Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Is Mumsnet shutting down GC views? FAO Justine Roberts

339 replies

Pluvia · 27/04/2023 10:18

Mumsnet, are you aware that GC views are acceptable and are held by the vast majority of people in the UK?

Why are you using the 'not in the spirit of Mumsnet' argument to shut down discussions?

In the thread about a trans co-worker you allowed pro-trans arguments presumably from the US, Australia and Canada to mount up overnight. When GC women here in the UK countered with facts this morning you shut the thread down. I didn't see a single offensive post — unless you've changed policy and now think using the medical term autogynephilia is offensive.

This is not acceptable. Maya Forstater's case established that GC views are worthy of respect and yet you seem to be censoring open debate.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
FlirtsWithRhinos · 27/04/2023 18:26

@beachcitygirl

I see innuendo, fear, biological determinism of the sort feminists despised only 20 years ago) bigotry, anger, upset more fear, lack of understanding of gender. Denial of gender, clinging to femininity and masculinity, outdated cliches

But not one single person who is open to changing their mind if given answers to their queries and worries. And who can state those worries simply and clearly.

I think you either have not read much on this board, or are seeing what you expect to see not what is there.

This is based on explanations I have given on other threads:

If Man and Woman simply refer to biological sex, they can be any sort of person. That's the exact opposite of biological determinism. It's literally saing the only thing your biology should determine is...your biology!

However, when you decide Man and Woman is not a fact of the body but an aspect of mind, you unavoidably draw lines between men and women that are about the characteristics of their minds. To me that is incredibly sexist and reductive, especially because you impose those definitions not just on people who actively choose those genderist terms, but on every single person who is known as a man or woman, even though for the vast majority that's simply the historic name for their sex.

To dress, express oneself or live "as a woman" implicitly assumes there is a specific way which women do these things. Gender identity reproduces reductive assumptions society has about what women can/cannot wear, how they are allowed to express themselves, perform or exist.

So while your analysis may currently stop at "if someone wants to do something It's bigoted to challenge them", looked at through a wider lens, gender absolutely is serving the Patriarchy by perpetuating bigoted and reductive concepts of womanhood.

Furthermore, female people suffered millenia of unfair treatment and the social expectations and structures that came from that are still baked into our society. So female-only supports exist in our society now to mitigate that unfairness. I hope one day we don't need them but sadly the very different risks and social outcomes experienced by male and female people shows us that, for now at least, we do.

Similarly, female sports exist not because men and women have different minds, because female bodies have different capabilities to male, and in some sports we simply cannot compete fairly or safely together.

So to insist these Women-only provisions are now open to male people simply because they changed what the word Woman means, from a type of body to a state of mind, is dishonest, because they weren't created in a vacuum just hanging around ready for anyone who happened to claim the name Woman! They were created for female people because they were what female people needed. Their entire existence and shape reflects that need. Male people, whether they call themselves women or not, have no claim on them.

So I want an honest recognition that the aspect of mind that trans women (and indeed, female people who feel they share that aspect of mind) experience is a different thing to being female bodied and therefore does not justify opening up female-only spaces, protections and opportunities to male people who have it, nor justify such male people taking it on themselves to claim they speak as and for "women" and expect their views to be accepted as "women's".

Once that is established, which is, after all, nothing more than a simple and obvious fact, then we can all stop this ridiculous side show of trying to fit trans needs into the pre existing sex-based structures and start doing what Stonewall et al should have been doing all along, which is fighting with feminists against gender stereotypes that constrain people from living happily as the sex they actually are, and working out and lobbying for whatever dedicated support, rights, services and protections (if any) gender non-conformong people need in the meantime until we get there.

Helleofabore · 27/04/2023 18:24

I see the posters are the content producers in this arrangement. We produce the content. Advertisers are temporary investors.

JolyGoodBloviator · 27/04/2023 18:24

thedancingbear · 27/04/2023 17:53

I didn't know that. That's absolutely mental.

Weird innit?

Like, I can get my head round the idea that some people support the idea of trans people being able to change their legal sex, even if I personally disagree…

but still, when you really look at the GRA and see all the indiscrepancies, surely everyone can agree it’s inconsistent to the point of being bonkers bad law?

It literally provides a loophole for privileged males to retain their male privilege!

I just posted some info re: Baron Matilda if Wythenshawe on another thread:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4794270-genuinely-willing-to-discuss-in-good-faith

Page 3 | Genuinely willing to discuss in good faith | Mumsnet

Hello. This is a thread for those who are uncomfortable with black and white and less than civil discourse around self id. I welcome those with di...

