Slide show on "How to Deal with TERFs"

[OlennasWimple]

Vimeo file embedded in this Twitter post: twitter.com/Gay4Plants/status/984358165075628032

Warning: do not watch if you are prone to high blood pressure, as it will send it rocketing

I'm not sure what's the worst bit of it TBH: the likening of TERFs to fascists, the fact that this was used for training at the NUS conference, the appalling spelling and grammar, or the downright lies it contains.

Yes, because a) they had or have a penis and b) they have benefitted from a life of male conditioning and supremacy within a patriarchal society. You can tell this by the way so many identify as women yet still tell women how to argue, think and what women 'really' feel.
So they are men, despite the feelz.

^^ this in spades

I don't think you really appreciate what it's like to live as a trans woman - the threats of street harassment
Which you have only had since you put on a dress, not since you were 10, and if it becomes physical you have the strength to fight back.

the rejection, the inability to even use the bathroom or have someone you call you by your name?

Yep all common things to happen to women and girls, have look at threads on here where relatives address birthday cards to Mrs Husband's name

The idea that it's simple or easy to ID as a woman to claim positive discrimination is just a lie, and a mean and nasty one at that because it ignores how much these women struggle to be recognised as themselves.

Positive discrimination? Pray tell me where?

The idea that trans women are opportunists trying to take opportunities from cis women is also totally naive

Well you are not taking anything from men are you? And as for the use of 'cis' that is highly offensive and quite sexist, I am a woman, that is how I am legally defined, socially accepted and how I identify. It also links me to women who have fought for my rights, including incarceration, torture and death.

It links me to women in other places who are fighting for rights for women. Malala Yousafzai took a bullet in the head for female education, 12 year olds in Asian countries are sold into prostitution, in Pakistan girls are married to older men and suffer dreadfully through being forced to carry and give birth.

When has a trans woman ever done that for me, for any woman or even for trans women?

It's quite clear you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to how women join these panels etc.

It's quite clear you have no idea why these spaces for women have been carved out of necessity.

Finally, than you for mansplaining.

Hello unassumingwolf

1. No. Men insisting on eroding womens boundaries is the epitome of patriarchy. women have not invited this. All of the reasons we want and need women only spaces and services still exist. None of the problems have been dealt with or removed.

2. Liberal feminism is about equality, we have not achieved equality and the chance is now slipping away.
   Radical feminism states that if society is harmful then we can change the underlying structure to make it fit for humans. Radical feminism isnt about equality, it advocates for autonomy for women. and part of that is being able to name ourselves.
   If we wanted equality we'd be advocating for 2 men a week murdered by women in domestic violence disputes, or equal numbers of men being raped, or men being told that sex work is just work.

3. Feminists advocate for women's rights. Why is it so easy for society to ignore women's rights and safety? There is an underlying, structural inequality.
   We dont have to take on board every single group and issue. It would divert our resources too much to do that.

Trans people are welcome to fight for a third space or service, and we can support that.

4. Trans people should ask for their own rights, spaces and services, and not take them away from women. Men can move over, why should women lose even more?

1. No.
2. Yes. And TRA ideology reinforces gender stereotypes horribly - a boy who likes playing with dolls is just a boy. He is not the opposite sex
3. You’d think wouldn’t you? And historically it’s worked like that. But self ID is a zero sum game, and they are trying to actively remove women’s protections rather than work towards the common goal of reducing Male violence.
4. No. Women’s lists are for women. I’m sure no one would have an issue with a trans proporational allocation but this cannot come out of the women’s ‘budget’

The common theme here is that TWs are saying that they need access to female spaces because they are worried about Male violence. Well so are women, and TWs have exactly the same pattern of offending as men

1. No. They are colonising feminism with patriarchal privilege.

2. No. Feminism is about the liberation of women, not equality for marginalised groups who aren't women.

3. No. Feminism shares this common goal with GNC women - eg lesbians and trans-identified females.

4. No. Males should include affirmative action places on their own lists for GNC males.

BTW - this thread is about a slide show, so your post was a bit derailing. Hope my answers were of interest, but it would be better if we kept to topic. Welcome to Mumsnet!

Thank you UpstartCrow

Your points make sense to me

Sigh pressed send to soon.

No one has an issue with trans people being safe, having rights and being protected from discrimination.
This cannot happen at the EXPENSE of women and girls though.

That’s about it.

Thanks for your responses! Sorry if I swung the conversation away from the initial point of the thread!

This is OT, but I grind my teeth every time I see a poster I normally agree with, @bewilderness, liken ‘trans women are women’ to transubstantiation as ‘a belief nobody actually believes’.

