There are genuine transgender people - but they are quiet.

their fucking rights. Sigh @ me.

Note to self: do not post on FWR while working (or pretending to oneself that one is working).

I never ever post on these boards. But regarding Trans people being quiet, I think its because a light has been shined on what they're doing. Entering women's loos/changing rooms/gyms etc.

I saw that interview on 'this morning' with the trans lady, saying we should let trans people into these spaces because they're already there and not causing harm. But for me that isn't the point, it isn't a fear of trans people, it's a fear that we aren't safe. Over a third of women have been sexually assaulted by a man, whether we know if there's a trans person in our toilets or not is irrelevant, it's the fact they COULD be. It means every time we want to use our old safe spaces, they might not even be safe anymore. It's absolutely not the fear of trans people, it's the fear of the unknown, anyone could be in there and have the right to be there too.

Actually, I'd say that the unnatural attachment you have to herb-dressed Weetabix with hot milk has caused a distinct lack of giving a fuck what others think. I suggest that this is perhaps a marvellous inoculation against self-sabotaging socialization and therefore the strongest argument yet seen for eating the stuff...

Right. Let me get this straight. The best way to encourage women to stand for the rights is for them never to actually stand for the rights in a direct fashion in case it upsets someone born male and puts the male person off continuing to try to persuade women of their personal special entitlement to women's rights?

Yeah, no.

Courage calls to courage.

Except Lang. But that's the impact of hot banana and roughage for you.

Are you saying I'm a victim of Weetabix socialisation?

My concern isn't for TSNTG, it's that they will still not have learned anything and their preconceptions have been reinforced. That is their choice!

Now, I know it isn't our responsibility to educate people- I've seen that repeated again and again, and agree you don't have to. But it helps if you want people to know more and understand more. And if I don't want to be helpful? I just want to say what I think without having to second guess the mind set of the listerner? I don't want to have to double think myself - When I finally stopped teaching I found that rather freeing - and that everyone else around tought it was normal!

People change by increments, they rarely 'see the light' because someone has beaten them about the head with it. Ah! But you have to want to see the light. Many posters here beat me round the head, drowned me as they swam past fror many months Eventually I started to rethink myself, not double think, just some good old fashioned reflective practice.

Do you know what I found? Female socialisation + teaching ethics = me being too fucking polite for my own good. Every post where I disagreed I had been re-wroting, I was constantly changing my wording, to avoid hurting someone's feelings. Now I just proof read and take out the "Sorries" - and that is harder than you may imagine!

Oh for goodness sake. I'm perfectly amenable to newbies. I don't pepper my posts with hugs and emojis, but I'm often taking the time to explain why I disagree with the overarching need to be very demonstrably 'nice' to everyone, and actually I think that being honest and giving someone the respect of addressing them directly and without flattery is much 'nicer' anyway. Most of the women here operate the same way.

Except Lang. But that's the impact of hot banana and roughage for you.

I've felt for a long time that it's a shame there's so much discourse-policing on this board. I personally suspect it's counter-productive, in terms of introducing more women to feminism.

That's another example of why feelings shouldn't trump facts.

Entry to this entire site via this specific board, FWR, has increased 12 fold in one year. From 15,000 in one month, to 177,000, same month a year later.

It's one of most popular boards on the site, and one of the first main entry points for newcomers.

I think we should all be extra nice to each other. I feel like a bad swimmer. Bobbing about trying to make progress while scary efficient sporty people zoom past mowing me down.

You've got sympathy from me, anyway.

I've felt for a long time that it's a shame there's so much discourse-policing on this board. I personally suspect it's counter-productive, in terms of introducing more women to feminism. The many threads I've seen on AIBU where lots of women have said they feel too intimidated to post here make me very uneasy about these tactics.

Still, at least non-conforming newbie posters no longer get told to "get back to the Daily Mail!", as used to happen fairly frequently, so I guess that's some progress.

My concern isn't for TSNTG, it's that they will still not have learned anything and their preconceptions have been reinforced.

We can't have female only spaces by persuading every single male transperson, one at at time.

We need the laws to allow us to have those spaces. And have the ability to challenge any males who don't think the rules apply to them.

My concern isn't for TSNTG, it's that they will still not have learned anything and their preconceptions have been reinforced.

