Fun times at Dulwich Leisure Centre on Friday...

[Bagpipes]

My particular concerns is data. If the categories of sex (ie M or F) become meaningless by the inclusion of biological men who *feel* like women, we will fail to get an accurate picture of data regarding crime, health etc. The ONS only recently was considering not gathering data on sex.

My personal view is that trans people should be treated with compassion and understanding and their rights should be enhanced. That's a no-brainer. But I'm afraid I have every sympathy with my female friends who say they don't identify as women, they *are* women. My friends can't identify out of the gender pay gap or any of the other issues women face as distinct sex class.

[tutorse22]

@rahrahrah

@edcam

Please have a look here:

http://randomstabbing.tumblr.com/post/144989720467/the-tip-of-the-iceberg-please-add-to-this-list

and

http://womanmeanssomething.com/1034-2/

The study, available at www.womanmeanssomething.com/targetstudy, shows that voyeurism-related offenses increased significantly after the publication of Target?s policy?doubling or tripling according to all measures, while other sexual offense categories changed little. The findings are consistent with the ?sex-predator? theory which has posited that sexual offenders may use gender-identity policies in private spaces to gain access to women and children in order to perpetrate sexual violence. This study is the first longitudinal analysis of risks related to gender-inclusion policies. The incident database is open-source and is available for further exploration and analysis.

[Bagpipes]

.

[Earl Aelfheah]

As I understand it there is going to be a consultation on any proposed changes. No one is being frozen out of the discussions or having their voices silenced - they are being invited to contribute to a debate. Also, whilst the detail is as yet undecided - no one is talking about individuals saying "I'm a woman" and then being able to enter women only spaces. What is being proposed is that the process of applying to legally change one's sex on official documents, will be less invasive than it currently is.

It will still be a big decision to live as a different sex than the one you were born to. I do not believe that many people will go to the lengths of legally changing their sex - choosing to live as a woman, just to gain access to female spaces for malign purposes. I am sure there are easier ways to do this, if you are a determined predator. That's not to say that it's impossible of course, but unlikely.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-action-to-promote-lgbt-equality

[Earl Aelfheah]

The petition calls "for women to be consulted", in response to a proposed consultation exercise. Is the intention that the consultation should be limited to just women, as opposed to the broad consultation (which includes women), as is currently proposed?

[SwearyGodmother]

A consultation has happened from which women were excluded, and at present the government are stalling on further consultation. This isn?t just about the changes to the GRA and Equality Act, it?s about the effect of service providers implementing self ID policies without applying any common sense. I am clearly a woman and when I stated that I identify as a man I was allowed access to the men?s changing room and swim. The implication is that any man could do the same. He wouldn?t have to legally change his sex, just tell a receptionist that he?s a woman. We?ve all been cowed into silence by the screams of ?transphobe, bigot? so I wouldn?t expect a receptionist to risk being abused by refusing someone access to a changing room, nor would I expect them to feel able to go against official policy. Now what kind of man would lie to get to watch women undressing? I mean, we?ve never heard of or experienced anyone do this ever. And they can do it in plain sight now.

[Earl Aelfheah]

The effect of service providers implementing self ID policies without applying any common sense is a quite different one.

[Earl Aelfheah]

My understanding is that a consultation is to take place at some point in the future. Why do you believe that women will be excluded from any public consultation out of interest?

[Bagpipes]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

No one is

> being frozen out of the discussions or having

> their voices silenced

That's not quite right. When the current govt consulted with stakeholders on possible changes to the Gender Recognition Act, no women's groups were consulted. A serious omission in my view.

[Curmudgeon]

You missed my point

I object to women being the only ones deemed relevant on the petition, and that men are excluded

If the transgendered community has been consulted to the exclusion of all others, then the petition should call for an open consultation

I believe in transgendered rights, I also believe in women?s rights, but not to the exclusion of men?s rights

You say ?We?ve all been cowed into silence by the screams of ?transphobe, bigot? isn?t it time that we put aside hypocrisy

Transphobic or mysogynist? To me this signifies a rise in misandry

By the way, in case of doubt, I?m female

[rendelharris]

Curmudgeon Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You missed my point

>

> I object to women being the only ones deemed

> relevant on the petition, and that men are

> excluded

>

> If the transgendered community has been consulted

> to the exclusion of all others, then the petition

> should call for an open consultation

>

> I believe in transgendered rights, I also believe

> in women?s rights, but not to the exclusion of

> men?s rights

>

> You say ?We?ve all been cowed into silence by the

> screams of ?transphobe, bigot? isn?t it time that

> we put aside hypocrisy

>

> Transphobic or mysogynist? To me this signifies a

> rise in misandry

Logically and in isolation you're right. In the real world, how many women are going to be self-identifying as men in order to get into men's changing rooms or similar? Will that put men in danger? The negative aspects of allowing people rights according to their own self-identification regarding gender are going to fall overwhelmingly - and I mean overwhelmingly in the sense of 99.9999999% - on women. It's not misandry, it's just not wasting time, money and effort on something that really won't affect men.

