Mumsnet Says They Are Trans Friendly; What do you think?

As we know, guidance suggesting that girls couldn't object to males in female spaces or they risked being convicted of a hate crime, and it wasn't necessary to consider their privacy and dignity needs at all, was removed by several local authorities and the CPS when there was the threat of a judicial review.

I cannot and will not sacrifice my child's safety and happiness on the alter of an ideology. It's not an option in my mind, it's not something that has ever been up for debate, and whatever organisation we've been dealing with has been more than accommodating. I go in, say we need to abc, can you give us that? Yes, cheers, thanks a lot. Occasionally more of a descion is needed, especially when there's a sleepaway aspect, but organizations are typically highly helpful and move heaven or earth to get dd what she needs.

Bigoted views are often rehashed and packaged in the same ways. It is with hindsight you can see them for what they are

in what ways are single sex spaces, services and sports "bigoted"?

Do you have any awareness of the struggle of women over decades for such provisions, and are you aware of the ways in which millions of women around the world still suffer on account of not having such provisions?

that you completely ignore women's rights and requirements for various safeguarding measures, and for equity in sporting competition, says more about your bigotry, maybe. that you don' consider women's needs, voices and vulnerabilities worthy of consideration.

I agree sanluca. Also teaching young males its fine to enter female spaces and cross boundaries without consent, its up to the girls to fight to stop you if they dont like it.

I'm sure South Africa up until the 1980s and America into the 1960s had such third spaces for non white people

Yes, & racial segregation accompanied lack of civil rights for black people.This is not the same issue, and it is incredibly tiresome that people keep using this sort of example, as it reveals a total lack of nuanced understanding.

Everyone has equal civil rights in the u.k, regardless of ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation or class background. And women, of whatever colour, ethnicity or class have the right to single sex spaces, services and sports. Indeed many BAME women would not be able to partake in much of society if this were not so,

It was never communicated to me, because to be honest, it wasn't any of my business if they did. I advocate for my dd, I expect everybody else to advocate for theirs if they have to, and for the school/camp/boarding house/extra curricular/halls/whatever not to make it my problem until it is my problem

I think this response falls firmly into 'as long as I am allright' camp. Very egoncentric and one of society's main failings it seems, to never give consideration to others.

Eteri so you never stopped for a second to think of how school girls would feel being forced to share a space with a teenage male?

Of course a third space should be available. The problem is the powerful lobbies don’t want that. They will not get behind it, because it doesn’t afford them what they want

Yes, but because the most important consideration for those lobby groups is not primarily one of personal safety and dignity, but about wider ideological imposition.

The thing is third spaces is the only possible, & most equitable, solution; and the wider and general public will be able to see this.
It would be clear that it is not women's groups that are being unreasonable or hateful; nobody is denying the transperson's right to exist or to have safe services and provisions; they just want the same for themselves.

The wider ideological push would become quite evident, very quickly - in the face of a reasoned solution. This, therefore, has to be an important strategy going forward.

It was never communicated to me, because to be honest, it wasn't any of my business if they did. I advocate for my dd, I expect everybody else to advocate for theirs if they have to, and for the school/camp/boarding house/extra curricular/halls/whatever not to make it my problem until it is my problem.

Yes, it's really telling, isn't it. Almost like some of them aren't interested in listening to trans people at all. Here either to scold or to promote a male supremacy agenda.

Maybe not interested in listening to all trans people, maybe just in listening to a particular set of trans people.

It’s a mystery as to why. 🤔🤔🤔

It's incredibly sad that people wish to destroy this forum.
Mumsnet really helped me getting ds assessed for disability, which is one way it can be used. The wealth of knowledge from Sen parents in our case proved better than the pediatrician.

Similarly, on the fwr board, I've learned so much from intelligent women: lawyers and doctors for example. A place for them to share their knowledge is absolutely vital when other platforms won't let women's voices be heard.

To try and destroy the sharing of knowledge like this is downright sinister and it annoys me how discussing women's rights, which we are bloody entitled to do on a feminist forum puts the rest of the site at risk.
Mumsnet is for parents primarily and we have the right to express our opinions and concerns.

Eteri did your child use of loos and camps require all other girls having to give up their sex segregated spaces?

Do you understand why that is an issue?

Obviously your child should have spaces that accommodate them, but so should every child.

*no issue with their biology

while there are plenty of posters whose concerns are purely based on protecting cis women's rights

You mean women's rights. Zero need to add 'cis' to a word that describes 99%+ of females who have no with their biology or use it to try to shoehorn males into the female category.

Telling us it's 'cis' women and transwomen as if these two sets of people are somehow part of the same group with the same needs and concerns.

Yes, our concerns are on protecting female sex based rights. Because our sex is the the cause of our oppression and this is the FWR board.
Women, transmen and non binary females are included in this.

So people looking in from the outside might want to do a bit of reflection on why certain people seem to want to destroy this forum

Why if TWAW why are they so hellbent on removing the legal rights and protections of females? Something that would cause harm to women?
Is it because as males they have no need of these female sex based protections?They are a barrier to them. They don't need them so we can't have them and they must be destroyed.

They want to destroy MN because they can't control the narrative here so it must go.

Pesky disobedient women.

GardenBird48 personally Id consider it a productive convo if I could get an insight, understanding, empathy into others way of thinking.

I have changed my opinion on many things on these boards due to decent debate.

But that never, ever happens here as the language some use changes constantly, words have no meaning to some TRAs and can be given as proof of an attack, based on a meaning of that word they have made up, and wont share. It happened last night with one who was after twitter screenshots.

We can not have any conversation with people who insist words mean whatever they want them to mean, they wont tell you what they think the words mean, but they can and will use those new meanings as evidence against you.

Ok Eteri no probs if you don’t want to engage. If you change your mind and want to address my questions that would be great but no worries if not.

Maybe someone else could help me out with what cbd is? I’m not aware of that term (other than the legal cannabis products)

In the attached photo - they don't seem to be reproduced when using the quote feature!

Or is it? 'C1s' seems to have 'clithered' back in...

If feminism should include TW can anyone provide examples of what TW have done to forward the cause of all women's rights, not just those with a penis?

See then maybe we could start to consider this idea that were apparently all the same.

Mishy

The civil rights movement did not require anyone to deny biology. It didn't require people to change their language. It didn't mean throwing safeguarding out of the window. It didn't insist in a pathway of medication and potential surgery for young people.

Therefore, like comparisons to homophobia, comparing this debate to race is actually pretty fucking racist and offensive. Natal women are the same biologically regardless of colour. A TW is not.

‘To include trans women’ that should read. Was being careful about the space to the exclusion of the word. Apols.

Just had an interesting personal dilemma - doing my will and want to leave a scholarship fund for women in my profession where women are under- represented and/or face sex based discrimination and/or career obstacles. Then I thought well how would I feel if my professional bodies applied this to include women - those who have not lived through those sex based disadvantages etc. Then I remembered we are still, just possibly allowed to use ‘mother’. Then I thought well what about those women without children. Ffs it might all go to my local cats’ home at this rate.

while there are plenty of posters whose concerns are purely based on protecting cis women's rights

//

To be fair if you take the damn cis out of that statement I've no problem falling into that category