Restoring Sanity Takes Time - Helen Joyce

The "no debate" position exists because debate exposes the misogyny and homophobia of gender identity beliefs for all to see.

The acronym. I won't say it. I'm embarrassed to even have engaged in this debate. The no debate position exists for a reason and I'm returning to it.

My 70 year old mother and her friends, who came of age as 2nd wave feminists in the 70s, are bemused and horrified by gender critical feminism and it's cruelty. But they probably don't represent all women their age.

They certainly don’t represent me (70) or any of my friends of about the same age, who are appalled by the recent wholesale dismantling of women’s rights, much of it driven by gender ideology largely promulgated to advance the dubious interests of certain groups of men. I sincerely hope that my early teen granddaughters are resistant to it.

It's a starting point with all men that they are a statistically higher risk to women than other women. Not your straw man about "trans" @izimbra

"Now you? Provide us with the evidence that at any time during transition a male person with a trans identity reduces there risk level of committing sex crimes when compared with the REST of the male UK population. As you say, there has been male trans people now for a long time. Show us the evidence!"

Asian men make up a disproportionate percentage of those involved in grooming gang activity.

Black men in the uk make up a disproportionate percentage of those with criminal records.

Do you think we should have safeguarding procedures that take these ethnic differences in involvement in crime into account?

Do you think it's reasonable to look on all Black and Asian men in the workplace with suspicion that they're more likely to be involved in wrongdoing?

But it's ok for our starting point with trans women is a suspicion that they're predatory perverts?

What term?

Fetish?

Are you denying the male people with trans identities that describe themselves as having fetishes the right to self describe? That would be very transphobic of you. You would now be attempting to define transgender people to suit yourself if that is what you saying is the problematic word.

If it is not fetish that you are trying to shame a poster for using, which word please?

I apologise for not noticing your relative lack of youthfulness earlier.

If you think an adolescent boy’s discomfort with being effectively naked in front of an adolescent girl is toxic masculinity, then you might wish to direct your empathy in a different direction for a minute or two. Adolescent boys are often excruciatingly embarrassed by the ‘behaviour’ of their penis, which seems to have a mind of its own. If a boy is brought up to be aware of other people’s needs, he is likely to experience something of a battle between his better nature and the very strongly felt biological imperative to have sex with anyone he finds in the slightest bit attractive. This is not an easy time of life for a boy who respects women, and there is often guilt over thoughts and sometimes actions that do not fully accord with the respect he knows he should be embodying.

I thought that earlier this afternoon.

And that is where your prejudice really shows through.

What part of my post led you to believe that I did not acknowledge illegitimate discrimination that same sex and both sex attracted people experienced? Please point it out to everyone.

Either at this stage you have ceased to read anything and are simply responding on emotion or you cannot understand even the basic concept of illegitimate and legitimate discrimination.

Yes, spurious safeguarding and privacy concerns were misused!!! For example, there is NO EVIDENCE THAT HOMOSEXUAL MALE PEOPLE COMMITTED SEXUAL OFFENCES AT A HIGHER RATE THAN THE REST OF THE UK MALE POPULATION. Therefore those 'concerns' were proven false.

Now you? Provide us with the evidence that at any time during transition a male person with a trans identity reduces there risk level of committing sex crimes when compared with the REST of the male UK population. As you say, there has been male trans people now for a long time. Show us the evidence!

Does that make it clearer? Do you even begin to understand what we have spent an entire afternoon explaining.

Worth pointing out that you have made homophobic arguments in an attempt to defend your gender beliefs, earlier in this thread.

What will it take to bring bigoted employers to heel? Part of the answer is time. During the past decade, the trans lobby has been stunningly successful in selling false analogies to HR departments: that separate toilets for men and women are like racial segregation; and that insisting people can change sex is “gay rights 2.0”.
Lazy, power-hungry HR managers and staff working in “EDI” (equality, diversity and inclusion) pronounce that the arc of the moral universe is bending towards denying sexual dimorphism, and relish imposing their will on others.

Spookily prescient of Helen Joyce, no? Thanks for the real time demonstration...

