Mermaids response to JK Rowling

twitter.com/HairyLeggdHarpy/status/1271795496693235713

Thanks for that Datun

??

Came across this today though which summarised a lot

It's a shame that the "Break it down for me" thread is like Swiss cheese now. Posts retroactively deleted despite the fact they were made before the new rules.

Silencing in action.

At least it's still up though.

Having said that, of late, I have decided that women should not have to reference statistics, male violence patterns, attacks already occurring, general sexism and misogyny.

We should just be able to say No.

It is, after all, as any mumsnetter will tell you, a complete sentence.

Datun I have to admit it is a bit of a hobby horse of mine.

I love a well referenced discussion and get exceedingly grumpy when links don't say what is claimed.

This thread is quite useful, leaking.

It starts off explaining various terms, because it does get very confusing.

Things have moved on a bit, too, but new information, as it comes up, gets added. As a resource it's quite comprehensive.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3145470-Break-it-down-for-me

Some of these people are supposed to be fairly clever aren't they? Emma Watson, thought she was a fairly vocal feminist ?

@Leakinglikeacolander you’re not missing anything. These vacant celebs haven’t thought it through or simply don’t care.

Mermaids lying to suit their agenda? Colour me shocked.

How do you know someone from Mermaids is lying? Their lips are moving.

Datun sorry completely missed your post while I was contemplating mine, so have repeated myself somewhat.

Is there an 'Idiot's Guide' ? I have too many questions which might (a) derail the thread and (b) Make me look like a dullard.
Bearing in mind what bishopgiggles said in response to my post I don't understand why all these celebs are falling over themselves to promote 'transwomen are women' without at least acknowledging some potential difficulties of going down this road? It's one of the reasons I keep asking myself what am I missing?

dolorsit

Well we crossposted there !

Yes, source material is vital. It's also long been noted that reading material put up by transactivists will make you gender critical.

I have absolutely no hesitation in recommending that people read as much as they possibly can from both sides of the debate. Although, I have to say, reading about transgenderism from transgenderists will get you there quicker.

I'm a bit hmm when I see so many speaking out against what JK Rowling said because some of it appears to be so obvious it makes me wonder what am I seeing that they are not or vice versa?

Leaking, it's the massive and disproportionate vitriol Which makes you think hang on a minute, there must be something more to this.

But there isn't. It's a lot misogynists finding each other online.

It stands to reason, that if you accept society as a whole is sexist, you are going to find innumerable people who represent it, gathering together.

Although it might take a bit longer, can I suggest that you go to the source of claims. Because that's the only way you lose any spin.

FairPlay for women has a lot of source material. They are pro women, but their source material is neutral. They go out of their way to make sure of it. So they cannot be accused of bias.

For those of you who are new to this debate I would strongly suggest that if a source is referenced to check the reference.

It's an old internet tactic to post a link to a source which doesn't support what you are claiming or is taken out of context. Most people don't read links.

Also be aware when a medical or science piece is referenced that the source may be an opinion editorial or an interpretation of the implications of the original paper. You will need to check the references to find the original paper. Sometimes you may need to go through a string of opinion/ interpretation pieces before you get to the actual study.

It's a pain in the arse to do, but you will eventually get an idea of who supports their arguments with evidenced links and who sometimes posts links which they don't appear to have even read because it contradicts their point in the first paragraph.

It's also worth doing for other contentious topics

I hope someone is archiving the different versions, before Winston Smith gets his pen out and puts things down the memory hole.

The strange thing is that the only people who will read any of it are their supporters and us, and none of us will change their minds.

I'm sure JKR isn't interested.

I'm on team 'we are on the gravy train and need to keep the money rolling in, so we will just chat utter nonsense and hope no one notices'

Some people involved in mermaids are also desperate to validate their own personal decisions, so they can not change direction.

Having said that, the results of these lies are team evil.

I don't want to label trans people as potential perverts on the actions of a few

People want you to think that some feminists are doing this but we are not (well, most of us aren't). If they say we are, they are lying.

