AIBU to ask MNHQ if we can have a trans discussion section?

[Skarossinkplunger]

Out of the first 10 threads showing on my AIBU page 4 of them are trans threads. There is seriously no escaping, please can they have their own board?

I think the Caldicott guidelines on best interests of the patient might come into play - if the trans status was relevant to the health care of the patient.

I would hope so saga, but unless this type of situation is specifically addressed in professional guidelines any HCP is going to fear becoming case law - and that could go either way: unlawful disclosure or failure to act in best interests.

I've had a quick trawl and haven't found much that's reassuring. There's this from 2016 which says:

Health Records of Transgender Persons
A patient can request that their gender be changed in a record by a statutory declaration, but this does not give them the same rights as those that can be made by the Gender Recognition Act 200467. The formal legal process (as defined in the Gender Recognition Act 2004) is that a Gender Reassignment Certificate is issued by a Gender Reassignment Panel. At this time a new NHS number can be issued and a new record can be created, if it is the wish of the patient. It is important to discuss with the patient what records are moved into the new record and to discuss how to link any records held in any other institutions with the new record.

And there's older guidance here (undated but obviously a few years old as Beaumont Society is still listed as a cross-dresser org). There's a fair discussion from p17 on data protection and disclosure. It very much stresses that any disclosure must only be done in accordance with the trans person's wishes.

I honestly don't know where this leaves a HCP who has an obviously trans patient with a sparkly new medical record and no intention of disclosing, if they present with what looks like a sex specific disease or condition.

When all the posts from a single poster are deleted there is usually a good reason, often (though obviously I don't know in this case) because mnhq have evidence that the poster is here for some sort of nefarious reason [sigh].

As an aside, I'm really hoping AssignedPerfectAtBirth is still reading. If you are, you are one of the posters who gave me a wake up call on this issue, and I know you are usually very reasoned and polite. I suppose everyone has their limits, and sometimes it's hard to remain calm in the face of such deliberate goading, so I'm sending and I hope you are ok.

Assigned everything you've posted on this thread seems reasonable to me. You haven't been rude or aggressive. Why is it still so inappropriate for women to be angry or passionate about a subject?

I used to roll my eyes when I saw yet another thread about transpeople on here. Some of them seemed transphobic and it just seemed so boring to keep bringing it up again and again. I couldn't understand why people were getting their knickers in a twist about the subject.

I've completely changed my mind. I've read countless posts by women spelling out what's actually going on. It terrifies me really. I want to feel safe in female spaces. It is so important this discussion happens where people who don't know much about it have access to it. I don't care if people have a differing view to mine so long as that is a considered view and they stick around and debate like a grown up. I have seen very little actual transphobia on mumsnet but lots of people shouting 'transphobe!' and running away

Assigned everything you've posted on this thread seems reasonable to me. You haven't been rude or aggressive. Why is it still so inappropriate for women to be angry or passionate about a subject?

I agree Copper.

You haven't been rude or aggressive.

They have called posters lazy, ignorant, selfish, amongst other things simply for daring to ask for a sub forum.

Just adding my name to the list wanting threads to remain on the main forum. It is an important current issue and it is discussed in a calm, factual way on the whole. Mumsnet gives women a voice.

bish

Well those would be personal attacks,

I can see one of her posts has been deleted

And as far as i can see she was referring to attitudes and not individual posters, which would explain why she hasnt broken talk guidelines

Please look at the feminist board for the threads there on the GRB. (And all threads are specific to self identification and the GRB). You'll find linked article after article, links to research, links to a wide range of speakers most of which are national names, plus reasoned discussion of that evidence. It's a massive library of collated evidence. Plus no few threads discussing and comparing evidence provided by different bodies some of which are pro TRA and some of which have concerns re trans political activist statistics and claims in an attempt by most posters to figure out what is true

I saw this before. Do you think the people discussing it on feminism chat are looking at this evidence they have posted in a neutral, balanced way or are they looking at it with an agenda?

Do people often challenge the evidence quoted and the statistics given? Is there any debate about the evidence in this vast archive?

o you think the people discussing it on feminism chat are looking at this evidence they have posted in a neutral, balanced way or are they looking at it with an agenda?

Well surely people are going to answer that they are looking at it in a balanced way

They are not likely to say 'I definitely have an agenda'

You could always take a look yourself

I have a feeling you have your own opinion

So not sure why you are asking the question

I have a feeling you have your own opinion

I suspect that the evidence and statistics quoted on that particular section are rarely challenged if they confirm the belief of people who post on that section.

And I also suspect that works the same way on trans activist sites when they quote statistics and evidence to support their view.

Activism is like that.

Certainly wouldnt argue with that

The challenging bit i mean

I do think there are a number of posters who make great efforts to find relevant information and statistics

But not all

Overwhelmingly posters on FWR want the evidence and statistics they post to be accurate, reliable and solid, otherwise it's not much use. You know this and you also know that debate is welcomed as long as it consists of something more than 'you're all transphobes/bigots/on the wrong side of history'. You know this because you have been posting there for years under various names.

I’m another lurker who is very grateful that this is being discussed on the main boards and not tucked away somewhere I wouldn’t think to look at. Like many others I was completely unaware of trans issues, and of how far the definition of trans had expanded - I knew about transsexuals (by which I mean people who were post-surgery/hormone treatment), and like most have no issues with this group, but I had no idea that men could now basically declare themselves female but undergo no transformation whatsoever.

