Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Are we the Baddies? Yes (well some!) according to the Daily Express: LGBT community is at war with itself, transphobia in the LGBT world has to STOP

140 replies

MishyJDI · 23/03/2021 12:09

I have to agree with a lot of this: Too much time worrying about a minority in echo chambers like this, and not enough fighting the real issues of feminism - patriarchy remains the number one enemy!

Mostly the younger generation get it, which is why there is such a disconnect and dismay expressed often on here.

(I'm sure this will make the Bunbury tales of scones and jam recipes - but seriously, trans ideology obsession on here is ludicrous.) Let's focus on real changes for women and girls that improve all our lives.

From the Daily Express

www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/1413110/transphobic-trans-what-is-transgender-JK-Rowling-LGBT-community-TERF/amp?

The LGBT community is at war with itself, transphobia in the LGBT world has to STOP - COMMENT

RESIGNATIONS from three Government LGBT advisers over Equalities Minister Liz Truss and Boris Johnson's Government failure on LGBT rights (including dragging its feet to grant trans people rights in the UK) comes as no surprise.

By Maryann Wright

Ending the trans culture war once and for all, and outlawing so-called conversion therapy which treats sexuality and gender nonconformity as a choice or mental health problem, is a stagnant, three-year-old promise. Policy delay from the Conservative government is frustrating and devastating for our LGBT community, but the continual warfare amongst our own is a deeply insidious undercurrent that needs rooting out too. I’m talking about transphobia within the LGBT community.

The small group of lesbians who believe that transwomen aren’t real women because of an essentialist and reductionist belief that a woman’s identity is rooted in biology.

The distorted fear that transwomen will invade women’s spaces to victimise them, or even more outrageous, coerce lesbians to sleep with them, implying that lesbians must accept transwomen as sexual partners so as not to be labelled as trans-exclusionary, and that sex isn’t based on consent.

Or the assumption that men will misleadingly dress up as women and pose threats of sexual violence in women’s toilets because of Britain's 2010 Equality Act that protects trans people from discrimination in accessing single-sex spaces.

A small group of lesbian feminists called “Get the L Out” even go so far to claim that lesbian-only spaces are disappearing because of transwomen, “leading to difficulties in meeting like-minded women.”

As someone who runs women-only spaces inclusive of trans and cis-gendered women and genderqueer, non-binary people, for the very purpose of offering alternatives to male-dominated LGBT bars and clubs, I call BS.

I agree that LGBT spaces and activism is still male-dominated, and that more needs to be done to promote equality within the LGBT community, but the idea that transgender inclusivity harms women, and lesbians in particular, is just ludicrous.

Persecuting an even smaller minority within an already marginalised community is counter intuitive and harmful, whether you’re taking an LGBT or feminist perspective.

Firstly, let’s bust an insidious myth. There is no evidence that trans-inclusive laws lead to a rise in assaults, stalking or harassment in single-sex spaces.

The loud, transphobic noise coming from trans exclusionary radical feminists, or TERFs, of late is fear mongering.

Trans activism isn’t eroding women and girls' rights to single-sex spaces by "offering cover to predators," nor are trans-inclusionary policies "playing fast and loose with women's and girls' safety".

Do you know whose safety we are playing fast and loose with in this debate, though? Trans people.

Almost 50 percent of transgender people have experienced a hate crime because of their gender identity in the last 12 months, and 67 percent of trans people surveyed by the Government Equalities Office said they’d avoided being open about their gender identity for fear of a negative reaction.

Transphobic arguments weaponise transpeople as if they are transgressors, harking back to the old and demeaning cinematic trope of cross-dressing serial killers, and yet the reality is that trans people are the ones being transgressed.

We need to be protecting trans people, not the other way around. Any suggestion otherwise is incongruent to the facts.

It isn’t too small a point to also remember that transgender people make up 13 percent of the LGBT community, so any claims that transwomen are invading lesbian spaces is an exaggeration at best.

All of this fear mongering strikes me as history repeating itself.
Thirty years ago we were having this discussion about gay people, living under the revolting Section 28 of Margaret Thatcher’s government, which prohibited the promotion of homosexuality. Back then, living my cis lesbian life in the UK would have been questioned and persecuted.

