to disagree with a uni vice-principal that this is abusive?

[PurgatoryOfPotholes]

Today, I've seen this exchange.

Person 1: And most trans women aren’t men.

Person 2: They are males.

Person 1: And you are an abusive bigot for asserting so. Blocked.

This would be of very little significance, except person 1 is the vice-principal of a Scottish university. The University of the West of Scotland, to be precise.

Saying that "they are males" is abusive bigotry? In that case, is there any way that anyone could express their opinion that transwomen are transwomen without being called abusive or bigoted?

If senior academics can honestly believe the above is bigoted, what implications does that have for Scottish hate crime legislation in practice?

Link about the bill for those who haven't heard about it: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-53580326

YANBU: "these are males" is not abusive or bigoted to post.

YABU: "these are males" is an abusive and bigoted sentence.

[quote Eightiesfan]@ufucoffee
Mumsnet is not anti trans. Some users are just against men saying they are women when they obviously aren't. If some men want to pretend they are women they can, obviously, crack on mate.

And therein lies the problem, you clearly have no understanding of gender dysphoria and the absolute horror both men and women have to live with through fear of people exactly like you. The fact you label ‘transwomen’ as men ‘pretending’ they are women is sheer ignorance. Educate yourself.[/quote]
None of this is relevant to what I asked. But seeing as you're following this tangent, please be aware that you're being old-fashioned. Not all trans people experience dysphoria, and it is transphobic to imply that dysphoria is a prerequisite for being trans. It's gatekeeping.

[quote Eightiesfan]@ufucoffee
Mumsnet is not anti trans. Some users are just against men saying they are women when they obviously aren't. If some men want to pretend they are women they can, obviously, crack on mate.

And therein lies the problem, you clearly have no understanding of gender dysphoria and the absolute horror both men and women have to live with through fear of people exactly like you. The fact you label ‘transwomen’ as men ‘pretending’ they are women is sheer ignorance. Educate yourself.[/quote]
No it's not ignorance to state the truth. Saying 'educate yourself' in a po faced sanctimonious manner won't make anyone suddenly agree with you

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

Just for the purposes of further clarification, for *@slashlover*

If I go to the effort of screenshotting and typing out a conversation verbatim/c&p'ing multiple posts in order to preserve the partial anonymity of someone (who I don't actually like!) and someone then uses the effort I went to, to imply I never even saw the conversation in context, I will be pissed off.

And then, I will say "fuck it, and just link directly. Because I am a human being, not an emotionless robot. If you would prefer me to maintain the moral high ground, don't taunt me down from it.

Your reply saying you wouldn't drive traffic was to OriginalEmu, then you went ahead and posted it despite them not replying after that.

Anyway, enjoy your pile on because of the job the tweeter does.

There is nothing wrong with being a trans woman (ie someone of the male biological sex who feels very strongly that they are of the female gender), and it is right to fight to be accepted as such and not abused and mistreated for being the person you are, or told that you are actually a man and should identify yourself as such at all times. There is something wrong with stealing the words and identities of others, though. There are men, women, trans men and trans women. Cis woman is an unnecessary fabrication. You should not fight for acceptance by pretending there is no difference between women and trans women, because that’s a lie and does not win the acceptance craved, it actually reveals the belief that you will never actually be accepted for who you are, so you want everyone to pretend you are in fact something else altogether.

Yes. I was still pissed off when the other person said she was confused about the first comment.

So I did not bother screenshotting and anonymising it, or c&p'ing; instead I linked directly.

If she'd asked six hours later, I'd have c&p'ed again. As she asked when I was still seething, I just gave her the information.

What in this confuses you? The idea that other mumsnetters are human beings?

Were males yes. Are males no. They are transwomen.

If they were born male, they are still male. It is not possible to change from what you were born no matter how much you want it. Bullying people into stopping stating these facts does not change them.

If they’re not males what are they transitioning from?

It’s not abusive. It’s just facts, they’ll always be male. Just because they don’t want to be doesn’t mean someone saying it is abusive.

@DomesticatedZombie

What is a transwoman, Furble?

A male who has transitioned to a female (gender identity not biological sex). That is the definition of a trans woman. Not born woman. Trans(itioned) to woman. Yes DNA and anatomy may say they were born male but they identify as female. I'm not sure why that's so hard to understand. I identify as blonde though my DNA and roots say I'm a brunette. You would look a bit of a plonker trying to argue with a blonde person that they are brunette. Were brunette yes. Are brunette no.

@FurbleSocks 97% of born men, per medical data, retain their penis and testicles. It is apparently less than 3% that actually transition.

Less than 3% actually transition. Less than 3%. So on that basis, were male, ARE male.

No. They’ll always be male.

