just got my comment deleted on the Guardian website

[dangermouseisace]

silly students protesting against Jenni Murray.

All I did was point out, when someone asked how our sex was being erased, that trans women offend with similar patterns to men, and concerns about recent trans women rapists, also violent trans women being housed in female prisons. I said that if these crimes are recorded as female it reduces the argument for separate safe spaces for women.

I also said about sports, and trans women being accepted onto female teams, and funnily enough being better than actual women, and advised people look up the Iran womens football team.

What did I do that was so wrong???

gotta love a TRA who posts a load of crap, uses biased stats and links to studies that they haven't read that prove the opposite of their point!!

And they claim to work in the area, lol!! Probably for mermaids based on the nonsense they posted!!!

I don't understand this argument about (dodgy) suicide stats and being oppressed and/or stigmatised. Lots of groups are oppressed, are stigmatised and/or have a high risk of suicide. It doesn't make them women:

men with MH issues
men with disabilities
gay men
BAME men
asylum seeking / refugee men
men with addiction problems
homeless men
...

Is the definition of 'woman' now anybody who is oppressed / stigmatised / discriminated against? (except actual women, obvs, will all that 'cis privilege' coming out of our ears).

If you want more detail on the 40Whatever% suicide stat, you can read the study Vanilla linked to - there's also a breakdown of it here which points out the many flaws (as do the authors of the study themselves)

4thwavenow.com/2015/08/03/the-41-trans-suicide-rate-a-tale-of-flawed-data-and-lazy-journalists/

The part about transmen not being helped by transition is particularly interesting (and sad) given my impression that many women transition in an attempt to escape trauma, and completely confirms my belief that what many trans people need is some really good therapy rather than unquestioning medicalisation.

I can't find it right now, but there's some interesting stuff on the brain scans, which supports the Blanchard stuff around AGP transwomen and Gay transwomen

This is a link to a study. There are slight variations in women's and men's brain and this link shows that transwomen (those who remain attracted to women) have brains identical to men.

The part of the brain responsible for gender dysphoria was present in all of them, but the study couldn't be sure whether that was innate or simply a consequence of an obsessive 'rumination over their bodies'.

There were no similarities in the women's brains to those of the transwomen.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/digest.bps.org.uk/2011/11/02/male-to-female-transsexuals-have-male-brains/amp/

And I agree re suicides. As far as I know, Mermaids said that it was a study of 2000 trans people, but it was deliberately misleading because it was actually only 27.

87% of trans-women are found to have a comorbid conditions.

None of which bears any relevance whatsoever to the definition of the word woman.

What's fascinating about mumsnet is the number of shared experiences about abusive men.

During one such thread, years ago, women started to talk about A Script. Arguments that abusive men are prone to use.

I was sceptical at first, but so many women had, had exactly the same experience, it became quite clear that there is a pattern.

Elements of that script repeatedly come up in the transactivist argument. I see lightbulbs popping all over the place from women who have experienced it in their own relationships.

Threats of suicide is one such element. Trans-people that will commit suicide as a result of their experience. But it cannot form any part of the argument. It's irrelevant as a fact and it's manipulative as a threat.

Vanillagirl you come across like a missionary who believes she's bringing a message of salvation to the heathen, and is horrified to find the heathen aren't interested in your message. You think that's because we're bigots savages; I think it's because we're actually more evolved, more civilised than you, but you don't have the awareness to recognise it.

On the offchance you're still reading, the reason we're disagreeing with you is not because we're small minded DM-reading bigots who need to have our eyes opened to compassion and tolerance, who need to be made to care about the rights of a vulnerable group.

On the contrary. It's precisely because we are educated and aware, because we care about the most vulnerable in society, that we are vehemently opposed to transactivist ideology which I for one see clearly as a form of abuse - emotional abuse of women and children at a structural, societal level; emotional abuse which can and does in some cases open the door to other forms of abuse.

In my eyes you are not an enlightened educator but a victim/enabler of abuse. You are supporting an ideology which is reactionary and regressive, not liberal and progressive. It is you who needs educating, who needs your eyes opening to what is really going on here, and if you stay around then there's a chance that might just happen and you too will hit Peak Trans, as have so many women on this board.

But if you flounce you'll just stay ignorant and continue to be a danger to real equality and real social justice. Which would be a shame, as your heart is clearly in the right place.

What is a women? It is a set of biological characteristics.
Females are noted across the animal kingdom to meet these characteristics. Most characteristics are observable: pelvis, ovaries, vagina, uterus, mammary glands.
Others are genetic: xx chromosomes (mt DNA passed from mother to sons and daughters).
Our brains and bodies are not seperate entities.
Trans is the perfect decriptor for someone who wants to be male or female. But there is no point saying it is the same as being male or female because it is nonsense.
No scientist nor medic would ever agree.
Goodness know what the level of science is in our schools.

Vanillagirl you come across like a missionary who believes she's bringing a message of salvation to the heathen, and is horrified to find the heathen aren't interested in your message. You think that's because we're bigots savages; I think it's because we're actually more evolved, more civilised than you, but you don't have the awareness to recognise it.

That's exactly it. She doesn't have a clue. So many people like this.

I have said all that I wish to say on the topic. I try to challenge prejudice where it exists, and I have offered this.

But you won't allow your own prejudice to be challenged.

TalkingintheDark

Brilliant post.

Do people really think that feminists are uneducated and ill informed?

You can confidently apply the term 'bigot' to many people, many groups even, but do people really believe that feminists, who have analysed inequality to a profound level and fought long and hard against discrimination towards all manner of groups, can suddenly completely contradict all their ideals, overturning centuries of analysis in the process and become 'bigoted'?

