Dealing with inflammatory posts re Trans on MN

notthenewsinbriefs.wordpress.com/2017/11/26/when-womens-rights-are-notadebate/

This is a good paper to understand the place many mumsnetters are.

It’s sometimes difficult to remember, amongst all the arguments, exactly what women stand to lose here. The sex category ‘female’ is being asked to absorb the sex category ‘male’. What women are being forced to accept could literally not be any more extreme.

So, that’s the point we’re at. Changes to the Gender Recognition Act are due for consultation in Spring 2018. Grassroots groups of women are springing up everywhere as more and more women realise what’s happening. On Facebook, on Twitter and on Mumsnet, increasing numbers of women are finding groups where they are allowed to debate, and real-life groups are forming off the back of these. Unfunded and voluntary for the main part, ordinary but extraordinary women are working together to protect the rights of all women. Our voice is finally being heard in the mainstream media. There will be a tipping point where the number of women refusing to be silenced will overtake the number of women too scared to speak up.

If you want to find out more, or join in, go and look at Fair Play for Women, Transgender Trend, A Woman’s Place, Mayday for Women, Youth Trans Critical Professionals, the Lesbian Rights Alliance, Socialist Feminist Network and more. Come and join us. Remember, as a clever feminist recently coined it, what TERF really stands for is Telling Everyone Real Facts. And someone’s got to do it.

Also, no one here hates transpeople. Everyone one should be free to express gender in whichever way they wish without judgement or prejudice. The idea that men must all be brave, macho and stoic and all woman must be gentle, kind and feminine is damaging.

Sue from the radical feminist perspective it isn't possible to be a woman in a man's body (or vice versa) because woman is a description of the body not the brain. The dictionary definition (and the most commonly accepted definition) of woman is adult human female, ie a person with a female reproductive system, so unless you change the deinition of woman a man cannot be a woman. A woman is not a person who likes wearing dresses, nurturing children etc. those are gender stereotypes. A woman could be a lesbian with a crew cut who shops in menswear departments and works as a plumber, but they are as much a woman as any other because they have a female reproductive system.

Men and women do not have different brains, neuroscientist Gina Rippon explains in this video -

You may not see what koyaanisqatsi sees, but there are frequent threads started by people who express the same concerns.

These threads are quickly colonised by same group of posters who all agree on the points and the debate is stifled.

The tone of the debate is them and us. You are either with us or against us. Many people realise the messy reality of life. We are not going to solve the issues that arise quickly and debate is needed but there is room for a spectrum of opinions.

You might not feel there is an issue with tone and content but when a number of posters mention it, when MNHQ mention it, just saying "I don't see it" is missing the point by a mile.

I think a lot of the disconnect is because of the current broadness (uselessness) of the term ‘trans’.

Studies like the one Sue linked to above are about gender dysphoria, something very few of the current cohort of ‘trans’ actually have. So using them to insist that any man who says he is a woman, with no interaction with any health professional, no diagnosis of gender dysphoria, no hormones, no surgery, no intention of removing his very male genitalia, should be treated instantly by all as a woman.

Why?

I don’t just want a self selecting group of people being used for statistics.

I want a separation in the statistics being shown to people.

If all the suicide stats, studies etc. are about people with genuine gender dysphoria then why are cross dressers and those that have sexual fetishes to do with this also demanding to be treated as those with a diagnosed medical condition are, without showing any sign of commitment, suffering or intention of changing their body.

Sue
Had a debate with someone about that report over the last couple of days.
As Teacuphiccup points out. It's fine. It states that there is good evevidence that gender dysphoria is biological. Not disputed.

How does it apply to the >95% of trans people not diagnosed with dysphoria?

Sorry ‘pro-trans’ was meant to be in quotation marks, as I don’t believe these posters are pro all trans, just the right ones.

sue

That report is to show that gender dysphoria is real and should be considered in health insurance.
It is not saying it is possible for a man to be in a woman’s body or vice versa just that gender dysphoria is real and can be caused by something biological.

I think you’d be be hard pushed to find someone who doesn’t agree with that on here.

But apparently having an opinion is not allowed anymore. There is only one Right opinion and anyone else is considered an invader and part of the enemy

I don’t recognise this mn. I have seen diverse opinions debated and respected, and lots of reminders that we don’t want to get into a ‘this is the only way’ froth like the fervently, almost religious TRA’s.