And I don’t think I’d be the one that looks like a ‘plonker’ when a male is claiming to be a female. Unless you’re someone who thinks trans women ever actually pass as women.

I have sympathy for people with gender dysphoria. It sounds really hard. I support people living how they want to live, dressing how they want, acting in ways that are more 'female' or 'male' according to social stereotypes without any censure.

But it is not an appropriate or helpful response to cultivate an illusion that changing sex is possible. Or to deny that one's biological sex isn't important in certain situations (for example, when people can be triggered by it, in competitive sport, when it comes to sexual attraction). That's the issue.

You would look a bit of a plonker trying to argue with a blonde person that they are brunette. Were brunette yes. Are brunette no.

What an absolutely ridiculous comparison

Yes DNA and anatomy may say they were born male but they identify as female

But DNA and anatomy don't change and that's what determines sex. What you 'identify' with is neither here nor there. What if someone identifies as a fish. Or a Maori. It doesn't make either of those true.

@TheKeatingFive

I have sympathy for people with gender dysphoria. It sounds really hard. I support people living how they want to live, dressing how they want, acting in ways that are more 'female' or 'male' according to social stereotypes without any censure.

But it is not an appropriate or helpful response to cultivate an illusion that changing sex is possible. Or to deny that one's biological sex isn't important in certain situations (for example, when people can be triggered by it, in competitive sport, when it comes to sexual attraction). That's the issue.

But you're aware there is no actual 'female' or 'male' way to live - unless, I suppose, it directly relates to your body parts (menstruating, for example, might be described as a 'female way to live')?

You're equating the label given to the sexed body with an assortment of cultural stereotypes.

I argue they should not be linked and in fact we should be making an active effort to dissociate the two, not say that 'being kind' or 'liking shopping' or something is a 'female' way to live. It's got nothing to do with the female body.

A male who has transitioned to a female (gender identity not biological sex). That is the definition of a trans woman.

Genuine question - what exactly do you mean by 'transitioning'?
Do you think it is/should be anything more than saying "I am a woman actually"?

A lot of trans folk would say they didn't change anything, they were always their gender. Do you think it is gatekeeping to say you need to 'transition' or change anything about you to be trans?

But you're aware there is no actual 'female' or 'male' way to live

You're equating the label given to the sexed body with an assortment of cultural stereotypes.

If you read my post you'll see I acknowledged all of that

I did read your post Keating! That's why I was confused that you still used sex-labels for stereotype things. And just wanted to point out (to the thread in general) that the two things are separate.

No matter how many people like to confuse them or use them interchangeably. I think it's important we are clear in our language when talking about things that can be male/female (usually bodies and cables) and things that can't.

(Not having a go - general musing on my part!)

YADNBU.

That's why I was confused that you still used sex-labels for stereotype things

Did you miss the bit where I specified 'according to social stereotypes'?

No, I reiterate, I read your post. That means I didn't miss things.

You said those things were 'female' and 'male', according to stereotypes. My point is that is the sort of language that perpetuates those stereotypes.

I would say 'feminine-coded' or something is what you're actually trying to say, is it?

Again, just musing on the language we use and why we feel compelled to bring sex-labels into descriptions of clothes and behaviour when even in the same sentence we acknowledge they are unrelated to the sexed body.

A male who has transitioned to a female (gender identity not biological sex). That is the definition of a trans woman. Not born woman. Trans(itioned) to woman. Yes DNA and anatomy may say they were born male but they identify as female. I'm not sure why that's so hard to understand.
I think it's hard to understand because male means biological sex and does not relate to one's identity. The stubborn refusal to ever define the concept of a female gender identity does not help.

My point is that is the sort of language that perpetuates those stereotypes.

I don't see any point in trying to ignore those stereotypes exist either. They do. I believe personally that they are societally constructed, which is why I stated that clearly and put them in inverted commas. I don't feel I've been unclear in my meaning, so I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to achieve here.

No worries.
I guess I think of it a bit like "crooked Hilary" - if two things are associated all the time it tends to get perpetuated. The inverted commas get lost as terms are repeated...!
Not trying to pick an argument. (Honest). I think we can agree to disagree!

I clarify they are born male its a clear factual statement that I've told my son he will be argued with if he repeats that because that's exactly what he believes I've also told him never discuss it with his sister because she believes people are clownfish its going to be hard for him growing up with his absolute black and white thinking he will struggle

I'm guessing when he says 'most' he means some men call themselves 'trans' in order to invade women only spaces. I may be wrong but what else could he mean? But if it is this then that wilis exactly the issue with allowing transwomen in these spaces, if men can just call themselves 'trans' if they aren't even actual transwomen. But the whole thing is confusing! Don't think he knows what he is on about but just wants to appear 'woke'.