Thread by @SkidRowRadio_YT

THREAD: The 'Labour Trans Rights' Pledges.

Such a delicate & complex issue cannot be done justice in a single tweet. I've tried, having been irritated by leadership candidates endorsement. Critique of this pledge requires unpacking as it is certainly not about hatin on trans. 1/

Pledges 1-3 are broadly unproblematic. However, while it is right to oppose hatred, there needs to be a conversation about what constitutes 'transphobia'. The pledges label progressive, inclusive orgs like WPUK (who are attended by trans people) as 'transphobic hate groups'. 2/

Pledge 4; the demand for unequivocal & unqualified endorsement of the proclamation 'transwomen are women'. That sounds like a statement of fact. It is not. It is a statement of courtesy to alleviate the dysphoria of those who feel they were born in the wrong body. 2/

'Woman' has an objective meaning; Adult human female. Obviously only male humans can be transwomen, ergo a transwoman is something different to a woman. The demands to ignore this difference manifest in a push for the eradication of female only spaces & provisions. 3/

The right to describe material reality objectively must be preserved to protect the rights of females to organise as a class, which has been oppressed not because of their identity but their biology. Being polite to trans & using pronouns is not precluded from this position. 4/

An example of the need for a measured approach can be found with the case of Karen White. An intact self-declared trans identified male who was sent to a female prison. White subsequently sexually assaulted 2 women in that prison. blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/10/the-ca… 5/

Feminist groups have challenged Tory proposals to change to the law to remove safeguards & systems of support from the GRA process to give 'self declared' gender changes legal weight. Currently GRA requires that a person first lives as their declared gender & receives support. 6/

The issue of 'self ID' is pivotal in this debate. Womens groups like WPUK are not challenging those w/ a Gender Recognition Certificate under the current system. The concern is that 'self ID' will open the door to a range of males who don't have a genuine desire to transition. 7/

Critics of people who question self ID use the straw man that they don't accept trans people. It's not true. Many trans people share the view that some system of support should be maintained when affording legal recognition of gender ID. @DebbieHayton 8/

The irony is that a broad brush is being applied in the pledge by assuming that every male who claims a trans ID is equally authentic & committed. But some males claiming 'trans' status are actually autogynephiles; sexual gratification from being accepted as female. 9/

Acknowledging the varied motives for claiming trans ID is again straw manned to be hostility to all trans. That is disingenuous. A current legal challenge by feminists to Labour's proposed change to allow self ID onto all womens shortlists does not challenge those with a GRC. 10/

The above analysis focuses on Trans Identified Males, & not TI Females (transmen) because the dangers that come from allowing self ID a legal weight are exponentially more present relating to TIMs & the push for self ID is coming exponentially more from TIMs than from TIFs. 11/

As indicted in Pledge 5, which focuses solely on transwomen.
Pledge 5 also asserts there is "no material conflict between trans rights & women's rights". Attached is a list of conflicts that do exist. It is not fair to label women who acknowledge these conflicts as bigoted. 12/

Pledge 6 is ironic since the authors of this list are not listening to prominent trans voices who question self ID. In fact they're vilified & accused of being 'self hating trans'. People like @KJ_Harrison who speak in support of a measured approach. 13/

Pledge 7 is completely right & is already in action. But there has been a bias towards only working w/ groups who take the view that self ID should be the legal default. Other voices have been ignored. To treat the entire trans community as one homogenous entity is wrong.14/

Pledge 8 again fails to consider the lack of an agreed definition of 'transphobic'. And if they are so loosely using the term as to describe groups that are supported & attended by trans people, then they cannot be taken seriously as the arbiters of the definition. 15/

Pledge 9 is libellous and easily demonstrated to be ridiculous, as indicated by the videos linked in this thread that show trans people talking at and being accepted by Womens Place UK meetings. A disgusting name drop. This pledge shames all candidates who endorse it. 16/

Pledge 10 seeks to hijack the basis for expulsion from the party by a division of trans rights activists who do not represent the views of the entire community. Their definition of transphobic would see women expelled from Labour for simply seeking to protect female rights. 17/

Pledge 11 vaguely asserts Labour should support changes to the GRA, but the crux of those changes are the self ID proposals first brought to parliament by the Tories. If reform is needed, it must come with a measured analysis of how women's rights are affected. 18/

Pledge 12 is a restatement of an earlier pledge & again presumes that a niche group would have cart blanche over what constitutes 'transphobic policy'.
Unqualified support for this list of pledges by leadership candidates displays a lack of awareness of complexities involved. 19/

Of course people should be able to live free from abuse or bigotry. Of course a person's right to identify as they wish should be protected. Those who question changes to the law are not motivated by hatred but by a desire to protect existing rights for women. 20/