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4794270-genuinely-willing-to-discuss-in-good-faith?reply=125759078&utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share

IwantToRetire · 27/04/2023 18:18

the advertisers are the customers and the posters are the product

No the advertisers are the investors, the posters are the consumers and the owners are the managment and shareholders.

If the managment fails to provide a service that the customers want to use then they leave, and the investors wonder if it is worth continuing to invest, and the shareholders lose their dividend.

Helleofabore · 27/04/2023 18:12

beachcitygirl · 27/04/2023 17:10

@Helleofabore read my comments before asking the same question again and again. Or disengage.

I was responding to your post to me. Was I not supposed to do that?

Disengage? Fuck, that is something to see!

Krinkles · 27/04/2023 18:10

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

nepeta · 27/04/2023 18:09

thedancingbear · 27/04/2023 17:53

I didn't know that. That's absolutely mental.

Isn't it? It's almost as if the rules were written so as not to inconvenience powerful men.

Helleofabore · 27/04/2023 18:03

beachcitygirl · 27/04/2023 16:28

The simple fact of the matter is that the gc mob on here are so horrific and jump all over every woman with a different opinion in such a "mob handed" spiteful and argumentative fashion that the rest of us are angry sometimes. There is a lot of deliberate misrepresentation and repeating of tropes it's exhausting.

You don't get to speak for us (inclusive feminists) (but some try to) and you leave us no place to express our feeling and thoughts.

This feels like rank hypocrisy - for goodness sake let other women speak.

Re the definition of transphobia. For me I think if you wouldn't say the same about a person of colour or another race in this context then its worthy of self examination.

This can come from a place of ignorance or fear.
Both are understandable emotions but we cannot and should not expect society to discriminate against others because of the fears of ignorance of some.

I did not see the post about the woman who would rather have looked for any other job than work with a trans woman. However if (and ifs doing some heavy lifting there ) That's clear transphobia & should have no place in society imho

Blimey.

Well, at least you haven't tried to hide your rather extreme prejudice. Or even attempt to use neutral terms towards people who disagree with you on some issues.

"for goodness sake let other women speak"

Who is not letting you 'speak'? Or do you want to be able to speak and have your opinion unchallenged on a feminist board on a discussion forum?

Because that is quite a different thing all together.

thedancingbear · 27/04/2023 17:53

JolyGoodBloviator · 27/04/2023 17:49

Then you should disagree with the GRA, because in some cases, such as primogeniture, it absolutely treats transwomen as men.

I didn't know that. That's absolutely mental.

xabia · 27/04/2023 17:51

@beachcitygirl
And the other topic is 'Feminism:chat' so get your facts right!

JolyGoodBloviator · 27/04/2023 17:49

beachcitygirl · 27/04/2023 17:44

@Butitsnotfunnyisititsserious I believe people can change sex for all legalities. Ie trans women should be treated as women legally.

Then you should disagree with the GRA, because in some cases, such as primogeniture, it absolutely treats transwomen as men.

Butitsnotfunnyisititsserious · 27/04/2023 17:47

beachcitygirl · 27/04/2023 17:44

@Butitsnotfunnyisititsserious I believe people can change sex for all legalities. Ie trans women should be treated as women legally.

But they aren't women so why should they be allowed to legally change sex? When their sex hasn't changed?

JolyGoodBloviator · 27/04/2023 17:47

beachcitygirl · 27/04/2023 17:42

@Pluvia Actually that's inaccurate. The board is named feminist, sex & gender discussions.
It's not rocket science. Let's stick to facts rather than nonsense s

No, it’s called,

‘Feminism: Sex & gender discussions’

The punctuation is important, you’ve changed the punctuation in order to misrepresent the nature of the board.

Theeyeballsinthesky · 27/04/2023 17:46

And the benefit to women for men to be treated ‘legally as women’ is what exactly?

ArabeIIaScott · 27/04/2023 17:46

beachcitygirl · 27/04/2023 17:44

@Butitsnotfunnyisititsserious I believe people can change sex for all legalities. Ie trans women should be treated as women legally.

In that case, rapists like Isla Bryson go in women's prisons.

nepeta · 27/04/2023 17:45

beachcitygirl · 27/04/2023 17:33

@Butitsnotfunnyisititsserious how do you know the majority of trans women keep their penis?
Secondly why do you care ?

