Mumsnet moderation of trans rights and gender critical issues II

[PermissionToSpeakSir]

Follow on from www.mumsnet.com/Talk/site_stuff/3276551-Mumsnet-moderation-of-trans-rights-and-gender-critical-issues?pg=40&order=

Gib - ok, your partner is biologically female as you understand it.

But it is increasingly clear that your understanding of 'biological female' is massively at odds with reality.

You've been posting for days about very tangentially involved stuff like mosaicism.

We only know about your partner from what you've posted on here. You haven't suggested that they are intersex; you've just posted lots of links which even I can see ate bobbins, & my only recent link to even gcse science is helping my teenage son revise.

I'm a competent critical thinker, though, & have been following Bowl & others with interest & increasing engagement.

You are not in a relationship with someone who has an unusual genetic set up which makes their sex tricky to determine (but no less defined).

You are in a relationship with a man.

& he may he an non gender conforming as owt, & good luck to him & you both & I wish you every happiness.

Put it another way, can someone please explain to me why GC women believe that the sex on every birth certificate is right?

Because when the sex is in any way ambiguous they test for intersex conditions.
This is not the case in all countries but it is in the UK and that is where the law is under consideration to make it legal for males to Self ID.

Men are not women.

I do not know why people are trying to negotiate with Gibb. They are clearly in a situation that warrants an intervention.

Not much we can do in terms of an intervention as randoms on a web forum. Though I agree that if I was a friend or family member I'd be concerned.

Stilll, though - men cannot be women, ever. Biological fact.

Disagree. There are many aspects of biological sex. Under present medical knowledge, some of those aspects are mutable (eg breasts) , some are immutable (eg genotype). Sex (male or female) is based on the overall picture. If enough of the mutable aspects change, sex overall changes.

And still: men are not women.

We will all be gone and Gibber will still be here lying to themselves and everyone else like the true believer that they are.

"Mutable" is the most bizarre way to describe breasts I've ever seen.

r work with trans men and women as allies on the condition both sides work to exclude the far bigger parts of the trans umbrella which make most women uncomfortable.

Interesting. How?

Not sure if you know this, but autogynephiles were historically denied treatment (hormones, breast implants). Presumably on the basis that the NHS weren't about to finance a fetish.

They were also denied a GRC.

Then transsexual was successfully rebranded transgender and internet sharing meant AGPs could coach eachother on how to fake gender dysphoria.

When I first read about this a few years ago, tips and tricks abounded on how to fool therapists.

Then the memorandum of understand was signed and HCPs were obligated to affirm anyone who said they were trans anyway. So it was all a bit moot.

Hence the inclusion and legitimisation of AGPs, transvestites, and part time cross dressers as genuinely trans.

Self ID is a move to further enshrine the legitimisation of that cohort without having to go through any pesky fake diagnosis efforts.

If you want to make a distinction between transsexual and transvestite/AGP (like many people do), my question to you is how does one tell the difference?

Yes, I expect to be here for a while.

Men are not women.
Women do not want penises in women's single-sex spaces.

"If you want to make a distinction between transsexual and transvestite/AGP (like many people do), my question to you is how does one tell the difference?"

If that is your absolute priority, then ask for 6 months hormones and blockers with blood tests confirm they have been taken. No man doing it for sexual reasons will persist if there is a permanent reduction / loss of male sexual function. Personally I prefer self-ID but my honest answef to your question is hormones + blockers.

And I say again:
Men are not women.
Women do not want penises in women's single-sex spaces.

LightofaSilveryMoon

I think it is abundantly clear that the transgender advocates do not care one little bit about what women want or need.

Going by earlier comments I think "biologically female" may mean "has boobs" in alternative reality.

Wait up duck. Some characteristics of sex are ‘mutable’ such as breasts. And if enough of the mutable bits change, ta daaaaaaa - sex change has occurred? That’s your belief?
So women who have a mastectomy due to breast cancer are - ta daaaaaa - men? Or is your line that it’s only a double mastectomy that counts? What else counts for a sex change, Gib? Where is the line between man and woman? You seem to have moved away from self-ID massively, as self ID does what it says on the tin - nothing mutable has to be... Er... muted. But now you are stating that biological sex change occurs when ‘enough’ mutable sex characteristics are changed?
Who defines the line, Gib?
Does it matter WHY the mutable characteristics are changed?

There is something a bit off when the people responsible for putting the women here at risk of doxxing and harassment through a security breach suddenly take the high ground to talk about what is hurtful to whom.

Are you posting to check if you still can? I toyed with counting deletions earlier and wondered whether they had installed an algorithm (maybe Ames Challenor helped them out) or whether the night shift are wrestling with a massive spreadsheet.
And then I wondered if Justine was sitting at home in her winceyette with a gin, reading the Spartacus threads and silently cheering that everyone was fighting back. I’d be bloody proud of FWR if I was her.
There is a possibility I’m overthinking this. But I really do hope she is willing everyone to fight back, whatever statement she has been forced to make.

Perhaps we can say "of the sex which produces sperm" to refer to persons known colloquially as transwomen.

I mean if HQ deems the biologically, scientifically and factually accurate "male trans person" to be (somehow, I'm not quite sure how!) unacceptable.

And frankly if we are no longer allowed to use dictionary definitions accepted the world over then we have clearly entered "how many fingers am I holding up, Winston" territory.

In which case, HQ don't need to ban me! I wouldn't want to participate in any way on a site that requires Orwellian capitulation from women (or rather the group formerly known as women).

Are you posting to check if you still can?

I expect to wake up to a polite kiss off message from MN.

I am hopeful they will see sense. There is no honour in compromising your beliefs, and to enforce bans for truth-telling would be ridiculous. Tomorrow will tell, I guess.