Trans media watch are lobbying mnhq

[BeyondTheHarpy]

I know this has already been mentioned in the PL thread, but I thought it might be an idea to bring it to the attention of mners in a thread of its own.

After the PL debacle, there followed a thread in AIBU about toilet. On which this post appeared...
"I'm with you OP and I'm horrified by the transphobia on Mumsnet. I have done some work with Transmedia Watch who are trying to persuade MNHQ to treat transphobia as they would treat any other hate crime. I don't know what MNHQ have against the trans community or why they don't challenge the widespread belief that trans women are rapists in frocks who want to see fannies."

So, yeah, just letting you know that they are (allegedly) on the case with mnhq.

But here we have the same problem, yet again. The myriad of reasons why people transition. From Elsa's child, who has a diagnosed medical condition which is crippling, to the fetishist transvestite who wants nothing more than the immersion in women's intimate spaces, to someone who is uncomfortable and restricted in their gender role and wants to switch part time.

As I said before, it depends on who you speak to last, or most, which determines your opinion. Which is why the arguments become heated and different standpoints collide.

A three way segregation is the only way in terms of bathroom use.

Treatment is another matter entirely.

Agreed Datun. I did think at first what about no segregation. Just individual private facilities for all, like in quite a few leisure centres. But my problem with that is a lot of people like the traditional format. It seems a little unfair to deprive so many of their wants for a very tiny proportion of society. For me it's about respecting all in society the best you can, you'll never accommodate all of everyones wishes. But people should have a least some dignity and being made to go in facilities oppersite to your gender must feel degrading. I am a single dad and it has been the case in a few places that the only baby changing facilities have been in the female toilets. It's very uncomfortable.

But to provide an extra facility would cost business, charities and organisations such as the scouts. If this legislation was brought in it would have a hard impact on some groups. Does anyone not what proportion of the population identifies as different from their birth assignment?

I am intrigued, in the situation Monkey has talked about, what they would do if it was a girl known to have groped other girls. (Or a boy groping other boys). Would that be treated differently?

I am a single dad and it has been the case in a few places that the only baby changing facilities have been in the female toilets. It's very uncomfortable.

That's been something of a recurring theme on here. And I agree, it must be awful. You're trying your level best by your child and have to run the gamut of objection based on your genitals!

Equality does go both ways.

Are there no gents loos with baby changing facilities? How unenlightened.

II remember when I was in school some boys would ping bra straps, stand really close behind girls and rub themselveson them , make humping motions at any stationary female, make really filthy sexual comments etc and this was all just accepted as what boys did.

I was hoping that things would be different these days, and the blatant sexual harassment would be stamped on.

monkey I'm shocked, though sadly not surprised, at the school's attitude. So much easier to hide behind a policy than to protect girls

I'd suggest that your DSD's parents raise this with the school as a safeguarding issue - which it is. Girls should not be expected to undress in front of any boy, let alone one with a history of inappropriate behaviour. It's not enough to say that girls can choose to change in the staff room - what about vulnerable girls who may not realise they are at risk or who have experienced sexual abuse at home and may have be able to set boundaries? Schools have a legal duty to protect children. DSD's parents should tell the school that it is failing to comply with its statutory duties on safeguarding and they will escalate this to Ofsted if the school does not act to protect all girls from being observed by a boy while changing.

Raising this as a formal safeguarding issue will make it much harder for the school to dismiss their concerns

I don't come across these issues because I don't use public spaces much I suspect so it is rare eg I am in a changing room or public loo.

On fathers changing babies - something my chidlren's father did more than I of, our gym has a space in the male changing for that and loads of fathers change babies in there. However not all gyms do.

(Yes, thank for the reminder - the green cake was Colin the caterpillar. I forgot he even had a gender and my girls loved him. Now there is a pink one so lots of parents will feel they must buy a pink one for the girl whereas before girls and boys liked Colin)

The question of why the many should suffer for the few is never very easy. If it's a simple issue like letting the one trans person in a building use the disabled loo that might be a good answer whilst they transition and before their penis is removed. Whereas if we made all wards in hospitals mixed sex just for the very few who are trans that sounds like more harm done (to all the women who don't men on their ward) than good overall.

