AIBU to feel a rage at how my voice is silenced and mocked? (trans thread)

[DonkeyHotei]

The trans threads on here pop up every day. The overwhelming response from the Mumsnet Massive is that, in denying trans rights as human rights, they are standing up for the rights of women and girls not to be abused by predators. And in virtually any other thread apart from those dealing with the complexities of a transgender identity, yes they are.... I'm really proud of the vehemence of the battle-hardened feminist warriors in taking a stance for the rights of women and girls. But when it comes to transgender issues, this site seems to stand in a world apart, because there is a hardcore contingent on here gleefully counting every one of the more moderate but less well informed folk they rally to their cause. But you ARE on the fringes if you go with this. You ARE denying the arguments that extremely well-informed people from FEMINIST ORGANISATIONS have considered long and hard: In Scotland, the reality is that feminist organisations support self-ID for a number of complex reasons. A statement from Engender, which included Close the Gap, Equate Scotland, Rape Crisis Scotland, Scottish Women’s Aid, Women 50:50 and Zero Tolerance, made that clear. You will ask me questions that are so infinitely complex that I'd be doing philosophical argument an injustice by trying to answer in a soundbite (I'll be asked, "What constitutes a women?"; I'll be told that I'm a traitor to the safety of women and girls. I am one and I have daughters.. Can i go for Bingo with this? First person who tells me I'm a scumbag and my view is invalid and damaging to the very people I am trying to protect: i.e., women, scores a bingo hit. I could bore on with the statistics of suicide and self-harm among the trans community, or I could get personal and tell you how it feels to lose a mother to the choice of taking one's own life. Horrific....I'd love to talk about it. You may bring out Karen and her foul predatory behaviour. And it's hard to come back from that one except to say she is a vile predator and I don't judge women by her benchmark. Include. Include. They are not "lady-dicks", they deserve not to be dead-named, Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria has no scientific basis...or if it does, please tell me? Include, include. You ARE on the wrong side of history on this one. I'm just a small person but thankfully I do have the weight of the better informed behind me.

The assistant looked very upset and was a young woman wearing hajib, I felt uncomfortable pressing her - she looked like she might cry.

.....

DH and I spoke to the manager who refused point blank to look at CCTV or call the police.

This is why I despair when people say oh if they are doing something wrong get a staff member as if that will magically solve the problem.

Same as when the answer is well women can take it to court to get if their current rights disappear - becuase courts never cost time and money .

Hi, please DO bore us with the statistics rec self harm and suicide, so that we can check their statistical integrity. There have been some very dodgy stats floating about, used by interest groups such as Mermaids and even Stonewall (I used to think them trustworthy )

If possible, please link back to the original published data.

Using stats for a purpose they weren’t designed for is up there with Trump’s level of truth.

Thanks

People in this country have had enough of experts". Anti-intellectualism at its best.

Oh that's quite a reach. Don't put your back out!

The Fawcett Society hosted an event recently where they were asked if a Parliament made up of 50% MTFs and 50% men would be acceptable. 0 females. Of course it was.

You’re absolutely right OP, and it gives me a real boost when someone stands firm against the powerful current on anti-trans sentiment on MN.

Remember that this site is an echo chamber and not reflective of this country generally, which is much more tolerant than MN. Not that we should be complacent - but it gives me hope.

Hi Blanche

Could I ask, do you agree with the below position?

The Fawcett Society hosted an event recently where they were asked if a Parliament made up of 50% MTFs and 50% men would be acceptable. 0 females. Of course it was.

Remember that this site is an echo chamber and not reflective of this country generally, which is much more tolerant than MN. Not that we should be complacent - but it gives me hope

This site is used by parents, predominantly mothers, from all walks of life. In addition, even the Pink News survey showed quite clearly that actually, the views here are actually reflective of those held in society overall.

Remember that this site is an echo chamber and not reflective of this country generally, which is much more tolerant than MN. Not that we should be complacent - but it gives me hope

you've been spending too much time on Twitter

Lots of people are supportive of transpeoples right to dignity and the human rights that we all have. I would say 90 percent of people in this country think the idea of self-id is absolutely ridiculous.

Could I ask, do you agree with the below position?

1. That survey appears not to have acknowledged the existence of trans men (not at all unusual for anti-trans arguments)

2. how likely do you think this scenario is? Given that it’s already bloody difficult to get anyone elected who isn’t a straight, white man whose gender identity corresponds with his sex, I can’t envisage a scenario where 50% of elected officials are trans.

3. if you don’t consider the scenario realistic, why are you using an imaginary and unlikely scenario as a scare tactic?

4. I wouldn’t favour a Parliament made up of 50% c*sgender men and 50% trans women on the basis that I want as much diversity as possible in parliament and I don’t think your imaginary scenario is sufficiently diverse.

If what you really want to know, behind the smoke screen of an alarmist pretend scenario that will never happen, is whether I am happy for trans women to be elected to Parliament and recognised as being women when they do so, then the answer is yes, absolutely, I think that would be a good and helpful thing.

I would say 90 percent of people in this country think the idea of self-id is absolutely ridiculous.

Is this based on evidence, or are you just making it up?

