[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Greg!

Post op I think it should be allowed as it's very likely a trans woman in a men's prison would be assaulted

And what about the women?

Prisons could surely be solved by a trans wing in a couple of them, given there are large numbers of people claiming they are trans in prison oddly enough. And sex offenders are massively over represented too among the trans prison population, much moreso than among the 'normal' male prison population actually.

Many kinds of men are at risk of assault in mens prisons. Disabled men, gay men, small men, feminine men. Should they all be put in with the women to make them safer?

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Greg!

Post op I think it should be allowed as it's very likely a trans woman in a men's prison would be assaulted

The main topic was having men who decide they're women (with no operation or even diagnosis) working in womens domestic abuse refuges

[Greg!]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

The main topic was having men who decide they're women (with no operation or even diagnosis) working in womens domestic abuse refuges

Oh right okay, didn't really read it properly

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Greg!

Post op I think it should be allowed as it's very likely a trans woman in a men's prison would be assaulted

This.

[Vicky.]

Here is the story that sparked the debate

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/w...taff-3txhcr8mb

(will copy text for those not a mamber as its paywalled but you do get 2 articles a week free)

Spoiler:

Rape and abuse victims in women-only refuges face being looked after by biological men after England’s biggest group of women’s shelters decided to review its ban on transgender staff.

The move, which could overturn almost half a century of refuges being run by women for women, was described by some feminists last night as the most significant erosion of female spaces yet.

It comes after the government promised to consult on letting people change sex on demand. Activists insist that “self-declared” transgender women — most of whom retain male organs — should be allowed to enter and work in woman-only spaces.

Justine Greening, the former equalities minister who drove the sex-change reforms, admitted for the first time last night that the concerns of women’s groups must be taken more into account.

She told The Sunday Times she still supported change, but stressed that the government should be “absolutely listening to the voices of women’s groups in all this and their concerns”.

The review of women’s refuges, which is not dependent on any government reform, was agreed last week by the board of the charity Women’s Aid, a federation that oversees more than 300 shelters.

Mary Mason, the board’s interim co-chairwoman, said: “We have agreed to start a review of our whole transgender policy, including the possibility of employment for self-declared transgender women without a gender recognition certificate.”

Describing it as “an extraordinarily difficult discussion,” Mason said the review, by Women’s Aid’s director of services, Nicki Norman, would take three to four months. Another board member, Sarah Forster, confirmed the move.

Prominent feminists expressed concern at the development. “Recent victims of male violence need women-only spaces where they can feel safe from men,” said Stephanie Davies-Arai, of the campaign group Transgender Trend. “This risks retraumatising vulnerable and victimised women for the sake of ideology.”

Karen Ingala Smith, head of the women’s sexual and domestic violence charity NIA, said she was concerned.

“I hope refuge providers protect the ‘for women by women’ vision of the feminist survivors and activists who built the refuge movement.

“A women-only space is one of the ways we can create a sanctuary for women to begin their recovery from men’s violence. Women and children escaping violent men should at the very least be able to expect this of a refuge,” Smith added.

A rape victim who stayed in a Women’s Aid centre said: “I am terrified for other women if this happens. I went through a patch where I feared and could not bear the sight of any man. The wonderful support I got just could not have been provided by staff who, to all intents and purposes, are men.”

Women’s Aid stressed that local refuges would be fully consulted in the review and would still have a say over who they employed.

Refuges already allow trans women as clients, though they are permitted to exclude them on a case-by-case basis. Women’s Aid’s quality standards say its services must be “accessible to transgender women”.

Currently, staff who are on the premises all the time with access to all areas are not employed in refuges without a female birth certificate. All refuge job ads on the Women’s Aid website say the applicant must be a woman.

Only people born female — or who have gone through the Gender Recognition Act process to change sex — can get a woman’s birth certificate. The government promised to consult on making the process easier, but has delayed the consultation amid growing controversy over the issue.

Equalities legislation allows providers of single-sex services to discriminate where this is “a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim”.

Women’s groups also fear predatory men could use any change to access shelters. Such cases are rare but in Canada, a sex offender, Christopher Hambrook, posed as trans to obtain entry to shelters and commit attacks. This view was attacked by trans campaigner Sarah Brown, who said it “punishes vulnerable trans women for hypothetical acts of infiltration by men claiming to be trans women”.

[bots]

The point is the safety and well being of the victims. If the victims are vulnerable then they should not need to be fearful of going to a safe place that could then be populated by people that traumatised them in the first place.

Take sex slaves as an example, a gang could just infiltrate a safe place easily by some of them saying they identify as being a woman. That's just not good enough.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

The point is the safety and well being of the victims. If the victims are vulnerable then they should not need to be fearful of going to a safe place that could then be populated by people that traumatised them in the first place.

Take sex slaves as an example, a gang could just infiltrate a safe place easily by some of them saying they identify as being a woman. That's just not good enough.

