Reflections on Trans Arguments

Go outside of your echo chamber and you'll find that almost no one believes trans women are women.

This reads like a parody, with zero insight. And beautifully summarises why many folks feel there is no genuine wish for exploring views beyond a narrow TERF/SC view. Go outside of MN and you'll find curiosity and discussion as to why such a bitter TERF view has taken hold on MN and in the UK so specifically. Some of you on here may not have considered its anti-feminist agenda (get distracted by punching down at trans folk, rather than working together to actually address systemic problems for women (and female-identifying trans folk, who are in general very much less of a threat to you than men and 'the system' n general...).

As per "explanation" above, anyone expressing other views is considered 'bad faith' or an interloper. 'This board gets ..', 'we get', other people are in bad faith, 'we' are attacked.

You don't own the conversation. You just think you do and that makes us all worse off in the auk

The OP lost me with their cutesey faux- misspellings.

Presumably intended to convey that 'everyone who doesn't agree with me is an idiot'.

Unfortunately, people here deal in actual arguments, not just name calling.

Trot off back to reddit.

If you're sexist enough to think that female or male is a costume or persona, then you will get challenged on that viewpoint by people who want to fight sexism and biological essentialism.

If you think that being a man or woman is about what type of body you have, you will also get challenged on that, by trans activists - unless of course you pledge to change your body in order to change ot become your gender (then of course that is what makes that belief somehow acceptable).

So either way you will meet people who disagree with you. Therefore it's a really helpful idea to fully interrogate your own beliefs and what they're based on, to learn and become confident in your viewpoint.

Pretending that everyone is duty-bound to agree with whatever you say does no-one any favours.

You lost me the moment I read "right wing" in your post.

How many effing times do we have to state : this is NOT a right wing versus left wing matter!?!

There are socialists who are GC and socialists who are trans activists!
There are capitalists who are GC and capitalists who are trans activists!

The conflict here is between women who want to retain women's rights, and the TRA who demand they be taken away to appease a minuscule number of men.

Obviously any sort of actual harassment or abuse of trans folk is unacceptable.

The trouble though, is that TRAs often see something as simple as asking a biological man to leave a single sex changing room as harassment and extremely distressing.

As I've seen in other places with the SC and how it's not really about loos etc but how "we" want to eliminate them.

I am not sure to what extent this is a deliberate strategy, DARVO, misplaced distress at being reminded what sex they really are or they do view this as a "hate crime".

If the latter, it makes life much more difficult than it needs to be as it simply isn't.

This is it in a nutshell...

Indeed. I'm one of those 'annoying' Autistic people who sees things in black and white. I deal only in facts. I can't do 'pretend'

Like you, I see harm. It's been so alarming to watch this ideology unfold over the past 5 to 10 years. I want no part in it. I just want safety for myself and for my 13 year old daughter.

I can't be more 'oh poor little darlings, what pronouns do you use?'

I just can't. Because I see it doing harm. It's cultlike and it's the most vulnerable who gets the shitty end of the stick from it - that's trans identifying children, vulnerable adults and women. Note IT INCLUDES concerns about those who identify as trans...

@LostInCatsFur

If it is necessary I will argue until my final moment that a man can't be a woman. I will highlight the harms that are done to women by this ideology. I will defend the need for single sex spaces and for them to be single sex, not single gender but reassured that don't mean I would attack your child or any trans person. I might if I felt safe doing so ask a Trans woman to leave a woman only space or reject a trans woman medic if I had ask for female care. But that's it. I was served by a trans woman in a cafe the other day the only things I said to them was my order and to ask for bill and a bit of chit chat about the weather. I didn't scream when I saw them, or refuse to eat food they had touched or demand another server. I didn't scream you are a man at them or whisper it. I didn't use the name (or if there were any pronouns) that were on their badge because A) I was talking directly to them, B) I couldn't read the badge because they were at the wrong angle for my varifocals to enable me to see what it said. I have a trans college - they have no idea I'm Gender Critical because I have never raised the issue at work. I am not a danger to your child, you and she have have reason to fear me.