I don't think this is this poster's first rodeo, @Helleofabore. Just a hunch.

Good way to avoid talking about the trans women who openly acknowledge their fetish, like Debbie Hayton.

Not all trans women access women's spaces for validation or fetish purposes but there is plenty of evidence that some of them do.

But you don't want us to talk about those trans women, do you?

I can see why you have been exasperated by the use of misogyny. Because you have given a very good demonstration of it here today.

You can support equality for everyone. I believe that people should not be discriminated against unless there is a need for it for safety of female people. You really seem to not really understand the people you are determined to demonise here. It really does seem that it is you who has an entrenched and ideological prejudice that you cannot logically or evidentially support at all.

You have done nothing but emote on this thread. Nothing has been coherent or consistent. Really, it is all based on your version of what is 'kind' as you say. Yet you cannot face the realities of the outcomes of your opinions.

I honestly hoped that you might come back with that evidence that I asked for. But you had nothing. And you cannot even be curious enough to interrogate why and what that means.

How convenient.

I refuse to engage with anyone who uses that term, like I refuse to engage with anyone who uses the n word.

Nothing will persuade me to stop supporting equality for all LGBTQIA+ people, so what's the point?

You don't though. There are fundamental clashes of rights around sexual orientation and transgender ideology that you can't just handwave away. You've picked a side.

You called your male friend a lesbian. Your male friend is not a lesbian, that's a word for female people attracted to other female people alone. Those women need their own word. They're not bisexual.

The fact that you don't think they should have one, points to the misogyny and homophobia which run like a stick of rock through this ideology.

Spurious safeguarding and privacy concerns were misused to promote homophobic measures and views in just the same way as is happening now to trans people, but of course you won't acknowledge the parallels.

I didn't mention her age at all.

You did.

I'm not sure that many people know about AGPs, regardless of their age. Especially if they are of the 'be kind' mindset.

The fact that you do and think that you are being kinder by allowing males to act their fetish out on women and girls means that I think you also attribute a different meaning to 'kindness' than most.

Unless you ARE just another common and garden men's rights activist. A surprising number do show up on mumsnet to scold women for our boundaries.

Based on sex.

What part of legitimate discrimination based on sex have you missed?

I suggest that you stop leveraging people who are same sex or both sex attracted into your argument. It is not a comparable situation.

People who are same sex attracted (or to both sexes) were subject to illegitimate discrimination. They were not asking for special treatment under any safeguarding principles or indeed, in life. They were asking, and rightfully so, for EQUAL treatment and equal protection.

Male people demanding access to female single sex spaces are demanding ADDITIONAL accommodations be made because of their gender identity. This is not a demand for EQUALITY based on a protected characteristic.

This is where your lack of understanding about discrimination seems to let you down. You are trying to use the wrong comparator in your argument.

It was always wrong to deny a person legally able to consent to sex the freedom to be in a relationship with another person legally of the age to consent (providing the age of consent is set to an age where it is reasonable to expect a person to be able to consent to sexual activity).

It is NOT wrong to exclude male people from a female single sex space because they are male. The protected characteristic is SEX not GENDER in this instance.

Ok then shall we get rid of toilets altogether then?
And have mixed sex piss holes for everyone to wee into together?

I can totally understand why my son doesn't want to have his penis visible in front of any female, even in the act of urination. It's inappropriate especially in an education setting.

I prefer my echo chamber. It's a much kinder and more inclusive place. My mother is not some old dear being 'shielded.' She's an active woman very much abreast of current events, but it's telling that you saw her in such ageist terms.

I should never have commented here. I'm not interested in debating your talking points. I was just exasperated by the misuse of the word misogyny. Nothing will persuade me to stop supporting equality for all LGBTQIA+ people, so what's the point?

There will be female toilets and I imagine there is probably a staff or other unisex toilet this girl could use if she isn't comfortable in the ladies'

No she can use the female toilets which are the correct ones for her sex. Or advocate for third spaces.

As it is no one is excluding her but her presence is making teenage boys feel uncomfortable.