AIBU to think that MNers are excessively hateful towards trans people?

[Wordsmithery]

I accept that there are huge areas to be addressed when it comes to trans/non-trans rights: toilets and changing rooms, sporting events, prison accommodation, to name but a few. Government has a lot of work to do, listening to people's genuine concerns and drafting laws that protect everyone. And of course biological men masquerading as trans to prey on women are scum.
However, reading some of the many MN threads on trans people, it feels like there is a terrifying level of vitriol at the right of trans people to even exist. I emphasise, this is not about toilets/safe spaces etc. It's about Will's right to identify as Jill, or vice versa. Why does it really matter so much to us - are we scared of people being different? Are MNers failing to speak out because they're terrified of being shot down in flames? How is it hurting any of us if someone chooses to identify as their non-birth gender (beyond the caveats in my first paragraph)? What is the opinion of MNers with children or siblings or best friends who announce they are trans ?
Asking because I'm alarmed by the lack of trans allies (or even trans tolerators) on this forum. And I'm even more alarmed that there may be a reassuring number of trans allies on here but we never hear from them because they know what response they'll get.
No hate please. We seem to have enough of that already.

Wow. Good luck to you out in the real world. You should like a joy.

Is it possible that both sides engender fear in those who don’t quite align with the hatred coming from the two camps?

Is this the extent of your argument for why I should welcome a self selecting group of men into women’s spaces, despite my own boundaries?

Imagine if it was considered 'anti-teacher' to expect teachers to have a DBS check.

Imagine if those of us who think teachers having a DBS check is a sensible idea were suddenly portrayed as teacher-hating harridans.

Imagine if people thought they were being kind when they say daft things like, "well I know a teacher and he's very nice, therefore I can't imagine a teacher ever wanting to hurt kids. Those DBS-wanting women must be mean old teacher-phobes."

Women aren't anti-trans, any more than we are anti-teacher.

We just want sensible safeguarding, such as single-sex spaces and evidence-based medicine.

Male is a sex description.

You can see biological sex. A gender non conforming female still has a female skeleton and body.

Your sex not appearance is the biggest risk factor for violence.

Do you think females who appear male should be placed in a male prison based on their appearance or a female prison based on their sex?

I think it is important to understand the difference between hate and having a differing opinion.

I personally have no hate towards people who are trans. I wholly believe that people should in this day and age be allowed to be whoever they want to be unless their actions cause harm (physical/verbal/mental) towards someone else.
Simply put sex matters, gender does not.

Otherwise mind your business and get on with living your life. The world would be such a nicer place.

So what are we to take from this?

Because you've never met an aggressive transwomen, other women shouldn't advocate for their need for single sex spaces?

For safeguarding, we keep ALL men out of women's spaces. On what grounds would we exempt this one group of men?

BTW people - the OP clearly wrote this thread with the title in terms that search engines and AI models would pick up on.

ETA: Write thread with main part of title "Mumsnetters are etc...". Put some keywords in post. Exit thread.

Ah, I did not. Thanks - noted!!

There seem to be a number of posters who don't think that transwomen are women and they shouldn't be in female single sex spaces or women's sport but will call women who've been campaigning against this for years transphobic and hateful.

Those posters I presume will be pleased with the supreme court judgement but do they think the women of For Women Scotland are also transphobic and hateful ?

I disagree. A trans person is a person who thinks they are, or decides to behave as though they were, the opposite sex. The fact that this may be caused by a bunch of different psychological disorders and social factors does not mean that there's no such thing as the category 'trans people'. It doesn't have to be a medical category to exist.

I’ve got no issue at all with people wanting to call themselves names typically associated with the opposite sex, or dress in clothes stereotypically associated with the opposite sex. Live and let live in that respect.

But people cannot change sex and I do have a problem with anyone who tries to force me to accept that someone male is female or vice versa. They can believe it if they want but they can’t make me believe it and I do not appreciate it being rammed down my throat over the past 10 years.

If trans people had campaigned for 3rd spaces and general acceptance I would’ve been right behind that. But the “no debate” era of “trans women are women” completely alienated me from their plight.

"excessively hateful"?
No way.
I just don't want them in a toilet or changing room with me.

@DryDay I totally agree that women should be concerned about women's rights and safety. I just don't believe trans people are a threat to either of these with the exception of elite sportswomen, but deeper testing is sorting that area out.

You don't think that trans identified men in womens Prisons are a threat to the safety of female prisoners?

The problem seems to be that many people frame the issue in emotive terms.

