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

OP. I definitely agree with everything you’ve said.

As a long-standing member of this board, I totally agree with all your points. Thank you for educating us.

**please understand that not all words I use might make sense to you. They may or may not mean the things you think they mean. However, I 100% know what I mean, and that is all that matters. Again, thank you.

I can understand why some trans men would want to use it, but it sounds odd to me.

if you really believe that you can biologically fully transition to another sex it becomes an impossible goalpost that can only bring frustration

This is absolutely excellent summation.

[quote AnotherEmma]@kaineus
Welcome to Mumsnet and thank you for your post which was very refreshing to read. I don't find it hypocritical at all.
Please feel free not to answer if you'd prefer not to discuss it on this thread (or at all), but I would be very interested to know what you think about the current trend of erasing the word "woman" from communications about medical services for biological females. As a trans man, how do you feel about services that you might need (relating to menstruation, cervical screening, contraception, abortion, pregnancy, childbirth etc) referring to "women", do you find this offensive or triggering or are you comfortable with it? Do you think it's ok for the word "woman" to be erased and replaced with "person" when it comes to female biological functions?

I have very strong feelings on this subject and I've tried to ask as neutrally as possible, but I have a theory that this trend has not come about as a result of accommodating the wishes of trans men (or non-binary people who were born female), and I would be very interested to know what you think - whether you agree with me or not.[/quote]
I feel like a good neutral middle-ground would to be say "women and trans men" for those who dislike being reminded of their female sex. At the same time however, like I mentioned before, I'm a firm believer in not avoiding the reality of biology because I feel like it could cause complications when conveying important medical information, so I am against the complete removal of the term "woman" or "female" from medical services that are specifically needed by biological women.

I hate seeing a gynecologist. It really is an awful experience, especially as a trans man. However, it's part of reality. In the end, transitioning was a choice I made in the hopes of improving my quality of life. At first I was really triggered by anything related to being female because I felt I had to avoid it like the plague to feel more affirmed in my identity as a man, but in hindsight it was not a healthy mindset to be in. In the end, I cannot become fully "male," and accepting that helped me in a way be more comfortable with being trans. I guess one way I can put it is, if you really believe that you can biologically fully transition to another sex it becomes an impossible goalpost that can only bring frustration. In the end it is cosmetic, and that is a really hard pill to swallow. It took me a very long time to come to terms with it. I think obfuscating that fact is harmful.

Regarding pregnancy I have a bit more complicated opinions. On one hand, if I ever became pregnant I would absolutely hate being called a woman. I would be miserable. With that in mind, I can understand the use of the terms "pregnant person." At the same time, I can't understand why someone with strong dysphoria would willingly continue a pregnancy and while I can see the good intentions behind referring to pregnant women as "pregnant people" I can understand why it would alienate women or make them feel othered. I think if I became pregnant personally I would find a doctor who was willing to respect my identity, but I have very strong opinions about forcing speech onto people outside of those who matter contextually.

Please note however, that I am not representative of all trans men and I am sure there are many who strongly prefer gender neutral terms, these are just my own thoughts.

Hi utility! Yes I read that. A family business too. It's lovely what gems you discover on MN

@kaineus, absolutely! There will never be any kind of resolution for this topic if we keep stifling debate and discussion. Labelling people (women) as being hateful for asking to discuss what the definition of ‘woman’ actually is isn’t helpful or appropriate.

Thanks @kaineus. Your post makes complete sense to me

Hi kaineus. Welcome and thank you for joining this discussion, I hope you stick around.

@Nightinghawk:

"I have to argue on the concept of feminism only for "biological women," since I feel that creates exclusion and, depending on the definitions or views loaded in the term, would exclude people who have lived as women their entire life."

Why is exclusion a bad thing, though? Take Black Lives Matter - it is particularly focused on the oppression of black people. It is a civil rights movement that is exclusionary to white people (hence the dismissal of 'all lives matter'.) Any attempt to widen the bandwidth of the movement to encompass white people and white concerns is rightly rejected. So why must feminism include everyone? Why do women not get their own civil rights movement? I could live as any number of things my entire life and that doesn't actually make me that thing (as Rachel Dolezal, or Hilaria Baldwin recently discovered.)

