Is using TRA rude and dismissive (a bit like how the word T**F) is used?

Personally, I believe in saying what you mean, even if it takes a little longer. We're basically talking about people who support trans rights and those who oppose them

Few disagree with human rights. And trans people already have those.

'Trans Rights', however, implies additional rights; such as the right to access spaces, services and sports set aside for the opposite sex.
Trans rights also posits privilege for trans people. That the needs and feelings of trans individuals trump everyone's else's.

There is a compulsion on everyone else when it comes to trans rights; an imposition on everyone else's speech and on the very language we use. The whole concept of pronouns.

Trans rights also implies transitioning children through the use of puberty blockers and cross sex hormones; it implies that 'trans children' need to be 'rescued' early.........

Basically trans rights is not just about human rights, or about the requirement for discrete, reserved spaces that other groups have campaigned for; or about equal treatment in law.

The very concept of transgenderism is itself an ideological construct that not everyone accepts or aligns with. So it really is not as simple as being for or against trans rights at all.

TRA is a shorthand for people who campaign in a very active way for all of the above.

TERF on the other hand assumes that everyone who is critical of gender constructs is a feminist, or identifies as one. Which is not the case. I don't use the term Feminist to describe myself, for example. So, TERF is not even accurate a description for all gender critical people.

Hi, Hypatia415, good to hear views from a different angle.

"many trans people and allies support trans rights as human rights"

Has anyone, ever, said that trans rights weren't human rights? I've never understood this line. Could you explain?

"dehumanizing trans woman is TIMs (trans identified males) or anyone who supports trans rights as TRAs"

I appreciate that some males don't want to be called such, but it is factually accurate and 'dehumanising' seems hyperbolic. FWIW I don't use the TIM acronym because I think that one is confusing - the vast majority of people have no idea what a 'transwoman' or a ''trans identified male' is. If we're discussing these terms with general public, we need to start at the very, very basic and clear terms. How would you describe a transwoman? In terms that the average person in the street would understand?

I'm sure someone will tell me that it's trans rights vs women's rights but I disagree with this framing, especially as most people support trans rights AND women's rights and that when we're talking about trans women we're talking about both a person's rights as a women and as a trans person in an intersectional way.

Only if you really believe that trans women are in any objective way women... I'd say, only if that was actually true but it's not.

We can however, talk about transmen and their rights both as a female and a trans person in an intersectional way.

I'm sure someone will tell me that it's trans rights vs women's rights but I disagree with this framing, especially as most people support trans rights AND women's rights and that when we're talking about trans women we're talking about both a person's rights as a women and as a trans person in an intersectional way.

Depends on what you mean with transrights. The right to be free from discrimination or the right to overrule someone else's sex based rights? If you mean the latter, then transrights are contradictory to womens sex based rights. It is really that simple.

Sad thing is most women support a discrimination free life and will treat transwomen as women in the majority of spaces. But when it comes to sex based services and sports, it seems to have to be a 'them versus us' if we want to retain the right to setup male free services and sports.

ISWYM @Lettera, what I mean is it's not about THEIR rights. They want rights that belong to others, that would be a privilege

Fly, I do think it's about rights. Men are claiming to be women and thereby entitled to women's sex-based rights.

I don't like the term TRA because it's not actually rights that are the issue. There should be no right to identify into classes and spaces to which you don't belong. No other group is can do it. This is privilege, not rights.

I don’t know what I should call the people who campaign to replace sex-based rights with gender-based rights. I can’t think of a short, clear name.

Part of the negative rhetoric creating divides in society today is by reducing those with opposing views in some way or another. Using terms like Terf and TRA is dehumanizing, reductive and often inaccurate.

Consider that people with a negative view towards trans people are not automatically feminists, and in many cases care little for traditional feminist issues outside of a discussion around trans rights.

Also, many trans people and allies support trans rights as human rights so branding anyone who agrees with this stance as a TRA (trans rights activist) is also reductive. Supporting a basic base line of dignity and respect does not make a person an activist.

Personally, I believe in saying what you mean, even if it takes a little longer. We're basically talking about people who support trans rights and those who oppose them.

I'm sure someone will tell me that it's trans rights vs women's rights but I disagree with this framing, especially as most people support trans rights AND women's rights and that when we're talking about trans women we're talking about both a person's rights as a women and as a trans person in an intersectional way.

I find I lack respect for anyone who claims that 'TERF is a slur' while at the same time dehumanizing trans woman is TIMs (trans identified males) or anyone who supports trans rights as TRAs. I disagree with the trans exclusionary position but at least feel there is a position in some cases. When people throw around TRA and other terms, I just think that person has given up on rational thought and is regressing to a fight/flight or 'us vs them' mentality.

I’m glad that Gender Reassignment is a protected characteristic under the Equality Act. I want Sex to remain a protected characteristic too and I’m very concerned about how it is being undermined e.g. in Scottish law and by the Green Party and Stonewall.

I’m also concerned about the recent attempts to change the legal definitions of “mother” and “father”. This wouldn’t merely validate the identity of trans parents, it would have implications for assumed parental responsibility in law.

We now know that babies start to bond with their mothers while in utero, and that they have a strong instinct to stay close to their mothers
after birth. Assumed parental responsibility for birth mothers is child-centred legislation. I disagree that this should be changed unilaterally by a single-interest group.

If I was talking to someone new to this issue I would say that I don't agree with anyone who claims that men can become women and thereby become entitled to women's sex-based rights. That accurately describes why I oppose what is called 'trans rights activism'.

I've tried pointing out that this is actually the gender critical position and that it makes absolutely no sense in the context of what "trans activists" usually claim but I get nowhere!

TRA helpfully distinguishes between those trans people who are anti women's rights and those trans people who are allies or neutral. The comparison between TRAs and MRAs is entirely valid, and I would add the TRA movement has allowed MRA entryism into feminism. It's pretty much provided MRAs with the perfect endgame: get rid of feminism by taking it over.

Anyway, the #bekind stuff becomes tedious when the other side are holding nail-studded baseball bats.

I wouldn't mind being 'super sensitive' if the sentiments were mutual, but they are not. My new favourite George Orwell quote is this ( from 1984:

The Revolution will be complete when the Language is perfect

I think TRA is an accurate description for trans rights activists. An activist is someone who is actively pushing for something in a determined and committed way.

I'll continue to use it as a short hand when appropriate to do so.

Recently on a thread about transitioning teenagers I used the term 'pro-affirmation posters' to try and make my point.

That sounds like a fairly clear description. Perhaps 'gender reinforcers' might also be apt for some, particularly re children?

people get offended by TERF (which is weird, but OK).

Well, check out the terfisaslur website, and maybe you'll get a better understanding. Also, didn't a judge recently agree that TERF is a derogatory term as well?

I am trying to think of other ways to express my thoughts rather than default to TRA (which is a nonsensical acronym to newcomers anyway).

Recently on a thread about transitioning teenagers I used the term 'pro-affirmation posters' to try and make my point. I hoped this wording was suitably neutral and suitably clear.

'Lobbyists' might be appropriate in some contexts?

TRA can be useful shorthand, but does also have certain shortcomings.

I think one of the dangers of language like TERF, TRA etc is that it implies two completely opposing groups on every issue relating to gender identity. When in fact there are many different issues at play here. There are conversations to be had about self ID, violence against trans people, trans people & prison, trans people & sport, trans people & toilets etc. Creating a false binary that you are either completely anti-trans people or that you support every trans person in every situation is unhelpful. I think we’re better off discussing these issues separately and the conversation could be a lot less inflammatory. There are clearly many, many instances of trans people experiencing violent or bullying behaviour which is unacceptable, and there are many, many instances of (non trans) women experiencing violent or bullying behaviour which is unacceptable, and most people on both ‘sides’ of the conversation are in agreement that it’s not okay. But somehow our agreement on issues like that can get lost by language which implies there is no common ground whatsoever. (Through various different career moves I’ve ended up with a group of rad fem friends and a group of trans friends and the common ground has always interested me!)

And I can only assume the difference in perspective is where male and female experience collides.

Individual trans women say I wouldn't do xyz what the hell? You're saying I'm a sex offender? WTF??!!

Women say no no. Just men. General men. Will see this as an opportunity. They will take it

And the answer is.
Yeah that's not going to happen

But. This is the thing. Metoo. Other stuff. Men in general say. Yeah I've not heard about this. It must be exaggeration. Why hasn't all this been reported to the police etc etc.

And that's the gap.

Women are frantically Telling You that there's a massive amount of creepy men out there who will use this

And we are told, as ever. Nope. You're imagining things, exaggerating etc etc

How do we resolve this?

Anyone who thinks there aren't blokes who will give anything to be in a changing room with girls/ women age 5-50 taking all their clothes off is.. ??? Don't even know tbh.

Terf doesn't make sense though.

On any level. It's totally illogical.

So that gets on my wick.

Pre existing rights? Would that be the wide ranging casting aside of the EA? Rapists in women's prisons, communal changing of a massive range of ages on self ID? Do you mean that sort of thing or something else?

Wrote a post and deleted it.

It's not about terms. Words. Posts on here saying is GC a problem maybe it should be changed.

It's not about the words it's what underlies them.

A different term would be seen in the same light.

Feminists have been called all sorts of shit for years, let's not forget.

I'm fine with it as a trans person who cares about their pre-existing rights.. I'm also fine with TERF, but I use 'GC' because people get offended by TERF (which is weird, but OK). I just want you to leave us alone.