A space for respectful dialogue about sex, gender and diversity

[Tandora]

This is a thread for posters who want to talk and share a diverse range of opinions about sex, gender, being gender non-conforming and/or trans, and public policy. It is to learn from each other; to engage in a productive exchange, and to hear different sides of the story.

It is not a space for bullying and insults. Please do not join if your intention is to control the conversation and undermine those who disagree with you.

Why are you so confident that your posts are part of a "productive exchange of differences in opinion"?

I think it could be easily argued that they are part of a pointless and relentless attempt by you to bully women into giving up their rights. One could also argue that detailed debate is unproductive (because the idea that men are not women is not a complex one) and "no, women have rights too" is about the only thing productive one can post.

I mean, I've seen from people who have detransitioned that it was the case for them.
Can you tell me what you believe the outcome would have been for me?

Thinking to how this might work in practice...

I understand what you are suggesting in theory but find it very hard to think of any context that would necessitate excluding people based on their inner gender identity rather than their material body sex. Can you suggest some examples of things where "slightly mixed sex" is appropriate?

And how/who would it be implemented? An honour system, or something more concrete? Or is it more that you assume gender is so fundamental to one's wellbeing that people will have no desire to be in the "wrong" space for their self image, and by definition if someone wants to be in a particular slightly mixed space, it is the right one for them?

How are you thinking this might work when it comes to people who genuinely don't feel any alignment to one of the "slightly mixed" genders? Is the assumption they will just "know" they are supposed to see themselves as aligning to the "slightly mixed" group that is mostly their sex? If so, how do you think that will make them feel, to be seen as what they are not?

I would like to raise the issue of appropriated language. Particularly the words transman and transwoman. I am increasingly annoyed by these words which I think promote the fallacy that a trans person can adopt the sex of the opposite gender. I am now using the terms Trans Identifying Man , and Trans Identifying Woman which I think both recognise that someone is identifying themselves as trans, which I have absolutely no issue with btw, but also acknowledges that their birth sex cannot be altered. Does anyone else have views on this ?

I think this is a fear that people have - and I understand why it would seem alarming. But it really isn't the reality of what is happening in society/ clinics etc.

I am interested in the evidence you have for the 'this isn't the reality of what is happening in society/clinics etc'. The evidence I see is, for example, the >5,000% increase in girls being referred to the Tavistock and (anecdote, not data!), seeing one adolescent I know prescribed testosterone from a clinic after one 45 minute online consultation. All this gives me pause for thought on the idea that "this isn't reality" isn't, in fact, reality.

I don't think these edge cases are over complicated and have been discussed before.

CAIS is a rare and specific medical condition. I think, on balance, entry to women's sport shouldn't be allowed, but if there are enough elite athletes a separate category could be considered. On an everyday, practical basis these individuals using women's facilities are clearly not in the same category as piss-taking, aggressive males (the type who do that woman-gender thing of taking photos of themselves in toilets).

Trans identifying females have the protection of sex and maternity characteristics under the EA2010. If they have children they will be legally recognised as their mother. They should definitely be incarcerated in women's prisons for their own safety. On a daily basis, their use of the men's facilities isn't a physical threat to men, and given the etiquette in gents (urinate, studiously avoid eye contact, leave) is less intrusive. The Supreme Court recognised this in the ruling.

Tandora you are being a control freak, admonishing polite posters because you don’t happen to like their views. I was appalled at your treatment of a rape victim on a previous thread and this one is coming across as me-me-me.

This is the FWR board. If you want to discuss how wonderful you are or the fabulousness of TW then Reddit will welcome you with open arms and I’m sure Mumsnet would set you up with a separate space. The women of FWR are not your support humans, we are women with rights, opinions, experience and intelligence.

Stop telling posters off. As a friend says to her children - you’re not the boss of me.

A lot to unpack.

Not all trans people describe their experience in terms of being "born in the wrong body". To the extent that this is a concept people use, it's simply a way of describing their experience, rather than a statement of 'belief'.

Do I think the experience of being trans ( a sex other than the one was observed at birth) is caused by social conditioning? Absolutely not, I do not believe there is any good evidence of this at all - quite the reverse.

Do I believe it is a mental illness? Well, this depends what you mean by "mental illness". While being trans is a psychological/ cognitive/ neurodevelopmental difference, I would not use the terminology of "mental illness" as I believe it to be stigmatising, and I do not believe there is anything inherently wrong with being trans.

If you believe there is only one, singular thing that a person could post that would be productive - "no, women have rights too" - then this is not the thread for you.

This thread is for those who are interested in hearing/ sharing a diversity of different opinions.

Fine. Campaign for this.

