Continuation of Polypostwonder thread

PPW why would you insist that genetic women refer to themselves with words in addition to woman in circumstances where they need to establish that they were born female, like sports and single sex clubs?

In order to distinguish ourselves from trans women, we are required by trans people to call ourselves CIS women or something like "women born with female chromosomes".

It is for the minority group to add a label, not the majority of the group that trans people want to be seen to belong to.

Of course your answer to this will be "I am a woman". Should you choose to try to complete at elite level in women's competition (yes there are some for older people), you'll swiftly find that's not the case.

So can you please put that answer aside right now and explain why you think women should have to add labels to themselves to describe to others that they are women born and bred, because a tiny number, statistically speaking, of men want to identify as women?

And this is your belief and i respect it, but disagree with it.

You forgot to add my privilege as a white person on top of the foreigner designation.

I've been subjected to the cultural enforcement of gender in religiously conservative muslim countries.

Jesus mate, did you type that with a straight face? I'm talking about the repression and exploitation female people face within their own families, not because of how they "present" because they are known to be female from the moment they are born.

Jesus. It's just not on your radar at all is it?

There is no definitive scientific proof of this. Sadly, the only effort that has ever been presented to research the topic was killed by Nike, who withdrew funding that it had publicly announced at the urging of the Trump government and gender critical people.

Both male and female puberties provide increased advantage over male 'minipuberty' combined with any additional pre-pubertal development. An adult woman will always outperform a pre-pubertal boy at any sport.

Some girls will have physical advantages over other girls. I don't deny it. What I don't deny is we can't know whether any advantages exist at this time other than to observe performance in trans girls. There is no proof that Becky Pepper Jackson is performing at anything other than the level of a girl at her age. She certainly isn't performing at the level of the boys.

Trans girls are not men. I disagree that there is a safeguarding risk different than within any group of girls, with the addition that bullying and harassment of minorities is a large issue that I assume schools are paying attention to now vs when I was in school.

Be sorry for equating your inconvenience as a vistor to conservative muslim countries with the lives of the women who live there.

"I acknowledge all of those experiences impact some women and never men."

I'm sorry for not contextualising why the experiences impacted some women and never men.

We were here last night. I said I'd be happy to support you finding a place in the world under a different name, but not the word "woman" because that's unreasonable and unfair to female people who actually have nothing to do whatever your belief about "woman" is that drives your self image.

That you knowing this nevertheless feel "woman" is the only word that will do for you is misogyny pure and simple.

We could have arrived this place last night.

I've been subjected to the cultural enforcement of gender in religiously conservative muslim countries.

Jesus mate, did you type that with a straight face? I'm talking about the repression and exploitation female people face within their own families, not because of how they "present" because they are known to be female from the moment they are born.

Jesus. It's just not on your radar at all is it?

And I acknowledge all of those experiences impact some women and never men. I was effectively sacked when I took leave after the adoption of our daughter. I've been subjected to the cultural enforcement of gender in religiously conservative muslim countries.

The rest is just mumsnet beliefs.

ETA: I removed the word 'severely'

No, just engaging in the misogynist belief that your need to call yourself "woman" has any meaningful substance outside your own selfish needs.

And, as this is mumsnet, I should have explicitly said I was not comparing the two experiences I shared with any of the provided list. I am not engaging in a misogyny competition.

That is your belief.

It does not change the reality that biologically female people are half of humanity, that our biology has physical and social consequences for us, and that we have a moral right to a name that is ours and ours alone.

Only a narcissist would believe his need to define himself as a "woman" is sufficient cause to impose upon half of humanity, four billion people, a definition of womanhood that far too many of us find belittling, insulting and not even especially relevant.

Let's not forget, for all the "social, cultural" gumph...

No transwoman was denied the vote because he was a woman.

No transwoman had to police his chastity, or have it policed for him, because without reliable contraception he had no way to prevent himself falling pregnant.

No transwoman is forced to veil and be silent in Afghanistan.

No transwoman faces the FGM blade.

