Use of trans identified male as opposed to transwoman.

[happydappy2]

MNHQ There has been much written recently about how the controlling of the words we use, is very misleading. Many women reject the word transwoman as it can be misunderstood. In light of this, would you reconsider yr guidelines that Trans Identified Male can not be used? It would seem a more factually accurate description of a human male who presents in a stereotypically female way. Thank you.

No, stop making false accusations.

You can say this all that you want, it doesn't make it true.

Your post is there for all to see and the meaning is very clear. No false allegations are required.

You said dome on here are men, and some are women - but how do you know? Maybe all posters on here are women? Why do you think that some are men?

Well, I dont know if you are attempting to get a ban worthy post out of me, so I shall tread carefully, but as it is pertinent to the topic of the thread, there are people posting on the thread who have been open about their trans status. As I hold to Barracker's opinions, I will not be pretending someone is one thing when they are, in fact, another.

I find myself wondering why would anyone want to prevent women discussing how language is important in order to recognise & combat male violence against women & children.

That the attempted prevention of discussion is on the Feminism & Women's Rights board of a perenting website is telling.

I can understand the Feminist viewpoint for not referring to a transwoman as a woman completely. However, refusing to name them as a transwoman is completely different

Except for some it no longer feels that way.......it doesn't feel too different at all. And if some people's feelings are important, then so, surely, are all people's feelings; especially those directly impacted by any imposed language change.

In all cases? So if someone wants to use the term cis you have no wish to stop them then? Because, after all, if you tried to stop them that would be coercive presumably?

Yes, in all cases. Use whatever language you like, I don't care. You don't get to label me cis, but if you want to use if about yourself, go ahead, why would I care?

“You said dome on here are men, and some are women - but how do you know? Maybe all posters on here are women? Why do you think that some are men?”

Well I recognise a couple of people who have previously said they were men, and at least one who has said she is a transwomen. Not sure wht the issue is, actually.

Well, I don't know if you are attempting to get a ban worthy post out of me, so I shall tread carefully

Yes! Just ignore those posts for now and focus on what you want to say about the original thread starter. Although, I think it has mostly all been said now.

Barrackers article refers mainly to pronoun use. Turning a transwoman into a ‘woman’ so to speak. I can understand the Feminist viewpoint for not referring to a transwoman as a woman completely. However, refusing to name them as a transwoman is completely different.

You might want to read it again, then. It's not just about pronouns, she very specifically talks about substituting woman for man.

I prefer trans identified male because it's factual.

I’ve said the opposite, that language is important rowan, even when people don’t like it.

So far the only explanation is that some people don’t understand what a transwoman is. Which is a bit of a strange point. Almost like saying you think MN’ers (which is predominantly woman) can’t be trusted to understand what a word means so you need to dumb it down?

Yes, in all cases. Use whatever language you like, I don't care

Yes, use the words you like best, or which most express your view. But don't expect other people to use them as if natural to themselves.
People can use CIS if they wish, but I also retain the right to reject that, along with the whole ideology from which it arose.

Except for some it no longer feels that way.......it doesn't feel too different at all. And if some people's feelings are important, then so, surely, are all people's feelings; especially those directly impacted by any imposed language change.

But think about how you feel when some quarters say that the word "woman" should not be used and suggest cervix haver or whatever instead? Read what you have written and the exactly the same could be applied to them too.

The words trans women and trans men have been developed to describe some people. Why do you now seek to ban those words?

Those words have a specific meaning. They differentiate a trans woman from a natal woman or a trans man from a natal man so, for the purposes of reporting crime for example, people will know there is a difference. So what are you objecting to exactly?

I’ve said the opposite, that language is important rowan, even when people don’t like it

Logical inconsistency....

Language is important regardless of whether people like or or not.

Justhadathought why don’t you have a read of my posts again and tell me where the logical inconsistency is?

Blimey some people (no idea what sex they are) really want to engage me today!

Not engaging in Dr Julia Long's feminist theory & its relation to male violence against women & children though which is the focus of my posting on this thread.

Its a mystery!

language is important regardless of whether people like it or not

glad we’re on the same page. So the term transwoman is the correct language to describe a male to female transsexual, careless of whether you like it or not.

In the same way woman means AHF whether you like it or not. And should be used as such?

Correct?

I was very confused by the term ‘transwoman’ when I first came to this topic and thought it meant someone born biologically female who wanted to be male.

I have argued on here before for the importance of linguistic clarity and avoiding acronyms or less-known terms, especially when communicating in real life.

I don’t understand what is wrong with using the phrase ‘man who identifies as a woman’.

The words trans women and trans men have been developed to describe some people. Why do you now seek to ban those words?

Women who are feminists and post on FWR do not seek to 'ban' words.
Its a bit of reverse projection isnt it?

Where is the source of compelled language useage?

The words trans women and trans men have been developed to describe some people. Why do you now seek to ban those words?

Nobody is seeking to ban anything; not here, anyway. As in make some word illegal.

People are reserving and asserting their right to use the language that best works for them; or which is most expressive of how they view the world and all around them. You do what you like. I do what I like. the only real conflict that arises is when one tries to force their version on the other.

It is probably true to say that most people who post on here regularly are materialists; in the sense that we recognise the material, earthly reality of being born female. We recognise material conditions; and we recognise that material conditions matter.

Transwoman means Male who believes they are female (paraphrased)

Naming them a transwoman doesn’t deny they are born Male.

Calling a M2F a transwoman does not take away From Julia Longs theory of needing to name Male attackers as the word transwoman doesn’t deny they’re Male.

As I’ve said, I understand why you wouldn’t want to name them female.

You could just say trans person then their preferred pronouns.

I feel this needs repeating:

R0wantrees...
I find myself wondering why would anyone want to prevent women discussing how language is important in order to recognise & combat male violence against women & children.

That the attempted prevention of discussion is on the Feminism & Women's Rights board of a perenting website is telling.

Facts & accurate reporting, especially of male violence, is vitally important.

It has substantial impact on managing violent crime perpetrated by men against women & children especially.

This matters in everyday language and debate. For a comprehensive conversation to be had the language used has to be fit for purpose. That is why fact first descriptors work best for everyone to understand, not just the tiny few who are re assigning known words to alternative meanings.

Clarity is key.

Man who identifies as.

Calling a M2F a transwoman does not take away From Julia Longs theory of needing to name Male attackers as the word transwoman doesn’t deny they’re Male

You seem not to have understood Dr Julia Long's position.
I recommend the speech in its entirety to anyone interested in feminist theory as well as combatting male violence against women & children.

link here of transcript:
pastebin.com/nGwr3i4U

video: 'What is Gender?' Speakers' Corner event, 13 September 2017

I don't like the word transwoman because my brain really does pick up on the woman part and try to convince me I am talking about a female.

That just isn't true though, is it?