Is it even possible to debate the trans-narrative outside MN?

The problem is that you can’t deny reality 🤷🏻‍♀️ men whatever they wear, whatever surgery they’ve had, are not women. Most of the time, it doesn’t matter but sometimes like the right fir women requiring intimate care to have a same sex carer, like the right of female rape victims to have a female only support group it really does

decent men would recognise this and not force themselves into women’s spaces. The men that do this are not decent, they are only thinking of themselves

what I’ve learned over the years is that for example 99% of the public agree that men should not be in a female rape survivors group - that makes 99% of the public transphobic

Well, no. This is the feminist board. Generally attracts feminists, as you'd expect.

If anyone is looking for broad spectrum of views maybe look out for polling on the issues. Yougov has a bit, WingsoverScotland has done a few.

Edit: response to Sir Walter's post.

“Trans people and supporters don't deny that there are some people who cause issues but most trans people do not act in this way and there is usually no way to even tell they are trans. Realistically, you are no more likely to get assaulted by a trans woman than by anyone else and we should be using these cases of assault to deal with the abusers themselves and not an entire group of people on a whole. For example, if someone gets assaulted by a cisgender man, this is not an excuse to start being discriminatory towards all men in general.”

By this statement, it seems you don’t seem to understand how safeguarding and risk assessment works.

“if someone gets assaulted by a cisgender man, this is not an excuse to start being discriminatory towards all men in general.”

Er, safeguarding does discriminate against all male people.

So, while you are here, can you link us up to the evidence that a male person at any stage of transition becomes less of a risk of committing sexual offences as any other male person in the UK?

This is going to be my only post on this thread.

I just want to say that this is to some extent an echo chamber; there will be lots of Mumsnet posters who disagree with elements of the consensus on this board (myself included) who have no desire to insert themselves into a debate where they know that 99% of the posters on the thread will be ready to argue against them. Perhaps this makes me weak (or just busy and stressed by life) but please don't assume that you're reading a full spectrum of views on this board.

I saw people debating the issue yet again on Jeremy Vine the other day and realised that we are in a strange cultural stalemate where TRAs always appear to be winning any debate, because the person on the other side can never openly say that they don't believe in gender ideology and so do not believe TWAW etc. We all know that loads would actually agree with that, but they're not able to say it so obviously they appear to be losing any debate because their argument does not make sense without that underpinned logic.

But it's pretty much taken for granted that whatever your views, you MUST at least agree with the ideology.

I would say it’s actually impossible to debate it on mumsnet. It’s become a horrible echo chamber of fear mongering and misinformation.

Surely the definition of an echo chamber is that people are only hearing the views that align with their own. Unless you think that gc MNers are not regularly exposed to genderist and TRA views in the whole wider media and in real life (and also from some posters on MN), then I don't see how that can apply.

Separated bathrooms are not discrimination. But people would not shame men on the internet for the same things that transgender people are shamed for
Cis women debating the genuine issue of bathrooms should not turn into people being transphobic for the sake of it

@ArabellaScott Most people in the GC group label themselves GC. Although now you have mentioned it, you're getting offended by me labelling someone in a certain way....remind you of any other group of people?

'if someone gets assaulted by a cisgender man, this is not an excuse to start being discriminatory towards all men in general.'

So you think all spaces should be mixed sex?

'GC'? Dehumanising, much?

We are right here, you know. You can speak to us. And your thought sounds like bollocks to me, but do go ahead and expand.

@popebishop If you want to understand being transgender fully, you are probably best to ask someone who is transgender because I can only speak for the people that I know and not for myself. I am not sure about your point in terms of same-sex attraction, could you clarify it?

Yes, I can definitely back my statement up. People tend to see the few instances of trans people abusing their identity to take advantage of people and assume that the majority of transgender people are also like that. This is the kind of sweeping stereotype that gay people have also had to face in the past and I find it sad that people are falling for the same misinformation again.

Trans people and supporters don't deny that there are some people who cause issues but most trans people do not act in this way and there is usually no way to even tell they are trans. Realistically, you are no more likely to get assaulted by a trans woman than by anyone else and we should be using these cases of assault to deal with the abusers themselves and not an entire group of people on a whole. For example, if someone gets assaulted by a cisgender man, this is not an excuse to start being discriminatory towards all men in general.

The reason that Sunak's comment was harmful was the fact that he is supposed to be the voice of the whole country and what he said has completely missed the 'point' of what being transgender means. For someone so high up to not know that sex does not have to match gender is quite harmful, and many people argue that he should be tackling greater problems in our country, such as climate change and systemic racism for example. He is entitled to his own opinion of course but this opinion in particular isolates and shames a certain group of people

speenmum, could you elaborate on your post please? Could you be more specific in who you are referring to. Feminists?

You've got it the wrong way round.

Do you think same-sex attraction is valid?

