Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Break it down for me?

1000 replies

TortiousTortoise · 20/01/2018 22:16

Hi all, I am fairly new to the discussion on the impact that transwomen are having on women generally and I want to more fully understand the issues (been trying to talk to my husband about it and am struggling to articulate it).

I feel so awkward writing about this as I definitely don't want to come across as sounding horrible about transpeople, I just want to understand.

Also there are a lot of acronyms being thrown about. Can anyone help me out?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
47
Yeahnahyeah · 10/12/2018 05:18

Bumpidebump

Beagadorsrock · 10/12/2018 10:32

In light of the letter against Prof Stock,
twitter.com/Docstockk/status/1071501177358114816

and a dickish supercilious tweet by a white man

twitter.com/Defencebrief/status/1071171260456030210

I wonder if we should put together and on this thread the 'scientific' evidence for (hahahaha) and against the statement that 'sex is a spectrum'. I am totally, totally amazed by the lack of critical thinking even in people who should really be able to discern things.

So. From reading the [https://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943 Nature article] linked in the letter vs Prof Stock (the one that astrophysicists and most of Liverpool John Moore's faculty signed), this is what I -not trained in the hard or life sciences at all- understood:

  • there is not only xx and xy, but also variations on that
  • but crucially, no z anywhere (third gamete?)
  • some of it is at conception (intersex - which may then have issues with phenotype, hormone production and reception, and something else?)
  • mosaicism: some individuals don't have 100% xx and 100% xy cells, but have a few of the 'other' type as well.
  • How many cells in a human? How many 'randomly non-standard' are needed before you can say the individual is NOT a 'standard' xx/xy? One? One in a trillion?
(oh, and about half of the cells 'on' a human are bacterial anyway. Are we actually bacteria?)
  • this bit is great: they found some male cells in women who had given birth to boys, probably coming in from the foetus. As in, the cells you identify in the 'Harmony' test of the pregnant woman's blood to tell you if the foetus has any trisomy etc. It also can identify whether the foetus is xx or xy. Does that make me, a mother to two boys, somewhere different on the 'sex spectrum' than I was before I had the sprogs? (answer, clearly not!)

To cap it all, the man at the "Gender Identity" Lab in a university in LA (no vested interest AT ALL in giving importance to gender, no, none at all) then says:

"since there are more than one factor one could use to say someone is a man or a woman (chromosomes, hormone production/reception/receptivity, phenotype [man-boobs?], ...) and none of them trumps the others (er, bit of a jump there, surely?), what should be the trumping factor? Gender identity of course. " (no reason given...)

There is a lovely explanatory twitter thread of the science

twitter.com/mrkhtake2/status/1036307008318779395

I think I saw a beautiful thread on here by Bowl... but can't find it now.

Yeahnahyeah · 11/12/2018 22:23

Bumping for newbies to the issues.

R0wantrees · 13/12/2018 10:52

Useful 'fact-check' document with linked sources:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3448982-Trans-Fact-Checker

R0wantrees · 13/12/2018 13:06

link to site above:
www.transfacts.com/

heresyandwitchcraft · 13/12/2018 21:45

Just a periodic reminder that not every trans person (by any stretch of the imagination) agrees with TRAs

Recent letter in the Times published by a group of transsexuals protesting the overreach and violent tactics by some trans activists is discussed on this thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3445694-Letter-in-the-Times-Plea-To-The-Trans-Lobby-from-group-of-transsexuals

Text of the letter:

PLEA TO TRANS LOBBY

Sir, As transsexual people we are dismayed by the escalation in harassment, threats and abuse directed at women and women’s groups in the name of “transgender rights activism” (“Trans lobby sent me death threats, claims professor”, Dec 6). In the past few years violent rhetoric on social media has spilt over into real life too often. After the harassment of Julie Bindel and the Working Class Movement Library, the physical assault on Maria Maclachlan and the recent use of “masked-up” tactics at a feminist meeting in Bristol, we are horrified by the intimidation and abuse directed at the human rights expert Rosa Freedman.

