To think that calling transwomen Male terms is against guidelines?

[ChilledBee]

That said, it’s clear that most trans people find the use of pronouns or names that they or others have consciously rejected, to be hurtful and would therefore struggle to engage in a discussion with those who insist on using them. The same is true of the expression ‘Trans-Identified Male’ or ‘TIM’. Likewise, many feminists are affronted by the term ‘cis’ and ‘terf’, so using these terms will make civil debate less likely. As we’ve said, context is everything – but it’s likely that going forward our moderation team will delete these expressions

So this is what Mumsnet say yet they allow threads which refer to the possibility of trans women using a changing room as "blokes". If I were a Trans woman considering giving my opinion around my presence in female changing rooms, hearing everyone refer to people like me as a man or a bloke would "hurtful" and "I'd struggle to engage". Why is this allowed, Mumsnet?

Having a read through the thread you're getting upset about op, the post mentioning "bloke" wasn't specifically referring to any "type" of person, just "dodgy blokes" with no mention of "female clothes wearing people" etc, so the inference is those men that do get off on wanking into lingerie, not tws, which is probably why it hasn't been deleted - but do message MN to ask about this, they are good at explaining why.

Other posts have been deleted as fitting on that thread.

So this is what Mumsnet say yet they allow threads which refer to the possibility of trans women using a changing room as "blokes" - The thread itself isn't headlines that way though - and the TW word isn't mentioned in the tweet quoted, just that M&S "support being inclusive".

So do you think there needs to be more genders, aside from the traditional 'man' or 'woman'?

I personally think there should be no genders at all. They're irrelevant. We segregate based on sex because it is demonstrable that not doing so results in issues for safety and equality for females.

Why would we need more genders other than to make everyone feel happy and fuzzy that they are being validated?

So do you think there needs to be more genders, aside from the traditional 'man' or 'woman'?

Man and woman are sex classifications, not genders.

Gender is a social construct. Gender is what dictates that men should be strong, macho, not cry at weepy movies, wear trousers, be good at maths and science and engineering, provide for their family, like football and blue and all that bollocks. Gender is what says women should be judged on their appearance and sex appeal, wear pretty dresses, be nurturing, like nail polish and pink and unicorns, play with dolls etc etc etc.

It's all bollocks. We should be doing away with gender, not multiplying it. It shouldn't matter what sex you are, you should be able to wear what you like in whatever colour, do whatever job you want and are good at, express emotion or not as you feel comfortable, enjoy whatever hobbies you like without labels, without being told you're a tomboy or you throw like a girl or real men don't cry or that's not very ladylike. Without men beating you up for not being manly enough (often a sign of repressed homophobia) or women wondering if you're a lesbian because you don't wear makeup and heels. Just be yourself, however you want to present yourself and be accepted, without having to pretend you're something you're not because you don't fit into one narrow set of stereotypes so you squeeze yourself into another. It's. All. Bollocks.

And THAT'S what being gender critical means, and why it's sad that GC women and transpeople end up at loggerheads rather than being natural allies - because ultimately we're both saying "people shouldn't necessarily feel they have to fit into the narrow stereotypical boxes society defines for their sex". But where GC women are arguing that gender as a concept should be dumped in the trash, transpeople believe that they don't fit into one set of stereotypes because they're more comfortable adhering to another and therefore they must be the sex that those stereotypes relate to. And then you get TRAs demanding that women open up their sex segregated spaces on the basis of their new gender identity; spaces which are sex segregated because society has accepted for decades that men as a class pose a threat to women as a class and we can't tell the nice guys from the rapists until it's too late. Now suddenly we're being expected to put ourselves at risk to make male-born people who don't want to conform to male stereotypes feel comfortable, rather than us both saying "aren't stereotypes a load of shit? Let's expand what it means to be a man to include men who like to wear dresses and makeup and call themselves Jane, and expand what it means to be a woman to include women who want to dress like a man and play rugby and call themselves Paul, and let's make sure Jane feels safe in the male spaces and Paul feels safe in the female spaces."

And THAT'S what being gender critical means, and why it's sad that GC women and transpeople end up at loggerheads rather than being natural allies - because ultimately we're both saying "people shouldn't necessarily feel they have to fit into the narrow stereotypical boxes society defines for their sex".

^^This

It's quite problematic though isn't it. One of the people you listed who apparently should be allowed in womens spaces, has committed violence against a woman. We probably need some words to describe that.

Absolutely agree, OP. And when you point out that they shouldn't be doing it, all you get is the "biology" argument.

I really wish they'd just ban discussing trans issues on here. It's turning into transphobianet. I blocked the "feminism" board just to get away from it.

Btw transphobia isn't feminism :)))

Btw transphobia isn't feminism

And neither is feminism transphobic. "Transphobia" is a lazy label thrown around to shut down much-needed debate. If you're centring the feelings of male-born people in your 'feminism' at the expense of the safety, dignity and privacy of women and girls, you're not a feminist.

all you get is the "biology" argument.

