Self ID of gender...can we discuss this?

But they're not male. They're women who by an accident of nature have been born in a male body. It's not something they decide on a whim. The drugs and surgery aren't a picnic in the park. They suffer a lot to change. Why should they suffer further by being denied access to certain women only places?

Galaxy

Because they are male vampire. It's why via the law they can be excluded from places such as refuges etc. So as I mentioned Eddie Izzard is the same risk as Jmmy Carr, that may be no risk or it may be some risk but it is the same risk. Compared to say dawn French the risk from both is much higher. In addition women who have been assaulted by men, are entitled to spaces without men.

You're making a statement using people's names Galaxy, and saying that there is a higher risk of two real people attacking women than there is of another woman attacking women. There's a fine line between example and defamation.

I'm not playing post wars, or trying to start a fight, just suggesting you might want to make it clear you are not suggesting any of these actual people are a risk to anyone as none have ever indicated that they might be.

Unfortunately these threads constantly illustrate that 'you know what I mean' is no defence. I hope you don't mind me pointing it out.

Because they are male vampire. It's why via the law they can be excluded from places such as refuges etc. So as I mentioned Eddie Izzard is the same risk as Jmmy Carr, that may be no risk or it may be some risk but it is the same risk. Compared to say dawn French the risk from both is much higher. In addition women who have been assaulted by men, are entitled to spaces without men.

But I don't understand your reasoning. Why would a transgender woman be a threat to any other woman? A man who going to attack women will do so regardless. A woman who is going to attack women will do so regardless. I don't see why discriminating against a group by refusing them access to women's spaces will protect anyone. It simply makes a difficult life even more difficult.

Vampire I think the issue is and I have said this before you believe transwomen are women, I dont believe you can change sex. The law is also clear that in some cases -prisons refuges etc, sex segregation is permitted.

No I am suggesting we have sex segregation for a reason vampire, I dont think sex segregation is discrimination.

Many in the intersex community have put out statements that they dont want to be part if the debate in transgender issues, they don't want to be used as a gotcha in this particular debate. I am afraid that single sex facilities are enshrined in law so there is a legal right.

Nature makes mistakes in the womb. We, when we can, correct those mistakes. In this case we can correct it with surgery ensuring that men can be men and women can be women. Aren't some people being a tad discriminatory against transgender women? If she's a woman then why should she be a threat to any other women? Some men will always be a threat to women just as some women will be a threat to other women. Some women will always be a threat to men just as some men will be a threat to other men. Are some of you suggesting that we discriminate against a group of people just because some people may pretend to be like them so that they can attack other people?

We're discussing self identity. How would we know which particular category people fall into? The intersex community are human beings I haven't seen anything here saying they want to be left out of the discussion.
If people want to use single sex facilities that's up to them too. Sometimes I have to go out of my way to use something because for some reason I don't like the nearest available. It doesn't give me a lawful right. It doesn't mean they should upgrade the standards.

Self ID isnt happening at the moment. I think we need to continue to ensure the exemptions are used in prisons refuges etc. So am glad we agree on that.
The intersex community have begged not to be involved in this discussion.
I am really happy some people are comfortable using mixed sex facilities, however you cant speak for other people. That's not how consent works.

...and also among humans.

Check out 'Hermaphrodites' in the plant and animal kingdom. Just a quick Google search.

FFS the mind boggles.
There are two sexes end of,in human and the animal kingdom.
Male/Female.

Interesting discussion
NellG well put throughout ?
Re: above (if I post quick enough) Let's not forget women also commit violent crimes; sometimes against men who are too embarrassed to report it. Sometimes women can claim PMT etc etc.
If we've encountered violence against women we're more likely to have an issue with separate facilities. Personally I'm happy to use mixed services - or I'd never travel abroad!

As other posters said yesterday unless someone dressed to be noticed who would know whether they were M or F? & - maybe it's discriminating to Want to know.

