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.

I'm saddened and frightened by transphobia. I wasn't aware of the statistics you've mentioned but I do know first hand from two friends both of whom have trans children that these issues are common.

But I am vociferously pro the securement of women's rights and women's safe spaces. The notion that Self-ID could slip through when men like Ian Huntlley are abusing genuine transpeople's status for his own pernicious means makes it essential that these rights are fought for. I am extremely wary of two things:

1 - the removal of women's (that's bio women's) rights to openly discuss and campaign for rights directly related to biological implications (eg secure spaces without a penis in sight for vulnerable women, as rape in bio women can lead to pregnancy; cervical and breast cancer stats etc)

1. Men self-IDing and then using male entitlement to dominate the female quota in organisations which still badly need to redress the male female balance.

We're not equal yet. Not by a long way. And the inroads we've made into equality are very recent.

All that said, there were some horrifically abusive anti-trans posts on one of the pro-women threads this morning. I was htinking about them this evening, and how fine a line it is between protecting women's rights and space and using that legitimate cause as a means to bully and deride others. If a transwoman has had surgery, I respect that. I won't ridicule the state of her orifice.

Decency and fairness for all is the way forward.

I totally agree MinaPaws, that is exactly how I feel about it.

tripping

Ive always said there is homophobia

Its not really fair to say that if its different posters saying different things (obviously if its the same poster thats bang out of order)

Ignore me tripping

There are eleventy billion conversations going on at the same time

I’m with you, OP. I have no problem with a trans woman in the loo with me, or changeroom, or whatever. I imagine she’d be a lot more afraid of me than I of her, frankly. And as for what her body looks like in the change room next to my little one? It’s a human body. Who cares if there’s a penis invovled?

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?

I'm guessing you don't do any work with numbers for a living, OP?

Do you realise that you've stated (without any citation, natch) in your opening post that a quarter of children who identify themselves as trans will succeed in committing suicide?

Do you stand by that claim? If so please provide your sources. Ta.

TippingTheVelvet roll your eyes farther back if you want, you still can't give concrete examples.

Incredible that so many of you somehow can't copy and paste...

There were a number of comments on the Tom Daly thread that said a baby needed a mother/wrong two men raising a baby

Really? I was on that thread and didn’t see that comment. I saw loads of posters saying that it was morally wrong to deliberately and knowingly deny a child a mother, a newborn especially. You may not agree but it’s a perfectly valid viewpoint. It’s not homophobic. The same posters applied this thought to heterosexual couples renting women’s wombs and/or purchasing babies. The deliberate act of removing a baby from its birth mother (regardless of who has provided the egg) to satisfy two men whose biology does not allow them to reproduce together. This is not homophobic.

A male poster (gay with two children supplied by a surrogate) then stormed onto the thread and basically called out every woman he’d ever known as heartless bitches and slagged off Mumsnetters for being fixated on mothers and female relationships and that he was delighted his children (boys) wouldn’t have a mother in their life if the brain dead bints on MN were anything to go by. He said we should stfu and get an education. I’m slightly paraphrasing, it was far nastier than that.

Is it really a controversial view to think that mothers are important to babies and that they belong together where possible? Is it still homophobia if the same view applies when it is a straight single male commissioning the surrogate?

I'm not endorsing the opinion but - why is it homiphobic to say a baby needs a mother.

Surely it's anti man?

Obvs it's wrong as lots of people have no mum for many reasons. But some women on the Tom Daley thread felt a baby should not be deliberately denied its mother. Why is that a homiphobic opinion?

I haven't noticed the specific posters names along the thread but that's the tone of it. Going from a straight denial of it to now but that doesn't count.

I'm not sure if I understood your question so feel free to correct me if I've interpreted it incorrectly. With the two men issue, I would say it is but accept other people might feel differently. To me that's the same argument as saying the stereotype of gay men being promiscuous isn't homophobic as it doesn't tend to be applied to lesbians.

Rufus homophobia is defined in relation to women and to men, it's an umbrella term, if someone said something discriminatory about a gay man then they are being homophobic, if they said something discriminatory about gay men they are being homophobic, if they said something discriminatory about a lesbian they are being homophobic, against lesbians also homophobic, against gay men and lesbians also homophobic. It's not a term that's up for debate it's literally what it refers to as a dictionary definition. It's a bit of an annoying term in some ways because I assume but haven't checked it links back to the era when it was assumed that 'lesbians' didn't exist! And it sounds like a very masculine term somehow.

However language isn't fixed it's affected by usage so if it were consistently used in a different sense then the dictionary definitions would change.

I totally agree OP, however, as you have seen from these comments already, you are pushing water uphill. These people don't get it, and are angry that you would so much as suggest any transphobia, it is so deeply ingrained they cannot even see the forest for the trees. It's all lip service 'I'd happily respect anyone's rights, so long as they don't impede on my life at all in any way whatsoever, and I can shut out anyone who doesn't fit my vision of society'. They all have a lot of lessons to learn.

