To ask why aibu is so anti-trans?

[BinkyBaa]

Just that really. I don't mean to be goady I've just noticed that when it comes up here, people seem more against it than other social circles I'm familiar with. I think I'm a bit out of the loop as to what the issue is.

Or have just communal changing and no cubicles

I wouldn’t
I would go swimming wouldn’t allow my child’s school to take her swimming
And would stop attending the gym

There is nothing happening to the people on the "wrong" side of the fence in the trans debate that wasn't happening to the people on the wrong side of the racism or gay rights debates.

Where do you stand on the issue of what happened to people on the "wrong" side of the fence in the Atlantic slave trade debate?

“I just pointed out that you cannot justify or excuse isms or phobias by finding worse examples of what other people do.”

So what is transphobia? Are women (and other people) who believe that sex is important as a biologically rooted Protected Characteristic by definition transphobic? Because that’s how it is defined by many TRAs. And is that really the same phobia as turning gay customers away from a guest house or beating a gay man up late at night or shouting abuse at a Trans person or the practice of so called ‘corrective rape’?

Mumsnet isn't a forum of teenagers trying to appear woke. That's why. It's representative of the actual way people think, not a parade of virtue signaling.

Quite.

I didn't make any such claim.

Oh, don't be ridiculous, JAPAB. You made a direct comparison between women standing up for their rights, racists and homophobes. You can pretend otherwise all you like, but we see you.

ArcheryAnnie nope. Somewone gave an example of trans women having their first names put in quotation marks as an example of disrespect.

This was met with 'well its not comparable to death threats and such is it?'

I made the point that the latter does not justify or excuse the former.

I mean, if I put "marriage" in quotation marks when talking about a gay couple's marriage, I cannot justify that by pointing out to traditional marriage campaigners getting death threats, as that is worse.

Again, the latter has no impact on assessing the wrongness of the former. If you accept this in the latter example then you ought to accept it in the former. That is the argument being made, and not anything else.

P.S. In my book transphobia is to demonstrate prejudice or unjustifiable discrimination.

Things like making unproven blanket assumptions about the entire group, the casual caricaturing of trans people, or misrepresenting them might fit the bill.

I have a genuine question that I don't in anyway mean to be goady, I would just be interested to genuinely see the opinions of women because it's something that only crossed my mind while reading through the comments.

If you disagree with trans MTF using the women's bathrooms. What is your opinion in a FTM using the women's bathroom? A female to male trans who has undergone hormones treatments/possible top/bottom surgery etc? Would you be comfortable with them using the women's bathroom? As the vast majority of FTM trans don't undergo bottom surgery they would still retain their female genitalia. They can look exactly like a biological Male though after undergoing hormonal treatment, so would lead to fear if required to use the female bathroom if we are strictly separating people by sex and not gender.

I'm just genuinely interested in people's opinions because it isn't something I've seen addressed in these kind of posts before. I'm not really sure what my opinion is, I'd need to be better informed to form an educated decision but would definitely find other opinions interesting.

I wouldn't care iggy. Transmen are women

Mumsnet isn't a forum of teenagers trying to appear woke. That's why. It's representative of the actual way people think, not a parade of virtue signaling.

That's quite an assumption.. you think that your way of thinking is the way that all 'actual people' think? I don't think that's quite true - I'm neither a 'woke' teenager nor transphobic.

Mumsnet is full of transphobia veiled as feminism and being gender-critical OP, but there is literally no point in questioning it.

“Mumsnet is full of transphobia veiled as feminism and being gender-critical OP, but there is literally no point in questioning it”

Sherlock- do you think that there is anything at all in any of the gender critical people’s concerns?

Would you be prepared to address the points I made about the Hampstead swimming pools?

Sherlocksays there's been a number of surveys done on these issues, including one comissioned by Pink news, and the opinions on Mumsnet are pretty much in line with the general population, ie 'actual people'.
This is also supported by sites and publications that allow open comments.

Yes the views here in mumsnet certainly tally with those of people I know. At work, mums at the school gate and friends etc.

feeling yes, a survey in Scotland this week showed 80% of women want to keep single sex spaces.

Are 80% of Scottish women wrong for wanting to retain safety and dignity?

If you spend most of your days online, it probably seems like being woke is the norm but the vast majority of women do not subscribe to this nonsense.

The problem with ‘transphobia’ as a term is that it has been over used. Now anything remotely critical of trans orgs or people is ‘transphobic’. It hides the actual transphobia and is doing no one any good. It is being used as a silencing tactic towards women who don’t want to have their identity, community and bodies redefined by an outside group.

