"chest feeding" men should not be put above women and babies by La Leche League. Reasonable?

[GenerativeAIBot]

How many women will self exclude based on this outcome? How many children will suffer because of it? Anything more than zero is unacceptable

This is the direct and foreseeable outcome of ever allowing the word woman to be mutable. This is the ultimate outcome of all these progressive policies, generally well meaning, with terrible outcomes

https://archive.ph/NsquC

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/society/article/breastfeeding-charity-chief-quits-over-transgender-policy-zhvhl8nps

Identity politics should be dead and we need to bury it.

If it helps, the article is about male people wanting to be in the breastfeeding groups. The article is written by someone who has used the very well established word for an adult male - man. There are people being quoted who are talking about ‘transwomen’ who are still male people. And obviously, biological male has been used as an attempt to clarify.

But the article linked in the OP is explicitly about a La Leche founder leaving because of her concern about allowing any male person into what are female support groups for breast feeding. And also rightful concern about male people ‘feeding’ the secretions they artificially induce to new born humans for their very own motivations based on their demands and never centred around the infants needs.

Yes. The thread seems confusing but that is the result of a group trying to force society to change language to suit that group and not suit the needs of wider society, and society really not complying to that demand. And this has caused utter confusion in communication.

Edited to say: this male feeding issue is most definitely happening. As can be seen from links up thread the NHS Brighton has a policy to ‘assist male people to do this’. And in Australia there have been multiple reported cases. One Queensland endocrinologist stated that they had given at least 9 male people, iirc, the treatment to do this. And that was a year or two ago. There would be more since. This is not scaremongering. This is a growing area of treatment.

I find the 5% confusing

Edited to say: this male feeding issue is most definitely happening. As can be seen from links up thread the NHS Brighton has a policy to ‘assist male people to do this’. And in Australia there have been multiple reported cases.

No reported cases in the UK though? I'm guessing that female-born transmen are much more likely to be the target market.

There are :

feministlegal.org/gender-critical-campaigners-slam-trans-woman-activist-over-breastfeeding-photo-daily-mail-online/

Yes. There are reported cases in the UK. And the NHS Brighton has a policy to assist those male people to do this.

And reported cases in the USA. And Australia.

And Canada.

https://reduxx.info/canada-hiv-positive-trans-identified-male-boasts-of-breastfeeding-infant-with-professional-support/

And don’t let’s forget that male people find watching women feed babies a sexual fantasy as well. Indeed, we have have MNers tell us of male people in the past of joining breastfeeding online groups, making mothers uncomfortable with comments and questions etc. And those mothers, iirc, were asked to leave some groups because they were not accepting of those male people.

reduxx.info/uk-trans-identified-male-who-sparked-backlash-after-using-womens-changing-room-during-teen-swim-meet-engaged-with-erotic-breastfeeding-account/

That's got to be the last word in creepy.

It's all about him, his fetishism, his wants and needs. Poor baby. He's HIV positive and says he will feed the baby with whatever is produced, secretions from drug induced changes. Good grief this world is sick, why is this tolerated, its child abuse.

Robert Jenrick got it wrong on his interview with MNHQ. 🤦‍♂️

why is this tolerated

Because there are a lot of empty headed spineless people in the world. They are so open minded their brains have fallen out. In many instances, they are ignoring basic safeguarding and exposing vulnerable people to predators.

JFC that man in Canada. Social services should get involved.

Really feel we should boycott any organisation that endorses such stupid ideas. Absolutely crazy and downright offensive.

They are so open minded their brains have fallen out.

It is a challenge for anyone who counts themselves as being on the progressive side of politics to avoid falling foul of O'Sullivan's First Law, which states that "All organizations that are not actually right-wing will over time become left-wing". O'Sullivan gives a good explanation of why this is so, albeit couched in somewhat reactionary language here: web.archive.org/web/20100715191034/old.nationalreview.com/flashback/flashback-jos062603.asp

In this case, the general social movement that decided (rightly, I hope most would agree) that it's OK to be non-white, or a woman, or gay, and that those groups should have absolutely equal rights, seems to have also decided that whatever group of people came along next claiming to be oppressed must also be correct, and that anyone who pushed back against them must be as bigoted as those who would deny non-white people/woman/gays their rights. Saying "Oh your poor things, did those nasty right-wing newspapers say horrible things about you" became a substitute for thought, because obviously if the Telegraph or the Express doesn't like it, they are being horrible bigots. Hence why the majority of people with pronouns in their e-mail signature probably know zero trans people; they just want to be nice and not beastly to these poor people who are a bit different to themselves.

A further tragedy of this is that people who want to stand up and say no find that the only support they can get often comes from gleeful right-wingers. 90% of what JK Rowling believes would be laughed at by the majority of people who support her on Twitter, and Graham Linehan seems to have gone round the twist. I'm not sure what the right way to push back is, but it's something for the left to sort out because while we might like what Trump and Putin have to say about genderwang, we probably don't want the rest of the package that they're offering.

We all need to wake up and stop pandering to these men with fetishes. Women breastfeed. Women breastfeed. Women breastfeed.
men can’t.

100% my view. It’s such an uncomfortable world where people skepcital about gender theory find themselves lumped in with Trump and Meloni and whoever else. Grim.

@samarrange

I'm not sure what to make of your article considering it's advocating for the death penalty and calling people re*ds.

I don't think believing in human rights is particularly left wing.

The trans agenda seems to be a Trojan horse used in order to push the interests of fetishists. It's also been advocated for by all political parties in the UK bar Reform and the far right.

It may have started out as 'inclusive' but has morphed into an authoritarian monster encompassing cancel culture and stifling free speech.

It's a problem that effects everyone no matter which side of the fence you are on because it violates basic safeguarding and betrays vulnerable people. TRAs are violent extremists who seem to enjoy intimidating women.

I really don't see what's so difficult about it. Trans literally means different than/opposite to. Cis means same as. It's the same as cis and trans bonds we learn in chemistry at school.

Trans woman = woman who was not woman. Gone from man to woman. I.e. biological male.

Trans man = man who was not man at birth. Gone from woman to man. I.e. biological female.

It's such a simple concept I don't understand why people can't grasp it.

You're vastly more likely to die in a random car accident on your way to a breastfeeding cafe than tragically encounter a breastfeeding transgender woman at one, but don't let that stop you getting very very angry and scared at the hypothetical likelihood of it happening.

Finally some sense.

Get your flame suit on though, trans women are despised on Mumsnet.

Because "trans man" contains "man", so you could imagine that it is "a man who has become trans". The word "trans" appears to be a qualification of "man", i.e., the basic category is "man" and this is a special kind of man, namely, one who lives as a woman. (Again, I know this is wrong, but I'm explaining the logic of the person who gets it wrong.) Compare "gay man", which communicates that this is a man who has a specific attribute.

I have taught myself to get it right, but I completely understand how people who don't discuss the topic much might not be sure which way round it goes.

Because, as was repeatedly highlighted by some posters declaring that two male boxers were ‘cis women’ because they were ‘assigned female at birth’, cis is actually meaningless in describing the unique needs of female people.

The language changes that one group of people has tried to coerce society into using to support their philosophical belief are changes that remove the ability to speak precisely and communicate clearly.

How many women do you feel is acceptable to you to be harmed by self excluding because policy allowed a male to join a breastfeeding group?

How many women do you feel is acceptable to be harmed before women are allowed to discuss the policy without being shamed by those who support the policy changes or just dismiss the significance of the changes?

One is too much. You apologist.

no. People here just recognise men, as men.

trans women - are men.