Mumsnet Says They Are Trans Friendly; What do you think?

[Nightinghawk]

I’m coming over from Twitter since @/MumsnetTowers has encouraged people to join, promising that they would not ban people for using the word “cis” and also that they think “Campaigning against trans people’s existing human rights and legal protections is transphobic” is “an interesting question and a debate [they’d] welcome seeing on the boards.” When asked if they believe that trans women are women, trans men are men, and nonbinary people are nonbinary, they responded with “We believe adults have a right to say what they think about matters of active public debate.” However, they do say they do not tolerate hate speech, malicious content, sweeping negative generalizations, derogatory or aggressive content on their site.

Given the conflicting messages I’ve seen from them in the past, and the fact that they to this day think campaigns against trans people’s rights could in any way not be transphobic and their hesitance to affirm trans people’s autonomy in our self-description and our gender(s), I’m hesitant to believe that Mumsnet the site is actually trans friendly. I mean this as no disrespect to the mod team or others in position of authority; it is merely my opinion (and lived experiences) that any online forum that doesn’t immediately consider campaigns against trans people’s rights as transphobic tend to have (accidentally or otherwise) cultivated a transphobic customer base on their forums. I say this as a trans person who has been leveled all kinds of harassment in a variety of online forums, where those which had not condemned transphobia had immensely more transphobia in quantity and in vitriol.

All this is to say, I’d like to hear your (Mumsnet’s users’) opinions on the matter. Is Mumsnet really a trans friendly space? Do you believe that advocating against trans people’s existing rights is transphobic or anti-trans? Do you think these existing rights for trans people are “interesting” enough for “debate”? Do you think the term cis should be censored? Am I safe asking for/providing advice here as a trans person? Why? Why not?

For reference: I am nonbinary trans and use xe/xem pronouns. I understand they can be difficult to use or to remember to be used for some people. If you don’t want to use my pronouns, then please use my username: Nightinghawk, or NH as shorthand.

It's woman friendly. That doesn't mean it's flowers and sunshine for every woman all the time. There are opinions.

Just catching up with this thread with my morning cuppa.

I believe our recent visitors from Twitter are answering Mimmymum's rallying cry to expose Mumsnet as a vile cesspit of transphobia to the Marketing bods at Soreen, convincing them that they would be accepting the devil's coin if a feminist ever purchased a maltloaf.

I feel the tactic may have backfired. If Soreen follow the trail to this board what they'll see is page after page after page (the other thread filled up within a few hours) of women putting their points across patiently, respectfully, with some humour and an unassailable barrage of facts and evidence.

The thing is, it's always dazzlingly obvious on these threads which side has the better quality of evidence-based argument. Which side has robust stats from respected sources. Which side looks to clearly definable terms on which to base law. And which side relies on faith-based belief, obfuscation and co-opting the struggles of other protected groups. I think that most people wandering in here for a read from outside the trans-twitter bubble wouldn't see any transphobia, just good questions intelligently posed.

As is so often the case, I'm not sure that Mimmymum has done those she seeks to represent any favours at all.

@MissLucyEyelesbarrow

Disability and biological sex are not analogous.

Disability can take many forms, can fluctuate, and is often context-specific and therefore, to an extent, subjective. Not all individuals with the same impairment consider themselves disabled, or they may consider themselves disabled in some contexts but not others (as I do with my own disability).

Biological sex is none of those things. It is binary (yes, even for people with DSDs), irrevocably determined at the moment of conception in all mammals, and is consistent at all times for any given individual. It can be objectively scientifically determined. It remains objectively true, whether or not the individual concerned accepts it.

This .

Also maltloaf - yum

@TheLovleyChebbyMcGee

I think the vast majority of mumsnet is transphobic. They resist using peoples preferred pronouns, deadname people, and assume that trans people want access to single sex spaces to rape women

They resist using peoples preferred pronouns

I have seen none of that on here.

deadname people

I have never seen that happen

assume that trans people want access to single sex spaces to rape women

Not true, wanting women to have privacy and their own safe space is the issue, and you know it.

