AIBU to think of course all the anti-trans posts on this website and others are leading to real life harm?

If free speech means trans people can talk about their experiences freely, then women should be allowed to talk freely about their negative experiences. By shaming and bullying women out of talking in spaces meant for them (mumsnet is a parenting website so most of us are women I would guess) to talk it pushes it into truly fringe spaces.

In other words yet again men who HATE that women have rights now and they hate that we can express it on the open internet.

The only generalisation that can be made about a black person is that they are black (and actually not even that, given that "Black" is an identity that only makes sense in a world that takes humans from a myriad of backgrounds with a vast range of skin and lumps them together based on some assumed sameness).

The only generalisation that can be made about transwomen is that they are all men, in the sex-based meaning of the word. But in a world where to be female bodied is to face risks and obstructions (and to be fair some opportunities) simply because of the sex you are, that is a significant fact.

The only generalisation that can be made about trans people is that they are all sexist, unless you really believe some types of minds can only be right for men and others only right for women.

I think that news reports of some of the antics and misbehaviour of some trans women (some of it of horrific violence and depravity) is more likely to be the cause of public hostility to trans women in the streets, although the image of Tommy Robinson-esque thugs getting riled up by posts on Mumsnet is one I will cherish.

Indeed!

What do you think it is?

Unisex facilities are bad for women because of the behaviour of men in them and around them.

This is why single sex facilities were set up in the first place. This is why single sex facilities are recommended by advocacy groups in third world development policy.

Nothing has changed and recent data from modern UK shared sex changing villages in leisure centres, only serves to reinforce this inconvenient truth.

Gender neutral by default unfortunately benefits men to the detriment of women.

There's a whole award winning book called "Invisible Women" that explores the need for sex to be visible and acknowledged to reduce harms and inequality for women.

Unisex toilets don't cut it.

@keeptoiletssafe has extensively written about why these facilities are also dangerous for medical emergency related reasons.

You should read up on it.

Women need and should have access to single sex facilities. If others want to use less safe gender neutral facilities then that is for them.

I agree, in an ideal world our clothes should have no social meanings at all.

However this is not an ideal world, and our clothes carry many meanings that mean something being worn by one person has different connections to the same thing being worn by other.

Women's clothing in particular is sexualised by men because we ourselves are sexualised by men. And men who chose to wear "Women's clothes" are often wearing them not just because they like the clothes but because they specifically like the idea of wearing women's clothes.

So it's entirely possible and consistent to know that clothes shouldn't matter, even advocate that they shouldn't matter, while accepting that here and now they do and one has to work within that framework when assessing men who chose to dress as "women". One need not "harass" such men to understand they are dressing inappropriately or even at times fetishistically.

The best way to fight this is for men to wear feminine coded clothing cut for the male body and continue to identify as men. Over time, the idea that some clothing types are mens and some are women's will fade.

The worst way to fight this is to validate the men who believe that they are in some way "women" therefore should be wearing women's clothes. That's just baking in the sexism even more.

We focus on gender ideology because it is the cause of most of the harms women are and have suffered over the last couple of decades.
Because of gender ideology women have lost our language, our services, our spaces, our sports and our rights.
Because of gender ideology women looking for rape counselling were confunted by men in their group therapy and told that they were bigots who should expect to have their bigotry confronted and to reframe their trauma for asking for female only therapy.
Because of gender ideology mixed sex changing villages have become the norm in leisure centres, which has resulted in sky rocketing numbers of sexual assaults, rapes and voyeurism
Because of gender ideology women have been raped in female only hospital wards and the NHS coverd it up by saying no men were present

I could go on for hours about the harms to women caused by gender ideology and its the ideology that we are fighting along with the harms that it brings including to vulnerable confused and/or autistic children.

We are only now beginning to turn the tide on gender ideology and push it back so we can get our rights and spaces back so ofcourse we haven't seen the drop in sexual assaults that you are say we should have already seen

I doubt she'd be vilified tbf. One of the most beloved Austrian actresses, Adele Neuhauser, only recently starred as a trans-identifying elderly man returning to his childhood village to great acclaim including from the German language equivalent of Pink News (the sole criticism of her portrayal was "a slight Viennese accent in an ostensibly Bavarian character"). And that figures, because it's all about validation as women. That's why all the vitriol has been reserved for men, like Eddie Redmayne, playing another man.

The thing is there are a number of groups which make up a wider group that identifies as trans.

It's a multi cohort.

Unfortunately there is a small group within the trans community who are a problem and that is impacting on women and girls.

This can not be just hand waved away because it's 'mean to all the nice trans people'. Especially when the other cohorts are not standing up and supporting women and saying "Not in my name, this behaviour is unacceptable and we, as transpeople, do not support and condone it".

