Enthusiastic Consent - I am .. confused.

[loopyapp]

So .. AIBU that the once previously highly held gold standard for consent between partners had to be enthusiastic and complete. Any hesitant or unsure thoughts = a grey area in which the other party should NOT ever step into??

I ask because (I am very new to all this so please be gentle if I've got this wrong) this sudden uprise in trans activists insisting that predominantly gay women (though men too apparently) should willingly sleep with transwomen and transmen regardless of what genitalia they have or where they are in their transition is confusing.

Are trans people really insisting that people have sex with them despite their lack of enthusiastic consent because its their right??

I must have this wrong.. surely.. we were banging the #metoo campaign drum not that long ago .. all up in arms about how both parties need to be fully able and willing to consent to engage in anything that could be considered sexual contact.. its how I've been raising my 4 boys .. its what I completely believe in .. that absolutely everyone is allowed to turn sex down at any point, even during, simply because they wish to without having to give a carefully drafted PC reason????

[Edited by MNHQ to remove poll]

[quote fallenwood]**@BloodinGutters* you say Nope not an assumption. There’s research into this. Blanchard, but we’re not normally allowed to name the (scientific/medical) term he uses for straight tw* if you are talking about "most" you need statistics, not research. Do you have bonafide statistics? If not it is an assumption. If you think any piece of peer reviewed research backs up the assumption then please link[/quote]
It’s against the rules here to reference the term Blanchard uses, said that already, so I would assume links would be deleted as quickly. And I don’t want to go to MN jail.

But it’s easy to google. He has a bunch of studies and it’s not like he didn’t have predecessors who did research also. I would be very surprised if Miranda Yardley wouldn’t have every study there is linked on their site.

However there are very few official stats as the trans umbrella that stonewall use includes a huge range of people and only a tiny % of those have gone for grc. So there’s no way of establishing official stats when the few thousand that have a grc are only a fraction of those identified as trans under stonewalls definition. Reading the studies that exist is the best we have, certainly gives a better chance of being representative than your one trans friend.

[quote fallenwood]**@BloodinGutters* you say Nope not an assumption. There’s research into this. Blanchard, but we’re not normally allowed to name the (scientific/medical) term he uses for straight tw* if you are talking about "most" you need statistics, not research. Do you have bonafide statistics? If not it is an assumption. If you think any piece of peer reviewed research backs up the assumption then please link[/quote]
Oh plus, there is logic too of course- tw are male. Most males are straight. (Hence being gay or bi are protected minorities).

There’s literally zilch that suggests tw are made up of any differing break down of sexuality groupings than other males are.

Hth

@titchy

if you are talking about "most" you need statistics, not research.

Oh that is funny!

ie their research is void of statistics and so it isn't valid research. Someone said most transwomen are men who are attracted to women, I said that all the evidence I have seen personally is the opposite, but that there is no clear information either way. They said there was research, and I pointed out that there were no statistics so it remains an assumption, but that if they had peer reviewed research to link it.

Also you have upthread compared this issue to issues around speaking out about racism, child abuse and male violence. On what basis are you making a comparison? There is a second valid interest group here which doesn't apply to your other examples, and the numbers involved and duration is also completely different.

More to the point, you are discounting and ignoring what people are saying about the fact that normal transwomen (ie most) are nothing to do with the extreme transactivism nor the abuse nor the violence and they are also a threatened group.

If you want to discuss, discuss. That means listening to other points of view and considering and responding, not laughing and mocking and screaching "namalt" to try to shut down discussion.

I support discussing this issue and taking it seriously. I don't support how you and the OP and other posters are going about discussing it.

In short, grow up.

This is completely absurd.

This is like a thread of people trying to raise awareness that there were abusive priests in the Catholic Church, with two or three posters in the middle shouting "Stop saying all priests are abusers, priestphobe!"

No-one thought all transwomen were rapists.

