TERFs are not the problem

[niadainud]

AIBU to think that transwomen's beef should not be with so-called TERFs, but with men who rape women or who have sexual proclivities such as autogynaephilia?

It is not (imo) transphobic to want women-only spaces for a number of reasons, but if (some) men weren't predatory in one way or another then women would have nothing to worry about.

I realise this is a highly utopian way of looking at it, but it riles me enormously that it has somehow become socially unacceptable not to pretend a man in a wig and a dress is actually female. I was introduced to someone's "niece" recently and they had facial hair. It's just ridiculous.

I also think that "real" transwomen (i.e. those who have undergone surgery etc.) make things more difficult for themselves by adopting this very black-and-white stance. People like Blaire White are realists and seem to speak some sense about the issue but they're a tiny minority.

I do the opposite of this. Wilful misinterpretation or mistake?

If we ran a poll on whether this was typed/voice-inputted with a sober mien…Especially from someone who so consistently illustrates bad faith engagement…

I will ask again, because you did not answer my direct questions:

Do you or do you not tell people you are a male person before you engage in sex?

Do you or do you not counsel young people to fully disclose their sex (not their gender identity) to someone before engaging in sex acts?

I have re-read. This is what you say:

"I am talking about enthusiastic consent between two or more adults, one of whom is not disclosing that they hold views which are hostile toward trans people or transness in general, and one of whom is not disclosing that they are trans.
This is not all that unlikely a situation; many trans people are not identifiable as trans, and many people with trans-hostile views are not identifiable as having trans-hostile views."

Nothing in there that says, don't go stealth, be upfront and seek full consent. Seems to be the opposite.

"My standard advice to young trans people intending to go stealth is 'don't fuck bigots or those even faintly vulnerable to bigoted ideologies; they can and will send you to prison and there is legal precedent supporting them doing so' with a side order of 'you can't know if someone is a bigot until they show you. Make sure the first time they show you isn't in court'. Schrodinger's bigot is something we have to factor into our daily lives."

Nothing in there about disclosing the sex of the person. Instead, it seems to be advice on picking a vulnerable person to have sex with without disclosing what sex the 'young trans person' is. Did you mean it to read this way? Again, it reads like an abuser's charter.

"And this is why we advise younger trans adults intending to go stealth to avoid 'bigot' bad vibes; not only is there a very real direct risk of personal harm, but also a risk of prosecution from anyone seeking to punish them for being trans."

Nothing in there that says, don't go stealth, be upfront and seek full consent. Again, like above. This reads like you are advising them to remain in stealth and pick a vulnerable person to have sex with.

"Nah, just that having a legal precedent that is weaponisable against minority groups who are trying to escape persecution is really fucked up.
While the precedents were both from another era and involved very dubious behaviour I sure as fuck don't condone, they still exist and the effect they have on all trans people who go stealth is very real."

Nothing in there that says, don't go stealth, be upfront and seek full consent. In fact, still talking about ''going stealth'.

"Nah mate, I warn them not to fuck cis people who hate them"

Nothing in there that says, don't go stealth, be upfront and seek full consent.

"Well it would be pretty fucking irresponsible to recommend to vulnerable young people who are trying to escape a lifetime of prejudice that they put themselves in danger in order to test a legal precedent, wouldn't it?
So we just advise them not to let bigoted cis people fuck them as it's safer all round. Maybe in a world where it isn't dangerous to be publicly trans we wouldn't have to worry about privacy quite so much."

Nothing in there that says, don't go stealth, be upfront and seek full consent. Like before, this reads like you are advising young people to target people who will not take them to court. It does not read like you are giving them healthy advice to seek full consent at all.

"If you successfully escape from daily lifelong prejudice and exist as a healthy sexually active adult in society you should be prosecuted.
What a green and pleasant land eh?
Anyway, that's only one of the ways trans people are discriminated against. I listed many others as well and that was by no means a particularly exhaustive list.
I'm off on holiday to a lovely country that doesn't discriminate against trans people. Have a lovely week."

Nothing in there that says, don't go stealth, be upfront and seek full consent.

Please. Do tell me what it is that I missed or misinterpreted.

I see operation letthemspeak is going splendidly!!!

In fact, this seems to be to be someone advising young people that society hates them. To choose vulnerable people to have sex with so that they don't take that person to court, but that at all costs, it is righteous to not disclose what sex they are. That the only people who want to know are to be reviled and to be hated and treated as bigots.

You are saying this to children and vulnerable young people.

In these posts, there is so many red fucking flags I am horrified that any organisation allows this kind of 'counselling'.

There is a word for a person who targets someone that they feel they can have sex with who won't tell anyone, including the police, if it turns out to be an act that they don't consent to. Do you realise just how predatory your posts read?

