Please can we have a Trans topic?

[LooseSeal]

The trans debate seems to be devouring the boards at the moment. It's spread across feminism, chat and AIBU and it's often not clear from a thread title that it's going to be another trans thread.

Considering that trans threads are accumulating in numbers and attract hundreds of posts and posters I think it's time trans was given its own topic.

when people have openly admitted on the threads that they wouldn't e.g say that in RL to a real trans person.

I'm not sure what kind of comments you are talking about, but I don't think a lack of willingness to confront individuals in real life is an indication of lack of conviction.

Cock off!

see what I did there?

Come off it Judy. You are one of the most pro-trans on here, which is of course fine, but don't make out that it's not in your interests for the topics to be sidelined or that all is equal with the Active convos

I'm not pro-trans so much as anti the way a vulnerable group of people get demonised round here. As such it isn't in the least in my interests for the topic to be sidelined: I simply don't care. I feel even more strongly about, for instance, Trump, but I don't care if pro Trump topics appear in Active Conversations. It's really quite bizarre to think I would. But surely all is equal in Active Conversations? Threads appear on there whenever someone posts on them, even if they're started in the most obscure of sub-topics. So even if that were my evil plan, having a separate topic wouldn't achieve it.

But then if you're happy for them to be there, happy to post on them, happy for them to be in Active Conversations.... where's the problem with things as they are?

It's a complex mix. They tend to eat topics like AIBU in the same way as EU threads did, which ultimately decided MN to move them to a separate topic. It seems illogical to treat them any differently. With one or two honourable exceptions, they tend to lead down the same path with the same points being made again and again and again (often by the same people), and dissenters being jumped on repeatedly. Sometimes there is outright bullying - and there has been at least one instance when a poster who blatantly bullied a trans woman got banned and MN got lambasted for that. They tend to demonise a group of people who, in my experience, are usually pretty gentle souls who just want to get on with their lives and wouldn't in a million years contemplate violence in any shape or form whether they possess a penis or not, and who have no wish whatsoever to use their male attributes to gain any advantage over women (and who in fact may be seriously disadvantaged by virtue of being trans). They tend to scaremonger about things that, in many many cases, simply aren't genuine issues; and they tend to jump on each and every negative event involving a trans person and represent that individual as being representative of all trans people. And there are probably other reasons that don't come to mind at this time of night.

I know it isn't going to happen, and I think there's an interesting question about why, when you look at all the topics that do get moved to different threads. But it's a perfectly legitimate request.

I am not aware of all the current trans threads and certainly haven't seen all the trans threads on MN, but I can think of atleast three current, news based issues that have nothing to do with violence or scaremongering and a lot to do with feminism and parenting.

These are genuine issues. If they were non issues, it should be possible to explain why in a clear, evidence based, logical argument. 'Dissenters' tend to get 'jumped on' when they fail to do this.

It makes as much sense to demonise any group of people as it does to call them gentle souls.

This is a chat site.

I think a trans topic is an excellent idea. As then those who want to chat about it can find it easily, and those who don't can hide it all (rather than having to hide every thread).

It's not othering or ghettoisation, any more than other chat topics - read the list, they range from the weighy to the trivial and are in no way related to any perceived 'worth'

A vulnerable group of people? What? Men?

General 'trans affecting women' stuff is usually in the Feminists topic.

Current news items are the only ones I see in AIBU, Chat, In The News etc.

As they should be.

The threads being categorised as trans threads are already in the correct sections: news; parenting; feminism.
There is also an LGBT section but most 'trans threads' don't sit there because they are about issues (ie politics; quotas; education; crime statistics) not individuals.
I think a 'trans' topic is problematic because it lumps the individual and the political together. That won't help trans people looking for support. It won't help people wrestling with the political, social and legal impact on women.
The only posters it helps is those who don't seem to want to hide threads. I don't think their need is greater tbh.
And, of course, even with a trans topic it would still appear in active and they might still click through accidentally.

Whilst people mischaracterise all these threads as 'trans', they are not. They are all about the erosion of women's rights, safe spaces and ability to be counted and measured as a group. Hence the overwhelmingly female audience on MN should have the chance to be aware.

Pressed post too soon: issues such as MNer with a child who feels they are trans should be the ones which sit in a trans topic where sensitive input and advice can be provided to help. That topic does not need nor should it be the place where people debate issues of women's rights and tranactivism.

The referendum threads were truly taking over, there were dozens going at a time. So-called trans threads are not in that league. Look on any board and you won't see more than one currently active trans thread, and obviously the vast majority of boards have zero. It's not at al comparable to referendum threads where you had multiple threads on multiple boards all active at the same time.

I honestly don't see any RL galvanising. I see anonymous arguing

Being 'out' in public about being gendercrit is risky. There are spaces for women who are organising and taking action but they are closely guarded. They are not mentioned on a mumsnet thread for fairly obvious reasons.