But we need to deal with the number that are, and their enablers

@BloodinGutters I am guessing your views are quite entrenched here, but to reiterate, I was talking about personal testimony from transwomen who know many other transwomen who want to be in relationships with men. You are ignoring that. You seem completely disinterested in it. Your "research" is banned for a reason. You have no idea what sexual preferences most transwomen have and nor does your researcher, and nor do I. The information is not on google either.

Lesbians, i.e. same-sex attracted women are a small minority of women.

Opposite-sex attracted men are a large majority of men. What sex do you need to be, to be a transwoman?

[quote Linning]@TatianaBis

It’s funny how the whole thread is about «isn’t it wrong for people to feel entitled to lesbians engaging with them when they should be free to only engage (sexually or otherwise) with whoever they want?» (which I fully agree with by the way)

And yet posters (like you) who agree with the principle that lesbians should be free to engage or not as they want (as should be the norm for anyone) ironically feel entitled to me engaging with them and answering to them right away on mumsnet just because they quoted me and therefore feel it entitles them to an answer from me and if I don’t provide it in a timely fashion, or engage with others instead of them, feel like I should be called out and have a further lecture as to why I should address them and why if I haven’t then it probably means X, Y, Z about me and my argument.

I don’t mind it but isn’t it (at least a tiny bit) ironic?

I will answer you though.

I have at no point made a point about all Mumsnet posters in this thread. I haven’t made one single generalization about people who agree with the OP or disagree with the OP. I haven’t said that all people who agree with OP are «anti-trans», I haven’t denied the fact that some transwomen are a threat to lesbians, I haven’t even said that all people who fear transwomen, think that they are rapists. Nothing in my post suggest any of that.

My post was me sharing my experience as a lesbian and why I don’t consider myself threatened by them. I at no point said no transwomen is a threat, and I at no point accused all Mumsnetters on this thread with a differing point of view of accusing all transwomen of being rapists. Some people, like a poster I quoted before, purposefully misquoted me in a way that clearly imply that (in her world) transwomen and rapists are the same and interchangeable which is absolutely not okay and is exactly the type of people that I was addressing when I said that some allies are more threatening than transwomen as whole because thoughtless and biased generalizations and stereotyping of entire (sub-) groups of people is exactly the thing that has caused so much harm to minorities, including lesbians. But that was a comment to the people who engage in that type of thinking and argument and I purposefully specified that in my original post (and later reiterated it to the specific commenter) I at no point made the bold statement that “all people who have apprehensions about trans people think they are rapists” and that’s why I didn’t answer to your initial comment to me because your point seemed to be that I seemed to assume/think everybody who doesn’t agree with me assume all transwomen are rapist when it’s not ever what I said or assumed.

It’s undeniable thought that some people think like that (including some on this thread) the same way some transwomen/allies think it’s okay to coherce lesbians or call them transphobic and both are problematic.

Me addressing specifically/exclusively the people who think like that in my post doesn’t mean I assume everyone think like that.[/quote]
The thread isn’t about lesbians being free to engage, sexually or otherwise, with whoever they want.

This thread is about a piece of investigative journalism that looked at a culture where SOME transwomen feel entitled to fuck lesbians and bully, harass and rape those who say no.

Don’t manipulatively reframe that to suit your point.

You joined a discussion thread. You are aware in a discussion people answer questions, not just avoid answering them and give ‘answers’ to questions that were never asked/points never made, right?

So when it starts to feel very ordinary people and people are squirming out of answering straight forward questions sometimes posters say can you answer the question I asked.

Now you aren’t suggesting that is the same thing as rape are you? Because going by your reframing of that it kinda reads like you are.

@Linning you may want to get your definition of ironic from a dictionary not the song. It might help you not misuse the term.

Hth

[quote fallenwood]@BloodinGutters I am guessing your views are quite entrenched here, but to reiterate, I was talking about personal testimony from transwomen who know many other transwomen who want to be in relationships with men. You are ignoring that. You seem completely disinterested in it. Your "research" is banned for a reason. You have no idea what sexual preferences most transwomen have and nor does your researcher, and nor do I. The information is not on google either.[/quote]
That’s an interesting spelling of informed

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

Lesbians, i.e. same-sex attracted women are a small minority of women.