What really shocks me is that people don’t see it. Women are being told their oppression is a privilege. How is that ok?

Mumsnet is full of transphobia veiled as feminism and being gender-critical OP, but there is literally no point in questioning it.

Once again for the gazilionth time; it is not trans people that people have a problem with, it is men.

If you can explain how a man is immediately safer once he says 'I am a woman', then please feel free to explain what has happened in order to make him safer for women and girls once he states this.

If a man changes into a woman, at some point in this 'transition', you are free to explain how this happens.

But you lot never do. You just accuse women of being 'transphobic' and flounce out again.

Mumsnet is full of transphobia veiled as feminism and being gender-critical OP, but there is literally no point in questioning it.

Transactivism is full of misogyny veiled as progression.

Funny how I never, ever think there's no point in questioning it though.

I suspect it's something to do with logic and reality.

Sherlock point at it... show us! Explain it to us.

Oh, and you used that word... literally You need to know that is is quite a flag waving word, often misused, as in "Literal violence" In using it you choose to wear a certain badge... one that we see, quite clearly

I didn't make any such claim. I just pointed out that you cannot justify or excuse isms or phobias by finding worse examples of what other people do.

As pointed out to you, you're making false comparisons. Female people do not have structural power over males. White racists are of the class that has traditionally had structural power over black people. Female is the equivalent of black here, and male white. Not the reverse.

I discuss the issue on other forums on the internet that actually understand feminism properly.

Are there women on Mumsnet who are not feministing properly? Women know your place...

Mumsnet is full of transphobia veiled as feminism and being gender-critical OP, but there is literally no point in questioning it.

Why do you think there is 'literally no point in questioning it'?

Would you be prepared to address the points I made about the Hampstead swimming pools?

Still no reply then. Isn't it weird that even the regular posters who complain that MN is transphobic can never engage with the details of women's concerns?

Why is it so hard to say (for example) 'yes that particular decision is daft because it excludes a lot of women who need single sex provision for cultural or personal reasons when there is perfectly good, inclusive provision for transwomen already'?

Anti-trans is a lazy, frivolous way of closing down what's lately turned into a very serious debate.

I've read a good few threads on the subject on Mumsnet. What I've seen is a real concern about self-identification, that any man can deem himself 'living as a woman' to receive access to women's space. There are concerns that it would be, in effect, an open-door policy for would be abusers to gain legitimate access to their potential victims. There are already stories of upskirting, recording, spying and voyeurism in shared changing facilities. And were these shared spaces to become the norm, these instances can only increase.

The trans rights activists have voiced objections to these concerns that can generously be described as insubstantial. First is 'it won't happen'. Thanks for the vote of confidence, guys. The fact is it can, and does, and sex crime against women by men is already de facto legal by virtue of the woefully low reporting rate and even lower conviction rate. Second: transwomen have been sharing toileting facilities with women for generations, without any issue and probably without anyone even noticing. This is true. But it's disingenuous to claim that self-ID and a wholesale legitimizing of this practice would not put women at increased risk - from opportunists if not transwomen. What about our rights? I've been a victim of rape, stalking and sexual assault. I would prefer not to share changing facilities with any other being - man or transwoman - with a penis. Thirdly, there are concerns about convicted rapists such as Karen White being granted access to female prisons to continue their revolting crimes under the umbrella of 'trans rights'.

These are serious and legitimate concerns. I've not seen many bona fide objections to calling a transwoman by a female name and adhering to their choice of profile, provided that the rights of women are not being trampled on to appease those who don't - who cannot - share the bodily vulnerabilities and experiences of those built with weaker bodies that can be more easily overpowered - and penetrated.

The problem is, that they are.

NB. A common objection by transwomen to the use of women's facilities is that 'it's none of your business what is in my pants'. Well, unless I personally have actively invited them in there, it's none of men's business what's in mine.

The problem here is that upwards of FOUR men in my lifetime have helped themselves to my body without my express consent (that's not including the backside-grabbers etc). Two of them were rapists (in the same incident). Never mind that it wasn't their business. They decided that they were going to take, and they took regardless.

And I don't want putting at any increased risk - and self-ID/shared facilities DOES increase that risk) of a repetition of someone taking what they want from my body at my expense and against my will. And frankly, this kind of response to women's concerns is just adding insult to bloody injury. That is some level of CF'ery right there.