Unfortunately the problem is that behaviour that would be unacceptable from any other human is not only tolerated, but is cheered on and then any criticism or concern about that behaviour is then met with more placards encouraging violence towards women. The irony and hypocrisy here is not lost on me.

But it's women who actively say Tommy Robinson is a violent thug who has nothing to do with them, that are the problem somehow?!

All women on MN have done is say "Er this is unacceptable, unlawful behaviour, we should have our rights respected". We have not called for violence. We've just pointed out that unfortunately reality means that you can't change sex, even if we are supportive and want protections for transpeople.

Women can't win.

This thread is just another incel thread to blame women for mens behaviour.

If I’m honest in my ideal world the only thing truly differentiating men and women would be their sex. In most cases that would be unimportant. In spaces where people had specific needs for privacy like toilets/changing rooms etc we’d look at the most effective way to provide that, which might be unisex facilities with all single stalls/cubicles. Where there was a particular need for completely single sex shared spaces (centres dealing with rape victims/domestic abuse survivors, prisons, school group tents/dormitories & similar) we’d split people based on sex and provide a third space if needed.

I don’t think huge numbers of people (including trans people) actually disagree with the fact there are times you need single sex spaces

I suggest an experiment.

Let's remove all transwomen from female single sex spaces for a period of, say, at least 15 years. Then the Board Monitors- those that trawl boards looking for 'wrong-think' can assess the amount of 'vitriol being spewed' against transwomen during that period of time.

If there is a significant amount, we can reassess.

When if there isn't, everyone can carry on with the status quo.

It is, of course, a fairly substantial amount of time for such an experiment, but it's surely warranted, to ensure safety for all. We must be thorough in our research.

Do you think someone should have asked Grayson Perry to leave the children's charity when he had a black dildo sticking out the front of his dress? Or would that have been harassment?

Yes if the trans person wasn’t perfectly aware that they’re actually the biological sex they were born with and didn’t know that they’re actually female and need a smear test / male and need a prostate check. And unless they’ve been misrepresenting themselves to their doctor they’ll get the necessary reminders.

@Cloudtime - what about the threats of violence, rape and death from trans rights activists towards gender critical women? Do I deserve to be gang-raped, beaten up, genitally mutilated because I believe human beings cannot change sex, and women and girls need and deserve safe single sex spaces?

The threats from TRAs towards women like me are numerous and sickening, and I haven’t seen anything like the same level or number of threats from women towards trans people. They define women saying No as violence towards them, while condoning or issuing behead TERFs threats. One of these things is not like the other.

So what’s the conclusion you are drawing here? Women should just give up their legal rights to single sex spaces because men want access?

I expect the OP is perfectly bright.

They’re just being very manipulative in their tactics to get women to STFU about their rights.

Person sees a male person being violent towards someone else.

Person decides that this is exactly why we should stop campaigning to not let male people into female single sex spaces.

You're not the brightest, OP, are you?

They're not anti trans, they're pro women

No you're not wrong .

It’s becoming increasingly acceptable to persecute trans people . Of course it will lead to significant harm and the people jeering along and jumping on the bandwagon now will step back and claim they were only discussing ‘protecting their spaces’ on online forums and meant no actual harm.

You can’t reason with the type of person who is so ignorant they think it’s a mental illness.

Nobody has ever said ALL transwomen have fetishes, but the ones trying to use women’s loos are far, far more likely to have one than the ones that stick to the gents. And those in the women’s loos are far, far more likely to be a danger to women. Trans women don’t have to invade women’s spaces. You can be a trans woman and still respect biological women by staying out of their spaces. Most trans women stay out. It’s the ones that try to get in that are the danger.

Yes, @ChilliBassy - it IS men who are the problem, and that is exactly why we don’t want them in our single SEX spaces, no matter what they are wearing, how much make up they use, and how they identify.

All women want if to be able to freely complain and alert other users ‘there’s a bloke in here’ when they see a biological male in a single sex space. We couldn’t before the Supreme Court verdict. We couldn’t warn others of a transgressor. We can now. It’s so important to have that freedom back!

MN in bed with GLP means you can not even call a convicted pervert a deviant in a dress.

shame on you, MN, shame on you!

Indeed.

But that still probably wouldn't stop women being blamed for Tommy Robinson's independent actions as an adult male for some long convoluted reason.

We'd still probably get abused for the existence of Tommy Robinson gobshite because a woman hadn't parented him right, or because his ex girlfriends had treated him badly or something other such incel nonsense.

Cos women are always to blame for male fuckwits, not the male themselves.

Funny isn't it?