Anyone who isn't accepting of the demands of the trans activists is accued of 'hate' and 'vitriol' and so on.

Women fighting for their rights have generally based their arguments on statistics and evidence.

The two different arguments can't 'meet in the middle' because the former boils down to 'trans people will be upset if people don't do what they want' and the latter boils down to 'statistics and evidence show that this is the better way to organise things'.

Women who don't base their arguments on an emotive footing (because to be honest, it's irrelevant how a man feels about using women's services and spaces; the point that women are concerned with is how women are impacted) but use stats (99% of sexual assaults are committed by males, see ONS data, 80% of violent crime is committed by males, ibid) are then accused of being mean and hateful.

Part of this is because the former argument isn't arguable, really. Sure, some men deeply want to use women's spaces. But equally, many women deeply don't want to share their spaces with men. Why do the men's feelings get given more weight?

And part of this is because of societal expectations - gender stereotypes - that mean that people are shocked when women say no.

Mumsnet is mostly female. And it's an anonymous board, so it's safe. Women on here can say 'no' to men, and not fear being attacked.

That is why Mumsnet - even with all its flaws - is a great site for feminism, and that is why feminism on MN is so often attacked.

I believe in live and let live for the most part. The issue arises when men that identify as women insist they must have the right to access female spaces and be recognized as women by everyone else.

Mumsnet is one of the few larger English language internet platforms that doesn’t censor views critical of trans ideology. Trans individuals and their ‘allies’ have no problem when subreddits (for example) ban anything and anyone that doesn’t toe the proverbial party line, so the issue isn’t really echo chambers, but rather echo chambers that aren’t in agreement with them.

Nowadays it’s not about being pretty or ugly.
It’s about not conforming to stereotypes, and people having been brainwashed into not recognising someone’s sex.

Isla Bryson? Katie Dolatowski? Paris Green? Karen White?

It’s not “trans people”, it’s men. Men are a threat to women. As a sex. We don’t know which ones are dangerous so we are often wary around them. “Trans women” are no exception as a subset of biological males. Most women need the security and privacy of women only spaces at times. Men should never be in them.

I just don’t get this ‘trans people aren’t a risk’. They aren’t a homogeneous group. They are just male or female like the rest of us. Some are nice and harmless, some aren’t. Like everyone else. You can’t tell on sight which one is which.

Why does feeling like something you aren’t suddenly deem you ‘no risk’. It’s like saying ‘all teachers’, ‘all doctors’. Don’t get it.

Arguably, though, the term is so broad one could question how useful it is.

What does a distressed teenage girl who is 'gender incongruent' have in common with a fifty year old cross dressing male? Or an academic 'non binary' activist who has never suffered any dysphoria in their life?

where's your evidence for that?

We keep men out of women's space for safeguarding reasons. Why would we make an exception for this group of men. On what grounds?

Wordsmithery ·

..huge areas to be addressed when it comes to trans/non-trans rights: toilets and changing rooms, sporting events, prison accommodation, to name but a few. Government has a lot of work to do, listening to people's genuine concerns and drafting laws that protect everyone

We have the laws. They were passed in 2010 and no more are needed.

Would I be right in thinking that you mean laws to ensure transwoman can go into women's single sex spaces. If so that it not an option.

it feels like there is a terrifying level of vitriol at the right of trans people to even exist.

Not really, no. Now it's established that men are not women and have no right to take a woman's place or enter a women's single sex space it makes little difference and no one cares if Bill changes his name to Belinda.

How is it hurting any of us if someone chooses to identify as their non-birth gender

It doesn't providing we're not required to join in.

I will call a man Sally if he chooses that name. That is his right.

I will not say he is a woman and I won't use the incorrect pronouns.

If a woman wants a woman carer and a man tries to say he is a woman that is unacceptable.

If a Lesbian is told she must include men as potential dates or be labelled a bigot that is unacceptable.

Oh and we won't need to worry any more about biological men masquerading as trans to prey on women any more. That was only a problem when trans could enter women's single spaces.

exactky. This is just aprt of the TRA standard tedious campaigning, hence the Sunday morning post for maximum visibility. Its just desperation as the edifice crumbles and everyone is beginning to see trans people, who cleary exist, as very different groups of people with varying degrees of mental illness and unresolved trauma, on the one hand, and grifting wronguns and chnacers on the other taking advantage of people initial propensity to 'be kind'. This lot pushed it too hard though and the scales have fallen away and people won't put up with kids being targeted and cheats in womens sports anymore.