Mumsnet says Trans Rights are Human Rights!

[ool0n]

I always assumed Mumsnet were not the biggest supporters of trans rights, given the stories about them. But this is a good statement on Twitter, "of course trans people exist, and of course trans rights are human rights"
twitter.com/MumsnetTowers/status/1367071394870276099

Also I thought using terms like cisgender or cis were against the rules, this isn't true either -
twitter.com/MumsnetTowers/status/1367080005193318401

So can I get a trans rights are human rights, trans women are women, trans men are men and non binary people are valid!

@bigotryisbad I've also just checked back and can not see that I have had any deletions on this thread. None at all. Zero, zip, nada. It seems you are stretching the truth there.

How tedious. A man has come to lecture the bad, bad mummies.

I note, yet again, that no TRAs ever get so aggrieved at the existence of Kiwi Farms. Why don't you go on there and lecture them?

OP. I wish you would clearly define what you mean by gender identity.

Saying you want a debate but not really answering the most basic question, makes it really hard to actually, you know, debate with you.

I am of the female sex so have a lot in common with other biological adult human females. But apart from that I don't conform to many female 'stereotypes'. My identity is me.

(It isn't really surprising that more regular posters start talking recipes when you as an OP are avoiding answering basic questions.)

That's not a change of identity, Pippa identifies as gender fluid. Changing identity there would be to force them into a binary identity But Pips Bunce epitomises the binary.

Man in suit, does manly boss things

Woman in skirt, does womanly boss things

And you might want to drop the conversion torture line. It doesn't work!

This particular 'thought experiment' is so stupid. Apart from the fact that it is literally impossible and therefore moot, you would have had however many years (presumably at least 18?) year as a man, socialised as a man, in a man's body, so yes, I'm not surprised if you woke up the following day with tits and a minge you would feel a little discombobulated. Assuming that's what you mean by 'typically considered a woman's body'!

Yes I've always thought it was a stupid argument. If it happened I think you'd probably just go insane not just 'struggle with your gender identity'.

[quote RowanMumsnet]@bigotryisbad This might be a genuine piece of miscommunication - our assertion that we welcome debate is our statement, as in MNHQ's (the mod team and the people who run the site). MN has about 8 million users a month - we really can't claim that all MN users agree with us on anything[/quote]
Welcoming debate on a forum where the responses to very politely worded disagreement with the anti-trans norm have been both racist and transphobic rather than admitting that MNHQ a significant issue with both...

Is an issue that MNHQ need to address.

I'd say to anyone who thinks they're making it up, or not serious about their identity, why doesn't the threat of literal torture make them drop the pretence?

You seem to think we imagine that people who are gender non conforming are somehow 'lying'. We don't. We just think they are expressing their individual personality, not their gender.

Trans people's existing rights to use the spaces and services that align with their Equality Act 2010 section 7 protected characteristic are not 'in conflict' with women's rights.

The protected characteristic in the EA is 'gender reassignment'.

For the purposes of objective legislation, what does 'gender reassignment' mean, and what is a 'trans person'?

There are of course single sex exemptions in the EA which apply even if someone has a GRC. Do you agree with these exemptions or are you on the side of Stonewall who think that females shouldn't be entitled to any single sex spaces and want this exemption removed?

@WhatWouldPhyllisCraneDo

Everyone has a gender identity, there are 60+ years of research into gender identity and when children express theirs. Usually around 2-4 years old. Interesting. Between the ages of 2 and about 7 I would say, DS2 was very very into "traditional" girls things. His favourite colour was pink. His favourite socks were pink fleecy ones with rabbits on (he cried when he outgrew them and they are still in his sock drawer at 14). When he needed a new mattress he chose the pink one and was upset when we had to put a sheet over it because he couldn't see it anymore Etc etc. In short, if i believed in such nonsense, I might have said he was female gender. Hes 14 now and very definitely male sex and gender, although he has almost waist length hair.

At a similar age both my dc wanted to be dogs and would often play 'fetch' and drink water from a bowl on the floor.
I'm not sure that behaviour as 2-4 year olds has any bearing on what children become or indeed want to become.

Anyway. Back to malt loaf. Toasted you say? I'll have to try it! Also how do you slice it without it becoming a sad looking squished lump? I tend to buy the sliced one for ease, but its not always available.

Serrated knife. It’s a game changer!

@CuriousaboutSamphire

Are you saying that the post by *@BaronessWrongCrowd* that you quoted is trransphobic and threatening?

That's the oddest and most unsupportable accusation I've seen here in years!

Thank you. I think that this poster is seeing things that they want to see, not what is actually there.

Apros of nothing.

What time is it across the time zones of the Northern Americas and Austrailia?

Are many people now un/underemployed in those countries due to Covid19?

Trans people's existing rights to use the spaces and services that align with their Equality Act 2010 section 7 protected characteristic are not 'in conflict' with women's rights.

