FWR more unpleasant than ever

[Snappity]

The Talk Guidelines have done little to improve things. The majority of threads are about trans matters and very few, if any, positive. Misgendering is increasingly rife. "They" for a trans woman is as bad as "he".

Even the sex of trans women with female birth certificates is not respected.

There is post after post that trans women are not women and that sex is biological and cannot be changed (totally ignoring that many aspects of sex can be changed).

Then increasingly material from elsewhere which is anti-trans is being linked.

While individual comments are fair enough, the sheer volume means that FWR is a thoroughly unpleasant place for the majority of trans people and those of us who have trans family members.

Intersex women are also repeatedly disrespected with frequent posts that women are XX or are those with female reproductive capacity. It is hugely offensive.

I am going to be here less. The harassment - and I think that is what it is - has driven me away. It is a shame because trans and intersex feminists - indeed trans inclusive feminists - should be as welcome here as any other feminists. If MumsNet believes in debate that means ensuring that one side isn't shouted down - and the sheer volume of people saying that trans women are not women and belong in male spaces (because anyone "male" is a risk to women) is shouting down the other side of the debate.

FWR needs to regain a balance.

Got this from Reddit just now. Originally from The Onion (The Onion's book of Knowledge) I think it about sums things up.

Kitty, a good friend of mine was recently piled on because she, as a survivor of FGM, stated that women and girls can't identify out of their sexed bodies and that FGM proves this. Cue being leapt on, and still being piled on by TRAs stating that she is just a massive bigot 'using' her victimhood to 'harm' transwomen.

You cannot capitulate enough. You cannot debase yourself enough. You cannot erase yourself enough to satisfy TRAs. And the people who are being most violently affected by it all are women, girls and transsexuals who know they aren't women.

Gender critical feminists claim that the debate is pro women not anti trans

Safety is pro women - including trans women : refusing to accept that trans women are women is anti-trans.

Nope.

Snappity. Again, what definition of trans women are you using?

Are transwomen who acknowledge they are not women anti trans?

snappity

This just keeps going round in circles.

You can't force people to believe what you believe or say what you want them to say. For the sake of your own well being you need to come to terms with that.

I will never never never accept the lie that transwomen are women.

Safety is pro women - including trans women : refusing to accept that trans women are women is anti-trans.

Well then nobody can be gender critical can they? Because even being gender critical is anti-trans. Look, it's obviously not easy for you as you have a trans partner. You inevitably feel loyalty to your partner and your own experience has also clouded your thinking about gender, even though intersex is a recognised medical condition and people here are very sympathetic to intersex people. But a debate cannot be had if you take a totally entrenched position that 'anyone who says they are a woman is a woman'. You have shown time and time again that you cannot answer even the most basic of questions in support of your position. You have no answer besides 'TWAW and anything else is anti-trans'. If it's upsetting you in the way you say you are, it probably is best to spend less time on here because you won't get very far if you don't engage at all.

I'm late to this thread but have tot ake issue with these claims:

On hormones trans women develop breasts and trans men develop facial hair, male patten baldness and their voice breaks. All changes in attributes of sex.

Men develop breasts - indeed, men can die from breast cancer. Doesn't mean they're not men or that they've 'changed attributes of their sex'.

Women develop facial hair - quite a lot of us, actually. Doesn't mean that they're not women or that they've 'changed attributes of their sex.'

Women can get male pattern baldness. Doesn't mean etc etc.

Snappity your take that It is certainly possible to argue that trans women are not women but we need honesty that that argument is anti-trans not pro women is blinkered.

Many people support trans women and want them to feel free to hold whatever identity they wish and to express this identity however they like. They want trans women to have all of the human rights available to all. They simply want to acknowledge the difference between trans women and natal women because these differences are significant in some contexts. Seeking to deny people the right to acknowledge these differences is, simply, wrong.

I can see how acknowledging the differences between trans women and natal women can be upsetting to those trans women,who would dearly love to be natal women. I can also see that doing this, for the sake of it, at any given time or any place is insensitive. Can you honestly not see how denying natal women the right to be clear about the differences in some contexts is insensitive.

Snappity
refusing to accept that trans women are women is anti-trans.
Nope. Sigh.

Seriously you need a break & a lie down! About 33 hours ago you wrote I am going to be here less do that, as a gift to your own mental health.

Suppose you were interested in golf and went on a couple of golf forums.

