Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think its Theresa and the Tories forever now.....(weeps!)

229 replies

SuitedandBooted · 23/05/2018 11:31

Given that Labour can't even decide what a woman is, or follow their own bloody policies. Perhaps Maria Miller MP should change to their side..., why should anyone give a thought to 52% of the population after all?

For those who missed it, David Lewis did this to make a point;

blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/05/meet-the-man-standing-to-be-a-labour-party-womens-officer/

Personally I'm of the opinion that a woman is an adult person of the female sex, but then I'm not a "woke" Brocialist tosser.

Things have now moved on to this, as Labour was VERY cross with him, as he clearly wasn't being Trans enough Confused. After all, they already have a male-born woman's officer (no surgical changes/hormones etc) who has come out as a lesbian - that's sincerity for you!

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3256772-Guess-how-I-got-suspended-from-the-Labour-Party

Dear Jezza, I wouldn't trust you and your pals to run the school fete.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
SuitedandBooted · 24/05/2018 11:41

But were they men or "women" ? -

www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4305270/RACHEL-JOHNSON-woman-trial-rape-Really-No.html

OP posts:
Bowlofbabelfish · 24/05/2018 11:45

98% of violent crime is committed by men.

Once that’s down to the same levels as women, we can talk about toilet access.

Bowlofbabelfish · 24/05/2018 11:50

"Does that mean we should scatter all existing protections and safeguards to the winds? Fuck no". Why?

Are you saying we should remove all safeguarding procedures?

Are you saying allowing any Male to perform personal care alone on a female girl guide is not going to attract men who are predatory ?

Predatory men (regardless of trans status) are attracted to places with no safeguarding - do you accept that as a fact?

Do you understand why we have safeguarding in the first place? And why removing protections lets ANY man in to become a risk. To make it absolutely clear I’m not implying that those men will be transwomen. I’m saying that predatory men will exploit any loophole they can.

ReliefOfChaos · 24/05/2018 11:57

Not profiling people based on their group (or class) is not the same as 'removing all safeguards'. I'm vaguely familiar with the safeguarding protections for children, and I'm fairly certain it's more thorough than "Do you have a penis?"

SuitedandBooted · 24/05/2018 12:04

And just for the "Its all fine, nothing to see, (or talk about, or else), you're all nasty, EVERYONE agrees with meeee!" Woke Brigade;

wingsoverscotland.com/girls-and-boys/

It's a survey on public attitudes to Self-ID

Summary
SCOTLAND (excluding DKs)

Good idea: 23.3%
Bad idea: 76.7%

ENGLAND (excluding DKs)

Good idea: 25.4%
Bad idea: 74.6%

So not everyone is happy to agree that biological sex is irrelevant, and what really matter is "feelings". Pink for girls, blue for boys, and if you don't fancy your side, you can swap.

Gosh, I'm shocked......NOT.

Hi Jezza. Any interest in what the public actually want?

OP posts:
Bowlofbabelfish · 24/05/2018 12:16

and I'm fairly certain it's more thorough than "Do you have a penis?

Actually in quite a few cases that is indeed what is relevant.

Disabled girl guide requiring toileting help. Person with penis not allowed. Person without penis allowed. Under self ID, person with penis allowed and parents not notified.

Absolutely nothing could go wrong with that surely? Oh wait...

Whereas before predatory men would be put off by simply not having access, and there being rules in place, now there will be males thinking ... yeah. Girl guiding.

Predatory men (and again, I mean men. I’m not singling out transwomen) WILL exploit any loophole they can. Loopholes are closed all the time as they are found. Look up the changes to safeguarding principles after the Soham murders. It’s like an arms race with predators - they find a loophole, it gets closed. Unfortunately it tends to take a serious case to expose them.

And let me be very clear as well - children of both sexes and children with gender issues will be affected by safeguarding being diluted. Kids with gender issues can be classed as vulnerable and they are at risk too.

Self ID and changesbto the GRA will reduce safeguarding. Of all children. They will reduce women’s safety too.

hoistTheSales · 24/05/2018 12:36

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

ReliefOfChaos · 24/05/2018 12:38

Don't think you want to be quoting Wings over Scotland as a reliable source. Campbell is a nationalist conspiracy nut who refused to believe that the editor of the Herald was chief reporter for the Sunday Herald despite being told it wasn't so by the Herald, the Sunday Herald and the man in question.

This is Stuart "Hillsborough was the liverpool fan's fault" Campbell that you're relying on for support. Talking about scraping the bottom of the barrel.

charlestonchaplin · 24/05/2018 12:49

ReliefOfChaos
profiling people based on their group (or class) is not the same as 'removing all safeguards'. I'm vaguely familiar with the safeguarding protections for children, and I'm fairly certain it's more thorough than "Do you have a penis?"

In the NHS trust I worked for, men were not allowed to perform personal care for female patients unless a female nurse/HCA was also present. (Haven't read most of the thread so hope I'm not picking up something out of context).

Ohmydayslove · 24/05/2018 12:56

If you have a penis you are a bloke!

Stay out of women’s places. You are not welcome sorry.

