Have things gone too far?

That's why I'm here, not because I've been ordered to be here by some shadowy trans conspiracy. They made me post that by the way. I'll try do more jokes

Please do

And i agree with 7days re the first paragraph

[quote jj1968]@334bu

I am posting in good faith, I'm not a horrible person or raging misogynist - I want to see this fixed and for all women, and gender variant people of any description to be able to live free from violence and all the shit in the world that comes from not being a male identified man. I don't really care whether people think trans women are women, I care for trans women are able to live safe dignified lives and part of achieving that has to be recognising that trans women often face very similar social problems to all other women whilst recognising there are also differences. Throughout I've called for solutions that seek to accommodate everyone, such as decent single stall toilets with sinks or a properly funded refuge system with a diversity of provision.

I object to misinformation being posted, which it is quite often, even if by mistake and seek to challenge that. I'm also deeply concerned about where some elements of this are going and the consequences for all women in the long run. And I think the trans perspective has a right to be heard in a high profile debate on the world's largest parenting website. Also, I suspect like several posters here, I'm quite prone to getting drawn into an argument and sometimes get sucked in when I didn't mean to. That's why I'm here, not because I've been ordered to be here by some shadowy trans conspiracy. They made me post that by the way. I'll try do more jokes.[/quote]
Your top paragraph here is exactly what the GC crowd want.

So wheres the friction? Honestly, as you see it.

Biology deniers are no more credible than climate change deniers.

Worse, in fact, because few of us have actually examined ice cores for ourselves or modelled wind patterns on fluctuating water temperatures.
Yet, we have all come from the body of a woman and we all have a father, so the evidence is rather closer to hand.

We need to have clear objective language to describe phenomena that exist. We can add the psychosocial layers on top, in different contexts to solve the problems that will pop up.
But we will solve nothing if we destabilise the objective meaning of basic facts, when there is no new discovery that makes these basic facts obsolete. Which of course there isn't.

There is such a thing as freezing point.
There is such a thing sexual dimorphism.
There is such a thing as sexual orientation.

Now let's discuss the psychosocial elements.

If the aim is actually to solve problems.

Jesus, I don't know what's got into me.

I think it's called a last ditch attempt to make a TRA understand. Personally, I'm not holding out any hope.

jj, I have no issue with people being protected against discrimination or violence, whatever the motivation for it.

That applies very much to the lesbians and gay men who are currently facing a fresh wave of despicable homophobia from some TM, some TW, and a whole raft of hangers on who seem to rather enjoy it being acceptable again to call gay men fags and suggesting that if a lesbian likes a strap on she should accept a male lesbian.

You made quite some mileage out of claiming that you feel Stonewall support you on the Allison Bailey thread, and tbh, fair enough. The TQ+ in the LGBTQ+ have nothing particularly in common with me, but I don't begrudge them getting support for whatever their issues are. Equality law should indeed, and does, ensure that no one should lose livelihood or home because of how they choose to present themselves to the world wrt ideas of 'gender'.

Up until this point you have steadfastly refused to acknowledge the particular issues pertinent in this issue to women, and specifically to lesbians, and in fact have expended enormous effort in dismissing every single example brought to you of the discrimination, coercive behaviour and even danger that women have faced because of the very policies you claim are harmless.

I believe you claim a gender fluid identity (I can't recall, correct me if I am wrong) and from what I have picked up, I think you are attracted to men? Again, if I'm wrong, feel free to say so, and indeed, to say simply 'no, you are wrong' on that point without further info if you don't want to be more specific about yourself.

If you were born male, and are oriented towards men, then I'd consider you gay or bi, and as such, just like many men I knew in my younger days who faced hideous homophobic bigotry. You're entirely right that we should have common cause.

But it's very difficult to find that when you behave as you do towards women, lesbians included, who simply wish to retain their rights, all the while insisting that there is no conflict between trans rights as demanded, and women's rights. I'm feeling an excess of generosity tonight, because I'm incredibly tired, my brother is dying and I am prepared to believe that you are genuinely simply scared that men will harm you for being different.

Is it possible that you could acknowledge that there is an issue here, and that maybe there is a workable solution that doesn't take rights and provision from women? That LGB issues are not exactly the same as T ones?

Jesus, I don't know what's got into me.