.... Not to mention many, many mentions of desire to eat malt-loaf! Advertising win, which is the point of advertising a product which doesn't require the consumer to believe anything in order to enjoy it.

@SirVixofVixHall

Also maltloaf - yum

Really important question To toast or not?

@ErrolTheDragon

Chemistry pedant... for those of you who didn't do a couple of degrees in chemistry

Cis and trans are configurational isomers, not mirror images (that's chirality, 'handedness'). And they're chemically (not merely optically) different - they can have different boiling points and different properties. An obvious everyday case is in saturated fats, one form is now known to be worse for you than the other. They're simply different and not generally interconvertible. All the same bits, but in different places, so no analogy with biology at all really.

Hi five, fellow pedant.

If the TRA movement insist on using a clumsy and misleading chemistry metaphor, they might at least use the right one

I believe our recent visitors from Twitter are answering Mimmymum's rallying cry to expose Mumsnet as a vile cesspit of transphobia to the Marketing bods at Soreen, convincing them that they would be accepting the devil's coin if a feminist ever purchased a maltloaf

No, it was MN themselves who invited people to post and see for themselves that they were open to "debate on the boards."

But, but, "it's Latin!"

How tiresome.
There’s about another 50 threads of op’s posting the same shit to appear clever and asking the same questions.
Why can’t Mumsnet hq just post links to those on Twitter so we can get on with other things?

Gah. Sorry - slow thumbs this morning! As someone else said, this board is full of frighteningly intelligent women, experts in all areas of life and experiences, so if you want to debate, you need to do so with good faith and with knowledge. It doesn't matter if you're not brilliant at articulating your points, but please don't use "fancy" terms / phrases that you yourself don't fully understand in order to shut down discussion - it's very likely that someone here will have an advanced degree in it....

They resist using peoples preferred pronouns

I have seen none of that on here

Really?!
Just two examples
A thread just the other day - someone posted about their trans son and the thread constantly referred to as "OP's daughter."

Also it is very common to use "they" when referring to trans people on here, even when the person goes by she, or he.
Which confused me when I first saw these discussions on the boards, but soon realised was a way to make sure nobody had to refer to the preferred pronouns.

As someone else said, this board is full of frighteningly intelligent women, experts in all areas of life and experiences, so if you want to debate, you need to do so with good faith and with knowledge. It doesn't matter if you're not brilliant at articulating your points, but please don't use "fancy" terms / phrases that you yourself don't fully understand in order to shut down discussion - it's very likely that someone here will have an advanced degree in it....

Great point.

No, it was MN themselves who invited people to post and see for themselves that they were open to "debate on the boards."

And I think this was in response to someone called ChloeClark who replied to the Mimmymum tweet with "@SoreenHQ Why are you working with Mumsnets when they openly support transphobic, homophobic and racism on their site? And punish anyone who dare to speaks out about it on their site"
The conversation went on from there.

I think most Mumsnetters actually don't get involved in any of the conversation around trans on here. I am one of those Mumsnetters! Until now anyway!

I am here mainly for the Style and Beauty board and the Baby Names board. Sometimes I get dragged into the weight problem chats, but I try to avoid those too, as a vocal minority of Mumsnetters are fatphobic cunts.

Anyway, as to your question; I am happy to use pronouns he / she / they or whatever the person would like. I personally don't identify with any gender, but I'm a natal woman, (cis, if you must), as I was born with a vagina, uterus etc. I've given birth, had periods, breastfed and so on.

What has bothered me about the wider conversation, outside Mumsnet, is the notion that a trans woman can self identify as a woman and walk straight into female only spaces. Do I think all trans women are evil rapists, just because some of them choose not to undergo the full surgery and still have a penis etc? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! I'm not a nutcase. Obviously, I don't think that and if I meet a transwoman in normal day to day life, I chat to her as a woman, as far as that's even a thing.

