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?

OP, the concerns have been widely discussed both on this thread and in the media, yet you still cannot see any problems.

The vast majority of people in this country do see many problems with this, and forcing this change in the law through without the full consent of the electorate makes it bad law. I am at a loss why you think your opinion is more valid than other peoples.

In real life many of us may well share our spaces with trans women and not even notice. Some of us have also shared spaces with trans women and have found it it an extremely unpleasant and intimidating experience.

The incident I experienced was in the ladies at a motorway service station, and we were able to get the security people to intervene and they removed the person involved. If this law changes then that person would have had the right to be in that space and could not have been removed, but this does not prevent trans people to use these spaces for the purposes intended if they treat them and other users with respect and consideration.

Lawmakers are very keen on a concept called the Precautionary Principle, and it is depressing that so many people think that the health and safety of millions of women and children doesn't merit the use of any precautions at all, and we are all being told to shut up and put up on the say so of a handful of male cry-bullies.

sex-matters.org/posts/category/campaigns/single-sex-services-voices/

Suggesting that one needs psychological help or needs help to deal with their sexual fetish of being a woman.

If you switched the word trans for gay in that sentence it would be homophobic.

I'm sure the definition police will be along to tell me that transphobia is fear of or hate towards, but its wider than that. That post is appalling.

This poster likes throwing the word transphobic round. Yet to see an actual transphobic comment they think is transphobic

No, I'd prefer people not to be downright cruel. It's funny the reality is unkind argument only comes out when it's the other side. Misogyny isnt always untrue, neither is homophobia or racism, but we dont stand for it and we houldkt for this.

I agree with the rest of your post.

Meaningless words can be very important if they get written into law and then people with an agenda put a spin on what they mean. By now there are horrible confusions in law about what sex and gender, men and women, male and female mean. There are contradictions between (at least) two different laws, the equality act and the gender recogntion act. And there are also increasing confusions between law and common sense.

It's been bubbling away and now it's all coming to a head with the GRR. We could end up with "man" and "woman" meaning different things in Scotland and England. Not massively different, but different enough to be a legal problem.

And there's a ratchet effect. The meaning is pulling away from your commonsense "transwomen know they are not physically women..." to the legal "...but they can still demand access to every space where physical women are allowed and access to everything that physical women have". First in Scotland and then the rest of the UK.

This poster doesnt answer to you.

Where did I say you did? I'm just correcting your bullshit name-calling

Thanks for your input.

Why?

You're welcome. Not that you actually listen to people. You just run off shouting bully.

I'd love to know why that post is transphobic too.

I certainly dont listen to you.

What is the kinder action:
Giving someone psychological counselling and support to love and accept themselves as they are, and be more comfortable in their skin?
Or putting them on off-licence medication, stunting their brain and bone development, making them unable to orgasm or have children, performing mastectomies on healthy bodies, and putting them on lifelong hormones with many long term health problems?

We know most young people desist and are gay or lesbian once they reach adulthood under the watchful waiting approach.

It’s not transphobia to want to offer anything other than a medical pathway.

I know two detransisters and what they were put through was absolute hell.

Suggesting that one needs psychological help or needs help to deal with their sexual fetish of being a woman.

Those trans people for whom it is a sexual festish do need help. And we need to stop them from imposing that fetish on non-consenting women.

You do know it's not a sexual fetish for all trans people though? And we're not saying that it is?

The problem is that the GRR removes any possibility of telling who is and who isn't.

sex-matters.org/posts/resources/fair-play-for-women/

sex-matters.org/posts/groups-defending-sex-based-rights/for-women-scotland/

sex-matters.org/posts/resources/genspect/

sex-matters.org/posts/resources/keep-prisons-single-sex/

sex-matters.org/posts/groups-defending-sex-based-rights/labour-womens-declaration/

sex-matters.org/posts/groups-defending-sex-based-rights/mbm-policy-analysis-murray-blackburn-mackenzie/

sex-matters.org/posts/resources/safe-schools-alliance/

sex-matters.org/posts/groups-defending-sex-based-rights/safeguarding-our-schools-scotland/

sex-matters.org/posts/groups-defending-sex-based-rights/standing-for-women/

sex-matters.org/posts/schools-and-safeguarding/transgender-trend/

sex-matters.org/posts/groups-defending-sex-based-rights/womans-place-uk-2/

sex-matters.org/posts/groups-defending-sex-based-rights/womens-rights-network/

For the lurkers. Not an exhaustive list and of course, there's the other side of the coin to look at. I'm not going to link to any of them, as I'm a women's rights campaigner and my priority will always be females - women and girls.

No, I'd prefer people not to be downright cruel.

It's crueler to play along with believing one is a women when they are actually male. We don't agree with anorexics that they are fat.

I invite the people earlier who wanted to know why I wouldnt define something.

I addressed a post as being transphobic (to me, I'm not god) explained why, twice, yet three posters are still questioning it with another poster making pointless personal remarks.

And posters want to still be faux astonished that these topics are a pack mentality and echo chamber.

*woman

That's because anorexia is a mental illness. Being trans is not.

But as long as you all defend each other and pretend these claims arent being made, it's a pointless discussion
The poster was clear on their view of trans.

Well I am certain there are more people that don't listen to you. So I won't lose any sleep.

twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1616796097602588673?s=20

Be kind, they said.

Single sex spaces whatever your gender is indeed the answer but sadly that’s considered transphobic Balance

or third spaces - but they’re considered transphobic too

That's because anorexia is a mental illness. Being trans is not.

I'd argue gender dysphoria is a form of mental illness. It's still unkind to reinforce a fact that isn't true.