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?

Who do you escalate it to at home?

its just 'guidelines' not the law!!

It's unreasonable to expect to control what other people call you. A human being with penis and balls is a man/bloke/guy. Truth.

He may think he's female in his head, he can't force us to call him her.

People can live how they want, I don't care. It bothers me when they try and control others.

Who made you the identity police?
The person who gave the rhetorical example.

Are you saying there are 'non-genuine trans'?

Well unless I doubt the numerous examples MN users give of people who seemingly abuse trans rights to exploit and harm women, there must be!

I've never met or seen anyone on TV that made me doubt their trans identity until I heard some of the shit CJ says.

@Anotherlongdrive

At home? When it was my husband's friend, I looked to him to back up that his friend needed to leave

CJ?

Naming the correct sex and things associated with are derogatory?

Yes, if the person on the receiving end of it finds it derogatory.

Yes, plenty have repeated the same points. Which still havent responded to.

Such as?

I find being caused 'cis' objectionable. I'm a woman. I am NOT 'cis'.

Never have I encountered a bunch of people with such weird ideas and unbridled claptrap. If you have a penis, you are 'he'. If you have a vagina, you are 'she'.

And I will continue to use those pronouns because they are the proper pronouns and it is not up to them to mangle the English language to suit their agenda.

Yes, if the person on the receiving end of it finds it derogatory.

No, scientific facts are derogatory.

such as

Read the replies. You were tagged into lots of them.

Well unless I doubt the numerous examples MN users give of people who seemingly abuse trans rights to exploit and harm women, there must be!

No, you said you thought Jenner was genuine.

It doesn't mean that we revert to the derrogatory terms that they do understand does it?

Using 'male' to describe a male or 'female' to describe a female is derogatory now?

We're even further down the rabbit hole than I thought.

OP: Use the correct words! If other people get it wrong or misunderstand that's their problem.
Also OP: No, not those correct words...

Well, little but little,the law is saying otherwise. However, more importantly, Mumsnet recognise that misgendering a trans person is hurtful to them and claims that it will delete the vast majority of posts that do so.

Not commenting on the fact that most of the M&S thread is about non-trans men?

It's unreasonable to expect to control what other people call you.

I find being caused 'cis' objectionable

If you refuse to be told what to call people you can't really object when they ca you something that you find objectionable can you?

Male born is not derogatory its factually correct.

Whatever someone wears now doesnt make that not true.

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras

How does describing someone as a TW change their biological sex? It doesn't does it? It's very clearly saying they are a TW.

Exactly

Anotherlongdrive

I've looked back and can't see ones that I've been tagged in.

I wouldn’t call a trans woman male-born instead (is that what people do?) why does that need to be stated when there’s a term that is accepted?

A man in heels and a dress is still a man. A woman who does chest binding and takes testosterone is still a woman. Surely that’s not too hard to understand?

Imagine being so unkind as to tell the wives of transwomen that they were married and in the case I mentioned assaulted by a woman. They know the reality they felt the strength of their hands around their neck. Imagine hearing strangers referring to that experience as anything other than male violence. Or do only certain people's feelings count. Transwidows have been really clear about how this makes them feel. I think it depends on your perspective as to who is being cruel.

The point of the M&S thread was that it wasn’t misgendering. It was talking about men (not TW) misusing self ID to gain access to female spaces. It was about M&S not having thought through the potential risk of allowing any male bodied person to say they felt more comfortable in the female changing rooms.

Can you not see that there are some unpleasant males (who have nothing to do with the trans community) who may wish to take advantage of relatively free access to a female changing room.

Male born is not derogatory its factually correct.

You might not think it's derogatory but the person being described as such might well find it derogatory.

Same as the "N" word can be used between POC but it can still be considered an offensive term when it is used by other people under different circumstances. Do you go around calling people the "N" word claiming no one is going to tell you what to call them?

I wouldn’t call a trans woman male-born instead (is that what people do?) why does that need to be stated when there’s a term that is accepted?

Exactly.

Are you saying there are 'non-genuine trans'?

Well unless I doubt the numerous examples MN users give of people who seemingly abuse trans rights to exploit and harm women, there must be!

You misunderstand again - or perhaps it's wilful?

If someone says they are trans/identifies as other than their birth sex, we have to accept they are trans. To do otherwise is transphobic, according to Stonewall. So if a sex offender claims they are trans, they are trans. Or, to be absolutely precise about it, if someone claims they are trans and then commits a sexual offence, they are trans. If someone commits a sexual offence and then claims they are trans, they are trans. It doesn't matter if a person may rationally suspect a particular person's claim to trans status was a smokescreen to allow them easier access to potential victims. The very point of self-ID is that if someone says they are trans, they are trans. There is no 'genuine' and 'non-genuine', only the word of the person identifying.

Same as the "N" word can be used between POC but it can still be considered an offensive term when it is used by other people under different circumstances. Do you go around calling people the "N" word claiming no one is going to tell you what to call them?

So you are saying that calling men, men, is the same as called black people the 'N' word?