Permanently banned for ‘promoting hate’

[RumAndReisling]

Following ten years uneventful membership of a major social media site I have been permanently banned for ‘promoting hate’.

Never again will I be able to participate on that site.

My crime? Saying that if you had given birth to a child, there was no way you could literally change sex and produce semen to father one.

Is this not a statement of fact, or is this now unacceptable to say?

AIBU to say that my husband isn’t able to give birth?

I'm fine with anything! I did say the family's choice is the important factor. It's none of my business what anyone decides their children should call them, or how they refer to themselves. If my friend WANTED to be called mum, for whatever reason, he could do that if he wanted and I wouldn't say anything against it. But obviously he doesn't want to because he's a man for all intents and purposes other than literally the fact that he doesn't produce sperm and doesn't (presumably, I haven't asked or looked) have a penis. Neither of which is any of the child's concern other than to tell them when they're older that they were born from somebody else's sperm. That's it. So he's a dad.

Your friend is a woman and always will be. What definition of man are you using that an xx chromosome person with no DID fits into?

Why did you introduce the concept of passing if you're now saying it's not relevant?

Brilliant post, Sock. I agree with every word.

I brought up passing because I mistakenly thought there might be some situation where it would be acceptable to you for a child to call their parent by their gendered parent name instead of the parent name corresponds with their biological sex. I was wrong about that so passing isn't relevant after all.

So you think that no matter what the family's preference is and no matter how a person lives their life, their appearance, their legal sex that's on their birth certificate and ID documents, how the child sees their parent, any factors whatsoever, a child has to call their parent dad if that parent was born with a penis and mum if they were born with a vulva. That's incredibly weird but whatever.

I'm actually not so bothered about what they call them. In the same way as a person's first name is e.g. Jill but they go by the name Dawn. It doesn't change their legal name. Neither does being called dad make you a man. What I think is that it's highly offensive for any man to call himself a mum and that 'man' is a matter of biology, not identity. Your friend is a woman. I do actually feel sorry for them because an inability to accept reality is a hard thing to live with. That doesn't mean we get to force others to pretend that reality is different. Whether your friend is one of the few who pass is not relevant.

Is it "forcing others to pretend" if others don't actually know that you're trans? If that is the case then why is "reality" of any concern for anyone? If nobody had told me my friend was trans I probably still wouldn't know, and why would I need to know? Whose business is it and why does it matter?

People do know most people are trans. Sure it's only pretending if you know the truth but again we're back to the 'most trans people don't pass' reality. We need a rule which applies to all not just to those who can't fool people regarding their sex. Are you agreeing then that when we're told Eddie Izzard, Leah Thomas, as examples, are women that we are being forced to pretend?

Trans people aren't generally forcing you to do anything. I haven't ever spoken to my friend about his trans status and he hadn't asked me to do anything, but still I call him a man and so does everybody. I don't think Eddie Izzard is forceful about what people call her either. I don't know anything about Leah Thomas's attitude but you can't force yourself onto a swim team, they have to let you be in it.

It's about teaching a child reality, not lying to them. You don't think lying and misrepresenting a man as a woman can harm a child?

Firstly, 99.999999% of trans people never pass.

Secondly, do we really have to go through this again? Of course it matters if a man is posing as a woman and entering womens spaces. It should matter to everyone!

@flaffydaffy , so why are trans criminals asking to go to women's prisons? OK, they aren't exactly forcing their way in, but there is an expectation that they will be considered for a place, which puts the women alreadylivingin those jails at high risk of assault. And unfortunately transwomen DID force their way into the bathing pond on Hampstead Heath, which meant that orthodox Jewish and Muslim women couldn't swim there any more.

These are two very different groups of women, with vastly different levels of privilege and life experience, but both groups were substantially disadvantaged when transwomen demanded access to their spaces.

I do not think my friend's child is going to be harmed by calling him dad, when he is their dad in every way except genetically, and being told about that latter aspect at some point when they are old enough to understand it. I genuinely can't think of any way in which that would harm the child.

And I'm not segueing into a conversation about "women's spaces" because this conversation is about parenting and we'll be here all night if we go onto a different topic so I'll ignore any more questions about that.

No it isn't. But sex is.

You're thinking of gender reassignment.

And since when is material reality a conspiracy theory? Do you know how stupid you sound?

Good god this is ridiculous. Women have been hounded out of their jobs for saying a man in a man. Women are threatened and assaulted because they think TWAW. Women's sports is being eroded because of all the men in women's sports. But none of this seems like attempts to force people to pretend that men are women?

I'd say you do you but please don't because it's dangerous and ignorant.

It's not a different topic. It's part of the same topic. If your friend is a 'man' than Eddie Izzard is a woman and women have to accept him and others like him in their spaces.

We can't say that your friend is really a man but that TW aren't really women.

If you can't see that then god help you.

Next time I see my friend, I'll start referring to him as 'she' in front of everyone. And when I hold his baby I'll say "here you are, back to Mummy" when I hand them back. And if anyone questions me or gives me a funny look I'll say that I have to reflect biological reality in my speech from now on, because otherwise I might have to go to the toilet with Eddie Izzard. Someone on Mumsnet told me and I found it very convincing.

I'm not engaging with you any more. I don't think you are a genuine poster but if you are, you're either not able to, or don't want to, think things through.

Personally I think what you're suggesting is an awful lot better than a man calling himself a woman or Eddie Izzard being in my hospital ward.

Oh come on, that was the first ridiculous or piss-takey thing I've said in this whole discussion. You can't say I'm not a genuine poster just because we disagree. Obviously we have nothing more to say to each other though if you think it's perfectly fine to be an utter arsehole to a friend who is trans in the way I've described. Goodnight!

You think that's the first ridiculous thing you've said? Really? Really????!!!!

You're going round in circles and refusing to answer questions.

I asked you what your definition of a man is. You didn't answer.

You think this is not connected with conversations about protected spaces for women.

You introduced the silly idea of 'obsessed by genitals' which is a TRA strategy to deflect from actual conversation

You went round in circles with confused talk about whether someone passed

You made up definitions of 'forced' in order not to engage in the content of a point

You're not engaging with the point that if your friend is a man then anyone who says their a woman is a woman - and that is a problem.

You're not engaging at all. You're fluffy, deflecting.

Entry level DARVO. You have nothing to add here.

@literalviolence you seriously want to continue this? I thought our conversation ended gracefully. Alright here we go:

I asked you what your definition of a man is. You didn't answer.
I don't recall being asked that. And I don't have a definition of "man" for you. You don't learn what a man is through being told the definition. A man is someone who seems like they're a man.

You think this is not connected with conversations about protected spaces for women.
It comes under the same very wide topic umbrella but we were talking about parenting and you tried to move the conversation on to women's spaces which is not the same topic even though they are both trans related issues.

You introduced the silly idea of 'obsessed by genitals' which is a TRA strategy to deflect from actual conversation
I didn't say obsessed by genitals. I did say the only thing that would make my friend not a man is his genitals, because it's true.

You went round in circles with confused talk about whether someone passed
I brought it up because I thought it was relevant and it turned out not to be.

You made up definitions of 'forced' in order not to engage in the content of a point
I didn't define "forced".

You're not engaging with the point that if your friend is a man then anyone who says their a woman is a woman - and that is a problem.
I don't have a problem with considering trans women to be women.

You're not engaging at all. You're fluffy, deflecting.
I am engaging with you except with my refusal to enter a conversation about women's spaces.

Absolutely none of these things show that I'm not a genuine poster. Some of them show I didn't respond to every single one of your points. It's fine if you think I have imperfect debating technique but that doesn't make me not genuine.

You haven't been conversing gracefully at any point in time.

Definition of man - I clearly asked you. You still haven't answered. 'A man is anyone who seems like a man' is not a definition. It doesn't explain or clarify. It's circular and silly. Feel free to give an actual definition.

Same topic? Of course it is. Their interlinked and can't be fully separated. Wide umbrella or not, refusing to engage in discussions about the wider impact is not going to help a conversation.

Genitals? You said this "Certainly not what type of genitals each parent has" very early on in the exchange. You introduced the concept of genitals in a way which is very reminiscent of the TRA tactic. It's not true that this is eveything which makes your friend a woman. Your friend is a woman to their core. They have women's DNA which impacts every single cell of their body. It's not just their absence of a penis which is relevant.

Forced - you effectively made up a definition of forced in order to pretend that trans people are not trying to force women to pretend that TW are actual women.

I'm glad that you have now answered the question about whether TW who absolutely do not pass are women and should be allowed into women's spaces. I'm sorry though that you have so little regard for women's safety and needs that you feel that it's OK to make all women's spaces mixed sex. It is better to be open about your bigotry though so thanks for that. Personally I think it's disgusting to support the obliteration of women's sports and the locking up of fully intact men in women's prisons. I don't know how you live with yourself.

Exactly! Groucho Marx, 'I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member', it applies to so many groups now, they all seem to require total committment to their point of view, a cross between Stalin and Hitler,

I think you're projecting everything you don't like about "TRAs" onto me. I've been involved in conversations about trans issues on a few Mumsnet threads, I'm not an activist and I don't use specific tactics. In my own neck of the woods I'm just a normal person who supports trans people, like everybody I know. I've never met an openly gender critical person in real life so it seems like a bit of a chronically online thing to me, and I'm mystified by it. I'm not heavily involved in discussions like this normally though so please believe me that I don't bring up things like genitals because it's a tactic that I follow. And it's unfair of you to demand I debate certain topics with you and say I'm not a genuine poster if I don't. And ask me for definitions of words for no reason.

Then if a trans woman second parent 1. Looked like a woman i.e passed and everyone assumed they were a woman, and 2. The birth mother was also very happy for her partner to be another "mum" and referred as such (no abuse or coercion involved and she is supportive of their gender identity) do you still think the children should have to call that second parent "dad"?

I realise that this is all hypothetical, but would the transwoman happen to be the biological father of the child too?

Transitioned female people could be said to 'pass' better due to the irreversible side effects of testosterone.

They invariably grow beards - which is unusual in itself as a large proportion of biological men are clean-shaven - and wear stereotypically 'masculine' clothes (or at the very least 'neutral' ones); but it's their height and slight build that almost always prevents them from 'passing'.

Mothers of sons usually notice the point at which their sons grow taller and bigger than them, and this is usually well before they are actually adults.

I'm not convinced that even most very tall transmen would necessarily pass as actual men, as very few tall women also have the wide frames that a man of that height usually would.

a man is someone who seems like they're a man.
Again, you’re basing someone’s gender on how well they “pass” and what the general public think of them.

How does this square with women who wear jeans, t-shirts and have short hair? Does this make her a man because she “seems” to favour wearing more stereotypical masculine clothing?

You’re saying that we have to define who are men and who are women on sexist, regressive stereotypes but what about people who don’t fit these stereotypes?