I’ve seen it said that it’s homophobic because surrogacy is the only way two men can procure a child so if you ban commercial surrogacy you are denying gay men the “right” to become parents.

I wholeheartedly disagree but just explaining for you. I don’t think anyone gay or straight has the right to become a parent.

Oh just go away will you.
I'm a woman with all that it incurs. I've had bloody evilperiods, a miscarriage and given birth to two gorgeous dc. It's what makes me a woman and I'm proud.
If you're a bloke you're never going to experience this. Popping on a frock and a bit of lippy does not make you a woman. Fact. Deal the fuck with it

Tripping
MN can’t control what is posted. So people will post homophobic comments. The key thing is that they should not be allowed to stay. By deleting the comment MN is sending the message that the views expressed are not acceptable and homophobia will not be tolerated. We all have a responsibility to call out unacceptable language.

Saying a baby needs a mother is potentially homophobic, depending on what's meant by 'mother:' if it's meant to refer to an individual who consistently parents/nurtures/forms a primary bond with an individual then fine, if it's meant to refer to women only then it is a problem because it's essentially saying a child can't be brought up in a household by parents who do not include women. However I imagine that this reflects a lot of views and I would rather know that than not. I find it harder when people give the impression that they're not prejudiced and then I find out slowly that they are, it's more depressing somehow. However there are also those who are not prejudiced but simply misinformed or who just have never had to think about these issues. If people aren't encouraged to ask questions without fear of being thought stupid they won't ever get the chance to think differently.

Incidentally, or maybe not incidentally, I've seen a hell of a lot of antisemitism on here over the years. I don't hold Mumsnet as a site, or its users in general, responsible for the nasty prejudices of a tiny minority of its users.

It's a very, very rare thing to have a discussion forum that GENUINELY allows free and open debate - compare for example the bloody gulag that is the Guardian's Comment is Free - and I personally value it immensely.

It might be personally upsetting to me to encounter antisemitic posts, but on balance i'd rather they were here - and dealt with effectively either by MNHQ or by strong arguments from other posters - rather than have this site censored to fuck.

Do people really think that trans women are secretly trying it on to take over women's space?

When men who put a dress on and demand to use women's spaces then yes

Have you not seen what they have to go through (for some, horrific surgery;

I think 99% of women will readily accept a trans woman who has had surgery to remove his cock. It's the "women" with a cock, who demand the right to use spaces designed for real women that women object to. With good reason.

The surrogacy issue is complicated because it does become about competing 'rights', there are a number of concerns/arguments re: surrogacy in relation to the potential exploitation of the bodies of low income women/women of colour outside the West etc...In which case whose rights come first? But the debates are not about gay men using surrogates, they are about anyone using them. Also there is the issue of surrogacy excluding low income people, it's a very expensive business so if it's a right to have children then that raises the issue of whether or not surrogacy should be a funded service. In addition there are those who believe commercial surrogacy is turning babies into products that are being bought and sold on the market, so see a human rights issue arising. None of these debates are that easy to resolve:

www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2017/mar/28/cross-border-surrogacy-exploiting-low-income-women-as-biological-resources

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/25/surrogacy-sweden-ban

Well, as someone on that thread said, come back to me when rich women start being surrogates for poor people.

Excellent post Dottie. I am a big believer that it's through discussion and not aggression that changes people's minds. I think that is an issue here on MN. I also don't think being uninformed makes it OK. It's no less homophobic/racist/antisemitic just because they haven't been corrected. Take the example of someone suggesting on the AMA thread that sexual abuse made people gay. It's a stupid, ignorant assertion but that doesn't mean that it's not homophobic.

Who cares if there’s a penis invovled? (sic)

Biological women do. We do not want a penis involved in our D.V. safe houses, our Rape Crisis centres, our changing rooms, our sports, and for some of us, definitely not in our beds.

That is neither transphobic nor homophobic.
Fact, as Rafa Benitez would say.

I've seen you before spannablue, a long time ago. You are no academic.

Sorry I can't stop to chat, as I'm worried about my old flat arse which appears to be the subject of a shitty ageist thread elsewhere. Ta ta.

if it's meant to refer to women only then it is a problem because it's essentially saying a child can't be brought up in a household by parents who do not include women.

But why is that homiphobic and not just anti men?

What if we're referring to mother in the biological sense rather than a mother figure or female carer? Is it homiphobic then? Are there not studies showing that children are in most cases best off raised by their biological parents?

Tripping I take your point, I have at various points in my life been addressed in ways that I found and knew to be offensive, sometimes the people were just straight-up prejudiced, but other times they genuinely didn't know that what they were saying was offensive. In those cases when I told them why what they said was a problem then they never used those terms again. Face to face or when you know the person it's easier to gauge how to react. Unfortunately on an online forum it's harder to tell what people think from their 'written' tone. If a post is discriminatory in any way I just report it regardless.