I have found the vast majority of the discussion to be rational and respectful with very little bigotry, and I genuinely think most posters are sympathetic to trans people - they are just concerned about the consequences for women and women’s rights, and also for trans people themselves, particularly children who may be encouraged to undergo life changing treatments on the basis of some very dodgy logic.

The more I’ve read about this the more horrified I am, not least because it hasn’t been discussed in the mainstream beyond the ‘anyone who disagrees is a hateful bigot’ kind of shutdowns. I think there are still a majority of people in the wider world who don’t realise that under this law all a man need do to access women’s shelters, toilets, changing rooms, and anything else, is fill out a form. The potential for abuse is as obvious as it is horrifying, and surely most people, male or female, would object to this if they knew. I can’t imagine many fathers being comfortable with a male-bodied person joining their daughter in a changing room, even if that person has decided that they ‘identify as a woman’, whatever the hell that means.

So thank you MN for bringing it to my attention. I only wish it was discussed in as open a way throughout the media as a whole.

Overwhelmingly posters on FWR want the evidence and statistics they post to be accurate, reliable and solid, otherwise it's not much use

I would disagree with that - only certain evidence that support a view is normally given, and it can sometimes be picked apart and challenged. But I don't really see people who want the evidence to support their view do that - it's not something people usually do if it supports their view.

sagamartha

You post on there all the time. If you want to refute evidence or statistics with some of your own you’ve every opportunity!

Another glad of all these trans threads and increasingly worried about self declaration.

saga it's open to anyone to post evidence and statistics and anyone else to pick it apart. Trans ideology is very susceptible to being picked apart because it doesn't bear scrutiny. That is not a flaw in FWR.

Thing is @sagamartha I, and I think most of the posters on the Feminism board, came from a place of LGBT rights, activism, left wing politics and remembering the bad old days of the 80s with anti-gay agendas everywhere. We weren't bigots, reactionaries and closed minds.

I was for many years, hanging out with, working, living and partying with gay, gender non-conforming and trans people; saying everything the people who call us bigots say. And I was not convinced by arguments trying to tell me that lesbians, Muslims, HIV positive people or any other marginalized person was 'out to get' me. Much as Thatcher and others tried.

It took very good evidence, which I examined critically, to convince me that there was an issue. It is very rare for people to change their world view but this issue has done that. So when you say that we are in an echo chamber of non-critical thought you could not be more wrong.

I WISH I wasn't a TERF. I'd love to drink the Cool Aid. This issue divides my community and makes me angry and sad. I remember when we felt great as trans allies because we could all get along. We still can with lots of trans people who want to live their lives and have rights while we live ours. Self ID is the enemy of that.

Don't silo this away it's so important this us talked about in full sight.

sagamatha
Have you ever considered the fact that transwomen don't tend to use male areas so there won't be any evidence of attack because transwomen avoid such areas.
Of course its possible. My post was more in reply to the sneery tone of the way this conversation went down

Poster 1 - vulnerable transwomen are being abused and assaulted because others refuse to allow them access to women's bathrooms and changing rooms.

Poster 2 - Larger answer, but only the 'I don't have the stats' part of it was copied. And misrepresented to make out as if it had been poster 2 who brought up assault and abuse apparently suffered. When it was indeed poster 1 in the first place to assert 'facts' with no evidence.

Poster 1 - No. Nobody ever does on these threads. They just swallow propaganda whole and regurgitate it, which is why it's impossible to debate rationally.

---

As if poster 2 had made unfounded claims about violence stats in the first place. When it was infact the very same person who was accusing others of 'swallowing propaganda whole and regurgitating it' that was the person doing that to start with! Poster 1 was effectively arguing against themselves, then berating themselves. While trying to make out that poster 2 did something wrong. It was rather bizarre to watch play out, thats all

--

I see no reason why transwomen would not suffer assault at the hands of men. Male violence is very real. No arguments from me on that.

My question though is the same as it has been for a while. In what way does it make transwomen safe from the male violence they are scared of, if the changes transactivists are fighting for (with self-ID) happen? How will transwomen be any safer, by giving access to female areas to all males? Surely, all that will happen is now the female areas are more unsafe too.

Wow that was longer than I expected. Really really tired too. So will come back in the momrning to check if it all makes sense as my eyes are pretty fucked at the moment due to 2am. Night all. Been a lpeasure seeing some people on the other side stick around a little anyway, its a refreshing change. One way or another, this issue does need an actual debate.

@MillicentFawcett

I do remember someone with similar opinions and basis for their argument as @Malcom. I don't see what they'd have done wrong by returning to a thread and sharing their opinion again.

Wonder if they'll be back. It didn't even strike me as sock-puppeting as they never responded to themselves and weren't pretending to be different people. I wonder if they had used different usernames in different threads and confused themselves changing.

I disagree with their stance but at least they had an opinion and tried to get it across.

Back to the OP, I do wish that there could be a single thread - like the way all the people still complaining about Trump are doing it in one, easy to avoid, thread.

It does seem to be taking over AIBU which doesn't seem to be the place for it.

Another annoying aspect is people playing dumb with things like "AIBU to not understand CIS". Not goady, just an excuse for an anti-trans echo chamber.

It wouldn't be a silo.

It' would be chat topic. Like Education, Relationships, or The Doghouse or S&B.

All go-to places.

If it turned out to be a quiet topic, then it would show that actually amNers don't want tomchat about it.

And this is a chat site - not a campaigning one.