Reclaim These Streets have been captured.

Distinct not destiny

Most women in the U.K., as borne out in multiple polls, are happy for people to identify and express themselves as they like, but they think of "trans people" as old school transsexuals who have fully transitioned physically including surgery, and they don't want other males in women's spaces where they expect privacy and dignity. They also don't support legal sex self ID or males in women's sports.

If people think they do, and that TWAW is genuinely what most people think, in the same way they do, they need a wake up call.

Most people just don't think about it that much. They're not pro trans rights warriors, they think it's a minority issue which won't affect them. When they see the implications they tend to answer differently.

As we discuss this in depth on MN in a way few other places do, more women have come to see the issues and articulate their feelings and concerns.

Maybe because most women and feminists are trans inclusive? Mumsnet feminist chat is an echo chamber really, not real life.

An echo chamber?
That’s interesting because what I see here is people being allowed to air their opinion/beliefs and in fact being asked to explain their beliefs more.

What I see elsewhere is anyone who doesn’t agree that TWAW 100% and that TW should be included in every female space completely is transphobic, their comments are deleted.

If you have a “nuanced view” then take time to explain that and go in to some of the nuance. Otherwise what was the point of engaging with the conversation.

I have been told repeatedly that science say biological sex doesn’t exist or that science doesn’t agree there are two destiny sexes. However when I ask people to please provide link to this science I’m not given link I’m just told to do the work myself and that I am transphobic.

Mumnets is given a lot of flack but it is the only place so far where I have actually seen people able to have a debate about TWAW without having their comments repeatedly deleted.

Maybe because most women and feminists are trans inclusive? Mumsnet feminist chat is an echo chamber really, not real life.

It's much more representative of the average person's views than the TRA-adjacent filter bubble on Twitter etc is.

I was thinking about that "terfs" sign and how out of place it was.

One reason will have been so they can push their own agenda. Totally inappropriate and disgusting.

And those they deem terfs don't murder women or transwomen.

However those they deem terfs are likely to be feminists and therefore likely to attend a vigil for a murderer woman.

So it can only have been put there as a warning to those they deem to be terfs. To make them feel unwelcome and uncomfortable.

At a vigil for a murdered woman.

Not as bad as the kids on twitter say

🤣🤣🤣🤣 I needed a laugh this morning. Biggest users of twitter are over 35. Kids are on tik tok.

Maybe because most women and feminists are trans inclusive? Mumsnet feminist chat is an echo chamber really, not real life.

That's what people might tell you because they feel they have to, but in the real world of people who are not involved in mainstream / left wing campaigning groups, it is really not what people think, male or female. There is no one in my social or work circle (including women's charities), a mix of middle class and working class, left and right wing, male and female that really thinks TWAW / TMAM when you talk to them and they think about it in any depth.

If you don't like an internet forum, you can leave it.

There's an element of choice there, unlike a lot of situations...

Maybe because most women and feminists are trans inclusive? Mumsnet feminist chat is an echo chamber really, not real life.

The lines up well with my experiences.

I came here really not expecting it to be anywhere near as bad as the kids on twitter say...and the fact that I'm not sure if it is or isn't after being here a few days is rather worrying.

The RTS FB is now full of posts which say, in effect, "in order to be INCLUSIVE and for ALL WOMEN we have thrown THESE WOMEN off this FB, and promise to put THESE MEN on the moderating team."

(Caps included.)

So that went well, then.

As for donations, I think the crowdfunder site is returning some donations themselves, rather than making you ask RTS direct, as RTS are pretty openly planning to spend the money on stuff they did not fundraise for. It's certainly worth asking.

If that poster replies I suspect it will be something about how lots of countries didn't know what a woman was before colonialism...?!

I imagine that might be the direction this line of thought is going. Pretty sure all cultures know how babies are made.

Not a position I've ever actually stated here, and my actual view is a little more nuanced than that, but... you're pretty close?

Awfully predictable, aren't you? Also, nuance is transphobic, who told you you could make up your own rules?

If that poster replies I suspect it will be something about how lots of countries didn't know what a woman was before colonialism...?!

"Whoever came up with the concept of woman," is a fun line of thinking to go down. You should look into that a little more.

Oh yes, of course it's totally nothing to do with the female sex. Males completely aren't looking at actual women when they think they "feel like a woman", it's just an essence which emerged out of nowhere and coincidentally applies to 99% of biological females.

But, in reality, it is imposing beliefs whose effects are actually grim for the least privileged. It's something that is said on MN a lot. What we are seeing is groups of privileged people - who feel they have not inherited their birthright - stamping down hard on those below them, whilst adopting the language of oppression.

When we talk about institutional capture, what we mean is that we are seeing privileged groups flexing their muscle, whilst using a language of inclusion.

What is the exclusion of women-only groups from a vast, gifted money-pot other than the divestment of funds away from the most marginalised and vulnerable groups, towards groups that actually create space for non-marginalised or faux-marginalised groups?

Yes, this is a great point. If these groups weren't privileged they wouldn't have been prioritised at the expense of other protected groups. Faux-marginalised is a good description.

Hmmm ok.

I would say that all/ most mammals know male female, adult/ juvenile male female.

I would be surprised if any language in the world didn't have a word for girl (juvenile female) and woman (adult female).

Humans would have known these concepts before speech, and when speech came then they would have been basics along with stuff like food, shelter, baby, mother etc.

I can't prove this obviously but I'd be pretty surprised if it's not the case.

Where do you think the word woman came from? You seem to imply that the concept of woman was created. I've shared my thoughts, what are yours?

*will they buggery

@NiceGerbil it's just one of those glib rhetorical tricks that people with no real substance to their positions use
Nonsense said with an knowing wink and a hint of great knowledge if only you had the wit to understand
But ever engage with any substantive point raised?

They really are luxury oppressions, and they are luxury beliefs. And many, many people sense this - and they avoid endorsing them when it comes to the ballot box.

It drives me mad - there's a brutal class politics here, masquerading itself in the name of fighting oppression.

But, in reality, it is imposing beliefs whose effects are actually grim for the least privileged. It's something that is said on MN a lot. What we are seeing is groups of privileged people - who feel they have not inherited their birthright - stamping down hard on those below them, whilst adopting the language of oppression.

When we talk about institutional capture, what we mean is that we are seeing privileged groups flexing their muscle, whilst using a language of inclusion.

What is the exclusion of women-only groups from a vast, gifted money-pot other than the divestment of funds away from the most marginalised and vulnerable groups, towards groups that actually create space for non-marginalised or faux-marginalised groups?

It's beyond mind-bending. It's very frustrating.

But people know.

And that is why, at the ballot-box, they keep voting to keep these people away from more power.