'Trans' a book about transactivism

Exactly trisher I find your opinion of what being a feminist strange that’s why I was so surprised at your opinions of other’s feminism.
If you read my post, the email includes the fact that sometimes girls can be faster than boys. It also contains other information about why this swimming club chooses to race boys and girls in separate races.
There is a possibility . . . Some of the boys and girls at the club (not in the squad) have been swimming from a young age. I wonder if their parents/coaches would accept that they haven’t been encouraged . . . But I’m not going to be diverted into another blame game.

trisher

I can see that it's a lot simpler to say "ban transwomen", as if that would solve the problem, than to admit the problem is bigger and other solutions are required. And actually people have said that it is all the fault of transwomen. Which is pretty similar to saying it doesn't matter and banning transwomen would solve it. I'm simply pointing out it won't.

I didn't say 'ban transwomen', though. I do wish you wouldn't put words into my mouth. Just don't let them compete against women.

Also, it's really not about 'admitting' anything. I'm not arguing for arguing's sake, but people keep saying that the two things are separate issues, yet you insist on linking them and blaming those who don't agree for saying things we haven't said.

That is the DARVO thing:

Deny that the abuse of women and the fact that men can cheat at sport are different issues (and fair enough, obviously you don't see it that way, but bear with me?)

Attack those of us who are pointing it out and accuse us of not being good enough feminists and of being transphobic.

Reverse things so that we are in the wrong for pointing out that the things are separate, so that the

Victim (strong word, but I didn't make up the acronym) but the one being attacked for being transphobic, not caring about women, not caring about black people, not being feminist enough, whatever, becomes the

Offender (the one who has to defend their position against those accusations ).

It doesn't move the debate on, and it is increasingly frustrating.

I'm surprised that anyone who professes to be a feminist would dismiss another woman's ideas by insisting she was only supporting or favouring men.

I don't understand this. Are you saying that feminists are not supposed to criticise other women's arguments, even if they don't agree with what they say? Or is it just that we aren't supposed to object when every one of those arguments puts men first?

I was reading this today but it does seem to 'be a thing' that changing ID gives predators access to vulnerable people

Talk to detransitioned women, see the scars and listen to their heart rending accounts of lack of support . At a meeting in Glasgow earlier this week this caught my eye. It’s not about the unfairness of transwomen competing with natal women or about the wrongness of some transwomen who use their self ID to access places where natal women have the right to feel safe. It’s about what happens if transition doesn’t solve the problem.

Forgot to attach the poster.

Mollygo

Exactly trisher I find your opinion of what being a feminist strange that’s why I was so surprised at your opinions of other’s feminism.
If you read my post, the email includes the fact that sometimes girls can be faster than boys. It also contains other information about why this swimming club chooses to race boys and girls in separate races.
There is a possibility . . . Some of the boys and girls at the club (not in the squad) have been swimming from a young age. I wonder if their parents/coaches would accept that they haven’t been encouraged . . . But I’m not going to be diverted into another blame game.

So the argument seems to be that girls shouldn't compete against boys.I wonder if the first woman ever to run in a marathon would agree with you. She was coached by a man, they thought her entry was a man's, and her male friends ran around her to protect her from the man who tried to pull her out of the race. Kathrine Switzer- a role model for girls who want to compete kathrineswitzer.com/1967-boston-marathon-the-real-story/

Trisher it’s not an argument, though you seem to want one.
You don’t actually wonder about anything you simply keep posting about past events which suit your purpose. Keep going.

So the argument seems to be that girls shouldn't compete against boys.I wonder if the first woman ever to run in a marathon would agree with you.

Of course girls or women can compete against boys or men. They should be free to enter an open/mixed sex class, formally known as the male class, leaving the other class for female sex people who only want to compete against others of the same sex. Transwomen will not be banned from sport (what a horrible suggestion!) they will compete in the open/mixed sex class where they won't be disadvantaged at all. I'd suspect your Boston marathon runner would be quite happy with this.