We seek to find common cause with women against male violence and we condemn the threats, harassment and intimidation of women who argue that sex-based protections are vital in a society still punctuated by sexism. Women are oppressed because of their sex, not some metaphysical gender identity. We are concerned that women are being dehumanised as “TERFs” (trans-exclusionary radical feminists) in order for abusive males to unleash misogynistic rhetoric and violent abuse with impunity.

We call for respectful discussion and debate, and for transgender rights activists to distance themselves from physical violence and attacks on free speech carried out in their name.
Debbie Hayton; Miranda Yardley; Danielle Elizabeth; Kristina Harrison; Emma Haywood; Seven Hex; Ashlee Kelly; Jennifer Kenyon; Kay Meddings; Leanne Mills; Carol Nixon; Fionne Orlander; Jenny Randles; Gillian Simpson; Melissa Symes; Jay Walmsley

Yeahnahyeah · 15/12/2018 22:19

Bumping to first page for the many questioning people who have found their way here. Welcome, welcome.

heresyandwitchcraft · 16/12/2018 17:11

This thread on Pink News and breastbinding helps highlight why so many women (especially mothers) are concerned about trans activism. I personally am heartbroken by the very idea that females feel they need to go through a painful flattening of their chest because they hate their bodies so much. The process of binding is risky, too, including potentially breaking ribs....

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3447751-Pink-news-looking-for-girls-for-a-video-on-binding

heresyandwitchcraft · 17/12/2018 16:54

For those who still don’t understand why feminists on Mumsnet are worried about the erasure of the female sex as a category in our speech, language, culture, medicine, services, society, and law, here is more discussion:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3452486-Why-does-MN-feminism-focus-on-trans

heresyandwitchcraft · 18/12/2018 07:36

Important thread and Times Scotland article on NHS Scotland and same-sex healthcare provision, where women are potentially self-excluding from lifesaving tests and treatment like cervical cancer screening as they cannot be guaranteed a female practitioner (not a male who identifies as a woman).

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3454191-women-risk-health-over-trans-nhs-worker-fear-article-in-tomorrow-s-times-scotland-edition

heresyandwitchcraft · 18/12/2018 20:15
Xmas Smile Hope everyone is remembering to look after themselves out there, and warm season’s greetings to you all.
Yeahnahyeah · 19/12/2018 23:39
Smile
heresyandwitchcraft · 20/12/2018 20:39

This thread explaining the situation regarding freedom of thought/speech/belief, misuse of the police and legal system by (frankly borderline totalitarian-like) trans activists and need for truth/accurate language is essential for any journalists reading this:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3455257-For-any-journalists-misuse-of-the-legal-system-and-police

R0wantrees · 20/12/2018 21:37

Just a periodic reminder that not every trans person (by any stretch of the imagination) agrees with TRAs

Recent letter in the Times published by a group of transsexuals protesting the overreach and violent tactics by some trans activists is discussed on this thread:

The thread also reveals tensions within the group and the impossibilities of separating transsexuals from trans rights activists.

R0wantrees · 20/12/2018 21:47

JackyHolyoake "Listen to Prof Rosa Freedman here, making it very clear that UK law defines sex as biological; ie: relating to chromosomes, gonads and genitalia [hear also about the protections for females as a sex class across the globe in international human rights law]:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYQL5PZ_tSU&t=66s

thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a3455257-For-any-journalists-misuse-of-the-legal-system-and-police

heresyandwitchcraft · 21/12/2018 07:55

The thread also reveals tensions within the group and the impossibilities of separating transsexuals from trans rights activists.
Thanks R0, as always. That’s an important point to highlight.

