Xenophobia, homophonic, transphobia

[spstchmu]

Are you gonna do anything about it? Like, i know the line is that shoving the madness in the feminism board means it's not transphobia. And I know it's been done to death but I'm sick of it. It's not acceptable. Xenophobia, racism and homophobia also increasing.
And no. I won't leave. This is the biggest forum of its kind and it needs to represent and respect us all. And care that it's not.

What you call transphobia is for most women I know simply facing reality and facts. The word itself is meaningless because it’s certainly not a fear but a rejection of delusion. To be called hateful and bigoted for having a different view especially from other women I find is sad. To be a men’s”s rights activist in supporting them to “violate” women and girls’ spaces and sports in unfathomable to me. If a man wants to live as a woman that’s his choice and his right so long as it doesn’t infringe on my right to dignity and safety . I was on the fence until I was in a sports changing room with my 9 year old grand daughter and a big hairy man took off his women’s clothing and walked around naked showing of his tackle sneering and defying any women there to challenge him. He was built like a brick shit house so no one spoke up but we were all mortified and angry . Especially a Muslim woman with two young girls. On complaining to the staff we were told they could do
nothing as on Fridays he identified as a woman despite living as a man the rest of the time. Any legislation that can be abused to allow this is simply not acceptable.

I disagree that it’s a generational thing. I see it swinging back the other way amongst many of the youngsters I work with. At the moment it’s a trend but like all trends they will move on .

Quite

Its an odd statement given Stonewalls 'no debate' policy.

”’Cervix-havers’, ‘menstruators’, ‘birthing person’” - not all these things have anything to with trans people. Plenty of women don’t have a cervix. Some menstruate, some don’t. They’re still women.

You’re correct about ‘birthing person’, though.

You think the redefinition of language to use these terms has nothing to do with trans people?

And your evidence for this is...?

When a medical document said that the terms for the female genitalia was 'front hole' and the term for the inversion of the penis was 'vagina' you think that wasn't 'trans' people? Who was it for if not 'trans' people?

This is mumsnet. Not Stonewall.

So many arguments here are not arguments at all - just deflection.

I hear almost nothing on these boards that genuinely take into account the needs of trans and non-binary men and women. I hear ‘not my problem’ a lot. And if you ignore them, the problems won’t be resolved.

You’ll be forever scanning peoples faces and bodies to see if they might be trans, and people will be doing the same to you.

But it isn’t our problem. They’ll have to come up with a solution, where possible and reasonable, that doesn’t conflict with other people’s established rights.

And in the meantime all men need to think about someone other than themselves and stay out of women’s spaces, for all the reasons listed. Some won’t, but then they will stand out.

This just shows you don't get it. We care about WOMENS RIGHTS. Not mens rights. We really don't give a stuff about the male sex's needs and rights. Why should we?

You're asking the hens 'take into account' the needs of the foxes. Not gonna happen!

When are you going to take into account the needs of the oppressed and vulnerable sex - females? And 'non-binary' is not even a thing.

We know in an instant a male face. That is how society has flourished and reproduced for multi millennia. It's not a rocket science.

They know what a tomcat is though. And the gardeners understand a thing of two about sexual dimorphism. And there are some who find that triggering and no I’m not being sarcastic for the sake of it. There are people in the world - a minority, but with a loud reach till recently - who struggle with bald, biological reality and do not think it should underpin common reality or how society works.

Not talking about those terms though are we?

The fundamental problem here is that many posters can only think of trans people as their sex assigned at birth, and don’t see that there is a difference between a cis man and a trans woman. They treat trans women as predatory males.

This is an erasure of trans people.

It also ignores intersex people entirely.

So no balanced argument is possible.

It doesn’t matter whether they are predatory males as to whether they should be in women only spaces. It just matters that they are male.

What is that difference, other than one has said he is a woman? I’m all ears.

The fundamental problem is you seem to think there is a difference between 'cis' men and trans women. There is not. ZERO difference. Any male who enters a FEMALE ONLY space is automatically by definition, predatorial. Indeed, prison data proves that transwomen sexually offend 5 times higher than so-called cis males.

A male is a male is a male. And when someone thinks a male is less of a danger because they put on a dress, they cannot be reasoned with.

Intersex (or people with DSDs, which is the preferred term these days), are either male or female. They are not trans. And they've asked that you stop weaponising them in this discussion. Please respect their wishes.

Should be easy, given that it’s supposed to underly the principle of how we tell men from women, right? And apparently makes it so compelling that everyone should comply to give them access to women’s stuff without question. I imagine it must be more weighty than just because a man says he is à woman? No?

They treat trans women as predatory males.

I disagree @Darker. They treat trans women as if they MIGHT be predatory males. In the same way that they treat ALL men as if they MIGHT be predatory males. They are being treated the same because they are the same. There is no discrimination here. No transphobia. Just the desire to keep women safe.

People see trans women as male. Because they are male. The majority of males don’t commit crime but we still have single sex provisions for a reason as we cannot tell the nice ones from the ones who want to harm us. They don’t come with signs or pre-warnings. Trans identified men retain the same offending rates.

Just because a male presents himself in a usually regressive stereotypical way associated with the opposite sex, doesn’t take away that potential risk. I believe all the nice men should stay out of women’s spaces too, does that mean I want the erasure of all men?

@Darker - I consider any male person who deliberately violates women’s boundaries around single sex spaces to be a predator - no matter how they ‘identify’.

If it was about safety for trans women, they would be happy with a third, gender neutral space and would leave the single sex female spaces to women - but it isn’t. It is about deliberate destruction of women’s boundaries, forcing us into playing along with their fetish, forcing us to ‘affirm’ them, and using women as human shields when the trans women say their problem is fear of violence in the Gents.

I would say you are all just proving my point, which is that debate is futile because the premise of the argument is disputed.

No, from where I stand you’ve very beautifully proven our point. Let’s enjoy our mutual victory, eh?

I was never a teacher. Have no idea why you imagined I was.

So what is the difference between a “cis” man and a “transwoman”? Both are male. What makes one not allowed in female spaces and the other not?

You’ve decided what you think. Nothing I say will make the slightest bit of difference.

Is that to me? I haven’t actually decided what I think. I am just asking, as you state there is a difference between a man without a trans identity and one with a trans identity, what that difference is? Or do you not know?

You’ve referred to a trans woman as a man. Bit of a giveaway.