This poster has already said they've been on here before. They've heard all the arguments. There is nothing left for them to 'learn'.

Furthermore, this specific poster knows full well what women's reasoning involves. They agree with everything. They've said so. They get it.

Just not for them.

You can't educate someone out of their sense of entitlement. This poster has a subjective view of our objective reality.

They have decided that what they think about themselves takes precedence over our lived experience.

And they just need to make us accept it.

The fact they can't, is where the discussion ends. Hence the flounce.

picklemepopcorn, yes, learning is a process, for sure. I know that way back when I was but a lurker, it was the behaviour of AWAs that proved instructive over time. Hopefully a robust response from women will encourage some reflection, that's a good outcome.

But, tbh, I'm rather more interested in liberating women to the point where they begin to stand up against the manipulation and pressure. Would I like to convince males to stop oppressing women? Yes, that would be lovely. It is very unlikely to happen by continuing to cosset them, so I think it's more useful to show women how they are being manipulated so they get righteously pissy about it and push for change.

Lots of women saying how they used to make a distinction, but now realise you can't

This. Exactly. Even a couple of years ago I was distinguishing between genuine and fake transwomen.

But they’re all male.

There is no debate to be had. It’s a firm no from me to any male who thinks they should be entitled to enter womens’ spaces, in fact I’d go so far as to say that it’s the ones that feel entitled who are precisely the ones who we need space away from. Men who try to go out of their way to convince you of how lovely they are rarely turn out to be lovely at all. I don’t know who is a nice, unthreatening male, not until it’s too late. I found this out pretty early on unfortunately. If we could all spot a creep from 50 paces then there’d be no sexual assault or rape, no abusive or violent relationships and no women a week would be killed by men. It really is as simple as that, and while it may seem harsh, that’s the reality we all inhabit, and while that is the case female only, male free spaces need to be robustly defended.

I used to be nice, and now I’m in an awful situation because of it, so nice me has gone away for ever, to be replaced by absolutely no way am I putting up with what I don’t want me.

Oh, and I had an infestation of fruit flies last autumn. They completely ignore hunney but they go mad for vinegar. Just saying...

Thanks for the links Rowan. Those detransitioning videos are very interesting.

I didn't say the question was the issue. Not at all. It was a good question that achieved its purpose.

I was more concerned by the multiple challenges after that. The accusations of flouncing, of being 'just as bad' 'and there we have it, Male privilege. Tada!' etc. I'm not going back to look for precise wording. The cumulative effect of multiple posters disagreeing with someone is quite overwhelming regardless of how correct individuals are.

My concern isn't for TSNTG, it's that they will still not have learned anything and their preconceptions have been reinforced. Now, I know it isn't our responsibility to educate people- I've seen that repeated again and again, and agree you don't have to. But it helps if you want people to know more and understand more. People change by increments, they rarely 'see the light' because someone has beaten them about the head with it.

And other women getting upset that what you might call a genuine transsexual is getting treated the same as a fetishist.

Indeed. From women's point of view, surely the only really important distinction 'types' of transwomen are those who choose to endanger women and girls by invading their spaces and eroding their rights and those who don't. AGPs who are not trying to invade women's spaces - crack on! Friendly, mild-mannered traditional transsexuals quietly invading women's spaces - nope.

Of course "genuine" transexuals have been quiet!

Would you create a stink if you had acquired a bundle of rights and entitlements stealthily since 2004?

Would you shout 'not fair' when state-driven policies - in the NHS, the police, councils, schools, girl guides, refuges, prisons - have put your needs first?

Would you call out Stonewall, Jess Bradley, Mermaids et al, when they were doing such a fine job of driving change on your behalf?

It's only when there are threats to rights, entitlements and funding that the beneficiaries see the need to get involved. It's only when pro-trans lobbyists are getting a bad press, that they see the need to come out from behind their skirts and appeal to women directly.

It's hard being told you are part of the problem. Really hard. Even harder because it is true.

Which is why I asked a simple, straightforward, blunt but not aggressive question. To ascertain the extent of the "part-of-the-problem-ness". I got the answer.

