Number of trans people who are murderers is greater than the number of trans people who are murder victims in UK **Title amended by MNHQ**

You can guarantee that Transgender women are absolutely no threat to women at all anywhere can you?

You say Transgender women want to be accepted into female society, I think they want to run female society in their own image, using the language they decree acceptable and I see no respect from the current vocal TRAs for women at all.

I don't make them feel anything. Women are allowed boundaries even if it gives some men the sads. Managing those sads is also not women's job. Hth.

Surprising how many people don't grasp this, isn't it?

Bless. It's late now, isn't it, and the random argument machine seems to malfunctioning into incoherence now.

We've definitely reached the flailing stage.

I find it's what happens when mantra meets critical thinking.

Why is not accepting feminised males in my 'female society' (who exactly is Victorian here ) a human rights violation?

I don't make them feel anything. Women are allowed boundaries even if it gives some men the sads. Managing those sads is also not women's job. Hth.

Bless. It's late now, isn't it, and the random argument machine seems to malfunctioning into incoherence now.

No idea what point you were trying to make with the gay people and fundamentalist Christians, but I do always enjoy being randomly called Victorian. It's just so steampunk.

Victorian thinking?
Show us the evidence that males as a reproductive sex class do NOT commit most of the rape and violence.
Until such time, I must go with the data we have.
We also have at least one paper where MtF transsexual women (fully legally/medically transitioned) were found to have offending rates equal to that of males (the transsexual woman's actual sex). I can only guess that self-identifying transwomen are even more likely to have equal risk profiles to that of the other people in their biological sex class (males).

Please do feel free to peruse these beginners threads, if you are still unsure of the feminist position:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3145470-Break-it-down-for-me

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3335962-Frequently-Asked-Questions-FAQs-I-have-noticed-here

Where did I insist that anyone who says they are transgender is transgender?
So you agree that self-id is a bad idea then.

I think you are expressing Victorian thinking to the issue of biological gender. All spaces need to be safe for women. Transgender women are hardly the threat. There are bad people full stop Transgender women want to be accepted into female society and who are you to make them feel vilified like this. You seem to see everything in black and white. It’s like saying gay people shouldn’t be allowed around the children of fundamentalist Christians because they put their children at risk. But that’s ok; they have the right to choose.

I am not asking anyone to forgo rights, but you are!

Yes you are. No we are not. It's not a human right for male people to invade women's spaces. Women say no. You don't, but that's just you. I do. Respect that. You don't have the right to consent on my behalf.

Feminist4, my 'approach' has nothing to do with the transgender community at all. My only concern as a feminist is putting women and girls at the centre of my politics and general thinking. The only reason any trans person would intersect with that is if they themselves were actually female, or if their demands put women at risk.

It is not the job of Feminism to solve all the problems of the vulnerable groups of the world. Egalitarianism is what you might be looking for, and be welcome to it. I'm good with putting women's rights first, which is why I am a Feminist.

100% of transgender women are biologically male.
That is the concept to really grasp, in order to fully see the picture.

Transgender women have their own issues, and should of course be protected from harm. But they are not the same as females.

Females have their own needs, including healthcare, spaces, representation, and identity.

You can sneer at the women who recognize that fact. You can dismiss the wisdom and experience of the feminists who have been tirelessly working to protect women from sex-based violence and oppression. You can smear all the journalists at the Daily Mail, Spectator, and the Times and consider the readers of these publications as "less than." You can pretend vulnerable female prisoners don't matter, maybe because you think you'll never end up there. You can call other women hateful witches and join in the calls for persecution of wrongthink, because you think you're more "enlightened" than they are. You can dismiss religious women as "crazy." You can think you're better than other women, smarter, and more caring.

You can dismiss all the women on this board, who have been thinking, speaking, and researching this issue for a VERY long time. I am but a newbie, but radical feminists probably know more than most people in this "debate," because they don't really care too much about Judith Butler and the theoretical existence of a million gender identities. They don't get bogged down by whether someone is neutrois or agender or gender-fluid or non-binary or what. Radical feminists care about female bodies, power dynamics between the sexes, male violence, and the real lives of females (as a group based on shared biological traits) which are shaped by one's sex observed at birth. That would include transgender men, also, if trans men wanted to be part of such a feminist movement.

When you actually dismiss the women who are worried:
You are choosing to side with the males who say they are women, instead of with actual females.

That isn't feminism.

Do you exclude transgender men too?

How do you, or I, or any woman or girl know with 100% certainty who the 'good' men are? We don't, so we exclude all males from female only spaces as a precaution.

