@MNHQ Another one in your midst (Title edited by MNHQ)

[AssignedPuuurfectAtBirth]

www.huckmagazine.com/perspectives/opinion-perspectives/mumsnet-transphobia-online/

To believe this subject shouldn't be discussed on MN you also have to believe that feminists shouldn't talk about gender and a website aimed at mothers should 't be troubled with the wider world. MN has some very odd interns.

Don't they. Their internalised misogyny is showing. (Not MN's!)

(good point - the article now I've read all of it rather than that paragraph was talking about the feminism board and of course the feminism board can discuss whatever it likes thankfully just as anyone could put up a thread men are superior to women or men do more housework than women or whatever else.)

It continues to be completely astounding that Woman's Hour continues to avoid this massive elephant in the room. Continually.

"Yeah, I'm like totally going to get an internship at mumsnet, because it's like really sweet that all these women still think that they need to be defined by being mothers and have to talk about prams and stuff, but I think I can shake it up a bit and show them that they don't have to be obsessed with like biology and they have like so many opportunities, and maybe if they wouldn't keep going on and on about all that icky stuff like breastfeeding people would take them seriously.

It's like I was talking to my mentor, and he said that men don't do that. You know he's lovely. He's like totally supportive of his wife's decision to stay at home, but in a totally post modern way. I mean she likes ironing!"

mm, that made me laugh.

:)

yes Pratchet this is very noticeable...I suspect the two presenters are at odds over the issue. But not to discuss it all now seems an extraordinary omission....certainly the elephant in the room.

It's very odd. Are they afraid?

I've worked out why MN annoys them so much. We're such a disparate bunch (so contradict the lie than only a certain type of person is concerned about the erosion of women's rights) and as individuals we can't be pressured by money either by the promise of it or the withdrawal of it.

Of course, they hope MNHQ can be impacted by the fear of losing finance from advertisers.

But advertisers must be aware that according to the Harvard Business Review, globally women represent a growth market bigger than China and India combined. Women also make the decision in the purchases of 94% of home furnishings…92% of vacations…91% of homes… 60% of automobiles…51% of consumer electronics. We're a demographic that companies should be wary of isolating.

Boycotting is the silent protest with which we can all engage, without making it public. I'm sure they know this.

Woman's Hour episode last Friday is worth listening to (if missed) as it focuses on impact of social media & misogyny in two segments,

'Manosphere'
"This week Alek Minassian was arrested and accused of killing 10 people in Toronto when he drove his van into them. Just before the attack, he posted praise on social media for the 'incel rebellion' - an online community of men united by their inability to convince women to have sex with them. The incel rebellion is just one of a number of men's rights groups that have been accused of vulgar sexism, under the umbrella collective of the 'manosphere'. We hear from Mike Wendling an assistant editor at BBC Trending, and Ruby Lott-Lavigna an online journalist who's spent time undercover exploring the manosphere and the people behind it."

'Take back ConTroll'
"We've brought together four women who've been abused and trolled online to following their journey to Take Back ConTROLL. We partnered them with the advertising agency Mother, to see if they could help them reclaim their identity online. We will reveal on Monday what they've come up with . Today we hear Kelly's story. In January 2017 she received a Facebook message from a stranger containing intimate photos of herself. She reported the crime and her ex-partner was found guilty of sharing the sexually explicit images."
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09zt3qq

especially in relation to Catherine Bennett's article at the weekend:
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/29/violent-misogyny-not-confined-to-internet-incels

Thanks Rowan 👍👍👍

@SophoclesTheFox

It wasn't about trans people being more likely to commit suicide. It was basic causation of being trans.

Is it homophobic to say you've often wondered if there's a correlation between sexual abuse and being homosexual?

She can't have done much reading while she was here if that's the best she's got.

I do think we need to make sure people aren't censored by a simple accuation of XYZphobic. I wouldn't mind men coming on here and saying they are superior to women for example. I would much rather there were open debate than people shut discussions down because something is XYZ phobic. It should all be up for debate - all topics.

I agree that we all have such different views on here it is hard to stop us expressing all our very different views. It is one of the strengths of the site and long may it continue.

Is it homophobic to say you've often wondered if there's a correlation between sexual abuse and being homosexual?

I've never said such a thing, I've never seen anyone on this board say such a thing, and I don't believe there's a correlation. Hope this clears that up.

On whether it's transphobic to raise the question of links between gender identity issues and abuse, here's a link to a reddit thread where transgender people discuss if their transgenderism is related to their sexual abuse. here's another. Summary: (some) transgender people wonder about this and make the link in themselves.

I do hope you have some time in your schedule to scold them for their awful transphobia, too.

Its like merrymouse was actually there

@SophoclesTheFox

You didn't clear it up as you didn't answer the pretty straightforward question.

vitara You couldn't be any more transparent if you were made of cellophane.