Yet you persist in asserting that this question was the issue and not the revelation of part-of-the-problem. I would advise reflecting on why your instinct was not to ask the emotional blackmailer to stop doing it but rather to add to the emotional blackmail by demanding the women not ask questions that might result in emotional blackmail.

But you are absolutely correct that safeguarding of women and children and standing up for this is in no way unkind and i need to tell myself that more and strengthen my resolve.

The Safeguarding is especially relevent for children and vulnerable people who are or have questioned their gender identity.

See threads:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3507109-Pique-Resilience-Project-young-detransitioned-women-sharing-their-personal-stories

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3518188-BMJ-Prof-Carl-Heneghan-Evidence-Based-Medicine-Oxford-Panorama-Trans-Kids-Gender-affirming-hormone-in-children-and-adolescents-Evidence-review-concludes-There-are-significant-problems

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3410257-BMJ-article-We-need-research-to-explore-the-interplays-between-gender-identity-mental-health-and-neurodevelopmental-problems-sexual-orientation-autogynephilia-and-unpalatable-gender-roles

“Some want the Equality Act scrapped, Gender Recognition scrapped and no rights at all for trans people because they are "men in dresses".”

I am someone who believes that the GRA should be repealed and replaced with a law that gives protections to non-conforming males (and females), which does not strip females of our sex base rights, and does not permit the legal fiction that someone can change sex. The only “rights” males would loose is the “right” to use female only spaces and the legal fiction that they have changed sex, neither of which are reasonable or ethical “rights” for them to be permitted to have in the first place in my opinion.

By passing the GRA the government created a legal fiction that allowed some men to gain more legal rights than other men. It permitted some males (the ones who claim to be women) to enter female spaces, and it forced the rest of us to pretend they are actually women. The passing of the GRA gave males who claim to be women more rights than males who don’t claim to be women, and eroded female’s boundaries and rights to spaces free from all males.

Some may think these are rights that certain males should be entitled to. Others (like myself) do not believe these “rights” should have ever been granted to males in the first place. It was a law that was deliberately sneaked in under the radar (as some TRA’s themselves boast about). Now some women are questioning the sneaking in of this law, and saying “hey wait a minute this law was never ethical or reasonable to begin with, hence why it had to be sneaked through”. A law that is based on unscientific ideological nonsense, that strips females of our rights, and is having an extremely negative impact on children, is arguably unethical and I believe there is a strong case to be made for its repeal. The fact that some males have used this law for 15 years should not be used an excuse to retain it, when it clearly erodes female’s rights and boundaries, particularly when another more ethical and reasonable law could easily be proposed to replace it that does not infringe on female’s rights and boundaries.

I think the tone of these discussions reflects the urgency of the issue and the current threat to women's rights. It's a good thing.

We're standing up for women, not recruiting transsexuals to the cause. The focus, especially in the media, is still off women.

Whilst knowing they are male, knowing that women don't want men in their spaces, they are still going into female only spaces, because they are special.

The fact they think that some men are outside the remit, only serves to show you that they do not understand. You cannot make exceptions for 'some men'. And they know that. But they still want you to. For them. (Be nice, be nice).

This here is what really bothers me about these threads - the exceptionalism. "But I'm really nice! I wouldn't hurt a fly! People like me are innocent!". Thing is, we only have the word of the person asking for this exception. And we're being asked to trust that everyone like them is ok too. But it's because we (as a society) can't be absolutely certain that a person's word is good (and that everyone they speak for is good) that we have safeguarding protocols, DBS checks, chaperones, and single-sex spaces. And even all that doesn't work all the time. So no, nobody is above suspicion and nobody gets to circumvent the rules "because they're nice ". People that truly understand this don't push boundaries set up for the good of all.

Thanks Terry and Rowan for your replies.

It actually makes me feel sick the thought of how i always try to default to the "be nice" mantra as my knee jerk response to things. I do my best to try and think things through for a while before forming an opinion and i think this whole subject has been my last part of "resistance" if you like, to going completely down the rabbit hole. This coupled with my now inability to block out the amount of misogyny i find to be everywhere (ignorance really was bliss) has been a hard pill to swallow.

But you are absolutely correct that safeguarding of women and children and standing up for this is in no way unkind and i need to tell myself that more and strengthen my resolve.

TYPER!