'Trans people' don't have a Right in law to use these spaces. That's the truth.

As others have said, of course trans rights are human rights, it does not mean that trans women are women or that trans men are men. Children's rights are human rights, it does not mean that children are adults. (An analogy of two groups that fall into human rights, obviously not comparing trans people to children in any other sense other than being human)

But the question is, is Mumsnet HQ saying they are now supporting trans-rights because they really do support trans-rights? Or because they have lost all their sponsors/advertising contracts and realise noone wants to work with them anymore?

As far as I know MN has always supported trans rights. Because trans rights are human rights. Please explain what human rights trans people do not have.

Cis is a scientific term, in Latin, as is trans. Cis meaning "this side of" and trans meaning "the other side of". If trans is a valid prefix as used in any context, so is cis. "Cis" is the best word for describing all people who are not "trans" because it doesn't discriminate against partial cis positions (for example, non-trans women only) but instead, describes all in that group (for example, all the men and all the women and people who do not identify as trans). There is no other definitive word to describe all non-trans people. Being "offended" by the word is a learned response, based on not-knowing, rather than it being a word of denigration. (Some people might be new to this understanding of 'cis', others are not new to it, but remain offended out of preference.)

Trans people's existing rights to use the spaces and services that align with their Equality Act 2010 section 7 protected characteristic are not 'in conflict' with women's rights. Except for when they are. WHich is what is discussed here. The conflict, as defined by owmen. Who have an equal right in law to want the laws upheld.

They have existed for decades in this form and in previous versions and there is no evidence that this has lead to systematic issues for cis women, trans women, cis men or trans men. Not cis. Men, women, transmen, transwomen. And given recent court and HoL debates and cases you are whistling into the wind with that one!

In this thread alone, this claim has been made repeatedly, without evidence. Lots of evidence. MoJ today...

To justify or excuse the removal of existing legal rights and protections from trans people. To demand the protection of womens rights

This is extremely transphobic. Which given what you are railing about is extremely misogynistic!

I say the "discombobulation" is the disjunction between my identity and my new body. No identity, no discombobulation.

You would feel weird because you are a bloke who wakes up with a woman's body!

I would feel weird if I woke up tomorrow with a cock and balls - not least because I have a gynaecology appointment next week to work out why I am bleeding between my periods when I shouldnt be, and I wouldnt really know what to tell the hospital

[quote BaronessWrongCrowd]@bigotryisbad that's quite the claim to make. Please can you explain how exactly how it is transphobic and threatening?

Please bear in mind that if it was either of those things then it would have been deleted by @MNHQ very promptly. Me thinks you doth protest too much.

[/quote]
Given that one of your posts was deleted very promptly by MNHQ (for which I thank them), I think you've neatly proved my point.

@Soubriquet

Trans right are humans rights Women rights are human rights Men rights are human rights Trans women are trans women Trans men are trans men

This a billion times.

It's interesting that the OP seems to have only posted on this one thread.

@bigotryisbad Well, we obviously don't agree the opinions expressed here are transphobic (any more than we think your opinions are misogynist) because if we did we'd delete them.

One post - that, to reiterate, was deleted within three minutes - used a racist slur to make an ill-advised point about the legitimacy of using contentious language in a discussion about language. It was deleted immediately for the racist slur but it honestly feels like a very big reach to use that (on a thread of 250+ posts and counting) to characterise the response of MN users overall as 'racist'. Again - we'd ask you to do this in good faith. Because we are.

Some people on here assert their entire identity as a man or woman is based on their bodies.

No. They assert that they have to deal with the consequences of biological sex regardless of identity.

I'm really trying to understand your argument (still waiting for the explanation of how a 2 year old asserts their gender identity), but unfortunately it's difficult to know where to start when you seem to have completely misunderstood the GC feminist argument.

Some people on here assert their entire identity as a man or woman is based on their bodies. So logically if they woke up with a different one, they'd just say "OK, I'm a man/woman now" and carry on sans-discombobulation.

I am yet to understand what 'identity' means. You have posted a few things about stereotypes but nothing actually relevant to why I, personally, have a gender identity. And why, you feel that you are able to assert that I do.

[quote JoodyBlue]@ool0n My comment was to illustrate that gender expression in children does change, most of the time. Children developing, growing, changing, do try on identities like costumes. It is a natural part of development. My kids did this all the time.

I don't know anything at all about conversion therapy. Can you point me to some reading?

I will also say however, that I do support people to live the lives they want to. Almost everyone on this forum would agree with that.[/quote]
Gender expression =/= gender identity. Which is why I raised the pink example, when being "manly" was liking pink that had no effect on gender identity.

You can read someone's first hand account of attempts to electro-shock the trans out of them here - (CN here!)
twitter.com/FMStompdotcom/status/1085543284464930816

Study into conversion therapy and the effect it does have - poor mental health for trans people.
jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/article-abstract/2749479