Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

What should trans people actually do?

274 replies

BTT · Yesterday 11:29

I'm making the assumption that gender identity exists and that there can be a mismatch between it and sex which will likely cause distress and a desire for trans people to find a safer and more comfortable place in society somehow.

I'm talking about practical measures to minimize problems for trans and non-trans people. Please respond only if you have some reasonable ideas.

OP posts:
MyrtleLion · Yesterday 18:50

hihelenhi · Yesterday 18:48

Yes, we do. So no, no hypocrisy at all. This has been covered again and again on here. Perhaps you should try reading.

Also, generally speaking, unless one is a massive sexist, I'm afraid that in real life most 'trans men' are still recognisable to most of us as natal women. They pass better than most 'trans women' of course, but it's not difficult.

Show quote history

and the SC ruling was careful to mention trans-identifying women who look a lot like men that it may be permissible to exclude them from women's single-sex facilities and spaces. For example, I don't think trans-identifying women who have taken extensive amounts of testosterone should be allowed to participate in women's sports for doping reasons.

FrippEnos · Yesterday 18:50

Mouldemort · Yesterday 17:34

Gender critical people have a habit of ignoring or patronising trans men, or weeping about their top surgery in a borderline creepy way. There existence is inconvenient for gender critical people, but they get less direct hassle than trans women, partly because they are men, and transmisogyny is poisonous.

I some ways, however, they are most affected by the new guidance - in some circumstances there is nowhere left for them to pee.

What transgender people should do is advocate for the acceptance they have in other civilised countries such as Spain or Malta - raise awareness of the complete lack of any evidence for increases in any kind of sexual assault, or even the very modest changes that Theresa May proposed.

The problem isn't transgender people, it's bigots.

Show quote history

The people that ignored trans men until it became a point which they thought that they could use to win was the TRAs, trans lobby and their allies.
Who strangely are to blame for the situation that trans men find themselves in as the were actually just going about their lives and not trying to rewrite history.

BobbleBear · Yesterday 18:51

Their imaginary problem so they can find the solution. 🤷🏻‍♀️

ChasingTheSunshine · Yesterday 18:52

hihelenhi · Yesterday 18:44

I'm also unclear why you imagine that third spaces aren't the answer to everyone's needs here. Why do you insistent on women's spaces being for you, when they're categorically not? It couldn't be because it's less about safety and more about validating yourself as "really" female, could it?

Show quote history

I’m sorry, but can you actually read? I’ve been arguing that alternative/third spaces should be provide for trans people, not that we should access spaces for the opposite sex.

hihelenhi · Yesterday 18:55

alcovecupboards · Yesterday 18:50

The Supreme Court disagrees with you.

Show quote history

No, not really so I'm not sure why you imagine this is a gotcha. It's not as much of a problem either way, I'm afraid. They may have recognised that SOME women would see 'trans men' as male and took account of that. But it's completely irrelevant to the issue at hand. Because "trans men" are women, and do not have anything like the risk profile to women as the actual men who identify as "trans women" do. And we can mostly tell, I'm afraid, however much you like to tell yourself otherwise.

The Supreme Court ruling makes it extremely clear. Men who identify as trans women are considered as being of the male sexe for the purposes of the Equality Act and its predecessors and do not and never have had the legal right to enter women's single sex spaces. Of which, incidently, toilets is only one.

The law is clear. I'm sorry that you feel the need to try and obfuscate it because you don't like what it says.

ChasingTheSunshine · Yesterday 18:55

MyrtleLion · Yesterday 18:47

The protected characteristic of gender reassignment means that those who fall into this characteristic cannot be denied the following because they have that protected characteristic -
*
*

  • service in a shop, restaurant or other establishment open to the public and not sex-segregated;
  • where there is sex-segregation they should use the services available to their sex as recorded at birth, or a third accessible space.
  • a job, an employer cannot refuse to hire someone because they fall under the protected characteristic of gender reassignment
  • nor can that person be fired for having the protected characteristic
  • nor can that person be denied other employment rights, this includes women who have the characteristic of gender reassignment cannot be denied maternity rights/pay or time off for antenatal classes etc if they are pregnant
  • that person cannot be paid less than someone without the protected characteristic
  • housing, an estate agent, landlord, social housing provider cannot refuse to show, sell, let or otherwise discriminate someone with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment because they have that characteristic, so you can't refuse to let someone buy a house, or charge them more rent, or evict them for having the characteristic.
  • healthcare, someone protected by the characteristic of gender reassignment cannot be refused treatment on the NHS, or at a private healthcare/dentist for example because of their characteristic - it would be advisable to treat them as their natal sex where that affects their treatment, to treat them as the opposite sex may be actively damaging to the person.

There are probably more examples, but essentially, you can't treat someone who is trans less favourably than someone who is not trans just because they are trans. This does not include permitting people to access services reserved for the opposite sex to their natal sex.