Opposite-sex attracted men are a large majority of men. What sex do you need to be, to be a transwoman?

But logic is very hard for some.

Linning, if you and I were friends, I wouldn't talk to you about any instance of me being pressured into sex by a transwomen, because I wouldn't be able to bear the sort of response you've given here. (And then, of course, I'd have to watch you declare that no women you know have ever been pressured into sex by a transwoman.)

Your anecdotes aren't the gotcha that you seem to think they are.

In this thread, we have some posters outraged and angry about "hurtful rhetoric".

We have other posters outraged and angry about the rape and coercion of lesbians.

I know which group I'm in.

extract

One in 50 inmates in adult male prisons now claims to be transgender, according to the annual report, published last week, by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons.

There are only two possible explanations for the dramatic rise. Either the figures, based on questionnaires circulated in prisons, are a true reflection of the demographic in our jails.

Or the system — more in tune, supposedly, with modern Britain — is being exploited in growing numbers by criminals with ulterior motives.

The fact the ‘one in 50’ statistic is more than ten times previous Home Office estimates, and at least four times the proportion in the general population, suggests the latter.
(Continues)
Inside Time, a newspaper for prisoners, has received dozens of letters about this issue.

The following is from an inmate who describes herself as a ‘genuine trans prisoner’ and who, until recently, was held at Littlehey — the same jail as Carrie Cooper.

‘The sickest part of this is that the system can do sod-all about these trans bandwagon jumpers, because the policy states they must be treated as transgender prisoners if they say they are.

‘I have had staff and other inmates express their disgust to me (a genuine trans prisoner) over this behaviour.

‘It is trans imposters who give real transgender people a bad name, in and out of prison. To genuine trans people — stay strong.’ The author, whose name was supplied to the paper, said she knew of ‘17’ fellow prisoners who had jumped on ‘the trans bandwagon’.

Continues: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7287343/PAUL-BRACCHI-1-50-inmates-male-prisons-claim-transgender.html

If random males are feigning a transgender identity, statistically they are more likely to be opposite sex attracted than same sex attracted, aren't they?

Also, some research this week on sexual offending amongst male university students found approximately 1 in 10 of the students was a sexual abuser. Might there be some cross-over between rapists and men who feign a transgender identity to access women...?

@Waitwhat23

I just find it baffling that anyone can hear about this and can call the women reporting these experiences liars/ deny it happens/say NATWALT/say 'well, it's only a few lesbians it happens to, so who cares?'.

If this is happening on any scale, the human reaction would be to say 'fucking hell, that's awful that anyone is being coerced into sex, for any reason!'. The reaction from Stonewall (the only 'allowed' LGBT+ organisation) should surely be 'we're horrified that this is happening in our community, we condemn it utterly' not 'it shouldn't really be happening but....'.

Does the whole 'me too' movement just not apply to lesbians in some posters opinion?

It’s amazing, the defensiveness from those who just don’t want to acknowledge that this is an issue, isn’t it!

I agree so much Waitwhat, the normal reaction - particularly from any woman who claims to care about #metoo, or thinks of herself as in any way feminist - would be to be shocked by this phenomenon, to condemn it unequivocally, to support 100% the women (the lesbians) this is happening to.

And yet there’s just defensiveness and denial on a massive scale. I’m so tired of these misogynistic women shouting at and scolding other women for caring about women’s rights. For daring to think our own feelings and experiences matter.

How invested do you have to be in perpetuating this agenda to just be able to ignore all the evidence like this? It’s not just that BBC article, or what the women concerned are saying; it’s what huge numbers of transactivists themselves are saying, and what Nancy Kelly, CEO of Stonewall has said, FFS! She drew a direct equivalence between exclusively same sex orientation and “societal prejudices”! The woman who leads the charity that is supposed to represent women who are exclusively same sex attracted, for crying out loud!

Although it’s a fact that Stonewall has chosen to no longer represent lesbians who are exclusively same sex attracted, as has been established by people writing to them and asking them explicitly, and being told “we can’t help you with that” in response.

