Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Transphobia or truths?

999 replies

TwittleBee · 11/05/2018 22:08

Hi there!

First, apologise if this has been really over discussed already.

I'm pretty new to the whole self ID and trans issues and pretty shocked to discover I'm probably classed as a "Radical" feminist.

How comes it's seen as transphobia when women talk about women's rights or sex or gender?

Perhaps I'm being naive, but I haven't seen anything i would class as transphobic on MN yet? Just a lot of feminists discussing their concerns for women and girls' rights?

Looking for answers so I can see both points of view but also so I can attempt to understand what is going on here.

Thanks x

OP posts:
Thread gallery
16
Opheliah · 12/05/2018 10:05

And a not Freudian slip somewhere in the last paragraph but I think you get the drift.

FlippinFumin · 12/05/2018 10:14

Thank you Opheliah, thank you for the information.

MrGHardy · 12/05/2018 10:18

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

crispbuttyfan · 12/05/2018 11:14

Isn't it amazing how a site accused of being transphobic and an echo chamber for misinformation and conspiratorial nonsense, refutes it and endlessly provides misinformation, and conspiratorial nonsense?

I would say, if a site is racist, they would deny it and use the same diversionary tactics, if a site was homophobic, they would deny it and use diversionary tactics, if a site was accused of being misogynistic they would deny it and use diversionary tactics...

Can anyone see a pattern here?

Ereshkigal · 12/05/2018 11:17

if a site was accused of being misogynistic they would deny it and use diversionary tactics.

Yes. Like all your TRA friends do. All the time. Mumsnet is pro-women and women's rights. Sorry if that offends.

ToeToToe · 12/05/2018 11:28

crispbuttyfan - No.

We are being asked - no, it is being demanded of us - to change our language, change the definition of the word 'woman' - even when it defies biological reality - and to accept 'gender identity' - just because someone says so.

That is a belief system - an ideology - akin to religion - only there are no blasphemy laws for me to fall foul of these days. Nobody is demanding that I accept "God is real". However certain transactivists are demanding that I accept that "a woman can have a penis" or whatever. I'm not doing it. I don't believe in this new religion.

crispbuttyfan · 12/05/2018 11:40

and so it continues.....

Ereshkigal · 12/05/2018 11:42

And round and round we go.

ToeToToe · 12/05/2018 11:50

We can go round and round, and round and round - but you cannot make people believe.

LangCleg · 12/05/2018 11:50

Being pro-woman is not a diversionary tactic. It's being pro-woman.

Trousersdontmakemeaman · 12/05/2018 12:29

Can anyone see a pattern here?

I am not refuting the accusations of transphobia, I couldn't care less about them, and it seems most people here think the same, it's a nonsense.

The twitter feed supposedly tracking mumsnet transphobia is a joke.

You have made the decision that anyone using the word woman or man about women and men are transphobic, which is frankly beyond parody, so why should anyone really care what you think, or what your silly word means anymore?

ToeToToe · 12/05/2018 12:37

It seems the "mumsnetreport" twitter account has gone too - been banned, I think. It was madness of MNHQ to ever give that account any credence at all - allowing their site to be policed by people who aren't even MN members. They seem to be less heavy on the delete button now.

This saying everything is 'transphobic' really has gone too far - hopefully some good sense is prevailing, even on twitter.

Original poster
TwittleBee · 12/05/2018 13:11

Thank you everyone

So basically transphobic accusations towards feminist happen because feminists refuse to let the progress they've made so far towards equality slide back into gendered steroetypes which causes transactivists to throw a tantrum and kick the word transphobic around?

OP posts:
natgt · 12/05/2018 13:38

I do not think talking about women's issues such as periods etc is transphobic (obviously) but to claim there is no transphobia here is disingenuous. Whenever this is stated it's shut down with "go on! Show us the transphobic comments ! So From recent memory I have reported the following to mnhq :

  1. Someone asking how long it is before we get a transgender terrorist because they are all so angry

  2. many instances of spiteful misgendering (different from accidental)

  3. saying all trans women are perverts (many times )

  4. accusation that a trans woman was a pedophile ( because all trans are doing it for sexual enjoyment and therefore her looking after her baby in a motherly role is sexual)

  5. someone stating they wanted to know what university Lily madigan went to so that they could make sure their friends child didn't go there

  6. many sweeping spiteful comments about trans women being bearded blokes in dresses and similar

I have noticed things have been a bit better here recently and people are starting to respect mnhq position more but don't pretend it's all even transgender people trying to stop civilised discussion.

Trousersdontmakemeaman · 12/05/2018 13:45
  1. Everything is transphobic.
natgt · 12/05/2018 13:49

Well I suppose that fits your narrative better doesn't it?

Ereshkigal · 12/05/2018 13:56

3) saying all trans women are perverts (many times )

Where has anyone said that all trans identified males are perverts? Pointing out that cross dressing sexual fetishism is a thing is not the same thing. It is. Blame Stonewall for their widely accepted definition of transgender. It hurts transsexual people too.

Opheliah · 12/05/2018 14:04

many instances of spiteful misgendering (different from accidental)

It is some people's strongly held philosophical position to use pronouns that refer to a person's sex rather than counter-intuitive pronouns referring to gender. It's not spiteful. To ignore someone's strongly held beliefs is spiteful whichever side you are on.

There are actually bearded men in dresses that say they are women too btw.

natgt · 12/05/2018 14:06

I can't show you because the lovely mnhq team have deleted all the posts I have reported to them (and if they hadn't I'm not going to have bookmarked them!)

Opheliah · 12/05/2018 14:07

The AGP ("perverts") thing does get on trans activists nerves because it's true.

Not all Transpeople have AGP. Not all transpeople have gender dysphoria.

Don't blame women for this mish mash.

AGP is the most common paraphilia in sex offenders and they are now under the Trans umbrella. Don't you dare blame women for that.

natgt · 12/05/2018 14:47

I'm not denying agp exists I'm saying it's offensive to imply all transgender people are.

And don't be daft I'm not bloody blaming women for anything . For one I would be a bit of a hypocrite to claim women all thought the same !

Ill reiterate in case I wasn't clear, what I was trying to say is SOME posters were saying offensive stuff which mnhq are now clamping down on but stil crops up more often than is helpful. I believe this plays a large part of the reputation for transphobia mn has gained and it's not simply a case of tras getting upset that a group of women are discussing periods or "telling the truth" like has been claimed. They go low we go high approach that is being adopted is great though and I think it will improve discussions.

HerFemaleness · 12/05/2018 14:48

Can anyone see a pattern here?

I don't feel the need to justify myself to an ally of a group of people who routinely threaten to commit egregious acts of violence against women.

FermatsTheorem · 12/05/2018 14:56

It might be worth posting Stonewall's own definition of "transgender" which as you can see includes cross-dressers. Now I'm sure many cross-dressers are perfectly fine (I'm pretty sure I'd get on like a house on fire with at least one prominent cross-dresser in the public eye, from the interviews I've seen with him on TV and on the radio), but they're not people I want in a communal (i.e. open-plan) changing area with me, or playing contact sports like rugby against me, or carrying out my cervical smear or mammogram. That has nothing to do with whether or not they are likely to be sexually predatory, and everything to do with the fact that they are men.

It's not my fault as a woman if Stonewall have chosen to use a definition so bloody all-encompassing as to include pretty much the whole of the human race.

From Stonewall's page:
"Trans

An umbrella term to describe people whose gender is not the same as, or does not sit comfortably with, the sex they were assigned at birth.
Trans people may describe themselves using one or more of a wide variety of terms, including (but not limited to) transgender, transsexual, gender-queer (GQ), gender-fluid, non-binary, gender-variant, crossdresser, denderless, agender, nongender, third gender, two-spirit, bi-gender, trans man, trans woman,trans masculine, trans feminine and neutrois."

natgt · 12/05/2018 15:00

I hear you on the stonewall definition , but by the same token multi racial doesn't imply someone has Chinese descent does it?

And the comment below you , implying all trans people area homogenous threatening group has proven my point quite well anyway Hmm

FermatsTheorem · 12/05/2018 15:07

No, they're not a homogeneous threatening group. I didn't say that. No-one on this thread has said that. You are wilfully misreading everyone's post.

I personally have no issue with the GRA as it currently stands - gate keeping for people with dysphoria enabling them to be accorded the legal status of female in almost all circumstances, with a few carefully thought out exceptions where biological sex matters. I don't want this extended to encompass cross-dressers (i.e. men who like wearing women's clothes but have no dysphoria).

The point is that the self-ID law, coupled to something like Stonewall's stupid definition, will mean that legally everyone under that definition will get treated as a homogeneous group - transsexual, cross-dressing, the whole bloomin' alphabet soup of demi-bois, nutrois, etc.

Which will screw over women. It will also screw over old-style transsexuals (see recent letter to the Guardian). It won't really bring any material gain to the gender fluid, nutrois, demi-whatevers. The only people who'll benefit are the tiny but dangerous minority of pervy men piggy-backing on a attempt to get a very ill-thought out law written into statute.

Why do people find this so hard to get their heads round? If there is no independent criterion for being trans, beyond "I say I'm trans", then anyone is allowed into any space they fancy.