Non-binary: What do you understand it to mean?

[FishFright]

Transwomen = men who identify as women.
Transmen = women who identify as men.

To be honest, transmen are mostly left out of the debate because they are not seeking access to single sex spaces, and even if they did it wouldn't be a problem. I am not aware of any transman prisoner seeking to be moved to a male prison. Similarly, female athletes who identify as male seem reluctant to leave their women's sports teams and try out for the men's side.

I don't think men object if transmen use male changing rooms because they are no threat.

There's a huge issue around girls rejecting today's prevalent culture of hyper femininity and thinking that this somehow makes them not women, in my opinion. But that's a different side of the transgender debate.

What do you base that opinion on ? It doesn't fit with any transmen I've met.

 

[Julia9054]

Thanks for the info, so it's Women who now dress like Men and the one's who can't make their minds up?

Thanks for your valuable input, caller.

 

[FishFright]

Thanks for your valuable input, caller.

I wait all night for calls like these

[Chorus]
An independent station
WJAZ
With jazz and conversation
From the foot of Mt. Belzoni
Sweet music
Tonight the night is mine
Late line 'til the sun (til' the sun) comes through the skyline



that's todays earworm sorted ! (Donald Fagan - Nightfly)

 

[AuroraSaab]

Transmen using male toilets or changing rooms isn't much of an issue is it though? Statistically they are no threat whatsoever to men. It might make men feel uncomfortable but not in the way that a man being in women's spaces make women and girls uncomfortable. You would have to consult the guys on here as to whether they would be happy with it.

As for a woman pretending to be trans in order to get off on being in men's single sex spaces - or filming men in changing rooms and similar behaviour - it doesn't seem to be a thing. Unlike men pretending to be transwomen as a cover for sexual misbehaviour, which very much does seem to be a thing.

I am not aware of any great demand from transmen (women who identify as men) to be:

Housed in male prisons
Placed on male hospital wards or male mental health units
To be housed in male domestic violence refuges
To compete in the male sex category in sports (with the exception of teen wrestler Mack Beggs).

California is one of the states that allows transwomen to move to the female estate:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/male-inmates-in-womens-prisons-11622474215

"Ms. Thornton, the Corrections Department spokeswoman, stressed that the department evaluates transfer applications (of transwomen to move to the female estate) on a case-by-case basis. It has approved 26 of them. “We haven’t denied any requests so far,” she said.

She also confirmed that although there are many female prisoners in California’s women’s prisons who identify as men, only seven have requested transfer to the men’s prison. Why so few? I asked Ms. Ichikawa, who answered: “They would get killed.”

Also research suggests that there is a higher prevalence of transwomen than transmen.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33644314/

Of those in the UK who get a Gender Recognition Certificate to legally change their sex, 77% are male to female.

https://fairplayforwomen.com/penis/

Personally, I would say that transwomen retain their sense of male entitlement and are thus more vociferous in seeking the validation of being in women's spaces. It brings huge benefits and few disadvantages. Whereas for a transman, the validation thrill of being the only female bodied person in a male prison would be rather short lived.

So in short:

"..transmen are mostly left out of the debate because they are not seeking access to single sex spaces.." because:


1. Them being in males spaces isn't much of a problem anyway
2. There are fewer of them
3. They aren't as massively entitled as males and as such their campaigning is less aggressive and less publicised
4. They seek less validation through being in male spaces
5. There are few benefits to being a transman in exclusively male environments

 

[Bromptonaut]

"..transmen are mostly left out of the debate because they are not seeking access to single sex spaces.." because:


1. Them being in males spaces isn't much of a problem anyway
2. There are fewer of them
3. They aren't as massively entitled as males and as such their campaigning is less aggressive and less publicised
4. They seek less validation through being in male spaces
5. There are few benefits to being a transman in exclusively male environments

So sauce for the gander is not sauce for the goose?

 

[Fab Foodie]

I wait all night for calls like these

[Chorus]
An independent station
WJAZ
With jazz and conversation
From the foot of Mt. Belzoni
Sweet music
Tonight the night is mine
Late line 'til the sun (til' the sun) comes through the skyline



that's todays earworm sorted ! (Donald Fagan - Nightfly)

Ahhh, Lester....