(I’ve been listening again to the highly informative Inciteful Sisters podcast, the StillTish episode - she’s been investigating the funding sources of the trans lobby and it is quite mind blowing how deep it all goes)

I'm going to look this up, thanks @BundleBoogie

I really can’t fathom what you’re expecting from us. No one on here (except the trans activists) is going to agree that people can change sex.

Everything else flows from that.

Obviously vulnerable people like your child with this serious and debilitating mental health condition have the sympathy of most on here. It is expressed frequently and sincerely.

I know a couple of girls who identify as boys and I’m devastated for what they’ve done to themselves and the future impact it will have on their lives - they are victims in this. But we have to be able to call out the people who are driving this - and some of them are trans.

It sounds like a social media break would do you good though. Maybe process some of the things you have learned here and use it to help your child.

So much DARVO on one post. Where to start?

Thr Supreme Court judgement was carefully thought out by the best legal minds in the country and reflects fact and reality. If these facts clash with trans identities then it’s the identities that are the problem here.

Have you heard the story of the 3 Little Pigs? Well trans ideology/identities are like the house made of straw. It doesn’t stand up to the tiniest bit of scrutiny, has no discernible logic and is entirely fact free. The house is made of straw and built on a foundation of sand.

In fact I would go so far as to say it is a belief that is not Worthy of Respect in a Democratic Society. I think there is a very good reason why despite vast funds available (I’ve been listening again to the highly informative Inciteful Sisters podcast, the StillTish episode - she’s been investigating the funding sources of the trans lobby and it is quite mind blowing how deep it all goes), that no legal case has been brought that would establish trans ideology as WORIADS, because they can’t. It isn’t.

an online space that's supposed to be a haven for open and free discussion is infected by a sizeable number of people who are fanatically obsessed with the idea that trans rights should be curtailed - and maybe eliminated altogether

It’s only very recently that women on Mumsnet have been allowed to even use the word ‘he’ in relation to a man that wishes he was a woman and many have been banned for less. It IS a space for open and free discussion but you don’t like what we have to say.

Your use of the word ‘infected’ is highly offensive and belies your wish for ‘free and open discussion’. You don’t want ‘free and open discussion’, you just want everyone to agree with you. Then you make wild accusations about things we haven’t said to try and silence us again. #nodebate is over.

Trans people have the same rights as everyone else- the current set of demands are privileges which will not be granted and where previously granted under duress, are being revoked. The house of straw has been blown down.

This times a million.

What an unbelieveable waste of time all that 'ground breaking' was. I despair.

Alternative perspective.

Women have spent the last decade being bullied into silence, being told that we have to agree that trans women are women because this is the only correct position and there will be no debate about it. It has been drilled into us that if we put our heads above the parapet and say, "Actually, we're not OK with all this", we are at risk of being fired and losing our livelihoods, no longer being able to feed our families, losing business opportunities, losing our close friends and family members who will find our bigoted and hateful views totally unacceptable. It has been made painfully clear that we will not have the support of our bosses, our HR managers, our unions, our healthcare professionals or our MPs. If we are publicly any less than completely supportive of gender ideology and all that it entails, we can expect to get the JK Rowling treatment, only without the huge net worth and ability to get proper security to protect us from the people who would threaten to rape and kill us for saying that women deserve female only spaces.

And then in April the most senior judges in the country said, in a very reasonable and fair judgment, that this is wrong. That women are female people and trans women are male people, that women exist in law and that it is reasonable for us to have some single sex spaces and services from which the opposite sex can lawfully be excluded.

And once the highest court in the country spoke the truth, they made it OK for ordinary women and men to speak the truth too.

The Supreme Court judgment has not legitimised hatred against trans people. It has legitimised the truth. If you experience the truth as hateful, the problem is you, not the people who speak the truth.

And the truth is that humans cannot change sex, and sometimes sex matters.

You would struggle to find anybody on this forum who believes trans people shouldn't have the same rights as everyone else. If we believe trans rights should be curtailed, it is only because trans people currently have rights that no one else has, and many of us believe that trans people's rights need to be brought back into line with those of other groups.

Trans people have had rights that no one else has had both officially and unofficially. Officially, they are still the only people allowed to have a piece of paper with a legal fiction on it, which enables them to retrospectively falsify their birth certificates and hide their previous identities even from the Disclosure and Barring Service. Unofficially, they have been granted access to spaces and services for members of the opposite sex, even though this has never been legal, as confirmed by the Supreme Court. And now they are complaining that because they have been allowed to behave as though they had these rights for the last fifteen years, they should be able to continue doing so. The human rights version of squatters' rights, if you like.

Well, no.

Anyone who wants trans people's rights to expressly trump women's rights in law now needs to campaign for that, debate it in public under the scrutiny of the House of Commons, the House of Lords, the media and the voting public, and if they successfully manage to convince the right people that one trans woman is more important than a hundred women, bring about that change through democratic means rather than by stealth.

I get that trans people are upset because society has finally said "no", and "actually we don't believe trans women are women and we never did". That must hurt.

But being called bigots for wanting female people to exist in law and have single sex rape crisis services hurt too.

That isn't the same thing as me saying the SC was wrong, but the very, very real fact is that many people have a very narrow view of gender and are prepared to aggressively assert that view when they falsely feel it is under threat.

We [the Royal We] do NOT have a VERY NARROW VIEW OF GENDER.

Some of us broke the NARROW VIEW OF GENDER in the 1980s and were often the first WOMEN in MEN's jobs and roles paving the way for the next generation. Some of us had flat top haircuts in the 1980s. Some of us wore DMs to school in the 1970s. Some of us refused to do Home Economics and would only do METALWORK and WOODWORK and went into ENGINEERING and spent 20 years getting grief for it.

We have the widest view of GENDER that it is possible to have. We just don't want KIDS STERILISED, MUTILATED, BREASTS BOUND and PENISES CUT OFF because kids want to be GENDER NON CONFORMING.

Fucking hell, how many more times do we have to repeat this?

Adn what I am worried about is that an online space that's supposed to be a haven for open and free discussion is infected by a sizeable number of people who are fanatically obsessed with the idea that women's rights should be curtailed - and maybe eliminated altogether.

It should be open for discussion whether trans rights should be curtailed when they take away other people’s rights eg. the right to single sex services, spaces, sports.

That’s all this is about.

Other people have rights as well, and a balance must be struck.

Generally what is referred to as trans rights is special exemptions to use single sex spaces belonging to the other sex. This is more rights than other people have, trans people have not changed sex, and other users of these spaces have the right to a safe, single sex environment where they have that right in law.

Bloody hell, you went for it there.

'infected by'. We're not germs. We're ordinary women who happen to think that humans can't change sex, and that believing that they can is dangerous for women's rights.

'fanatically obsessed' or, as I would see it, worried and concerned.

'that trans rights should be curtailed' I'm not sure any of us sees it like that. There IS a conflict of rights, and that is where we wants 'trans rights' to be limited. We don't want men in women's changing rooms or women's prisons. Please explain why having them in those places ISN'T a safeguarding nightmare. So long as 'trans rights' don't fuck women over, they can fill their boots.

'Such behaviour is ugly, morally bankrupt' You think being concerned for women's rights and safeguarding and sporting opportunities and representation is 'ugly and morally bankrupt'? O-kay.

'and unbecoming' HAHAHAHAHA Perhaps not the best word to use when arguing with a bunch of arsey feminists.

Yours,
'a reasonable human being'

Edited for inevitable typos.

And if you're going to post grammatically incorrect, made up Latin phrases, at the very least use Pratchett's Latatian which has the benefit of actually being a clever 'pune' on words.

I think you will this video insightful OP:

@JsmeLegie
I agree with you. I don't have a trans daughter, but my daughter does have trans-identifying friends and the amount of negativity they are facing has escalated massively since the SC judgement.

That isn't the same thing as me saying the SC was wrong, but the very, very real fact is that many people have a very narrow view of gender and are prepared to aggressively assert that view when they falsely feel it is under threat. The SC judgement has only been seen by many as legitimizing their attack on the identities of some of the trans community.