If women (the biological kind) retain their single sex spaces as they have then now, I'm genuinely not bothered if other groups try to get further provision.

I don't see how it is practically or legally workable, but go for it.

I also don't think men who identify as trans will like it at all. Try asking them what they think about your proposal?

I was appalled at your treatment of a rape victim on a previous thread and this one is coming across as me-me-me.

This is not the thread for personal accusations/ attacks levelled against other posters.

It's a thread for a productive exchange of differences of opinion on the topic of sex, gender and diversity.

Another of my posts yesterday emphasised the importance of these concrete questions on the basis that threads like these, while fascinating - looking forward to following this one - can become a bit circuitous, an an explanation of why: it may move such threads forward even further. Just as an eg.

Tandora, above, you write,

[Calling a space for trans women and women 'mixed sex'] is also unreasonable as it completely fails to recognise that "trans women" (whether you believe they are a "subset of men" or not) still exist as a distinct category of people.

I could equally write:

[Calling a space for trans women and women 'single sex'] is also unreasonable as it completely fails to recognise that "women" (whether you believe they are a "subset of the group trans women and women" or not) still exist as a distinct category of people.

In other words, you term 'unreasonable', in this context, just doesn't make sense unless as an indication of a parallel failure to recognise that women, in the way the women here wish to define themselves (female; sex-based), still exist as a 'distinct category of people'.

Other adjectives could be applied: complex, difficult, thought-provoking etc. But 'unreasonable' doesn't hold up.

It's issues like this that lead me to request some more concrete details re: your views.

Instead of trying to police who contributes, why don't you just engage with the debate?

For example, I am interested to know what you think would be the point of a space for "women plus trans people" and in what circumstances you envisage such a space existing.

With regard to your closing line, here, have you read Time To Think by Hannah Barnes, shortlisted for the Orwell Prize? It does show, in an incisive and thoroughly referenced examination of gender care in the UK, that this is, in fact, absolutely a significant part of (an overall hugely complex picture of) "what is happening".

If a women requests that no men, whatever their gender identity, are allowed in a female single sex spaces, eg changing rooms, prison ,rape counselling groups etc, is that a transphobic request?

Do I think the experience of being trans ( a sex other than the one was observed at birth)

Being trans isn't being a sex that you weren't born as, though, is it? You might decide that that's what trans people are, but they say they are people who have gender identities that don't align with their sex - the physical sex is a separate thing from their gender identities.

Please could I ask - so that you don't risk posting untrue statements that you don't mean - that you are careful that your language reflects what you mean - so when you say 'sex' people will take that the mean the definition of sex that's in the dictionary.

By all means, if you use a different meaning of sex then for the sake of clear debate, please set it out explicitly so we know what you mean when you say it.

This has been a real issue with your trying to set out your position in the past, Tandora - you use words to mean different things within the same post or thread then complain that people don't understand you.

For example, I am interested to know what you think would be the point of a space for "women plus trans people" and in what circumstances you envisage such a space existing.

The point of such spaces is to recognise and include a diversity of women, including trans women, in society; to enable a diversity of women, including trans women, to have access to basic public services in a manner that is compatible with their rights, dignity, privacy and basic humanity; t make society a better and richer place, and to ensure that the human rights and dignity of all people are protected, even those who are part of minority groups.

The particular definition that you have for "trans" from a previous thread describes a mental illness

to have a pervasive , profound, unrelenting recognition of self as being the opposite sex.

This is a textbook definition of a delusion.

A delusion is a firm, fixed, false belief, maintained despite clear evidence to the contrary, and not explained by the person's culture. These are symptoms of a mental, neurological, or medical disorder, with examples including believing that one is being plotted against (persecutory) or has extraordinary powers (grandiose) or that one is a member of the opposite sex (trans).

That doesn't really answer the question. What sort of spaces are you talking about and what purpose do they serve from women's point of view?

But women plus TIMs makes as much sense as "disabled people plus LGB people" or "Afro-carribeans plus women" or "men plus disabled women" or "black men, but not including those from muslim countries"?

You ae not going to find the 'diversity' you seek on this particular board because it was created for the purpose of being able to discuss the negative impacts of transgender Ideology on female people and on children. This pre-supposes that most posters already reject much of that which you propose. Saying the same things over and over again is not going to get you a different result this time around.

Well give it a go.

I think what you might find is that the space ends up being predominantly made up of men identifying as trans. And then not being used at all.

It would be interesting to find out.

What was it that first attracted you to the notion of males colonising spaces intended purely for biological women?

I would be very interested to empirically test your theory there, as I suspect the very opposite.

How do women benefit from letting TiMs into their spaces?