Now, we are lucky to have made real progress in battling homophobia, and we need to ensure that progress passes down to our trans friends.

Lesbian rights are not under attack by the trans movement.
Transphobia has no place in feminism and no place in the LGBT community.

It is not a competition about who is having the most horrible time. There’s not a finite amount of equality.

Yes, the dominance of the patriarchy is alive and well, and misogyny is exhausting.

But it is not mutually exclusive to recognise that society as a whole is patriarchal and women are more likely to be killed by a partner, earn less, and find it difficult to go back to work after having a baby, and that people get to decide their gender identity.

Let’s also not confuse cismen with transwomen. The lived experience is entirely different, whether or not you respect their gender identity.
So many people have a complete disconnect with the lived experience of a trans person, and they don’t take time to consider this before casting judgment.

We need to stop perpetuating hypothetical fears not based in reality. The distortion and the hyperbole is destructive. The conversation has to mature.

How about we move the discussion to supporting trans people. Let’s ensure the Gender Recognition Act and Equality Act is fit for purpose. Let’s ban conversion therapy.

"Let’s instil a supportive framework within the LGBT community that encourages a person’s right to choose to express their gender identity."

The in-fighting needs to stop, let’s work with trans people to protect their right to a life of self-definition, safety and peace.

Maryann Wright is the Founder of Sappho Events, producing safe, sober and social events for LGBT women and non-binary people. www.sapphoevents.co.uk

OP posts:
Helleofabore · 23/03/2021 15:13

@Wrongsideofhistorymyarse

How about we move the discussion to supporting trans people.

On the feminism board? How about no. How about focusing on women and our lived experience.

I'll be in that!
Sophoclesthefox · 23/03/2021 15:11

How does inclusive language around medicine enable discrimination against women?

Here’s a few examples off the top of my head.

If we target outreach for smear tests to “people with a cervix”, we’re disadvantaging the 44% of women who don’t know what a cervix is (source: Jo’s Trust www.jostrust.org.uk/node/666780). This will include some of the most vulnerable women who may already struggle to,access healthcare - women with English as a second language, or who don’t speak English, women with learning disabilities, women from culturally conservative backgrounds. More women will miss smears, so more women will get cervical cancer and die.

If we do as the Endometriosis society recently did and state that “1 in 10 people will suffer with endometriosis”, then we’ve hidden the true data by halving it- it’s 10% of women, which isn’t the same thing at all. We’ve sex re-aggregated the data at the very point that we’ve just started to become aware of the dangers of not having sex disaggregated data ( see I visible Women by Caroline Criado Perez).

I could go on, if you’re interested?

Datun · 23/03/2021 15:03

@RedDogsBeg

Datun, Funny how we keep being told that no-one out there in the big wide world agrees with us here on FWR, we are in a echo chamber, wrong side of history, and yet time and time again when the public at large are asked they align with and agree with the points we make and objections we have. I'd suggest that the echo chamber is not FWR.
Indeed. And whilst it's not necessarily how I would express it, the most liked comment was

"Mad as a sack of ferrets."

stumbledin · 23/03/2021 15:03

The reason the conversion therapy bit has been delayed as the usual suspects have included in it a section that would effectively not allow support for detransitioners.

It is really important to remember that yet again (sigh) women have had to rely on the Tories to spot this underhann attempt.

So only skim read the article but usual plucking at the heartstrings about gay men and lesbians but not even bothering to think about the impact of the rainbow pathway the medical profession is pushing young people down.

So yes to stopping conversion therapy re same sex attraction, but NO to the need for and possibility of detransitioning.

Toseland · 23/03/2021 15:03

The answer is still and will always be NO - you can’t have women’s rights too.
There isn’t an obsession with trans ideology here; there is an obsession with women’s rights; it just so happens trans ideology keeps butting in.
This article is a load of old regurgitated rubbish, hidden low down in the Comment section of the newspaper. None of the comments beneath that article from Joe public agree with it either 😂 (which is something I’ve noticed more frequently lately.)

LastRoloIsMine · 23/03/2021 14:58

2nd verse same as the first.....

RedDogsBeg · 23/03/2021 14:55

Datun, Funny how we keep being told that no-one out there in the big wide world agrees with us here on FWR, we are in a echo chamber, wrong side of history, and yet time and time again when the public at large are asked they align with and agree with the points we make and objections we have. I'd suggest that the echo chamber is not FWR.

Kit19 · 23/03/2021 14:53

I do wonder how it would go down if we went onto a board for trans people and suggested we discussed how to support women instead...

Wrongsideofhistorymyarse · 23/03/2021 14:52

How about we move the discussion to supporting trans people.

On the feminism board? How about no. How about focusing on women and our lived experience.

Datun · 23/03/2021 14:49

No-one in the comments is buying it.

From the fed up and disinterested

"Do we really 'need' LGBTQR etc 'advisers' anyway and if so, for what purpose ?
The whole ridiculous trandgender storm in a thimble is about a mere handful of individuals who feel misplaced, despite their obvious gender. But why should that be a mainstream issue or of any real interest to the ordinary person ?"

To the more analytical

"The common law only deals with objective reality (facts) majority rule and not subjective opinion (theories) and minority rule.
To do otherwise turns legal texts into oxymorons and democracies into dictatorships.
Demanding the whole agrees with a minority groups subjective opinion is not how society works. No matter how much you stamp your feet and demand that it does. All you prove is your tyrranny."

Followed by the rather succinct

"This is parody, right?"

terryleather · 23/03/2021 14:49

@CuriousaboutSamphire

Good grief. Do we have to keep on going all the way back to the beginning again?

Is it because some quite important people have recently shouted back TWAM?

Or Mother has legal meaning?

Or single sex spaces are absolutely legal?

Is that why we are being treated to a time travelling, press the reset button, take it all back to square one thread?

Pshaw!

I know Curious, it's fecking tiresome innit.
CuriousaboutSamphire · 23/03/2021 14:47

Good grief. Do we have to keep on going all the way back to the beginning again?

Is it because some quite important people have recently shouted back TWAM?

Or Mother has legal meaning?

Or single sex spaces are absolutely legal?

Is that why we are being treated to a time travelling, press the reset button, take it all back to square one thread?

Pshaw!

NiceGerbil · 23/03/2021 14:39

@Zinco

Thirty years ago we were having this discussion about gay people, living under the revolting Section 28 of Margaret Thatcher’s government, which prohibited the promotion of homosexuality.

No it didn't. Not in general. You could promote homosexuality as much as you wanted in the world of adult politics.

It did limit local education/ teachers from giving propaganda to kids, but there are all sorts of things that teachers shouldn't be allowed to promote in the classroom.

??? at this response!

Promoting homosexuality?!

Ereshkigalangcleg · 23/03/2021 14:34

How about we move the discussion to supporting trans people.

Not when there are relevant issues for women, we won't solely focus on trans issues and ignore women's rights questions then, thanks all the same!

Ereshkigalangcleg · 23/03/2021 14:32

Genderist ideology is the biggest threat to the sex based rights of women and girls that I've seen in my 50+ years on this planet.

I don't give a tiny shiny what some "young people" think if what they think is based on having been indoctrinated by science and material reality denying arsewash pushed by lobbyists, misogynists and others with questionable agendas.

I'll take a mad wild guess that most of them will wake up to this nonsense as they experience a bit more of the world and think a bit further than "be kind".

Meanwhile the grown ups will treat the daily tedium of being cajoled into accepting their own erasure with the contempt it deserves.

Great post, agree with all of it.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 23/03/2021 14:28

Why would "women and non binary people" constitute any sort of meaningful group however you define "woman"?

MaudTheInvincible · 23/03/2021 14:25

@Annasgirl

Does anyone else find it offensive to put transwoman in the same sentence as black woman, disabled woman, asian woman, muslim women - i.e. the list of women who are biologically women and therefore represented by feminism and need to have their rights advanced and defended by us - and adding in a group of people who do not need to be part of a women's movement.

Yes. It's pure gynophobic bigotry.

Usagi12 · 23/03/2021 14:24

@Annasgirl

Does anyone else find it offensive to put transwoman in the same sentence as black woman, disabled woman, asian woman, muslim women - i.e. the list of women who are biologically women and therefore represented by feminism and need to have their rights advanced and defended by us - and adding in a group of people who do not need to be part of a women's movement.
I find it so fucking offensive I could explode.
Barracker · 23/03/2021 14:24

People can choose their identity?
Perhaps they can try, but other people also can choose to reject and deny such false identity claims too.

