To think mumsnet needs a separate 'Gender' section?

[Jargoyle]

I've been lurking here for years prior to signing up, but have now all but abandoned the women's rights section due to the overwhelming proliferation of trans threads.

I get that self ID is a big issue but I was saddened, for example, during the whole Irish abortion debacle that the first thread on it was barely two pages long whilst people were happily discussing Caitlyn Genner's style comments until the cows came home.

I think a separate section would be beneficial where the same old posters can have the same old discussions about it all.

Oldcrone, for example, trans people have said over and over that gender role (stereotypes) and gender identity are not the same, but you still conflate them

Because we disagree with their analysis. It's really not that we haven't put the work in. We have and we still disagree. Women don't have to do as they are told.

What do you think it is?

No idea, but people who are sympathetic to trans characterise it as a compelling feeling. I think of it like my compulsion to protect my children. So strong, and nobody could argue me out of it. I don't know if gender identity is like that for some people, but it's enough for them to get surgery and go through all kinds of social drama for it so it must be pretty strong I think.

How can we discuss all the other important issues facing women, if we can’t hold onto the word woman to describe our own sex? If a woman is simply feelings rather than a material reality, then we automatically lose all the rights we have and are continuing to fight for.

Every few weeks we get this nonsense suggested and most of us recognise it as just someone shouting “shut up, because I don’t like what you’re saying!” Women being told what is ‘acceptable’ to talk about is NOT acceptable!

Anyone on this thread can start a thread discussing any topic that they feel is important to females, but you can’t force other women to join in the discussion. We’re not a bunch of schoolgirls and you’re not a teacher. We get to choose our on topics of discussion. Maybe you should look at the way you are presenting a topic and what evidence you have, before you start any thread.

on = own

I like FWR and think there is an interesting range of discussions. Would I describe myself as a RadFem? No. Am I horrified about the insidious erosion of Women's Rights? Yes.
I thought society was at a point where we were nearly equal. Gender pay gap etc aside. I was wrong and it took FWR to make me realise that.
People don't have to read and engage, or they can start threads of their own.
Wrt the toilet/changing issue, I was assaulted in a toilet and am very nervous still of using public facilities. Please don't give consent on my behalf because you're comfortable with it.

but it's enough for them to get surgery and go through all kinds of social drama for it so it must be pretty strong I think.

Approximately 85% of males who identify as trans get no genital surgery.

Approximately 85% of males who identify as trans get no genital surgery.

Yet are terribly keen for children to get surgeries.

“People go to extreme lengths because of this thing, therefore it must be a ‘real’ objective/verifiable quality, rather than an ideology/socially constructed theory” is a bit of a leap, isn’t it?

How is gender identity different to the extremely real feelings that people with anorexia have?

Oldcrone, for example, trans people have said over and over that gender role (stereotypes) and gender identity are not the same, but you still conflate them. That's not the worst strawmanning, but I personally find that kind of argument frustrating. Better to deal directly with the real arguments. But that requires understanding the other side first.

I don't understand what gender identity is. But pretending it's stereotypes is just avoiding the question.

If you don't understand what it is (neither do I) how do you know that it even exists, or that anyone genuinely has a 'gender identity'?

I'm not conflating 'gender role' and 'gender identity', I've said that one exists - stereotyping is definitely real - and I don't understand what the other one is, only that all the explanations seem to rely on stereotypes or an internal essence. It's not strawmanning to say that. We can't have a discussion about 'gender identity' if one side says that it's real and they experience it and the other side are asking what it is and getting no coherent answer. It's a bit like talking about God with an atheist.

But fundamentally I don't feel that Mumsnet is a safe place for me as a mixed race GC feminist or for other women of colour.

I’m so sorry. Can you elaborate on why that is? I know as a white woman, my background is not obvious, so I can’t imagine what crap a woman of colour has to go through. Just reading some of the racist shit on Mumsnet in general is difficult to stomach, but you have the double whammy of being GC, which gives the woman haters the extra excuse for abusing you. I hope you feel able to comment on the FWR boards as we need strong women that are able to recognise material reality.

No idea, but people who are sympathetic to trans characterise it as a compelling feeling. I think of it like my compulsion to protect my children. So strong, and nobody could argue me out of it. I don't know if gender identity is like that for some people, but it's enough for them to get surgery and go through all kinds of social drama for it so it must be pretty strong I think.

So quite like a strong religious feeling then? I have no objection to people believing they have a gender identity, just as I have no objection to anyone following any religion they please, but the quasi religious aspect of gender identity is being forced on all of us, and young children are being taught in school that they should have a gender identity.

If this doesn't worry you, I'd like to know why.

for some people, but it's enough for them to get surgery and go through all kinds of social drama for it so it must be pretty strong I think.

