Thread 2 - Is anyone else on here pro-trans

[tinydaisies]

I was really enjoying the 1st thread, hopefully it's ok to have a follow on so we can continue debating

Thread 1: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5115405-to-ask-if-anyone-else-on-mn-is-not-anti-trans

Hopefully this isn't a TAAT.

Why would that happen? It only becomes an issue if those spaces are open to biological males. One would naturally assume that since men are not allowed, it's simply an androgynous looking woman, so nobody would want to chuck them out.

At one time I worked in security. I was on guard at a music festival. The ladies toilet had a long line, so one drunken woman went into the men's room. This was before being trans was something that was widely talked about.
She was not androgynous at all. The men in there heard her sit down to pee. One man was outraged because his young son had seen her bare ass as she was too drunk to close the door properly. Other men were upset because she had seen their dicks at the urinals. I then had to throw her out of the show because after I warned her, she tried to do it again, then became belligerent when challenged. Her drunken excuse was she was actually a man.🙄
If I did the same thing now, I could have been accused of "bigotry" for my actions, even though I did it to protect the privacy of those men.

The point of telling this story is that who is going to assume, without clear evidence, that anyone is the opposite sex if the spaces are kept single sex? They would need a good reason to think so, which in that case the men had. I highly doubt they'd have complained to me about an androgynous looking person using the men's room.

Yes - including mine, which broke no rules at all as far as I can see? Why is that?

The state of being physically male or female is scientific fact; are you disagreeing with this?

Whether somebody's brain tells them otherwise is not what the women here are talking about; when I was about five I decided I was a pussy cat but that didn't make it true, and had I glued on fur, pointy ears and a tail it would STILL not have been true.

Anyone's brain can trick them into thinking all sorts of things for all sorts of reasons.

Again this is very superficial. There is no place for males in female spaces, if some can sneak in under the radar because they come across as female, that's not a reason for women's spaces to be thrown open to any male who fancies using them.

Did you not see the many posters telling you that filtered photos are one thing, moving around in reality gives the game away.

If you do further searches on their name you will find countless images, showing their natural and unfiltered states.

If successful means something else entirely, which going by your engagement on this thread wouldn’t be much of a stretch.

Humans have an unerring ability to tell ‘androgynous women’ from men. It’s called millennia of evolution.

If humans could change sex, we wouldn’t need all the mantras, hormones, ‘facial feminisation surgery’ etc

But all I really care about is how my daughter is supposed to tell a ‘cis man’ from a ‘transwoman’ when a guy follows her into the female toilets.

And…why TW are seemingly allowed to be afraid of sharing spaces with men, but women aren’t

Please explain why that male person is no longer a male person if they have opted for extreme body modification? Please explain in detail how that male person has become no longer a male person.

Please then provide evidence that that male person without a penis has a lower risk than the general male UK population for the sake of assessing safeguarding risk for that subgroup of male people. You are here arguing that some male people should be treated with special accommodations compared to other male people. To do this, you should provide evidence that they pose the same risk or lower than the general female population to access female single sex spaces. Otherwise you are arguing to expose female people using those spaces to an additional risk of harm based on philosophical belief.

If you do further searches on their name you will find countless images, showing their natural and unfiltered states.

I don't want to see a male porn actor's "unfiltered states" thanks.

This is why we need parameters. I've said from the start that a Grayson Perry type should not be allowed into a ladies changing room, as he is not a trans, but those who genuinely are trans should perhaps be afforded more acceptance. It's a highly nuanced subject. Perhaps it should come down to only allowing post-operative trans into female spaces but to call them eunuchs as a PP did is really derogatory.

The GC people in here won't be reporting your use of slang for a female body part. That's because the GC people can hold up their end of an argument and don't need to run and cry to mommy to help them.
That being said, you have demonstrated that you are massively hypocritical and seething with internalized misogyny.
Nice work outing yourself.

What is a 'pitman'?

You've posted two pictures of porn stars so far. Is that what you call 'successful trans women'?

There are some very pretty transwomen who still respect women's single sex spaces and use mens toilets - Blaire White and Fionne Orlander for starters. Fionne has written about never having faced any issues at all in mens toilets, despite being slight, feminine, wearing a dress and makeup and having long hair.

And as has been pointed out several times already, how a person looks in a filtered curated photo online can be very different to how they look in real life.

@XChrome i havent reported any posts mentioning moobs.

A miner

aaaaand we're back to

1. define 'trans'
2. explain why yer porn actors and me should share the same bogs

I've said from the start that a Grayson Perry type should not be allowed into a ladies changing room, as he is not a trans, but those who genuinely are trans should perhaps be afforded more acceptance.

But as many people have said already

How. Do. We. Tell. The. Difference?

What is the relevance of posting images of people on threads and subjecting them to other’s value judgements for your own political agenda?

Plus you must be aware that photographs do not mean that those male people will not be highly likely to be accurately identified as male people in real life, particularly when people see them moving and talking.

You don't know still images are unfiltered. And I'm sure as hell not searching for your porn star of choice's moving images, thanks all the same.

Grayson Perry is trans, ask Stonewall. You've just committed transphobic bigotry.

How embarrassing for you.

So as long as a TW is hot that's ok. But otherwise they aren't actually trans?

Is there is a test for genuinely trans that I can refer to as to whether I should feel comfortable with a biological man in my changing room. Grayson Perry is a No, noted. Eddie Izzard would be…?

Nah. They’re male, hot or not

You are basing your assessment of whether a man can be a 'successful' trans woman on whether he looks like a pornified stereotype of 'femininity'.

This is highly offensive, but most of all, it's just nonsense.

Many women have absolutely nothing in common with these porn star examples of 'successful transwomen'.

What does a woman with short hair, jeans, and a scruffy men's hoody have in common with a highly made up, surgically altered man who says he's a woman?

And what on earth do miners have to do with absolutely anything at all?

@DianeAbbotsJamjars you do know that when you see those 'no make up' pics of celebrities, they are in fact wearing a metric fuckton of makeup, right? Just different make up to their going out stuff.