Why is Mumsnet allowing itself to be bullied by Shon Faye?

[Manyfridays]

Really sad that this site is going to allow itself amd women on here to be bullied and silenced. Most of all because the support here for abused women is some of the best on the net and now the actual site is allowing itself to essentially be abused and bullied into submission

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how transwomen are women without using a gender stereotype.if I could do that for you (so if I started a thread on it or whatever), what difference would that make to your standpoint please? Really keen to know.

Yes, absolutely. I'm always open to discussion and am more than happy to change my mind if a logical case is put forward.
However, I still haven't seen 'woman' defined without using biology or sexual stereotypes so await your definition with interest.

So there are double standards, trans people (activists in particular) can refer to previous names, to named people, to specific facts, but we can't.

Like the Jazz posts - it's ok for Jazz's parents and Jazz themselves to post about their body/penis/status, but we aren't allowed to refer to it on here.

It's very confusing, knowing what we are allowed to say. I mean, I'm an adult, surely I should be allowed an opinion.

And I'm back to the bad old days of splitting posts. I hope others do the same. I'm sick of long interesting factual posts disappearing because of a misplacement of a single he or she, or an apparently transphobic sentence meaning the entire post is deleted.

Yes, Marvelle, it definitely was goady. I knew it would be deleted. I hadn't seen the article though, and it was interesting to read SF's opinion on SF a few years ago and see how things have changed, and how we are all expected to suspend factual belief and pretend that things are now and always have been the way we are told they are (if that makes any sense).

'Shon is a misogynist currently engaged in abusively stalking women for being non-compliant'
THIS
Until Mumsnet realises this we will be abused and effectively silenced

“However, I still haven't seen 'woman' defined without using biology or sexual stereotypes so await your definition with interest.”

That’s because there’s absolutely no need to define ‘woman’ without using biology - biology is a very good way to define ‘woman’.

Why Maryz didn't you know? Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia...

Here's the thing: I don't want Mumsnet to be the transphobic site because I think parents with trans kids need somewhere to go and talk about their worries without feeling judged. My impression is that Mumsnet is that sort of place and they would find a lot of support and useful advice here, but the image that's being presented to the world is frothing transphobia. I am not taken in by TRAs - they are misogynist to their core, men's rights activists co-opting the language and ideas of oppression for their own purposes and set on dismantling all the meagre protection that women have currently got in law/society from threats men just don't face. But I wish we could have discussions without attacking individuals or mocking them because it undermines the solid, decent points many people make about feminism, family and trans kids here.

If talking about genitals is transphobic then why do many trans people discuss their 'new' genitals?

That's kind of the point - there is no absolute definition so whatever definition you use is going to be completely arbitrary
No - if something isn't "absolute" that doesn't mean it's arbitrary. That's nonsense and obfuscates the issues.

Also we aren't really talking about a definition per sec. We are talking about a descriptor as to how we categorise humans.

99.5% of humans come in one of two flavours. This is the same as all other sexually reproducing organisms (including plants). It is not arbitrary to recognise that categorisation and name it.

If you want to use "woman" to describe something other than "adult human female" the onus is on you to define the group "woman" describes.

I don't get the argument/confusion? If any woman has a penis or has had a penis, then she is not a woman. What's so difficult to understand?

For anyone saying a woman with a penis (or born with a penis) can be called a woman, try asking someone with autism! Or shall we accuse autistic people of hate crime, too? My adult son (autistic) laughs his head off when he hears someone insisting female with a penis is a woman.

I truly hope MN doesn’t start bending to please TRA’s. I am only aware of this debate because of MN.

If someone had asked me last year if transwomen should be allowed to access female only spaces I would have said yes and would’ve assumed people who disagreed were pearl clutching bigots. When it’s spelt out like it has been on MN many times by patient, educated, erudite women the issues are blindingly obvious.

I socialise in a very left wing, pc group and absolutely everyone I know that I’ve spoken to about this is in absolute agreement that self id is a terrible idea. People are writing letters to mps, people are slowly feeling brave enough to voice their opinions. I really think the tide is turning on this and this is why TRA’s are suddenly becoming so focused on shutting people up on here.

But thank you anonymous people who have informed me about this. I never feel confident or educated enough to actually comment on the feminism board but I think you’re all bloody awesome.

So we are almost 150 posts in on this thread, and still no one has been able to explain exactly how transwomen are women, or give a definition of women. This happens every time. I have been on a hell of a lot of threads about this and I have never seen anyone give anything close to an explanation of the basis on which trans women are women. Just saying it and calling anyone who doesn't agree 'transphobic' doesn't cut the mustard in amongst the grown ups I'm afraid.

I think another reason that the TRAs go after MN (apart from because they want to silence women) is because so much sense is spoken on these boards, and they just don't like that. There is not point going after the ty f*s type pages, because those sorts of 'discussions' aren't going to convince anyone that there might actually be a clash of rights or an issue with redefining womanhood.

The posts and debate on these boards have substance. Posters make points that get people thinking about how certain parts of the trans agenda might affect other people. Those points argue against the mindless 'transwomen are women' mantra and give reasons why. That's why TRAs are so keen to get this sort of debate shut down.