BH is a counsellor? Sorry did I miss that?
🤦🏼‍♀️

Yes. ‘A respected elder’ in their community being there to give advice to any child and young person who seeks it.

This poster told us this months and months ago.

Ok, that's what active enthusiastic consent is for.

People can withdraw consent at any time; that's how it works. If you decide you're actually not into them, you can say no. If you feel unsafe, you can say no. If you remember you left the front door unlocked, you can say no. That is final and binding, always.

If you find out the person you're fucking is a nasty minority with a protected characteristic your ideology forbids you from fucking, you can still say no! It's ok. You're allowed to say no no matter the reason and the reason ultimately doesn't matter. No is no. Everything else is secondary.

If they don't respect you saying no at any point prior to or during, then that's rape and I and any other reasonable person, trans or not, should whole-fucking-heartedly support the full weight of the law coming down on that vile piece of shit.

You are allowed to change your mind. You are allowed - hell, actively encouraged at all times - to say no and there should be no shame in it. We should encourage people training themselves to say it; to identify points where their boundaries are being crossed. We should train people to look for no's that can't be spoken; to always be on the lookout for their own blindspots and mindful of others.

I'm not talking about that, though, am I?

You know I'm not talking about that. It's fucking obvious I'm not talking about that. For avoidance of doubt:

I

AM

NOT

TALKING

ABOUT

THAT

I know more than I would ever want to about this and the life-shattering effects it has. I've withdrawn (or not even given in the first place) consent during sexual contact so many times during my life that I have literally lost count. I used to have a partner who would get drunk and push my boundaries regularly even when I was trying to push them away. I literally lost count of the number of times it happened. I was too scared to ever say anything because they knew I was trans, was generally stealth within my social group, and past evidence indicated that they would not have hesitated to destroy my life if I ever so much as hinted it to anyone. It took me a very long and terrifying time to safely extract myself from that relationship, thankfully many years ago now. It still hurts to think about it. Hell, it's still dangerous to even mention it on here anonymously given the power they still have over me.

My first sexual contact at university was with someone who touched me intimately when I had made it very clear I did not want to be. It has happened so many times that I lost count before I was 20.

I am very, very much aware of the importance of consent so please do not insult and gaslight me over it. It's disgusting behaviour that reflects terribly on you.

One last time:

I am
not talking
about that

You know I'm not. I've told you I'm not. Please don't do it again.

What I am talking about is the fact that I am a trans person who is perceived not to be trans by society. I am not a telepath and if someone does not tell me that they have an ideological opposition to fucking trans people, I may observe all reasonable good consent practice and accidentally let them fuck a person they secretly hate but don't even know it yet.

That person then holds the ability to retroactively withdraw consent under the law for literally no reason other than that I was actually trans and though they had no problem with every single thing about the person they actively and enthusiastically chose to fuck at the time, they can then rewrite history after the fact.

That is grotesque and terrifying.

Persecuted minorities should not have to metaphorically wear badges to warn prejudiced people away from normal human interactions with them. That is the state of the law. That is why, when you asked for rights trans people do not have, I listed it.

Thanks.

I will ask again, because you did not answer my direct questions:

(I don't want to know the answer to the first question so I have deleted it.)

This one below though it is hugely important.

Do you or do you not counsel young people to fully disclose their sex (not their gender identity) to someone before engaging in sex acts?

Is there a reason you will not answer the direct and very clear questions?

In fact, don't bother answering the first one. Just answer

Do you or do you not counsel young people to fully disclose their sex (not their gender identity) to someone before engaging in sex acts?

It's not about trans status. It's about biological sex.

Almost all people want to know the sex of the person they are going to engage in sex with.

Most people couldn't give a fig if someone is bigender, genderfluid, agender, or cakegender. But they do care what sex they are.

According to you, this is bigotry.

No one is entitled to sex.

No one is entitled to sex when a vital piece of information about the sex of the person they are about to have sex with has been withheld. And deliberately so.

Teaching young people that they can with hold that kind of information and that this is righteous and that this is necessary because an adult has made them very scared about this disclosure, is beyond words that are allowable on MN.

Teaching young people that they should pick someone who won't take them to court for not stating to them specifically in very clear language what their sex is, that they should always disclose their sex is again beyond words that are allowable on MN.

These actions are the very definition of someone who feels they are entitled to sex.

for literally no reason other than that I was actually trans

It's literally for the reason that you are male, surely?

"Trans" is so nebulous that even you are unable to describe what you think it means.

Are you categorically saying that no-one had a problem with you being male? And that the problem was your internal feeling of self-identity?

I'm going to address the DARVO that it's other people with the ideology, not BH. This is a nonsense, because absent BH's ideological worldview, a woman is simply the name for a female adult human being. A view gender critical feminists share, seeing as it is founded in reality.

And here.

Tell us what we have missed. Where is it that you say you advise young people to be fully upfront about the sex they are and get full consent before they engage in sex.

