Follow on thread III - Feeling sad and weary that feminists and trans-women are constantly pitted against one another.

All of the words the doctors and the trans advocates use to describe the process of transitioning are deceptive. More and more people who have undergone surgical transition are coming forward to complain they were deceived. More and more detransitioners are coming forward to complain that they were deceived.
The suicide rate goes up post surgical transition. It does not get much more damning than that.

SaucySienna wrote - "If a transwoman looks like a woman, and has female parts (sex reassignment surgery), then she's a woman."

Biologically, a transgender-identifying biological male person is not a woman. Such a person is also not a woman because of looks.

Sex reassignment surgery is not magic and therefore it does not change a transgender-identifying biological male person's male body parts into female body parts. The surgery changes the male parts to look like female parts. The surgery perhaps also gives the transgender-identifying biological male person some chance of replacing the typical male sexual response of penis erection with a specifically transgender-male response to sexual intercourse or masturbation (i.e. obviously not an erection because their own penis has been removed, but also not a female response) .

For a transgender-identifying biological male person, reassignment surgery can involve removing the person's penis and using the skin to form something often called a "neovagina". For a transgender-identifying biological female person, reassignment surgery can involve enlargement of the person's clitoris to form something often called a "neopenis". Supporters of transgenderism use these words to deliberately create the misleading impression that surgery has performed a sex change, even though sex change has not actually occurred.

I think it would be more accurate to describe a "neovagina" as a "neopenis" because it is made from a penis, and it would be more accurate to describe a "neopenis" as a "neoclitoris" because it is made from a clitoris.

Well done everyone for keeping at these threads - three of them! I have been reading them between shopping, cleaning and doing Christmas stuff and it has been very interesting to read.

Although I can't remember who said what, there's been some important thrashing out the difference between a favour/kindness/politeness and a 'right'/'entitlement'/'justified' demand, regarding born males entering women's spaces.

Also there has been very key discussion around transing kids and how it should be, and it will be, regarded as a form of child abuse. And focusing on how the people pushing for it now better be prepared for future legal action for the scandal we are heading for - and I agree screen shots are a very good idea.

Also the perennial issue - of defining the difference between 'equality means equal rights and treatment' and 'being equally free from disadvantage'.

So well done everyone for sticking at it.

Haven't quite caught up but wanted to say thank you for this brilliant thread and specifically to debbie and perfectly, who as someone said are "peak transing machines".

Happy Christmas 🤘

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/justine-greening-delays-divisive-plan-for-easy-gender-swaps-gm77qd9gn

Delaying the decision in the GRA. Still time to show this for the lunacy that it is.

Sophocles It's one of the things that drives me mad about equality feminism, they seem to think that the only way we can have equality is by pretending that there are no differences between men and women.

It presumes that as long as both sexes are treated exactly the same then we'll be on level ground. Which is bollocks. For example men don't need the exact same employment rights as women, as they will never need maternity leave or allowances made for breastfeeding. They also don't need the same level of protection against gendered violence, and this is where equality feminism's blinkers seem to be hugest.

That was on the previous thread.

Going back a bit, 10.07 yesterday, someone posted a link to a Grayson Perry short about crossdressers. The thing which really jumped out at me was the "midnight walk" which was the first time they dressed in public. I know women will walk around at night, but I doubt many regard that as a safe time.

If biological sex is unimportant, DH would have given birth to our son.

YY Red. I didn't particularly enjoy pregnancy and childbirth. DH is a kind man who pitches in. And yet when it came to producing our kids he didn't even suggest taking on a birth or two.

Must ask him why that was.

If biological sex is unimportant, DH would have given birth to our son.

He didn't.

Why was that again?

There are some inescapable realities that can not be escaped in life. You can try and deny them or spin them or find an alternative to get round the issue by other means but ultimately you cannot escape them.

If you are born male you can not bare children.