Apologies for the essay, here:
My own view is that there is a conceptual difference between someone who is transsexual who has undergone permanent medical procedures versus a trans woman who has no intention of even shaving their beard. As a rule of thumb, I ask whether a person understands there is such a thing as biological sex - transsexuals as a group seem much more grounded in the basics of biology than most vocal TRAs (like the TRAs who argue males have no advantage over females in sports or that females don’t actually exist).... BUT there is no “good trans” or “bad trans”, nor any way to differentiate intent or what respect for women a male person has in a female space (however they identify or have modified their bodies). Increasingly, I would argue that the very act of using a female-only space or feeling entitled to a female-only service as a male person means you have crossed boundaries and ignored the need to seek full consent from women before entering their private domain. Claiming womanhood when you can never know what it really means to be female does trouble me. I am very grateful to transsexuals for speaking out because I do think it’s important to understand that this painting of trans people as a monolith by TRAs is very false. I still find myself conflicted - when you hear the emotion when someone like Kristina Harrison says she would never go back to being thought of as a man, or Rose of Dawn talking about what her genital surgery meant to her, it’s hard to not see them as different to someone like... well certain TRAs who will remain nameless. So I remain an advocate of some form of sensible third space solutions. As much as I care about the rights of trans people to live their lives happy and free of harassment, the simple fact is that males cannot become female. So I think it’s for dysphoric trans people to sort out their own umbrella. I’d argue no males belong in the female category, ever. My priority here is what actual women/girls need. I have come to fully appreciate that when it comes to females, feminism, female-only spaces, statistics, protections and services the line must be biological sex. No males can be female, no ignoring basic reality, and no more throwing females under the bus in order to validate feelings. Women exist outside a male fantasy of femininity. Women are not a constellation of nebulous feelings that a man can identify into. We are flesh and blood, our bodies are what make us female, and the only consistent factor that binds all females together is the female body. Not a supposedly innate liking of pink or submissiveness or whatever. Our minds are not sexed, they are just human.
Feminism is for females. We need to be able to define “female” for feminism to be able to function, and feminism still has a LOT of work to do. This is why I care SO deeply about this issue.

R0wantrees · 21/12/2018 08:45

The thread also reveals tensions within the group and the impossibilities of separating transsexuals from trans rights activists.

Influential transsexual trans rights activists (TRAs) include,
Stephen Whittle:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3249035-Stephen-Whittle-s-blog-on-Genderquake-with-a-detailed-briefing-for-panelists

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3436955-Stephen-Whittle

SW joins thread & acknowledges his use of suicide statistics was contrary to Samaritans' standard good practice:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3397010-Guardian-article-on-MPs-concern-with-GRA?pg=3

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3397127-Stephen-Whittle-Press-for-Change-irresponsible-use-of-likely-suicides-follows-Helen-Belchers-Trans-Media-Watch

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3398127-Stephen-Whittle-influential-TRA-asserts-We-know-we-have-Labour-behind-this-one-so-will-simply-do-our-best-to-get-them-elected-Corbyn-seems-to-confirm-this-at-Pink-News

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3375587-Press-for-Change

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3212371-Where-are-all-the-trans-men-An-Answer

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3362097-BBC-Breakfast

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3399188-Guardian-today-Shifting-sands-six-legal-views-on-the-transgender-debate

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3228002-Yogyakarta-principles
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3284051-yogyakarta-principles-plus-10

CBBC, 'I am Leo'
"In most ways I'm like an average thirteen year old boy apart from I was born in a girl's body'
Stephen Whittle portrayed as super hero

(published 2014 67,572 views)

Press For Change formation:
2013 important Guardian Article:
(extracts)
"Most trans people barely notice everyday harassment. Stephen Whittle, professor of equalities law at Manchester Metropolitan University, still gets stones thrown at the house where he has lived for 20 years with his wife, Sarah, and their four children. He has also been abused in the lecture theatre by students, who have called it an "abomination" that he has children. "On the whole you can get by in life without too much hassle, which is pretty different to 20 years ago when every moment of life was hassle," he says.

