New guidelines - we aren't allowed to refer to natal sex

Snappity
"Whatever, it is the law."

Interesting... you maybe haven't been aware of the importance of changing laws re maital rape, abortion rights in Ireland etc etc etc etc etc

trans women are not sex = women without knowing their personal details

Well, that seems true by definition, yes. Unless you're now using trans woman to mean female person who transitions?

Snappity
"we should moderate on the basis of the law"

Mumsnet moderates on the basis of promoting 'civilised discussion"

Are we following the law as it exists to the letter - as you claim is being done here with equality law, or are we supposed to work ahead of the law - as is being done with self ID?

Make your mind up.

The law is an ass, as they say.

Whatever, it is the law.

Some very familiar arguments here.

Exactly this

My understanding from previous threads where posters like Truscum and Jaycee have contributed have given me the impression that the gender recognition process was always explicit in ensuring those transitioning understood that while they would achieve the legal status of a woman, that they would not actually be changing their sex (due to biological impossibility).

In fact they have only limited recognition for some purposes in law.

It certainly does not mean that at all times and in all circumstances everybody has to defer to this legal fiction.

"R0wantrees That excerpt is incredibly sad for Sarah and Sylvia, but a belief doesn't change fact. My understanding from previous threads where posters like Truscum and Jaycee have contributed have given me the impression that the gender recognition process was always explicit in ensuring those transitioning understood that while they would achieve the legal status of a woman, that they would not actually be changing their sex (due to biological impossibility)."

S9 of the Gender Recognition Act is clear. Sex changes. The Equality Act is clear sex ≠ biological sex. You might not like the law but we should moderate on the basis of the law

to quote Jon Ronson from his TedTalk 'How one tweet can ruin your life'

"I favour people over ideologies"

talk is worth watching in understanding the power of twitter

The law says that people can. It is transphobic to deny that.

For lurkers: actually the law foolishly says that it is necessary to treat a biological male as female for most purposes (with some exclusions) if said biological male obtains a bit of paper saying that they are female. This is currently only given where they have a dysphoric psychological disorder as laid out in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders edition 5.

The law says that people can.

The law is an ass, as they say.

AlfredDaButtler
The whole article is worth reading as it features many of the people we hear from today asserting the need for rights for people who are transgender.
It is very moving. I felt a great deal of compassion.
The background is important and also the insight it gives into the current situation.

"MNHQ I've got some questions:

1. Why are male feelings about language are being prioritised above females?

2. Why aren't females allowed to use their own language to describe themselves without it having to be vetted/approved of by males?

3. Have MNHQ read about abusive types who are never satisfied?"

I would be very interested in the answers to these questions. Historically women's language, lives, healthcare, fertility has been dominated by men, to varying degrees. Why is this allowed to be continued in 2018? On Mumsnet?

*Also there is no obligation to believe that transwomen are women

There is because otherwise you are assuming that some women aren't women without knowing their birth certificate or biology. That is discrimination. T*

Ok now you are into the realm of thought crime. There is no legal obligation to believe anything. I wasn't aware that we live in a theocracy.

I know this is a derail but it's all good for the lurkers.

Snappityphobic

Snappity - what are you trying to do? Set up a gender control system? Impose an ideology on people?

What is your mandate for this? Have you been voted in as a representative of mumsnet posters? Are you self elected?

Curious as to why we need you managing us here?

If women have to accept people who say they are transwomen as women, am I able to identify as a transwoman?

Of course

Realityphobic. Factphobic. Gynaephobic

To Snappity, obvs!

Didn't I send you to the Tower a while ago? It's phobic of my queenly identity that you haven't gone.

What an odd false dichotomy this person is trying to create.

We are honestly in the realms of Monty Python now.

Some people on here might be pretending to be women and if you don't agree that everyone should send in birth certificates then you agree that the existence of internet impersonation means that a woman is now anyone who does an internet impersonation of one. Gotcha, suckers!

Ok then!

R0wantrees That excerpt is incredibly sad for Sarah and Sylvia, but a belief doesn't change fact. My understanding from previous threads where posters like Truscum and Jaycee have contributed have given me the impression that the gender recognition process was always explicit in ensuring those transitioning understood that while they would achieve the legal status of a woman, that they would not actually be changing their sex (due to biological impossibility).

Humans can’t change sex.

The law says that people can. It is transphobic to deny that.

We cant communicate meanings with people who dont speak the same language.

This. Agree it's pointless engaging with zealous genderbelievers.