No transwoman pushes his sanitary projection up his sleeve on the way to the school toilet.

No transwoman was delivered with his dowry to the husband his parents chose for him.

No transwoman was divorced because he failed to conceive, or because he only conceived daughters.

No transwoman was sacked because he got married, or got pregnant.

No transwoman was told his family weren't going to educate him because educating girls is a waste.

Pepper-Jackson has had testosterone advantages as I have detailed over the past pages. From birth.

His not holding a record is absolutely meaningless to the advantages he has had by being male. Even a mediocre male athlete has male testosterone advantage and likely, as per that study other advantages such as muscle memory.

So, yes. I consider that Pepper Jackson has advantage over some female people. Just like you, personally, will have physical advantages over some female people despite you denying it.

No male adult or adolescent should have their risk of harm to female people dismissed, in my opinion. It is a huge mistake to do so. And it would be a safeguarding failure.

I will not be coming around to the gender critical definition.

Counter to the gender critical belief, I've also heard trans-supportive women state there is no single biologically-based characteristic or experience shared by all women, and as a social class, women share far more experiences within culture. My beliefs are similar to this. The perception of my biology is not in my control.

Society hasn't needed to know whether everyone it groups together culturally as women has identical functional biological capabilities, because factually they don't. The likely capacity of pregnancy was assumed of me and the roles of SAHM and eventually working mother were assigned to me.

The social definition of "woman" isn't "my definition" and it doesn't liberate me. I've never claimed that it does. I have no special ability that enables me to escape how society treats women as a class. Women have been culturally manipulated by society for far longer than I've been alive. My transition and inclusion within women didn't divert or change this in any way.

You and the majority of women experience your female biology as women. I understand that. The first definition of woman references biology for this reason. The word is also used socially, very commonly in other contexts that do not diminish the first definition.

I very much have personal experience with 'woman' as it applies to more than half of the population. Not one person, government or organisation has ever needed to know what my chromosomes are, my internal organs look like, what gametes my body was organised to support, or the status of any SRY genes. I live under the same language, law and cultural beliefs. I am not above it, nor do I control it.

I do feel that things like this highlight how limited, privileged (and, ironically, sex-based) your conviction that there's no need for a shared noun for adult human females is.

Maybe think of it this way...

Your definition of "woman" liberates you to say, as you do here, that "I very much have personal experience with 'woman' as it applies to more than half of the population."

But you saying that renders the same phrase meaningless for nigh on all of the 4 billion women globally. Because, in their wonderful infinity of collective experience, they'd be mystified by what it could possibly mean.

Prior to your inclusion, of course, they'd have been perfectly clear: menstruation, a likely capacity for pregnancy for a proportion of their life, and menopause. With your inclusion, though? That's the silence of not far off 4 million women scratching their heads in bemusement as they try to work out what commonality could possibly unite them all outside of that. I mean, we're so wonderfully, fabulously, expansively different! What's left, besides biology, that doesn't flatten "woman" into unrepresentative homogeneity?

Your answer would be, I assume, "being seen and treated as women". And right there is the privilege. Because that's an extraordinarily dangerous definition that women simply can't afford. To be defined by how we're seen and treated? Really?! Look around you at the world today!

Your definition downplays the physical reality that is the axis of our shared oppression to indiscriminately embrace the very constructs which exploit that reality.

Your phrase "Not one person, government or organisation has ever needed to know what my chromosomes are, my internal organs look like, what gametes my body was organised to support, or the status of any SRY genes." is so extraordinarily and ironically revealing. We'd kill for this to be about some theoretical "knowledge" of our gametes and chromosomes etc. for us. If bloody only! For women, knowledge is irrelevant. Our life is the experience of living them. To misquote Descartes, We "know" because we are.

Your more liberal and liberating definition? Our prison.

Your conviction that women globally can afford (let alone want) to embrace woman-as-perception over retaining a shared word with which to name and resist the daily - hourly - challenges that unite us? Our evidence of your privilege.