[tomskip]

In a debate about women's rights why do we always have to remember the men?

[Earl Aelfheah]

As I understand it a LGBT survey was launched, covering a wider range of issues. There will (at some point) be a full, public consultation when / if any firm proposals emerge regarding gender recognition specifically.

As I?ve said already, the idea that lots of men will legally change their sex and chose to live as women in order to access female only spaces for nefarious purposes seems to me, far fetched.

[Bagpipes]

rahrahrah Wrote:

------------------------------------------------------

>

> As I?ve said already, the idea that lots of men

> will legally change their sex and chose to live as

> women in order to access female only spaces for

> nefarious purposes seems to me, far fetched.

You're missing the point (as you've done already). Self-ID means there is no requirement to live "as" women. If you identify you can access spaces formerly reserved for women.

> I see no evidence of any decisions having been

> made and no evidence of people having their views

> silenced.

Again, women's groups were not consulted when the govt consulted on this issue. That is a problem as it is women's sex-based rights that will be lost.

[rendelharris]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> As I?ve said already, the idea that lots of men

> will legally change their sex and chose to live as

> women in order to access female only spaces for

> nefarious purposes seems to me, far fetched.

I think you're absolutely right, there certainly won't be "lots" of men doing it - but some might. The reason the proposed gender identification laws are worrying is that anyone could simply change their gender - and change it back again - as they pleased, simply by ticking a form, without any evidence of genuine transgender leanings (that's very poorly expressed, can't think of a good phrase) or in any way living as a woman. One can well imagine transphobic people deciding to use the proposed system to make a point, in fact were one that way inclined it'd be a gift, surely? I don't have any answers to this conundrum, but the changes out for consultation, if accepted, seem to me to be opening a very dangerous can of worms.

[Bagpipes]

A more tangential point but another troubling aspect to all this is children being put under pressure to change genders. Supporters of transing children have some unlikely allies in the Christian right. Parents who cannot bear feminine or effeminate boys are happier to tell themselves (and their children) that they are actually another gender. Easier to have a girl who was "born in the wrong body" than a feminine boy. Latent or overt homophobia influences some of these choices and it's disturbing.

Gender is a social construct. It's a straightjacket for boys and girls - *especially* if you don't conform. Instead of telling people there is a disconnect between their biological selves and their - what? brain? soul? feelings? - we should be saying it's fine to be feminine if you're male and fine to be masculine if your female.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Legal gender recognition has got nothing to do with access to gendered changing facilities, as evidenced by this stunt.

[Bagpipes]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Legal gender recognition has got nothing to do

> with access to gendered changing facilities, as

> evidenced by this stunt.

The stunt is about self-ID. Do keep up!

[Earl Aelfheah]

That?s very patronising.

I thought you were campaigning against possible changes to the gender recognition act which could make it easier for trans people to change their legal status. The suggestion seems to be that such a change will somehow make it easier for predatory men to enter changing rooms. Yet, you?ve shown that the two things aren?t actually linked at all.

Or is it the policy of Dulwich Leisure centre that you?re actually protesting against?

If I haven?t ?kept up?, maybe your arguments need to be more coherent?

[Earl Aelfheah]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

--------------

> The reason the proposed gender identification laws

> are worrying is that anyone could simply change

> their gender - and change it back again - as they

> pleased, simply by ticking a form, without any

> evidence of genuine transgender leanings

If someone wants to access a female changing room, do you really think that applying to change their legal status, their passport, there driver?s licence, bank accounts etc etc, is the easiest way to do it? The stunt suggest it?s a total red herring and has nothing o do with legal status or changes to the GRA.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Let?s force someone living as a man to use the women?s changing room, because that?s their ?birth gender?. That?ll delight people.

[heartblock]

http://cheerful.libsyn.com/episode-9-transgender-rights-are-human-rights

Interesting podcast.

[rendelharris]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If someone wants to access a female changing room,

> do you really think that applying to change their

> legal status, their passport, there driver?s

> licence, bank accounts etc etc, is the easiest way

> to do it?

No of course not, but surely the point is that if/when this is accepted people will be able to say they're identifying as a particular gender and access spaces reserved for that gender without having to offer proof? If facilities like the leisure centre started asking to see a passport as proof of gender before allowing people to use the facilities that would start another avenue of protest, not to mention extreme embarrassment.

[Earl Aelfheah]

That isn?t to do with gender recognition laws though. It?s about a leisure centre?s changing policy.

[Earl Aelfheah]

heartblock Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> http://cheerful.libsyn.com/episode-9-transgender-r

> ights-are-human-rights

>

> Interesting podcast.

Listened to this in the way to work this morning. It?s a good episode and pretty enlightening.