I fully support all protection for transwomen who are living as women, and agree that they should be treated as women
That's easy to say, but what about in practice?
Should someone who has lived forty years as a man, followed by two years as a woman, be eligible for a post such as this - representing women in the Labour party?
Should transwomen who have not had 'bottom surgery' and so still possess their penises, be treated as women when, say, applying for employment in a women's refuge or a women's prison?
Should birth certificates and medical records be changed, meaning that an illness may be misdiagnosed or missed altogether because of that change?
Gransnet forums
News & politics
I'm a woman on Wednesdays
(342 Posts)blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/05/meet-the-man-standing-to-be-a-labour-party-womens-officer/
Sometimes it’s hard to be a woman. Except in the Labour Party, when it’s surprisingly easy. Just ask David Lewis. David, 45, is a member of the Labour Party. After several years of supporting the party, he became a full member last year having been “inspired” by Jeremy Corbyn. Tomorrow, David will be a candidate for election as an office-holder in his Constituency Labour Party in Basingstoke. He is standing for election as women’s officer, a post that Labour rules say can only be held by a woman. David is standing for that post because he is a woman. On Wednesdays, at least. When we spoke yesterday, he put it like this:
“I self-identify as a woman on Wednesdays, between 6.50am when my alarm goes off and around midnight when I go to bed.”
What does self-identifying as a woman mean? In what way is David a woman on Wednesdays?
“My womanness is expressed by my saying ‘I self identify as a woman’ now and again on Wednesdays. I make no changes in my behaviour or my appearance. I keep my name, David and my male pronouns. I wear the same sort of clothes I wear the rest of the week. I keep my beard. I enjoy the full womanness of my beard.”
The Basingstoke Labour Party last week accepted the womanness of David and his beard. He is listed as a candidate for election as CLP Women’s Officer, a post that involves encouraging women to join the party and generally speaking for women, their concerns and their experiences. But who is a woman? In the Labour Party, among other places, the answer to that question is not always as simple as some people might expect.
Labour operates a policy of self-definition: if someone defines themselves as a woman, the party recognises that person as a woman, with no question, verification or scrutiny of that definition. This approach is intended to make the party inclusive and supportive of transwomen, people who were born male and later say they wish to change their gender and be recognised as female. Many advocates of greater legal rights for trans people say that accepting such self-identification is right and fair because “gatekeeping” checks, where trans people are required to “prove” their gender identity to another person or authority, are discriminatory and intrusive. “Transwomen are women,” they say, as if those three words are all that’s needs to settle this matter. More on this later.
The Labour approach on self-defining women also extends to the all-women shortlists used to select the party’s candidate in some parliamentary seats. Some Labour members have doubts about the policy of self-definition. Some are feminists who worry that a policy that allows male-born people (who might have enjoyed the social and economic advantages that are often associated with being male) to compete for and hold women-only posts is unfair to people who were born female (and thus prone to social and economic disadvantage.)
Some raise legal questions. Generally, equalities law doesn’t allow organisations such as Labour to reserve jobs or services for any particular group, but the Equality Act 2010 includes some exemptions for single-sex services, because Parliament wanted to ensure that women could be guaranteed that there are some roles and places where men cannot enter.
Some Labour members have sought to bring a legal challenge against the party for opening up women’s roles to “self-defined” women. They argue that where transwomen are not legally recognised as women (i.e. they do not hold a gender recognition certificate) they cannot be entitled to posts that the law reserves for women. Some women have resigned from Labour over this issue.
Labour’s NEC, meanwhile, has insisted that the policy of treating self-defined women as women will stand. Which brings us back to David Lewis, candidate to be Basingstoke Labour’s women’s officer:
“After I looked at the NEC position and what it really meant, I thought, I’ll put my name forward for women’s officer. After all, what’s the worst that could happen? I expected them to say, ‘don’t be silly’ and politely decline my application. But they didn’t. They accepted my candidacy as valid.”