As the theoretical category that you now seem to be suggesting doesn't exist I can't see what else is proposed except stopping transwomen competing. I did post one suggestion for reorganising sports classes but I think that was dismissed.
I am apparently now being accused of calling people transphobic something I have consciously refrained from doing as unlike others I find name calling and accusations of bias unhelpful.
I certainly would want to see sports competitions properly reorganised and people able to compete at their own level. This would of course still involve some way of assessing the categories anyone should compete in which brings us back to finding a satisfactory way of designating who is a woman.

Where have you been accused of being transphobic?

Which others have been name calling?

Doodledog
Victim (strong word, but I didn't make up the acronym) but the one being attacked for being transphobic, not caring about women, not caring about black people, not being feminist enough, whatever, becomes the
Mollygo-see above.
The process seems to be when you can't defend your point of view because something which is accurate and important and which reveals holes in your viewpoint has been posted, attack the poster by saying she only supports men, is DARVOing (what a silly term) or is questioning your feminism.
I still don't understand what your feminism involves by the way. It seems to centre around thinking all men are the enemy, something I thought we dealt with in the 70s-. Remember "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle"? And I thought we had progressed to a more inclusive version where we realised that it isn't men who are the enemy but the toxic notion of masculinity perpetuated by the patriachy.
But if you want to explain it to me I'm willing to think about it.

Not sure if that reply is addressed to me, or to Mollygo, but I’ll answer anyway. Yes, I remember the fish/bicycles thing, but no, that is not my view of men.

I am not going to be manoeuvred into defending my position on feminism on a discussion about self-ID. That is a strategy that you always use, and I am not playing, as I know from experience that it will end in a lecture about different waves and other textbook notions that have zero bearing on the debate on self-ID.

If you haven’t used the term ‘transphobic’ you certainly imply that the motives of those who disagree with allowing men to self-define as women at will have transphobia at their root, however much we tell you otherwise.

I have repeatedly said that I don’t see your your mentioning the mistreatment of black female athletes as ‘something which is accurate and important’. to this debate.

It does not ‘reveal holes in my viewpoint’, as my viewpoint is (as I have said) that it is another ‘wrong’ that should be addressed, but that it is not relevant to the discussion of self-ID, other than the fact that without the possibility of men posing as women to compete there would be no need for the mistreatment at all.

Again, you are reversing the argument here to try to make me defend my position on feminism and on the straw man of the mistreated athletes, when the questions surrounding the actual debate (which started with prisons and have moved to sport) are avoided. This always happens on these threads, and I am not falling for it again.

Where have I said I think all men are the enemy?
I have said that some transwomen use their self ID for purposes which override the rights of natal women. That is a fact.
I have not accused anyone on here of being transphobic because that would mean that having an irrational fear or aversion to trans rather than an objection to some behaviours.
I do find it strange that you support the rights of transwomen over natal women in areas where it benefits the trans more than a natal woman but you find it strange that I feel the other way.
You are secure in your version of feminism as I am in mine. So really, accusing me of things that aren’t true won’t get any of us any further.

I raised a different aspect of trans that I find concerning on Friday 19:58.
Do you have an opinion on the lack of support and help either surgical or psychological, for those who regret transition and the irreversible changes they made to their bodies?
There is greater possibility of getting a tattoo removed in the NHS than there is of undoing the damage the physics and/or chemical changes that they thought would help them.

Mollygo anyone who has a problem with their identity and who undergoes surgery or other treatment then discovers that it has not helped them of course has my sympathy, why wouldn't they? I don't know much about these people I must admit, or what level of support they need. I would imagine this is a fairly recent phenomena and the NHS is sometimes slow to catch up. Removing a tattoo is a much simpler process that can be dealt with by a plastic surgeon. Dealing with someone with complex gender issues would require special training which may take time to come through.
I don't support any one group of women over another group of women. I question women who want to split women into sections and set them against each other. The woman who stands beside me at a rally may be a transwoman or may just be a bit butch. Either way she's my sister.
Just as I don't condemn all men as paedophiles because a few are, I don't condemn all transwomen because some are violent.

