Is it possible to be a feminist and also have some empathy for transgender people today?

[HoundOfTheBasketballs]

I’m not going to pretend I’m an expert here but everything feels incredibly polarised. Like, either you’re with us or you’re against us.
Is there no middle ground in this debate?
I am, and always have been a feminist, but I know and like people who are trans and non-binary. I can’t be the only person feeling confused and conflicted, can I?

What is it that is confusing you?

Transgender people (mostly men self identifiying as women) have not lost any rights today.

What middle ground are you talking about?

Every single gender critical feminist that I know IRL … every single one… has wanted good things for trans people, including protection in law.

Just not at the expense of protection for women.

(ETA - so that means it is a win-win today)

Trans people have the same rights today that they had yesterday. All this judgement has done is clarify that they have rights based on their gender reassignment and not the rights of the opposite sex. As has been the case since 2004.

Of course not.

They haven’t lost any rights though. The law has been clarified that’s all. It’s just that they’ve been aggressively implementing their own (wrong) version of it for some times.

This

and for years women on FWR and mumsnet have been saying that transpeople need protection in law

I'm not sure what you are confused about? You can still be a lovely friend I would have thought without encouraging your trans friends to buy into anything that isn't true ie that they are the opposite sex. And non binary means basically nothing at all doesn't it?

Whats the middle ground here OP? A women’s space or sport is either a single sex space or it isn’t.

I have empathy for young women who are not only going through the physical puberty but also coping with a ridiculously appearance-focussed world with every-more-rigid sex stereotypes and who decide to take refuge in an invented gender.

Massive empathy and sympathy.

Still don't think they are boys/men.

I have empathy for them because I think they’re unwell and have been lied to. I know a couple of trans women and I’ve definitely felt sorry for how upset they are today.

However I still don’t think biological men/people who were born male should have access to single sex spaces or organisations.

This, why can no one articulate what trans people are being stopped from having re human rights?
The right to do what you want and force others to believe what you want isn't a right is it?

It’s just that the feeling I get from a lot of people posting on MN is that trans people are all in favour of their rights at the expense of women’s rights. But the people I meet in real life aren’t like that. The trans women I know are just people, trying to get on and live their lives in peace. They want to be happy and safe and they want women to also be happy and safe. But when I go on the internet it all feels so much more aggressive. Maybe I should just stay off the internet.

They’ve not lost anything though. It’s just shown they have rights based on their reassignment?

Sympathy? In what sense?

Nothing has changed in law.

The law is exactly the same as yesterday and the day before and the day before that.

Except it's recognised that the Equality Act is about Equality. And this women are allowed privacy and dignity away from males every bit as much as transwomen.

The only difference is now no one can shout bigot at women for saying this and upholding this.

This does not mean transwomen have had any rights removed. Nor does it mean their right to privacy is removed. It just means that legally it has to be approached in a different way which ensure women's rights are not sidelines.

The fact that TRA thought transwomen were entitled to use women and shit all over their rights is frankly, not my fucking problem not do I waste any time or sympathy for male supremacy.

The equality act is about equality. Man forcing women to go along with and facilitate males being women is not not equality.

I too have empathy for them. But I'm bloody glad the trans (mtf) sex offenders I work with will no longer be able to claim sex based rights as if they were women.

Yes.

i know trans people. I have sympathy for them. I support their right to dress how they want and have whatever medical stuff they want as long as they are an adult.

they are not biological women and the court case today was about whether they counted as women in the equalities act sense of the word. They are not biological women.

the judgement made clear they are still protected from discrimination etc which I feel is also important.

the judgement made no comment on toilets etc.

I would have thought being non-binary would mean quite a lot to someone who believed they were non-binary, and their friends and family. To just dismiss this as meaning nothing feels a bit callous.

Some have been misled into believing they could legally waltz into any women's space and only law breaking bigots (aka terfs) would stop them. Some are so deluded they genuinely believe, and this belief has been fostered, that they have changed sex, that they are no different to real women. I have some sympathy for the misled and deluded. This judgement must be a horrible shock for them. I'll get over it. I suggest they do too.

My real sympathy is for the transwomen who were transed as children. Such as the son of that Mermaid woman. I doubt they had any real agency in taking the path they were led down. They've been lied to and damaged irrevocably, by people who should have protected them.

I suppose a middle ground would be a third space or an open category.

Hopefully Stonewall will put as much energy into lobbying for those now as it did into trying to systematically colonise or eradicate women's spaces.

Those who were trying to erode women’s rights have lost the ability to do that - no more taking selfies in the ladies loo or getting naked in women’s changing rooms

When I first entered this debate i naively thought that third spaces or open categories was the reasonable middle ground. Then I was called a transphobic bitch for even suggesting such a thing.

That was never a right, though. It was an infringement.

The press like to present the issue as being polarised. It really isn't. I think that most women want trans-identifying people to be safe from predatory and dangerous men too, we understand the risks!

I wonder what you mean by middle ground and I think I disagree with your premise

i believe most women want transgender people to have lives free of fear and discrimination.

they just don’t want that to be at the expense of women.

what about women who can’t go to a gym because of men ( transwomen) in the changing rooms? What about women who can’t play sport against men? Why should their desire for single sex be less worthy than the transgender desire for single gender facilities ?

transwomen need their own rights and their own support. But that type of “middle ground” has been repeatedly rejected by the transactivists

The judgement was specifically about a trans person who was a natal male and whether they counted as a woman for an equalities act quote for women.

so in this case a trans person absolutely did was taking up a position that otherwise would have been the place of a biological woman and the court has ruled that the right of a trans person to be considered their legal gender does not override an equalities act requirement for a biological woman.

so this case actually was specifically about trans rights overriding women’s rights.

I have never understood what rights trans people feel they should have, that they don’t already have.