Its not alarmist - it was a real debate. And the outcome was that the Fawcett Society would be happy with no actual natal women in parliament.

Remember that this site is an echo chamber and not reflective of this country generally, which is much more tolerant than MN

Is that based on evidence or are you just making it up?

I am taking an educated guess - hence saying 'I would say'

The majority of people literally have no clue about self-id - they think transwomen are cuddly transvestites like grayson perry.

As soon as they realise it now includes complete denial of biology...I haven't seen ONE SINGLE person say 'oh of course, yes that makes sense fair enough'.

You talk about systems, OP. I work in an area where systems are put in place to protect patients. The foundation for all these systems is the concept that people fuck up badly, for a variety of reasons from innocent to malign and so ansystem has to be as robust as possible to reduce damage from the inevitable human errors.
The system allowed Karen white to rape women and assault women. The system allowed a convicted child abuser to be placed in a women’s prison with a mother and baby unit. That means the system itself is wrong.

It’s nongoodbsaying thevsytem is OK, it just was an error. Thebsystem is flawed because it ALLOWED that error. The system can be righted by removing all possibility of that error being made. By making sure all prisoners are in the estate corresponding to their actual sex.

And a reminder that if the definition of sex isnreplaced by gender and self ID goes through, the system WILL NOT BE ABLE TO distinguish between sex and gender and absolutely nothing will be able to protect the female prison population from the Karen whites of the world

Its not alarmist - it was a real debate.

I’m not saying it’s not a real debate, I’m saying it’s a debate about something that’s never going to happen (must like the majority of scaremongering about self-ID)

I am taking an educated guess

It’s not an educated guess when you’re just choosing to believe that the overwhelming majority of people agree with you. Do you really think, given the level of debate on this issue, that only 10% of the population are in favour of self-ID?

10% of the population are in favour of self-ID I'd say that's pretty generous tbh

One of the main problems with these threads is that participants pounce on the existence of people like Karen White to tar all trans people with the same brush

Fairly sure noone does that, and Karen White is 'pounced on' because Karen is a 'great' example of the logical end of self ID. Its about male predators. Not necessarily 'transwomen'.You cannot say that Karen is not trans, whilst agreeing with self ID. You also cannot say that karen was just good at faking, as we are told noone fakes it, noone would ever do that! Etc. Its basically yet another of those things we were told would never happen, that has happened. Yet people will still claim it never happens, despite there being loads of proof now that it does. Of course it does, predators will use any loophole for access to victims. Which is why self ID an obvious bad bad idea.

I wonder how many people on this thread are genuinely well-informed enough to know that self-ID isn’t about giving trans people any rights that they don’t already have, but is actually about making it less burdensome to acess those rights? I would be willing to bet there are a few here who have no idea what the current situation is, and what the proposed changes are.

How many of you think the following things?

• trans women currently aren’t allowed to use women’s changing rooms, toilets, shower facilities or women’s shelters?

• trans women currently have to show proof of their gender identity to access the above spaces?

• rape crisis centres currently don’t provide services to trans women

• rape crisis centres are opposed to self-ID

• self-ID means men will be able to access women’s changing rooms by saying ‘I self-identify as a woman’

• it is currently straightforward to obtain a gender recognition certificate

Because NONE of the above are true - and if you believe they are, you don’t understand this debate.

Thanks OP, it's refreshing to see someone reminding us that the anti-trans people here are in the fringes of a weird subset of feminist thought.

Also on this, I know it makes some people feel better to claim this, but self ID is a hugely unpopular idea among the general public, kind of proven time and time again by various polling. Oddly enough, men can see the issue with it, and women can see the issues with it, and there seems to be a small fringe of society who pretend they cannot see the issues, yet MUST be able to see the issues really.

*Blarneybear

Remember that this site is an echo chamber and not reflective of this country generally, which is much more tolerant than MN. Not that we should be complacent - but it gives me hope*
From polls that have been published the majority of people don't support self id, so mn is pretty in line with the outside world.

OP (and other interested people), A bit of a long read, but the linked article really sums up my own feminist position on self ID and trans rights more generally.

www.versobooks.com/blogs/4090-i-m-not-transphobic-but-a-feminist-case-against-the-feminist-case-against-trans-inclusivity

I wonder how many people on this thread are genuinely well-informed enough to know that self-ID isn’t about giving trans people any rights that they don’t already have, but is actually about making it less burdensome to acess those rights?

Nice try, but the problem for you is we are informed and we do know what ‘less burdensome’ will actually mean in practice. So you can stop your patronising.

On the 'its just a minor beuarocratic change, won't affect anything at all!' type arguments...even legal experts cannot agree on quite what self ID would be about. Ontop of this, businesses are adopting a 'self ID' model already to get 'ahead of the law'

docs.google.com/document/d/1b7viOWsx-Wgw344fujX3QddaJN8d4JKJoaVhyzMz1so/edit

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/oct/19/gender-recognition-act-reforms-six-legal-views-transgender-debate

She can remove him/her for filming someone in a changing room confused

Are you really OK with shop assistants, many of whom are young and female, being on the front line of "policing" men behaving inappropriately in changing rooms?

I'm astonished you think that is a solution.