So Stonewall itself, the biggest “LGBT” org there is, is explicitly excluding from its remit, from the so-called LGBT community, a group of actual lesbians. And some people on this thread are fine with that, just as they’re fine with lesbians being coerced into corrective rape and not having anywhere to talk about it, anyone to listen to them.

I don't even know what to say at this point. Misinformation, othering of people, and division are how all hateful ideologies start. It frightens me that so many are getting whipped up in to a frenzy about transwomen, who make up so many of my dear friends.

I would say, Ijustreallywantacat, that it is you who is in the grip of a hateful ideology. The ideology that insists that gender identity overrides biological sex, that seeks to punish and silence anyone speaking out against it, that would deny women the right to boundaries and bodily autonomy. The ideology you espouse and support is genuinely hateful towards women and especially lesbians, and is causing great harm.

You decry us as bigots, I think the bigot here is you, and those who think like you. I don’t want to live in a world where your hateful, divisive, authoritarian ideology holds sway.

It frightens me to live in a world where misogyny and lesbophobia pretend to be “progressive”. Where the demands and sexual entitlement of a subset of male people are valued more highly than the rights and safety of women, where women’s rights aren’t human rights and we are just seen as “service humans” there to facilitate life for the important “real” humans, the male ones.

You have shown me who you are in the way you dismiss the experiences and pain of the lesbians this really is happening to. You have shown me which group of people you think it is that matters. You have shown me where your sympathies lie and how biased you are against women, which is tragic if you yourself are a woman.

But that’s what so many women do in a male-dominated society: internalise the misogyny and pretend that outright injustices and abuses are perfectly fine and reasonable. Play along with those who have the real power to make yourself feel safe, while actually making the world less safe for yourself and other women. It doesn’t give you the high ground or the moral authority you clearly think you have. Quite the opposite.

Nancy Kelley did not say this at all.
She can dress it up in all the weasel words she likes, it won't make the implications any less clear than when Mridul Wadhwa said that rape victims who suffered from PTSD in the presence of males should "reframe their trauma".

@ArcheryAnnie

In this thread, we have some posters outraged and angry about "hurtful rhetoric".

We have other posters outraged and angry about the rape and coercion of lesbians.

I know which group I'm in.

Me too, ArcheryAnnie! Me too.

@BloodinGutters you say Nope not an assumption. There’s research into this. Blanchard, but we’re not normally allowed to name the (scientific/medical) term he uses for straight tw if you are talking about "most" you need statistics, not research. Do you have bonafide statistics? If not it is an assumption. If you think any piece of peer reviewed research backs up the assumption then please link

That is good point. Can we have the same rigour for the claim that trans people are the most vulnerable members of our society?

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

extract

One in 50 inmates in adult male prisons now claims to be transgender, according to the annual report, published last week, by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons.

There are only two possible explanations for the dramatic rise. Either the figures, based on questionnaires circulated in prisons, are a true reflection of the demographic in our jails.

Or the system — more in tune, supposedly, with modern Britain — is being exploited in growing numbers by criminals with ulterior motives.

The fact the ‘one in 50’ statistic is more than ten times previous Home Office estimates, and at least four times the proportion in the general population, suggests the latter.
(Continues)
Inside Time, a newspaper for prisoners, has received dozens of letters about this issue.

The following is from an inmate who describes herself as a ‘genuine trans prisoner’ and who, until recently, was held at Littlehey — the same jail as Carrie Cooper.

‘The sickest part of this is that the system can do sod-all about these trans bandwagon jumpers, because the policy states they must be treated as transgender prisoners if they say they are.

‘I have had staff and other inmates express their disgust to me (a genuine trans prisoner) over this behaviour.

‘It is trans imposters who give real transgender people a bad name, in and out of prison. To genuine trans people — stay strong.’ The author, whose name was supplied to the paper, said she knew of ‘17’ fellow prisoners who had jumped on ‘the trans bandwagon’.

Continues: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7287343/PAUL-BRACCHI-1-50-inmates-male-prisons-claim-transgender.html

If random males are feigning a transgender identity, statistically they are more likely to be opposite sex attracted than same sex attracted, aren't they?

