What will happen when the EHRC Code of Practice is released?

[ItsCoolForCats]

And is approved by Parliament. More protests? More moobs on the streets? Will organisations follow the law now that they can no longer say they are waiting for the EHRC? Will we ever go back to 'normal'?

Oh goooood, just what we need.

Dumb and Dumber NW will have that cross expression on her face that she uses when she is trying to be serious and scolding folks for not wanting men to steal wonen’s rights.

Yes. The more we mention this the greater the chance that the message seeps in.

if that organisation is being audited and investigated then it needs to go back as far in time as needed.

Just musing on something - for a while it has been posited that the favourable answers on polls asking "Should trans women be allowed in women's spaces" etc are because a lot of people think that trans women are women, ie the other way round from the truth.

And this judgement will have made a few more of them realise that transwomen are men.

So the polls might change...

Yes. I’m sure some will comply, others will need to be forced to comply through legal action. It’s a tedious process for women.

Why not both, to quote a meme?

How do you know none of them realised? Did you ask them? Or are you assuming that because no-one said “ooh you’re trans” that they didn’t know?

Do you not understand that we are all perfectly capable of not saying anything in day to day interactions? It is rude and unnecessary to say “you look like a man” in this context. It is also not necessarily physically safe for a woman to act confrontationally towards a male person, so we don’t often do it. It’s why legal boundaries matter to us - and why we want and need single sex spaces.

And so proud of them assaulting someone with soup while they were having a conversation - that’s a marvellous achievement.

Exactly.

And not only that, the general public must be wandering where all these transwomen are. Because the ones they see are going topless and pissing on statues. Or sound like a trucker who smokes 50 a day.

The image of a delicate, fey, unassuming man is nowhere.

Honestly Bee, the only issues any of us have with what trans rights activists are demanding are the degree to which physical treatments with very severe side effects are being used to allieviate mental distress, and the conflation of sex and gender such that female people's sex-based rights and language are for some reason getting mixed up with gender validation.

As a trans woman you clearly do not believe "womanhood" is dependant on being female, as evidenced by the simple fact that you believe yourself, a male person, to be a woman, so perhaps you can explain this to me.

I really do want to understand why is it so important to you that a group of people who you don't even belong to, who have nothing to do your definition of "woman", who by number alone have historically been marginalised, exploited and abused more consistently than any other group of humans, whose problems are different to the problems you may or may not face, be denied legal rights, social acceptance and even our own name and language with which to speak of our own experiences.

Why is it so important to you to take away the tools we need to fight our historic and onoing marginalisation, abuse and oppression, things that are nothing to do with you or womanhood as you experience it but are centred in our female bodies and how society treats us because of them?

It seems axiomic to you that female people must lose their rights for trans people to be safe but I really really do not see the connection here. It's not like female people don't actually exist or anything 😂 we are real and our bodies are real, and sometimes whether we like this or not our bodies are a really significant factor in what happens to us. So removing our rights and protections and the language to talk about that really does hurt us.

It is not an act of hate to trans people that female people should want to continue to exist as a legally and socially recognised group, and to maintain rights and social protections based on sex to mitigate the challanges and needs we have because of our sex.

The needs of female people because of our sex are nothing to do with gender identity. This shouldn't really be an issue to trans people at all so I do not understand why it makes you so angry. You are not angry about the rights of Black people, or disabled people, so why so angry about female people?

I just don't get what is so wrong with acknowledging that and allowing us to continue to have female-only spaces, rights, resources and opportunities for those times that our sex is significant and does make a difference.

Can you explain?

Because honestly, I'd really love to know

Ah, i see the morning seething hate is here

I think Orwell himself would be astonished and horrified by this genuflection to his masterpiece by the most committed proponents of doublethink and newspeak around.

Oh yes, I'm sure Kelly Jay Keen, the gentle soul who approved of a GC man talking about trans genital torture fantasies and never stops shouting at trans people, like ever..was just having a lovely chat and sat herself next to someone she thought was trans 🙄

Half of my trans friends just exist in the world in their acquired sex with only those closest knowing, most of the rest 'blend'. The whole point of transition (and why the GRA is written the way that it is) is for people to transition then just get on with their life, with dysphoria minimised.

