Ooh step back, India Willoughby is going to penetrate the Mumsnet debate

[ALittleBitOfButter]

Just saw on twitter that IW says will do radio interview about Mumsnet. Sorry can't link as on phone.

But legally and medically transitioned transwomen are women

No. Legally and medically transitioned transwomen are transwomen.

Women have been referred to as Mrs husband's first name/husband's last name on all kinds of documentation and mail over the years. It still happens from time to time even now. One of my children's schools still does it. My MIL still does it much to my chagrin.

Funnily nobody seems to give a crap about that sort of misgendering. It isn't even a reference to someone I used to be, it's total erasure of who I am and identifying me as a completely separate human being.

Maybe Stonewall could add me to their umbrella.

That simply has no basis in REALITY.

Yes it does Idontdowindows, it has a basis in psychiatric and legal REALITY. It is there in black and white.

I don't understand why Justine would go public and to the Times and on Talkradio defending our right to have this discussion and at the same time limit our language so that we can't actually have the discussion or even say that a male human is in fact a male human.

I wonder if this is mods being trigger happy? It would help if Justine could clarify her stance.

What you say reminds me of how people objected to the decriminalisation of homosex, or the legalisation of same sex marriage. Or the end of apartheid. Or women getting the vote. Or the burning of Catholics in the 17th century.

Women advocating for the preservation of women's rights is the same as objecting to women's rights?

You are in the Orwellian weeds now.

After looking through the original Spartacus thread I had put as many others did feel free to ban me
I have since namechanged

MargeH No. Legally and medically transitioned transwomen are transwomen.

So what is on a medically transitioned woman's freshly issued birth certificate? Is it F? As in female. Could be wrong but I don't think there is a legal category transwoman.

Calling someone transphobic, threatening them with sanctions etc.

When they point out misogynistic behaviour from transwomen is classic male chauvinist behaviour Looks to me like victimisation (section 27 of the Equality Act)

I’m sure mumsnet doesn’t intend to victimise posters here. But I do think that there’s a fundamental confusion about how the protections of the equality act work.

Victims of male aggression do not owe their oppressors politeness and to attempt to enforce said politeness is to align oneself with the aggressor and oppressor. And it’s against the law

it has a basis in psychiatric and legal REALITY

Neither trumps the biological reality of a sexually dimorphic species.

Supermatch - that's a rather terfy remark
it has a basis in psychiatric and legal reality

Supermatch: there's no definition of woman in UK law, the man is not redefined as a woman: instead he is given the right to be treated legally as a woman.

That includes the right to an F on his passport.

OvaHere Mon: Women have been referred to as Mrs husband's first name/husband's last name on all kinds of documentation and mail over the years. It still happens from time to time even now. One of my children's schools still does it. My MIL still does it much to my chagrin.
Funnily nobody seems to give a crap about that sort of misgendering.

You're right that is extremely annoying. Have you been equally vocal about that on Mumsnet? Written to your mp? Twittered 30 times a day, every day? Or do you not really give a crap about it?

SmurfOrTerff Supermatch - that's a rather terfy remark
it has a basis in psychiatric and legal reality

Que? Now you've lost me...

But legally and medically transitioned transwomen are women

In the same sense that some companies are legally people. It isn't possible for a biologically male person to actually become a woman. It's a polite fiction which exists to help those suffering from dysphoria. Which I have no problem with. Saying that because it's legally true it's objectively, factually true, though? No. And that's before we get started on the reality-denying nonsense that is self-ID.

I missed this post the first time around - , I think it deserves another reading.

twitter.com/search?q=talk%20radio&src=typd

I've always had a certain sympathy for Marie Christine von Reibnitz having to become Princess Michael of Kent.

The outdated convention re Mrs is that you are Mrs (Husband's initial) unless you are widowed when you revert to your own

However, I never refer to myself as Mrs. I always give my forename and am quite happy (even after 41 years of marriage) to be referred to as Ms.

Idontdowindows it has a basis in psychiatric and legal REALITY

Neither trumps the biological reality of a sexually dimorphic species.

What has that got to do with using the correct pronouns (as determined by law) and protecting women's spaces - including those women who are legally female, and medically transitioned in a way that gives them some of the same vulnerabilities as those originally born women? Ie. vulnerable to much stronger violent men?

You're right that is extremely annoying. Have you been equally vocal about that on Mumsnet? Written to your mp? Twittered 30 times a day, every day? Or do you not really give a crap about it?

Struck a nerve much?

We have had those discussions before on mumsnet and I do point it out to organisations or individuals (not always with success). I somehow think my MP would be less than interested in how my 75 year old MIL addresses my birthday cards.

Avoid pronouns - OK, we can do that. Avoid the word male? That's a different thing.

The proposed solution was to use "transwoman", which, do we really think that won't be complained about too? And some will feel that they can't use that word, because of what it implies about what being a woman means, and I don't feel comfortable telling them that they're wrong about that.

I somehow think my MP would be less than interested in how my 75 year old MIL addresses my birthday cards.

My auntie has addressed cards to me as Mrs His Name before, despite being asked not to and being told that I never changed my name and therefore Mrs His Name is actually DHs mother, not me. If I suggested that mumsnet/the government/Twitter ought to do something about that the response would be anything from bemusement to laughter.

(I also would not want to sic Twitter on my auntie, because despite what some here may think I am not that horrible a person.)

Do you mean this post suite?

twitter.com/damienjstarfish/status/985873603035049984?s=21

I don't want to be forced to tell lies, and I also don't want to be patronizing to people I view as my equals by telling them that I see them as women when I don't.

I'll concede to small, comforting lies told to soothe young children or the mentally unwell, but if I truly recognize a transwoman as my equal then I won't condescend to them.

It may be rude for me to say, "Sorry, but I sense your body and behaviors as male and not female," but it seems worse that I should coddle them like a child or someone too mentally fractured to bear the truth.

Super, men who transition as adults still have the same bone structure and muscles as other men.

It is not up to women to protect men from other men.

Your argument that individuals are legally required to call males females if they wish us to is bogus.

But yeah, to clarify, the response I got from MNHQ was that we are to use transwoman instead of male and that will allow us to make the point we're trying to make clearly enough because obviously transwomen are male. So, for those who're fine with that, you're golden.

My guess is that if implemented this will eventually attract complaints too, precisely because it will be obvious that it's being used to differentiate transwomen from women and that's what TRAs want us to stop doing.