One of the main functions of MN (apart from its primary mission of supporting parents) is as a platform for 'anonymous arguing', open to all but particularly attractive to women old enough to be mothers or grandmothers. Its a great place to thrash out ideas - E.g. I've done a lot of 'anonymous arguing' on the Pilosophy and Religion board which has informed my thinking and therefore RL actions. Same thing with this and other issues pertaining to feminism.

There shouldn't be a ghettoised trans topic that can be safely ignored by people who want to bury their heads in the sand.

MN is one of the few places where it is OK to challenge the fundamental principle that if you believe in the view that there should be no such thing as "girls toys" and "boys toys"; "girls clothes" and "boys clothes"; or "girls career aspirations" and "boys career aspirations" (this view is commonly called feminism and is a legitimate and not particularly extreme view) then you can't also believe the clashing and incompatible view that it's possible to be completely genetically and physically a man but "feel" like a woman.

It is only possible to hold both views if you haven't thought about it properly.

It is legitimate for people who have thought about it properly to make lots of noise about it and make people think about it because the path we are on is going to erase a lot of women's rights and protections if left unchecked.

It is perfectly possible to go with the former view (feminism) and still be 100% supportive of any person's right (male or female) to wear dresses, high heels and makeup, and ask people to call them Helen and not use male pronouns to refer to them.

I agree - that way it still gets to the people who are unaware but people can hide the topic.

It won't happen though because of the posts above - words like 'ghettoised' and 'shut down discussion' and 'women's rights erosion'.

Is it shutting down discussion to have a feminist/referendum/dog/WOHM/SAHM topic? Presumably not. And people who aren't interested in those topics are at liberty to hide them.

When anyone dares to offer a different view to the majority re trans issues they are 'shut down' and then those posters deny it and demand evidence that they have been transphobic etc.

I recently suggested a separate topic on one of the threads and was told not to post if i didn't like it and to post in site stuff.

Sadly this thread will descend into a bunfight due to the subject.

If you're going to call people transphobic, don't you think you should tell them what you've based that judgement on, rather than saying how mean they are and flouncing from the thread? Otherwise how are they going to learn? Shouldn't you educate them in the error of their ways?

how is not wanting to see the same people arguing over the same thing and spouting the same predjudice and scaremongering burying our heads in the sand?

There are plenty of other places i can go to read much more intelligent and unbiased discussion about the issue if i want to.. i dont need the constant threads on MN to raise my awareness.

Talk about fucking ego.. jesus.

Its Mumsnet, not "EducatePeopleOnTransIssuesNet"

I really wish you'd all take your big heads and naval gazing where i don't have to keep stumbling across it!

Is it shutting down discussion to have a feminist/referendum/dog/WOHM/SAHM topic?

No, but 'trans' threads discussing gender identity already fit into the feminism topic.

It's also perfectly acceptable to talk about dogs on AIBU and chat or any other board where dogs are relevant. Most importantly, the 'doghouse' topic exists because people want to post there. It's a bit difficult to maintain a topic that nobody chooses to post to.

When anyone dares to offer a different view to the majority re trans issues they are 'shut down' and then those posters deny it and demand evidence that they have been transphobic etc.

Obviously everyone should follow the talk guidelines. However, a strong argument isn't shutting somebody down. The solution is to offer a better counter argument.

Maddy please would you give specific example of what you class as prejudice and scaremongering?

I would love to know where else I can read and participate in more intelligent and unbiased discussions than here. Please would you link?

MNHQ already said no not long ago. Pointless starting another thread when the question has been answered.

the same people arguing over the same thing and spouting the same predjudice and scaremongering

the threads aren't all prejudice and scaremongering.

i didn't say they were, but the same people do it in every thread.

And no, i'm not going to cite sources because its a talk forum and i don't fucking have to.

this isn't the feminism topic and i am not going to be subjected to the same shutting down, interrogations, and demands for sources that the 'i'm more intelligent that you are' posters do over there. I avoid that topic for the same reasons.

If you want all threads that discuss trans issues to be shunted off to feminism, MN can already do that, although, I think intentionally ghettoising feminist subjects is a bit of a retrograde step.

If you don't think discussions of gender issues fit in feminism, then, well, that's a bit odd.

Best hide all the threads then Maddy. Really, not sure what you expect people to say. For someone pearl clutching about "offensive" posting you're making quite a good job of being offensive yourself to people actually posting on this thread.

I'll continue to post when and where I feel like doing so, thanks all the same.

i am not going to be subjected to the same shutting down, interrogations, and demands for sources that the 'i'm more intelligent that you are' posters do over there

why is it wrong to ask for a source?

And from what I gather, plenty of people would argue that all posting on the feminist boards is 'robust' at best and intimidating at worst. Are trans discussions really that different?