Letter in the Times - Plea To The Trans Lobby from group of transsexuals

I fear that what Kay has said this evening has very much been taken out of context and used in the most negative way possible.

No.
What Kay has said is clear.
Please don't blame women who can read.

Kay is a very genuine person who is like many fed up with the attack on transsexual people by modern transgender ideology.

It is very understandable that some transsexuals are fed up with the damage done by transgender ideology.

This has been going on for some time, driven in part by some prominant transsexuals.

With respect, energies may be better spent challenging this elsewhere.

Please don't lump two very different things together.

There is not a clear separation.
As discussed previously.

Please don't attempt to rebuke posters who are expressing safeguarding concerns for children.

This is a parenting site.
It shouldn't be surprising that many here are concerned for children.

current thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3452489-Mermaids-given-500-000-by-National-Lottery-Sunday-Times

I fear that what Kay has said this evening has very much been taken out of context and used in the most negative way possible.

Kay is a very genuine person who is like many fed up with the attack on transsexual people by modern transgender ideology.

I am unsurprised that Kay would be upset because what we are seeing at the minute isn't just about stopping the modern agenda but a reversal of things that have been in place for many many years. When someone has enjoyed certain privileges how should they feel when told these privileges should now be taken away because a non medicalised group wih their own agenda are attempting to hijack them.

I hate the way transsexuals and transgender people force gender stereotypes into children and encourage children to take puberty blockers and wear binders.

In what way have transsexual people being doing this ? Transsexual people have been around for decades without a problem. It is the new modern transgender agenda that brings the problem.....you cannot attribute this to transsexuals.

Indeed it is the transsexual people that want proper medical diagnosis, a stop to self id and who see transition only as a last resort.

Please don't lump two very different things together.

Classy.

Its not really in the spirit of Mumsnet to launch such a personal character attack on a regular poster.

I agree.

I was never under the illusion that TS were on the side of women, or that you were all rallying to Miranda's message. If any of us were under that illusion, then the various waves of 'reasonable TS' initiatives, from TSRainCrew onwards, have surely disabused us of that notion.

So I'm not particularly surprised or disappointed to read that you give no shits about women and girls' boundaries or our consent for you to be in our spaces. That was expected.

What I am disappointed and surprised about is that you have done it on this thread, which was about a letter, signed by you, simply and unambiguously condemning violence and intimidation of women by TRAs.

And the personal attack on Miranda was really shoddy.

She does not represent us, or any significant sub group of us. This is not an attack. MY knows what I and many other think of the insults and invective. It is embarrassing to behold, andnot a thing anyone wants to be associated with.

Rather disingenous to say something isn't an attack when it clearly reads as such, and quite a personal one too.

As commented previously, your position has been made clear kay

Miranda Yardely does not represent " the acceptable face of " transsexualism " in the eyes of many of us who see ourselves as anti self ID , and have lived long lives in the acquired gender role, and may have a GRC.

Or not. No matter.

So self-id then, just on your terms?

Its not really in the spirit of Mumsnet to launch such a personal character attack on a regular poster.

Well, thanks for letting us know exactly where you stand, Kay.

Most informative.

I'll be standing right by Miranda, thanks, and as far away as possible from you.

As always, saying 'no' is a good test.

current thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3322589-Saying-no-to-men

Lang, the longer time goes on, the clearer it becomes to me that irritation is an entirely appropriate response to some things.

One might possibly begin to see why I become intemperate on other threads concerning junior members of the movement who also think they are exempt from women's consent.

I do find it fascinating that someone is actually openly saying "I refuse to respect your boundaries. My only interest is in you being kinder to me so I can decide which men are allowed to transgress your boundaries, and what length of time it will take for them to be allowed to do so"

Quite astonishing, tbh.

Fascinating.

Women's consent as a limited concept. Interesting way to condemn the bullying and violence directed at women who do not consent.

Way to go, Kay, way to go.

mirandayardley (who wrote the letter, which was then edited by Debbie Hayton) Fri 14-Dec-18 12:33:25

"For clarity, what The Times letter was about:

to highlight the intimidation and promotion of rhetorical and physical violence against women, which is being justified by and in the name of transgender activism; and
to act as an invitation for transgender activists to recognise this and so denounce and distance themselves from the violence and violent rhetoric being acted in their name.

What The Times letter was not about:

Individuals;
Self-ID;
Validation;
The TS v TG faux debate;
Me."

Your position has been made very clear Kay

Sparticua etc.

I signed it because every word of it was something I sincerely believe is right. I believe in free speech, within the law. Simple as that.

If I write something that you do not agree with, or if I state an objective truth that some wish wasn't a truth ( eg that TS men and women will be in the loos of the acquired gender, whether anyone likes it much, or not,) that does not indicate that I don't want to "listen to women's concerns".

I was happy to sign because it dealt very much with the shitty way that some of what we conveniently call " the TRAs" have conducted themselves in words and deeds

It seems that (as MirandaYardley ) has commented earlier on the threads, some trans signatories are more intent on seeking 'common cause' from women (adult human females) than challenging male-pattern control used against them.