Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Urban v's the Commentariat

How easy it to get a gender recognition certificate?

you're taking about a minimum of 2 years living as your chosen gender, providing evidence of that, plus evidence of diagnosis of gender dysphoria. and some combination of a spouse's permission and/or divorce.

I think the answer can be - it varies, but it's not easy and it will be necessarily harder for those without the finances to pay for paperwork
 
there are plenty of men who claim to be transgender to gain access to women's spaces - abusive men in particular who are trying to access their partners or other vulnerable women. we had a client last year who claimed t be transgender and was trying to get a court order so that he could live in a women's hostel and had tried to take the prison service to court to put him in women's prison. he was returned to prison because he groomed a vulnerable underage teenage girl online and she ran away from home to be with him - she was found in his hostel room. this guy is a serial sex offender whose MO is to seek out vulnerable women and to try and use the system to gain access to women. if claiming to be transgender is enough to get you into a women-only safe space, this man is allowed in. he's not the only one in london, sadly. i'm told that one of london's sexual violence support services has a ban list containing dozens of individuals who are known to have done this at some time.

out of interest how do you know he/she was 'claiming' to be transgender? it is just as possible for someone transgender to be a sex offender as it is a man or woman who is not trans.
 
out of interest how do you know he/she was 'claiming' to be transgender? it is just as possible for someone transgender to be a sex offender as it is a man or woman who is not trans.

because part of my job involves reading casenotes and being aware of what care is being provided. he was with us because he is a sex offender. we have plenty of other sex offenders who are not trans. his was just an interesting case.

his psychiatric care team didn't believe he was "genuinely" transgender, btw. they considered that this claim was part of a package of behaviours designed to gain access to vulnerable women and children. unfortunately he's not the only one. trans-rights activists often claim that we should take a person's gender as the one they claim - in the case of serial sex offenders like my former client, doing this would be a really bad idea. that is why they are wrong that we shouldn't critically analyse individuals. likewise, terf types would have you believe that all transpeople are like this, and this is incorrect and unfair too.
 
because part of my job involves reading casenotes and being aware of what care is being provided. he was with us because he is a sex offender. we have plenty of other sex offenders who are not trans. his was just an interesting case.

his psychiatric care team didn't believe he was "genuinely" transgender, btw. they considered that this claim was part of a package of behaviours designed to gain access to vulnerable women and children. unfortunately he's not the only one. trans-rights activists often claim that we should take a person's gender as the one they claim - in the case of serial sex offenders like my former client, doing this would be a really bad idea. that is why they are wrong that we shouldn't critically analyse individuals. likewise, terf types would have you believe that all transpeople are like this, and this is incorrect and unfair too.

fair enough, it strikes me as very unusual, having looked into the terfs argument before i found barely any evidence of people living permanently and presenting as the opposite gender (which presumably he/she was doing if they were bringing court cases etc) to gain access to female only spaces to be sexually abusive. I very much doubt agencies have lists of dozens of men doing this.

worth remembering as well that transgender is a very broad term encompassing everyone from drag queens to fetishistic cross dressers to people diagnosed as transsexual.
 
trans-rights activists often claim that we should take a person's gender as the one they claim - in the case of serial sex offenders like my former client, doing this would be a really bad idea.

by the way who should decide what a person's gender is if not the individual themselves? and how? see its a bit more tricky then it seems on the surface.
 
Oh yeah, James Bloodworth wrote a pro-fracking article for the WSJ:

Christmas came early for the world’s liberal democracies this year, with news in mid-December that repressive regimes from Russia to Venezuela and from Iran to Belarus are tumbling down an economic spiral. Who or what should we thank for this geopolitical yuletide? The neocons? Pro-democracy protesters? George W. Bush and Tony Blair ?

No. Thank instead American shale producers. The shale-gas and hydraulic-fracking revolution is lighting a figurative bonfire under the world’s petrocracies. Dictatorships that for years blackmailed the West in the knowledge that we would come crawling back for the black stuff are now catching a glimpse of a bleak future.