I know. So annoying when people bring logic and scientific fact into an argument.

And crime stats and other factual data.

Bastards...how dare people have a valid argument.

Why is “biology” in quote marks. Is it not real? What is wrong with being factual

I am so sick of hearing about trans this and trans that. 10 years ago it was a thing very few people did, now it's the 'in' thing.

FFS. How is it a problem to state the obvious. A man has a penis basic biological fact

Absolutely agree, OP. What do you agree with?

Humans can change sex?
Women must be polite and pretend they can?

As for banning ANY topic on here - that would be proscribing the 'right' things a woman can talk about, wouldn't it? How very silencing of you!

Is "Don't mention the biology!" going to be the modern-day version of "Don't mention the war!"?

What's wrong with using the terms woman, transwoman, man, transman in these discussions?

Why do posters need to refer to males and females?

Why do posters need to refer to males and females?

Because...it's accurate? Humans are a sexually dimorphic species. Do you have an issue with accuracy?

I use 'male-born person' because it includes transwomen (who are male born but often don't like to be called 'men' / who are very likely to still have their penis / to make it clear for people who get confused between TW and TM), men who do not present as feminine but may try to access female spaces (for nefarious purposes or shits and giggles, like the boy a PP referred to above), genderfluid people with a penis who may use female facilities one day and male another...have I missed anyone? It's a lot quicker than rattling off all the permutation of males individually, while being absolutely factual.

Why do posters need to refer to males and females?

In the thread OP was talking about the reference to blokes, wasnt about transwomen.

But are you suggesting people cant talk about this issue factually? They cant talk about the fact that women (adult human females) have a very high chance of being assaulted by someone born male. Regardless of how that male dresses?

We cant talk about the issues of having someone born Male, in womens refuges? Or someone born Male competing against female athletes?

Because...it's accurate? Humans are a sexually dimorphic species. Do you have an issue with accuracy?

There's very little concern given to accuracy in most other conversations though, so why only this subject?

We all know what is meant by TW or TM so why do you need to go out of the way to say "male born person" etc? What more does it add to your point?

If I'm talking about someone should I aim for accuracy at all times? So instead of saying "I spoke to a man today about the new library" I should say "I spoke to a fat, bald man today"? It's accurate but entirely unnecessary.

We cant talk about the issues of having someone born Male, in womens refuges? Or someone born Male competing against female athletes?

But in all of these examples TW works just as well as saying "male".

We all know what is meant by TW or TM

Who is 'we'? I've met plenty of people who don't.

But in all of these examples TW works just as well as saying "male"

No it really doesnt. Because anyone born Male ahpuldnt be in women refuge. Wether they call themselves non binary, genderfluid, transwoman.

They shouldn't be there.

We all know what is meant by TW or TM so why do you need to go out of the way to say "male born person" etc? What more does it add to your point?

I will go back to the Katen White example. Karen white was referred to as 'she' and 'her' and, very occasionally, called a TW.

If you read the story replacing TW with 'male born person' or male and use 'He' or 'His', you can see how ridicultoucs it was that a male born sex offender was placed in womens prison, where he raped women.

TW crimes are being recorded as crimes committed by women. If you say Male crimes are now being recorded as crimes commuteed by women, it makes people see the ridiculousness of it.

in all of these examples TW works just as well as saying "male".
No, because outside the trans lobby echo chamber (and GC people who have made it their business to know), "transwoman" means "woman who identities as a man" not vice versa.

Why do posters need to refer to males and females?

To avoid the mushing together of sex and gender.
Single sex areas are segregated by sex not gender so male and female are the categories you need to be talking about. A person’s gender identity isn’t relevant to where they can go.

"I spoke to a fat, bald man today"? It's accurate but entirely unnecessary.

Is the fact that he waa bald and fat relevant?

Because talking about TW and the impact on woman. What sex someone was born as is relevant.

We all know what is meant by TW or TM so why do you need to go out of the way to say "male born person" etc? What more does it add to your point?

1. Conversations on here about the subject previously have made it clear that some people think TW are women presenting as males and vice versa for TM, so no, we don't all know.

2. It covers all the various categories of male who could gain, or attempt to gain, access to women's spaces, not all of whom are transwomen.

3. Referring to TW as men can occasionally and arbitrarily result in a deletion, depending on the moderation team / how many people feel compelled to complain / the weather / what colour socks today's mods are wearing. I haven't yet been deleted for referring to male born people, presumably / possibly because it is absolutely accurate. TW may consider themselves to be women now, but they were born male and most retain their penis.

“Trans woman” is not clear. Some people interpret that to mean a biological female who is trans and prefers to identify as something other than a woman.

Language needs to be precise for discussions to be meaningful.