I have put it all here for you to point it out where I missed it.

So can we finally dispense with any pretence that trans rights (which here are described as going stealth and lack of informed consent in sexual relations) are in any way comparable to LGB rights (the people who stood up to the actual bigots who were physically dangerous to them at great personal cost in some cases to achieve acceptance and change society for the better)?

It's not about trans status. It's about biological sex.

The poster knows this, or they wouldn't keep saying the same thing, they'd acknowledge other people's different view and speak in a less gaslighty way.

"If they don't respect you saying no at any point prior to or during, then that's rape and I and any other reasonable person, trans or not, should whole-fucking-heartedly support the full weight of the law coming down on that vile piece of shit."

What? Like not giving a person a vital piece of information about the sex category of the person they are about to have sex with when that could very likely change their consent? You mean that bit of 'disrespect' that the law should come down. Vile piece of shit is your own words.

"If you find out the person you're fucking is a nasty minority with a protected characteristic your ideology forbids you from fucking, you can still say no!"

You have told us that you don't wish to disclose this, so how would this sex partner be able to say no?

"You know I'm not talking about that. It's fucking obvious I'm not talking about that. For avoidance of doubt:"

I HAVE ASKED YOU DIRECT QUESTIONS BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK YOU ARE TELLING CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE.

I mean, if you can use capitals, so can I.

Maybe you could answer the direct question with a clear and concise answer though.

Yes, straight from the horse's mouth: gay people stubbornly persist with their bigoted ideology that forbids them from fucking those of the opposite sex.

though they had no problem with every single thing about the person they actively and enthusiastically chose to fuck at the time, they can then rewrite history after the fact.

But if you are stealth, and you pass, then there is something that they don't know about and therefore can't say whether or not they have a problem with it.

This is deceptive, coercive, and withholds the ability for them to consent, whether enthusiastically, actively, or whatever.

You talk LOADS about the consent of the stealth trans person in this scenario - and yes I agree, they can withdraw consent at any time, for any reason.

But we are all talking about the OTHER person in this equation. The person who is unaware of your biological sex. The person who may or may not have a problem having sex with someone who is lying to them by omission, but doesn't have a chance to say so because they are not in full possession of the facts.

This person cannot consent if something as significant as biological sex is actively concealed from them by the stealth trans person.

If they find out after the fact, this is not rewriting history, this is revealing a significant piece of information which they were not in possession of at the time because the trans person purposefully concealed it.

They may have been totally fine with it and enthusiastically consented if the trans person had told the truth beforehand and given them a chance to consent.

But if the trans person lies by omission and/or deception, they definitely cannot consent. By proceeding with sex with this person in their circumstances of ignorance, that is a criminal offence.

The courts have ruled in the recent past that having sex with someone while misleading them into thinking you're the opposite sex is rape by deception. Because the consent is not informed, and therefore not consent at all.

Misleading would, I imagine, encompass just not saying.

How is that different to what you're advocating, Butterfly?

Gosh.... maybe we just are stuck believing in nuance free- axiom style of consent. And not the wonderfully loving, respectful and nuanced style of consent that we should all be striving for as a compassionate, sacrificing and humane society where someone should never be expected to disclose one of the very important pieces of knowledge that allows them to give consent.

Because, apparently wanting to know the sex of the person who we are about to have sex with is bigoted.

It really cannot get any clearer I think. I think that is what I am being told. And that I am supposed to know that it is only ever a bigot who wants to know the sex of a person before having sex with them.

In fact, it cannot be clearer.

The whole argument of 'I should be allowed to deceive people in order to get sex and anyone who objects is a nasty bigot' is truly vomit inducing.

There's so many hideous parallels that it's hard to know where to start.

Don't forget, this poster is someone who has stated they get to meet with people who influence policy as well as counsel young people.

This is a poster who has presented the arguments where they are to be considered a 'true' transgender elder who wants males they don't personally consider to be transgender to be excluded from single sex spaces, while they can continue to have access to those spaces.

This is a poster that speaks directly to children and young people.

I already answered your question @Helleofabore.

It is the same answer I gave last time.

I advise people that there is legal precedent for cis people to retroactively withdraw consent for sex with trans people regardless of their clear consent at the time. I don't like having to say it because it's one of the many shit things they have to know in order to be safe and it's not like they have a shortage of those.

I'd much rather tell them that this country doesn't have a legal route for people who hold negative attitudes toward transness or trans people in general to send trans people to prison for having sex with someone who is consenting at the time but might later decide they actually weren't afterwards. However, that is not true.

Since it isn't safe to detonate your life and future prospects for escape from transphobia anyway, my advice is thus 'don't fuck cis transphobes if you decide to go stealth'. I can't advise for or against going stealth; just give the facts - and the facts are that this is a country where having sex while stealth can send you to prison.

That's it.