Good intellectual slight of hand to put Venezuela in the same bracket as dictatorship and 'petrocracies'.

Some of the most vociferous opponents of fracking are liberals, yet the shale revolution has the potential to undermine some of the world’s most illiberal regimes, in the process freeing the U.S. from its bondage to Saudi Arabia, as demanded by progressives for decades. Thuggish governments in Caracas, Moscow and Tehran don’t much like shale either, which ought to endear it still further to democrats.

This is not to dismiss the environmental concerns regarding shale extraction in urban areas, nor to call for the abandonment of a long-term strategy in the West for the development of green renewables. Yet it is to recognize that American shale producers are engaged in a price war with some of the world’s vilest regimes. In that respect, the left should get on board the fracking revolution.

LOL what a bizarre justification.

Full text:

Christmas came early for the world’s liberal democracies this year, with news in mid-December that repressive regimes from Russia to Venezuela and from Iran to Belarus are tumbling down an economic spiral. Who or what should we thank for this geopolitical yuletide? The neocons? Pro-democracy protesters? George W. Bush and Tony Blair ?

No. Thank instead American shale producers. The shale-gas and hydraulic-fracking revolution is lighting a figurative bonfire under the world’s petrocracies. Dictatorships that for years blackmailed the West in the knowledge that we would come crawling back for the black stuff are now catching a glimpse of a bleak future.

As the American people and companies shift more of their consumption to cheaply produced domestic energy, the geopolitical leverage of oil-rich autocrats diminishes. A barrel of crude on Monday sold for less than $60, down nearly 50% since June when it went for $115. Take that, ayatollah.

This is a price drop made in the shale-rich heartlands of the U.S. Between 2007 and 2012, shale production in America jumped by more than 50% a year. In that time the shale share of total U.S. gas production rose to 39% from 5%. Last year the U.S. overtook Russia as the world’s leading energy producer; next year America is projected to overtake Saudi Arabia as the world’s biggest producer of crude oil.

One consequence is a massive fall in the price of oil just a few years after the words “peak oil” were being bandied around as gospel by environmentalists. Peak oil now looks like one of the most outlandish theories of our era. Rather than contract, the global supply of energy continues to diversify and expand, in no small part because of the boom in American shale.

This ought to put a smile not only on the faces of free-market economists, but liberals and progressives, too. As America becomes a net exporter of energy, shale could help topple some of the world’s worst regimes.

The relationship between oil wealth and autocracy is well-established, with a number of studies showing that democracy is less likely in oil-rich nations. Oil wealth helps keep dictators in their palaces by allowing vast military expenditure to repress dissent and providing a ready pool of money with which to co-opt their populations through generous welfare stipends.

Sitting atop large and valuable energy reserves also gives autocrats the luxury of keeping a tight lid on economic entrepreneurship. Winning the geographical lottery ensures that the oil money comes in regardless of how little revenue the rest of the economy generates.

Consider Russia and Venezuela. At least some voters in both countries have tolerated the emaciation of civil society while the Putinist and Chavista regimes have learned to use oil money to fend off unrest and buy off loyal cronies. Meanwhile, the armed forces in both nations have been placated with high-tech toys and rising salaries.

Despite legitimate environmental concerns about fracking and horizontal drilling, the long-term impact of shale on the global oil price means that regimes that have long relied on a single export for their survival are facing a potentially ruinous economic future.

Russia’s economic woes are well-documented, largely due to the fact that oil revenues make up 45% of the government budget. But elites in Iran and Venezuela also have the jitters and have been pleading with OPEC, the world’s largest oil cartel, to cut production to prevent the price of oil from falling any lower. Venezuela needs a price of $151 a barrel next year to balance its budget while Iran requires around $131.