So he’s standing for a woman’s post. Why?
“My priority here is to inform the CLP, and maybe some other people, about what this policy means, about what happens when you say that someone’s gender depends only on what they say and nothing else.”
How would David respond to those who might say he is being offensive or bigoted, that he is trivialising the issues that transgender women face?
“I’d say those people don’t have any right to criticise my gender-identity. If I say I am a woman on Wednesdays, then all they can do is accept that. After all, there are other people who only identify as women on some days of the week and not others, and they are accepted, not criticised.”
David adds:
“In any case, anyone else’s criticism or questions about my gender identity are just not relevant to the Labour Party at the moment, given the current policy. If I say I’m a woman, I’m a woman.”
Now, if you’re new to this topic, you may by this point have come to appreciate that yes, in today’s Labour Party, anyone can be a woman if they say they are a woman, even David with his beard and his complete lack of any outward effort to live or pass as a woman. And maybe you might think “Yes, well, that’s the loony lefty SJW Labour Party, and nothing to do with the rest of us who aren’t part of it.”
If so, you’d be wrong, because that policy of “self-identification” could become the law for everyone. The Government will shortly bring forward a consultation on amending the law on gender recognition, where some groups will argue that people should be able to define themselves as a woman or a man (and thus obtain the associated legal rights and entitlements) without external check or verification.
Some people think that’s a good idea, because they say the current system institutionalises unfairness to trans people. Some people have doubts, because they worry that such rules could be (ab)used to erode the legal status of women, opening up their roles, jobs and places (for instance, domestic violence shelters, all-women colleges, hospital wards) to people with male socialisation and anatomy.
Many (but not all) of the people who raise questions about self-identified gender rules are women, women who are struggling to make their voices heard in what passes for the public debate about gender, because those who speak out are at risk of abuse and accusations of transphobic bigotry. Or even being assaulted.
Which is why what David Lewis is doing strikes me as important and worthy of attention beyond the lovely town of Basingstoke. David Lewis is a man standing for a post that the rules say should be open only to women. He can do so purely because he has said the words “I am a woman” and rigid adherence to the orthodoxy of “transwomen are women” means no one can question his claim. And if anyone who says “I am a woman” must be treated as a woman and granted the status and rights of a woman, does the word “woman” still have any meaning? You do not, I submit, need to a radical feminist to see that the logic of complete self-identification raises some quite profound questions.
Although I worry he’ll get his share of abuse for it, I think David Lewis deserves praise for what he is doing. He is standing for a woman’s job to make a point about what can happen to women when rules that affect them and their rights are made and enforced on the basis of blind dogma, not balanced debate. “We need to be able to debate this, we need to be able to talk about this without being told we are transphobic and to shut up,” David says, before adding:
“I completely understand the problems that trans people face and I can see the case for reforming a system that some people find difficult and undignified. But I think we have to have a proper debate where both sides are heard and there are people who raising valid questions who are not being heard. In the end, we need to have a compromise. And a good compromise is one where both sides are equally unhappy.”
Does he think there is any chance he might actually win his election and end up being elected as women’s officer? “I am hoping that my local party will be sensible.”
Here's a little story that may illustrate what's going on, for some of you who have not noticed the creeping acceptance of daft ideas.
Trans Rights Activists has been busy getting into schools. Here's what happened in one. A girl who had been brought up happily rejecting gender stereotypes, started school aged five. Her new teacher, noting her short hair and kickass attitude, asked what pronoun she should use.
This is now, in the UK. Quote it, often.
What seems to me to be different about the debate about rights for trans women is that they can only be given by taking away rights from biological women. Other battles for rights for ‘minority/oppressed’ groups didn’t entail this - at least not in the sense of taking away rights from the powerful group that they were ethically entitled to. So for example, when the franchise was extended to women, you didn’t take away the votes from men; when abortion became legal, the right to choose not to have an abortion remained; when homosexuality became legal, the right to be heterosexual was not taken away; but this change wants to take away the rights of biological women to bw only safe spaces, services, to compete as bw against other b w in a whole host of areas, to have bw represent the views of bw when that’s relevant - our rights to have our life experiences as bw validated and respected, our rights as bw to be recognised as women and for women not to be defined as non-men.