Most people who self-identify as transgender have no surgery at all, and don't intend to. But I'm sure you know that.

It's one of the mysteries of the whole transgender movement that middle aged men who suddenly discover their inner woman want to be accepted as women despite the presence of a penis, whilst children are encouraged to have hormone blockers ASAP and surgery as soon as they become legal adults. (And we're told that they'll all kill themselves if they don't get the medical treatment)

Most women I know don't even know any transwomen but all have encountered violent heterosexual men or been affected by discrimination of some sort, for example.

Most people who object to gender ideology are doing so because they recognise that biological females as a class need certain protections.

Not from transwomen, but from the detrimental effects of gender oppression. These manifest in many ways, and affect everything from women's physical safety and healthcare to their career progression and financial wellbeing.

It's not transwoman that are the threat, it's what certain trans activists are saying about gender and the dangerous way that this is reframing societal norms and reinforcing damaging gender stereotypes, to the detriment of biological women.

Women can't assert their rights under the legal provisions put in place to protect them if the definition of woman has changed beyond all recognition. It prevents them from being able to articulate their issues legally and linguistically, and on top of this, anyone who points this out is silenced with accusations of bigotry.

So, OP, you might find that no-one is talking about this to you in real life, but I wonder how much of the silence you're encountering is because people don't care and how much is because women are living in fear of speaking up while quietly watching their rights being taken away from them, powerless to prevent it without risking their careers, families' livelihoods and reputations.

I remember someone starting a thread in FC about domestic violence and the way divorce courts systemically discriminate against battered women, a thread which did not mention anything to do with gender ID or trans issues in any way, and the very first response was something like, "Warning: the OP is a known pro-trans poster, don't engage with her."

That's just awful. How can anyone defend that?

But fundamentally I don't feel that Mumsnet is a safe place for me as a mixed race GC feminist or for other women of colour.

That's really depressing. I feel like there's so much still to be said about feminism and culture and race. True intersectional feminism. But you are right, the trans discussion is stifling everything else.

“Feminism” is a noun derived from the adjective “feminine.”
“Feminine” is a gender.

Maybe they shouldn’t have called it feminism!

If you don't understand what it is (neither do I) how do you know that it even exists, or that anyone genuinely has a 'gender identity'?

Because they say they do and act as if they do. Same as if someone says they like chocolate and eats a lot of chocolate. Or says they love someone and try to spend time with them and a million other things. How can we know their feelings are genuine? Of course, we will never know. But I think you have to accept what people say about their own thoughts and feelings especially if it's consistent with their actions. Unless there's evidence to the contrary.

Maybe we should just base our laws on whether or not people like chocolate. It could work?

I've also seen a lot of first time posters in FC recently, posting very goady stuff that has nothing to do with gender or feminist issues, and some of those posts have been overtly racist. There's a thread in FC right now about how white privilege doesn't exist, how it's actually black and Asian people who are privileged (with goady posts trying to portray Muslim men as rapists) and how expressing an opinion that something is racist is censorship and an attack on freedom of speech. Basically saying black and Asian people aren't allowed to speak up about their experiences of racism

Which thread is that, please? If it's the one I'm thinking of (Douglas Murray, although if so, you've somewhat misrepresented it) the OP is not a new poster and is of a BAME background herself. As am I. I agree with much of what she says. I am definitely privileged compared to some white people in this country. Not all BAME people hold the same view on these issues. Nor do we all require a "safe space" where everyone agrees with us and validates our view of the world. Having a different idea of what constitutes privilege (for me class and financial means, not skin colour, are the biggest nexus of oppression in this country) does not make someone racist.

People say they have been personally spoken to by god and act as if god is real but there is no evidence of god.

People say they are overweight and restrict their food intake when all evidence suggests they are underweight.

People say they see and talk to people who don't exist in reality.

People say lots of things and act as if they are real when they are not.

Real things can be described, observed, measured. 'Gender identity' can't be.

but the quasi religious aspect of gender identity is being forced on all of us, and young children are being taught in school that they should have a gender identity.

Well exactly. That is why we need precision in this discussion, in my opinion. What is gender identity exactly? In a way, it seems cool, the idea of children identifying with the other gender more. Like, boys looking up to women role models etc. Of course, that depends on what gender identity is. Maybe it's not cool, depending on how it's defined!!

I think you have to accept what people say about their own thoughts and feelings especially if it's consistent with their actions

Agreed. There's no reason to doubt someone else's innermost thoughts and feelings.

The problem is when those feelings are then construed as physical facts which, in turn, changes the legal definition of a protected class to include people who are biologically distinct in hugely significant ways from the biology of the intended protected class.