AIBU to think women should not be banned from Social media for asking the question - Thread 3

[Thewithesarehere]

Many women have been suspended from sm for asking the question:

“Do you believe that male sexed people should be allowed access to changing rooms and showers for female sexed people and teenagers?”
Seems like a perfectly reasonable question which we should be allowed to ask.

Let’s vote with our AIBU.

Sorry I thought you meant the Staniland Question

She does mean The Staniland Question. The thread keeps getting detailed.

Derailed!

Women-only toilets are not public spaces.

Parents have a right to know if the person sleeping next to their daughter in a tent went through puberty as a male (hence stronger muscles and bones than a girl) and still has a penis. I am not sure why this concern for safeguarding of young girls is so hard to understand.

Ah! I thought so from the title but a few posts confused me. In that case, I stand by my original post.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

The number of people who talk with great authority about trans issues without having even a clue about the basics because they got all their information from mumsnet and gender critical twitter is becoming astonishing. And depressing.

What exactly was wrong in what was said there?

There seems to be an enormous misunderstanding of what transitioning with the assistance of blockers looks like. All this talk about deep voices, beards, tennis ball sized testicals dangling in your daughters face.

No. That's not what transitioning with blockers looks like. My sd doesn't have a beard, but what she does have -at 5'10 and weighing 53kg- is natural c-cup breasts.

I am one strike away from suspension so someone else needs to take up this thread if that happens.

Both strikes are related to puberty blocking drugs.

A genuine question here: Is 5’10 and 53 kg healthy BMI? I can’t calculate on the top of my head (and probably need to sleep 💤 ).

@Thewithesarehere

Women-only toilets are not public spaces.

Parents have a right to know if the person sleeping next to their daughter in a tent went through puberty as a male (hence stronger muscles and bones than a girl) and still has a penis. I am not sure why this concern for safeguarding of young girls is so hard to understand.

It's hard to understand for people who are so woke and accommodating that they refuse to believe that male bodied people with 'dysphoria' would ever pose a risk. Then there are the people who fully understand how bonkers this is, but are to scared to chime in with what they really believe. I would not want my daughter sharing with tents with males. I certainly wouldn't want my daughter to have to be accompanied to the toilet by a male at school. The list goes on and on and on!

@Thewithesarehere

Women-only toilets are not public spaces.

Parents have a right to know if the person sleeping next to their daughter in a tent went through puberty as a male (hence stronger muscles and bones than a girl) and still has a penis. I am not sure why this concern for safeguarding of young girls is so hard to understand.

But what if somebody didn't go through male puberty?

And don't worry, I'm not reporting any posts and I ask hq not to ban anybody in relation to any posts of mine they respond to, unless they truly break guidelines.

Maybe I could repost for thread 4 but not sure my cut and paste will work

Okay, I'm talking about ghe original question, I realise there is a whole other convo going on here. I need to read yp on the thread.

None of it really makes any sense but taken in totality it sounds plausible - thats why people get into conspiracy theories, this join the dots approach is seductive - a report from Dentons here, a couple of misrepresented scientific papers, a whole load of straw men, a tweet you don't like there, a trans person who's a bit creepy, the opinions of a few fringe scientists, a sprinkling of wild speculation, some pictures of scary looking trans criminals, an unqualified sculpter talking about the threat to children, a lingering hint of a big pharma money making plot and lots of WHY IS NO-ONE TALKING ABOUT THIS THE TRANS ARE SO POWERFUL and suddenly omg you're peak transing hard and can never come down again.

So when we discuss written evidence submitted to court by pro-trans organisations, written evidence and research produced by GIDS, policy documents for the NHS written specifically to change 'sex' to 'gender', documents written by Stonewall - do you consider these 'misrepresented' or 'unqualified' or 'speculation' when we are literally copying them or referring directly to the documents themselves?

Do you actually think these documents that we discuss are false?
That somehow they appear on our computer screens but aren't really what Stonewall/ GIDS/ etc are saying? Please do clarify, jj.

