Trans unpeak moment

[Sunflowersforever]

Have really been tuned into the whole self-Id issue and subsequent discussions through mumsnet, and appalled at the encroachment into women spaces and the silencing of women's voices. Was so glad to have read Hadley Freeman's article and how she summed up concerns in such an articulate way that reflected my views.

Ok. Here is the unpeak trans bit.

On HFs twitter feed, someone posted about selfid saying. "It means swearing a statutory declaration that you are living as a woman (and there are legal consequences if you lie), changing your name and documents, telling friends, colleagues, family".

Is that correct? If it is, I didn't know that and it changes the whole 'any man can enter a woman's space unchallenged' argument a bit as surely documented proof can be produced if challenged?

Someone else also said Ireland had adopted this law with no consequences? Really?

Anyone aware if any of this is true?

Great summary Pencils.

Also, there's a big fat grey space below the threshold of criminality that those of us who work in the public sector or particular bits of te private sector where even a sniff of so-called transphobia can be fatal to a career. Even when that allegation is on the basis of saying something as rooted in biology as "women don't have dicks"

OlennasWimple

Or you could spark of a whole heap of trouble commenting it's a nice painting, if your the leader of the labour party

Hmmm. Not sure.

I had a bit of a wake-up moment with the YouTube shooter and the amount of people on here who jumped on to say it was definitely a trans woman with an adams apple. Utter bollocks when there are pictures of her as a young girl. She was not trans at all. I have also had feelings of unease when people on here have said it's basically OK to bully trans people at work etc (on a thread about a trans person winning a tribunal case against their employer).

I remain concerned about certain spaces remaining natal female only and I find it illogical that people can say it is possible to change from male to female. However, in recent days with the number of youtube shooter threads, I feel that people on here have gone too far and I realise that we aren't really on the same page with this.

I had a bit of a wake-up moment with the YouTube shooter and the amount of people on here who jumped on to say it was definitely a trans woman with an adams apple. Utter bollocks when there are pictures of her as a young girl.

You had a wake up moment - in which you realised that when news stories are reported as women and who are men, it means we cannot trust when news stories are women and they might be women?

Surely the solution is to ensure that we report all male violence as male violence and not as female violence?

Re Scotland: the EA is Westminster legislation so the Scottish Government can't change but it still applies in Scotland.

From what I could see posters immediately pointed out that the YouTube shooter threads were speculative and not based on reputable news sources and were quickly deleted.

(The threads were deleted - not the posters).

@Debbie666
You urge Anyone on the fence about unpeaking to go and l Ok at hate crime legislation. I’m not sure many people are ‘peak trans’ed on the idea that they might get thrown in jail for accidentally misgendering someone ... it’s more that the precedent of not being able to insist a man is in a space which he doesn’t belong (because he is signalling ‘man’ with the hypothetical beardy burliness, and behaving inappropriately by drawing attention to himself rather than TW who is ‘passing’ and attempting to NOT draw attention to themselves).

YES, women could still a) confront beardy bloke or b) complain to the management about beardy bloke, but social conventions and the law get conflated and adopted very quickly when people are confused and afraid about what is reasonable to insist on.

So once Self ID says any person might be a woman or a man, then it gets much harder for anyone to stand up against the exploitation of this.

Girl Guides and Swim England sort of proved that by ignoring the current law and setting new standards based on self ID, basically. They’re reviewing it now that the unintended consequences have been pointed out.

It’s not fear of being prosecuted that’s the issue per se with misgendering, I believe. It’s how society will interpret it.

I reported a YouTube thread because it was speculative. Its unhelpful to give ammunition with conspiracy stories. It may be true. It may not be true.

The real point about the youtube story is the lack of trust that women now have and how they are looking around with suspicion in a way they never did before.

That's a problem.

Woman are starting to feel unsafe in a way they never have. Trust in who they are around means they will moderate their behaviour. As in they won't put themselves in certain situations because they are afraid.

Not only that but it has more troubling consequences. Any sense of cover up by authorities tends to fuel social tensions rather than ease them. Bannon and Trump capitalised on conspiracy theories and lack of trust in the liberal media. Bannon is hanging out over here.

I can forsee a situation arising where you get a similar phenomenon to paedophile hunters appearing. That could affect anyone who is nonconforming (including butch lesbians).

The violence that trans women are trying to run away from in the mens toilets doesn't just disappear because you force your way into the womens toilets. Nor does it go away because you mandate a bunch of draconian rules on words and thoughts.

The truth is a precious thing, and people don't understand the importance of integrity to the truth and how when you lose that it has social consequences.

Putin has kept power in no small part by creating a situation where no one knows who to trust and what information is reliable. Through conspiracy theories and misinformation. Understanding this is crucial to protect liberal democracy from a lack of faith in it and a back lash against all the current political parties.

As I keep saying, messing with words and their meaning is an issue about power and destabilises society. Its not simply about trans issues.

The real point about the youtube story is the lack of trust that women now have and how they are looking around with suspicion in a way they never did before.

Exactly. Gaslight women over and over by reporting burly male rapists complete with stubble as women and the YouTube shooter situation is what you get. It's instructive that TRAs wish to blame suspicious and unsettled women for that, rather than a media and justice system that openly tells them outright lies and expects them to go full 1984 obedient instead of pointing out the lie.

Thanks Datun, for your support and the suggestions. I discovered Transgendertrends website and Lily Maynard’s blog a couple of months ago - and both resources have been really informative, and have provided much sanity for me and DH. Reading Lily Maynard in particular has been so helpful, she is calm and measured and humorous too, but absolutely tells it like it is. Every day is a journey on this horrible path but knowing there are people out there who are able to de-code all the nonsense that’s spouted is such a relief.

I have regular what if moments when I see posts on twitter which really are spiteful, like Miranda's ones about LM. I loathe LM and all they say and do, but those kinds of comments give ammunition to the 'agree with me or you're a transphobe' brigade. It allows them to be a martyr. I prefer to leave the spite and hyperbole to the TRAs, we women have better ways to speak.

Lang

"Gaslight women over and over by reporting burly male rapists complete with stubble as women and the YouTube shooter situation is what you get"

I so agree. But we still being called bigots for daring to ask.

So we have to STFU?

AnchorMum - there is also a forum for parents of gender questioning children who want to take a route away from the affirming, cheerleading Mermaids stuff - gendercriticalresources.com/Support/forumdisplay.php?fid=24. Most of it is private so you can talk without fear and I think it's up to about 700 members now. Run by GC Dad on Twitter.

I knew the TRAs would make hay with that. Let them say what they will. We're not the Borg. There is no "approved" position. As individuals we are obviously going to express ourselves any way we like. It's fine to say things, and fine to disagree. But in general I don't think we should go around tone policing. People always speculate and rubber neck about disaster situations, it's human nature. And yes, women are tired of being told male criminals are female.

I had a bit of a wake-up moment with the YouTube shooter.

I baulked at those threads too. That sort of speculation is taking it too far for me. I’m glad the mumsnet moderators seem to have the same sort of cut-off point. In fact, I’m not particularly comfortable with a lot of the invective used against LM. I don’t like what they stand for, but personal abuse is personal abuse whether I agree with the general view of the person it comes from or not.

AnchorMum

I don't know how communicative you are with your child, but would it be possible to get them to read through some desisting stories, too?

A sort of deal that you will talk about what they want to talk about, as long as they read something you suggest.

I can remember another parent of a trans child who struck this kind of deal and, incredibly slowly, it made a difference.

I hesitate to suggest it, because everyone's an individual and it might go either way.

But I can't imagine what it feels like to be a parent in this situation. The inner conflict must be immense.

Personal abuse makes me uncomfortable too, it shouldn't have a place in the debate.

I agree with this

The real point about the youtube story is the lack of trust that women now have and how they are looking around with suspicion in a way they never did before.

I would advise anyone who is worried about gender issues that their child may be having, for the sake of your child, you research more than any one opinion, or angle.

This is a good starting point.

thinkprogress.org/transgender-children-desistance-a5caf61fc5c6/

No, a good starting point would be a neutral watch and wait approach. Like the Tavi and Portman recommends.

The real point about the youtube story is the lack of trust that women now have and how they are looking around with suspicion in a way they never did before.

Yes, but this point was made on the thread about workplace bullying of trans people too. The idea that women always have an excuse for behaviour that seems transphobic because it's all a result of having too much trans ideology rammed down our throats. I don't think it is a legitimate point- those many threads speculating over the appearance of the shooter were definitely transphobic and with an air of 'this is what trans people are like' about them. If you replaced the word trans with any other minority group, it would be seen as entirely wrong.

I don't know what thread or case you are referring to. Can you link?

"The idea that women always have an excuse for behaviour that seems transphobic because it's all a result of having too much trans ideology rammed down our throats."

All women? Generalising much?

I feel your post has an air of "this is what female people are like" ..... see what's going on here Susan? It works both ways.

It's so interesting to observe how hostile men who would like to be women act towards the sex they would like to be. It seems be a a difficult conundrum.

• how hostile some men