I believe in transubstantiation: at the Eucharist the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ, hidden under the forms of bread and wine. I know lots of people who also believe this. It’s standard among Roman Catholics, Catholic Anglicans, and Eastern Orthodox Christians, who together make up a huge proportion, possibly the majority, of Christians worldwide.

I’m not asking anyone here to agree with me on this, just that other people’s beliefs are reported accurately.

Men still can’t become women, though

1) If trans women no longer identify as a man isn't that a powerful message for feminism (they have essentially have essentially relinquished their patriarchal power and privilege) ?

They do not relinquish patriarchal power and privilege. This is bestowed and enjoyed on a class basis by a patriarchal society and cannot be opted out of or into by an individual.

2) As feminism is about equality - does reinforcing gender stereotypes about men and women act to our detriment? The gender system oppresses us all?

Feminism is about liberation of women. Also some men would have some benefit from not being expected to conform to stereotypes of masculinity, men overwhelming benefit from gender oppression. Trans ideology reinforces gender stereotypes by saying gender non-conforming individuals are actually members of the opposite sex.

3) As feminists are a group in society that have to fight for their voices to be heard, do we not share a common cause with transwomen in representing their rights?

Feminism is for the liberation of women. We might share some limited common cause with some other marginalised groups but we should not feel we need to take care of the problems of other groups. This is part of the emotional labour demanded of women in a patriarchal society. It's difficult to resist the socialisation to take care of other people but women need to be able to focus on women's rights.

4) If there is an issue with trans women taking the spaces of cis women in women only panels or something, could we not make them proportionately representative of the population? For example on a panel of 10 women, having one spot for a transwoman and 9 for women. would this make things better?

If gender non-conforming men need to have their representation among other men increased, they should organise this separately from women. This is where the Green Party's "non-men" grouping comes from (previously, the women's group).

1) If trans women no longer identify as a man isn't that a powerful message for feminism (they have essentially have essentially relinquished their patriarchal power and privilege) ?

That's not the way privilege works. I could renounce my university education, I could go and live in a sink estate but I would still retain my privilege. I would still be listened to and taken seriously as someone who talks right proper and has a bit of higher education. Others would still treat me better than my working class neighbours in the estate.

2) As feminism is about equality - does reinforcing gender stereotypes about men and women act to our detriment? The gender system oppresses us all?

Transgenderism reinforces stereotypes about men and women. They believe in sexed brains, that all women are somehow 'programmed' to behave and think in the same ways. Feminists say that women are adult human females, and that our reproductive capacity has nothing to do with our personality and interests. You can be a man who enjoys dresses, there's nothing wrong with that.

3) As feminists are a group in society that have to fight for their voices to be heard, do we not share a common cause with transwomen in representing their rights?

Their rights are sometimes in competition with our own. Whose rights should be represent then? For example, defining woman based on 'brain sex' will be detrimental for women but beneficial for transwomen. Employers could argue that sacking a woman during pregnancy isn't sex discrimination because men can get pregnant too.

4) If there is an issue with trans women taking the spaces of cis women in women only panels or something, could we not make them proportionately representative of the population? For example on a panel of 10 women, having one spot for a transwoman and 9 for women. would this make things better?

Transwomen don't make up 10% of the population.

RE Unassuming Wolf's questions, multiple people have already answered, but to add to those...

On 4, even if we were to agree to this in principle (and I'd go for no), do you actually believe that transwomen are 10% of the population? Because that's off by several orders of magnitude. 0.1% would be an extremely generous estimate. So, given that, why would you suggest that that particular group be massively overepresented politically?

Hi unassumingwolf

I wanted to answer earlier but couldn't because I was at work. So here goes.

1) If trans women no longer identify as a man isn't that a powerful message for feminism (they have essentially have essentially relinquished their patriarchal power and privilege) ?

No. Witness the way some males who identify as female have behaved - presuming to speak for women, tell women what they're allowed to think, taking women's allocated places in politics and sport etc. Now think of how many transmen there are bullying and usurping men. You'll find that TIFs are far less prominent than TIMs. The patriarchy is still very much at play.

2) As feminism is about equality - does reinforcing gender stereotypes about men and women act to our detriment? The gender system oppresses us all?

Trans ideology is all about reinforcing gender stereotypes.

TRAs argue that 'woman' has historically been defined by a combination of biological and social elements. That is true to a point. But if a male is viewed as a woman, that can only be the 'social' definition of a woman, not the biological one. That means it's bolstering certain social stereotypes about what a woman is - reinforcing gender.

3) As feminists are a group in society that have to fight for their voices to be heard, do we not share a common cause with transwomen in representing their rights?

Most rights women are fighting for are ultimately rooted in biology, e.g. access to abortion, maternity leave, freedom from FGM, sexual exploitation etc. In some cases TRA demands conflict with women's right to safety, privacy, and representation.

4) If there is an issue with trans women taking the spaces of cis women in women only panels or something, could we not make them proportionately representative of the population? For example on a panel of 10 women, having one spot for a transwoman and 9 for women. would this make things better?

I suspect people with genuine sexual dysphoria are far rarer than that. The trans 'umbrella' has been extended to cover transvestites, fetishists and other kinds of gender non-conformity. No, I wouldn't be happy with AGPs making up 10% of the places allocated for women. They are not women.

The idea behind women's panels, short lists etc is to overcome a lifetime of discrimination. So imagine if a very highly paid CEO who transitioned in his forties (naming no names) took one of those slots? Would that be fair?

This is OT, but I grind my teeth every time I see a poster I normally agree with, @bewilderness, liken ‘trans women are women’ to transubstantiation as ‘a belief nobody actually believes’.

Thanks for that. It never occurred to me that people actually believed they were eating human flesh and blood rather than a symbol when they took communion.
I will never say it is a belief no one believes again.

Thanks bewilderness. It’s not quite as gross as it sounds, because we believe that it’s hidden under the form of bread and wine, but yes, many of us do believe that.

End of derail!

Oops username fail! That was me.

SecretPotplant

Important to be aware that the concerns raised on this thread about the presentation at NUS Women's 18 'How to Deal with TERFS' prompted EH's publication of data collected over the 6 month internship.
Also important to be aware of possible links to activism associated with conviction of T. Wolf for assault at Speaker's Corner.
blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/if-mumsnet-can-stand-up-for-free-speech-why-cant-mps/

Dear MNHQ

I'm very grateful for the commitment to free speech you've publicly taken, and for Justine's courage this week.

A former disgruntled employee of MN is writing on Twitter about the 'transphobia' of MN staff, and calling you TERFs. She is showing a great deal of bias and intolerance towards women with feminist views, this may well be her honest opinion, which is no big deal I suppose, since she is no longer an employee.

At least, it isn't an issue until she calls a shout out to her
'friends who still work at MN' to report and take down posts by 'transphobic scum', by which she appears to be referring to any poster objecting to being called TERF by her friend.

Regardless of the personal views of the MNHQ staff, who should be as free to hold their own views as I am mine, I am disturbed that there may be a small contingent of employees who are invested in unfair moderation and will not be applying fair-handed principles, at least if the claims of this ex-employee are credible.

Can you please give posters some reassurance that the difficult job of fair-handed moderation isn't being abused by the 'friends' of ex-employees who are 'reporting it all' and taking down posts because any gender criticism means the poster is 'transphobic scum'?

Thank you.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3225517-The-MNHQ-Moderation-team
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3226060-The-MNHQ-Moderation-Team-Thread-2

R0wantrees - thanks for reminding us that this was the thread that prompted EH's clusterfuck.

I've re-read the thread, my OP and the slideshow that prompted it, as I feel slightly responsible for setting in train the series of unfortunate events. I wanted to check that I wasn't being unfair, that I wasn't inadvertently giving credence to the "all MNers are a bunch of transphobic scum" lie.

I have to say that I still stand by the thread, and on re-reading the slides I'm even more outraged by it. Delete the word "Terf" and replace it with any other word and there's no way that such a presentation would be deemed acceptable in anything other than backroom pubs and the murky bits of the dark web. Prompting discussions about how awful Terfs are? Likening them to fascists? Really?

It's a shame that in the furore about the data theft, the fact that the NUS in 2018 is condoning this sort of bile has got lost.

EH had already collected MN data during her internship and, from reading her now deleted blog she was angered by the Times article. The focus really needs to be less on individuals but on how wide-spread such an ideology/activism has become. The slide show is appalling, the 'recommended reading' even more so since it (& similar docs) have clearly being absorbed / believed and used widely as justification for a great deal of harm.
'a really good guide that outlines common TERF arguments"
theterfs.com

have you all seen EH's retracted apology? astounding.

@Flomper retracted?

Where did she retract it?

sorry, here. I presume this was after she apologised? I didn't see the apology on here though so it could have been earlier? Stull, bit v sincere.
twitter.com/ValerianaOlmos/status/987025978722570240?s=19

not very sincere.

Which thread was the supposed apology on? I lost track.

No Flomper, the chronology is wrong

that post from EH was prior to her posting the screenshots. April 15th.
That post - (it was my screengrab there) - was her announcing her intent to 'do what you gotta do'

And then she did.