Tiger transition usually has no impact on genitals. The overwhelming majority of transwomen still have a penis (for lots of reasons). We really need the public to understand what transition and self-identification actually means. It means Bob from down the road identifies as gender fluid and uses the men's changing rooms on Wednesdays but the women's on Thursday and Friday, but never takes any hormones, has any surgery and often doesn't even wear what society considers 'womens' clothes. So we have no idea if the person with the obviously male body is a harmless man, Bib from down the road on a day he identifies as a woman, someone who identifies as a woman but doesn't want to alter the way they present in the name of 'expanding the bandwidth of womanhood' or an opportunistic sexual predator. And you have absolutely no right to question that person's intentions incase you trigger them or cause 'actual harm'. And women all over are literally falling over themselves to make this happen in the name of being a good ally. It's the absolute pinnacle of internalised misogyny.

Come Datun, cheap dig. Wasn't trying to make a point about it. I am not about kicking and screaming if there has not every facility in every venue. I was just trying to give an example of the sensitivities a play and negative feeling involved. To put things into perspective. It was difficult for me to use the facilities and although 9 out of 10 women I am sure would have been very understanding it stills makes for an uncomfortable situation for all.

Like I said think we have to be sensible and pragmatic with our approach. I do believe that some people are genuinely trans, non binery or what ever. I believe people should have the freedom to be who the genuinely feel. But I don't think it's fair to expect the happiness and security of the many for the sake of the very few. There could be a compromise. I was trying use the example because in real terms it does hurt this minority and I can understand that. But I don't think that letting anyone using any bathroom is the answer.

Although just to add a thinking point. Do you think that is whole bathroom issue will be viewed as backwards or discriminative in the future? Segregation of gender in toilets is pretty new in the history of public toilet facilities

1DAD2KIDS

You misunderstand my post. I genuinely think men's loos should have baby changing facilities. Or at least a unisex option for those men who want to change their babies.

I was being serious about the discrimination. How can women fight for equality, including paternity leave etc if we are not also behind making it easier for men to take up that option?

In answer to your question, I am of the opinion that there are too many people, particularly men, transitioning for dubious purpose. I would expect that one or two high profile cases, might turn the tide of public opinion. I think most people, when they are realise what is being advocated for - fully intact men who are attracted to females gaining access to women and children everywhere - will see it as a backwards step.

Sorry my post wasn't clear, it's great that mean come on and give us their experience.

PS I still want to know! Are there any baby changing facilities in the gents loo anywhere?

Sorry it's so easy to get the wrong end of the stick when just reading text devoid of voice tone, body language and facial expressions. Also I didn't realise you where serious about changing stations in men's toilets (thought you were being sarcastic)? But of course what would you know about the inside of gents? I have seen a few changing stations in gents but no it not the norm. But there is often a separate changing area provided or the changing area is in the disabled toilet (which I know is a separate issue with some disabled users). Provision of some sort is fairly common. It is generally not the norm so I don't get why I should have special provision made for me. Although having young kids of both genders I do prefer a separate baby change area. And a toddler toilet is a bonus. Anyway probably digressing off point.

I don't think there are many trans or other genders who are in it for a dubious nature. Yes I think there are some out there like that but not many. I think most people are genuine and I think a lot of people are being too harsh. We are talking a very small minority of people. I agree with most on here that toilets should stay as they are. But ideally I think a third toilet would be a possible answer, one that everyone to use. You wont please everyone. We can but do our best accommodate people best we can while safeguarding people's safety and respecting the wishes of the majority. We have to be practical.

I also hate the way Transmedia are threatening to shout hate crime and intolerance. I hate the whole hate crime card that is being played Transmedia as a weapon of intimidation. Yes a bit of intolerance and misunderstanding (fair bit of it on here) going on but no hate crimes from what I can see. I do fear for free speech, it seems almost everything is a hate crime in someone's opion. Like the slightest poorly judged statement, off the cuff remark or differing opion should be shut down and punnished harshly by the PC Witch hunt. I think we need to prevent hate crime but where do you draw the line. I think the line is being blurred and used by some as a weapon of fear and intimidation.