Trans-women are trans-women. They absolutely should have access to services, legal protections, better health support. However inclusiveness and protectiveness of one currently marginalised group should not come at the expense of another.

By allowing self-identification, it literally means that any man can claim to be a woman and be legally allowed into women-only spaces and services without any medical intervention or assessment whatsoever. Places which include those housing or providing services to vulnerable women such as refuges, rape clinics and prisons.

It is not transphobic to be concerned about this. Self identification is also bad news for those with genuine gender dysphoria - as it places those transpersons who have undergone gender reassignment at risk from the potential consequences of allowing an open door. Self ID also risks isolating and excluding a significant number of women who are religiously observant - such as Muslims and Orthodox Jews, who are not able to use spaces such as loos which are gender neutral.

Finally, there are an increasing number of children who are on the receiving end of early interventions, where the effects of the medicines and procedures they are undergoing are irreversible and significant. By allowing self-ID this has the potential to completely open the floodgates and allow significant medical interventions to a young person who still isn't sure who they really are. We already know that teens are very vulnerable to peer pressure. That it can be a real time of upheaval and change, which some teens struggle with. Hormones and puberty can be a powerful combination. How many of the adults reading are the same people you were at 13, 15 and 18? With exactly the same passions, interests, doubts and uncertainties? I honestly think that before too much longer we are going to start seeing a number of young adults taking legal action for the bodily changes they've been through as a result of self-ID and later regretted.

dinosaursandtea Thu 03-May-18 15:17:30

Trans women are not men. They’re women. Saying otherwise IS transphobia.

Where are they getting their extra X chromosome from? Kinder Eggs? A person with XY chromosomes is male, that will never change, no matter how much you wish it. Biology is fact. Feelz is not.

If this is deleted @MNHQ then I think we can all agree you've caved in to the TRAs and are throwing women under the bus to appease your advertisers, just as Justine said you wouldn't.

You are rolling over to get your tummy tickled by these people, but be assured they will not stop until this site is shut down. They hate women. They hate women talking amongst themselves even more. You must stand up for women. I do and I will and I'm not even a woman.

You are rolling over to get your tummy tickled by these people, but be assured they will not stop until this site is shut down. They hate women. They hate women talking amongst themselves even more. You must stand up for women. I do and I will and I'm not even a woman

Aye, what he said. 👍

Were you born with a penis?
Are you XY?

It IS that simple.

Being a woman, or female, is not a state of mind. It is a biological fact.

You can be as stereotypically 'feminine' or 'womanly' as you like. You can chop what you like off and take whatever drugs you please.

You are still a man. You are still male. You are just not 'masculine'.

Until you decide to block stairwells and threaten speakers and journalists because the truth hurts you in your 'safe space' of correct pronouns and dysphoria.

Fight for your own fucking rights as your own new 'trans' gender. You are not women. Stop piggybacking our causes. Stop trying to force yourselves in to our spaces.

Basically stop shitting where you fucking eat.

So did @dinosaursandtea ever return to explain how exactly transwomen are women?

Nope. Thought not.

Half of the human race is one reproductive sex.
The other half is the other.
It doesn't matter which collection of consonants and vowels we associate with which sex. What matters is the the association is explicitly understood.

People will always try to layer extra associations onto the words that we use to refer to the sexes. Often those extra associations are brutally unfair and serve a nasty agenda, and frequently they are unwarranted and false.

So do words matter? You tell me, transactivists. If they don't, if you can make them mean whatever you fancy, then why have you targeted the word woman which means of the sex that makes eggs. Why not make up your own word which doesn't have that definition as part of it?

And for that matter, if you successfully claimed woman, and agreed a definition which clearly differentiated it's characteristics from that of man, would you be content if 3.7 billion people formerly known as women abandoned the word and left it to you entirely? Do you want the word woman when biological sex has been stripped out of it completely and what is left is a word that describes a personality type but has also become associated with exclusively your male bodies too?

We all know that the word alone isn't what is desired.

And if the female sex ceded the word woman to you and created their own new word for their bodies you'd be after that before we could utter it's syllables.

This battle to control language is in truth a battle to prevent women from being recognised and acknowledged for what we truly are. To acknowledge the truth about women is to acknowledge that exist separately and differently from men and that men can never be like us.

RatRolyPoly didn't return to provide us with a non-biological definition of woman either, surprisingly

The trouble with defining anything is that all definitions are ostensive - it's just pointing at something and grunting and hoping that the other person takes your meaning. Arguing about what the definition of a woman is makes no more sense than arguing about what the definition of green is. The only possible answer is to point and go 'Um, that is'.

Certainly not the only possible answer.

Green light has a wavelength of~577-492nm. Green objects absorb other frequencies of light, reflecting this wavelength so we perceive them as green.

Females have xx chromosomes, a human with xy chromosomes would be classed as male.

It strikes me that there is something almost transphobic itself in insisting transwomen and women are one and the same. What is actually wrong with being a transwoman? Why can't that be owned and be something to be proud of? Surely that's where the fight should be? Acceptance of transpeople, not pretending they don't even exist?