To be saddened by the transphobia and homophobia on Mumsnet?

[spannablue]

I used to come on here for a good laugh. But now there's just so much casual, vitriolic, uninformed rubbish om here!

Do people really think that trans women are secretly trying it on to take over women's space? Have you not seen what they have to go through (for some, horrific surgery; for others, lashings of abuse; job losses; loss of contact with family; street attacks)? Why would anyone choose that?

Did you know that if your kid comes out as trans, they are around 48% likely to attempt suicide, and around half of them succeed? All the literature/research on this shows that it's transphobia, stigma and bigotry that causes this, rather than some innate pathology. When a trans kid is supported to be who they want to be, those suicidal feelings tend to go away. If you've ever had or known a child with depression, anxiety, or who self harms, you'll know the fear and terror that they might succeed.

We're talking about a tiny minority of people who are trans. But what I'm seeing on Mumsnet amounts to collective bullying.

When did it become ok to be so judgmental? Have you ever actually met a trans person and listened to them with an open mind?

There are people of all kinds on social media - trans, not trans, gay, straight, bi, lollipop ladies, lawyers, teachers, academics and bus drivers. Some talk a load of crap. And others engage in intelligent, informed, openminded debate. Please consider trying out your ideas thoughtfully with these people before perpetuating the sort of hateful kneejerk nonsense which can have terrible consequences.

For the record, I'm an academic researcher in the field of applied sociology. I'm not trans. I'm a lesbian with four kids aged 3 to 25, one of whom is nonbinary.

*are worried

Because that's one of the most heteronormative things I can imagine, that we carefully release non-conforming women from the straitjacket of gender stereotypes by insisting we are not women at all, and then by extension reinforce that 'real' women or 'cis' women, the majority of women, are naturally or innately feminine. That seems to me to be a huge step backwards.
Nah. I'm a woman, I'm just not very good at it and that's fine.

@Datun

Please read my post above. Far from pearl clutching, I'm not saying that at all. I am, in fact, saying how can you differentiate - or say - it's ok for you, but not for others. Of course my daughter isn't a pervert. But other people will say that about their own children. So how do we tell? Do you have a pervert detector?

Which does, in fact, make yours a straw man argument.

This is at odds with the Tavistock's report of one suicide in the last ten years in their client group
Well it would be. On the Tavistock client list is children who have made their way up the list and are/have received treatment and assessment. My DC was on the Tavistock list but never reached the top for 6 years. Now on the adult list and still waiting. Meanwhile medicated for depression, psychosis, nightmares, night terrors..recent diagnosis of autism. I can absolutely understand why transactivists want the system simplifying. It is hell. What I want is the current system to actually work. The reason self_ID is being pushed is that waiting for diagnostic services and treatment is so hard.
If the TRAs were campaigning for more resource to be made available I would be walking with a placard tomorrow. If they were campaigning for safe spaces I would be walking with a placard. They aren't though. They are campaigning for women's spaces, to be their safe space but also to validate their identity. Not all people now claiming to be trans have gender dysphoria or an identity dissonance at all, which is why it is so important to have these discussions. I still think the way forward is through discussion though, not name calling each other and bullying.

Don’t see how the hospital example washes - if the trans woman in the example was really viewed as female she would be on the ward, same as all the other women, leaving the side room for medical cases. I thought that wouldn’t have been acceptable anyway, same as using the disabled toilet?

They were originally on the ward with other females, that was the problem. They were moved to private rooms for the sake of the other patients. They weren’t male so couldn’t be placed on a male ward but couldn’t stay on the female ward either. They were removed from the female ward for stripping naked & wanking in view of other patients & nurses, sexually assaulting a pensioner while she slept & threatening a nurse. The side room was the only place left for them. They still have to be treated.

The agenda is not hidden. It's to make sure women's genuine concerns are properly aired, considered and risk assessed.

Its difficult to tell if people like ratpoly are wilfully or genuinely stupid.
The difference between the state of affairs we alleged transphobes want, and the state of affairs she argues for, is that in the former, there can be social and if necessary legal obstacles placed in the way of men who seek access to women’s spaces for the wrong reasons. She wants to remove those obstacles and this increases risk.

That includes my daughter (and many like her) - because how do you differentiate? So effectively - by this logic, she is banned just in case she is a pervert.

Yes I understand the conflict you have. It's not difficult to understand. But we segregate, because men, as a class are overwhelmingly more likely to be sexual offenders than women.

The answer is a third space. Gender neutral, mixed sex, whatever.

I don't think Rat is stupid at all. She just has no respect for the feelings and boundaries of other women. It's all about her pomo worldview.

She just doesn't care. It's not that she doesn't realise.

Hmmm.
My jury’s still out, I have to say,

karenna

Risk assessment and safeguarding isn't based on individuals. It can't be.

If anyone wants to work children they all have to have a DBS check. They don't complain that people think they're paedophiles. It's not personal and it's not individual.

Men commit 98% of sexually violent crime and 90% of violent crime. Therefore the assessed risk factor is that they are male.

This doesn't change if they identify as female.

Women's spaces aren't a catch all for every vulnerable male. Otherwise effeminate gay men, old men, disabled men would all be welcome.

The problem is male violence. Allowing men to access female spaces does nothing to address that and makes women into human shields! And, in a breathtaking lack of logic, suddenly makes female spaces just as dangerous as male spaces.

There is no resolution that will satisfy everyone, because there is an inherent conflict.

The best compromise is a third space.

Datun - Gender neutral is one answer. But not the definitive one - the situation you describe could still be the case. Genuine trans vs non-genuine.

the situation you describe could still be the case. Genuine trans vs non-genuine.

But how do you measure that, Karenna?

karenna

How do you mean, I'm not sure I follow? Can you clarify?

"Because that's one of the most heteronormative things I can imagine, that we carefully release non-conforming women from the straitjacket of gender stereotypes by insisting we are not women at all, and then by extension reinforce that 'real' women or 'cis' women, the majority of women, are naturally or innately feminine. That seems to me to be a huge step backwards.
Nah. I'm a woman, I'm just not very good at it grin and that's fine."

Well said. I am as much a woman as someone who does stuff like putting on make up. The fact my interests are human interests like the outdoors, DIY etc does not make me less a woman.

Sorry. I meant that the situation regarding men self-identifying with the aim of ogling women would still apply with a 3rd gendered changing room.

So the genuine trans women would be exposed to this.

I agree it's very difficult. And I don't know what the answer is.

Don't blame feminists, Karenna. Blame the killjoy biology. Why do we have single sex spaces at all? We have them for women's safety, dignity and privacy. We have them because men are bigger, stronger, far more aggressive and most are sexually attracted to women. We have every reason not to include them when we are naked or otherwise vulnerable.

The UN Council on Refugees prioritizes safe areas where women and girls can wash and relieve themselves away from the prying eyes and sexual violence of men.

Yet here, in the UK in 2018, women are being told to give up those hard won rights. Excluding males is the whole point of female only single sex spaces. Males, however lovely, should use their own spaces.

And what about the Muslim, Orthodox Jewish and Roma women who will not be able to access public life without single sex spaces?

Your daughter is not the victim here. There are already single sex facilities for her sex.

Yes there are - female spaces. Is this what you mean?

A big sign saying, "No flashing, no gawping; manager's decision is final"

Christ you're naive.

Please, tell me this. Only 5.7% of rape cases are convicted. And only a small number are even reported in the first place. Why do you think that is?

karenna

Well yes.

If the trans ideology has nothing nothing else, it's certainly highlighted male violence and the reasons for sex segregation in the first place.

I don't think there's a woman here, or on the feminist board, who doesn't profoundly empathise with your situation. Parents of children who are trans are stuck between a rock and a hard place.

What woman doesn't want to do the best for her child?

The third space, in order to protect the people using it, would have to be individual. Lockable toilets, lockable changing rooms, etc.

As someone else has said, in practical terms, this is less a problem of ideology, and more problem of money.

There is a rather cheap and obvious point to be made here, which is that the single spaces problem for women would go away if the so called TERFs were what the TRAs say they are. Because women’s spaces wouldn’t be any safer for trans women then than the men’s spaces.

So how do we tell? Do you have a pervert detector?

No, but we can insist on the law as it is, which that if you are a woman but sexed male, you get a GRC and then we no longer have to take just the person's word for it.

Of course it won't completely stop women being assaulted and of course SOME trans people are going to turn out to be pervs, just like any other demographic. But it places a reasonable barrier against predatory men who want to appropriate your daughter's status for their own ends.

You are definitely NBU, OP. But they won't listen, so there's no point telling them.

No, Karenna, you can't have read what I said. People like your DD have other options. As GC feminists have said so many times, if trans people want a third space we'll back you all the way. Taking single sex provision away from women and girls is a terrible idea.

Blame the transactivists for that. For many years there was an honour system by which transsexuals were tolerated in women's spaces so long as they didn't make waves. Now, with the new definitions of trans and the explosion of sexual fetishists into the population, women have had enough.