Gender discussions

[kat.becs]

Personally I think with or without the law if a man is going into a female space to do something to a female they wouldn’t listen if they were told to leave, and probably wouldn’t give anyone chance to even tell them to leave.

A man with really bad intentions is unlikely to leave if asked.

 

[Mykuf]

But if a man walks in and I run out and alert the reception staff to be told that he identifies as a woman I’d be shamed for being transphobic! Can’t you see this is the crux of the issue? Woman DON’T KNOW if men are a threat to them, thus the need for single sex spaces. It’s the old poisoned m&m analogy. If we let men in who identify as women, we may as well just change to unisex spaces.

 

[kat.becs]

But if a man walks in and I run out and alert the reception staff to be told that he identifies as a woman I’d be shamed for being transphobic! Can’t you see this is the crux of the issue? Woman DON’T KNOW if men are a threat to them, thus the need for single sex spaces. It’s the old poisoned m&m analogy. If we let men in who identify as women, we may as well just change to unisex spaces.

I’m not arguing that. But I see so many people saying the law is going to see a huge increase in sexual assaults, etc which I can’t imagine is the case at all. Sure it may provide another setting for some men to assault but I can’t see that it will cause an increase at all.

No, women don’t know if men are a threat to them, I’m not negating that, but you don’t know if women are either?

 

[Mselvista]

And you're right, no one mans the doors for most single sex establishments but currently if there was a man faffing round in the women's changing room at my gym I could have him removed. It would not be so simple if Self ID came into law.

In this scenario how are getting him removed? Phoning or visiting the front desk? Calling the police?
Is the likelihood not that you would be overpowered before help came? Prevented from calling help? This is the case now and would be post any GRA amendment. I don't see what material difference an amended GRA would make in this instance. The difference an amendment would make is to trans people in making it less onerous to change documentation.

 

[RosePetals]

In this scenario how are getting him removed? Phoning or visiting the front desk? Calling the police?
Is the likelihood not that you would be overpowered before help came? Prevented from calling help? This is the case now and would be post any GRA amendment. I don't see what material difference an amended GRA would make in this instance. The difference an amendment would make is to trans people in making it less onerous to change documentation.

Yes I would go to reception or call the police if necessary.

However you also seem to assume a man would have to physically do something such as overpower me to make me feel uncomfortable or threatened. A man just faffing around or sitting in a changing room would make me uncomfortable, even though he's not actually doing anything physical.

 

[kat.becs]

Personally as much as my son would be happy with unisex bathrooms they somewhat worry me more because anyone could have access to him too, and as hate crimes towards trans people are rising, I have concerns about that. He’s already been targeted.

Not saying they shouldn’t exist and that women’s concerns aren’t real but there are risks for everyone involved and there’s no ‘right’ way to deal with any of it.

 

[Mselvista]

Do men intent on atracking women take their time or hang around waiting for someone to give them permission to be where they are?
Men (or women) intent on attacking men, women, boys or girls will attempt to do so and unfortunately will often succeed. This is the case now.
I don't think changes to the GRA will increase the danger of attacks on women and girls. You believe otherwise and I accept your belief is sincere. I also think it is mistaken.

 

[PoleStar]

The phrase I used was "the language of transphobia".
JKR said in her piece that she had read widely on this issue and sought to present herself as a neutral outsider who had read stuff from "both sides".
However the language she used was a red flag that this was not the case.

If you read FB post and the poster repeatedly said "moslem" instead of muslim would that set of alarm bells? Their defence would be that it is a correct alternative traditional spelling. If you suggested they were racist they may say "Islam isn't a race". I have only seen racists insist on using the term "moslem". If they insisted they weren't racist I think oh I got it wrong . I don't think that racists get to self define - someone saying they are not racist is not going to persuade.

Similarly someone saying "I'm not transphobic but..." does not mean I think that person could not possibly be transphobic.

As for the language - I haven't got the blog to hand but JKR's repeated references to trans activists (posting on twitter, especially posting offensive insults is not activism) and her saying "biological" and "natal" women. This is not neutral language. It is the language of "gender critism" aka transphobia. The term Rowling wants is cis. Cisgender is in the OED. The refusal to use a neutral non loaded term is, again, to me indicate that JKR has being read transphobic material.

Comments on "people who menstruate" are dishonest. How often have you seen that or similar terms in the wild? The phrase is used, as I'm sure you all know, to be inclusive. What should it be replaced by? Women? But we know not all women menstruate so discussion of, for example medical research relating to those who menstruate then being relabelled as about women would be wrong and the conclusions would be wrong. Do you think it should be replaced by "women who menstruate"? But that, as I am sure you know would not include trans men and non-binary folk, so again would be misleading and change the meaning re the group the research related to.

Some may think what I've said is absurd.
I think the idea that "terf" is a gendered insult used to silence women is absurd. "Shut up terf" is the equivalent of saying "duck off racist". Many think you shouldnt "debate" racists. Many feel that there is no point debating "gender critical" feminists. Their views are legitimised by being deemed worthy of debate, those views are very entrenched and not open to change and you will end up exhausted, hsving wasted your time and possibly given platform to a trsnsphobe in the process.

Apologies for all the typos/wrong tenses used above - had only just woken up and didn't read it back before posting.

Why should language be neutral and not specific? Should we change the whole English language to suit a very small minority? According to a survey undertaken in 2011 by the Equality and Human Rights Committee 1.4% of the UK population are within minority gender groups, do you think the other 98.6% of the population should change everything to suit them? Women are women and I will not be reduced by anyone to "cis". I was born female, I have two X chromosomes and no Y chromosome, therefore I am a woman. A man who undergoes gender reassignment survey or hormone treatment possesses a Y chromosome and is therefore genetically a man. DNA does not lie! Even the most convincing looking transgender male to female is still biologically male, that is a fact of nature pure and simple. As for the "not every woman menstruates" argument, every woman on the planet stops menstruating once they have gone through menopause!

As for the Muslim/Moslem argument, I used to work with a Muslim Dutch lady who described herself on all documentation as Moslem. I used to book flights for her very regularly and on every booking in the comments section she requested a Moslem meal. Not Muslim, Moslem!

 

[Mselvista]

Yes I would go to reception or call the police if necessary.

However you also seem to assume a man would have to physically do something such as overpower me to make me feel uncomfortable or threatened. A man just faffing around or sitting in a changing room would make me uncomfortable, even though he's not actually doing anything physical.

I thought men were going to use GRA changes to attack wonen in single sex spaces. What are they now going to just hang out in women's changing rooms catching up on emails?

Why should language be neutral and not specific? Should we change the whole English language to suit a very small minority? According to a survey undertaken in 2011 by the Equality and Human Rights Committee 1.4% of the UK population are within minority gender groups, do you think the other 98.6% of the population should change everything to suit them? Women are women and I will not be reduced by anyone to "cis". I was born female, I have two X chromosomes and no Y chromosome, therefore I am a woman. A man who undergoes gender reassignment survey or hormone treatment possesses a Y chromosome and is therefore genetically a man. DNA does not lie! Even the most convincing looking transgender male to female is still biologically male, that is a fact of nature pure and simple. As for the "not every woman menstruates" argument, every woman on the planet stops menstruating once they have gone through menopause!

As for the Muslim/Moslem argument, I used to work with a Muslim Dutch lady who described herself on all documentation as Moslem. I used to book flights for her very regularly and on every booking in the comments section she requested a Moslem meal. Not Muslim, Moslem!

The Dutch for Muslim is Moslim. I wasn't talking about the use of the word by non-English speakers. This is bad faith.

 

[RosePetals]

I thought men were going to use GRA changes to attack wonen in single sex spaces. What are they now going to just hang out in women's changing rooms catching up on emails?

Not sure if that's deliberately missing the point or not, but I would feel uncomfortable with a random man sitting or faffing around while I was getting changed. And I can definitely think of a few men I have the misfortune to know who would go sit in the women's changing rooms or follow them them into the bathroom for some sort of weird perverted kick.

I don't have the data to back it up but would be willing to bet money that I am not the only woman in the world who would feel uncomfortable with men in women's changing rooms. It also wouldn't be allowed in some cultures for a woman to undress in front of a man who was not her husband.

Also lets be real, a man wouldn't wonder into the women's changing room to catch up on his emails.

There could also be young girls changing, I went for adult swim classes last year and the adult lesson began soon after the children's ended, which meant there were always adults and children getting changed at the same time. There are definitely men in the world who would be happy to faff around in changing rooms to get glimpses of undressing girls.

 

[HarderFaster]

I've been considering this for a long time now, I was super sympathetic to the plight of trans women but the proposed GRA amendments are what made me critical of the movement. I don't think any woman would refuse to be polite and accommodating to a trans woman in our spaces, because we are generally conditioned to be so. However, my concern goes beyond bathrooms or changing rooms (as has been noted, trans women with a GRC have been using these spaces for decades and it doesn't bother me). My fear over the amendments with self-ID is more about spaces for vulnerable women such as DV shelters. You only have to look at Canada to see that men who very much present as men are self-IDing as women to access these services (see Danielle Moscato, and that Tyler character who someone screenshotted earlier). Most women will never end up in shelters or prison, so it's very easy to speak from a position of privilege and say "well the trans bathrooms situation doesn't bother me and therefore anyone bothered must be a bigot".

We need to consider the effect legislation like this has on sex protected spaces for women fleeing violence and abuse, or incarcerated women. Most shelters won't allow boys over 12 because the residents are so traumatised by men in their proximity. Imagine being a mum separated from her pre-pubescent son because he'd be a traumatising factor to other women, but there being a trans woman with many remaining male identifiers housed in the same building. It's just unimaginable to me.

And I agree that this is very much a male problem: trans women also experience considerable violence at the hands of men. However, in the same way that women have had to self-advocate and organise to protect themselves, the trans community should work (and women would be more than happy to advise and assist, I am positive) to create similar support networks which cater to the very specific needs of that community.

I think while women and trans women can be staunch allies for each other, our needs and services shouldn't be conflated. We're all oppressed because the label of 'not a man' is somehow considered less, but the implications of biology create nuance which I think we can't ignore.

 

[Mselvista]

Why should language be neutral and not specific? Should we change the whole English language to suit a very small minority?

Why can I not use the term terf to describe transphobic feminists, male or female? It is not neutral and is specific.
Why should this term, an acronym of how some feminists described their beliefs not be used to describe men and women who espouse anti trans rhetoric dressed up as feminism?
Should we change the whole English language to suit a small minority? I would argue in this case no. Those offended by being calling a terf aka a transphobe do not get to dictate how they are described.
In some circumstances I would argue we absolutely should. That is how language becomes more inclusive.
Also language changes all the time. As progress is made the concerns and objections of "small minorities" contribute to that change. I consider that a good thing and assumed all right-minded people did too.

I have asked for recommendations of reading or perhaps links for me to understand.
I am assuming those disagreeing with me have read widely on this subject and I know it is sometimes easier to provide a link then type out a long post.

 

[PoleStar]

@RosePetals I understand that some women have been made to feel worried and scared about this possibility.

But if a man wants to go into women's toilets or changing rooms they can do that now. They can just walk in.

And that had nothing to do with trans people who, as you say, have been using the appropriate toilet/changing room for years.

Changes to the GRA won't affect access to toilets or chsnging rooms as far as I know. You don't need to show id to get into the ladies' loos.
[/QUOTE

Really??? It IS affecting women already, try reading this:

https://www.archive.is/oldest/https...women-girls-risk-voyeurs-say-campaigners.html

 

[kat.becs]

Genuine question though - if transwomen aren't allowed to use female fitting rooms in shops, which can they use?