Great story. I have been worried about this self identification thing since it bcame a thing. Ivwe known two people who changed from male to female with the accompanying hormone and surgery interventions. In both cases the interventions were done on adults but both were damaged to the extent that I believe they gave consent to mutilation.
What will happen to children being encouraged to self indentify I cannot imagine. Most of us will have known boy children who liked earrings and frocks or girl children who preferred jeans and footballs. It mostly falls away at puberty. Can we not accept that for some of us its not that easy to identify with either gender and leave it fuzzy?
As far as I'm concerned if you have a penis and testicles, you are a man and you should not be allowed in any woman only spaces just because you feel like it on Wednesday or any other day of the week. Even if you have an operation to remove them that still doesn't make you a woman in my eyes. Babies who are incorrectly sexed at birth because their internal organs don't match their outer ones is a different matter altogether.
Good Grief.. never heard of anything so crazy! barrel scraping at it's worse?
This whole fuss is based on a deliberate misunderstanding of the "Self Identification" issue. When I transitioned I lost my family, my home, my church and my friends. I was fortunate not to lose my job - at least not straight away. This is what life is like for a trans-person. I had to complete two years living as the person I really am, pay for two doctors letters and pay for a court hearing I was not allowed to attend to get my Gender Recognition Certificate. The proposal that is being discussed is to remove the expensive and intrusive secret court hearing. That's all. It won't mean that anyone can just get a GRC on a whim, it will mean that it will cost rather less than £250 to do so. How many times have any of you demanded to see a GRC anyway? I bet no-one here even knows what it is.
Genius move by DL. Shows the whole thing up for the farce that it is. Signed.
FarNorth Thanks for the link, signed.
Maryeliza, Thanks for the link to the mumsnet thread started by David Lewis, it made me laugh.
S/he is my hero of the day.
I think you're missing the point MaryXYX. The point is that SelfID is so open to abuse.
Right now, if David Lewis walked into a female-only space we would all feel able to challenge him and turf him out. If SelfID becomes law, all he would have to do is say 'I identify as a woman' - what would be the effect on US ?
Would we risk turfing him out, knowing we could be charged with assault and taken to court? Would we risk even challenging him, knowing that we could be charged with a hate crime and taken to court? THAT is what SelfID will bring about - an unwillingness to challenge any male from entering a space that is meant to be male-free.
As a middle-aged woman, I might find myself silently fuming and pushing up my blood pressure. But what about younger women? Especially, what about teenaged girls ? Those at that stage in life where we are still deferring to older people, still unsure of what is acceptable social behaviour, still trying to be 'nice' and 'polite' the way we've been taught to be? They don't have good firm boundaries yet, they can be easily pushed into doing things they'd rather not, because they don't feel able to say no. They go along with things they'd rather not go along with, because they lack the self-confidence to walk away or to say 'no'. As adults we should be ensuring that they are not put into such positions until they have the wherewithal to protect themselves.
If there's one thing MeToo should have taught us, it's the ubiquity of predators and chancers. They are everywhere. And SelfID will be one huge feckin' GIFT to them. Do you seriously think they won't use it? Of course they will! And our teenagers will be easy meat for them. Nowhere to retreat to where they cannot be followed. And, more to the point - a SelfIDing environment will psychologically groom them to never challenge any man who manipulates them into somewhere or something that they don't want. 
So I'm sorry MaryXYX, but this is not about you. This is about our entire society, and how we protect our young teens and bring them up to know how to protect themselves. And to know they are ENTITLED to protect themselves.
