Kier shows his colours

[averylongtimeago]

From Facebook, I guess he has picked a side.
51% of the population just don't count.

Personally, I don't give a toss what gender identity people want to express

I just don't want gender identity to be replacing sex where sex matters

And I don't want lies and misinformation used to try and force women to accept a specific gender identity , and I don't want those lies to remove sex based protections from those formally known as women

If the fight was ...why do so many transwomen end up in prostitution, what additional rights and support do transpeople need to live life fully, how can we ensure they get access to proper healthcare, what research is needed to determine what the best health treatment should be...then I would be fully supportive

When the fight is I gender identify as a woman so you have to accept as if my sex was woman even if I carry on and act like my sex is Male, and my feelings matter more than your feelings in all cases , and if you want any female rights then you are cis identifying , then no.

Two completely different sets of demands that are both wrapped up as transrights are human rights

If they do it’s because they’re deluded. Because anyone who had half a brain would know trans rights means we’ll all be raped in the toilets by male criminals dressed as women. And this crime epidemic will not be punished, society will just allow it to happen en masse. Because we live in an anti-woman on the scale of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

That’s the general vibe in this corner of MN.

No its really quite simple to be honest.

Do you believe that any man who self identifies as a woman is actually a woman?

Do you believe that women should be entitled to certain single sex spaces, or should have the right to request a female is to carry out an intimate procedure?

Do you believe that the law should be reformed so that any male can falsify his birth certificate and legally become a 'female' without any gatekeeping or checks at all?

Do you believe that a male who has raped someone should go to a female prison, if that's the prison he feels like going to?

What exactly do you mean by 'trans rights' in this context?

I won't hold my breath for answers to any of this by the way, because those answers never come. Because once you think for more than 5 seconds about the ramifications of what is being proposed in certain quarters, it's like..... 'oh.... Wait'.

longest why do you think these sensible, positive discussions you keep calling for aren't happening?

Did you read upthread what happened when women tried to raise a debate in the Portsmouth Labou rParty? Here's the link again.
womansplaceuk.org/2020/11/22/erasing-and-silencing-women-in-the-name-of-inclusion/

Or when WPUK held a public meeting in Brighton during the Labour Party Conference?
womansplaceuk.org/2019/11/19/what-happened-at-brighton-wpuklab19/

If only we'd just sit down and have a proper debate eh?

is a funny hill to die on

How overwrought. People have pointed out that it's dishonest. Literally nobody died. That's the actual point.

only associated with "older, white, heteronormative women?"

Because it's considered an effective tactic in minimising in needs analysis. It's happened to older white men for decades and now older white women are moving into the demographic as having had their turn and now have to shut up.

Older women in the UK are actually the only demographic with a gender pay Gap that is not reducing, and it can't reduce for the current 60 plus cohort. Age 40 and under it's gone all together. And the pension gap for older women is vast. So that group never achieved anything like economic Equality but it seems like Labour are bored with them now and have moved on. Which is interesting in itself.

And if you check out who the big policy influencers are in the trans legislation groups. They are overwhelmingly older male dominated. The very group that enforced and enjoyed the reduced competion from discrimination against their female peers. This is the group who are determining the PR messages you are coming to a feminist board to repeat for them.

This kind of brings me back to my original post. Why, if these issues are as clear as day, do you think your message is only associated with "older, white, heteronormative women?"

Because that is the message pushed out there - that only straight white middle class women care about this issue. That is absolutely not the case.

Who is pushing that message out there and why do you think they might be doing that?

Older male - when the group of young people who are approaching clinics and doctors and female?

.

I think recognition of gender identity as s right - a facet of human dignity - as it were - is here to stay and we'd be better off working with that than railing against it if we want sex segregated spaces to be mainstream policy.

But what do you mean by 'recognition of gender identity'?

I don't really give a shit what 'gender identity' someone chooses. I mean, I think the whole thing is steeped in bullshit gender stereotypes that are especially damaging for children who may be wondering why they don't like the clothes and toys that society says is meant for their sex. But if someone wants to say 'I feel more comfortable presenting according to the stereotypes normally associated with the opposite sex' then I really don't care. Hell, I don't really care if someone says 'I like wearing dresses, and it makes me feel like a woman' if that's where it ends.

But 'recognising gender identity' seems to be totally bound up in erasing sex completely, there is no room for compromise it seems. It's 'I identify as a woman, so I am legally woman which means I am entitled to everything that is meant for women, and I want to remove any exemptions in the Equality Act keep anything solely for the female sex'.

We are at a point now where 'gender identity' is this objective, unarguable, point which must be set in stone in law and policy..... and biological sex is a 'grey area'. It's batshit!

Aren't "GC" kind of trying to do the same thing, on here?
I mean, trying to terrify the living shit out of women by saying everyone is invading the women's toilets.

who has said that everyone is invading the women's toilets?

No one convinced me there was a problem, I worked it out for myself. I read an article about self-id and because I'm not completely without brain, I realised that if anyone can proclaim themselves a woman with no gatekeeping or even a change of appearance required, we have a problem.

No one has answered my question yet - Quaag/anyone do you want to try?

What do I advise my 11 year old daughter if she walks into the toilets and finds a man in there?

1. Get out quick and report it
2. Oh don't worry dear it is just a transwoman who has decided not to transition their appearance and is just quietly going about their business
3. Oh, be a little bit cautious because it is a 'lesbian' identified transwoman a la the bearded wonder that is Alex Drummond. Alex might fancy a bit of you, being a lesbian and all, so just be a bit careful
4. Faff about for ages trying to work out whether you are going to offend this person by running away and leave it too late and find out the hard way that it is a predatory male who corners you and rapes you. but hey ho, you takes your chances.

The trouble is now, the police are so captured, I don't even expect their backup if I report a suspicious male in the toilets (all males in the women's toilets are suspicious to me). They will just tell me off for being transphobic.

Also Quaag/anyone - what do the girls who can't share a private space with a male stranger on religious grounds? As Michelle mentioned earlier, they are having to self-exclude. The urinary leash has returned. Religion is a protected characteristic you know?

Sorry, another question that no one seems to be answering -

We all recognise that the situation with Katie Dolotowski sexually assaulting an 11 yo at knifepoint is wrong (yes?). Why then, instead of strengthening rules, laws, procedures to try and prevent that ever happening again (like normal people would), are people campaigning to change the law to make it even easier!!!

It's been said on here before that mumsnet is one of the only forums where these issues can be freely discussed, and yet the atmosphere on here is so volatile and hostile that I can't imagine anyone who isn't highly articulate/ educated and confident from sticking around.

That's a bit unfair, loads of MNers are illeducated, inarticulate and neurotic and yet manage to contribute to the (far more aggressive) AIBU. I think you underestimate the tenacity of TRAs and stupid people in general :-)

More seriously, I too regret the suspicious and touchy nature of some conversations on here but it's inevitable when one of poster/@lmake goady or transphobic comments just to grab a few screen shots or troll people and poor phrasing can get you deleted. I think debates continue very well under the circumstances.

More seriously, I too regret the suspicious and touchy nature of some conversations on here but it's inevitable when one of poster/@lmake goady or transphobic comments just to grab a few screen shots or troll people and poor phrasing can get you deleted

Absolutely

I think recognition of gender identity as s right - a facet of human dignity - as it were - is here to stay and we'd be better off working with that than railing against it if we want sex segregated spaces to be mainstream policy.

longest - I hear what you are saying and I think that anyone is free to express their gender identity in any way they like. I support the idea of people 'expanding what it means to be male' - like the fabulous pop stars of the 80's were doing - freedom of expression/dress etc.

Sadly, for many vulnerable youngsters, the concept of 'gender identity' seems to be applied to narrow their choices of expression, rather than expand them - if a girl is a bit of a tomboy and likes 'trucks' for example, then the narrative is that she must actually be a boy, not a girl and therefore is directed down a path that culminates in lifelong hormone treatment and major surgery, often a double mastectomy. The advocates for this are planting the idea in worried parents and distressed children that they may commit suicide if they don't transition as early and quickly as possible. I watched an horrific video where an American church had some sort of nursery age group of children who were being invited to 'come out' as lesbian, pansexual, trans, gay etc etc. These kids should not have these very adult concepts put into their little brains - kids are very literal thinkers and have very little concept of risk and consequences - that's why they are classed as children. Why on earth would a 5 year old need to come out as pansexual?? Yet that is what they were encouraging and giving them flowers and attention as a reward.

I don't know how much you know about the children's trans charity Mermaids but they were, until they made a sharp u turn recently, pushing this narrative that if you like pink, sparkly things you must be a girl, regardless of whether you were born a boy. This reduces being female to a concept defined by a very narrow set of social stereotypes. If you plopped a load of kids on a desert island (with some food obvs) but no accoutrements of the modern world, I would be certain that none of them would 'deal with their inner transphobia' (a quote from a trans person who has had rather a rapid journey from lesbian via nb to transman) and view themselves to be of the opposite sex. They would all just get on with being themselves.

Have you heard about the GIDS clinicians concerns that parents of children that may have been gay were very keen to be given a diagnosis of trans for their children. Some children reported suffering homophobic abuse in the home and then subsequently came out as 'trans' - how do you think that happened?

Question to longest - how do you define gender identity without resorting to the 'girl brain in boy body' idea (now rejected as an explanation by the trans charities) or narrow socially imposed gender stereotypes?

the atmosphere on here is so volatile and hostile

Oh rubbish. The tone of this thread is calm, rational and polite with reasonably explained issues.

It gets beyond irritating when a very few posters can't engage with actual debate - mostly because they know they can't argue against the points being made - and instead resort to just repeatedly flinging out the same red herring posts over and over, and to making silly, unsubstantiated statements like this in the hope that people reading will somehow see between all the very obviously calm, rational, reasoned posts and think these silly messages instead. It's like flashing up advertising in the middle of a Disney film. Just saying something really doesn't make it true.

That's a bit unfair, loads of MNers are illeducated, inarticulate and neurotic and yet manage to contribute to the (far more aggressive) AIBU.

I'm not 'educated' and I find it hard to make my points clearly and usually once I've managed to get it together find someone else has already made it far better!

I'm still going to make my voice heard though, it's important to me and at the risk of sounding up myself I think it's important generally. Mumsnet really gets up the noses of Trans Activists and that's very telling.

People come on here and expend a lot of time and energy telling pp that they're doing it all wrong, that their stats are wrong, their convictions are wrong - why do they feel the need to do that? It seems obvious to me that they want to try to break people down or goad them into saying something that will get them banned like donquixotedelamancha says.

@Quaagars
“Fishy” is what drag queens call themselves when they think they look fabulous. It is reference to female genitalia. At no stage did I insult women.

You sound like one of these well intentioned women, who don’t know very much about the trans umbrella / pride infiltration. And yes, for many drag comes under the trans umbrella, with drag Queen story time in libraries for the under 5’s, drag queens visiting schools. There was a recent scandal with a drag queen, who posts pornographic images of themselves on Twitter visiting a school in Scotland.

I am not anti trans. I am pro woman and children. Perhaps you should stick around and find out more - as there is more - instead of telling us we are trying to “instil fear”.

Also for the benefit of lurkers, always interesting to note which threads are most vigorously derailed and end up being pages of the same silly red herrings being repeated regardless of how anyone tries to engage, debate the point, point out the misconceptions. Then look at the OP and consider the phrase 'they only ever play the man with the ball'.

[quote turnitonagain]@Impatiens As Director of Public Prosecutions he worked to improve investigation of rape and prioritised FGM as a prosecutable crime as no charges for FGM had ever been brought against anyone before his tenure.

I’d say he has a career that shows a commitment to reducing violence against women, including a crime that can only be committed against a female human woman - FGM. But the tweet is “true colours.” OK.[/quote]
Yes and that's why his actions now are so disappointing. I think he does support women's rights and that he 's well aware of the tactics of TRA but he still validates them by allowing such a post to be put out.

I think he does support women's rights and that he 's well aware of the tactics of TRA but he still validates them by allowing such a post to be put out.

It has been up to this point a pretty consistent strategy of government and establishment in general: to try and pretend that it is possible to hold both positions simultaneously and be on everyone's side. And for it to be visible in this way that what is said, but what is done, do not represent reconcilable views. And this is largely based on female humans not being a scary group in any way to annoy, and it being not only quite fashionable and virtuous but also expected that you can say what you want to the female punters and electorate, because they're only female and will vote/buy from you anyway. It's kind of the kicked dog view of womanhood.

I reached this point fully with the Amnesty nonsense this weekend. This 'we can be on everyone's side' bullshit has to stop. Organisations and individuals must be faced with that if they put out these pretty virtue signals, and say nothing at all regarding the assault on women's rights - FGM ffs - or point out and separate themselves from the wrongness and moral indefensibility of some of the behaviours, actions and demands from this lobby - then they are actively colluding in, supporting and part of those behaviours and must take responsibility for doing so.

Didnt the labour party send out a load of letters/emails actively telling women rhey didn't want their vote or their contribution to the Labour Party?

They picked their side years ago...

It is a tough board to post on.

Mainly because it's not groundhog day, a lot of ideas and actions are well advanced and so when posters like wanderingstar put their wheels on the runway and make statements around an assumed failure here to engage with inclusive feminism and divergent LGBT opinion, it's actually quite a silly and ignorant assumption.

The exhortation to listen to others with an opinion made by wanderingstar can only be interpreted as a belief that we have all sat here for years talking in a vacuum. She did actually say you think you know everything. We have been informed hundreds of times here of every argument, and not just here. It's a bizzare assumption that we only read here.

There is an assumption that mumsnet feminist posters are an echo chamber but I think it's a failure to see that this is a talk board with a history and a membership who are fully engaged elsewhere too.

The board takes on a sort of goldfish rythym at times, with some posters stuck in the every present on every thread. I admire the patience of those that will deal with it but I can't when someone arrives with a superficial assessment of what mumsnet has been doing and where it is now and how easily we could be educated out of our misconception if we tried a bit of googling. No thanks, I will respond in kind.

@Escapeplanning

It is a tough board to post on.

Mainly because it's not groundhog day, a lot of ideas and actions are well advanced and so when posters like wanderingstar put their wheels on the runway and make statements around an assumed failure here to engage with inclusive feminism and divergent LGBT opinion, it's actually quite a silly and ignorant assumption.

The exhortation to listen to others with an opinion made by wanderingstar can only be interpreted as a belief that we have all sat here for years talking in a vacuum. She did actually say you think you know everything. We have been informed hundreds of times here of every argument, and not just here. It's a bizzare assumption that we only read here.

There is an assumption that mumsnet feminist posters are an echo chamber but I think it's a failure to see that this is a talk board with a history and a membership who are fully engaged elsewhere too.

The board takes on a sort of goldfish rythym at times, with some posters stuck in the every present on every thread. I admire the patience of those that will deal with it but I can't when someone arrives with a superficial assessment of what mumsnet has been doing and where it is now and how easily we could be educated out of our misconception if we tried a bit of googling. No thanks, I will respond in kind.

Yes, this is all very true. I have seen the same arguments dozens of times from people who think they are swooping in with the gotcha that is going to silence the radicalisation portal once and for all. I have asked the same counter questions dozens of times. I have received radio silence back in return dozens of times.

I find it much more accessible to post here now though than I did when I first joined about 10 years ago. It was a lot of academic theory stuff with a small number of very intelligent and totally intimidating people, I didn't know what they were on about half the time!

I feel like since FWR has grown there are a lot more 'normal' (for want of a better word!) every day women like myself on here, who aren't massively articulate or anything but understand the issues at hand very well.

If starmer was going to come out and say that he supported women's legal rights, he would have done so by now. Of course trans rights are human rights. No one has ever said they're not. But the erosion of women's rights to suit a minority of males with gender feels is not on. Starmer isn't interested in this. He's shown you who he is. He's unelectable. I doubt labour will ever get in power in my life time. Not unless half the population were stupid enough to willingly give up their legal rights and protections. Because that's what a labour vote means.

@Duckwit is there a need to be so condescending? Honestly what is the point?

I’ve said elsewhere on FWR my opinion. I think a lot of trans/gender NC is a trend among younger people that most will outgrow without undergoing medical treatment. The small number of genuinely gender dysmorphic people are, in my opinion, quite often emotionally and mentally fragile in other ways. Attacking them seems cruel, they are genuinely on the fringe of society no matter that a few of them have glam surgery and makeup and get attention on social media.

I do not believe that trans rights are a threat to women’s safety. MEN are a threat to women’s safety and they roam freely in society already. They don’t have to pretend to be women to attack us. Most of them abuse their family members who they already have access to.

So while I do believe that sex cannot be changed, I do not believe that trans rights are the threat that many on this forum do, and so my comments are from that position.

(cue frantic posting of links on how violent transwomen are and asking “what do I tell my daughter to do if she sees a man in the changing room.” Actually funny enough several of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims were recruited by his female accomplice in changing rooms.)

I lived in America when the debate on same sex marriage was raging and it was said that it would be the end of marriage, that society would collapse, that people would be marrying their dogs and video game consoles. Didn’t happen with that. Won’t happen with this.

So while I do believe that sex cannot be changed, I do not believe that trans rights are the threat that many on this forum do, and so my comments are from that position.

What, specifically, do you mean by 'trans rights'?

What's your view on self ID (as proposed in the consultation for reform of the GRA)?