I'm an A&E doctor/urgent care GP. I meet a lot of people who got up that day, not expecting to need medical care (so they have dressed as usual), and I often have to ask them to take their clothes off. I have never, ever been surprised at someone's sex, when I do.

There are some TM who might pass when I first call them in from the waiting room but, after a couple of seconds talking to them - way before they get undressed - I know.

Also, if you have modified your body with drugs/surgery to the point where you get hassle in the women's toilet, that's on you. It's not my problem and it's not a reason to deny women single-sex spaces.

Another vote for third spaces. It really does solve these issues.
Of course, we know that many of the people that they are aimed out will choose to use toilets for the opposite sex, perhaps as validation or as voyeurs.

a law which states there must always be a unisex toilet provided, alongside a law which states single sex toilet use as a legal boundary, would be helpful for everyone imho.

The thing is OP, many of us on this board are wary of people who rock up and seemingly pose innocent questions (I just want to understand etc.) - only to call us all horrible bigots and use screenshots on twitter/ reddit etc. 'proving' the transphobia that is supposedly rampant on MN. It's been done many many times, so you may get a frosty response initially until posters realise you are a genuine poster.

To all the posters who keep saying about the anti trans posts and prove it, as someone unaware of the high percentage of people who chose not to remove genitals i can assure you most of the posts looks transphobic.

I was the one asking about what you mean by anti trans, and I'm still interested in what you mean when you say that. I'm not trying to be goady, I'm not trying to annoy you - that terms is thrown around so much often without explanation or context, and sometimes even asking a question or having a genuine concern about something is considered transphobic.

JK Rowling is considered a horrible transphobic bigot - this is repeated in mainstream media often - and yet she has said nothing hateful at all, simply expressed a need for single sex spaces for women and that the legal category of woman be protected. That's why we have become wary of what exactly someone means' when they say transphobia, because often it is just saying something that the activists don't like or agree with (usually something factual).

As for removing genitals, it's not my business if a man removes his penis, it doesn't mean he's a woman. Why can't he be a gender non conforming man, which is essentially what he is. Why are trans rights activists and groups against third spaces, even though that seems like the fairest option for everyone? Also, how exactly would we police that, by checking people entering the toilets? that would never work.

Women are not just men without penises, we are not eunuchs. We need single sex spaces without ANY males, regardless of how those men feel about themselves, regardless of any plastic surgery they have had. Women fought hard to gain single sex public spaces and now they are under threat.

On the subject of men who have had their genitals removed:

Sarah Jane Baker castrated himself while in prison. He claims to have then eaten his testes. After inciting a crowd to punch 'terfs', he was recalled to prison, as he is on a life sentence for kidnap, torture, and attempted murder.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/07/10/punch-a-terf-the-violent-misogyny-of-the-trans-movement/

I do not want to share a space with this man.

At present I'm imagining the best, most workable solution is 'third spaces' - for those that don't want to, or don't feel comfortable, using the facilities for their own sex.

Third spaces are the obvious solution in the meantime.

What has " this day and age" got to do with basic sex differences, though? They still exist. We don't have single sex spaces because we're twee and prissy - we have them to preserve and protect women's dignity and privacy.

You do know there is fetish cult which is predicated on 'nullification' in which the male genitals are castrated; and even men who are AGP go as far as to have their genitals removed.

Men remain men, though, with a male gaze - regardless of genitalia. Single sex spaces are based on biological sex for good reasons, especially for women and girls.

Regardless of " support" from trans identified people, it is the most obvious solution, and one which would have wide spread public support - which is what really matters when it comes down to legislation.

Also, even without genitals, men retain their male-patterned behaviour.

A study into chemically castrated sex offenders in prisons, showed that they continued to commit sex based crimes, but with even more violence than when they were not chemically castrated (think, using implements, viciously, rather than their penis).

Well I for one would not want to be in a dark alley with Sarah Jane Baker.(Probably many men wouldn't either...)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12282337/Who-Sarah-Jane-Baker-Trans-activist-called-TERFs-punched.html

Just saw that @ArabellaScott beat me to this one!

I have been faced by a bearded transman in the ladies toilets. Initially my fight or flight started kicking in, but in another second I could see her height, and build, and lack of adam's apple, and female features, and carrying angle, and way of moving, and instantly relaxed as she was obviously a woman. As a woman, she had a right to use the ladies.

Ah the lovely Sarah Jane!

@fromtheshires I suppose the next logical question would be if they had genital surgery would it be an issue to anyone?

It makes no difference to me at all. I have no way of telling whether a man has had genital surgery, it's none of my business, and I don't want to know.

Well summed up.

And that is precisely the issue actually.

You are spot on that "most men with an ounce of decency" would not change next to a small child (or any female who does not ask them to). And they don't.

But, with self ID, the ones with no decency can do, do do it, probably get some "frisson" while doing it and women cannot by law stop them.

See? You know intuitively what the issue is! 😀