Important to remember there are people on BOTH sides of the debate

Even here refusing to perform that gender role will upset and/or enrage some people. Such is life, I guess, though you might expect women posting on a feminist forum to at least try to work their way through that piece of internalized misogyny.

seem to forget that women are people too, with rich inner lives, not some amorphous blob sat at home looking after everyone.

Well bloody said.

I am convinced that this is why the rage over the treatment of trans people is directed at feminists, not at men, even when men assault and kill them. Violent men are just being men - not great, but still behaving according to gender role. But women’s gender role is to support and affirm others, and if we’re refusing to do that then the sky will fall.

BarrackerBarmer

As an actual, biological female, I find the ENTIRE ideology insulting, sexist, false, regressive, unscientific and damaging.
Every trans person, by definition, is perpetuating a false idea about women.
So, whilst a trans person may be 'nice' as a person, their beliefs about sex are about as sexist and damaging as can be, and I do not need to respect their position in regards to this issue and how it pertains to me and all females.

Total agreement with this. The very concept of 'being transgender' relies completely on making a ton of sexist generalisations on 'what makes a woman a woman, or a man a man, if it isn't biology?' The idea that 'woman' is a feeling a man can have about himself that is more true than the lived understanding that women already have about themselves, is grossly offensive. Every time someone says "you have no right to say trans women aren't women" to women what they are saying is that we have no right to identify ourselves. I have no right to observe and acknowledge and state that what I am is something meaningful and distinct from something a man is or wants to be or could ever be. He is allowed to identify what a woman is, but I am not. This fact alone shows that the people who say this shit do not believe it. Given the choice between respecting a woman's right to identify herself and a man's right to overrule her, they are backing the dude. It's the biggest tell there could be that the whole thing is the same old misogynist sham.

"No wonder feminists are getting a bad name."

NO FAVOURS by making generalisations about trans people

This is one of the problems - generalisations about feminists - A-OK, generalisations about trans people - BAD

Like LostArt says - women don't seem to be NAWALTed unlike men, trans.. I know that's because so many men (and women - because of our patriarchal society) seem to forget that women are people too, with rich inner lives, not some amorphous blob sat at home looking after everyone.

I think we do need to accept that “people living as the opposite sex” need to be catered for, and probably avoid the kind of misgendering which looks spiteful, while making our points (ie, point out that Transwomen are natal males as much as is necessary but maybe be flexible on the pronouns), and generally just emphasis the problems of self ID specifically and that fundamentally sex is real and gender is a construct.

That’s strategic, not stylistic.

Facts don't have feelings. But people do. If we are going to make a convincing political argument we need to take those into account when lobbying and persuading.

That’s a much more compelling point than “It’s nice to be nice, Ladeez”.

BarrackerBarmer

Excellent post. Completely agree.

Apart from anything else, women are angry each in their own way. It's utterly impossible to make everyone agree. And why should we?

It's quite astonishing, already, that most women have exactly the same goal. Which is to retain female sex-based protection.

With some minor disagreements about hammering out the details.

After a few years in this quagmire I'm actually starting to think that having a wide range of feminist approaches is in fact a good thing.

I don't exactly chime with the hardline approach of some radfems who think there should be no platform at all for gender critical TiMs like Miranda Yardley. I respect the purity of their position, but I think they are less likely to succeed with this approach - however, I'm actually glad they are taking their own position on this. It has helped my interrogate my own beliefs about how pragmatic I want to be to succeed.
At the other end are the feminists who are happy to accept some men as women if they have met certain criteria (GRC, SRS etc). I think this is a mistake and simply resets us back to the point at which our laws conceded that the female sex didn't really exist as a category any more. It's a holding position that ensures we are delaying the inevitable pushback once again about 'truetranswoman' criteria.

There are those who argue from an ideologically academic approach. I respect this, but I don't think it reaches most people at the right level.

And there are those who make memes, which convey the message so effectively in 5 words that rafts of people suddenly get it.

There are the calm protesters, letter writers, lobbyists, and civil disobedience disruptors. Banner makers. Internet warriors. Petition makers. Chanting Protesters.

I think we need all of them. All the different approaches speak to different people. The message that biology exists, and matters, and should not be ignored for any ideology is getting through, one way or another.

And I don't see people 'converting' from a gender critical approach to a transideology approach.

The penny drops in only one direction.
Because gravity, like biology, is a material fact that nature can't ignore.

#girlslikeus is #peaktrans in action

A 2 second look and the 2nd tweet was

twitter.com/somuchKat/status/976116677619396608

@Datun

Thanks!