The crazy thing about all this venus is this big split between people who essentially want the same things - people who really do care about social justice, who want protection for the vulnerable, who believe passionately in equality.

Those on the trans ally side of things just can't seem to see that this is the case. They can only categorise us in terms of hateful, narrow-minded bigots. We just don't fit their worldview of what a "good" person should look like, so we must be "bad".

Extreme ignorance and prejudice.

Ant remember my guardian log in but this thread made me look up jenni Murray on every social media and follow her. I love jm

And it puts me off writing any more for the guardian

Those on the trans ally side of things just can't seem to see that this is the case. They can only categorise us in terms of hateful, narrow-minded bigots. We just don't fit their worldview of what a "good" person should look like, so we must be "bad".

I know. Spent a fair amount of time arguing with such types recently. Hopefully some of it might have sunk in, for when they get to the point of peak trans.

Sorry, meant to quote talkinginthedark in the first para!

Datun You can confidently apply the term 'bigot' to many people, many groups even, but do people really believe that feminists, who have analysed inequality to a profound level and fought long and hard against discrimination towards all manner of groups, can suddenly completely contradict all their ideals, overturning centuries of analysis in the process and become 'bigoted'?

Yes, it's this crazy double think again, isn't it. Hence Maria Miller dismissing women who raised concerns about that report as women "purporting to be feminists" - she knows, on some level, that it just doesn't make sense for those who fight inequality to be against something that's pro equality but rather than look again at what kind of agenda she's really supporting, she cast doubt upon the "social justice" credentials of anyone opposing that ideology.

venus I do wonder if in order to debate with those types we have to keep stressing over and over again that effectively we're on the same side as them. We share the same ideals.

I think we just have to keep combatting this lie - this insane lie which has come out of the whole "ciswomen have cis privilege and are therefore the power elite not an oppressed/discriminated against/vulnerable group at all" toxic ideology.

We have to keep making the point again and again that we are not who they think we are, who they have decided we are. We DO care about equality; we are motivated by the same cares and concerns as they are; we are on the same page. Just reading it differently!

I have said all that I wish to say on the topic. I try to challenge prejudice where it exists, and I have offered this.

As Talking so eloquently said, it's not prejudice - it's postjudice (to make up a word) - we've thought long and hard about it all, about the impact, and we hold these considered opinions, not kneejerk reactions.

TalkingintheDark

I think you might make partial headway with some homosexual transsexuals, the 'old school' trans.

But I don't think you stand a chance in hell of collaborating with the gynephilic transwoman.

Misogyny is at the core. Collaboration would conflict and be a direct contradiction of what they want.

But I'd be very interested to know why you think collaboration IS possible. Because in an ideal world, it's preferable.

I've pretty much stopped reading the Guardian. Apart from Hadley Freeman, there are few writers I want to read and their blind lefty-liberal stance is frustrating to me (a natural lefty-liberal). Where is the strong left wing press at the moment? The same place as the strong left wing political opposition, I guess

Am talking here about trying to reach other women, the trans allies, Datun!

I agree we've no chance of making headway with misogynists. But we could possibly reach those who are unwittingly supporting and enabling misogyny.

TalkingintheDark

Oh, I'm sorry! I misunderstood.

Will get my glasses on and re-read.

Isn't "post judice" an actual legal term, ChocChoc? Meaning exactly what you said I think! Good point anyway!

"I do wonder if in order to debate with those types we have to keep stressing over and over again that effectively we're on the same side as them. We share the same ideals."
I think you have a point. Also - I think the people who argue we are bigots are ill-informed; I think they see the word 'transgender' and can't actually imagine that that now means more that people with gender dysphoria.

I know I didn't reach peak trans until I realised that transgender wasn't just a prissier word that actually meant 'transexual'. Until then, I was just fine with the extremely small number of people crippled by this condition to be accommodated. Believing that they would have had extensive psychiatric help and counselling and that gender reassignment surgery had been the last resort, because by god that's some brutal surgery to subject yourself to! Such naivety. Then I slowly realised that it was something completely different - the people I had sympathy for were just a small subset being used as a human shield by those with AGP. And the narcs with their gender-fluid bollocks. And the frankly dangerous inevitable outcomes of those encouraging the transing of children . Mumsnet guided me to peak trans, through solid information and people discussing it logically.

I do share the ideals. I want everyone to be safe and fulfilled and happy. I do NOT want my ideals to be corrupted into doing the wrong thing, as I believe the handmaiden-type's ideals have been.

There's an old (lengthy) joke, can't remember if it was Billy Connolly or Dave Allan. Concerns a man whose atheism is the bane of his family's priest's life, can't persuade him to repent and believe. Lots of intervention, blah blah blah nothing 'works'. End up being taken to Rome to discuss it with the Pope. Punchline - a cardinal peeking through the door, seeing the Pope with his head in his hands, saying shakily 'But William, I am a Catholic ...'.

We need to be William.

Anyway, in practical terms it's divide and conquer for me. I will continue to point out that 'transgender' is becoming meaningless as it encompasses an ever-widening list of frankly trivial self-serving barely-non-gender-conforming bollocks. Gender fluid my arse. That the gender dysphoric should not be used by the AGPs as a human shield, and that the AGP agenda should be looked at for what it is. That children should not be sterilised and mutilated and frankly fucked over. That MtT athletes are just doping cheats using a loophole. And that fawning over AGPs/narcissists/child-abusers/cheats is definitely not upholding their ideals.