Several studies exist. Here's one from 2019 which lists the frequency of various kinds of surgeries

https://tau.amegroups.com/article/view/25593/html

https://tau.amegroups.com/article/view/25593/html

IwantToRetire · 27/04/2023 17:45

I was surprised to see the thread about a trans woman at work had been deleted. I was up late enough last night to see it, and to realise some sort of pile on from the US was happening, so posted a few more supportive comments and said I was sure that in the morning those with proper contacts would post.

But now it has gone. What is not in the spirit of mumsnet to try and help a woman asking for support at her workplace.

More importantly, the moderators have the option to delete unacceptable posts, why the whole thread.

Have @mnhq contacted the woman who started the thread to make sure she is okay?

What does it to mumsnet reputation that women cant ask for help on an open forum managed by them, because of (????) not sure what.

I hope the OP who started the thread is okay and had time to get the info she needed.

Shameful.

PS thanks to the OP of this thread for at least making the fact this has happened is in the public domain.

ArabeIIaScott · 27/04/2023 17:45

Why don't you think trans people should be allowed to legally change sex

Because if men can 'identify' into women's rights, women lose the rights and protections awarded to us on the basis of our sex. Women's inequity stems from our sex.

IcakethereforeIam · 27/04/2023 17:45

Iirc the risk assessments that were performed regarding putting men in women's prisons were regarding the risk to the man. No consideration of the risk to the women he would be housed with.

Incidentally, woman is not just a word. It has a meaning and a reality. It is one of the ways I describe myself. Transwomen can be Transwomen but they're not and can never be women. If that word is taken we'd need a new one, but they'd come and try to colonise that just like they are with girl and female.

beachcitygirl · 27/04/2023 17:44

@Butitsnotfunnyisititsserious I believe people can change sex for all legalities. Ie trans women should be treated as women legally.

Pluvia · 27/04/2023 17:43

Why don't you think trans people should be allowed to legally change sex

For a start there's the slight problem that human beings can't change sex, ever, under any circumstances. So there's nothing legal about it. It's like suggesting that human beings can appear and disappear at will or fly without the aid of machines. It's not possible, so there's no need to legalise or delegalise it. The GRA created what's known as a legal fiction. It needs to be abolished.

OP posts:
Butitsnotfunnyisititsserious · 27/04/2023 17:43

beachcitygirl · 27/04/2023 17:32

@JolyGoodBloviator which part of the gra don't you agree with in particular. What makes you feel it's "bad" ?

Why don't you think trans people should be allowed to legally change sex.

So if you believe people can change sex, although scientifically impossible. Do you think people can change race? How about species? How about age - could an elderly person become a baby again?

beachcitygirl · 27/04/2023 17:42

@Pluvia Actually that's inaccurate. The board is named feminist, sex & gender discussions.
It's not rocket science. Let's stick to facts rather than nonsense s

JolyGoodBloviator · 27/04/2023 17:40

beachcitygirl · 27/04/2023 17:32

@JolyGoodBloviator which part of the gra don't you agree with in particular. What makes you feel it's "bad" ?

Why don't you think trans people should be allowed to legally change sex.

Because sex is biological category, not a legal status.

No one should be able to falsify historical documents.

And if sex and gender are actually different, why would legal recognition of a persons gender change their sex marker anyway?

nepeta · 27/04/2023 17:39

NotHavingIt · 27/04/2023 17:06

What angers me, and still does all of these years later is the colonisation of 'woman'; of women's spaces, services and everything in between; and the ensuing erasure of women and disrspect for their integrity as a distinct class of human being; even down to the language that is used to describe women and their bodily parts and functions. Very angry - and yes, now very radical in sayng " No".

Being censured and cancelled doesn't help either.

I was so troubled by seeing this creep into everything, very slowly over the last fifteen years.

I firmly believe that the oppression of women and girls is sex-based (not based on 'performing femininity, though some get caught in it by appearing to be of the female sex even if they are not), that social gender (as in roles, rules, and sterotypes) is one of the ways that oppression is achieved and maintained, and that fighting against sex-based discrimination in all its forms (ranging from the extremes of Afghanistan to the way blind audits show slight preference for men over women in job applications in the West) is absolutely crucial.

The three axes of exploitation are based on sex, race and class. When we erase 'sex' from all language, we will not erase the sexism and misogyny from reality, but we make it extremely hard to fight against it. And we erase the embodied 'identities' of many women (and men if anyone tried to erase 'man' from language) who are now educated to see themselves as women for reasons of being passive, submissive, emotional, and nurturing (all used to define femininity) or because of hair, heels, and makeup.