It doesn't matter if you are a pro-trans right activists or 'transphobic'. Your opinion or the way you identify or view others does not change this.

Science might try and develop ways for babies to be gestated artificially. It might get there. This will still only be available to a small number of people who can afford it, even if it happens. This still leaves the basic issue. Women have babies because of their biology.

As long as a transwoman passes, what's the problem?

Are you actually that fucking stupid you think it's about how convincing their costume looks?

On the scary lesbians point... my lovely nurse practitioner is lesbian. Before she did a smear/breast exam there was a lot of subtle stuff. She had pictures of her wife and children on her desk and spoke about them, hints dropping everywhere. And she booked my intimate exams, rather than doing them then and there. Had I been uncomfortable with her sexuality (I couldn't give a shiny) I could have easily asked for someone else or gone somewhere else with no issues on my part. I'm fairly sure that's why she does it. Even though it would have been my loss.

Respectful, thoughtful, understanding and filled with informed consent. That's my experience of a lesbian HCP.

If any trans HCP acts in this exact way, no shouting about transphobia, it would be fine. But the activists don't even want women making a choice about who they shag, never mind healthcare.

The idea that women will want to see their penis is perhaps one of the most disingenuous arguments it is possible to make.

Genital checks again. Such active imaginations some have. Odd how its never feminists who bring up these genital checks. Another thing feminists do not say, but get blamed for saying, basically

They do sound rather like a premise for BDSM wank fodder don't they?

Groundhog Day!! Exactly.

I know we have had three threads in quick succession. But it is Groundhog Day every day over this issue.

The exact same arguments come up. They get refuted.

It’s quite interesting, sometimes. Either new posters have not read the thread. Or they think if they say you’re transphobic it will end the thread there and then.

A tactic that, presumably, worked for them before. Thank God for mumsnet allowing people to actually talk.

SaucySienna

The primary concern here appears to be that allowing transwomen in women's areas increases the likelihood of sexual violence etc.
Lesbians are sexually attracted to other women, and may thus have a motive to sexually assault other women in the area, yet they are still allowed into women's facilities.

No, that’s not the primary concern.

In this specific issue, the primary concern is with boundaries. Lesbians do not violate women’s boundaries. 98 percent of sexually violent crime is committed by men, not lesbians. Boundry violation however, does not have to involve sexual violence.

It’s not about sexual attraction. It’s about power.

( I realise this has already been addressed. But as it regularly gets trotted out, I thought I would answer it too)

Datun An honour system relies on both parties honouring the agreement. Trans women can use the ladies as long as they behave and women agree not to chuck them out purely because they are trans

Wrong. There is no agreement. There is the occasional favour asked for, and occasionally granted if all else is okay.

And women can absolutely chuck them out, not because they are trans, because they are men.

Groundhog Day!! Exactly.

Dear Lord it's like groundhog day
sienna did you read the previous 2 threads? Maybe you could have a look, get up to speed with what's been discussed. Otherwise we are all just going to be repeating ourselves.

PS suggesting lesbians are as likely to sexually assault women as men is extremely homophobic

Ah I do hope transmen keep up with that shite. Been lesbians bearing the brunt of this insanity for far too long. Once its men on the recieving end of the skrieks of transphobia (for their sexuality..which is apparently a choice one should get over ) the message will be heard loud and clear.

From the other side, a woman who thinks she is a guy, goes on a gay dating platform and responses drop when she puts 'transman' in her profile.

Who knew gay guys liked dick eh? and calls it transphobia, not from abuse no - just from the number of contacts that cease to come through.

Will this be another thread stuck in the land of obtuse?

They all are.

This is what pisses me off the most about this whole debate I think - we are repeatedly expected to restate the absolute basics of why sex segregated spaces are needed in the first place. Every fucking thread we have to explain again that male violence is a thing and that women are oppressed because of our female biology.

So Saucy, why was women's sport created? If biological sex is not, as you claim, important?