Or do you think a male and female couple are gay because of how one of them feels?

One of those is the gender-critical view.

Happy for you to help me understand the trans experience though. When someone says they are a woman, what do they mean? They are female? They are feminine? They wear certain clothes?

whereas anyone dissenting gets accused of being a man, "welcomed" to MN 🙄 or if that doesn't work try to paint as being angry.
An echo chamber of posts.

So if one person posts those three responses, that makes it an echo chamber?

Commenting that someone seems angry and pointing out it's their first post, happens all over MN. Always has.

I've never called anyone a man on here, because I believe it's a biological descriptor not a personality type, and most GC people would say the same.

There, I've disagreed with you.

I think most people aren't well versed in being the object of people's questions or posts so due to their number (eg if someone said "well women are feminine" they would provoke a lot of responses) it's easy to perceive hostility that wasn't intended. You need to treat questions like genuine questions (that is what "good faith" means, partly) and not attacks.

And if you (general you) post misogynist things on a feminism forum you need to be prepared to clarify or back up your claims, or be thought of as a numpty.

I think GC are the equivalent of homophobic people a few decades ago who automatically invalidated someone else's experience just because they couldn't understand it

I work in the public sector and was attending some on like training a couple of weeks ok. The trainer asked us to introduce ourselves in the comments and put our job title and pronouns. There was about 20 of us on the course and not one person mentioned their pronouns. Of course you can’t read too much into that but it felt like a quiet act of rebellion at the time 🤷‍♀️

The Bryson case didn't get much discussion,someone mentioned it and was told it was 'nothing but a moral panic'.

The majority were silent

Someone posted this upthread.

Preference falsification is doing a lot of work on these issues.

Most people with 'gc' views (sex is dichotomous and immutable) stay silent in case of attack.

While I appreciate that many of the trailblazers have suffered greatly, and some people have to be cautious for professional reasons, things have changed.

I've heard this week about a workplace where one person mentioned feminism, cautiously, to have every other staff member agree, one by one.

Now is probably a good time to speak up for many. It's in the news. It's current. GC beliefs are protected in law.

And the Scottish Hate Crime Bill is not yet in force ....

“It is an echo chamber, as in it is a place where you ( mostly) all share the same views and expect praise or reinforcements of beliefs whereas anyone dissenting gets accused of being a man, "welcomed" to MN 🙄 or if that doesn't work try to paint as being angry.”

And yet, as you admit, rebutting voices are fully able to post here. They are able to post on every thread on this board, and do so, and they are able to post their thoughts and their evidence and to stay within talk guidelines.

Posters who don’t agree with feminists who seek to prioritise sex when needed over gender post here. On nearly every thread.

The cultural aspect of praise or pushback doesn’t make this necessarily an ‘echo chamber’. I believe you are instead using this as a reason to negatively frame the board. Something you spend post upon post doing.

I find it hypocritical to negatively frame praise here when you, personally, have a very long history of giving praise to posters who you feel get their points across. You also will often join in ‘taking down’ a poster or posts.

That is not then including the fact that so many people who receive negative pushback started posting in threads with posts aimed at shaming posters or the board in general with no intention of engaging either with the thread or with posters. And you praise them too.

Or is your intention merely to praise posters who deliver posts that fit your ideological viewpoint and who you believe also shows up the ‘echo chamber inhabitants’ poor behaviour? while you yourself scold and join in on the sidelines?

So, your historical posting patterns indicate that you celebrate the behaviour from others that you deride in regular posters here. It all depends on which point of view they are supporting. Isn’t that hypocritical?

I've seen a fairly robust discussion on a particular club's forum, which was quite interesting to watch as a fair few of the posters who were generally inclined to "be kind" were uncomfortable about the unfairness aspect. And when the Isla Bryson story came out, even the most vocal TWAW ones were "yeah, I don't think that's right", although they seemed to think it could be dealt with on a case by case basis rather than it being evidence of flawed policy. I think one of the reasons that the discussion didn't get shut down was that one of the more TERFy posters was one of the mods, although she seems to be in the TWATW camp rather than the TWAM one.

I've found the opposite is true. What marks MN out from other forums in which this issue is discussed - and I use this term loosely stopping short of 'debated' - is that the GC position is largely informed, both by real world events, the plain evidence of people's eyes, and an actual knowledge of where the pretentious 'queer theory' came from that underpins GI in the first place.
You don't seem to understand what an echo chamber is - as nothing you've posted there is talking about an echo chamber, despite you saying you find the opposite - then talk about something completely unrelated.
It is an echo chamber, as in it is a place where you ( mostly) all share the same views and expect praise or reinforcements of beliefs whereas anyone dissenting gets accused of being a man, "welcomed" to MN 🙄 or if that doesn't work try to paint as being angry.
An echo chamber of posts.