 

[AuroraSaab]

So sauce for the gander is not sauce for the goose?

Well they are female so, regardless of how they identify, as far as society is concerned their voices don't matter as much as that of entitled males.

Anyone have any thoughts on why transwomen seem to vastly outnumber transmen?

 

[Bromptonaut]

Anyone have any thoughts on why transwomen seem to vastly outnumber transmen?

Are there any statistics?

A quick search is drawing a blank.

 

[Bromptonaut]

1. Stonewall want an end to all single sex exemptions under the Equality Act so it's not unreasonable to think this really means all single sex spaces. Again, if you are allowing self id, on what grounds will you say a transwoman can be excluded? That would be no different to the status quo, which trans activists vehemently reject.

2. Your link just says 'lived in the acquired gender' - it doesn't explain what that even means. How do you live as the opposite sex without it meaning stereotypes of femininity or masculinity?

3. I'm not against making getting a GRC easier and cheaper but the proposals for self id were done behind the scenes after lobbying by Stonewall and other trans groups. Trans groups were part of the consultations in to the GRA reform but no women's groups were officially consulted. It was only the fuss kicked up by the later public consultations that derailed this back room deal.

4. In what sense are transwomen not still men? They are men who identify as women. I think it's simply naive to believe some men won't take advantage of in effect making women's toilets unisex by claiming to be trans.

Again, it's not just about toilets. It's about an oppressor class (men) being able to opt into a class that are oppressed (women) and everything that entails, from changing rooms, to sports, to winning women's awards, to calling male rapists 'she'.

What is the difference between this and someone self identifying as black and winning an award aimed at the black community?

Why is Rachel Dolezal bad, and Eddie Izzard good?

You seem to be very focussed on Stonewall. Is there a reason for that?

I think they may have scored an own goal where parts of the membership have forced adoption of a policy other parts of the organisation are much more cautious about. Albeit other forces are at work the policy of self ID had seriously damaged Stonewall's reputation for and marketability as a trainer in diversity.

Any change to the law in England would surely start with some form of options exercise followed up by a policy paper. Traditionally white and green papers.

The consultation done in 2018 stated explicitly that the protections in the Equality Act would remain:

https://assets.publishing.service.g...hment_data/file/721642/GEO-LGBT-factsheet.pdf

Why would something far more radical from Stonewall take precedence now?

As to the phrase living in the acquired gender I'm sure there's plenty of explanation in guidance for those applying for a GRC and, further cack when the bill was in parliament. To me it has the ordinary meaning of using the pronouns/names of the acquired gender.

As I've already said I don't doubt there are men (mostly) who might want to enter women only spaces for 'kicks'. I don't think waving a statutory declaration will be a magic wand stopping them from being removed and charged with various statutory or common law offences.

I don't know if there is anything comparable in female changing areas but it's fairly common in male facilities for there to be signs warning against any form of sexualised behaviour. If you're caught in flagrante delicto whether solo or en masse you'll be out.

I'm not saying men making a nuisance of them selves won't happen; it does now and will in future.

It can though be dealt with proportionately way short of forcing transwomen to ID themselves and shuffle off to some 'third sex' annexe.

 

[PK99]

I don't know if there is anything comparable in female changing areas but it's fairly common in male facilities for there to be signs warning against any form of sexualised behaviour. If you're caught in flagrante delicto whether solo or en masse you'll be out.

I think it worth pointing out (as some readers will not have much experience of the inside of male facilities) that it is not as common as @Bromptonaut 's post might suggest. In fact, I cannot recall seeing such warnings in any of the male facilities I have used anywhere in recent years in pubs, shops, shopping centers etc.

 

[BoldonLad]

.......

I don't know if there is anything comparable in female changing areas but it's fairly common in male facilities for there to be signs warning against any form of sexualised behaviour. If you're caught in flagrante delicto whether solo or en masse you'll be out.
....

I thought I was quite widely travelled, but, I must have led a very sheltered life. I have NEVER seen such a sign in any male "facility", I must visit very boring pubs and clubs.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Ahh well maybe it's that London that's a funny place.