@334bu

I am posting in good faith, I'm not a horrible person or raging misogynist - I want to see this fixed and for all women, and gender variant people of any description to be able to live free from violence and all the shit in the world that comes from not being a male identified man. I don't really care whether people think trans women are women, I care for trans women are able to live safe dignified lives and part of achieving that has to be recognising that trans women often face very similar social problems to all other women whilst recognising there are also differences. Throughout I've called for solutions that seek to accommodate everyone, such as decent single stall toilets with sinks or a properly funded refuge system with a diversity of provision.

I object to misinformation being posted, which it is quite often, even if by mistake and seek to challenge that. I'm also deeply concerned about where some elements of this are going and the consequences for all women in the long run. And I think the trans perspective has a right to be heard in a high profile debate on the world's largest parenting website. Also, I suspect like several posters here, I'm quite prone to getting drawn into an argument and sometimes get sucked in when I didn't mean to. That's why I'm here, not because I've been ordered to be here by some shadowy trans conspiracy. They made me post that by the way. I'll try do more jokes.

But yes I agree with you that people's sex is perfectly obvious in the vast majority of cases, however people present themselves.

It is not the key element of the act. The sex characteristic is quite clear. A female of any age = woman.

The act is all about perception.

No, it isn't. It's one grounds by which you can be mistakenly discriminated against. It's not a major element of the act and the cases where it has been used are quite possibly very few.

Ok, but maybe the poster is just putting their view out there, having a discussion, what if that is what they are trying to achieve? Is that wrong?

My view and that of the law, is that lesbians are same sex attracted (biological) women. I couldn't care less, of someone thinks differently, unless it gets written into law or everyday protocols.

Calling Robert Winston an old toff has the perception of anti-semitism about it, if you ask me.

@BuntingEllacott

But perception is important isn't it? I'm not just trying to be antagonistic, but as an example, many people on here acknowledge that some trans men pass as men. So a man in a relationship with that trans man (and the trans man himself) will face potential harassment and discrimination because they are seen as gay men. It doesn't feel very fair to leave people to face all the hostility that comes from homophobia in society but to not allow themselves to name themselves as gay, despite everyone else is doing that to them. That's a horrible position to leave people in. And this applies to some degree to all trans relationships and it would be very difficult to put down a marker that says this trans couple experiences homophobia this one doesn't based on appearance, name or whatever. It's going to vary hugely depending on all kinds of factors. Isn't it at worthy of thought that how people identify and how people are identified is at least a factor in how people should be recognised by others with the caveat that we all have absolute respect for people's sexual and romantic orientations, do not accuse each other of bigotry and recognise where our political struggles diverge and where they meet?

I do believe that jj may well be posting in good faith. I think for jj the idea that transwomen are women is personally very important and to convince women to accept transwomen as women is vital. Unfortunately to be truly accepted as women , transwomen must be included wherever women are and this is where the problems start , as transwomen are male and like all other males present a real and present danger to women. This does not mean that all males( transwomen and men) are predators but enough are to be a threat. My own son finds it personally offensive that men are considered in this light but he accepts that some males are predators. So he makes a special effort not to make women uncomfortable, (he will cross streets at night to avoid following a lone female ) and I would guess that many men will modify their behaviour to be less threatening..
Transwomen are personally offended that women might see them as predators because some of them are. However, their need to be accepted into female spaces means that they must deny that they might be a danger to women. They must at all cost deny all the evidence that shows transwomen are no different to other men in patterns of criminality. They must convince everybody that they are no more dangerous to women than any other " women " , hence the constant " lesbian trope. Anything in fact not to be compared to other males and if this means ignoring the needs of women so be it.

It was all funny

Spiking Covid vaccines with oestrogen was tres droll. Not heard of that one. I think your position as sharpest wit on the board is safe, though, Rufus.

Yes, it tickled me too.

Me too, Rufus. The International Trans Conspiracy will probably rotate jj off mumsnet duty after that.

So you'd rather just have boards where everyone agrees all the time?

Strawman. I'd rather we didn't need this board in its current form at all, to be quite honest.

I think the key for me was getting a hold of not being to consent for others. So you might not mind the male in the female changing rooms, but you are not the only woman there, so you cannot consent for them too. That can sometimes make things clearer when you are wrestling with competing claims.

I like funny

You think I'm enjoying it? The management of the international trans conspiracy put me on mumsnet duty for a year after I got demoted for misgendering a furry. I was supposed to be spiking Covid vaccines with estrogen by now.

This is the most normal, mumsnetty post I've ever seen you make.

I think you're getting assimilated.