So far Sunni Saudi Arabia has been willing to tolerate low prices in order to hurt its Shiite rival in Tehran. Yet Riyadh is no less worried about the long-term consequences of shale than are the Iranians—it simply has a bigger buffer of foreign-exchange reserves with which to soak up the short-term consequences. If oil stays at $60 per barrel in 2015, Riyadh will run a deficit equal to 14% of gross domestic product.

Some of the most vociferous opponents of fracking are liberals, yet the shale revolution has the potential to undermine some of the world’s most illiberal regimes, in the process freeing the U.S. from its bondage to Saudi Arabia, as demanded by progressives for decades. Thuggish governments in Caracas, Moscow and Tehran don’t much like shale either, which ought to endear it still further to democrats.

This is not to dismiss the environmental concerns regarding shale extraction in urban areas, nor to call for the abandonment of a long-term strategy in the West for the development of green renewables. Yet it is to recognize that American shale producers are engaged in a price war with some of the world’s vilest regimes. In that respect, the left should get on board the fracking revolution.
 
James 'worth some blood' is a truly nasty specimen. His articles are always a vapid and dishonest defence of neoliberalism and imperialism cloaked in a couple of leftishsounding buzzwords, like a poundshop (although imo his stock was vastly overrated anyway) Christopher Hitchens.

Despite legitimate environmental concerns about fracking and horizontal drilling

If they are legitimate then why do they only merit half a sentence? Fuck the US working-class who will actually have to put up with the degradation of their environment, there are profits to be made and coups against democratically elected governments to unleash.
 
Not defending him but he is one of the few journalists who writes consistently about benefit issues, or at least he did, may have 'moved on' now.
 
fair enough, it strikes me as very unusual, having looked into the terfs argument before i found barely any evidence of people living permanently and presenting as the opposite gender (which presumably he/she was doing if they were bringing court cases etc) to gain access to female only spaces to be sexually abusive. I very much doubt agencies have lists of dozens of men doing this.

he's not living permanently and presenting as the opposite gender, that's the point. his sole claim to transgender status appears to be based around trying to gain access to vulnerable women and girls.

you may not believe me on this, or on the anecdotal stuff about agencies, what i can prove i won't because i'm not interested in risking my job at the moment to win an argument with someone on the internet. what i can't prove i can't anyway, so it doesn't matter.
 
I do find that many of the trans activist websites seem a bit misogynistic tbh, which ties into the idea that a few people are claiming to be transgender to prey on vulnerable women (cis or trans, the site I linked to goes into a few cases of that nature). Some of the sites I have been looking to around this stuff written by trans people express concern that some people are just fetishists who have no interest in transitioning full time. However, this is in no way a justification for terfism or any other form of transphobia. To be honest I would imagine that most trans people just want to live their lives and be left alone.
 
This blog by a trans bloke has a few posts going into the damage that identity politics is doing to trans people's ability to access services on the nhs, and could be used as an excuse to cut services, since it is thought that being able to identity as your real gender without medical intervention means that few/no trans people ever need surgery. I am possibly oversimplifying his argument but It's a very good blog imo

Http://toplioncub.tumblr.com
 
i don't know. you'll note that i'm not claiming to know, nor proposing anything, merely stating that a problem exists with a particular model of practise.

fair enough, the answer currently is the government and how is based on provably living as the opposite gender for two years, having a diagnosis of transsexualism and having had some treatment - which means hormones, the same kind of drugs that are used for chemical castration. This seems a drastic and elaborate step for a non-trans man to take to gain access to womens only spaces and I can't believe it is so commonplace that agencies have lists of dozens of men doing this.

There may well be examples of men masquerading as trans to get into women only meetings, workshops etc although I've never heard of one.
I suspect though that anyone without a gender recognition certificate, who isnt being treated and has been diagnosed, is unlikely to get anywhere near a womens only hostel, and neither is your bloke who isnt even presenting as a woman and sounds like a crank.
 