How do you, or I, or any women or girl know with 100% certainty who the 'good' transgender people are? We don't and you are asking us to set aside all precaution and take a risk on the basis of what, exactly?

But your approach is very hostile to the transgender community. A community that is vulnerable.

Oh, and I'm sorry but having a pop at 'questionsble statistics' and then trotting out '99% of transwomen blah blah blah' is my favourite lack of self awareness moment of the evening.

I don't know what it is, but I'm getting the distinct impression you're not listening.

My female friends and I have the right to say we do not want a male bodied person in certain spaces. We are allowed to say no to our sports being erased, the single sex exemptions being removed, and to decide whether a male inserts a speculum into us or not.

What you are proposing removes all those rights. What do you not understand about that?

Honestly, when the Daily Mail is cited as a source of reliable information then the case is well and truly lost. I am not asking anyone to forgo rights, but you are! Genuine and vulnerable transgender women need to be protected and not vilified. Quote whatever questionable statistics you like - it does not make you arguments stack up. You forget the 99% of transgender women we should accept and welcome. Lets fight the real injustices in this world. Grouping all transgender women in with the few bad apples is a dangerous and immoral action. Just as I don't want to be judged as being similar to Rosemary Wests of this world.

It’s pretty obvious they want to access these spaces as they identify as women. A concept many people here reject. No need to give me the boring repetitive mantra about what women want. I’m a woman and I’m happy to welcome transgender women into my spaces.

Firstly - a boring repetitive mantra about what women want? Really? Your username proclaims you to be a feminist, yet you dismiss women's voices and experiences like this? Women are telling you exactly what they want. Women are saying they do not feel safe or comfortable around any men when they are vulnerable, no matter what name the man has, how the man feels, or what fashion the man wears. But you would rather ignore these women. Are their concerns beneath yours? That sounds quite elitist, frankly.

Most women on here do reject the concept that the feelings of a male who identifies as a woman should be prioritized over the feelings of females. Most women posting here will center the needs of the female in a scenario, not focus on exclusively on how to best preserve that male's ego. Because this is the feminist board and most feminists listen to women first.

I don't give a damn if you feel comfortable with males in your space, as long as they say they are women. I don't give a damn if some women are fine changing in front of gay males. I don't give a damn if some women are alright with being intimately examined by a straight male doctor. I don't give a damn if some women want unisex spaces. I don't give a damn if some women are unbothered by the prospect of sharing a cell with the likes of a Jacinta Brooks, Lian Huntley or Karen White.

I give a damn about empowering that one woman who is saying NO. Her autonomy, rights, feelings and boundaries are the ones that matter most to me.

I care, deeply, about the women who do not want to be around any male (trans or not) when they are vulnerable, incarcerated, in a state of undress, etc.

Single-sex spaces and services are set up for females only, to protect women when they might be at risk. They're for all women's comfort, dignity and safety. It is not for the "but I am fine with it" people to unilaterally decide whether some males get let in, speculate on which males are the "good ones" and run roughshod over the feelings of other women who really need that female-only space.

As Floral says, far more succinctly, it is not for anyone else to decide to give away another woman's rights.

It doesn’t involve me ceding rights as far as I’m concerned. Just respecting the rights of others.
You're not respecting the rights of the females who do not want these changes. You're trampling all over their ability to consent - because you insist your "yes" is worth more than their "no."

Feminist4 you are not respecting the rights of other women to say no. I'll reiterate, just because you're happy enough to forgo the right to a same sex HCP for example, doesn't mean you get to give away that right for another woman.

Or do you think it's normal, respectful behaviour to offer up other women's boundaries because you're not bothered? You don't mind the bloke on the bus grabbing your boobs, so you see no issue with cheering him on as he grabs mine?

It doesn’t involve me ceding rights as far as I’m concerned. Just respecting the rights of others.

Feminist4, doesn't matter what rights you are willing to cede as a woman. You have no authority whatsoever to give away other women's rights. That is way beyond your gift.

I think I'm going to copy and past your words to every cool girl who thinks other women don't matter.

Helpfully, for those who are interested in trial design and various testings artefacts (and that stuff is vital :) ) there is specific comment on just what is amiss with that Batrinos Testosterone paper: notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/12/03/comments-on-batrinos-2012/

i am also very interested in the reform of rape law that has entirely passed me by- would like some more detail please roisin?

and yy floral. you have your boundaries, feminist and I have mine. mine are not in your power to change.

Perfectly put Floral.

Feminist4, doesn't matter what rights you are willing to cede as a woman. You have no authority whatsoever to give away other women's rights. That is way beyond your gift.