Also, some research this week on sexual offending amongst male university students found approximately 1 in 10 of the students was a sexual abuser. Might there be some cross-over between rapists and men who feign a transgender identity to access women...?

I think there’s a study of inmates in California prisons that shows similar. That tw are disproportionately over represented in violent male prisoners.

The most likely answer would be that’s because violent offenders want to identify their way into female prisions.

Hmm, I wonder if perhaps violent males without criminal convictions (i.e. not caught yet) might want to identify their way into women's spaces on the outside. Nah...

Only men with a criminal record would ever be so sneaky...

No means no.

What I find utterly scary is relating it in my terms to teen me that when it got to a certain point of heavy petting that I felt I had to have sex with the boy otherwise Id be leading him on or not following through with what Id unintentialy promised. It makes me shudder and feel sick that grown lesbian women are basically being told to think the same as teen me.

Everyone has the right who they sleep with and if you don't like a penis that isn't going to change with boobs and dressing in traditionally female clothing.

My post was me sharing my experience as a lesbian and why I don’t consider myself threatened by them.

But again, so what? What do your personal experiences matter? Bully for you if your experiences have been positive ones. This is a discussion about the negative experiences of some. Your point only has any validity of the article was generalising to everyone's experiences. Which it clearly wasn't.

@Ijustreallywantacat

It's 'scaremongering' when women talk about their experiences of being coerced into sex?

It is scaremongering when a national news organisation runs a whole article focusing on the behaviour of a few people from a minority group, and then people are led to believe that it is representative of that group, and that that group are people we should be afraid of.

That article very explicitly used the word "some" in the headline. It could not have been more clear. The only people who take that to mean "all" are morons. People trying to claim that it implies something else are clearly trying to shut discussion of sexual violence against a vulnerable minority down. I don't want to consider what their motives might be for doing this.

I really can't get my head around anyone thinking that a lesbian should have sex with someone with a penis.

I mean lesbianism is a simple premise.

And anyone that thinks anyone should be able to peer pressure, pressure or coerce someone into sex is just fucked in the head.

Strange how no one calls heterosexual men bigoted for only being attracted to women.

But women who are only attracted to women… who won’t sleep with men, however they identify, because they have penises….? It’s fair game to call them all sorts of disgusting slurs and pressure them into sex.

It’s deeply, deeply sad how homophobic and misogynist our society is at the moment.

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

This is completely absurd.

This is like a thread of people trying to raise awareness that there were abusive priests in the Catholic Church, with two or three posters in the middle shouting "Stop saying all priests are abusers, priestphobe!"

No-one thought all transwomen were rapists.

But we need to deal with the number that are, and their enablers

Indeed. Would a discussion about the incidence of child abuse in the RC church (or in other churches, for that matter) be subject to the same denials and defensiveness from devout Catholics, I wonder?

I suppose it was, for a long time. There were indeed many devout Catholics who enabled the very worst sins against children to be perpetrated by abusers within the “sacred caste” of priests, for decades and decades, because it was too threatening to their belief system to acknowledge the reality.

As a result, many many more people had their lives ruined by CSA that could have been prevented if people had been willing to listen and believe the victims.

I think that’s a very accurate analogy for the denial and defensiveness on here. People don’t want to believe it so they have to accuse those saying it of scaremongering, of exaggerating, of having it in for those they are accusing.

Meanwhile, the abuse goes on, and if any decision about action on it were left to these people, it would continue to go on and on and on, unchecked.

Because naming abuse that’s happening is a far worse crime than actually committing the abuse, in the eyes of these people.

As others have said, there’s a parallel too with the way Muslim grooming gangs were allowed to operate with impunity for years and years after they were first identified, and many, many more vulnerable girls raped and abused, because it wasn’t ok to recognise the phenomenon seeing as the abusers were from a minority themselves. Same old, same old. No lessons learned. No outrage, no protectiveness, no concern for these vulnerable victims at all.

Just a resounding “so what”.

I don’t have words for the extent of my contempt for those who enable this.