Do I think someone who identified (publicly at least) as a man yesterday and identifies as a woman today, should be able to access changing rooms with women and little girls in there? No, sorry, I don't. It's because I've had bad experiences with penis owners, (not necessarily men, obviously). And the problem was indeed, their penis. So it does make me a little jumpy if I'm butt naked and unexpectedly there's someone with me, in a female only space with their penis on full show. Maybe this is a 'me' problem and I just shouldn't use public changing rooms? Who knows what the wider population thinks? I know what MN thinks, so nobody needs to tell me from here. But interested in what op thinks. Genuinely interested. Not wishing to goad.

I also find it irritating that women are the ones having to accommodate trans, while men don't. Trans men use female prisons (it wouldn't be safe to have them in with cis men). Transwomen also use female prisons. So cis women have to accommodate. Cis men don't seem to have to accommodate, and they are clearly the problem (sorry menz) if both transwomen and trans men feel unsafe being housed with them.

Womens health it is sometime suggested should be changed to be more inclusive....oh what was it "health for people who get pregnant and bleed" 🤢. But I didn't see anyone saying mens health should be changed to "people who have penises and ejaculate". Or maybe I missed it.

It annoys me that womens issues panels now have people who lived lives as highly privileged men, (although they were trans women all along). But nobody knew that, so they were treated by others, with the same level of privilege that white, wealthy men tend to receive. Now they are experts on issues facing women, having lived openly as women for only a short time...? Are they? I know when we consider intersectionality, they are under privileged because they are trans, and if they joined a panel for trans rights I'd think "yes, of course, you know more about that". But they have lived with the privilege afforded to men, for a long time already. Seems a bit much for them to now have a voice on a panel for issues affecting a historically oppressed section of society, (women I mean...or is it people with uteri?), on the face of it.

Just my thoughts. I very rarely voice them on here.

I do think refusing to use someone's pronouns is shitty. I do think transpeople are discriminated against generally and do face a number of dangers just for living their lives and that is unacceptable. Trans rights are human rights - yes, absolutely. But, women (cis), also are human and have rights. So, there is a balance and a conversation to be had, without people screaming TERF or cis scum at anyone who wants to have that conversation.

@SirVixofVixHall

Also maltloaf - yum

Yum.

We once made Soreen beer. It was cracking. We definitely should do it again.

A major thing I've seen come from this forum is people saying "trans women are not women" and subsequent misgendering and exclusion, but I'd like to know if that's just a vocal minority, as some have said already, or if it's truly a majority on this forum.

Yes most women here (and elsewhere I think) believe if one only self-ID and have not actually committed to be the gender they identify as via gender reassignment surgery then they are not transwoman/transman. Not saying it's my belief or not, but that is how most women (and men I think) see it.

Toasting soreen? That is the devil's sport. Recommend eating entirely plain,slightly softened and warmed in the microwave with a cup of tea. Mmm.

@WellityWellityWellity

I think most Mumsnetters actually don't get involved in any of the conversation around trans on here. I am one of those Mumsnetters! Until now anyway!

I am here mainly for the Style and Beauty board and the Baby Names board. Sometimes I get dragged into the weight problem chats, but I try to avoid those too, as a vocal minority of Mumsnetters are fatphobic cunts.

Anyway, as to your question; I am happy to use pronouns he / she / they or whatever the person would like. I personally don't identify with any gender, but I'm a natal woman, (cis, if you must), as I was born with a vagina, uterus etc. I've given birth, had periods, breastfed and so on.

What has bothered me about the wider conversation, outside Mumsnet, is the notion that a trans woman can self identify as a woman and walk straight into female only spaces. Do I think all trans women are evil rapists, just because some of them choose not to undergo the full surgery and still have a penis etc? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! I'm not a nutcase. Obviously, I don't think that and if I meet a transwoman in normal day to day life, I chat to her as a woman, as far as that's even a thing.

Do I think someone who identified (publicly at least) as a man yesterday and identifies as a woman today, should be able to access changing rooms with women and little girls in there? No, sorry, I don't. It's because I've had bad experiences with penis owners, (not necessarily men, obviously). And the problem was indeed, their penis. So it does make me a little jumpy if I'm butt naked and unexpectedly there's someone with me, in a female only space with their penis on full show. Maybe this is a 'me' problem and I just shouldn't use public changing rooms? Who knows what the wider population thinks? I know what MN thinks, so nobody needs to tell me from here. But interested in what op thinks. Genuinely interested. Not wishing to goad.

