Please help me navigate the first stages of dating, with a conflict on trans issues (I'm a guy...)

[ConfessionalPiece]

Name changed for obvious reasons.

Relevant background:

I’m male, divorced, and recently back on the dating scene after a relationship ended about three months ago.

I’m gender critical / sex realist and politically engaged (specifically on this issue, quite engaged). I care a lot about politics, debate and ideas. I also have strong ADHD and light autistic traits, which means I can be quite intense, direct, and I know I don’t always find grey areas easy.

So, I matched with a woman on a dating app recently. There was a very strong connection straight away. We had a long conversation the night we matched, then met the next day despite some distance between us. The date went very well, with real chemistry and intimacy.

Let’s call her Lady X.

There are some practical location issues, but nothing I would necessarily see as impossible if things developed.

The connection felt unusually strong, although I know it is very early days. We seem to have similar neurodivergent traits, and there was that sense of recognising something in each other which can be quite rare.

On my Tinder profile I had said I was genuinely interested in politics. She asked whether I was right wing or a Tory / Reform voter. I said I don’t really fit neatly into party labels, and that I’m more of an issues-based voter than someone tribal about one party.

Then this came up.

While chatting on messages, she mentioned she used to have an anonymous X account where she saw herself as being an ally to people getting abuse, mainly trans people. When I asked a bit more, it turned out this was around the time J.K. Rowling published her letter. Lady X said she had been pushing back against misinformation, scaremongering and bullying. When I asked more, she sent me a link to Mermaids’ response to J.K. Rowling.

I pushed back a little and said I think there are serious issues with Mermaids and that I wouldn’t automatically trust their framing.

This has left me unsure what to do.

I think this could potentially have legs. I also know I am not always easy to be in a relationship with. Partly that is because of how I see the world, partly because of ADHD/autism, although I am happy being who I am. It can just make relationships harder. So the idea of being with someone who genuinely “gets” some of that is very appealing. It could be brilliant. Or it could be a disaster.

I also know that people with our kind of brains can sometimes become very black and white about the world. I have had to work hard on this myself. Years ago, for example, I found it extremely difficult living in a world where people eat meat, because veganism felt so morally obvious to me. I have had to learn, slowly, to sit with ambiguity and difference. I still find it hard.

I am much better sitting with grey areas and ambiguity than I was in the past.

The issue is that I really don’t believe humans can change sex. I think sex matters in some contexts, and I see this as a serious feminist issue. I am struggling to work out whether this is something we could navigate.

Do we just avoid the subject? That seems unlikely to work, especially for me.

Do we have a proper discussion and see whether there is any meeting of minds? That could go well, or it could expose a complete incompatibility.

Do I walk away now and save everyone the trouble?

I want to be live-and-let-live. I genuinely want to respect differences of opinion. But when a difference of opinion touches on women’s rights and safeguarding, I find it much harder to treat it as just another political disagreement.

Am I thinking about this the wrong way?

I know this could go in Relationships, but I thought I might get a different steer here.

And yes, I do know this is only one date so far.

Maybe this is really about politics and values more broadly, and I’m focusing on the trans issue because it is currently so salient for me.

I’d really appreciate advice, especially from women here who understand the current debate.

Please be kind. I know I may be overthinking it.

and yet I don't. I was dismissed by the bloke.

You didn’t change your sex.

So as you haven't been back I'm guessing starting this thread was just an excuse to post that link. Thought you'd be educating the women folk?

Absolutely no desire to see.what you look like. Its the relentless insistence that you really truly honestly do pass, in post after post. Its very very boring and totally pointless. You could be a sentient bowl of porridge for all anyone can tell.

So you are trans, then you admit that you are not a woman?
Otherwise you wouldn't be trans.

I don't impose views. I am not telling anyone how to live their life or possess the power to control anyone's access to rights.

If you use spaces that are single sex and for women then you are imposing your views and controling the rights of women.

You're both men, but one's honest about it.

Exactly. That’s why males with a trans identity do not experience misogyny. Now you’re getting it!

Do not diss porridge like that! I’d say All bran is more apt.

Thinking about mixing it up on Friday nights with a bit of guy liner.

You just need a V-neck T-shirt (apparently).

Shit i have about five, is that another signal I have been giving out by mistake?

Well, in the Sal Grover thread, it was supposedly argued that she should have known that Roxy Tickle was a true and honest woman due to his V neckline.

Yes, the assumption seems to be that the only reason one would wear a V-neck is to draw attention to cleavage, which is weird on so many levels.

Men who think they have the authority to tell women they are women as well, especially given when the women do not agree and say "No" are by definition Incels.

Transwomen who say they are women too are transincels.

Sorry but the lack of consent matters.

I’m struggling to find the difference between TRA and people like Andrew Tate to be honest.

Well, Andrew Tate rapes, assaults and trafficks women for a start...

Added 'sex realists believe wives and mothers are incels' to the list.

Sex realists really spend way too much time watering down feminist theory and observations with rubbish like this.

I think the similarities between AT etc and the TRA are that both groups think women are inferior and deserve no rights, threaten women when told no and reduce women to sexist offensive stereotypes. The best ones are those who treat women as props in their delusions and treat women as NPC

The best ones are those who treat women as props in their delusions and treat women as NPC

You're really selling yourselves short. NPCs (looked it up) don't respond on internet forums.