But what if somebody didn't go through male puberty?
I would be most definitely accommodating once I know this. The whole point is that I won’t know this.
Also, my foggy brain has calculated finally. That height and weight falls firmly in ‘underweight’.

Didn’t mean to imply that you don’t know this is underweight @Fastedbrownie.
Only thinking out loud and imploring you to share and/or look into the data behind the assorted medications your DC is being prescribed. If you feel like it, PM me and I can look into this.

Because they are public spaces.

Public spaces for female people not male people. Males are excluded for the very good reason that some of them present a danger to females. Transwomen are male and there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that they are less dangerous than any other males.

a report from Dentons here - what do you make of that report jj?

a couple of misrepresented scientific papers - Apart from Blanchard, which ones are you talking about? The Hilton Lundberg review on transwomen in Sport? Which papers? Ones published by gender clinicians with decades of experience that you don’t like the conclusion of?

a whole load of straw men - what strawmen do you mean in the video?

a tweet you don't like there - ok. There are plenty of those. And plenty that you don’t like as well.

a trans person who's a bit creepy - really? That is your words and not ours as we wouldn’t get away with saying that. So, I guess this is for effect.

the opinions of a few fringe scientists- which scientists do you refer to? Please be specific.

some pictures of scary looking trans criminals - do you mean photos available in the media reports where the media outlet is reporting on the crime. You are the one again making negative comment about how they look. You have also been on MN long enough to know that those types of comments are deleted.

a lingering hint of a big pharma money making plot - this one is good. You know you keep trying to prove UK women’s groups are funded by far right US organizations on far less evidence than this scenario. Really jj, you DON’T think the suppliers of the drugs used in any component of transition are making money from it? Or do you have some inside information that these pharmaceutical companies are donating the medications. And that having people on life long medication isn’t making those companies money... and yet.... you continue with the far right conspiracy theories ...

@Thewithesarehere

I am one strike away from suspension so someone else needs to take up this thread if that happens.

Both strikes are related to puberty blocking drugs.

Now sure why you'd be suspended for this?

Refreshing that you read the thread Pumpkin! But there have been many many convos on the three threads. Isn’t it great to see them going on here? I am concerned that women here are overmoderated on these threads as opposed to every other thread though...hence the question I guess.

By the way MNHQ. My bold quotes above are from jj’s post. I am not calling any trans person creepy. Or scary looking.

There seems to be an enormous misunderstanding of what transitioning with the assistance of blockers looks like. All this talk about deep voices, beards, tennis ball sized testicals dangling in your daughters face.

No. That's not what transitioning with blockers looks like. My sd doesn't have a beard, but what she does have -at 5'10 and weighing 53kg- is natural c-cup breasts.

I cant believe Im actually writing this, but it doesn`t matter what size the genitalia are, that is totally irrelevant. It is which sex they belong to that is the matter in question.
Biologically male bodied individuals trying to access spaces for biologically female bodied individuals.

I am also sick of people dismissing the voices of Buck Angel and many of the other trans individuals who TRAs call "truscum" because they don`t hold with the TRAs ideology. Their voices should be heard, not silenced.

Didn’t know creepy was wrongthink..

It's not the about wokeness or accommodating. If anything, the complete opposite is true. You all are looking at it from an ideological perspective. I'm looking at it from the lived reality of having had a child who at the end of the day still needs to pee, and as a parent, my own personal need for it not to be a traumatic drama that ends in tears every time they do. It's very easy to sit and scoff about how things should be done, it's very different to bare the weight of that reality several times a day.

@Langrycleg

Refreshing that you read the thread Pumpkin! But there have been many many convos on the three threads. Isn’t it great to see them going on here? I am concerned that women here are overmoderated on these threads as opposed to every other thread though...hence the question I guess.

This is the problem with the whole thing. Women aren't even allowed to express their concerns on this matter.

For example I am sure I have read threads on AIBU talking about a creepy driving instructor/ family member/ teacher/ neighbour that weren’t deleted. It must be the special ones only that we can’t talk about. What would be the reaction of those posters if they were deleted?