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.

And I should have added to my post, wrestling with: 'how we support and protect women.'
Should check before I post...

Almond- sorry I told you I can't get my head around it, my confusion is coming across loud and clear.

Thank you to the others who have taken the time to clear some things up. I understand what you are saying about needing policies in place to protect us from the few who wish to cause harm. I guess the pp who stated that there is not a way for us all to win is right and that is why I can't get my head around it. It feels like it has to be us or them and I don't like that at all.

The trans in toilets threads has just been closed by HQ.

Thread singular.

Under nineteens transitioning is mostly a threat to girls rather than women.

Lila Perry wanted to share a school changing room with teenage girls, not with women.

Am I being idealistic to think that in a decades time this will be easier, and that the tension comes from trying to resolve the position of people having late transitions?

It's no longer clear what a transition consists of, or if transition necessarily involves any physical transition of any significant kind.

Stormwhale, yes, that is the difficulty of it I think.

It felt like under the old equality act guidance there was room for uncertainty - so service providers could make decisions about trans women in refuges or group counselling sessions on a case by case basis.

We seem to have lost that leeway for people in the situations to look at them and make decisions based on the needs of everyone involved.

storm, the difference between your religious analogy and the trans situation is that the extremists have somehow won the ear of the government and the media.

Almond - but how could it be done without firm limits on what constitutes a 'safe' transwoman? Would they need proof of transition? Who decides the limits? Sorry if this has been done before, I am new to the party.

People are being censured, in schools and universities, and in workplaces for not accepting a definition of 'woman' that is anything other than 'adult human female'.

Lesbians are being marginalised and harassed for not believing that there are lesbians with penises.

Transmen are receiving accolades for being the 'first female to...[insert achievement here]'. So the first actual woman next line is...what? The second woman?

They are being counted on boards with gender mix targets as 'female'.

Girls in schools are being co-oerced into sharing changing facilities with transboys.

Woman and girls are being co-erced into sporting competitions with males as if they're on a level playing field.

Every transwoman you've ever met may be lovely. And your point is...? I know two parents with transkids. So what? I'm sick of that straw man argument. It doesn't make them a woman. Even if they are lovely.

Women give birth. Men don't. Every human in the world was birthed by a woman.

Wear what you want, wear makeup, or not. Wear dresses, or not. Make love with whomever you want. Teach my kids, fix my car, do my taxes, cut my hair, book my holiday, fix my dodgy knee. I don't care what sex you are, or if you are trans. I don't hate you. I don't fear you. I am not phobic. But if you tell me you are male when you are actually female (or vice versa) then I will speak up. Especially if you start teaching that shit in schools.

"It's no longer clear what a transition consists of, or if transition necessarily involves any physical transition of any significant kind."

Exactly. And I can see where this is going. If women insist on physical and medical transition before transwomen are welcomed into our spaces, we'll be accused of violence.

More and more transwomen seem to be happy to simply present as (their idea of) female.

And I can see where this is going. If women insist on physical and medical transition before transwomen are welcomed into our spaces, we'll be accused of violence.

Quite.

For my money, the old system worked okay. That is, the system whereby a doctor had to confirm full gender reassignment surgery before a GRC was issued.

The reasons behind the pressure to move to what is essentially a "self-cert" system are at the crux of the current problems.

(Maybe that's partly because numbers have mushroomed)

"a woman is anyone who identifies as a woman"

is as meaningless as

"Brexit means Brexit"

or

Here's a scenario. A little science fiction story. Imagine we make contact with an alien planet. On this planet there are two species of intelligent life, the oolongs and the sqooshes. They mostly cooperate in peace and harmony with one another but it wasn't always like this. The oolongs are larger and more physically powerful than the sqooshes and up until about 100 years ago the sqooshes were basically a slave race, doing all the menial work and disbarred from all the prestigious and lucrative careers despite being of comparable intellectual potential. Happily that changed and now sqooshes are supposed to have equal rights. But there is still a great weight of history and tradition favouring oolongs in many fields. Sqooshes are underrepresented in science, high ranks of law and other professions so well-meaning egalitarians set up programmes to encourage more sqooshes to pursue these careers.

The physical differences between the two species are significant so when there are sporting events obviously these still need to be segregated by species or the winner of everything that needs physical power and strength would always be an oolong and a sqoosh could never aspire to be the very best. So there are oolong events and sqoosh events and that's not speciesist it's a sensible response to genuine physical differences.

Sadly all is not perfect in this world and some oolongs still think sqooshes are inferior and should be in menial roles and sqooshes need to be protected from them. sadly many such oolongs hold positions of power and influence. Violence against sqooshes remains an endemic problem.

