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.

Polls show that the majority view is that male people with a penis (ie pre-op) shouldn't use women's toilets and changing rooms. There is also zero appetite among the public for changes to make getting a GRC easier.

Because calling trans women men makes them sad and may get our posts deleted if the thread is being policed by the "be kind" people.

Because people come in two sexes and this is about sex. Would you like a diagram?

That is incorrect.

If an organisation has claimed an exception under the EA2010, they can exclude any male person including any with a GRC.

It is up to the organisation.

I mean, it is true that women's groups are campaigning to make the guidance for that part of the Act absolutely clear. However, we have also been assured by the Labour Party that the law is clear enough already.

Women's Aid allows service users to self ID. Ok. But is that because they have been pressured to allow this because their funders have forced this?

Other women's shelters have used the exception under the EA to exclude male people as is their choice.

@Helleofabore is a very articulate and intelligent poster. I've enjoyed reading their posts. There's no need for personal attacks.

Now all the public need to do is join the dots and realise that it's not possible to distinguish between pre and post op trans people for the purposes of single sex spaces.

In the absence of a dislike button, anyone who disagrees and appreciates @Helleofabore's contributions please thank this post.

The numbers ok with post op MTFs in female spaces is going down over time along with support for males in female spaces, services and sports in general. There's no way for trans orgs to spin it, the general population is mostly live and let live, but not when there are negative consequences for other vulnerable people.

Please engage your brain.

If it is considered legitimate for a lone female host to only accept female guests for safeguarding reasons, why does the safeguarding go out of the window if a man says he is a woman?

The risk of having a male guest and a male guest who says he is trans is the same.

We don't think trans women are the terminator, and that they unstoppably murder every woman they come across.
We just think they're men with the male pattern of offending, including opportunistic sex offences, and lower level offences like harassment, voyeurism, or indecent exposure. If a let excludes men because of this risk, it should exclude TW.

"Why do you keep saying male people and female people? We know we’re talking about people. It’s really annoying."

It is annoying. Oh dear...

I have already explained up thread that I use terms such as those to ensure that there is no misunderstanding about the sex of people I am discussing.

And because, feminists campaign for the rights of all female people. Even those female people who have chosen to use terms such as 'man' or 'boy' to describe themselves. Those female people require the very same rights as all other female people because the negative sexist discrimination that female people have experienced for millennias is based on their sexed body. Regardless of the modifications that those female people choose to do to their body, they are still female people.

If I said 'we need to exclude some women from female sporting events' it will not communicate what I really mean which is 'we need to exclude all male people from female sporting events'.

I don't care that you find this annoying, it is no attack on you or anything that you post. But it does give those reading along, and there are a lot of people reading this thread, more certainty in what I am trying to say.

Please stop using the term 'terf'. You are using it as a slur on this thread.

Please explain the point of being able to exclude some but not all male strangers from your home because I'm not seeing it.

It's a decision they'll have taken based on not wanting to be accused of transphobia, and possibly based on the laws in certain countries where they operate, where women's safety is considered less important than not upsetting trans women.

Yup. Same.

You may have just lost air B&B custom !
Although as a business model , it's impact on local communities isn't something I have been able to overlook

Complete side track

Still curious why you exclude some males
Because statistically transowmen and males behave the same way- so if you accept one you might as well accept the other

I'm interested in why an Air bnb owner who only wants female guests is fine with some of those guests being male. Why?

Absolutely, it’s still as simple as that. Women made extraordinary progress in the 1970s, with Women’s Liberation, and continued for a long time after. But misogynists came up with a clever new way of pushing women down. Unbelievable how many sane adults have gone along with it.

Yep. I remember being deleted for saying things like 'that man' and using 'he'.

It is much better now, but I prefer my 'verbose and pompous' posts to remain active in threads because I often include links etc. Not in this thread, but the habit remains. They also usually contain questions that readers come to notice are never answered.