 

[PoleStar]

Why can I not use the term terf to describe transphobic feminists, male or female? It is not neutral and is specific.
Why should this term, an acronym of how some feminists described their beliefs not be used to describe men and women who espouse anti trans rhetoric dressed up as feminism?
Should we change the whole English language to suit a small minority? I would argue in this case no. Those offended by being calling a terf aka a transphobe do not get to dictate how they are described.
In some circumstances I would argue we absolutely should. That is how language becomes more inclusive.
Also language changes all the time. As progress is made the concerns and objections of "small minorities" contribute to that change. I consider that a good thing and assumed all right-minded people did too.

I have asked for recommendations of reading or perhaps links for me to understand.
I am assuming those disagreeing with me have read widely on this subject and I know it is sometimes easier to provide a link then type out a long post.

You can say what you like, just don't expect everyone else to accept it or agree with it! I think you just enjoy being obtuse.

 

[Pinkii]

I have a question and I hope it doesn’t offend anyone.

why are women being forced to pander to a minority? Same sex toilets and changing room
Etc.. We are dissmissing other important things.

for example as a muslim you are not permitted to be undressed infront of a male etc.

There has been a discussion on our local neighbourhood social site (nextdoor) Our local swimming pool does one evening a week for women only (female life guards etc) and this is the time where you will see majority of the muslim women, because they feel comfortable there but any male can come and claim to identify as a woman and would be allowed in dressing room etc now to these muslim women this person is still a male, who has the right here? So why should say for example 50 women have to lose this for the sake of 1/2 people?

 

[Mselvista]

I am not being obtuse. I am attempting to engage in good faith but I understand that you may not beleive that.

 

[PoleStar]

Genuine question though - if transwomen aren't allowed to use female fitting rooms in shops, which can they use?

This isn't referring to those who have undergone reassignment surgery and had their male parts removed, but men who are simply saying they feel like a woman. Two very, very different scenarios in my mind. I've been on the receiving end of male abuse, both physical and verbal and it is absolutely awful and gut-wrenching. If I'm in a changing room trying on bras, for example, I would feel terribly vulnerable if I thought a man could come in at any moment. It's outrageous that a tiny, tiny minority of the population are trying to dictate to women what is OK and what is not.

The solution as I see it is an additional unisex changing room.

 

[kat.becs]

The solution as I see it is an additional unisex changing room.

Okay that makes sense.

but then what about the protection of those in the unisex changing rooms? That's why I don't feel like there is one right answer to this at all. It's so complicated. I just see so many people unwilling to even consider the opposite side of it without considering they're trying to take from women, which is not the case at all. I don't mean you, btw. Just generally.

 

[RosePetals]

I have asked for recommendations of reading or perhaps links for me to understand.
I am assuming those disagreeing with me have read widely on this subject and I know it is sometimes easier to provide a link then type out a long post.

Will work on a better post when I have time but for now:

https://4thwavenow.com/resource-index/ a fairly long resource list
I find https://fairplayforwomen.com/ quite comprehensive

Also some stats on why have single sex spaces is paramount

Violence against Women and Girls and Male Position Factsheets – Home Office in the media

The Home Office has published a refresh to its 2016 Violence Against Women and Girls Strategy and a Male Victims position paper. Please see below for factsheets on both of these publications, highlighting some of the key fact and measures

homeofficemedia.blog.gov.uk

Violence against women

It exists in virtually every culture in the world today. Even where it is prohibited or illegal it creeps into schools, homes, workplaces and out on to the street. </p>Violence against women is a human rights issue, and it's everyone's problem.

www.amnesty.org.uk

Domestic abuse is a gendered crime - Women’s Aid

Whilst both men and women may experience domestic abuse, women are more likely to experience repeated and severe forms of abuse, including sexual violence.

www.womensaid.org.uk

Unisex changing rooms put women at danger of sexual assault, data reveals

The vast majority of reported sexual assaults at public swimming pools in the UK take place in unisex changing rooms, new statistics reveal.

www.independent.co.uk

Sorry not the best list but perhaps others can add more