Last thought - some people are born this was - totally biologically , Intersex (hermaphrodite) Apparently more common than we know ( or need to know)

Then* Galaxy* with the absolute greatest respect, and I honestly do mean that - you have no argument. Self ID is happening, the language is changing, the exemptions will be, and are used. All you have left is a complaint - making an argument of it is akin to running round trying to tell everyone the sky is falling in when it clearly isn't.

If women really want to change the narrative they'd be better of starting with seeing how they undo their own arguments and create gaps that allow dismissal to creep in.

Fair point Gagajo I agree and can't argue. In your view what is the real point of feminism?

And I am asking honestly, because I think the interpretation varies and therein might lie the infighting.

If the one thing we could manage here is a consensus on that meaning, it has to be a good thing, doesn't it?

I think the changes in language result in a further dehumanising of women which obviously impacts on how everyone behaves towards women

Men in womens prisons has caused serious issues already, those who work in them are expressing serious concerns. So yes I do. I dont think self id is going to happen for the time being, I think women have changed the narrative on that. I think the exemptions in the equality act should be used.

Galaxy I didn't dispute it, but I did ask a question. Do you believe that encouraging self ID will increase violent crime against women?

I also asked if you thought that changes in legislation, language etc would result in natal men posing as women in order to carry out violent crimes against women?

I already knew the statistics, but thank you for reiterating.

The fact that a lot of Male violence happens in the private space is no argument to reducing the safeguards in a public space.

Yes unfortunately we dont have a way of seeing into peoples souls so the point is Eddie Izzard and Jimmy Carr have the same likelihood of committing violent sexual crime as each other. Men commit 97% of violent sexual crimes.

Thank you Gagajo, I needed to know that.

Lets be frank (or Betty if you like!). Men DO commit most violent crime. Most rapes ARE committed by men. BUT most of these attacks are committed by men that women are ALREADY in relationships (of one form or another) with. The likelihood of a man/stranger dressing up in order to invade female spaces and attack women is miniscule. Men manage to perpetrate violence against women without all that subterfuge.

ALL this fuss over offering support to trans people, when IMO, we should focus on the threat that is actually there and always has been. This ingroup bickering is just another deflection to stop the real point of feminism.

Galaxy Do you believe that allowing people to self identify will lead to more violent crime?

I ask because there seems to be a suggestion in the argument ( the argument, not necessarily your argument) that should society become more accepting of self ID re gender, that somehow, already violent and aggressive men will don female clothing, self ID and invade women only safe spaces. Given that those spaces are already and will continue to be protected by law, for those of us who accept that trans women are women it's hard to see that there will either be an erosion of protection, or an increase in violent crime against women.

In answer to your question (speaking for myself and not everyone as I don't want to sound lofty) and using said males as the same example - Eddie Izzard describes herself as she and identifies as gender fluid - she/he ( specifically EI does not get hung up on pronouns, I checked) does not have any criminal history that I am aware of that would lead anyone to believe that she would progress to violent sexual crimes against women to exercise power and control. She is typical of most people in her position. Jimmy Carr presents as a male and I'm not aware that he uses alternative pronouns. Again, to the best of my knowledge he has no criminal record, or pattern of behaviour that would suggest he is likely to carry out a violent crime against a woman. Again, I would suggest he is typical of most of the people in his position.

Therefore in my opinion it's not the gender ID or biological sex of a person that suggest they are or will become a danger to others. My stance is that the reason more men attack women than the other way around is almost entirely because of the way men are socialised. The 'almost' is because there can be physical brain changes, but to the best of my knowledge those are no different to the changes that could occur in a female brain.

Whats the issue with transgender women taking part in sports?

I'm a pretty average woman in her sixties (imo). I don't have a problem with men in general. I'm happy to share hospital wards, changing rooms with separate cubicles, toilets etc with them. Why shouldn't I be? What do you think the men are going to do?