Truscum · 24/05/2018 12:58

How do you know what women think and feel?

Hang on to your seat because this may blow your mind!

I listen to women, I empathise with women and I respect women.

Above all? I don’t pretend to be exactly the same as a woman.

So yeah, I’m not a woman, but I sure as hell will stand up for them when, on a woman dominated forum, they keep getting dive bombed by obnoxious posters determined to keep them quiet and dismiss their concerns.

The anger in your posts shines through, but if you think a few harsh word will shut people up you are very wrong.

Truscum · 24/05/2018 13:00

charlestonchaplin they don’t want to hear that.

‘Safeguarding’ is just a term coined by bigots to deny men access to women’s spaces, didn’t you know? Wink

SuitedandBooted · 24/05/2018 13:10

It's a standard survey of 1000 people. I doubt they only asked Hillsborough apologists, and told them what to say.....

Lets talk surveys then, how about this one below, highlighting the claims about suicide amongst transgender people, and used to give further weight to the claims for self-ID, and get it pushed through quickly.

Its a survey which contained 27 Trans people which suddenly became reported as a survey of 2000....can't think why, maybe they were just really bad at counting.

------------------------

"In this article the 2014 Pace survey on which the transgender suicide statistics are based, is referenced as a study of “2000 young people with gender issues”:

Green reels off shocking figures from a 2014 study by the mental health charity Pace which surveyed 2,000 young people with gender issues: 48% attempt suicide, 58% self-harm. “It’s really common.” She pauses. “You can see why we’re worried.”

Sounds truly awful, except:

"The survey recruited 2,078 people of all sexualities and genders. The majority of those 2,078 people were not transgender.

When analysing the responses relating to suicidal ideation the study only looked at respondents under the age of 26. This reduced the sample size to 485 people. Of these, 27 identified themselves as trans. That’s TWENTY SEVEN. Not 2,000 trans people, 58% of whom had considered suicide, but 27 trans* people, 15 of whom had considered suicide.

It is tragic when anyone considers suicide but it’s also unfortunately extremely common. According to the same study a third of young LGB people have, but this fact is not emblazoned on every leaflet or proclaimed loudly by Stonewall in every media discussion.

From the survey:

“…given the nature of PACE and also of the topic of the research, it is possible that there is a disproportion amongst research participants of people with experience of or who are sensitive towards mental health issues.”

Indeed the recruitment methods described were very likely to attract trans* people who were receiving or had sought support for mental health issues. The survey sums up with the caveat:

“Ultimately our findings can only be considered valid for our samples.”

Yet transgender support organisations are presenting these statistics as facts, scaring transgender people themselves, their families and anyone who has dealings with them.

Back to the statistics. Let’s turn it into numbers that reflect the truth of the survey results:

2014 survey of 27 young trans people in UK

13 had previously attempted suicide

8 attempted suicide in the last year

With no adjustment for co-morbid mental health issues or the fact that the respondents may well have found out about or been attracted to completing the survey because of their interaction with mental health services or history of suicide attempts, these figures should really not be extrapolated to apply to the entire transgender population.

Whether or not you think a sample size of 27 people is representative of an entire group and justifies the entire group being labelled according to the findings of such a small study, there is a glaring issue here. Mermaids, the support group for transgender children and their families, effectively lied in its presentation to a roomful of legal professionals. The survey was not of 2,000 trans people at all. Saying it was lends credence to a trope that is already incredibly emotive and potentially dangerous.

Bandying around these doctored statistics as facts does a good job of garnering support for the cause and strikes fear into people who might otherwise be less than supportive of certain demands by and on behalf of transgender people but at what cost? Are there not enough genuine arguments to further the cause for equal treatment of transgender people without resorting to exaggeration and obfuscation of the truth? Presenting this trope to families of transgender children and young people is nothing short of emotional blackmail. “Allow your child to transition or you will have their suicide on your hands.” In any other context threatening suicide in order to force others to accept your demands is emotional abuse, in the context of transition it is positively encouraged as a way to dismiss concerns of friends and family.

By announcing that trans people are an unmitigated suicide risk we are telling them and their families that they are likely to commit suicide. People are very suggestible. If you are told 50% of people like you will be suicidal, when you are having a dark day, instead of thinking tomorrow will be better, are you not more likely to worry that you’re going the way of all those suicidal folks and therefore spiral downwards? Parents who think their child is suicidal may treat them differently and make different decisions based on that information.

Suicide is contagious. Suicidal ideation is incredibly dangerous, especially for young people. There are guidelines in place for reporting of suicide for a reason and, in the main, the press seem to follow them with one glaring exception – transgender people. Surely transgender people would be better served with a positive movement like It Gets Better rather than seeing their advocates and support organisations constantly telling people that they are a danger to themselves."

Full article here:

www.transgendertrend.com/a-scientist-reviews-transgender-suicide-stats/

OP posts:
Poloshot · 24/05/2018 13:12

Winkdry your eyes OP

Bowlofbabelfish · 24/05/2018 13:15

Predatory people (or men, if you really need to) don't need a loophole. Did the Catholic priests and nuns look for legal loopholes before abusing children?