Did you watch the video Bee?

Obviously not.

Bee, I'm not sure if you realise this but you only ever consider the trans person's perspective.

Outside the trans person's head, what you call "blending" or "getting on with their life" is actually deception, colonisation and the bypassing of consent as to who we chose to be vulnerable with, to allow to touch us, to compete against us, to counsel us, to offer our support and mentoring to,

I have noticed there seems to be a significant disconnect between on the one hand your statements that this is a non issue for most women who are happy to accept trans women and on the other this very stong need to be allowed to deceive and hide. Can you elaborate on that?

I am wondering if it is because underneath you realise what you want is transgressing women's boundaries and bypassing women's consent, and like all opporessors and colonists what you really fear subconsciously is the people you have hurt and dominated may turn the tables on you.

We wont, you know. We just want trans people to deal openly and fairly with us, and to not appropriate sex-based rights, protections, opportunities and language simply as a backdrop to play out their ideas of gender.

Bee like most TRA isn’t remotely interested in watching any of the videos or reading links to any of the evidence we post either. Ironically despite endlessly describing FWR as an echo chamber, they inhabit the biggest one of all, the one called No Debate.

Just like they mindlessly cheer the fox killer every time he announces a new massive "win", without looking into the veracity of it at all.

It's not that they want to marginalised anyone.

It's that they are too fucking scared to say no to anti social men who cause a massive drama because they have a lack of respect for boundaries of others.

Why do you expect people to give a toss about your friends?

I'm sure these men think they 'blend'.

You have to wonder why the likes of @BeeSouriante are so desperate to violate women and our boundaries.
Do you accept women saying no in your day to day life, or do you violate the boundaries of those women too?

There's so much here that I'll have to split up to answer and, honestly, given that, even with notifications reduced as far as I can (without just blocking them all) I have 30+ (most of which is crap trolling), don't be fussed if I don't get back after.

"Honestly Bee, the only issues any of us have with what trans rights activists are demanding are the degree to which physical treatments with very severe side effects are being used to allieviate mental distress, and the conflation of sex and gender such that female people's sex-based rights and language are for some reason getting mixed up with gender validation"

This is just not true:

(a) many GC activists are explicitly eliminationist in their words

(b) most GCs in my experience use ancient homophobic tropes and laughably bad pseudoscience to imply that trans women are a sexual threat whilst gleefully ignoring that the vast majority of us take medications that are used as chemical castration agents (i.e. testosterone blockers). This is a common tactic used by hate groups throughout history (Irish people in the US, Black people, gay men and lesbians etc etc) during moral panics.

(c) many GC activists have espoused that trans people should have fundamental rights removed - a notable one was JK Rowling when she, in an opinion piece in the Times (or Telegraph, I never remember) stated that trans people should not have the presumption of innocence, which is pretty disgusting and shameful. GCs have been VERY active in trying to stop 'trans-inclusive' events happening and have time after time have (badly) attempted to try and separate trans people from our LGB siblings (carelessly not understanding queer culture at all).

etc etc

Trans people have been using cross-sex hormones for most of a century and the evidence for any harm is scant and usually related to synthetics, which barely any trans people use anyway. It's notable that I never hear GC activists express concern about the use of synthetics with younger cisgender women (where they are still used a LOT) via BC. Neither did I hear GC activists talk about the vaginal mesh scandal and rarely the issues with poor hormonal care for women going thru menopause.

When I talk to my friends who are feminists, I feel educated by them about these and many issues, when I talk with GCs, it's crickets.

It's just concern trolling and for a 'movement' that states that it's based in feminism it sure is against bodily autonomy.

Trans people have been medically transitioning for most of a century, we're hardly a secret and the 'norm' is to accept that trans people move to their acquired sex. You can see such 'woke' publications such as the Sun and Daily Star in decades past seamlessly respecting trans people's names, pronouns and gender. Nobody (including trans people) said that trans men were exactly like men or that trans women were exactly like women, but that they were close enough and that was fine.