I suspect though that anyone without a gender recognition certificate, who isnt being treated and has been diagnosed, is unlikely to get anywhere near a womens only hostel, and neither is your bloke who isnt even presenting as a woman and sounds like a crank.

fortunately you are quite right - he isn't getting anywhere near a women only hostel or prison, and he is a crank. a crank who managed to groom a child this year, and may well have raped them too.

but the reason that i brought him up is because i am critical of a model that relies on trust, when the people they are trying to keep out are untrustworthy. it's completely wrong - and i know they mean well, and they're trying to help break down stigma and be non-critical of transpeople, but as a gate-keeping method it's a massive failure.
 
fortunately you are quite right - he isn't getting anywhere near a women only hostel or prison, and he is a crank. a crank who managed to groom a child this year, and may well have raped them too.

but the reason that i brought him up is because i am critical of a model that relies on trust, when the people they are trying to keep out are untrustworthy. it's completely wrong - and i know they mean well, and they're trying to help break down stigma and be non-critical of transpeople, but as a gate-keeping method it's a massive failure.

but I dont think the model does rely on trust completely, but also a bit of basic common sense and as shown in the in the case of your bloke it works. the standard terf position is fairly ludicrous and I'm not sure anecdotes like yours, which actually show how these people are weeded out by current practice, should be used to bolster it at all.
 
your point was that a model which allows people to self-identify gender is flawed because there are lots of predatory men who would present as women to access women only spaces to abuse women. your evidence was an anecdote about a man, who didnt present as a woman, and wasnt given access to women only spaces. i dont think that evidence is very strong, so I disagree with your criticism of the model, with the caveat that a bit of common sense needs to be applied and if a man turns up with a beard and a hard on claiming to be a woman and wanting to get into a female sexual health workshop he should probably be told to fuck off.
 
I'm not prepared to accept your claim that "there are plenty of men who claim to be transgender to gain access to women's spaces - abusive men in particular" based something someone told you once and an example which is clearly not a case of a man presenting as a woman to access women's spaces, if you think that's me calling you a liar sorry.

and yes, I agree there should be some common sense, I dont think anyone would suggest a former sex offender who lives and presents as a man should be able to live in a women's hostel and its a complete straw man to suggest that anyone would. so I wonder why you are bolstering the terf position with evidence that doesnt stand up whilst also undermining the opposing position by misrepresenting how it is called for and operates in practices, thats all.
 
It's going to be a long time before I feel confident to enter women only spaces! I've been a man too long! Unfortunately I am now not allowed in male only spaces either! It does become a problem! I've overcome the toilet issue and not had any trouble except from men but I still feel very wary especially as I see very negative stuff about trans women all over the mainstream media!

As for being a cunt obsessive, the opposite is true in my case whereby I've always had fairly uneasy relationship with female genitals but not felt able to enter into relationships with men either for whatever complicated reasons that probably only therapy will reveal!
What confused me I think is how much I loved being in female company and still do! At the moment I could only contemplate living with women as I more or less have done continuously since I was 21.

Now that I've started on female hormones and let myself explore being my true gender I find that I am very attracted to men and sudden to able to contemplate a relationship with a man!

many trans people I know, men and women, who were confused about their sexuality or identified as gay/ bisexual prior to transitioning, now identify as straight!!
 
I'm not prepared to accept your claim that "there are plenty of men who claim to be transgender to gain access to women's spaces - abusive men in particular" based something someone told you once and an example which is clearly not a case of a man presenting as a woman to access women's spaces, if you think that's me calling you a liar sorry.

and yes, I agree there should be some common sense, I dont think anyone would suggest a former sex offender who lives and presents as a man should be able to live in a women's hostel and its a complete straw man to suggest that anyone would. so I wonder why you are bolstering the terf position with evidence that doesnt stand up whilst also undermining the opposing position by misrepresenting how it is called for and operates in practices, thats all.
That's what I was thinking
 
Back
Top Bottom