There are many different types of trans people, just as there are different types of non-trans people. Some are racist, some are perverts perhaps, some are homophobic, some are Tory... most are just "normal" people who wear clothes/make up/have surgery etc to appear in the opposite sex. ("Normal" in inverted commas as I'm not sure anyone is a normal person!). The problem is that the TRA line is to insist anyone who says they are trans are trans. No question. Acceptance without exception.

People can lie. We are worried about potential perverts labelling themselves as trans, just as they can be priests, school teachers, doctors. No-one would say all school teachers are perverts just because some criminals might become school teachers.

I hope someone is archiving the different versions, before Winston Smith gets his pen out and puts things down the memory hole.

And I’ve just read the tweet above in the thread showing they’ve made multiple changes since it went live and they STILL publish lies and bullshit. To paraphrase Dave Eggers, it’s a heartbreaking work of staggering evil and ineptitude. This is an organisation that purports to care for children.

Glad this thread was started, it has been an interesting read for a trans issue novice.
It all seems so very complicated/nuanced and some of you are very invested with your facts and figures which I look forward to reading in further detail.
I read both sides of the argument and find myself yes but , every time I read something.
I don't want to label trans people as potential perverts on the actions of a few, but I do want people to be safe.
I'm a bit when I see so many speaking out against what JK Rowling said because some of it appears to be so obvious it makes me wonder what am I seeing that they are not or vice versa?

There are many accounts and growing research showing that hormone therapy does not necessarily render a person infertile, although it has been suggested that taking oestrogen or testosterone can, over time, lead to a complete loss of fertility. This however has not been proven in any clinical trial

No. Nothing has been studied long term. That’s the concern. But no mention - deliberately here of course - that puberty blockers are what leads to infertility. Tbe whole point of puberty is tbe development of secondary sexual characteristics, which include maturation of sperm and ova and the ability to deliver them. Puberty blockers mean this doesn’t happen. Mermaids advocates for puberty blockers.

Some surgeries do render people infertile, but they are not available in the UK until 18, at which point the decision has been made by an adult with the full understanding of the consequences, and there are lots of discussions around freezing eggs and sperm for the future.

Not forgetting that Susie Green’s child had permanent surgery on their 16th birthday, it’s a bit rich to say the decision is now made by adults at 18. Can’t go to Thailand any more, hey Susie? And you can’t freeze eggs and sperm that haven’t matured as a result of puberty blockers. When they say lots of discussions, I imagine it’s “yeah, we can’t do that now, too late, soz”.

It’s worth remembering that surgical regret is proportionately very low amongst gender affirmation outpatients and research suggesting otherwise has been broadly disproven.

Surgical regret is low, but no one has any idea about the regret for puberty blockers because there is no study of the thousands of girls who are only just reaching their 20s now.

Honestly I don’t know why I bother. They’re ruining children, and it just makes me so angry.

We know of no evidence of transgender women being a threat to other women in refuges

Leaving aside the fact of TW being present at all is a threat to female people who are traumatised and terrified of biological males, and will exclude females from access to refuge at potential threat to their lives if there are reasons why they cannot cope with a male present.

However distressing it is for TW to have to face that they never, at any point stop being biological males, this is a fact and a reality, and has a significant impact on female people. There should be refuges available for TW. Some of them are likely to be shared with female people who are privileged enough to not mind mixed sex spaces. There will need to be refuges available that are female only. That some TW will take the existence of any female only refuge as a personal offense and threat to their identity and would prefer female people to suffer or be excluded or in the case of refuges actually die rather than have their personal identity go unvalidated, is not something that reflects well on them.

1. The process of legal transitioning is not lengthy, medicalized, or complicated. Those are three lies. No medicine or surgery is required. The process takes a few months, not years as some have suggested. And the paperwork is not complicated. They need to get doctors to sign off on it? What doctor would dare not to in this era.