1DAD, why do you use the word 'gender'? Presumably you mean 'sex'?

Can you remember at what point did you start accepting the notion of 'assignment of "gender" at birth'?

I ask because I wonder if it was difficult for you to drink the Kool Aid.

Wrt the history of public toilets - it's a short history.

They were only provided for women in general when women above the socio economic level of mill girls started being allowed to venture forth to live their own lives outside the home, in offices and shops and other white collar workplaces. Poor women peed behind bushes, etc. It was very dangerous and very unsanitary.

Two forces were at work in the provision of public toilets - (1) the general recognition that public urination and defecation by men and women alike spread disease and (2) acceptance of the idea that women could go out and about freely.

If you look at the situation in modern day India where (mainly poor) women face the danger of rape while out in fields or on waste ground or behind walls, in parks, etc, peeing, you will see immediate parallels to the world of women in the west before public toilets were provided.

mathanxiety I don't get the cool aid thing?

As to the terminology thing the average person has not studied sociology or gender studies or anything like that. Yes it is common for normal people to not necessarily not to always use the terms sex or gender correctly in some eyes. I assume you are saying to use sex as physical birth characteristic and gender being the persons mental gender. To be honest it all seem a little nit picky to me. I am not to strung up on the finer nuances of these terms. Both technicaly can be used interchangeably in most circles but are being used to a growing extent to mean different things.

Intresting in site into toilet history. I think I did see a YouTube video that shared some of the same information.

I am still not clear on your stance on this issue. Are you accepting of view that our mental gender doesn't always match our physical birth gender? What is your view on accommodating toilet requirements for people who identify other than their birth gender?

And of course if we look further back such as roman times shared open public toilets where used both common men and women a like. Not many thinks were private or segregated in Roman life. Just throwing it out there; I am not saying this is how we would want to do our business in this day.

I'm not a sociologist or a student of gender studies. I studied history back in the early 80s. Back then it was all political history. I loved it. My interest in toilets in India (and elsewhere too) comes from conversations with an old school friend who is the head of an Irish aid agency focusing on empowerment of girls.

'Mental gender' is a meaningless phrase unless you can say you 'feel like a man' or 'feel like a woman'.
Can you honestly say you feel like a man, and if you can say that, do you really mean that you feel like yourself?
How can you tell where 'feeling like you' ends and 'feeling like a man' begins?
What then is 'mental gender'?
Is it something to do with clothing or footwear choices or preferences for a particular personal appearance?

Gender is the system in which the adjectives 'masculine' or 'feminine' are applied to people and objects. The system is used to discriminate against women because it is the means by which masculine traits are marked out from feminine traits. After that is accomplished, a high value is assigned to masculine traits and feminine traits are denigrated.

When it comes to inanimate objects, feminine items and toys and clothing include jewellery, floral motifs, nail polish, high heels, impractical footwear for both women and girls, highly decorated clothing (buttons, ribbons, that serve no practical purpose), clothing without useful pockets, motifs like cute kittens, preoccupation with keeping clothes clean and in mint condition, all shades of the colour pink and pastels in general, dresses, tights, dolls houses, dolls, prams, cooking sets, long hair, makeup, sugar and spice and all things nice are considered feminine. Trucks, blocks, balls, bats, trousers, acceptance of jeans with holes and dirt, the colour blue, dinosaurs, wild animals, x-box games, shirts, ties, practical, well made, comfortable footwear, useful pockets, slugs and snails and puppy dogs' tails are all considered masculine, and there's lots more for both sexes...

For instance, women are said to have brains that are well suited to English Lit, sociology, and social history, to be nurturing, good at multi tasking, to like knitting, and to be nice, agreeable, pleasant and to take the high road and opt for dignity are considered characteristics women should aim for. Men are said to have scientific and mathematical and logical brains, to gravitate naturally towards political and military history and the hard humanities like economics, to enjoy competing, to be single minded and narrowly focused, not nurturing, etc, and they are encouraged never to let anyone put them down or get ahead of them. Because of the assumption that masculinity does not involve nurturing, you find there are very few changing stations in men's loos.