Being a priest WAS the loophole. Some Men joined the priesthood solely because there were opportunities to abuse.

The setup of the church provided the loophole. Priests holding huge status in society. Access to unaccompanied children. Societal impunity. A hierarchy that swept abuse under the table. No legal consequences, you’d just be moved to another parish.

that WAS the loophole 🤦🏻‍♀️

You need me to define safeguarding? Jeez ok. www.nspcc.org.uk/preventing-abuse/child-protection-system/england/legislation-policy-guidance/

Here. Almost ALL of this legislation was drawn up in the wake of awful things happening to children. Soham for example. Huntley had previous - but there was no national vetting system so he was able to get a job as a caretaker in a school in a different area.

Note: predatory man exploiting loophole or gap in legislation and safeguarding procedures

After Soham, the bichard enquiry was set up, and recommended that there was a national framework for vetting set up - DBS checks. In 2011, there were 4 million DBS checks and 20,000 (twenty thousand!!) people were found to be unfit to work in schools/education settings with young people. TWENTY THOUSAND.

if you think predators don’t try to exploit any way they can to access children, that number alone should give you pause for thought.

Predatory people (and most are men) will use any weakness, or loophole they can to access children. Self ID is a dream for these people because it removes the right of challenge, it removes the right ofbparens to know if men with penises are accessing their children where previously there had only been people without penises.

And not just children. The elderly. Psychiatric patients. Women, transwoman.

Self ID will be a disaster. Safeguarding is vital and it cannot be watered down.

SuitedandBooted · 24/05/2018 13:20

Why the smile, Poloshot?

Aren't you bothered about suicide risks etc being reported correctly? Otherwise, how can the right support be given to those who need it

OP posts:
ReliefOfChaos · 24/05/2018 13:34

Don't think anyone brought up suicide Suited, but if it makes you feel better to knock down an survey that no-one referenced go ahead. It

SuitedandBooted · 24/05/2018 13:45

FeliefOfChaos

I posted a reference to a 1000 person survey on how the public views Self ID. HoistTheSales and you clearly doubt its findings, as you seem to think everything is above board in the pro Self ID world, and everyone is fully supportive

So I thought I would point out a survey demonstrating how prominent Self-ID groups are using surveys incorrectly, to twist findings and gather support.

But I'm sure you understood that.

OP posts:
hoistTheSales · 24/05/2018 13:56

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Truscum · 24/05/2018 13:59

Yeah hoistTheSales it’s probably just all a massive coincidence that pedophiles and abusers tend to gravitate to professions where they will hold power over young people and communities, and will get to be alone with said young people.

ReliefOfChaos · 24/05/2018 14:04

"HoistTheSales and you clearly doubt its findings, as you seem to think everything is above board in the pro Self ID world, and everyone is fully supportive"

No. Saying survey X is not reliable doesn't imply any opinion on survey Y. Crap stats are everywhere, and one of the big problems in these discussions is there there are no reliable stats anywhere.

Which incidentally was one of the findings of the Gender Identity Workshop, and data collection one of the major recommendations.

www.ons.gov.uk/methodology/classificationsandstandards/measuringequality/genderidentity/genderidentityupdate

Xenia · 24/05/2018 14:05

In the old days it always seemed to be the scout master who was up to it all with the children sadly, i suspect because it was easier to qualify as a scout master than priest (which involves 7 years in a seminary and no sex so not appealing to many men although certainly some as mentioned above). These people take on these voluntary roles (the few of them who are predators - most scout masters are good people) deliberately to get all those trips camping away with no parents around.

Most trans people are not into this kind of stuff but it's perfectly reasonable for women not to want someone with a penis around in female spaces. Lots of people who want kindness for true transgender people who are having surgery etc do not want self declaration of gender which is a ludicrous idea.

Truscum · 24/05/2018 14:06

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/spycatcher/201404/why-predators-are-attracted-careers-in-the-clergy%3famp

From the 25 year FBI veteran:

In most cultures, children pay deference to authority figures, especially religious ones. Knowing this, the predator can almost certainly count on children abiding by their sordid requests and keeping such matters “secret.” There is ample evidence of this from history, social psychology, and thousands of law suits.

Bowlofbabelfish · 24/05/2018 14:10

Which ones, or are you guessing / making things up

John Geoghan springs to mind. I’m sure a quick google search will bring the odd name up, there have been a fair few... 🤦🏻‍♀️

Abused children generally are mainly female - when you look at clergy abuse that switches and 4/5 cases involve boys. Since sexual preference is set, and celibacy is not considered in and of itself a driver of a abuse (most child abusers are already in relationships) it suggests a self selecting population bias towards those with a thing for young boys. So yes, men were and probably still are joining the priesthood to abuse. As they are all areas where children are involved.

There’s a fair amount of research on it. And I’m taking it from your disbelief you have absolutely no connection with growing up catholic or this wouldn’t even be a question.

SuitedandBooted · 24/05/2018 14:14

"Crap stats are everywhere"

True, but turning a survey of 27 Trans people into 2000 takes "crap" statistic reporting to a whole new level.

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread