Use of trans identified male as opposed to transwoman No2.

[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.

And the trillions of DMs I received, all agree with me. And they think I'm gawjus.

I always laugh when people use the many many PMs they apparently recieve everytime they post as some kind of benchmark of forum opinion. Its a silly thing to type really, and its brought up a lot, especially in these kinds of threads. Good to see that 'tactic' being ripped apart a bit today, usually its just ignored, and I think thats maybe why its spreading and people seem to think that it actually adds weight to their opinion, to claim they have been Pmed..often multiple times

So why exactly is it that women should not name males in their spaces? Would that make it more difficult to name predatory males?

Who really gains from this obfuscation on of language?

Predatory males.

This is what matters

'I recieved 28 private messages, all thanking me for adding my opinion to a thread, none of them dare post'. What nonsense.

Oh no no. Man also has another meaning, like chaps and guys

Sorry! I forgot

I feel guilty that i dont pm people to tell them they are gorgeous now

Might come over as a bit stalkerish 👀

Me - "They're still biologically male, that doesn't change but they still identify as female and that's valid too"

The next logical question to that would be
'how does a male identify as a female when they are not female'
probably followed by
'but what does identify as actually mean?'
and if answered
'someone who thinks they are X deep down inside'
then 'but they are not X so how can they 'feel' that way.

I was on a school trip in the woods with one of my children

And the guide said ‘so does anyone know what stalking is’

And a littleone said ‘its when you follow a girl you like’

All the grownups were like 😱

(Sorry)

Wow. That got bizarre. Glad I went to bed in the end. I see no genderists answered good faith questions.

Hamster, fyi, if I was talking to you in a workplace or down the pub, I wouldn't be all 'hey, male, get that project finished (or whatever)'. I would, of course, use your chosen name, and just treat you as any other person. Wanting the ability to name maleness isn't the same as getting a kick out of doing so. I might not be able to promise you female pronouns, but I would default to the singular they, because it wouldn't thrill me to rub your maleness in your face, as it were. Ironically, the less someone compels me to state they are female when they are not, the more I want to be helpful and polite towards them.

I have every empathy with transpeople who have or had GD. It's a nasty condition, very painful.

Chaps I have never seen used for women

Did you miss upthread?

Might come over as a bit stalkerish

No no, the done thing to do is PM instead of posting. You should, rather than add your own opinions on an anon forum..instead sit reading other peoples posts and PMing them when you agree with them, thaning them for having the same opinion to you.

You can also add in that they are gorgeous, if you like.

thanking, rather than thaning. I dont think thats a word..

I feel guilty that i dont pm people to tell them they are gorgeous now Might come over as a bit stalkerish

Christ ive been doing it wrong for ages!!!

Did you miss upthread? No, I meant except for upthread, as in in real life I have never heard chaps used for women.

You can also add in that they are gorgeous, if you like.

Well let's not go mad. You only say that if they are.

Oh good lord

We’re not going to be able to get datun through a door now

Her heads that swollen...

as in in real life I have never heard chaps used for women

That's how I see it too, but upthread chaps is used within female friends groups to refer to each other glad it's not just me as I've not seen that either.

but they still identify as female and that's valid too"

This is a meaningless thing to say. It would me like me identifying as a middle class professional, paid well and bound by a code of ethics - nice, but not my reality.

Personally (and don't forget I have kids with GD so a lot of practice in this area), I think a healthier and more attached to reality thing to say is ' they are male, but they are extremely uncomfortable in their male body, and wish that they had been female. That's not possible, but for some people with this condition (gender dysphoria) as adults they can make changes to their body that helps them live as more feminine people.'

No lies involved there, nothing hurtful, completely accurate.

We’re not going to be able to get datun through a door now

My head, quite evidently, proportionally speaking, is absolutely perfect

Yes

Some of my friends use chaps

Bats friends do not

Limes friends do not

None of us is lying

That's how I see it too, but upthread chaps is used within female friends groups to refer to each other glad it's not just me as I've not seen that either.

However the post I replied to, you seemed to say both chaps and guys, as if those are not words used for women?

My point was, I agree I have not seen chaps used. But guys is so so common, at least where I am from. So was a bit confused at those two being lumped together when one..seemd very rare where the other is common as hell? Unless I only class the second as common as..well its common among my friendship group (and near every damn restaurant employee too..bugbear actually)

One uses peeps

Any advance on peeps

I think we should be able to call male humans men, as that is what they are, regardless of their beliefs or feelings about themselves. So saying ‘a man who believes/claims to be a woman’ should be fine. I also think we should be permitted to use male pronouns for males, regardless of what the male believes about himself.

I think it should be obvious to mumsnet by now that those who want to police women’s language are manipulative and use gaslighting, they have shown that on this and the previous thread by:

Pretending to not understand what others have said when it has been stated in plain language for all to see and twisting the words of others so they can pretend they mean something they don’t. For example, no one has suggested policing their language, or have said they have to stop using ‘transwomen’.

Trying to goad posters, and derailing the thread into other issues, and then arguing about those issues at length.

Denying their behaviour when it is pointed out to them.

Then projecting their own behaviour onto others, which enables them to paint themselves as innocent victims, and women who don’t want their language policed as the problem.

This is such obvious gaslighting and manipulation. I think mumsent should seriously think if people who act this disingenuous and manipulative are really the sort of people they want to appease, at the expense of women being able to name the reality that males are men. The question mumsnet needs to ask itself is who does it benefit to ban women from naming males as men, and who does it harm?