Oh look, another false analogy. You're comparing admission of penis owners to women's safe spaces with an argument about whether women should be allowed to play golf in a certain area of land. One concerns whether a person is physically capable of rape, the other concerns whether a person can accurately hit a small ball with a weighted stick.

Bd67th the golf analogy reminds me of previous threads where TRAs or their apologists saw "womanhood" as some sort of club from which women are meanly excluding them.

It is not anti-trans to refuse to accept transwomen are women.

"Transwomen are women" is a mantra, made up and chanted by transadvocates. It has no basis in reality. You cannot force women here to believe or accept a lie.

Nope I'm never going to believe TWAW because they just aren't
Calling them TW is a liberty to be honest
Repeat After Us: Catfish are cats. No, they are fish that look a little bit like a cat
The more you push the harder we will push back.

I remember, a long time ago, a Canadian creationist came on MN to discuss - er, well, god & creationism and stuff, and to try and refute science and evolution. You know the sort of thing.

He tried (bless him) to set up a series of "rules" to frame the discussion. One of the rules was no swearing (ha!) and another was "God exists". Well of course he got his arse handed to him - because many in the discussion were atheist/agnostic - and are not willing to discuss on the premise that "God exists".

You cannot force people to believe stuff. You can chant it, you can try and ban certain terms from Mumsnet, MN can even delete our posts - but you cannot make people believe stuff they just don't believe - and you cannot force us to start a discussion with the premise "TWAW" - because we just don't agree.

I remember, a long time ago, a Canadian creationist came on MN to discuss - er, well, god & creationism and stuff, and to try and refute science and evolution. You know the sort of thing

Now theres an analogy that does makes sense. TRAs are basically like creationists, or flat earthers, trying desperately to convert people to their way of thinking. I doubt they would like that analogy though

I've decided today that I'm a goldfish. Which means I have the memory of one, of course. Oooh look I'm in a bowl.

I've decided today that I'm a goldfish. Which means I have the memory of one, of course. Oooh look I'm in a bowl.

I know this may come as a shock to some of you, but I've decided today that I'm a goldfish. Which means I have the memory of one, of course. Oooh look I'm in a bowl.

Big news folks! I've decided today that I'm a goldfish. Which means I have the memory of one, of course. Oooh look I'm in a bowl.

Oh, by the way, I've decided today that I'm a goldfish. Which means I have the memory of one, of course. Oooh look I'm in a bowl.

Now everyone, I've decided today that I'm a goldfish. Which means I have the memory of one, of course. Oooh look I'm in a bowl.

Did I mention that I've decided today that I'm a goldfish? Which means I have the memory of one, of course. Oooh look, I'm in a bowl.

Saying something over and over doesn't make it true. SCIENCE makes it true. I don't have gills, or fins or even a tail. I do however have an entire set (almost) of female reproductive organs. Human, female reproductive organs. Which makes me a woman. Yay me.

But I'm still a goldfish....

Saying 'transwomen are women' is inherently a male supremacist statement. The only pro-woman response to such a statement is to object to it.

The only way men can be women is if womanhood is defined by femininity/gender. And indeed this is why trans activists/gender identity zealots argue that gender is innate, & thus that femininity = womanhood and masculinity = manhood; and as such, that 'cisgender' women are females whose sex 'matches their gender'. i.e. women are defined by innate femininity/lady brains. And since feminine gender norms, roles and traits are imposed on females to subjugate us by & for the benefit of men, equating women with femininity is to equate us with our subordination to men, i.e. it is saying that our subordination/male supremacy is natural and true to what we actually are.

So women who want to dismantle patriarchy need to reject this notion of womanhood and the statement transwomen are women with all we've got. Indeed the whole notion of cisgender only entrenches gender, patriarchy and male violence. There is much gaslighting going on here....

Ohhh we're so oppressed, we're so oppressed...... welcome to the world of womanhood! Just what you wanted!

Snappity is pro-trans and anti-women.

This just keeps going round in circles.

You can't force people to believe what you believe or say what you want them to say. For the sake of your own well being you need to come to terms with that.

One of the inherent male traits is that they just cannot accept that women:
a - have an opinion
b - can be right
c - get quite frustrated and act weird when the women they are trying to force into something just will not do it.

Weird huh?

If TWAW, why do they need to declare their history to a potential partner?

I'm a woman, I don't have to declare I'm a woman and always have been. Why do transwomen, whether they believe it's from birth or from 2 weeks ago, if they are indeed women? Why does their history matter?

Sociopathsunited, you made me laugh.