Whittle, who "transitioned" nearly 40 years ago, was one of three trans men and three trans women who did an unusual thing in 1992: they went to meet Liberal Democrat MP Alex Carlile in Westminster. The unusual element was not the meeting but the fact that they travelled together – at the time, trans people never dared to because it increased the likelihood that they would be spotted and abused. These six wanted to start a campaign group; Carlile advised them to avoid the word "transsexual". So, in Grandma Lee's teashop opposite Big Ben, an anodyne name, Press for Change, was chosen. (continues)

In the 90s, when [Christine Burns] was chair of the Women's Supper Club of the local Conservative party association in Cheshire, she quietly joined Press for Change. Even then, the new activists dared not be openly trans. "The thing that held us back in the 1990s campaigning was that fear of being out," admits Burns. Eventually, she came out in 1995; she jokes that she realised she was more embarrassed to be a member of the Conservative party than openly transsexual.

Much of their campaigning remained on the quiet. The passage of the 2004 law to give trans people legal status was "remarkable," says Burns, because "the government was able to pass an entire act in parliament without anyone throwing a fit in the press". In popular culture, the activists became more forthcoming in their attempts to increase popular understanding of trans issues. Although the arrival of trans character Hayley Cropper in Coronation Street in 1998 was one breakthrough, Julie Hesmondhalgh, who plays Cropper, is a non-transsexual woman"

www.theguardian.com/society/2013/jan/22/voices-from-trans-community-prejudice

R0wantrees · 21/12/2018 09:22

twitter.com/BenjaminABoyce/status/1075114991143927808
Benjamin Boyce Twitter ,
"This is the person who has been harassing #MeghanMurphy, admitting at a city council meeting to being responsible for her Twitter ban, and asking that she be prosecuted for hate crimes"

"Will I Get BANNED For This Video?"

Benjamin A Boyce
Published on 20 Dec 2018
"They Who Shall Not Be Misgendered" has been litigating against small business owners, having websites like wordpress delete accounts and shadow edit articles, having reddit employees ban users, and takes personal responsibility for Meghan Murphy's deplatforming."

"This individual's behavior is NOT indicative of the trans community. There is a HUGE difference between radicals and those they claim to represent. Here are some discussions with rational, empathetic & respectful trans people, to prove my point:"
www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLRdayXEOwuMH3f0pmZqVQUU62rgJIzvt9

Interview with Corinna is worth watching, includes insight into the influential TRA tech industry

Benjamin Boyce's sympathetic interviews with people who are trans include Esther Betts, trans-activist who blocked stairs etc in attempt to stop 'We Need To Talk About Sex' meeting Jam Jar Bristol. Betts has since regretted aspects of her activism.
interview discussed frm p 19
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3433667-I-was-one-of-the-transactivists-on-the-channel-4-documentary-I-regret-what-I-did-this-is-why?pg=20

Break it down for me?
R0wantrees · 22/12/2018 17:43

article, 'Farewell to ma’ams'
(extract)
"Many things in life are confusing. For example, you might only have seen the occasional tweet or article from one side or another of the trans-rights debate and not taken much interest, and then you log into Twitter one morning and people who style themselves as woke and inclusive are calling lesbian icon, Martina Navratilova, a bigot, and you think, “That’s really quite confusing”.

Let me try to explain.

For most of human history women, as a class, have had a pretty shitty deal. They have been oppressed, they’ve been 2nd-class citizens, they’ve been property and, occasionally, they’ve been burned at the stake, even if they didn’t want to be.

This year, in the UK, we’re celebrating the 100th anniversary of women being given the vote, which means that we figured out how to make heavier-than-air machines stay up, how mass distorts space and speed distorts time, and how to explain the fundamental building blocks of all matter before we figured out that maybe we should let half of the population have a say in how the world is governed.

The axis of oppression against women has never been that they have an irresistible urge to play with dolls, or that, left to their own devices, they will gravitate towards putting on a dress and bit of lippy, or that they love plucking their eyebrows and shaving their legs. It has always been that, physically, they are different to men, and without 4 inches of incorrigible wrinkle-skin dangling between your legs, why, you’re fit for nothing more than a little light sewing and popping out babies, nothing strenuous.

