Trans sibling in law

You think the idea that penises don't belong in women only spaces is deeply unpopular "among the community at large"?

Aye, right you are.

Unless you are talking about the TQ+ community and ignoring ordinary people, as usual.

I think that we are guilty of thread derailing, but that most of the discussion has been about women's rights.

Since when is commenting on anything said on MN a day or two previously and following the last point in that conversation 'bullying'???!!! Get a grip.

Does this mean that if a thread in AIBU is seen by someone a couple of days later, they no longer can reply if they wish to comment or disagree with a previous point?

Come on now! Disagreeing is and having objections to the content of someone's posts is and giving a full explanation of why it's problematic is not bullying. It's continuing the thread where it left off.

Otherwise perhaps you should ask MN to lock all threads that haven't been posted on within the last 12 hours and see how that goes down across the site.

What gets me is the use of any argument possible to avoid being accountable for what you've actually said. It's deflect, deflect, deflect.

Gender is a sexism. Biology doesn't define us, but it's an inescapable reality in our lives that we can't pretend doesn't exist.

This doesn't change because it's been intellectualised by word salad. We all can see straight through it because of our own lived experiences.

What, you think believing that people can't change sex is 'hateful keyboard warrior nonsense' and 'deeply unpopular'? 🫠

Not by all polls taken they are not. Feminists are in the overwhelming majority. It's an 80/20 or 90/10 thing.

Almost as if many of the ideas and rhetoric taken here as gospel are hateful keyboard-warrior nonsense and deeply unpopular with the community at large.

It's not my place to speak for anyone else but you're right, I don't agree with you.

When gender clinics first sprung up in the 70s and 80s, a requirement for treatment was the acceptance that you were male and that medical intervention would not transform you into a female. This was not done out of some ethical deference to gender critical belief, it was because it was strongly in the patient's best interest -- there was a noted tendency for patients with dysphoria to delude themselves into thinking that they were in some true way really female or could become female, and a tendency toward narcissism that made that delusion extremely difficult to dislodge. It was understood that transition under that circumstance was not beneficial to the patient.

Even though times have changed (due to ideology driven 'gender medicine'), there remains a strong case for the position that even if you believe that 'affirming care' can be beneficial, and your sole motive is the patient's welfare, you should still only affirm identities of people who you know to gone have through a rigorous, supervised process of transition. So, you can be confident that they understand that you're affirming them out of politeness and to smooth their ability to operate in the world, but in no real sense are you suggesting they are actually female. Operating out of that maximally compassionate and deferential motivation, you should (especially) never validate absurd requests for identity affirmation.

Exactly, it’s a huge power trip. I think anyone who doesn’t acknowledge that is either naive or disingenuous.

I was reflecting about this the other day. There is an argument in the TG community along the lines of "it only effects a small % of the population". I think this is where people get annoyed because it effects them. This is a good example.

On a basic level people have call other people by different names, they also have to re-route their thinking when saying pro-nouns because the person opposite them is clearly not the sex they want to be. Then you get into the stuff about single sex spaces, sports etc.. Unlike same-sex attraction which genuinely only effects the people who are SSA, being trans/non-binary requires everyone else to participate, and therefore effects everyone.

Me too, I turned them all off. So no I don’t have the same experience.

Only if you choose to. You can opt out of notification altogether, you know. I don't receive any notifications at all, unless someone directly tags me.

You are under the mistaken belief that transmen have penises. Almost none do. They sit down to pee the same as other women.

Your ignorance of this issue is concerning.

The judgement removed absolutely no rights from trans people, as they never had those rights in the first place.

I suppose the heart of the disagreement is that while it's zero skin off your nose, many many real bananas are profoundly disadvantaged by my identifying as a banana.

It ain’t the posters of Mumsnet that are against you, it’s reality.

I’ve never once heard a coherent, good faith answer to this type of question from any believer in gender identity ideology in nearly a decade, just out of interest. A lot of deflection, flouncing and insults, because it’s clearly unanswerable without reifying sexist stereotypes. It’s all useful for lurkers to see, so I continue to ask.

The thing is, I wouldn’t. I know that because I haven’t, and that isn’t where I sit in the debate we’re really referring to.

I would instead let you live your life as a banana, with all of your yellow friends, and I would continue my life. Which isn’t yours.

I would continue going to the grocers, knowing you’d be there, and if I wanted apples I’d just get apples.

Again, if we’re following that analogy, that’s exactly what I’ve done. I carried on using the spaces, didn’t make anything out of who was in them, and haven’t told a single trans person/banana that they can’t be fruit.

Be whatever, I’m not bothered. Zero skin off my nose, even in the real life equivalent of our fruity analogy.

Okay; so what is the essence/definition/meaning of woman, if it’s not biological (female)? Why are you a woman and not a man? (In non-biological terms.)

Seems a tad long winded 😂

There is absolutely no way I can have not been born female. That has already happened. I am, an adult human female.

I personally don’t believe that’s where that ends, because I don’t see that fact as the whole picture of how/why I’m a woman. Which in my view, is different. Because sex and gender aren’t the same.

And at this point I really don’t think there’s any value in going back over why I think that.

As I say, you see validating whatever people think about their “identity” as a virtue, and I don’t 🤷‍♀️ sometimes the truth, and upholding it, matters more.

Banana please, not unicorn.

If there was a wave of social contagion of other like-minded wannabe-bananas, who all demanded that every other fruit give way to our special yellow fruitiness, and it became very clear that there was a lot of skin off your nose - a huge amount, in fact, then you'd put aside your womanly feelings about being rude and get to the point: you would certainly have a lot of debates about where this social contagion came from, and why.

At the root of which would be a discussion about how I'm not really a banana at all. And you'd find my and my peers' pressure to prevent you from talking about us in anything but very banana-y terms quite improper, and you'd push back against it pretty hard.

Which is where we are.

Quite possibly - I don’t believe it’s right to question (incessantly, I’d add) how someone else sees themselves in a body, brain and environment that I don’t live in.

You can be whatever you want as far as I’m concerned, what’s it got to do with me, and why would I intentionally hurt your feelings by telling you otherwise.

I also think that generally speaking we could do a lot more minding our own business.

Theres more to life, certainly my life, than bothering myself with what someone else wants to do or be called. I’d probably just call them it and get on with it.

OP’s sister in law could just be my new BIL as far as I’m concerned. I don’t see it as a big deal, and I wouldn’t go out of my way to do anything about it.

My brother could tell me tomorrow that his name is Sandra, and nothing would change in our relationship beyond the fact he’s got a new name.

You’ve used “their life as a female” in the passage I quoted above. So do you mean “other biological women are allowed to move through their life as biological women with their own understanding of their identity” ? But isn’t that just saying they’re biological women anyway, whatever they subjectively believe their “identity” to be? In which case aren’t you saying exactly what we’re saying?

Female is biological. Because there’s a difference between sex and gender. Which i honestly think we’ve covered?