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!

Sure, the US National Trans Survey. Shows 80-90% of trans men and women do, or want to, take HRT.

That doesn't equate to having the hormonal makeup of their acquired sex - even if you accept 'acquired' as being the rght word!!

That's why feminists (At least the ones I know) define woman as an identity, as to be a woman you don't need a particular biology or to follow a particular role. You are one if you say you are.

Absolute piffle. Tell that to the women dying in menstruation huts or the girls suffering FGM. Just identify out of being female and nobody will hurt you.

Sure, the US National Trans Survey. Shows 80-90% of trans men and women do, or want to, take HRT.

Thanks, that's not what I thought you meant at all!

You are saying that transmen and transwomen take HRT and/or want to take HRT. Right. Why would transmen take HRT?

Taking hormones doesn't change your sex. It's not possible to 'acquire' a sex.

Why is it that reams of virtual paper and veritable galaxies of pixels are expended on “what is a woman”, and absolutely none on “what is a man”, do we suppose?

Any takers?

There are 33,000 peer reviewed papers on Google Scholar

OP, you seem to be hung up on 'papers' and 'academia'.

Anyone can write a paper and get it reviewed, and just because a term is used by 'some' academics doesn't make it correct or mean that it will not offend some people

Not really the point at hand but I will take the spelling lesson as I agree that words are important.

Pseudo = somethng that is no genuine

Sudo = a Linux command (that I haven't used in about 30 years "super user do") or is the first part of the name of a soothing cream.

Given we are discussing the meaning of words when identifyng things/people, I don't think it's too much to ask that the words used are correct!

That's why feminists (At least the ones I know) define woman as an identity, as to be a woman you don't need a particular biology or to follow a particular role. You are one if you say you are

I found that actually offensive merry.

@PheasantPlucker1

TransRightsRCool as I explained, I feel gender is irrelevant to me personally. I dont understand the concepts or recognise a feeling of "gender".

Im genuinely interested how feeling non binary differs from this, or how you define it, as the few explanations I have read seem very similar.

I agree with this. I expect that there is massive crossover between lots of gender critical women and on binary people in the way that they feel and they present themselves. The fundamental difference is the ideology that you choose to interpret that through.

"This is the thing that confuses me. You are one if you say you are - VERY few concepts in the world are like this. I"m not a royal if I say I am.I'm not black if I say I am. I'm not rich, or 8 years old, or blind, or a cat, or beautiful, or thin, or a member of the Labour Party, or an astronaut JUST because I say I am. We acknowledge that in the world membership of categories have conditions that have to be met. I can't be thin if I weigh 500 lbs. I can't be blind if I have 20/20 vision. I can't be 8 years old if my birth year is 1950. So why is 'woman' magically the only concept where the mere utterance 'I am one' makes it so? "

This above is brilliant

@Sophoclesthefox

Why is it that reams of virtual paper and veritable galaxies of pixels are expended on “what is a woman”, and absolutely none on “what is a man”, do we suppose?

Any takers?

I think it begins with M.

@TeenMinusTests

bigotry The reason that this forum has developed it's reputation is the suggestion that those sudo-philosophical debates provide any justification at all for the removal of human rights and legal protections from trans people in the UK.

Sorry What? Where does this forum try to remove human rights or legal protections from trans people?

All it tries to do is to protect the rights of women, and wrt trans people that means not expanding the definition of women to include transwomen. I've never seen it written for example that transwomen shouldn't have normal protections to employment, protection by police, or whatever, just that they shouldn't encroach on female single sex areas.

You are grossly misrepresenting things, and it does your argument no good.

I have already pointed out that trans people, by laws that have existed in various forms for 80 years and which haven't changed in over a decade, already have the right to use the spaces which align with their gender identity.

These rights are protected in the Equality Act and the common law which it fundamentally repeats. I have set all of this out already in this thread and you're welcome to follow the links and confirm that this is the law. It's also backed up by the statutory guidance issued by the ECHR.

So "female single sex areas" already includes trans women and have done since before basically everyone in this thread was born. Pretending that it doesn't and that it hasn't is trying to remove remove human rights or legal protections from trans people.

God are you still twosting?

here is no definition of "female" in the law by biology. what does that mean? In law? There's no legal definition of "tosh" or "bunkum" but they still have meaning!

In fact trans women and trans men can change their sex markers, the governments legal recognition of their sex, to F and M respectively on all their documentation. That stands for "Female" and "Male". Yes, as has been said a few time, the legal fiction of a GRA was intended to negate the necessity of same sex marriages; were identified as being problematic at the time and are proving to be so now!

I refer you to the Scottish legal definition of "woman" that includes trans women with and without a GRC. That's based on the EA 2010 and the GRA 2004. And we will all happily refer you to the ongoing legal challenges of that definition! Not to mention its absurdity!

This is something I should have asked years ago really, but surely the "gender"- ie, the set of stereotypes that have been traditionally imposed upon and associated with the female sex is femininity, not woman?

"Woman" is different to female in that it's specific to humans and specific to adults. For me, this is where it went wrong. Men are welcome to be as feminine as they like, I'd argue for their right to do that. But they aren't women.

I don’t understand how it’s possible to be a feminist if you can’t explain what female means. Why would you bother to defend the rights of a group whose only common trait is that they identify with something that might be an aesthetic on tumblr - except that would require a clearer definition. What rights would thus group need? Why would they suffer discrimination?

@bigotryisbad I’m an employment lawyer with a big focus on discrimination. Happy to discuss this in detail with you because I don’t think the Equality Act says what you think it says.

That's why feminists (At least the ones I know) define woman as an identity, as to be a woman you don't need a particular biology or to follow a particular role. You are one if you say you are

Well you wouldn't get any marks if you gave that answer in a Biology exam.

@ArabellaScott

Sure, the US National Trans Survey. Shows 80-90% of trans men and women do, or want to, take HRT.

Thanks, that's not what I thought you meant at all!

You are saying that transmen and transwomen take HRT and/or want to take HRT. Right. Why would transmen take HRT?

Taking hormones doesn't change your sex. It's not possible to 'acquire' a sex.

Trans men take HRT to up their testosterone levels, that's what Hormone Replacement Therapy is. Replacing your bodies endogenous hormones with exogenous hormones.

You're right hormones are an aspect of biological sex, and just taking them doesn't change it. Surgery can change primary aspects of bio sex, hormones affect secondary aspects of bio sex.

Do people seriously have nothing better to do than to comb through the site looking for companies to go crying to

Could it be their job? Who knows? No idea

. I refer you to the Scottish legal definition of "woman" that includes trans women with and without a GRC.

Only if applying to join a Public Board as a non executive member.
Also the Equality Act does recognise female as being sex based when it maintains the right of male primogeniture even when a person born female has changed their sex marker to male.

You’re missing the kind of crucial part that in that time, the meaning of “trans” has changed beyond recognition, bigotry. When the GRA was brought in, part of the reason it was approved was that supporters were adamant that the sum total of transsexual people applying for GRCs would be about 5000 (and they were pretty close, as it turned out). There was a medical pathway to follow, and clear definitions.

Now we’re here in 2021 when, apparently, being a woman is anyone who so chooses, and being trans is your gender identity, which no longer has anything to do with helping people combat their crippling dysphoria, but is about how you express yourself.

Things have changed completely, but you’re using a sleight of hand to create equivalence.

I wish I'd known i could just identify out of being a woman.

Then I would have done so when I was a sexually abused teen. Maybe the abuse would have stopped and I wouldn't have ended up pregnant and told it was my fault.
Then when my PMDD voices tell me to kill myself I could tell them I'm not in fact a woman and could they please go away.
When I had a miscarriage. When my period is so heavy I soak through 2 super extra massively thick pads in an hour. Not great when I'm at work.

So how exactly do I identify out of that?

You get the idea. And yes I know boys can also be CSA victims. But my abuser only abused me, never my younger brother. And yes go and see the dr about the gyne issues. I did. They told me "some women have heavy periods".

In fact if we can identify as whatever we want, and we are that because we say we are Then I identify as a 4 year old. I will return to nursery on Monday and someone else can do the cooking and cleaning for a change.

There is a prohibitition under s13 of the Equality Act which makes all discrimination on grounds of Gender reassignment unlawful. The section 7 definition of "Gender reassignment" in the act is drawn widely: "A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.” Read the wording of the definition. It creates a subjective test of intention to transition any physiological or other attributes of sex. That doesn't just include binary trans people, it protects non binary people too

Direct discrimination under section 13 requires a comparator.

Where is your authority for the suggestion the appropriate comparator for a trans woman without a GRC is a natal woman?

I’ll give you R (Green) v Secretary of State for Justice [2013] as my authority that the correct comparator for a trans woman without a GRC is a man.

So section 13 when read in conjunction with section 7 says only you must not treat a trans woman less favourably than a man. It protects against less favourable treatment for the fact of being trans, or doesn’t give a right to be treated as a woman.

Above post FAO @bigotryisbad