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?

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

I only saw a couple of the threads briefly as they were deleted pretty quickly, but I saw no one there implying 'this is what trans people are like'. The speculation was over whether the shooter was indeed female, as she had masculine-seeming bone structure in some photos. As others have pointed out, this type of speculation is inevitable in a climate in which the media regularly obscures the sex of some male criminals, falsely attributing their crimes to women.

It was all somewhat unedifying, and HQ was right to delete the threads, but none of it was motivated by spitefulness. Rather, it was about women's (justified) fear that we were not being told the truth about the perpetrator of this crime. As a wise person said upthread:

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 also think it's worth asking yourself why it's so very important that women specifically come across as kind and sweet and definitely not too judgy or critical. Do you apply the same standards to men, Susan? If they come across as "transphobic" does it matter?

Fundamentally I think that if a person is put off a political viewpoint because they didn't like a few things that some people who have that viewpoint said then they probably didn't really agree with the viewpoint in the first place. Like when men claim that they were all for feminism until they tried to insist on this one specific thing and a feminist told them no, especially if it was a blunt no and not a gentle sugar coated if you wouldn't mind too much don't want to be a bother sort of no.

Has the question of what makes a human a 'woman' if a female reproductive system and XX are not required ever been answered?

phelina

The usual response is 'a woman is anyone who believes they are a woman' or something like that.

Completely circular and unsatisfactory

It was all somewhat unedifying, and HQ was right to delete the threads, but none of it was motivated by spitefulness. Rather, it was about women's (justified) fear that we were not being told the truth about the perpetrator of this crime.

Yes. The speculation was anger and fear and insecurity - it wasn't See? All trans are homicidal axe-wielding maniacs!. It was Oh my god, they're all going to gaslight us again, aren't they?

Agree that MN was right to delete but the posts weren't transphobic.

Has the question of what makes a human a 'woman' if a female reproductive system and XX are not required ever been answered?

Yes it has. Hope this helps.

If they come across as "transphobic" does it matter?

Since we are now in the position that defending single sex spaces for vulnerable women and the safeguarding of girl children is inherently transphobic, I genuinely couldn't give a single shiny shit if people who don't think those things are worthy of a robust defence decide that I, personally, am transphobic because I don't mince my words defending them. Have at it. I won't be losing any sleep.

That's a beautiful definition, terf. It almost brought a tear to my eye.

A TIM described 'women' to me as like the sunset - spectacular but difficult to put into words.

All women? Generalising much?

I think you misunderstood my point here. I am saying that whenever there is evidence of transphobia by women, e.g. a trans person being bullied at work by women, baseless speculation that a criminal is trans, there will be an MN poster saying that this is the result of repressing women and forcing the trans ideology down their throat. I never said all women, you said that, and I am not sure how else to make my point. I am keen to ensure that certain spaces are kept natal women only for safety reasons and that AWSs remain for natal women, but that is about the extent of it.

A TIM described 'women' to me as like the sunset - spectacular but difficult to put into words

You mean sometimes dark and stormy, sometimes red?

@SusanBunch
That is exactly it, it's about taking some problematic trans people, labelling them trans activists, and saying that this individual is representative of 10's of millions of people worldwide.
It's very blatant student-level propaganda. Theres a plethora of anti trans propaganda sites that use this tactic of using individuals to paint a class of people a certain way, peak trans, terfisaslur, etc etc
Its exactly the same tactics that racists, anti lgbt, anti-immigration groups have used throughout history to stoke fear and dehumanize a class of people.

You mean sometimes dark and stormy, sometimes red?

They shouldn't be looked at with the naked eye?

But similarly, crisp, we wouldn't want women to be stifled because NAMALT. Women need to be able to speak freely about the abuse they face, the issues they have and patterns of behaviour they see.

Otherwise misogyny is never going to eradicated.

That is exactly it, it's about taking some problematic trans people, labelling them trans activists, and saying that this individual is representative of 10's of millions of people worldwide.

Unfortunately problematic trans people are being invited to be advisors to the Labour Party, and appear on Question Time.

