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.

On the forum where JC Posts the trans people themselves are arguing over the TRA. Here What I see as old school transsexuals are as concerned as we are in some respects. JC I am also going to take this opportunity to apologise to you. When I saw your first posts and then that you posted on Angels I was sceptical to say the least, we had just had an influx of 'ploppers' and then you appeared. However, you've shown yourself to be very reasonable and not a TRA or MRA. I will confess, I still don't think you fully understand why woman are so worried, I do think you're trying though.

This issue is complicated and when transwoman themselves can't agree what's what, how the hell are we to show the wider world who have the power to enforce us to share our spaces?

@SupermatchGame

You are having the wrong argument here. We are challenging the law because it was intentionally designed to demobilise the word sex. In its original intentions it was a desperately important measure to protect the many wonderful transsexuals we all know and love, despite your assumption we are all clueless bigots.
www.socresonline.org.uk/12/1/whittle.html
The umbrella has gotten larger and larger. Check out the Stonewall descriptions, fluidity will wreck access for Muslim women, it's reducing women to non men, its making the word female mean male and female and the word male mean female and male for any one including the malicious and the insincere. There is a subtlety to this that is going right over your head in your bludgeoning us with what we already know. We have all studied this at length and yet you choose to talk to us at a level of superficiality that rightly invites superficiality back.

There is more to this than you understand. You have shown that here.

Research this properly and come back and you might be taken seriously.
fairplayforwomen.com/womans-place-uk/.

Thankyou, Spontaneous. I have not ventured back on Angels in a while as I think my views on self ID and Munsnet are antagonistic for some there. And that's fine. I have no desire to make things worse.

And some there feel as I do. Self ID is having a polarising effect in many places.

But if it furthers an open debate and puts it on track of not being abusive or divisive then I am happy as that is what we need.

alittle you asked Could someone please kindly tl;dr for me the mn fwr position on trans men and women

This is a forum for individuals to chat, debate, discuss. If there are 12 million women on MN, there'll probably be at least that many different opinions! There is no MN FWR position. It's not a hive mind.

It's also a huge subject for one individual to have "an" opinion on.

Your question is like asking "what is the AIBU board's opinion on mother in laws?"

Long before Mumsnet or the internet even existed, we created a place where people’s views could be heard and discussed, where opinions could be aired and compared. We even employed a group of people to ensure that such opinions would be raised and considered. The place is called Parliament and the people are called MPs. As a result of writing about this issue here over the last few months, I have come to know that quite a few of those MPs, from all parties, think that the sorts of questions the Mumsnetters are asking about gender are quite reasonable and should be answered. But precious few of those MPs will say so in public. They are not willing to do what Justine Roberts has done and say openly that there is nothing transphobic about debating gender and sex, even if some people don’t like some of the things that are said in that debate, because – and this cannot be said enough – there is no right not to be offended.

Justine Roberts has shown she has the balls to stand up for free speech and sensible political debate. The time is coming for MPs to show some courage and do the same.
blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/if-mumsnet-can-stand-up-for-free-speech-why-cant-mps/

I have not ventured back on Angels in a while as I think my views on self ID and Munsnet are antagonistic for some there.

Fess up Jaycee you know you don't get calibre like MN anywhere else on the Internet and you cba with Angels .

Yes JC, It's a shame that Kay M and Nikki Onandoff don't come over here I suspect it might be a more conducive atmosphere.

I think we are all a bit defensive about the ways in which Mumsnet has been defamed by those who hope to prevent women from discussing women's rights.
There are going to be more trolls goading us the way this one is.
Reporting without response is likely the best call. Hard to do because failure to object is viewed as acquiescence.

But please can we ask them to do the pre work. Honestly, just showing up and shouting Equality act/misgendering and TRA bingo is really inconsiderate in a complicated world.

SupermatchGame if you go to the Lisa Muggeridge thread you will find a fantastic essay (written to India Willoughby) which articulates perfectly why transwomen are not women, and why women have a problem with TRAs.

disclaimer- I do fully appreciate that the majority of transwomen who post on mn are not TRAs so I’m not equating that all transwomen must be TRAs, I may start using fauxtrans to refer to TRA transgender individuals as they do not represent transwomen anymore than they represent women. In my opinion.

thebewilderness Women have had to put up with it since time immemorial and always will I suspect. This is nothing new. Best to not engage and move on for MN sake who really are taking the heat by allowing us this space.

We do need to engage. One at a time. I take the piss when they are so one track because they are so one track but we have so many amazing resources to direct people to, we should do that more.

I resort to humour when people get pompous, and that person had the temerity to call bewilderness pompous which just dialed up the femihumour to 11 for me.

Spontaneous, I agree.

RunRabbit, I do get that but can't deny that there is always a majority view, which I thought was that self-id is the biggest threat facing women in UK at the moment. But that seems to have changed now.

I really really really want to understand super's logic and beliefs. I'm not getting it though.

Wrong side of history surely needs something more than a couple of tenuous analogies?

I have assumed that super is a he. Mainly because that long post had my "mansplaining" alarm ringing extra loud. Maybe he's a she. Sorry for misgendering based on my internalised gender stereotypes if you aren't a man super

Run

I am guilty of the same if so.

What do you think has changed aubergine?

I admit I'm tired and grumpy but fuck sake, you would need the second coming to put up with that logic pit.

No wonder he believes men can abracadabra into women though - it results from a serious deficit in the capacity to reason

Course it's a he.

Out of interest has IW ever come on the threads before - openly?

I wonder what you have to do to get the last post in the thread deleted