Women are pissed off because a small subset of non-women are trying to tell them what being a woman means? How very dare they?!

I just looked at the #girlslikeus hashtag and most of it is like a sort of mumsnet-for-trans-women.

There are comments on there that do just look pointlessly unpleasant

I agree with what Barracker said about generalisations. We are told not to generalise about trans people.

But the entire trans ideology is based on generalisations about womanhood and what being a woman means. Whilst the actual biological realities of womanhood are dismissed as unimportant side issues not worthy of discussion because they might exclude trans people.

Fuck that.

Get it right though Lang. It's no deference to Brian 'Pillock' Paddock or avoid sniggering at Shon 'Faux' Fayre

Heehee. But y'know. It's true. We need to make it clear to Joe Public what is happening. Shon Faye knows what is happening. Brian Paddick knows what is happening but doesn't want to admit it in public (like most women Labour MPs). Why must I be polite to them? I'd rather tell Joe Public that his daughter might come home pregnant from a Guides trip and if Brian Paddick had only listened in the first place, she wouldn't have been at risk.

Every trans person believes that 'female' is a psychological state.

I'm not sure all the non-TRA trans people who've found MN to be one of the few places they can talk without censorship agree with that. There are indeed people on both sides of the self-ID debate, and some of them are transmen and transwomen who are being silenced as much as women are.

I agree it's working Datun.

Which is why the TRAs are being even more vicious.

we have been painted quite surprisingly effectively in a very different light

But that’s not down to the tone of the debate on here. It’s driven by misogyny, and the fact that it’s very easy and socially acceptable to equate feminist with screeching harpy.

My point is that ANY disagreement, regardless of tone, with TRA activists will be met that way. It wouldnt matter if we were polite, apologetic, respectful, angry or howling abuse - they do not brook any dissent whatsoever.

The cure for that is not to reframe he tone of our debate - there is literally no form of words or use of language that will change their minds. It’s like trying to persuade Faith with Logic.

Politicians will NOT listen until there is a critical mass of the public being sufficiently annoyed about this.

I feel the tone of the debate on MN is generally respectful of individuals who do not fling abuse themselves. Where ridicule is directed at individuals it’s in response to invective. Fighting hate with mockery is not a violent crime. MNHQ do remove posts that are genuinely transphobic. The rest stay, because they are statements of opinion, backed by logic and fact.

So if they have been told by people they trust that we are anti-trans rather than as is true pro-women, this will be the lens they use to interpret how we talk and act. TRAs using that to distort the debate is a key part of the problem. That distortion needs to be changed to move the debate on.

I agree. But I also agree with LangCleg.

Politicians were told. They had written evidence from feminists. They were not allowed to speak. They have had letters, lobbying, appeals, campaigns. The lot.

They've either disregarded it, not appreciated it, or are now on the back foot.

Maria Miller said, after the report was released, not before, that the only objection was from women 'purporting to be feminists'.

Disregarding what the feminists actually said before the report was published.

Which leads me to believe that she simply didn't think there would be much pushback.

She absolutely knows.

She's being a politician.

Public opinion is the only way to get politicians to take action. And talking on mumsnet, promoting articles, etc, is the way to do it.

And it's working.

Get it right though Lang. It's no deference to Brian 'Pillock' Paddock or avoid sniggering at Shon 'Faux' Fayre

Hypermice

You can't 'reply'.

That button just lets you post.

If you want to reply to a specific poster, cut-and-paste the name. If you put an asterisk on either side (no gaps) it bolds it. If you put an @ it bolds it and sends them an email notification.

You won't change the mind of any TRAs, extremist or otherwise by being nice.

Politicians won't say anything gender critical until public opinion makes it safe to do so.

We are speaking to the general public, who have been misled by pro-TRA media spin about what exactly the implications of self-ID and the rest of the TRA agenda are.

This article posted yesterday - angrybirdroar.wordpress.com/2018/03/28/watching-the-terfs/ - this is how I speak IRL. This is how the people I speak to IRL also speak. They understand me. I'm blunt. There's nothing wrong with blunt.

Moreover, pussyfooting around is WHY the general public is so ill-informed. What we need to do is not show due deference to Brian bloody Paddick or avoid sniggering at the arsehole that is Shon bloody Faye. It's to inform the general public about what is going on by telling it straight.

When a critical mass of public understanding is reached, politicians will shit themselves and change direction.

That would make you a mule kittens