To find media discussion about trans issues far overstated compared to the actual seriousness of the issue?

[BarmyBrunhilde]

Full disclosure, I happily accept most trans people I've met as their transitioned gender which I know puts me at odds with most people on MN. But as a feminist and a lefty, even if one views trans women as men which I don't, in terms of political priorities it ranks so list on my list of concerns. I assume that applies to most people too (trans people included!).

What someone has listed on their birth certificate has no impact on my life, and surely minimal impact on most women's lives? Imo we should be focusing on cost of living crisis, housing, properly funding women's services including rape crisis services, funding childcare, sorting out the health service and bloody schools! Gender recognition comes way below those for me (even though I'm broadly supportive with some checks in place).

I know gender criticals won't agree with me, and maybe some trans people who feel very strongly, but I do feel there's a silent majority of us who just aren't that fussed?

It is a good article, isn’t it.

I don't care if Mn deletes it. It's still an issue. People are arrested for crimes, it's still an issue. I don't have to 'present' anything, it's there for all to see. You're not pretending with a straight face that theres not abuse and insults (on all sides) on those boards, are you?

I'm not dismissing it at all. I'm just interested to know why yours is so pertinent yet in order for me to be believed that posters with certain views are insulted along with trans people I must present evidence (or I'm told I must have misunderstood).

I accept that whar you're saying isnr acceptable but lets not pretend that side of the argument are squeaky clean.

Hours of research doesnr make you right. It isnt about who is the most intelligent who can spout the most articles and nobody is here to be judged. I couldn't care less about my credibility, I'm not on trial and I certainly don't have to gain validation from anyone else

Why do you think there aren't many opposing views on MN with the regard to trans issues?

Because the posters who are fully supportive of trans inclusion lack any robust evidence to support their arguments?

So, maybe you can tell us where else there is a debate hosted on these issues - where one groups demands for rights conflicts with the rights and protections needed by all females.

Any sites you can mention? Didn’t you claim there were other places on the internet? Did I miss your links to these places?

Ditalini's point is perfectly clear. You are sometimes meaning woman as a biological term and sometimes as an identity term. It's offensive to many women when you do that not least because you are defining my identity in a way I find outdated and regressive. You can't use a word ro mean two opposing things when it's also being used to define important laws. Either it's apologies term in which case no male is a woman. Or it's an identity term, in which case most former women are no longer women and you appear to be excluding me from all women only spaces.

You used the words women and men in a sentence meaning completely different things (sex first, gender second) - you don't see a problem that this could be misinterpreted.

To be honest, no "I don't think transwomen are women but they're not men" isn't at all clear, but I was able to interpret it in a way that seemed to make the most sense by using different definitions each time. Im assuming you're not transphobic, nor do you think trans people are a third sex.

😴 at least be original
I have not said, nor think, anything of the sort.
@AlisonDonut no, you know what you think a man and woman is, as is your right.

So you too are then going to claim ‘transphobia is a problem on Mumsnet’ when transphobia is deleted.

Do you then say that about every site on the internet that allows comments then?

Just so readers understand completely what you are arguing?

No.

I think transphobia, personal attacks, nasty comments, over the line things 'implied, are an issue on the gender boards, on both sides. MN deleting them is irrelevant. They shouldnt be said in the first place.

As it goes, yeah. I think all social media and the ability to hide behind an internet screen and say things you would never say to someone in real life is a huge issue.

But then yesterday I had 'the iq of a potato', my parents must have done a shit job (quote unquote) and previous to that was a tragic TRA, so what do I know

Only because you did so deliberately.

I think it was quite obvious what I meant.

@findmybalance

I think the fundamental issue with this is that the GRC is complete nonsense. As the original poster said very clearly, in order to 'live as a woman' on a day to day basis a certificate isn't needed.

Indeed if you read Debbie Hayton on this, she explains the case much better than I can.

As no one can even clearly explain what 'living as a woman' means in law, it's impossible to justify whether or not someone even deserves one or not.

So essentially you end up with a bit of paper that can be accessed by anyone who fancies it - and can use it for whatever reason they like. The thread is full of stories about people accessing womens spaces for various reasons that end up leaving women worse off.

So this is where 'lies' in law does matter. The original rules put off some of the chancers looking to benefit from the loopholes. Now what?

So you understand that using the terms ‘echo chamber’, ‘anti-trans’, ‘gender criticals’ or ‘the gender criticals’ are at the very least ‘insulting’. But you feel it is deserved because of transphobia that is deleted by the moderation team? Often not posted by feminist posters in the first place?

But posters who insult feminist posters from their very first posts even, should be only engaged with positively?

And insulting and dehumanising feminists, with the effect of making them easier to demonise and vilify, is quite ok because they deserve it!

Yep, you've managed to completely make that up.

I was very clear that nobody should be insulting anyone!

I get that.

So you don't know what a man and what a woman is?

Have you thought then, that you might need to go educate yourself?

Pretending that the man in girls school uniform getting onto buses with schoolkids and taking their photos is a woman is quite the take.

You know he is a man, I know he is a man, the kids know he is a man, the police know he is a man and by golly he knows he is a man. Putting a girls school uniform on doesn't make him a woman.

And I don't think anyone on MN is saying for a moment that pushing back on this issue is going to magically resolve all womens safety issues, but it's another example of our rights being eroded.

I can absolutely see OPs original point that it's small beer compared to DV numbers and the police's attitude to women generally.

But I can be concerned about both.

Did I say that?

I said you know what a man and woman is to you and so do I.

How does your story relates to trans issues? I assume you're not suggesting this is normal behaviour for.trans people

So because some posters were mean to you, you are happy to make negative generalisations about a whole group of people
that you disagree with?

And then happily use terms that are used to shame others because of it.

Good to know.

How does your story relates to trans issues? I assume you're not suggesting this is normal behaviour for.trans people

This maybe is one of the stumbling blocks. The GRC would be given to ANYBODY who wants it and can pay a fiver. Anybody. Including this fella.

Who is going to gatekeep? Who is going to decide he's not trans? He'll have a GRC. He's TRANS.

Goodness me, it's not that chuffing hard.

If you aren’t worried about it, you don’t know enough.

No. I find your posts are not actually that clear. Hence why I am still asking for clarification.

Because you seem to be very happy to dismiss the dehumanisation of a group because you consider some of them are ‘mean’ and have ‘insulted’ you and some people you are allied with.

I am talking about ‘dehumanisation’ and it was you who twisted it to ‘insults’. I interpret that as dismissal through minimisation.

Nope, not to me. He isn't a man to me. He is a man in every way. And a risk as much as any other man, with raised red flags due to his behaviour.

In Stonewall's umbrella he is trans.

The police's reaction was for people not to share photos as he might get upset.

You can't pretend that a man wafting through life is sometimes a man to some people and sometimes a woman to others. That's not how reality works.

I think that sums things up beautifully 😍

I'm honestly astounded how you are getting these things that i never said 🙈

Okay.