Will society accept transwomen ARE women in future generations?

[interestingdebatetoday]

Today I debated with a young woman I adore. I'm in my 30's, her in her 20's. She attended uni in a very liberal city and has studied psychology. Definitely armed to hold an opinion.

We disagree currently on several of the current topics re trans. I personally hold what's probably the norm on the feminist boards of mumsnet in my views.

It made me wonder though - she claims not to feel women are really impacted, uses unisex bathrooms as a norm, and obviously has been socialised to not find an issue in accepting transwomen as women. Is it possible that actually society will progress in a way that her generation down simply won't have the issues which I feel exist when trying to include transwomen AS women?

Can women be educated/socialised to a place over time where several generations on - we will be the old women with outdated beliefs and the world simply isn't bothered about the things which we were?

It has to go one way or the other really doesn't it? Either a big u turn and the idea that transwomen ARE women becomes laughable and delusional is mainstream and acceptable (as many of us might feel on the boards) OR transwomen ARE women and we were the ones who were wrong

It made me wonder... I was really suprised tbh. 10 years later made a huge difference to whether we felt our rights were under attack...

Vicky, I am a teacher. I can quite happily tell you that it is often the case that it is easier to manage 30 children than my own 2 and can assure you that many of my colleagues feel the same way. This is because my students are well aware that I know more than them, because I prove it to them every day. Meanwhile, my own children know more than me about almost everything, according to them.

Because conversations evolve?

It's not "evolving" it's typical whataboutery.

Vicky, I am a teacher.

Bet you're not as experienced a teacher as I am, though...

I can quite happily tell you that it is often the case that it is easier to manage 30 children than my own 2

That says a lot more about your parenting than it does about reality.

Most primary schools have no male staff at all. You must know that.
Yes I do know and they have volunteers that they use.

Same as when the class teacher is a man. A female volunteer goes along to supervise the girls.

Whataboutry indeed and boring as

Sorry - I have a real fear of my children being unattended around water. That, getting trapped in a car under water, or getting caught in a fire are my nightmares. I'm very distractable when these things are brought up. As you were, people!

It's not "evolving" it's typical whataboutery.

Yeah, it always is whenever someone doesn't agree.

Virtually every thread on MN discusses points other than the OP simply because things are raised as it moves on.

Most primary schools have no male staff at all. You must know that.
Yes I do know and they have volunteers that they use.

Same as when the class teacher is a man. A female volunteer goes along to supervise the girls.

You're absolutely certain this is the case in all primary schools or even most of them, aren't you...? The vast majority of primary teachers are women and male volunteers (who can be trusted...) are in very, very short supply.

Virtually every thread on MN discusses points other than the OP simply because things are raised as it moves on.

I know how MN works. This is derailing.

Vicky, there is absolutely no need for those kind of insults. I have been teaching for over a decade and have two fantastic daughters. I've quite purposefully brought them up to think for themselves. I can't really complain when they do it.

Derailing bigly and boringly

No VickyEadie I don't know what happens in every school and nor do you. I am explaining what happens in the school that my children attended and that I have close links to.

And talking about how structures in society affect women who are mums is Whataboutry indeed and boring as then?

Oh I don't know. I reckon the original question by the OP has been answered clearly enough - No.

Moving on to a different topic entirely suggests everyone currently on this thread agrees with that, or at least hasn't any good arguments against it.

Nopes start a thread on that then
You are derailing

Still at least the thread is nearly over. Then you can start "AIBU to think boys should be allowed in female changing rooms". Which of course you will.

Are we really talking about the possibility of an eight-year-old who can't undress themself, can't swim, and might fall in the pool and drown? Seriously?

Instead of deciding that single sex facilities have to go, wouldn't it be better to just wait a year and not take this kid swimming until they grow up enough?

I was talking about a the average 8 year old, who can dress himself, but cannot swim. Figures for 8 year olds are thin on the ground, but somewhere between 1/3 to 1/2 of 10-16 year olds cannot swim a full length (depending on which article you read).

And they don't magically learn to swim, unless you take them. I am a big advocate of teaching children to swim as early as possible. I don't think its something you can easily argue against, to be honest.

I've not read threads asking for boys of 8 or 6 to be banned from the loos.

But to be fair most people who I hear are worried about prisons, hospitals etc and not toilets.

My son is 9. He is capable of dressing himself and using male toilets. I'd only not allow him to do so if I was concerned for any reason. Then I might lol for a neutral toilet.

I don't think most women are worried about pre-adolescent males. Adult males are a different matter.

Of course children should learn to swim.

So should they undress themself and wait by the side of the pool. But if your child is incapable of doing that, either find a workaround - go with a friend, take them to lessons, hurry up yourself and wait the other side, use a pool with family changing, etc.

Or wait until they are more capable.

It's the sort of thing that all children go through. No one is fully responsible immediately. It's a learning curve, involving risk.

I understand the problems, because every parent has encountered them. But deciding that single sex facilities should go is not only not a solution, it's a ridiculous suggestion.

If that is indeed what Weetabix was suggesting. I'm a bit confused now, to be honest.

And yes, I don't think it would even be much of the topic, if it wasn't being used to challenge sex segregation.

Someone, somewhere will always think of a scenario without a solution.

Italiangreyhound

Ask the question to people on here - the thought is definitely that older than 8 should not be in the opposite changing rooms.

What I'm arguing for is a bit of common sense and choices of facilities.

I remember that the boys at my primary school were rather stupid and would do stupid, risky things, but none of them was quite stupid enough to jump into deep water without knowing to swim.

I know because there was a river running past my primary school, and we weren't prevented from jumping into it. There was just a fence we could easily climb over.

And actually did when the river was almost dried out in summer. But only then. Because even the boys weren't that stupid at that age.

If your 8 year old son is too stupid to not just run to the pool and jump in, then he has a disability and you can use facilities for the disabled.
(Also, I wonder how you get through life, as you obviously also have to prevent him from running onto the street and being ran over by a car all the time and cannot leave him alone even at home because he might jump out of a window because he only listens to teachers, not to you)

That aside, I don't know how things are where you live, but where I live, every pool has to have a person assigned to guarding it, and, for example, pulling out children stupid enough to jump in even though they can't swim.

Moreover, if you are not concerned about males being potential threats (because men are lovely and harmless and all that) why don't you just ask a random man who is about to enter the changing rooms to keep an eye on your eight-year-old-but-too-stupid-to-survive son?

The simple addition of a couple of parent and child cubicles, to be the only ones usable by male children 8 and above. and then only if they are with their mum, would be fine by me. If your son refuses to change with you, then they are definitely old enough to use the other changing room. If your son is old enough that you feel embarrassed getting changed in front of them, then again, probably a sign they should use the other changing room.

I'm very dubious about the danger presented to women or girls by a ten year child under the jurisdiction of his mother.