No it isn't at all, but we're not allowed point any of this out because we're intolerant and transphobic if we do

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

No it isn't at all, but we're not allowed point any of this out because we're intolerant and transphobic if we do

Because we are women and our rights come in second to a man who wants to be a woman. It's almost comical.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Because we are women and our rights come in second to a man who wants to be a woman. It's almost comical.

It would be hilarious if it weren't so serious

[Maru]

Moving post

[GiRTh]

Piers Morgan is such a prick. Master of the 'What if/What about' scenarios. Why is he talking about athletes?

I agree more with him than India however if post op then the refuge cant really deny them..

[Vicky.]

Had to post this. Is in relation to the video obviously.

Is it normal to look at a webpage full of women who have been killed by men, and feel sorry for men? I know that would not be my reaction

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Had to post this. Is in relation to the video obviously.

Is it normal to look at a webpage full of women who have been killed by men, and feel sorry for men? I know that would not be my reaction

What a disaster as a spokesperson she is. If I hear her sigh and shout "I'm a REAL WOMAN" again, I will throw something at my telly. She has no interest in women at all.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Had to post this. Is in relation to the video obviously.

Is it normal to look at a webpage full of women who have been killed by men, and feel sorry for men? I know that would not be my reaction

India Willoughby. Wants to be a woman, thinks like a man. Absolutely no clue whatsoever about women's issues and more interested in nail polish than the value of women's lives.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by jaxie

India Willoughby. Wants to be a woman, thinks like a man. Absolutely no clue whatsoever about women's issues and more interested in nail polish than the value of women's lives.

This is why I wonder about having been born with "a womans brain" in cases like India, to me her idea of what a woman is, is very much how a man would describe what a woman is, wears heels and dresses, like's nail polish and shopping etc

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

This is why I wonder about having been born with "a womans brain" in cases like India, to me her idea of what a woman is, is very much how a man would describe what a woman is, wears heels and dresses, like's nail polish and shopping etc

Thats all India has to go on though tbf She can hardly grow up as an actual woman or anything..or ever actually know how a woman 'feels', so all she has is a mans idea of what a woman should be.

[Jamie89]

I think trans women who are the victims of abuse should be allowed refuge, we should aim to protect all people in genuine need. And I think that's currently what happens. The problems seem to be with the potential new laws of self-identification and the process being made easier? I don't know a lot about them and need to look more into it tbh, but from what I've heard, I think there's a danger here to both women and transwomen. It seems like these laws could blur the lines in terms of public perception between transwomen and predatory men who claim to be trans, and in turn is likely to cause an even bigger divide between women and trans women as well as make certain situations more difficult for both, and so I'm wondering who these laws actually aim to benefit? Surely the current way of being able to asses a persons history of transexualism to determine genuine cases makes the most sense (and that would no longer factor into things with the new proposed way of self-id as far as I understand it but I could be wrong I'm not 100% sure on this), and with genuine cases of transwomen being allowed refuge I don't believe there is a danger to women in that.

Originally Posted by Niamh.

This is why I wonder about having been born with "a womans brain" in cases like India, to me her idea of what a woman is, is very much how a man would describe what a woman is, wears heels and dresses, like's nail polish and shopping etc

To be fair most transpeople undergo SRS and dress a certain way, not because they feel it's necessary do that to be a woman, but because they feel it's necessary to do that in order to be treated as a woman by the rest of society, and often it's something almost subconscious/ingrained, from a young age and being aware of the different social constructs surrounding gender and seeing boys/girls men/women being treated differently and in their minds these facades can become a fixation almost, in that they are things that can be changed and in doing so they will be more likely to be treated as the sex that they feel their biology should be. I mean you're not really wrong about it being what someone else would describe as what a woman looks like, but it's much deeper than just thinking 'a girl wears heels so if I wear heels I'll be a girl', as they already believe they are the opposite gender, they just want to be recognised by others as such, and in their minds they're not going to be unless they do those things, so I think is understandable.

[Alf]

For all we know, Harvey Weinstein types could be transitioning into women to get closer to them.

[Marches]

I kinda understand both sides but ehhh saying that I could imagine dealing with gender related issues for all ur life, you finally transition to be a woman and you’re not even allowed in a female refugee camp. I’d say just go to a male one but male abuse is trivialised and so many of them are getting refused funding now how fun

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Marches

I kinda understand both sides but ehhh saying that I could imagine dealing with gender related issues for all ur life, you finally transition to be a woman and you’re not even allowed in a female refugee camp. I’d say just go to a male one but male abuse is trivialised and so many of them are getting refused funding now how fun

Its not this. Transwomen who have transitioned already can use womens refuges. This issue is about letting 'selfID' rule all, basically. So no transition required, just anyone who says they are a woman in their head. No way that could be abused, eh..