I’ve also seen lots of pro trans posters completely ignore all actual transsexual posters in favour of berating women for their opinions. We seem to just get in the way of the magical thinking narrative.

this attitude of “we’re in a WAR and anyone who’s not 100% anti-trans is an evil invader who needs to be fought!” is just terrifying!

I’m not seeing this attitude.
Most women here seem to be against the idea that a transwoman is a woman. Not against transwomen as a whole. I don’t think anyone is ‘anti-trans’ just any having men claiming that they are women.

Here is the Endocrine Society report. Happy to debate respectfully. There is far too much ignorance, hate and fear driving the debate about trans and women’s rights.

www.endocrine.org/advocacy/priorities-and-positions/transgender-health

I am fairly sure that the few transactivists on twitter do not bother companies such as tesco. Especially when if tesco listen to the stropping, they may lose business from here.

I think - as F4J found out with M&S - that more MNetters are Tesco customers than TRAs.

I personally spend hundreds of pounds per month at Tesco - as I get a groceries delivery at least once a week, to feed a family of 5, a dog and 2 cats.

So we'll see. If Tesco damage Mumsnet by pulling their advertising, they'll find my money going to Waitrose.

there is surely an irony of an inflammatory post on a thread about how to deal with inflammatory posts....

Sue

‘the Endocrine Society states there is an “enduring biological basis” for being transgender'‘

That’s not quite true. What is states is that there is an enduring biological basis for having a ‘transgender identity’ which is a totally different thing.
It supports the idea that there might be a biological basis for someone to develop gender dysphoria, which no one denies.
But having gender dysphoria does not mean the person is another sex to the one they are born with.

Gender non conformity is without a shadow of a doubt not an illness, but gender dysphoria is. To say it’s not denies many trans people the right to appropriate medical care, how is this helpful to trans people?

Hi Sue, I would also be very interested to see the source for - 'the Endocrine Society states there is an “enduring biological basis” for being transgender'

I'm not sure why Sue has been reported, it would be a shame MN feminism board became more of an echo chamber than it already is.

I tend to use "gender identity ideology" to indicate I'm talking about the political movement rather than people - "transgenderism" doesn't make that clear because you could be talking about the group of people who transition, who may or may not buy into the political views.

I think most of us use TRA to indicate a person who supports that political ideology - such a person isn't necessarily trans although obviously many will be.

I think part of the problem is that people 'stropping' probably haven't read the many, many threads on MN. They have seen a screenshot of a post on MN that may have been taken out of context, or actually been transphobic and subsequently deleted.

There is an attempt to organise a boycott of MN endorsed products, I don't know how to link to twitter so I took a screenshot.

I am fairly sure that the few transactivists on twitter do not bother companies such as tesco. Especially when if tesco listen to the stropping, they may lose business from here.

Oddly enough, 'transgenderism' was just used at the end of another thread.

That was probably me. I did consider transgenderology, but that seemed a bit flippant.

There is an attempt to organise a boycott of MN endorsed products, I don't know how to link to twitter so I took a screenshot.

Whenever I have talked to friends about the current transactivism, they completely agree with and recognise my concerns- and they are not MNers.

I can't comprehend the confusion which is trans ideology. Lost for words, and sad at the ignorance and hatred in this debate.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3214788-Another-trans-related-question-sorry

Here's the thread, sorry

Hi Sue

Could you provide the sources please for:
the Endocrine Society states there is an “enduring biological basis” for being transgender

• latest scientific research shows that hormonal imbalances during foetal development and

• evidenced based research

as i find this really interesting, see this other thread where weve been discussing it. Its great that you agree that proper body dysphoria issues are caused by a medical issue, like most gender critical feminists here, as it shows very succinctly why we are so against Self ID and also why several regular trans posters (eg jaycee) also think that getting a GRA should remain a process that is medically managed, not just something any confused teenager or middle aged AGP can simply state.

Oddly enough, 'transgenderism' was just used at the end of another thread. It is widely known that this is another word that transactivists love to police and shut down. Rebecca Tuvel, a strong defender of transadvocacy, was absolutely blammed for using it in her Hypatia essay 'In Defence of Trans Racialism', onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/hypa.12327 even though she's completely in favour of extreme identity politics.

It's not implying it's an illness. More a movement. It seems a useful term and there's no reason one side should get to police language in this way.