Also, women's rights are my rights. I am in favour of increasing these rights, for all women.

There are some interesting names that could be posted here at this point with reference to rape, murder and paedos. These names have created headlines not just in Scotland, the wider UK and the rest of the world.

But yes let us conveniently forget them as they somehow don't count.

I think I’d have the conversation sooner rather than later. It will be a good litmus test to see if you can handle disagreement as a couple.
i enjoyed the fact you are diagnosed with adhd and all the diagnosis protectors were put in their places. Using the phrase adhd traits is perfectly fine. There’s is no blood test for this diagnosis. It is very subjective to the assessor- and psychologists often disagree with one another. Sometimes It’s inaccurate to pretend that there is such a huge difference between a person diagnosed with adhd and another who has adhd traits, some people are undiagnosed, and some people are wrongly diagnosed. It’s a mess, frankly

How did the chromosome exchange work then? Is it like a blood transfusion where they removed all the Y chromosomes and exchanged them all for X? And with your ‘change’ having an ending, when did you stop taking synthetic hormones?

"a sex change process that had a beginning and an ending"

The beginning starts with an organism (in this case, a male human being) that has a body that has developed to produce small gametes. The middle is a natural metamorphosis (so no exogenous hormones needed, or surgery). The end is when the same organism (so the very same human being, but now female) can no longer produce small gametes, but can now produce large gametes.

If that actually happens, I will concede that the individual has changed sex.

Unfortunately, it's not what happened.

Just been a bit busy and waited for third date. Had it. had a chat, and will now explain how it went (including bringing up trans women accessing bathrooms)

thanks though.

Whats happened: I decided to wait until there had been a bit more communication and general chat before raising any of the bigger subjects, but I did bring up a few things today to see how the land lay.

The conclusion I came to is that her position is generally “be kind”, regardless of the specific issue. The two things we talked about were: 1) the Green Party’s approach to immigration effectively unlimited, and 2) male/transwoman access to female spaces.

I think her central position is that she does not want to tar everyone with the same brush. So, for example, although we could talk about strongly anti-woman or anti-Jewish views among some immigrants from some countries, she would say that clearly does not apply to everyone. Her instinct is to allow people in, because she feels it is unfair for the actions or views of some to affect the chances and opportunities of others.

I went into the toilets and changing rooms issue in more detail. I started gently, by talking about mixed-sex toilets locally and how much I personally dislike them. She then said something like, “Yes, well, think how women feel”, which seemed like a good opening to explore the subject further.

Later we needed to use a public toilet and I pointed out that they were mixed-sex, but not actually legal in the way they were set up, because they were not single-occupancy rooms with their own sink. They were cubicles, but with shared access to the sinks. I said I really disliked that arrangement too.

There was also some discussion around sexual assault, including the fact that only around 1% is carried out by biological females.

I asked how she felt about women who do not want to share their spaces with males, for whatever reason, and who have not consented to do so. She said she could only speak for herself, but that she personally would be happy to share female spaces with transwomen, and that she felt she was at far greater risk of sexual assault from non-trans-identified males. I did not push it too hard, but I did ask whether statistics might change her mind. That did not really go anywhere.

I said that, in my view, the only workable solution is proper third spaces. Ideally these would be self-contained, soundproof, single-occupancy toilets with their own basin, sink, etc. She agreed with that. I then said that, of course, there often is not enough space or money to provide that, so what do we do when females have not consented to males using their spaces? She said she personally would be happy with it, but we did not get very far into the issue of her not being able to consent on behalf of other women. She did, however, clearly say she could only speak for herself.

I mentioned the UK prison/Home Office statistics on transwomen, which I think show that trans-identified males in prison are more likely to be there for sexual offences. She then said something about ADHD, which I did not fully follow, but I think her point was that a large proportion of the male prison population also has ADHD. That moved the conversation on to mental health and comorbidities. I said it seemed clear to me that many trans-identified men have significant mental health issues or other vulnerabilities, including ADHD, autism, histories of sexual abuse, being in care, etc. She strongly agreed with that. I said I thought people with these conditions were being badly let down by the state, and she agreed.

She also said that she did not think excluding transwomen from female spaces would make anyone safer, because if a male wants to assault someone then he will. I used a good argument I had read on here: a female-only sign is not magic, and it is not a forcefield, but it does make it much easier to spot someone who is transgressing. If a male is in a clearly labelled female-only space, it is immediately obvious that there may be an issue.

We agreed that it is not the case that all trans people are sexual predators. Clearly it is a minority. My position is that they should not be allowed into female spaces because you cannot tell who is unsafe. Her position is that they should be allowed in because you cannot tell who is unsafe.

I also mentioned the situation in schools and said I had heard of schools operating mixed-sex spaces without telling either pupils or parents. She said that children were different because of safeguarding.

This was a conversation I had been putting off a bit. It lasted a good half hour, but it did not turn into a row and it did not get heated. I think it actually went quite well, and we are planning another date.

At the moment, it feels like something we can accommodate and see how it goes. Maybe there is room for opinions to shift over time. Maybe there is not. I do not really know. I suppose we will have to see.

Anyway, I came here for advice, and I would still really appreciate any further thoughts now that there is a bit more context.