Also its not even about letting people use the refuges. Its about letting them work in them. Letting 'self identified' women (ie any male) work in a refuge for abused women is asking for disaster, IMO. I really really hope this consultation favours womens (and transwomens) right to be safe.Of course it should, given the nature of womens aid. But I am not sure given how crazy places have gone with this rubbish.

[Marches]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Its not this. Transwomen who have transitioned already can use womens refuges. This issue is about letting 'selfID' rule all, basically. So no transition required, just anyone who says they are a woman in their head. No way that could be abused, eh..

Also its not even about letting people use the refuges. Its about letting them work in them. Letting 'self identified' women (ie any male) work in a refuge for abused women is asking for disaster, IMO. I really really hope this consultation favours womens (and transwomens) right to be safe.Of course it should, given the nature of womens aid. But I am not sure given how crazy places have gone with this rubbish.

O I thought she said she wanted it to be trans women who could prove their transition. Well that was at the start then she rambled lmao. I agree it can be exploited for bad things but so can like everything really, tho self Id is the wrong way to go about society in some aspects

[Jamie89]

Originally Posted by Marches

I kinda understand both sides but ehhh saying that I could imagine dealing with gender related issues for all ur life, you finally transition to be a woman and you’re not even allowed in a female refugee camp. I’d say just go to a male one but male abuse is trivialised and so many of them are getting refused funding now how fun

There's also the reason that transwomen are likely to have been abused by men and so wouldn't want to be around men for the same reason women wouldn't want to be. This is why I worry so much about the potential divisiveness of these new laws between women and transwomen as the way it currently is seems to protect both.

(As a side note I didn't know they were being refused funding, don't know the details of that but it's quite shocking to hear)

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Jamie89

There's also the reason that transwomen are likely to have been abused by men and so wouldn't want to be around men for the same reason women wouldn't want to be. This is why I worry so much about the potential divisiveness of these new laws between women and transwomen as the way it currently is seems to protect both.

(As a side note I didn't know they were being refused funding, don't know the details of that but it's quite shocking to hear)

The transsexual people I know IRL are all against selfID (all 3 of them ) and on mumsnet there are many transexual posters (I know people can pretend to be anything, but they seem genuine, have discussed their surgeries and such too which would be pretty hard to fake) who are against it, as they feel 'self ID' makes a huge joke of a serious condition that they personally have. Which I agree with too.

Theres a thread on there thats just been picked up by the daily mail, about this kind of thing too

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...s-slammed.html

Its a VERY balanced article for the mail, I am surprised. Its actually accurate.

Basically allowing 'self-ID' and telling businesses to 'educate' anyone who thinks male people are male. Also very interesting double standards in the guidance, as they accept men with penises are women, however the same guidance says to tell transmen that they have to cover up their tits. Surely if men who say they are women can get their dicks out in the womens changing room, then women who say they are men should be treat like men too? And as such, should be allowed to swim in trunks? And the swimmers must be 'educated' that some men have tits, get over it! (actually, some real men have tits bigger than mine )

This is a post from a trans poster on the thread on there..I hope she doesn't mind me nicking it

Then you must have lived a lovely life. There are many, many reasons why that would be unacceptable to some women. I simply don't believe you can't imagine what any of those would be.

I would not enter any women's changing rooms before my op. I still wouldn't enter some of the ones described above (small, no cubicles) because I'm a considerate human being. I choose multisex changing rooms with many private cubicles.

Having been the victim of sexual assault myself I am also well aware of the panic and terror involved with being in proximity to a strange man, it matters not what his intentions are (because sadly for many it has been demonstrated that a fair many have very bad intentions)

No woman should be forced to share a changing room with a man (i.e. anyone with a penis is a man = it's ****ing insane that that needs clarification these days)

These aren't transsexuals that are being 'allowed' in (I think many are thinking of it like that in their head)

It is the AGP's, the sexual predators, the cross dressers who will be aroused by being in the women's changing rooms.

They will be the ones getting access to vulnerable women through this policy. And they are the ONLY ones this policy (and all the other ****ing madness) will benefit)

From
https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_be...msgid=75417453
Should jump direct to post. If anyone wants to check. Their other posts in there are interesting too. I have not fnished the thread yet but there are other trans posters who I imagine will say the same thing, as in other trans threads they are hugely against self ID.


None of this benefits transsexual people, its not about transsexual people. Its framed as being about transsexual people..and this is why it gets support, but its not. At all.

[Vicky.]

The proposed changes in law benefit neither transwomen nor women. They benefit only fetishists (who would not have a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, and as such, cannot get a GRC) and predatory males who would use this to...be predatory, basically. I have no idea why such changes are even being considered.

[Brillopad]

Sick of hearing about this stupid woman and her perceived rights. Her rights have no rights to trample over the rights of others. Attention-seeking bore.