To not understand why the 'woman' question is so hard for politicians to answer?

[Themidnightpig]

Genuinely not sure if I'm missing something here.

Constantly seeing it in the news politicians being unable to answer or getting flustered over the 'do women have penises' question.

Surely the answer is as straight forward as 'No, women don't have penises but some Trans Women do and as a decent society we treat them as women in so far as possible'

Why is this so hard for everyone to grapple with?

Stats to back that up, house?

as a decent society we treat them as women in so far as possible

And where do we draw the line?
At what point do we prioritise the Safeguarding of women? Where is that line?

Because its a difficult issue, nowhere near as clear cut as MN wants it.

I work with intelligent, educated, professional women. The overwhelming preference is for inclusion over women's rights. I don't hear the women's spaces argument ever and if I try to introduce it, people genuinely don't care.

Easier, I think, for right wingers to see it as black and white.

The only context in which the women I know care is sport.

Because trans people are a marginalised often persecuted group, and women - who have also long been marginalised - are concerned about rights and safe spaces for women being eroded, and whatever a politician says they are likely to offend/upset/enrage a sizeable proportion of people as this is a hugely emotive subject.

Capitalism. Putting children on a lifetime path of medical interventions is where big pharmaceutical giants come in, then you've got the tech giants on board. Before you know it, it's ubiquitous and here we are.

People have been utterly brainwashed.

Politicians probably keep an eye on polls on attitudes. YouGov results are typical - women more transfriendly, Libs and Labour voters also.

But my observation about women policing examples of deviation from TWAW etc is experience of it on social media. It really isn't just TRAs and men - in fact, I'd say that a lot of men don't much care, for obvious and privileged reasons. It is even a schism within Feminism. And also there are generational factors- for many young people, it's their Civil Rights issue and they really do see it in the terms that previous generations though of gay rights or campaigns against racism.

Thats the bit that should be up for debate I suppose.

For me the penis is a pretty clear line in certain spaces where women are vulnerable.

Totally this. It's part of the capitalist agenda. If they don't cripple them with sugar, junk food and wall-to-wall tech, they'll get them some other way. Children are mentally overloaded and out of touch with their bodies, forced to intellectualise everything, to me being a mother just feels like a damage limitation exercise.

It's called institutional capture.

Fear and cowardice.

Smartsub

you mean you work with women who have luxury privilege. Who are highly unlikely to find themselves in a refuge or a prison and don’t give a shit about the women who might so they can gaily virtue signalling without it having any impact on them.

FoiledByTheInsect

If it is part of the ‘capitalist agenda’ why is it the right who are generally against it and the left (apart from the old school feminists) who are totally for it?

Because politicians dont necessarily just act in the electorates' best interest.
They have other agendas and people to please.

But they are not. Gay people fought for their rights as gay people.. People of color fought for their rights as people of color. Nearly Everyone is on board for people with gender dysphoria not to be discriminated against for having gender dysphoria. Nearly everyone is on board for people not to be discriminated against for not conforming to sex based stereotypes.

The area of contention is that this particular gender ideology is not fighting for trans peopke’s rights as trans people, but is fighting for their rights as something they are not; that is the opposite sex. And that creates real implications for the rights and safeguarding of women and girls.
No other civil rights movement has fought for their rights by claiming they are something they are not ( literally women rather than trans) or has founded their rights by crushing the existing rights of others, or by fundamentally redefining another group ( women) to enable the diminution of the rights and safeguarding of that other group.
So no, this movement is nothing like the civil rights fight of any previous groups and it is intellectual laziness and moral deceit to claim it is.

Yeah I’ve noticed that middle class people really don’t care about lower income people. They never meet any and have no idea or interest in the differences of life experiences. And the current ‘progressive lefty’ analysis on identity leaves no room for that class analysis. So yeah, they have no motivation to think about how this ideology disproportionately affects lower income women who are more likely to be in prison, refuges and homeless shelters. In fact they have an incentive not to, as doing so could cause them to rethink their allegiance to this ideology and put them at risk of name calling within their ‘progressive’ group.

Why do people insist on pigeonholing and labelling all the time? Where are your statistics to back up those enormous generalisations you just made? Why is being "an old school feminist" a bad thing, and why are you even daring to use such a condescending term anyway, when women are still treated like absolute crap in 2021 and now have another battle to fight on top of what they already have to deal with?

Excellent point MsEverywhere about intellectual laziness and deceit.

@MsEverywhere I think you raise a very interesting point but it is slightly at odds with the fact that Mumsnet is pretty middle class and not too trans friendly judging by this thread!

Ridiculous post.

Could you explain how please?

MN in mind is full of middle class lefties so according to the logic in the post I'm responding to, it should be pro trans inclusion everywhere as it wouldn't affect them so much.

The 'middle class' is a myth as has been debunked on multiple threads many times. This is the thing: women here are passionate about female needs, issues and rights because this is a place where people get what it's like to run with your kids at 3am in the morning with a broken nose and PTSD to a refuge, or to have friends with disabilities or faiths or cultures that make mixed sex spaces inaccessible as opposed to just having interesting TQ+ friends, or have had to quit going to women only groups for health needs because they've been TQ+ taken over, or whose lesbian group has gone underground to escape male harassment and propositioning, or who actively do safeguard kids in a range of jobs, and support things like the Deptford Women's Project, and have the breadth of knowledge and belief that things should work for everyone as opposed to 'just me and my special mates'.

Being 'un trans friendly' usually translates in practical terms as 'won't get under the bus for TQ+ politics'.

Female centric view is - can we have solutions and accomodation that equally value everyone and work for everyone, and inclusion doesn't exclude anyone? Everyone matters and everyone should be cared for equally.

The pushed ideological view is - females must lose, some will be excluded and no one cares, inclusion is about male TQ+ people's wishes and needs only, and there have to be winners and losers. And homophobia and misogyny is fine, so long as you direct them to female people not doing what we say.

Frankly I know which view I see as more ethical.

From a politician's point of view, you risk alienating a proportion of voters whatever you say. Despite the prevailing view on MN, there is a strong trans rights movement, particularly among young people including young women. There is also a vocal GC movement.

It's a difficult issue to find a compromise position on. Probably needs a complete rethink of public spaces which would be time-consuming and costly and likely still unpopular amongst different groups.

I think a large part of it is age, not class or left/right leaning. I notice that it is mostly women of a certain age tackling this in the media. It's not surprising. It wasn't until I got to the point of having children that I realised just how much the odds are stacked against women and how important our sex based rights are.

It doesn't surprise me that young women, who haven't yet grasped the extent of the misogyny they will face in their lives are in favour of gender subsiding sex based rights. They are caught up in the idea that this is the human rights issue of their generation and they just don't understand the harm this does to the rights of their own sex.

Subsuming not subsiding - sorry