Also because of various gender-based assumptions, you find women being told they can't be astronauts or fire fighters or architects or mathematicians, and you find men being told they can't be nurses or early years teachers and boys are told they are sissies if they cry. With all of that goes the idea that men's jobs are worth higher pay than women's jobs.

Gender is quite the straitjacket, in other words, for both men and women. It also tends to keep women a bit poorer than men, in general.

'To drink the Kool Aid' means to accept some propaganda or party line or agenda that is being promoted.

'Birth gender' is a big fat heap of bullshit. You are born male or female. This designation refers to your anatomy and your chromosomes.
(There are very rare exceptions to this rule but they are completely irrelevant.)

You are then gradually assigned a gender. If you were born with a penis you will be treated as a boy. You will be given the benefit of the doubt when it comes to a good deal of behaviour. Your interests will be guided in the direction of 'masculine' things. You will be encouraged not to cry when you are sad. If you deviate from the set of appropriate interests considered ok for boys you risk being beaten up by other boys.

If you have a vagina you will be treated as a girl. You will be held to standards of behaviour that are different from those of boys, and encouraged to be interested in feminine topics. You will be allowed to cry but you will also be encouraged to mind the feelings of others.

Gender is just the means of preserving intact a cultural ideal of masculinity that is actually very toxic for boys and girls, men and women alike. It is toxic masculinity that makes effeminate men believe they do not belong in the men's loos. Toxic masculinity results in misogyny (hatred of women) - which is often just a fear of being considered less than manly, homophobia - again, often a fear of being seen as less than manly.

Men's loos should be safe places. They should be clean. Men should tolerate the presence of men in 'women's clothes' and with the appearance of women in men's loos. Men should tolerate the presence of gay men in men's loos. Parents should never have any reason to feel that sending a small boy into a men's loo or men's changing room would be dangerous.

The problem of acceptance of difference is one men need to solve.

Women should not have to accommodate men in women's places (and we are talking about far more than public loos here) because men have created problems for other men in their spaces.

(There was a long interlude between Roman times and the era of modern sanitation during which streets were open sewers - the issue of segregation of public loos was non-existent).

Ok so I've been on & off MN for many years under various names sometimes lurking sometimes posting very regularly but this is the first time I've come across this on here and I must say I am shocked! I would never ever EVER have expected so many of the women on MN to be so judgemental and prejudiced and ill informed and downright nasty regarding the trans community and I'm absolutely stunned at some of the comments on this thread and that they seem to be just accepted! Admittedly I've not read every post on every page and just skimmed it but some of the stuff I have read has made my jaw hit the ground in disbelief and my heart sink in disappointment. I really thought better of MNers. That's sad.

Nobody is being 'downright nasty' towards trans people.
In fact, I would hazard a guess that everyone who objects to the presence of men in women's spaces would love to see transwomen accepted fully by men, safe from harassment and assault when out, and safe in men's spaces.

People here are objecting to having to share women's spaces or girls' spaces, or compete on sports teams or in individual sports, with boys and men who have not modified their anatomies in any way.

In case you missed the list of women's spaces while skimming:
Women's prisons - why should an anatomically intact man who is not gar be allowed to share a cell and showers with women?
Bear in mind that many women in prison have led lives that have been marked by violence by men, as children, as teens and as adults. Especially prevalent among incarcerated women is a history of being sexually abused.

Women's sections of homeless shelters - why should this vulnerable population be exposed to danger similar to the danger they face out on the streets?

Rape Crisis counselling - why should a woman not be allowed to state a preference for a biologically female counsellor? WHy should female victims of sexual assault be required to attend group therapy where a man might lead it or men might be members of the group? Should women who have been raped be required to provide validation of the 'female experience' for men who have been raped or is their recovery to be put first and foremost?

Women's changing rooms in public pools - should men be allowed access to changing rooms where women and girls of all ages change before swimming? Can yo see no dangers whatsoever in this?

Girls' locker rooms and showers in schools - should girls be forced to undress for PE and shower afterwards in the presence of naked heterosexual teenage boys? Should schools get to decide for girls when they will undress in front of a male? Are we wasting our breath telling girls the importance of consent?

