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?

Yes I've accepted that.

But for some it's the same thing. It's one way to be trans.

findmybalance

I think you're right about one thing - you're very defensive and that's showing so clearly on your responses, especially as some of them make absolutely no sense. May I suggest you take a break from this thread and decompress. I'm not chasing you off, you can obviously ignore me or tell me to fuck off, but I sense some distress from you and I don't want to just ignore it.

It's good to hear that and I wish you luck in your continued trauma recovery. I've been assaulted and I also know how much these things stay with us and shape everything about how we relate to the world. It's one reason I'm so horrified at males in my spaces.

Which part of my post is that a reply to?

Do you think it would be better if we kept the old terminology to make the distinction between transsexuals and transvestites and ditched the trans umbrella?

Even back in 2007 the trans lobby were saying that transsexuals were a tiny proportion of 'trans' people. It's probably an even smaller proportion now. So going back to the old terminology would make it clear that most 'trans' people are just plain old transvestites.

It is now quite clear that you don’t seem to have any depth of understanding about these issues and you are not posting coherent arguments.

You admit you are defensive and yet seem to think you are posting clear and logical posts. No. I won’t stop seeking clarification on your posts. You can choose not to answer and ignore my posts.

I mention reporting to MNHQ because they are impartial. They are even more likely to err on the side of caution in deleting transphobia . The moderators would, I assume have training in this. It doesn’t make any business sense that they would allow transphobic posts to stand.

It doesn’t seem consistent to complain about transphobia on Mumsnet, admitting that transphobia is deleted if reported, and then posting something yourself that could be considered transphobic.

You are perfectly free to post whatever you like and I and others can post questions, and scrutinise, discuss or disagree with your posts.

Readers can then make up their own minds as to what they feel about the topic. Because isn’t that the purpose of a discussion forum?

Just for anyone who hasn't seen it - the 'right side of history' holding up signs saying 'decapitate terfs' at a demo in Glasgow, a demo attended by many of our elected representatives -

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4725108-snp-demo-decapitate-trfs

THIS!

It's getting really tiresome to have 2/3 responses from you on every post with"are you saying? is this what you're saying?" Take from my posts what you will, like it, don't like it, agree with it

Is it just my foggy brain today. Am I the only one finding some of the posts from this poster inconsistent, and unclear as they have just posted? I am on my phone and am struggling to be honest.

No, Helle, you're not alone.

And I consider YetanotherBecky to actually be quite careful when it comes to deletions. I have in the past felt she is maybe too cautious but I am not about to quibble with her about it.

It's completely inconsistent.

I have no idea what the point of the posts are.

Seems we can't have definitions except when the poster wants definitions. If the poster says it's transphobia it must be, we must accept their definition of that.

We can't discuss certain parts of the trans umbrella because they may upset some trans people.

The poster thinks that same sex spaces are the answer yet is advocating for changes to the law which will remove them completely.

It is totally bizarre. The only explanation I have is that they want to fill threads up so they fall off and that they want to confuse lurkers or new comers to the debate.

This is appalling Wewilllookback.

Telling women that they cannot question. that if they feel discomfort, it is based on hate and phobia.

I know KJK isn't everyone's cuppa tea, but this little rant of hers was EPIC

What that poster does is tell women that they must put men first and ignore their instincts and needs.

That is the whole point. It's control and domination.

Readers: here are threads discussing both of these issues.

The protestors did indeed call to decapitate women’s rights campaigners.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4725108-snp-demo-decapitate-trfs

This is the thread about the person in the school uniform. Who did say they were a trans person it seems.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4724126-to-think-that-a-man-standing-outside-a-school-in-girls-uniform-is-not-ok?page=1

I'm not distressed in the slightest, but thanks for your concern. It's pretty patronising to say I make no sense.

I am sorry about your past @findmybalance

So does the Rape Crisis situation bother you? That right now women can't access (biological) women-only groups if trans women want to join those groups?

And do you think issuing GRCs to all and sundry will make that better, or worse?

Because I think it will only make things worse. And I do think it's important.

We've already had that accusation. At least try and be original.

If you think I genuinely find threads to fill up (although it's not me doing the filling up, the number of times I've been asked the same thing/hellof insisting on clarifying every word I say is doing that) then that's on you, I would find that a strange way for anyone to spend their time.

Incidentally nothing you have posted is anything like what I have said. Not one part.

My views do change, absolutely, because I'm human. Having one set position on everything and anything on a massive spectrum is not for everyone.

If you two want to continue to paint me as either utterly incoherent or deliberately "confusing" lurkers, whatever that means, that's fine. You are free not to engage with me.

At the end of all that, I have no idea what this poster knows, or understands, or believes.

Do we even know whether they believe single sex meant female only? Those with the body type formed around producing large gametes regardless of whether that body has/will or is producing those large gametes?

Or is this just another sleight of hand like Starmer. Where we understand that he includes those who transition in those who can access. or extremists who use absurd ‘humans are biological’ and they identify as ‘female’ so are logic.

I now believe that we have all just been reprimanded for being unkind and not arguing nicely????

Thanks

I've answered this previously, of course it does.

Re the GRC I am still finding my way with that and doing my research.

I don't want to be rude but I am also not able to understand your posts. It may unhelpfully defensive to not consider whether you could communicate more clearly.

Fair enough.

Your reading skills have dropped off. I said "some of them make absolutely no sense". Still, you do you hun

Will you give it a rest.

The vast majority of this thread is you quoting the same posts several times, referring back to things said earlier in the thread, attempting to stir up, well I dont know what.

The me-railer here is not me.

Odd, as you engaged fine with me before you jumped on the bandwagon.