Then a new cultural movement starts to say "a sqoosh is anyone who says they are a sqoosh" and "an oolong is anyone who says they are an oolong".

On the face of it it's a wonderful idea. Born out of a new generation who believe oolongs and sqooshes really can be completely equivalent. But start to apply this on the assumption that it is true and the obvious consequences are:
*Born-Oolongs, claiming they are actually sqooshes, start to fill up all the places on the programmes to increase the number of sqooshes in prestigious careers, reducing the life chances of born-sqooshes who are still being discriminated against covertly
*born-oolongs start winning all the sporting events for sqooshes
*there are no longer any safe spaces for sqooshes where oolongs can't go, because any oolong cam get in by claiming to be a sqoosh.
*it is no longer possible to take action on violence or discimination against sqooshes because the terms oolong and sqoosh are becoming functionally meaningless

So what is an intelligent, aspirational sqoosh to do?

Stormwhale, part of it should be done by all the checks in place before someone gets a gender recognition certificate, rather than a move to self identification.

The other part is about the vulnerability of the women using the service, not just if someone is a 'safe' transwoman.

So Tara Hudson, who was in prison for violent assault was placed in a male prison based on decisions made by people familiar with her and the case. She was moved to a female prison due to trans activism.

Should a sixty year old who has fully surgically transitioned thirty years ago, has never been violent and is in prison for debt be in a male prison? Probably not.

And now we have an oolong on the panel of Loose Squooshes.

Exit

No that was a 'mix up at birth'. Tsk

As someone who identifies as a feminist but is most definitely not Spartacus, I find this one of the more heartening threads I've read on this topic.

Seek I think you've hit the nail on the head in terms of why transgender issues pose problems for feminism. It's to do with reinforcement and entrenchment of gender roles.

I don't really agree with you because I do think the growing acceptance of transgenderism has the potential to make gender roles more rather than less fluid, to acknowledge that gender works on a spectrum rather than being something binary, and that has the potential to help rather than hinder feminism. But I understand your concerns, and respect the cogency with which you make them.

I do also think that while there are some reasonable feminist concerns, in too many cases (not on this thread so much) they are used as a mask for what is transphobia, plain and simple.

So still not Spartacus. But thank goodness for a thread not obsessed with public toilets.

Love it miro! Sqooshes are not not-oolongs! Stand with sqooshes!

Mx, how does the concept of "girl brain in boy body", or "boy brain in girl body" make gender roles less fluid? Don't you think it reinforces them ever more strongly by saying that gendered traits are so fundamental, so critical that they even over-ride biology?

The thing is that if you could magically transform the planet into a utopia where there was no discrimination or violence and everyone respected one another as equals regardless of biology, and no one was respected any less or more according to whether they pursue a career which use to be oolong-dominated or sqoosh-dominated, then it really wouldn't matter that much. Everyone would agree that "a sqoosh is anyone who says they are a sqoosh" and "an oolong is anyone who says they are an oolong" and the only adjustment would be that instead of having sporting events for oolongs and sporting events for sqooshes you would have sporting events for people who have a biology dominated by oolonerayone hormone, and sporting events for people who have a biology dominated by sqookitone hormone without any implication that all the former were generally oolongs and all the latter were generally sqooshes. And everyone would be happy.

But you can't magically make the world a utopia by pretending that it is. You can't pretend there isn't any discrimination and violence against sqooshes.

^by gendered traits I mean typically feminine or masculine pursuits or preferences.

I think most transcritical people have always acknowledged that gender is a spectrum.

Sex, however, is not.

Thank you Mx.

I guess I can't see transgenderism offering much optimism for fluidity of gender roles, because to me it seems fundamentally invested in those roles. Like playing with boys' toys? You must be a boy! Prefer the softer, gentler, company of girls? You must be a girl! Not keen on either role? Oh, well rather than being a sensible rational person who carves his or her own way doing as you think best, you need a third way: you are gender fluid/nonbinary.

At every level, the options for 'identification' rely on, rather than deconstructing, the expectations of gender. If we said 'girls can wear/do/play with/fancy' anyone and still be a girl', that would be making gender roles less fluid. If we say 'women can have penises, testes, male hormones, and 27 years of having lived as a man as long as they dress like women and wear make up, they are women', that doesn't broaden what it means to be a woman: it narrows things to visual signifiers and feelings.

I'm not afraid (phobic) of trans people - but I am very afraid of the trans narrative.

So what do you think the solution is Mx? Genuinely? Something's got to give. Who loses?