Girls' teams and girls' sports (and women's) - do boys and men gain no advantage at all from testosterone when it comes to muscle development, bone density, shape of pelvis, height and other physical features? Why should women and girls accept that they will be also rans just so that a 'transgirl' can have her identity validated by the governing body of some sports federation? Girls like to win too. In the US, girls can get university scholarships on the basis of school sports. Why should boys be eligible for that money?

Women's psychiatric wards - you see no issue here?

Women's domestic violence shelters - where women go when they are fleeing often for their lives, from men...

Only if you are labouring under the willful misapprehension that no pervert would ever try getting into a women's facility under false pretences for purposes of voyeurism or exposure or sexual assault would you insist that women's objections to people who are anatomically male should be allowed access to women's spaces.

Only women who have truly internalised the message that it is women's place to accommodate everyone else, and perform the role of everybody's mother, could you insist that transpeople's interests must come before all others.

Maybe you think transwomen are all gentle, gay males who have absolutely no sexual interest in females? This is a common misapprehension.

Maybe you think society, the medical profession, and women should pander to what may in fact turn out to be a form of body dysphoria that is akin to anorexia? Should we tell anorexic children and teens that a diet would be a fantastic idea?

Maybe you think it is fine for people at a very young age to render themselves sterile by puberty blockers, or for their parents to make that decision for them, often for dubious reasons?

Allpart Perhaps you could tell us exactly what you object to, rather than making vague accusations about prejudice?

dad and you

You, I think you are both where many people were on the trans issue a while ago. It's really not a simple issue, and I urge you to read the threads ( and associated links and stats).

No one here hates transwomen. Several have made valuable contributions to the threads. Indeed, we have all been peeing with transwomen probably for most of our lives without a second thought. It's the sheer proliferation of people identifying as trans which has started to cause problems.

There is no doubt that some people feel more comfortable performing the role of the opposite sex. There is equally no doubt that there is no science underlying this whatsoever.

Gender dysphoria has historically been used as the cornerstone to diagnose transgenderism. This is a feeling of revulsion over ones genitals. Hence the 'wrong body' assertion. There is no doubt that gender dysphoria is a recognised medical condition. And crippling for those who have it. But it's rather like anorexia, or those who cut off healthy legs because they are convinced they were meant to be born disabled. Whether you think that should be treated as a mental condition, or accommodated through surgery, is a different thread.

However there are very many people identifying as trans who do not have a gender dysphoria. They are perfectly happy with their genitals, many men have previously fathered children. Of these ' late transitioners' the overwhelming majority retain their penises and remain attracted to women. And a great number have autogynephilia. This is an exclusively male sexual fetish where the sufferer is aroused at the thought of themselves as a woman. The fetish is enhanced by being in women's intimate spaces. (there are reams and reams of information about this on the web, and a proliferation of websites devoted to sufferers, comparing notes and sharing). These people are now identifying as transwomen. If you are in any doubt, try offering them a unisex facility, it is met with a resounding 'no'. This is where the 'transwomen ARE women' part of the ideology has come in. It's completely necessary for them to have people buy that idea.

These are the men who are promoting the 'cotton ceiling'. Despite having a fully intact penis they remain attracted to women and want to coerce lesbians into sleeping with them. Because as they ARE women, they are now lesbians (with a penis).

This sexual fetish has been swept up with the rest of the ideology.

There are many reasons why the law should keep spaces segregated by sex and this is only one of them, but it's an important one. It's also an issue that, although being widely available on the net to see, is nonetheless being kept under wraps as much as possible as it has been used to discredit. For obvious reasons. But a five minute surf will tell you all you need to know.

Most 'genuine' transwomen will not insist that they are actually women and they have no interest in accessing women's spaces. They are also becoming distressed over the push to allow anyone who identifies as a woman to use the women's bathrooms as they have been doing this for years, but now it is becoming a political statement.

Also as the criteria for identifying as trans is being removed, it means that any man, any time, anywhere can identify as trans, have a full beard, wearing a three piece suit, walk into the toilets after your daughter, and you won't be allowed to challenge him, as it will be discriminatory.

It's not about being nasty, it's about genuine concerns which are not being addressed. Anywhere. At all.