It is 'gender critical' (I wish it critiqued gender) ideology that is new, based on the unscientific and reductionistic mantra of 'sex is immutable' and contradicting most biologists' understanding of 'sex'. Obviously GC ideology comes from TERFism, but is pretty unrecognisable now from that.

I say this as I don't believe that GC ideology is anything more than a fancy label for a moral panic - TERFism was a thing..a very strange thing that most sane ppl would recoil in horror from, but GCism is just a mask for the lizard brain disgust that you and many people have about queer people...I know it well, I've seen it my whole life.

GCs show rarely show concern for women except when it comes to trans people - in my (queer) community there was far more talk and celebration over the recent decriminalisation of abortion amendment(s) than in all the GC spaces I know. Hell, you only have to look at these forums where the anti-trans forum is constantly abuzz whilst the feminism chat forum is, well, pretty dead..and even when something does appear, it often turns into 'about the trans'.

Furthermore, with the recent removal of protections from trans people (don't gaslight me, even Cunningham acknowledged it) - there was literally no mention of the effects on cisgender women in GC spaces - something that many (non GC) woman have expressed concerns about.

This is why we call you 'anti-trans' activists - just like the women in years past who would spread panic about predatory lesbians in changing rooms, it's never about protecting women, womanhood or 'sex-based rights', it's about that seething hate of difference.

Obviously trans people are a demographic and there are dodgy trans people like any group..hell I argue with other trans people all the time and I'm not averse to telling people off. Are there things that we could do better as a (very heterogeneous) community? Sure, but y'know it's kinda hard when you're being constantly demonised in the media to an insane level, when the mental health crisis is so bad that every day I expect to hear about more terrible misery or, gods forbid, another completed suicide, when your healthcare is in shambles and your rights are being removed.

Anyway, that's enough for now, sorry if that is offensive to you. Have a lovely afternoon.

Do you not feel a little bit lonely over here, Buzzy @BeeSouriante? Being the only flying monkey?

There used to be so many of you!

And yet here you are, but even your heroes on Reddit didn't interract much with your "Look at meeeeee! I done a post on Mumsnet!" thread last week. Is that why you deleted it?

Much of daily life can work smoothly with humans treating each other with dignity and respect. Sex shouldn’t matter and Bees trans mates should absolutely be treated no differently to any other human. Dressing in non conforming ways and/or having elected to altered their bodies through hormones and surgery should not result in them having fewer rights than conforming humans. The law reflects this and so should the Code of Practice, once it’s released.

Bees trans mates, if they are male, will not be permitted to access single sex provision for females, even if this hurts their feelings.

Hopefully, in making the above clear to all, widespread acceptance that the law is fair and reasonable will follow.

Those for whom the law and guidance is problematic (such as passing trans women and trans woman who have such an unstable personality that they equate the law as eradicating them) should be provided support and TRAs should advocate for their second best option - as they see it.

Just talking past everyone as usual.

I didn’t make myself clear. It goes without saying that they are going for the appeasement option because they believe that small group of men will cause more problems to them than any number of women.

They can still get on with their lives as well as use the facilities provided for them. Why are you making such a fuss about toilets. Going to the toilet is not your whole life is it?

Very few men could easily pass, the rest are obvious.....and we know this because we see men presenting as women on a frequent basis if we live in big cities or are around the. 'scene'. I imagine many think they pass, but they really don't.

They thing women are soft touches who won't complain.

Also see 'the fucking state of maternity services in the uk' as another reference point to this logic.

I think that it is far more significant to consider what the ‘man on the Clapham omnibus’ thinks and wants than what posters on FWR think and want. Having said that, there is significant overlap.

Most people want trans people to be have the same rights as everyone else - no fewer and no more. Most people think that trans people don’t change sex when they ‘transition’ and so, where sex matters, they think that they should not be categorised as the opposite sex. Most people think that both of these principles are really straight forward and become very confused when people suggest there is a lot more to it. When the simple facts are presented correctly, this is what most people think - because it simply makes sense.