Show quote history

This does not include permitting people to access services reserved for the opposite sex to their natal sex
I wasn’t even suggesting this. I have been clear that I think alternative spaces should be available for trans people who can’t use spaces for their birth sex.

murasaki · Yesterday 18:58

ChasingTheSunshine · Yesterday 18:55

This does not include permitting people to access services reserved for the opposite sex to their natal sex
I wasn’t even suggesting this. I have been clear that I think alternative spaces should be available for trans people who can’t use spaces for their birth sex.

Show quote history

Can, just don't want to.

hihelenhi · Yesterday 18:59

ChasingTheSunshine · Yesterday 18:55

This does not include permitting people to access services reserved for the opposite sex to their natal sex
I wasn’t even suggesting this. I have been clear that I think alternative spaces should be available for trans people who can’t use spaces for their birth sex.

Show quote history

Really? You certainly seemed to be.

So why don't you get on with campaigning for third spaces then? It would have saved a whole lot of time, heartache and trauma for everyone if that had actually been the aim rather than those supposedly advocating for 'trans rights' by attempting to change the law by stealth and demonising, threatening and smearing women who were standing up for their own, already established, legal rights.

Unfortunately, it seemed the main aim was "compel everyone to agree that trans women are literally exactly the same as women". Which wipes out actual women's rights and reality in one fell swoop.

MagpiePi · Yesterday 19:00

MyrtleLion · Yesterday 18:50

and the SC ruling was careful to mention trans-identifying women who look a lot like men that it may be permissible to exclude them from women's single-sex facilities and spaces. For example, I don't think trans-identifying women who have taken extensive amounts of testosterone should be allowed to participate in women's sports for doping reasons.

Show quote history

No woman who has taken extensive amounts of testosterone is allowed to compete in women's sports. Identifying as a man has no bearing on the matter.

hihelenhi · Yesterday 19:01

ChasingTheSunshine · Yesterday 18:52

I’m sorry, but can you actually read? I’ve been arguing that alternative/third spaces should be provide for trans people, not that we should access spaces for the opposite sex.

Show quote history

Yes, I can "actually read", thank you. I'm sorry if I've missed where you said that, but I did not see it.

Theeyeballsinthesky · Yesterday 19:02

Got all the screenshots you wanted yet OP?

Rollingpinofdoom · Yesterday 19:03

ChasingTheSunshine · Yesterday 17:20

The EHRC seems to think that as well, no? The guidance even says trans people must not be left with nowhere to go, so that would suggest just providing sex-based facilities on its own isn’t enough. I think the EHRC chair also said it wouldn’t be reasonable to put a trans woman on a men’s ward at the Women and Equality select committee.

Show quote history

But they do have somewhere to go. If they don’t want to…. That’s on them isn’t it?

alcovecupboards · Yesterday 19:04

hihelenhi · Yesterday 18:55

No, not really so I'm not sure why you imagine this is a gotcha. It's not as much of a problem either way, I'm afraid. They may have recognised that SOME women would see 'trans men' as male and took account of that. But it's completely irrelevant to the issue at hand. Because "trans men" are women, and do not have anything like the risk profile to women as the actual men who identify as "trans women" do. And we can mostly tell, I'm afraid, however much you like to tell yourself otherwise.

The Supreme Court ruling makes it extremely clear. Men who identify as trans women are considered as being of the male sexe for the purposes of the Equality Act and its predecessors and do not and never have had the legal right to enter women's single sex spaces. Of which, incidently, toilets is only one.

The law is clear. I'm sorry that you feel the need to try and obfuscate it because you don't like what it says.

Show quote history

Oh dear. You do seem quite sure of yourself. I fully support single sex spaces where appropriate. I'm sorry you are so radicalised that you think everyone else is your enemy unless they agree with everything you say.

BillieWiper · Yesterday 19:09

TransParentlyAnnoyed · Yesterday 12:32

People are allowed to use their own names, love.

Public toilets are entirely public spaces, completely unsafe unless we have company. And I welcome trans women in, because a) they're women, b) I don't want them.meeting a mob of violent cis men in the Gents and getting assaulted, c) it's cis men who assault is in toilets, both trans women, e) cubicles exist, and f) all.wo!an are harmed by dividing us by sight & deciding who's female.

Deadname is just a word, calling it 'male' is ridiculous.

"Compel speech" - you mean, be polite? Respectful? I've met a lot of people who think being forced to stop calling Black men 'boy' is compelled.speech and who insist they should be allowed to be homophobic. Deliberately disrespecting trans people is no different.

Verbal respect for difference is the first step to preventing discrimination and violence. Every single minority which gained legal protection has had the same struggles as trans people.

Stop blaming trans women for male violence.

Show quote history

You've met a lot of people who think it reasonable to refer to black men as 'boy'?
Why do you hang around with a load of appalling antiquated racists?

And why do you think women should accept people born with a penis and having gone through male puberty as being women? We don't. And nothing you can say can make us.

ChasingTheSunshine · Yesterday 19:09

Rollingpinofdoom · Yesterday 19:03

But they do have somewhere to go. If they don’t want to…. That’s on them isn’t it?