I think what LostInCatsFur is further worried about is that an online space that's supposed to be a haven for open and free discussion is infected by a sizeable number of people who are fanatically obsessed with the idea that trans rights should be curtailed - and maybe eliminated altogether.
It's a legitimate fear. Such behaviour is ugly, morally bankrupt, and unbecoming of anyone who wants to consider themselves a reasonable human being.

Why are they facing negativity?

• against them as humans (not appropriate)
• because the SC judgment has given people confidence to stand up and reclaim the rights that were being removed (to speak honestly / to own the definition of woman as women / to have female single-sex spaces without men in them etc.) and therefore in doing that those extra rights that some trans people were grabbing / the bullying / the oppression is now being pushed back - and some don't like that?

I am seeing very little negativity against trans people - instead, a lot of compassion - however I am seeing that people rightly are resetting the balance - if that is being defined as negativity against trans, then that is playing the victim inappropriately - the SC Judgement defined no new law - it confirmed the existing and removed no rights from the trans community - it confirmed they retained all their rights - they just aren't going to be allowed to carry on pinching rights from others!

Actually I think a lot of people on here have a very wide view of gender - the belief is that gender is societal-based and a snapshot in time as to how society sees men / women - there is no issue or concern with people redefining gender - if men want to put on high heels and make up - they are simply returning to society's understanding of gender in the Regency era - by doing this they widen the understanding of male gender... That is very different to the belief that a man can biologically become a woman - which is sex and has nothing to do with gender. This debate is about sex - gender is an external reflection of reality - you can neither fully define it, nor contain it - it is observed, not formed - it therefore can not be under threat and equally you can not transition between genders - as an observation it is defined by what men / women do - you don't somehow choose to be in one or the other - your biological sex defines the gender you help to create.

Identities of the trans community are simple:

• born a male = man
• born a female = woman

no-one wants to curtail trans rights...

• a 'trans-woman' is a man and has all the rights of any other man - neither more nor less - and the same vice versa.
• there is concern to ensure that the rights to a childhood are maintained for our children
• the right to not be abused physically / mentally
• the right for women to have single-sex spaces
• the right for girls to not have boys in their changing rooms
• the right for lesbians to choose to only have relationships with other women (those born female)
• no-one is removing rights - instead it is rebalancing and re-establishing the rights that have already been removed.

Ultimately there can not be any such thing as a trans person - you can not transition, it is biologically impossible - so the whole discussion is rightly being reframed back into real biology and truth - and the law has been confirmed to support that. This means:

• rights back to those from whom they were removed
• compassion and support to those who genuinely have body dysmorphia - which is a mental health condition, not some magical sex change...
• truth being spoken in loving, but sometime blunt and honest ways.

As with my previous post - compassion can sit alongside truth, biology, reality & the law - none of which need to be compromised to be compassionate. Compassion does not mean having to agree to and support a lie that sex can be changed, so yes the fact that the truth is blunt and not what the trans community want to hear may hurt, but we need to find ways to support those communities to live with the truth, not against it.

However much TRA's want to obscure the fact, a male in a female space or service makes it mixed sex.

Despite utterly bizarre claims that sex is a spectrum or the misappropriation of serious medical conditions in order to argue the right of males to access opposite sex spaces, sex is immutable and someone's inner sense of gender doesn't trump women's rights to safety and dignity in the spaces and services which were created for their use and enshrined in the EQA2010.

So however much arm flailing there is, if you are demanding that such spaces are made mixed sex to pander to the feelings of men, then you will face pushback from women. Soz.

Your finding it upsetting isn't a reason for us to stop talking about it.

A young relative of mine announced 'trans!' some years ago now. I've had a few conversations with her about it over the years. I struggle to use 'he'. I want to suggest that coming off 'T' might reduce the health issues thay have been cropping up, but I suspect that would cause a ruction so I keep quiet - and feel like a coward.

I love this young person. But I remain 100% certain that humans cannot change sex, that this is a social contagion which is damaging (often vulnerable) young people, that it blows open enormous holes in safeguarding, and is dangerous for women. This was painful for me to get my head around.

So I genuinely sympathise. But the days of 'no debate' are long gone. We struggled hard for the right to be able to talk about this, and we're not giving it up because talking about it is far too important.