Doodledog Please look at the history of sex determination in female sports. It has absolutely nothing to do with "the possibility of men posing as women" and everything to do with limiting female physiology. You may think it has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion but as a feminist it is an area of concern. Not because of men trying to pass but because of the controls exercised on women's bodies by a largely masculine organisation and the limitations put on women and in particular black women. And those controls will remain even if another class is created for transwomen to compete in. There will still be women who will be required to artifically control their natural hormone levels because of some ruling imposed that has no scientific basis whatsoever.

I don't condemn all transwomen because some are violent.
Nor do I, and I have seen no evidence on here that others would, either. I know transwomen who are anything but violent, and live 'as women', which means very little, really, but I absolutely respect their right to do so, just as I respect the right of anyone to ignore socially-imposed gender 'boundaries' and do their own thing.

TBH, I don't know if either of them are medically transitioned, and I wouldn't dream of asking, as in a social context it doesn't matter. If they wanted to compete in a female sports category, however, or in the unlikely event that they were jailed, I think it would matter a lot.

For the 762nd time - it is not transwomen who are the issue. It is accepting that men can classify themselves as women and 'become' women on their own say-so that is the issue.

To return to the thread topic, this article raises a lot of the issues that I find concerning.

As far as rape laws go Doodledog I'd prefer to see us adopt a definition more like the US one Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.
That way many crimes not now considered rape would becomerape.

And would you prefer to see people like the offender in the link housed in a male or female prison?

Doodledog good article. Can you even begin to imagine the added trauma after being raped to be expected to testify against your rapist as she? I can't, and I seriously question the motives of anybody who thinks it is appropriate.

Rosie51 I can't begin to imagine, no. And the victim being made to use female pronouns to appease the sensitivities of the rapist is a perfect (if appalling) example of the way in which men's 'rights' are being put ahead of those of women.

trisher I agree that the definition of rape should be broadened, but that is avoiding the issue. This is a case where a man (or are you suggesting that he is really a woman?) has raped a woman with his penis. The victim then has to say that she was raped by a woman, and the crime figures are skewed as the crime (of rape with a penis) is recorded as committed by a woman. Then there is the question of where to house the offender in jail.

Broadening the definition of rape, whilst sensible, does not attempt to answer any of these issues, all of which are relevant to the thread.

Doodledog & Rosie51 the situations you cite are appalling. Asking a woman in that situation to lie in addition to suffering such an attack surely cannot be acceptable.

Mollygo anyone who has a problem with their identity and who undergoes surgery or other treatment then discovers that it has not helped them of course has my sympathy, why wouldn't they? I don't know much about these people I must admit, or what level of support they need

How can you be so well versed in all things trans, an ardent supporter of transpeople and yet make this statement? Do you not read anything which isn't totally affirming?

Really have I ever claimed to be well versed in all things trans? Why should I be an expert? I'm simply someone who looks at thing and judges according to my own principles which basically are equality, justice, sisterhood, socialism and non-violence. If there are people who regret changing I haven't met any and until now the subject has never been raised.
I read all sorts of things Rosie but when they become just diatribes from people urging me to hate someone I tend to ignore them.
Doodledog I've already welcomed the opening of a transgender prison

I suppose one of the problems is if someone uses the pronoun "she" in real life and is termed "he" in court it could lead to confusion. Some of the people e-mailing me now are stating their preferred pronoun,one or two have said 'they'.
As far as the rape goes I think the law is relevant because rapes are sometimes committed by women using instruments, they are just not legally referred to as rape. Which actually brings me to the conclusion that it must be just as terrible to be assaulted by someone with an object and to be unable to call it rape as it is to be raped by someone who claims to be a woman and insists on being called she. The law on rape is unfit for purpose.
I just wonder why do you think that these extreme and unsavoury cases are somehow an argument against transwomen? Most of whom are not violent and do not behave like this. It wouldn't apply in any other case. We don't look at Dr Shipman and condemn all GPs.