@Lost art
No one is trying to stifle women or naming abuses, or 'patterns of behaviour'

But we have all seen how transphobes use the 'swedish study' to claim trans women have the same criminality as males, when the actual study proves the opposite. The author of the study is clear on this.
For a refresher... two cohort groups were studied and the 1972-1989 cohort group found raised levels of criminality committed by trans women compared to cis women. The raised criminality was mostly due to poverty and were petty crime etc Transphobes misrepresent this as saying trans women were committing the same crimes as males and were a rape or sexual assault threat, when the study said no such thing.

And even more so, the later cohort study 1989-2003 found there was NO such raised levels compared to cis women!

So when people claim there are patterns of behaviour, and want to eradicate misogyny, sexual abuse and rape etc, confusing the whole issue in an attempt to smear trans women, and implicitly stating trans women behave the same as cis males, is counter-productive to that cause.

Meanwhile there is at least one double rapist in a women's prison and William Jaggs is being released; but do crack on with how women wanting to retain our existing rights are actually the problem.

I didnt see the youtube threads

But i agree completely with what donkey has just said

I never said all women, you said that, and I am not sure how else to make my point

I doesn't matter. You were doing the same thing you accuse others of.

Read Donkey's post.

So I just have to be cool with people speculating on whether someone is trans just because they shot someone (no other evidence) and that someone thinks it’s okay to bully someone at work? I am not doing the same thing as what I am accusing others of- I am not saying all MN users are transphobic at all. I am saying that when I see people excusing what is blatant transphobia it makes me feel uncomfortable and makes me wonder whether this is the right way forward.

You are extrapolating from a minority of people, just as you accuse them of doing.

@crispbuttyfan why would ordinary women who until recently were very supportive of trans people want to stoke fear of trans people? What do you think explains this phenomena you are describing?

crispbuttyfan

I don't think you've got that right about the Swedish study. Was it Crispin thingy who refuted it?

It's quite true the crime wasn't specified. They didn't categorise the crime. Because it was just 'crime'.

In terms of the two cohorts, the second cohort included transmen, so women. Any conclusion drawn cannot be used to specify crime patterns of men identifying as women, one way, or the other.

But surveys of prison inmates certainly give you statistics about the likelihood of transwomen following male crime patterns.

The two reports done, both say the same thing. One here and one in California. That transwomen commit crime at the same rate, actually slightly higher, then natal men. Including sexual offences.

Why wouldn't they? Identifying is the opposite sex doesn't make you the opposite sex!

You only have to look at the aggression coming from trans-activists.

If people keep refuting this, I wish they would show me some evidence that men suddenly taken all the attributes of women purely by identifying as one.

I don't think anyone is saying that gender dysphoria is an indication of a crime pattern. Far from it. Just that it doesn't preclude it.

The murder and attempted rapist, Karen Jones actually cited their gender dysphoria as a reason for their attempted rape.

And a cross dressing fetish is the highest, most prevalent paraphilia of all male convicts.

Does being a criminal make you want to cross dress, or does cross dressing increase your chances of committing crime?

@SusanBunch is the fact that some trans people are bullied (bullying is always wrong, of course) and that there was some speculation over the natal sex of a shooter the reason you are not taking massive amounts of evidence of threats of violence, gaslighting and silencing tactics seriously?

@Italian, what stokes it is a core of transphobia and propaganda.

Which doesn't just effect trans women, it affects cis women too.
When transphobes stoke a moral panic, and launch such propaganda sites, it stokes fear in women who are not yet familar with trans people, specifically trans women.
It makes women who are survivors of assault fearful that either
a: bearded men are now starting to use the womens facilities, swinging their bits about
b: because of deliberately misinterpreting studies such as the swedish one I mentioned above, it is implied trans women will act and pose the same threats of men, and are likely to be sexual deviants...

When Target in the US announced a public policy to allow trans people to use the facilities that aligned with their identity, there was quite a backlash from the US transphobes.
I got involved in reading the posts on the facebook pages, there was a woman who was a survivor and was particularly upset at these new rules. She also worked with refuge's and counseled other survivors.
I tried to allay her fears, and explained what the actual policies meant, and she understood, I have known her for over two years and we are good friends, but I have seen first hand, the fears uninformed women have pushed upon them by a deceitful transphobic core group of anti-trans activists who run these propaganda sites and groups.