People make all sorts of false claims, yes, and others get to judge the merits of them and reject them if need be.

If anyone else cares to claim "I identify as Barracker off Mumsnet, that's my identity, don't challenge it" I'm going to say, nope, false claim, I reject it, you're an imposter.

If every single person I met claimed "I identify as Barracker's sex, female, that's my identity, don't challenge it" I'm still going to challenge roughly 50% of those false claims just as robustly.

My sex is no more up for grabs as an identity than my individuality is.
Material facts are not identities. Not for anybody.

If someone cares desperately to tell the world something about themselves as a person, they need to avail themselves of the many thousands of descriptive words out there in the English language that might fit.
But to choose a word that is in usage already and which already describes a group's material characteristics, and to attempt to redefine all the people it currently describes?
Nah.
That's not your identity, chum. That's my body type, and that's that.

CharlieParley · 23/03/2021 14:16

As someone who runs women-only spaces inclusive of trans and cis-gendered women and genderqueer, non-binary people, for the very purpose of offering alternatives to male-dominated LGBT bars and clubs, I call BS.

As someone excluded from some single-sex spaces due to the inclusion of male people and who has met and talked to other women excluded from all or many previously single-sex women's spaces on grounds of their need for privacy or their experience of male violence or their cultural or religious background I call BS on this BS.

To repeat a familiar mantra, we exist. We may be invisible to you, but we do exist. If you include male people in a space intended for female people, you exclude us. Those female people who need a single-sex space. That's not rocket science. That's not an argument asking you to stop offering such a space - I'm sure that those who frequent yours are happy and comfortable within it and I see nothing wrong with you providing it.

But that's not you providing a fully inclusive women's space. There is only one way to offer a space that is inclusive of all female people regardless of their privacy needs or their history of male violence or their cultural or religious background and that is to exclude males. All males, regardless of their identity.

Annasgirl · 23/03/2021 14:13

Does anyone else find it offensive to put transwoman in the same sentence as black woman, disabled woman, asian woman, muslim women - i.e. the list of women who are biologically women and therefore represented by feminism and need to have their rights advanced and defended by us - and adding in a group of people who do not need to be part of a women's movement.

Scepticaltank · 23/03/2021 14:13

Too much time worrying about a minority in echo chambers like this, and not enough fighting the real issues of feminism - patriarchy remains the number one enemy!

So many questions for Maryann.

Have a missed a research paper?
Do we have quantified evidence of how much time is spent on each issue?
What percentage of time is "too much".

Or is this just a(nother) guilt tripping myth?

We should be told Maryann, where are the experts that have done all this time analysis? (instead of fighting the patriarchy I might add).

And if your evidence is only mumsnet then I suggest you widen your "issues" research scope as you are actually operating as the echo on this one.

MaudTheInvincible · 23/03/2021 14:05

The TRAs are MRAs. There is zero difference. They both argue for male rights of control and access over female lives.

gardenbird48 · 23/03/2021 14:04

No. The writer is just saying that two issues, which are otherwise unconnected, it seems, are not mutually exclusive. People can still choose their gender identity even though women have babies, get killed by partners and so on. The one does not exclude the other. They can both be recognised.

I’m all for anyone choosing their gender identity or any other sort of identity as long as it doesn’t involve them accessing the single spaces, facilities or provisions of the opposite sex or breaking down women’s boundaries/ undermine safeguarding.

stuckinatrap · 23/03/2021 14:03

I get so sick of defending the 'you think all trans women are predators' line.

No one says that. The closest I have ever heard a conversation come is when someone says 'it never happens' and a woman says 'actually it has happened here, here and here'

'Ah. So you're saying because there are some bad apples that all trans people are like that.'

No! It's not a gotcha.

It goes back to why do we have single sex exemptions. It is for far more reasons than fear of attack. It is about dignity, comfort, facilities that cater for our biological needs... it goes on.

Having a reasoned opinion reduced to 'you think all trans women want to hurt you' is so fucking tedious.