Over 50% of FTMs in studies of childhood transitioners are victims of child sexual abuse. Nearly half of MTF childhood transitioners. Two choices: sexual predators can magically detect trans people before they ever come out, and prefer them sexually to all non-trans children. Or, perhaps transitioning is sometimes a reaction to abuse. The correlation is not disputed by any study. Causation is. If you'd like to make the case for sexual predators simply preferring trans children, please feel free to do so.

@thebewilderness

How is that not a good thing?

@WombOfOnesOwn

I'll take your stats at face value.

There's a third cause which my education (training) would lead me to hypothesise and that is sexual predators look for weakness and vulnerability. That could be from the abused being isolated from social groups due to their 'unusualness' or because their confusion over their identity (sexual, gender or whatever).

Interestingly, there is a possitive correlation between child abuse and homosexuality. I found this very quickly;

Epidemiological studies find a positive association between childhood maltreatment and same-sex sexuality in adulthood, with lesbians and gay men reporting 1.6 to 4 times greater prevalence of sexual and physical abuse than heterosexuals

So, is it offensive to think there could be a casual link between the abuse and homosexuality?

Is it offensive to think there could be a casual link between the abuse and transexuality?

Are you suggesting the first? Is the second offensive?

FWIW, I hope I'm being transparent and these are genuine questions.

That's also a plausible hypothesis, Vitara - so we now have three hypotheses on the table. The question is, do we allow someone to do the research, or do we say anymore questioning a child's self-declaration is being transphobic? Personally I favour allowing people to do the research.

Also, if your hypothesis is right, we should be very worried about some of the erosions to safeguarding procedures in schools being proposed by TRAs. I think it was Datun made the point on another thread that setting up guidelines which say teachers mustn't disclose trans status to anyone including parents creates a dangerous climate where child abuse can flourish. A child worrying about their gender identity confides in a trusted adult, who unbeknownst to anyone, is a child abuser (let us assume, using the language of TRAs, s "cis het male" abuser, which is the statistically likely profile), and this abuser now has an excuse to say "let's have this as our little secret" - a classic abusers' technique now enshrined in guidelines on how to deal with children with confusion over their gender identity under the guise of "affirmation only".

He mosexual people also argue between themselves about choice.

The entire question is a detainment. Are people homosexual? Yes. Fact. Not harmful to self or others. End.

Is it possible to be born in the wrong body? No. Is it harmful to behave as if this were true? Yes. End.

Wasveey generous with my spelling mistakes there.

@FermatsTheorem

It isn't about allowing the research, it's about getting the funding and finding regular and intelligent people who want to do the research as well as deciding if the research is worthwhile.

Does it matter if someone is gay because they were abused but they're in love and happy with a same sex partner? Would the research be used by American Christian camps to 'straighten the gays' and prove it's choice? I don't care if someone's gay or trans because they're born that way or if life experiences made them that way. If they're happy with their current situation then anything else is academic. Does it matter if a different race is more or less intelligent or more adept at a certain skill? I have a feeling that only racists are interested in trends like these. The rest of us are happy with treating individuals as individuals. These questions are only of scientific interest in very specific circumstances and the scientific community with it's Liberal bent have no interest in researching.

Datun made a trite point made by anti-homosexual protesters years ago. Let them into schools and they abuse. They'll use power and ensure it stays a secret etc. Teachers also mustn't disclose 'gay status' (using your term) and this can equally be abused. If a child tells us they're gay, we don't question them or out them. We support them. In theory we could use this knowledge to abuse them but it's nonsense to think that the 'trans agenda' are making schools dangerous.

There's a thread somewhere on MN (AIBU?) where someone wants a book explaining trans to children removed from the library. If so then it creates this potential issue you mention where the power of the secret can be leveraged.

@Pratchet

"[homosexuals] Not harmful to self or others"

Well. Whenever I accidentally read about pornification there are comments about girls all thinking bum stuff is normal and expected. If it's damaging to them, it's damaging to gay men.

I don't think that homosexuals damage others but not long ago they were seen as perverts who couldn't be trusted in changing rooms (ring any bells?)

"Is it possible to be born in the wrong body?"

That depends on how you define wrong. If you believe that gender is mostly innate and that men and women tend to have different brains (physically isn't up for debate, chemically isn't up for debate, the way they work isn't up for debate, the fact that these differences exist before birth isn't up for debate) then of course it is. If you're ideologically opposed to the notion of sex-based differences in the genders due to evolution then a) you shouldn't be a scientist b) you think it's impossible.

How is it harmful to behave as though gender can only be nurture?

In my reply, I've mentioned the parallels between homosexuality and trans people. I think there are massive correlations in homophobia from a few decades ago and transphobia at the moment and as always, those with arguments at the extreme are morons.