Restoring Sanity Takes Time - Helen Joyce

Not on the basis of gender on the basis of SEX.

I just want to say how proud I am of this "little corner" of Mumsnet. Amazing that though we're such fringe thinkers we have been so influential according to genderists.

And yet, you have actually given a marvellous demonstration of what is misogynistic about demanding male people access female single sex spaces.

Gotta thank you for that.

You also seem to have a flawed concept of what feminism is and what it has achieved and how. Plus you have not been able to provide any coherent or consistent argument to defend your position.

And you certainly have no evidence to link us up with to see why you have reduced the standards of safeguarding for society with your ideological arguments plus you don't seem to be able to come up with any coherent examples of how a society would reduce maternal mortality with redefining female people to not include their sex category.

If you had a well thought through and consistent theoretical position, then we would listen. All ears. It wouldn't mean that you would not be challenged on it though. I don't know too many spaces on MN that you would not be challenged to explain your thinking that are boards used by the majority of MN users to be fair.

@ForCoralFox your experience appears to have been limited if sex has never been a basis for assessing risk. If you believe that sex isn't a basis for assessing risk, you'll have no problem with @Helleofabore's questions, will you?

" the evidence where a male at any stage of transition has less risk of committing a sexual offence than any other male person in the UK?

Then, can you please link us to the evidence where a male at any stage of transition has less or the same risk of committing a sexual offence as any female person in the UK?"

No, you haven't.

Sex is the biggest indicator of risk.

98% of all sex offences are committed by MEN.

90% of all violent crime is committed by MEN.

It's the single biggest indicator of risk there is.

Hence...

... sex segregation

Ta da!!

Safeguarding has nothing to do with sex. I've worked with at risk children (and their parents) and sex has never been the basis for assessing risk.

Do you work for WPATH!

Not one single genderist, ever, has tried to convince me why I should believe in their male centred ideology with anything more than a glib platitude or a gotcha. There is no earnest, rational argument because they know it's all complete fucking nonsense, really.

You must not question. You must simply obey. It's just misogyny.

Yes.

Irritating and repetitive though it is, these people who come on repeating you're all wrong, and men should be allowed to do what they want, are quite a useful demonstration of what trans ideology is.

It always starts with I'm gender critical, or I'm a feminist, and it ends with well, we're gonna show you!

And the flounce, of course.

"If you cannot, why can't you?"

Do you carry this over to other groups?

Like should we design public policy around safeguarding on the strength of the likelihood of offending by age, gender, ethnicity, religion? Or just gender?

Maybe you should accept your daughter for who she is, rather than assuming that you know her better than she knows herself? And support her should she choose to medically transition.

You certainly have some preconceived notions about the women on Mumsnet standing up against gender identity ideology, Fox. So Mumsnet is responsible for "a lot of harm" but misogynistic men who ignore women's boundaries aren't. Right. And a nasty little gloat about what will happen to women's rights under Labour. As expected.

So not engaging with any of the issues. No answering any questions. Not addressing any of the points.

Sounds about right.

Do you wonder why we call it an ideology!

ok. My questions are relevant to this.

Safeguarding is based on assessing the risk associated with the sex of the person in question. There is a valid reason for this. It is based on the risk of male people committing sexual offences.

Because of the actions of some male people, ALL male people should be treated at the same level of risk for robust safeguarding.

Can you please link us to the evidence where a male at any stage of transition has less risk of committing a sexual offence than any other male person in the UK?

Then, can you please link us to the evidence where a male at any stage of transition has less or the same risk of committing a sexual offence as any female person in the UK?

If you cannot, why can't you?

Mumsnet is a useful resource for many issues, but this particular corner of it has been responsible for a lot of harm. I'm sure you are delighted about that. I wish I'd never commented. What's that quote about trying to administer medicine to the dead?

I suspect you will have less success under a new government. Maybe move to America, where things are definitely going to start going in a direction you approve of much more quickly.

Speaking of safeguarding. This is for fox.

Safeguarding is based on assessing the risk associated with the sex of the person in question. There is a valid reason for this. It is based on the risk of male people committing sexual offences.

Can you please link us to the evidence where a male at any stage of transition has less risk of committing a sexual offence than any other male person in the UK?

Then, can you please link us to the evidence where a male at any stage of transition has less or the same risk of committing a sexual offence as any female person in the UK?

If you cannot, why can't you?

Sometimes a Lack of personal boundaries will result in women thinking they have no choice but to get naked in front of men.

Fortunately, there are many women who will help to provide them with those boundaries.

@ForCoralFox

If I am in a female only space getting changed and a man comes in, is this a violation of my privacy and dignity? Forget about gender identity, imagine that you don't know it. If a man enters a female space where women are undressed and vulnerable, do you expect women to mind?

When a convicted rapist who had raped a woman so badly she was unable to have children, was put into a woman's prison, you're damn right things started to get stirred up. He even told the authorities, if you put me in there, I'll attack women. They still did it.

You might have thought that was a one off. But no. Being a rapist does not preclude the authorities from sticking a man in a woman's prison.

Neither does men's physical advances stop the IOC from allowing men to scoop women's awards.

Nor does the fact that one girl a day is raped in school, stop schools from forcing girls into mixed sex toilets.

Still, I'm sure there are an awful a lot of men who are fucking annoyed that women got 'stirred up.'

In my case, it’s not the existence of transwomen that has bullied or oppressed me. It’s the trans ideology that attempts to compel my speech and even my thoughts. My son is a transwoman, by at least one of the very vague definitions that fit under the enormous trans umbrella. Because of that, I am under enormous pressure to deny that my son is my son, and to pretend that he is my daughter. I will not be coerced, under threat of estrangement from the son I love, into deliberately lying to him or about him. It is not possible to change sex, and I don’t accept that his adoption of feminine gender stereotypes means that he is no longer my son. There is a risk that his membership of the “trans community” (I have a different word for it, which I am not permitted to utter here) will lead to him self harming by taking exogenous hormones or even, ultimately, cosmetic genital surgery.

My son seeing himself as in some sense a woman saddens me, because I don’t think it is a realistic or healthy way of thinking. He is welcome to be sensitive, gentle, more of a follower than a leader - all characteristics often associated with women, but that characterisation is undermined by countless examples of strong, inspiring women with leadership qualities. And even under the sexist stereotypes, my son has masculine qualities as well as feminine ones; maybe he struggles to see himself in the expectations our society imposes on men, but we don’t always see ourselves as others see us.

It is indicative of the traction that trans ideology has gained, that I cannot be confident that MN will allow this post to remain!

Right. But you do understand how this works. That there is a lowest common denominator effect here. That if female people have a basic need, in this case a female single sex space, that that is the priority. That way as many female people have what they need as possible.

Just because 'you are alright Jack' doesn't mean you get the deciding vote on what the minimum standard of safety, privacy and dignity is to be for all female people collectively. I think society would be well fucked if that was the case.

Oh wow. You don't understand safeguarding at all, do you?

Yeah, but even you must raise your eyebrow occasionally at the number of perverts who were born in the wrong body, somehow. There is a large overlap in the Venn diagram there. How can it be explained and resolved, do you think?

Being naked in a room with a trans woman is not a violation of privacy or dignity or safety.

It absolutely is, if I don't consent to it. It's also a safety risk, because male people are a much higher risk to women than other women. Gender identity is completely irrelevant.