@MaryXYX, the Labour Party has been careful to say that their NEC decision last night was about allowing self-ID for All Women Shortlists, and not about the (Tory led) review of the GRA. AWS' are designed to continue to improve the number of women MPs. Now those places can be taken by transwomen. It's illegal, as Self-ID is not law, so it's going to end in expensive legal case, and the Labour Party is losing both votes and women members in the meantime. The GRA needs revision but simple Slef-ID is not enough. You will lose rights, and credibility, as a person with an existing GRC. Many transwomen are also worried about this and are slowly daring to speak out.
Next time there is a queue for the ladies toilet I shall use the men’s, saying I am a man for the next hour
All Women Shortlists are not a legal requirement in any way, surely? So the Labour party, or any other party, can just decide to have All Women (including Transwomen) Shortlists if they want, can't they?
David Lewis was not trying to get onto an AWS. He wished to stand as a candidate for Women's Officer of his Constituency Labour Party.
Does this hold, I wonder, for anyone who wishes to join a male or female only club, on Wednesdays, of course?
It would hold for anyone who wants to say they are male or female, on any day, and join a male or female club and/or sport and/or be eligible for male/female awards.
I wonder if he'd like to come to WI, that's on a Wednesday.
However, the nice trips, etc are sometimes on other days, sorry Dave.
Technically they (Labour Party & government) are consulting with women in as far as transwomen can be said to be women. Therein lies the rub.
So if they propose all you have to do is 'self identify', what's to stop a pervert nipping into the ladies' changing room , shower or whatever for his own nefarious purposes??
But he will not be available for business except on Wednesdays, presumably.
There is a real problem with 'Self Indentifying '.
What is ' Self Identifying ' if not simply the individual stating ' I Self Identify as a Female/Male '.
The Labour Party has backed ' Self Identifying ' for eligibility to gain entrance onto it's All - Women Short
lists and Women's Officer Roles ' without the need for medical certification that they have changed their gender '.
The case of David Lewis and his ' Self Identifying ' for a Labour Party role means he technically did nothing wrong if you go by Labours own remit.
Yes he was pushing the point , yes he was making a mockery of it but he did nothing the Labour Party does not consider to be a right . That has subsequently caused him to be temporarily suspended from the Labour Party.
The question is who or what in the Labour Party will define/decide for all other cases of Self Identifying ? How will they decide because the terms / conditions for Self Identifying are wide open to abuse.
I don't understand how anyone can currently consider they have changed gender anyway. However clever the plastic surgery, however anatomically correct the changeover may appear, until and unless every chromosome in every cell in the body can be altered these people remain the gender they were born into. The consequence is, for a man, shall we say, that if he takes all the hormones and submits to all the surgery in the end he is merely a badly mutilated man wearing a fancy dress he can never remove. How absolutely dreadful!
In Scotland there has been a public consultation on the subject of self-identifacation of gender. The consultation questions and some really helpful information and notes for those replying to it can still be seen at consult.gov.scot/equality-unit/draft-gender-representation-on-public-boards/ Reading the notes dispels a lot of misconceptions.
Sorry, I posted the wrong reference. It should have been consult.gov.scot/family-law/review-of-the-gender-recognition-act-2004/
The intention of this self-identification proposal is that people will be able to declare themselves once in a lifetime as the gender they feel themselves to be without the painful and stressful process of surgical and medicated transition, and to get their paperwork changed to reflect that declaration. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be anything to stop anyone claiming to have made the declaration when they are in fact fully and rampantly unchanged- it is to be illegal to ask for documentary proof that someone is now of the other gender, so if you suspect someone of ulterior motives and say so, you could find yourself arrested.
starbox
"So if they propose all you have to do is 'self identify', what's to stop a pervert nipping into the ladies' changing room , shower or whatever for his own nefarious purposes??"
Nothing. Nothing at all. Indeed, knowing we'll be unlikely to challenge him (lest we commit a hate crime) is quite the incentive.
Join the conversation
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »

