This is a Premium feature
To use this feature subscribe to Mumsnet Premium - get first access to new features see fewer ads, and support Mumsnet.Start using Mumsnet Premium
Help fact-check this letter to Liz Truss from 7000+ women(86 Posts)
This letter has been signed by many women, of all walks of life. I think it's factually wrong in many places, anyone else willing to point out errors?
I am starting with the "gender marker" on a birth certificate. It's a box called sex, it records biological sex.
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
transphobic hate groups and organisations such as Woman’s Place UK, Transgender Trend and the LGB Alliance.
Not hate groups.
WPUk - defending women's rights
Transgender Trend - concerned children
LGB Alliance - formed because sexual orientation and gender identity are not the same type of thing and male lesbians are not lesbians.
That's why it needs a group effort!
to protect women’s single-sex spaces, trans women must be barred from entering them.
Well yes, otherwise they are not single sex spaces. Transgender people need safe spaces to get changed etc, but places for women and girls are not appropriate for males.
Are all those women happy to be labelled "ciswomen"?
'A handful of trans teenagers each year are given puberty blockers, a safe treatment available to trans teens on the NHS since 1989. Multiple scientific studies show that puberty blockers are a life-saving treatment for trans teenagers who want them.'
I mean, this has actually, demonstrably been proven incorrect, hasn't it? NHS changed its advice on puberty blockers very recently, and they are no longer considered harmless or reversable?
Haven't much more than a handful of detransitioners come forward recently? Including Keira Bell whose court case is still ongoing?
Suzie Green, CEO of mermaids, knows this. I am surprised she signed this letter knowing this is so incorrect, and didn't at least try to frame the objections in a different way; but there you go. It's the self assured arrogance of the narcissistic....
Liz truss, however, does know.
I was hoping there would be a change coming. Myself personally, I am much more comfortable supporting Jkr and putting across my own gc arguments than I would have been this time last year.
Cis gender women. Sums it all up
A made up name
I’m not sure I can see anything factually correct in this letter - it’s just telling Liz she’s starting to sound a bit transphobic for doing her job and democracy is rubbish. A bit desperate really.
The cases against the Tavistock, resignations and stuff written by Marcus Evans suggest all is not absolutely fine where teenagers are concerned.
Honestly, this just sounds ranty and ridiculous to me, like most TRA rhetoric. There’s no way Liz Truss is going to take any notice of it. It’s another own goal.
What a list. The volume of those who are actors, marketers or work in publishing is quite something.
Trans men, women and non-binary people young and old have always lived among us.
They have used the single-sex spaces that align with their gender identity this entire time
Lots of confusion about sex and gender identity here.
I still have no idea what a non-binary person is. How can a non-binary person choose a single sex space appropriate to their gender identity? Surely the whole point of a non-binary gender identity is not feeling like either sex.
I would argue that there have been extremely small numbers of people in the past who cross-dressed to the point where they actually used opposite sex facilities.
The number of people presenting as the opposite sex has risen hugely such that women do want to protect their single-sex spaces.
Actors are known for their intellectual rigor 😂
At the start This is despite the fact that several countries have implemented similar reforms to their gender recognition laws without any negative impact to cis women whatsoever.
There has no measurement so this statement is without any foundations!
In Canada, for their equivalent of GRA reform, women are still trying to get the impact assessment study legally required before new legislation.
In other countries rape/sexual assault “by women” has increased without any obvious explanation.
So no one bothered about “the negative impact to cis women”, didn’t attempt to measure it..
I do think we need to counter these arguments. People are lazy and will go "oh, thousands of women say it's okay, so nothing to worry about".
“This is despite the fact that several countries have implemented similar reforms to their gender recognition laws without any negative impact to cis women whatsoever”
I think there is a thread someone on here which documents individual cases - eg TW assaulting women in women’s prisons
But more generally, once orgs/countries, etc have a policy self ID, they tend to also lose the ability to even monitor the impact on the basis of biological sex, because allowing self id in effect does away with biological sex as a concept. So yeah, sure: once you deny that there is such a thing as sex, you do also magically remove any discrimination or negative impact on the biological sexes because they just don’t exist. So yes, they don’t find negative impacts because they don’t even monitor or look for them, because they can’t, because asking the question would betray the lie that the self id proclaims
Another quick scan. Noticeable how few mainstream journalists. Could only see poor old Laura Snapes from the Guardian although I'm sure I missed others. Then an acre from publications like pink News (how many people do they employ or are they all "I had an article once that was a glorified blog so now claim I write for them"?).
Many many people with skin in the game - jobs with charities whose income comes from the gender identity machine, academics ditto.
And then a sad list of mothers of trans kids - they are making such difficult decisions and must be so wedded to this world view, because if they are wrong and we are right, then my god the guilt will be unliveable. My heart goes out to them as the poor guidance they have received is unforgivable.
What a sad list.
I thought that the TRAs had been campaigning actively for trans rights? The letter mentions Stonewall, the LGBT Foundation and The Kaleidoscope Trust
Defo Stonewall has been throwing resources at this.
The letter says Liz shouldn’t be bothering her pretty head with trans issues and shouldn’t be wasting her time on this:
The fact that you chose to make this a priority during the biggest crisis the world has faced in decades is even more disturbing. During lockdown...die from COVID-19. Surely these issues are more urgent?
What is going on? Have the TRAs realised that being openly a TRA is a bad thing and they should follow the advice from Dentons to limit press coverage and exposure, to ensure the public don’t find out?
I don’t usually post on these things as I sit somewhere in the middle on trans issues.
However, these things really jumped out at me when I read it:
- It calls trans-critical groups ‘hate groups’, reframing debate as hate. They’ve worded it quite carefully, as if it could be hate groups and also and quite separately organisations such as Woman’s Place UK, Transgender Trend and the LGB Alliance, but I am assuming the lack of comma after ‘hate groups’ is deliberate. I have looked up different definitions of hate groups, and none fit these organisations.
- It does not define what negative impact to ‘CIS women’ would be, and ignores negative impact to trans people.
- It is keen to point out that Liz should not be wasting her time on this as there are bigger priorities. If that is the case, since everything has been happily ticking along for decades (their description) it is like they are making their own case to leave things as they are
- The majority of the ‘CIS women’ supporting the letter whose names are mentioned at the bottom are professionally invested in this. As the quote goes, “it is difficult to get a [wo]man to understand something, when [her]his salary depends on [her]his not understanding it”
This piece today has so many resonances with this type of letter. https://unherd.com/2020/09/confessions-of-a-student-marxist/
This is despite the fact that several countries have implemented similar reforms to their gender recognition laws without any negative impact to cis women whatsoever.
This is demonstrably a lie, with stories appearing every day.
In the time that I have worked at the shelter, men have always been welcome to stay alongside the women, on one condition: the men must tell us they are women.
When women report harassment by men in the shelter space, or approach staff to voice their discomfort, my coworkers’ customary response is to ignore the women’s reports completely. They do not record the reports in our daily logs, nor do they mention the incident to a supervisor. They do not confront the man to speak to him about his behaviour. If, while describing the harassment she is experiencing, a woman calls the man a man, or “he” rather than “she,” my coworkers take the time to correct her by pointing out that she is mistaken: this man is a woman.
Trans equality was not widely seen as an issue until the Transgender Equality Inquiry of 2015 triggered a concerted campaign in the media to depict trans rights as a new threat to cisgender women like ourselves.
I need to look up the Transgender Equally Inquiry of 2015.
I don't know why trans rights suddenly became such a talking point, the narrative on here is that Stonewall took it up after gay marriage was accepted as they had no major legal equal rights campaigns left on gay issues.
Please login first.