Show quote history

This section of the EHRC code is pretty interesting:

Example
13.123 A service provider operates a shopping centre and decides to renovate the centre. It initially intends to only provide separate-sex toilets to improve the safety and comfort of users. This disadvantages trans people because it means that a trans person cannot access a toilet catered towards their acquired gender. They also note that this option may cause safety risks and distress for trans users if required to use the toilets designated for those of the same biological sex. The service provider therefore decides to also provide toilets in individual lockable rooms with handbasins, which can be used by people of either sex.

FlirtsWithRhinos · Yesterday 19:17

alcovecupboards · Yesterday 19:04

Oh dear. You do seem quite sure of yourself. I fully support single sex spaces where appropriate. I'm sorry you are so radicalised that you think everyone else is your enemy unless they agree with everything you say.

Show quote history

Have you ever clarified which single sex provisions you think are appropriate? Or just asserted you do without specifics?

And when you don't think single sex provisions are appropriate, is that because you think segregation isn't needed at all or do you think some provisions should be mixed sex gender segregated?

If the latter, can you give some examples of those as well?

TheKeatingFive · Yesterday 19:23

ChasingTheSunshine · Yesterday 18:52

I’m sorry, but can you actually read? I’ve been arguing that alternative/third spaces should be provide for trans people, not that we should access spaces for the opposite sex.

Show quote history

What is the justification for trans identifying men getting fourth spaces (as we have disabled access spaces already) above any other group of vulnerable men?

This is not about PC btw, PC do not come with special toilet privileges. Aside from disabled access, for which the justification is very clear.

ChasingTheSunshine · Yesterday 19:28

TheKeatingFive · Yesterday 19:23

What is the justification for trans identifying men getting fourth spaces (as we have disabled access spaces already) above any other group of vulnerable men?

This is not about PC btw, PC do not come with special toilet privileges. Aside from disabled access, for which the justification is very clear.

Show quote history

The EHRC code makes clear that only providing mixed-sex spaces could be discrimination on the protected characteristic of sex. It’s clear how that could disadvantage women. I think it’s pretty likely that the inverse is true. Only providing single sex spaces could be discrimination on the basis of gender reassignment because it disadvantages people with gender reassignment.

The ECHR code had an example to this effect which I’ve posted up thread

FrippEnos · Yesterday 19:29

MyrtleLion · Yesterday 18:50

and the SC ruling was careful to mention trans-identifying women who look a lot like men that it may be permissible to exclude them from women's single-sex facilities and spaces. For example, I don't think trans-identifying women who have taken extensive amounts of testosterone should be allowed to participate in women's sports for doping reasons.

Show quote history

Whilst it is true that trans men can't take part in women's sport due to the doping rules, several have taken part in women's sport by not starting treatments

TheKeatingFive · Yesterday 19:32

ChasingTheSunshine · Yesterday 19:28

The EHRC code makes clear that only providing mixed-sex spaces could be discrimination on the protected characteristic of sex. It’s clear how that could disadvantage women. I think it’s pretty likely that the inverse is true. Only providing single sex spaces could be discrimination on the basis of gender reassignment because it disadvantages people with gender reassignment.

The ECHR code had an example to this effect which I’ve posted up thread

Edited
Show quote history

The ehrc is not remotely concerned with gender reassignment. It is very clear that any segregated provision is based on sex alone

RapidOnsetGenderCritic · Yesterday 19:32

Kokonimater · Yesterday 15:44

If you had a son or daughter that had identity issues would you be so harsh?

Show quote history

What is harsh about that?

Bellablahhole · Yesterday 19:34

.

ChasingTheSunshine · Yesterday 19:37

TheKeatingFive · Yesterday 19:32

The ehrc is not remotely concerned with gender reassignment. It is very clear that any segregated provision is based on sex alone

Show quote history

The EHRC is concerned with all the protected characteristics which include gender reassignment. And yes, single sex spaces must be segregated by sex. I haven’t disagreed with that. I’ve only said that only providing single sex spaces with no mixed sex spaces could amount to gender reassignment discrimination.

Bellablahhole · Yesterday 19:39

petiteetoile · Yesterday 11:36

Trans people should recognise that they can not change sex, and that sex matters in many situations.

If necessary they should have counselling to help them come to terms with this.

They should use facilities and services meant for their sex, not the sex they want to be.

Just this @BTT. Nothing more, nothing less.

TheKeatingFive · Yesterday 19:40

ChasingTheSunshine · Yesterday 19:37

The EHRC is concerned with all the protected characteristics which include gender reassignment. And yes, single sex spaces must be segregated by sex. I haven’t disagreed with that. I’ve only said that only providing single sex spaces with no mixed sex spaces could amount to gender reassignment discrimination.

Show quote history

There is no onus on providers to supply unisex provision in all cases in the ERCH as far as I can see.

As gender reassignment clearly references gender, not sex, then I cannot see the problem.