"I've seen a lot of GC people say that "biological" relates to body parts, reproductive organs, chromosomes, facial features, and I personally find that incredibly reductive for the concept of women."

In philosophy, 'reduction' is when a concept is nothing more than x. It is entirely explicable in relation to x. So, for instance, water is nothing more than H20. Once you grasp the properties and nature of H20 you have learned everything relevant about the concept of water. When we say that women are female, and female is a biological concept, we aren't reducing women to just their biology. Women are not 'nothing more' than their biological sex, because they are also people.

To paraphrase Jane Claire Jones, here, saying a woman is biologically female is NOT the same thing as saying her entire essence or existence is nothing but her femaleness. She is a person and a human being. Jones theorises that we still find it difficult to believe that females are fully human being, which is why some people think there is some kind of contradiction in saying that people can also be female. I would also ask at this point, what a 'non reductive' definition of the concept of woman looks like.

"Relating feminism to strict biological categories but also against the oppression of female reproduction seems somewhat counterintuitive to me (though there is truth in women being oppressed due to biological differences), since it appears (in my understanding of it) to relegate women to mere bodily functions rather than expand women beyond the patriarchal expectations constructed around those bodily functions."

I don't see how it is counterintuitive to be against the oppression of female reproduction while also saying that women are biological females. Women's female sex explains their oppression. Their sex is why they are oppressed. Feminism aims to liberate the female sex from oppression. The ultimate aim is to have no female human being oppressed on the basis of their sex.

Saying the definition of woman is an adult human female does not relegate woman to mere bodily functions. That is quite a sexist way of thinking, to be honest. Women are people, full human beings, who also happen to be female. This is like saying that disabled people are nothing more than their disability!

I would also note that if you expand the concept of woman so that it is wide enough to also encompass women's oppressors, men, then something surely has gone wrong.

Sorry that last post was to kaineus

kaineus Thank you for that heavy dose of rationality!

PS Sorry I forgot to add that I would also be interested in your thoughts on replacing "breastfeeding" with "chestfeeding"... I don't know whether you would consider having a baby and breastfeeding, but if you did, do you think you would be offended or triggered by calling it that, and would you prefer "chestfeeding"?

Woman is not a concept. Gender is.

Woman is not a gender because gender is sex role stereotypes. Females do not have to perform femininity to be women.
Woman is simply the sexed word used to describe adult human females.

Funny how TRA's never tell men that 'man' is just a concept or a gender.

No one is assigned anything at birth. Their sex is recorded.

Feminism is for females, not feminine presenting males who are not oppressed because of their sex and will never be controlled by men because of their reproductive capacity.

Telling women that talking about their bodies in relation to feminism or female right is reductive is pure misogyny. Our bodies are the source of our oppression.
We cannot fight this when adult males insert themselves into our sex class then tell us we must centre them.

@Flamingolingo

I feel like there are some posters here who are transphobic, but that Mumsnet moderation really works hard on keeping conversations civil while still allowing people to have a discussion and express their thoughts and I'm thankful for that. While sometimes I don't agree with some of the viewpoints, I've gained a lot of insight from reading the threads here.

@kaineus
Welcome to Mumsnet and thank you for your post which was very refreshing to read. I don't find it hypocritical at all.
Please feel free not to answer if you'd prefer not to discuss it on this thread (or at all), but I would be very interested to know what you think about the current trend of erasing the word "woman" from communications about medical services for biological females. As a trans man, how do you feel about services that you might need (relating to menstruation, cervical screening, contraception, abortion, pregnancy, childbirth etc) referring to "women", do you find this offensive or triggering or are you comfortable with it? Do you think it's ok for the word "woman" to be erased and replaced with "person" when it comes to female biological functions?

I have very strong feelings on this subject and I've tried to ask as neutrally as possible, but I have a theory that this trend has not come about as a result of accommodating the wishes of trans men (or non-binary people who were born female), and I would be very interested to know what you think - whether you agree with me or not.

@kaineus bravo! Thank you for sharing 👏

Out of interest, do you think MN is inherently transphobic? I’m sure there are some transphobic people around, but not all of us. Is centring women transphobic?

I don't care what pronouns you use for as I don't agree with the concept of compelled speech. I would prefer he/him, but it's not my place to tell you how to refer to me.

Despite presenting as male, I know I am still female.

There are women, men, and trans women and trans men. We all have our own unique needs and to lump them all together seems like it will cause nothing but harm to one group or another,

Bravo. And Brave. Welcome, really nice to read your post.

I'm sorry, but this thread finally made me make an account after a year of lurking.

I am a trans man from the USA. As a note, I don't care what pronouns you use for as I don't agree with the concept of compelled speech. I would prefer he/him, but it's not my place to tell you how to refer to me. I have experienced gender dysphoria from a young age and have legally and medically transitioned.

The idea that trans people are oppressed in the USA is questionable. I have never been denied healthcare due to being trans. In fact, getting hormones only took one short appointment due to informed consent here. For top surgery in my state there are very few requirements and you do not have to have taken HRT or have medically transitioned in order to have it covered by insurance. I found I was actually treated worse in the beginning stages of my transition when people still viewed me as female. I think people are confusing "oppressed for being trans" with "oppressed for not being gender conforming" or "oppressed because of homophobia" (many people still assume that trans women are simply gay men.)

This statement gave me pause because it seems to be contradictory in nature:
"My understanding of the last few waves of feminism has been to distance the patriarchal concept of defining women by their reproductive organs, while still taking pride in our bodies as a middle finger to the patriarchy."

Your reproductive organs are still part of your body. It's part of what makes you female. Consider this: it's not uncommon to talk about/hear about male genitalia online, but have you noticed that it's often considered gross/taboo to talk about female genitalia or things like periods? Why do you suppose this is?

I consider myself to be a realist. Despite presenting as male, I know I am still female. As a female human being, there are problems that will affect me and other female persons that a trans woman will never face. This is where my identity as a "man" conflicts with reality. I may present as a man, but at the end of the day I am still female and share more in common biologically with any woman than I do with any trans woman. Women's rights usually focuses on women's reproductive issues or issues that affect women due to the biological reality of their sex, so while I may identify as a man, they are obviously quite important to me because of this. Before, the trans community had an understanding of the difference between gender presentation and sex, but it seems like it is becoming muddled ever since we started coming up with many other new genders and ways to be "trans."

I apologize if this entire post seems hypocritical. I know I have takes that are considered very unacceptable from the trans community. I am trans for my own personal comfort, but I know that does not make me a "real man." There are women, men, and trans women and trans men. We all have our own unique needs and to lump them all together seems like it will cause nothing but harm to one group or another, especially considering medical needs. While this fantasy that you are magically another sex if you simply say so is great in theory, it is not grounded in reality. If I get medical treatment under the assumption I am biologically male it could be potentially deadly. I have not had bottom surgery, so if I have sex with a man I can still get pregnant because my body is female.

OP you say you identify as nonbinary with xe/xem pronouns if I recall? How is this any different from identifying as a woman or how does it affect your life? When I see any nonbinary person with non-standard pronouns it is typically safe to assume they are AFAB, and many other trans people I know have commented on this as well.

So what does being a woman mean to you? What does non-binary mean to you? Do you believe you face discrimination as a non-binary person rather than as a woman? If so, how can someone else tell what your gender is if you have not medically transitioned? Also, how does saying you are not a woman help advance feminism or women's rights? Do you feel like being a woman is inherently negative?

How is this not sexism? Pure sexism, wrapped in sophistry, by way of dead-end individualism?

I have been wanting to be even-tempered about this, but I find the underlying philosophy genuinely disturbing.

Pro-women's-rights is not 'anti-trans' unless trans rights activism is specifically targeting women's rights. Unfortunately it is - the ideology behind it is harmful.

Being aware of this has nothing to do with wanting to take rights away from anyone or to 'deny their existence' or any other hyperbolic phrasing that is used.

Your right to express yourself ends at someone else's nose. Gender ideology, in its current state, is leaving women with a lot of bloodied noses.

Everyone should be able to voice their views . I respect free speech. I fear the use of the term hate speech stifles free speech

I'd add that men as a class have always reduced women as a class to "mere bodily functions", and so it's interesting that when we try to organise as a class about the oppression we are under as a result, this term is weaponised against us. We are screwed coming and going. What a surprise.