First time I saw such signs was at The Oasis, a LB Camden swimming etc centre just NE of Covent Garden c1980. Still there 20 years plus later.

Seen in several other places since.

Admittedly never saw them in Leeds as a youngster

 

[AuroraSaab]

You seem to be very focussed on Stonewall. Is there a reason for that?

I think they may have scored an own goal where parts of the membership have forced adoption of a policy other parts of the organisation are much more cautious about. Albeit other forces are at work the policy of self ID had seriously damaged Stonewall's reputation for and marketability as a trainer in diversity.

Any change to the law in England would surely start with some form of options exercise followed up by a policy paper. Traditionally white and green papers.

The consultation done in 2018 stated explicitly that the protections in the Equality Act would remain:

https://assets.publishing.service.g...hment_data/file/721642/GEO-LGBT-factsheet.pdf

Why would something far more radical from Stonewall take precedence now?

As to the phrase living in the acquired gender I'm sure there's plenty of explanation in guidance for those applying for a GRC and, further cack when the bill was in parliament. To me it has the ordinary meaning of using the pronouns/names of the acquired gender.

As I've already said I don't doubt there are men (mostly) who might want to enter women only spaces for 'kicks'. I don't think waving a statutory declaration will be a magic wand stopping them from being removed and charged with various statutory or common law offences.

I don't know if there is anything comparable in female changing areas but it's fairly common in male facilities for there to be signs warning against any form of sexualised behaviour. If you're caught in flagrante delicto whether solo or en masse you'll be out.

I'm not saying men making a nuisance of them selves won't happen; it does now and will in future.

It can though be dealt with proportionately way short of forcing transwomen to ID themselves and shuffle off to some 'third sex' annexe.

Since gay marriage was legalised Stonewall have shifted their focus to trans inclusion and the massive grift where companies compete to get higher up their Workplace Equality Index which is simply based on Stonewall's own criteria. This involves implementing Stonewall's version of the UK law, and not what the law actually is. Which is detrimental to women's rights.

1. They have a stated aim of getting rid of the single sex exemptions in the Equality Act and have used their position to unduly influence government policy and misrepresent equality law.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/brand/p09yjmph

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-58913311.amp

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...ng-stonewall-dictate-trans-policies-v3gjzgvjs

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...te-government-trans-policy-ex-aide-warns.html

2. They have redefined same sex attraction as same gender attraction. The other week Stonewall's CEO Nancy Kelley likened lesbians who reject transwomen as partners to those who refuse to date black people or disabled people. Look at the push back against the BBC article where lesbians spoke of feeling pressured into sex with transwomen who say they are lesbians.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-57853385.amp


3. They have pushed the policy of No Debate, refusing to address women's concerns and the concerns of the community they claim to serve. They have been above criticism for years and have been given influence that no other charity has ever had.

They seem to be losing support in the gay community and companies are dropping out of their scheme fairly regularly now.

 

[PK99]

Since gay marriage was legalised Stonewall have shifted their focus to trans inclusion..

Classic example of Professionalisation of Charities and consequent Non Profit Mission Creep.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I don't know if there is anything comparable in female changing areas but it's fairly common in male facilities for there to be signs warning against any form of sexualised behaviour. If you're caught in flagrante delicto whether solo or en masse you'll be out.

I'm not saying men making a nuisance of them selves won't happen; it does now and will in future.

It can though be dealt with proportionately way short of forcing transwomen to ID themselves and shuffle off to some 'third sex' annexe.

No. Never seen a sign like that in a women's changing rooms or toilets. Not once.

What does it tell you about blokes that they need to put a sign up in the Men's though? If blokes need a written warning about dodgy behaviour, isn't that in itself a clue as to why women need single sex spaces?

At the moment, women can challenge any man in a single sex space. That would no longer be the case with self id. Of course, offenders can be dealt with but that would be after the event. Why make it easier for them to offend in the first place? It's not just about offending though. Just the presence of males is enough to make women uncomfortable in some situations; they don't need to actually be committing an offence.

Why is it women's job to validate transwomens identity? Which is what you are basically asking them to do. We are not emotional support units.