Since the whole graciously-granting-them-the-vote thing, things have been getting better, slowly, for women. Then, in the last half decade, a decision appears to have been made that they’re no longer allowed to organise themselves along the lines that have formed the reason for their oppression. The group ‘women’ has been extended to include two subgroups; trans-women and cis-women, and the rules have been rewritten to say that cis-women can have nothing, do nothing, say nothing and believe nothing that does not also include trans-women. Some things belong only to trans-women, but everything cis-women used to have, before they knew they were cis, now belongs to the group ‘Women’.(continues)

concludes:
"What the TERFs are saying are things like, “Is it a good idea to throw open all legal boundaries between all men and all women-only spaces?” and “Can we perhaps not make it illegal for women to centre themselves and have their own politics, collectives and biology?” and “Should we pause before giving long-term medication, with unknown side effects, to people who we don’t legally consider old enough to decide if they’d enjoy half a lager and a tattoo?”

Now to you and me those might sound like reasonable things to ask, and we might want to debate those issues, but we can’t, because trans-women’s existence is not up for debate…even though none of those debates are about trans-women’s existence.

Right, let’s just have another little look at that picture again.

The term ‘TERF’ itself is disputed. Those on the trans side of the argument say that its purely a descriptive term, being an acronym for Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist, while those on the gender-critical side say that it’s a term of abuse, on the flimsy evidence that it’s been used literally thousands of times in abusive messages, often with threats of violence directed towards stupid cis-women who think they’re just women. Although, to be fair, they do keep provocatively referring to themselves as women, refusing to adopt more inclusive monikers, such as ‘bleeder’, ‘non-man’, ‘menstruator’, ‘fanny-packer’ or ‘labian’, so maybe they’re bringing it on themselves.

Whether TERF is descriptive or abusive it is, at least, apt…because a turf-war is being fought. A ferocious battle over what a woman is, and who has the right to call themselves one. It is a battle that has aligned people into strange camps; the ‘progessives’ arm-in-arm with, and sharing the language of, the women-hating ranks of Men’s Rights Activists, Feminists finding support from the Religious Right.

All, ultimately, fighting over what it means to have, or lack, a penis.

To misquote Churchill, never have so many fought so furiously over so little.

This closes the introduction to WTF, and I hope it has been helpful. If you have any questions then why not ask them on Twitter, where you’ll quickly find the answer is that you’re a hateful bigot and deserve to die. If, like me, you’re not a woman (trans or otherwise) or a feminist (radical or mundane) then you may wish to watch from the sidelines. It’s easy not to get involved, to say nothing, to make no enemies, but maybe when you look at Twitter and see a cyclist, whose only claim to fame is winning a race for women, demanding that a tennis legend apologises to them you’ll think it’s time to say something.

I did."
excelpope.wordpress.com/2018/12/22/farewell-to-maams/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Yeahnahyeah · 24/12/2018 18:14
Xmas Grin
heresyandwitchcraft · 26/12/2018 18:19

Huh, I still have a LOT of female socialisation to overcome.
Blush
Thanks R0 and all you wonderful women for your patient teaching.

heresyandwitchcraft · 28/12/2018 15:25

Bump

R0wantrees · 31/12/2018 13:37

significant current thread which considers the lobbying by Press for Change etc and policy/legislation implications over ten years ago:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3463920-Lets-go-back-to-2007

heresyandwitchcraft · 01/01/2019 10:57

That 2007 thread! This has been going on for a long time.... and some prominent transsexuals really seem to have been deliberately strategising to get to where we are today. Where females cannot define or organise themselves as women solely based on their biological sex. Confused

Am going to re-watch Magdalen Berns, starting with this video (Transgender vs transtrender- a false distinction):
m.youtube.com/watch?v=lVgychW1YPQ

Yeahnahyeah · 04/01/2019 07:54

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread