Why I can no longer use the term transwoman...

[loveyouradvice]

... this actually makes me sad.

It is a term I have used for ages, comfortable with the compromise it encapsulated .... seeing it as a word much like seahorse - not horses, but sharing some characteristics ... and wanting to be generous to those who had had a tough time being able to express themselves and be accepted by society

But now - thanks to this board and especially to the MRAs - I can no longer use it.

I realise that it is a strategic move on their part - so that eventually there will be two groups of people:

transwomen and women ... i.e. the class of women
men and transmen ... i.e. the class of men... though I'm not sure the transmen get much of a look in

And yes, every time I now read the term trans woman with that all important gap signifying no greater difference than "tall woman" or "Asian woman" .... it makes me truly frightened for our future and for our daughters

I will follow mumsnet guidance on the new language we must all use... this forum is too important in enabling the world to see what is happening: I love the fact that the media and politicians take a peak here to see what women are saying.... so yes, I will play the strange new game of verbal linguistics.... while recognising that my own position is shifting (and continues to do so)

It's not a parallel - I'm not forcing everyone I meet to pretend I gave birth to my children. I'm not making a formal complaint every time my children have to hand over adoptive certs instead of birth certs. I'm not encouraging them to lie to other people. I'm not telling them that really I did give birth to them, and they don't have another family.

I'm not reporting people for bigotry if they mention that my children aren't biologically mine.

ffs. It's not in any way the same - if anything it's the complete opposite.

No, it's not HOW DARE YOU, adoption is simply not the equivalent. It really is not.

Cross posted with Mary

The objective reality is that men and women cannot change sex. Gender is where there are different views, and the law currently upholds gender identity to a point because gender identity is being heralded by LGBT organisations and bodies like the group behind the Yogakaryta Principles, which completely omits sex as a protected characteristic, and yet they the YP is being upheld as international best practice.

The YP is a symptom of patriarchy basically, and LGBT orgs have taken it on-board as they too tend to put women last and be very male dominated, and their guidance to local authorities has omitted sex as well as the YP filters through these organisations, and only now has that been uncovered and challenged by feminists of course - not politicians, not organisations, but feminists who uncovered this and addressed it.

The idea that the law dictates right and wrong is just a childish deference with no understanding of what the law in fact is. And it is incredibly ignorant in light of the ways that laws and lack of legal protections impact on women.

And I'm not "triggered". I'm fucking furious.

Stop using other people to justify the ridiculous set of lies that is being put about by people who think other people can change sex.

I can't change my children's situations any more than any person can change their children's sex. I wish I could sometimes, but I can't.

I'm not telling them lies about it though. Big difference. Huge.

It's an equivalent that they're both legal fictions. It's not equivalent in every aspect, but the fact of the matter is that they're both legal fictions. There's no debate on that - that's simply the facts of the matter.

"I'm not reporting people for bigotry if they mention that my children aren't biologically mine."

No, but if they outright told you that then you'd have a case for harassment. It would be an incredibly mean spirited thing to do.

"I'm not encouraging them to lie to other people. I'm not telling them that really I did give birth to them, and they don't have another family."

No, but the law recognises you as their legal parent. Just like it recognises transpeople with a GRC as what they identify as (with exemptions, of course).

"And I'm not "triggered". I'm fucking furious."

As I said earlier, people do when their situation is compared to something they dislike, however apt the comparison is.

I get pretty mad about this kind of stuff too. Your anger is unfortunate, but it's sad that it would blind you to even the smallest of comparisons.

The equivalent would be an adoptive child's legal father demanding to be called their biological mother.

As I said earlier, people do when their situation is compared to something they dislike, however apt the comparison is.

Yes, like transactivists dislike it when people draw a parallel with MRAs. However apt the comparison may be.

It's disgraceful and downright nasty that two of you on here are comparing being an adoptive mother with being a man with a GRC. Even if you believe that gender is innate and thus that women are the people with lady brains that make us do lady things and that justify our subjugated status within society, you know that most women on here are feminists and absolutely do not view gender as innate and therefore do not ever view men as women. So knowing that, you go on compare an adoptive mother with a man who says they are something that most women here believe them not to be and think the word 'legally' is a get out clause for this nasty comparison. Well it's not. Get better arguments. There is no comparison between a man saying he is a woman and an adoptive mother being a mother. Not legally or otherwise.

It's not a parallel - I'm not forcing everyone I meet to pretend I gave birth to my children.

No but you're not forced to tell everyone you meet if you don't want to.

I'm not making a formal complaint every time my children have to hand over adoptive certs instead of birth certs.

I'm not sure your children would be disadvantaged by the revelation to others that they are adopted, as much as a trans person could be by the revelation that they were born a different sex. I'm not sure the risk of violence would be the same either.

I'm not encouraging them to lie to other people.

I don't think gender clinics encourage their clients to 'lie' to people. I'm not sure why you would want to equate transgenderism with lies.

I'm not telling them that really I did give birth to them, and they don't have another family.

Trans parents don't usually lie to their children either. None of the ones I've seen do - they're quite open about it with their children.

Kettle - exactly (!)

Sure. I imagine that some people see a comparison. I personally don't and think that would be a huge generalisation, but I can understand why you would think that, given your personal beliefs on the matter.

However, that's a subjective comparison and up for debate. The legal fiction comparison is purely objective - they're both entirely legal fictions. Ergo, your attempt (and you personally have actually used the term "legal fiction" regarding the GRC a number of times to de-legitimise it I've noticed during my time her Ereshkigal) to use "legal fiction" as an argument regarding the GRC would also apply to adoption.

Personally, I'm happy to acknowledge both legal fictions and I'm happy to support both. I don't believe that transpeople can really change sex, just like I don't believe that adopted children become biologically their new parents' children. However, I'm happy to refer to transpeople as men/women (whichever they choose) just like I'm happy to refer to "your children" if they've been adopted. I'd never dream of pointing out the truth of the matter as it would be mean spirited.

"It's disgraceful and downright nasty that two of you on here are comparing being an adoptive mother with being a man with a GRC."

That's what it comes down to always - an apt comparison is made, and the OUTRAGE!!! begins. Just like the black people back in the day who were furious that their struggles were being compared with the struggles of the LGB community. I feel like I'm reliving history lately.

"Well it's not. Get better arguments."

I don't need to, because that itself isn't an argument.

" There is no comparison ... Not legally or otherwise."

But that's simply untrue. At the very least, they're both legal fictions. That's objective truth.

"transpeople with a GRC".

Are we back to them, now? Do we only have to pander to the people with a GRC? Can we assume that everyone trans who doesn't have a GRC is not legally trans, and therefore we don't have to recognise them as trans, we can use their legally correct names with the associated pronouns etc etc.

If you are comparing, let's compare. Only people who have legally adopted their children can refer to themselves as adoptive parents. Following that logic, only people who have a legal GRC can consider themselves to have "changed gender".

I presume that's ok. The rest of them; nah, they are still whatever they were born as.

Ergo, your attempt (and you personally have actually used the term "legal fiction" regarding the GRC a number of times to de-legitimise it I've noticed during my time her Ereshkigal)

Yes I have. Because it is. I'm not sure what your problem is?

www.nytimes.com/1993/06/28/us/blacks-rejecting-gay-rights-as-a-battle-equal-to-theirs.html

Just a quick example, just in case anyone doubts the validity of my LGB comparison.

Way to miss the point that saying men can be women is a falsehood that we are nonetheless expected to uphold by TA's....

Absolutely leyat. SMG has had it patiently explained, and yet goads on and on. I condemn any attempt to upset people so much they lash out. Also Mary's had you previously discussed adoption? Because how did SMG know? To raise it deliberately would involve MN stalking and provocation.

So that's the thread subject effectively derailed then. How does this fucking tag team shit work in practice do you think?

This is goading of adoptive parents.

Sisters, they are not worth it

"Yes I have. Because it is. I'm not sure what your problem is?"

Of course you don't see it. I'll leave you with that. Hopefully some others may see and use some critical thinking to actually consider things though, rather than responding with outrage.

Oh, one more comment, because I can't resist this:

" So that's the thread subject effectively derailed then. How does this fucking tag team shit work in practice do you think?"

Not everything is a conspiracy or teamwork. I've never even seen the other poster before today. Sometimes people agree with an argument and decide to voice their opinions.

Where's my outrage Puresummer? My critical thinking is fine thanks.