I also find it irritating that women are the ones having to accommodate trans, while men don't. Trans men use female prisons (it wouldn't be safe to have them in with cis men). Transwomen also use female prisons. So cis women have to accommodate. Cis men don't seem to have to accommodate, and they are clearly the problem (sorry menz) if both transwomen and trans men feel unsafe being housed with them.

Womens health it is sometime suggested should be changed to be more inclusive....oh what was it "health for people who get pregnant and bleed" 🤢. But I didn't see anyone saying mens health should be changed to "people who have penises and ejaculate". Or maybe I missed it.

It annoys me that womens issues panels now have people who lived lives as highly privileged men, (although they were trans women all along). But nobody knew that, so they were treated by others, with the same level of privilege that white, wealthy men tend to receive. Now they are experts on issues facing women, having lived openly as women for only a short time...? Are they? I know when we consider intersectionality, they are under privileged because they are trans, and if they joined a panel for trans rights I'd think "yes, of course, you know more about that". But they have lived with the privilege afforded to men, for a long time already. Seems a bit much for them to now have a voice on a panel for issues affecting a historically oppressed section of society, (women I mean...or is it people with uteri?), on the face of it.

Just my thoughts. I very rarely voice them on here.

I do think refusing to use someone's pronouns is shitty. I do think transpeople are discriminated against generally and do face a number of dangers just for living their lives and that is unacceptable. Trans rights are human rights - yes, absolutely. But, women (cis), also are human and have rights. So, there is a balance and a conversation to be had, without people screaming TERF or cis scum at anyone who wants to have that conversation.

Great post and I agree with all your points.

Also it is very common to use "they" when referring to trans people on here, even when the person goes by she, or he. Which confused me when I first saw these discussions on the boards, but soon realised was a way to make sure nobody had to refer to the preferred pronouns.

That's because language is important. It's very hard to argue that "she" shouldn't be in a women's prison, or on an all women's shortlist.

By accepting calling a man "she" we make it harder to explain why that man should be treated the same as other men.

I will not call a man she or a woman he as it's not possible to change sex.

I believe that people who are trans should be able to present as they wish and have all the same rights as everyone else to housing, jobs, healthcare, I do not believe that they should be able to change their legal sex.

I will not call a man she or a woman he

OK, that's fair enough but for the poster who was saying "never seen any of that on here"
there you go then.

@bethanybiskits

I see people offended by 'cis'. Are you also offended by 'straight'? Because the exact same arguments have been made by homophobes.

It's not a slur, it's a completely appropriate word to use in the context of discussing gender and sex. I'm white. I'm female. I'm British. I'm cis. Frankly, it doesn't matter if you're offended by it, the word isn't going away; it's useful and is the correct latin form opposite of trans.

Yes, I am offended by the term straight. Know why? Because what's the opposite of straight? Bent. CROOKED. It insinuates that a gay person is somehow a crooked person. A bent person. Not being lesbian myself, but having a friend since I was 11 years old in primary school who is lesbian, I know it upsets her and other lesbians (and perhaps gay men) that the insinuation is you either are straight or crooked.

Hence I never use the term 'straight' any more after I learned that it offensive lesbian and gays and derides them by virtue of the of what the opposite insinuates.

Just as the 'n' word isn't going away, it doesn't mean it is acceptable to use. Cis is a slur. Just as the n word is.

I haven’t rtft but since we are requesting preferred language I’ll also say please do not use cis.

What trans rights have you decided that the people on MN are against?

I'm picking this post up from the end of the full thread since it was not answered, and these are assumptions that definitely need unpicking as they fail to understand or recognise the issues for some women that are here.

The right to use the right toilet for them, for a start

I see your point, that personal choice of space that is 'right for you' is absolutely important.

However it's important to everyone and not just trans people. What do you intend the women should do who cannot use mixed sex spaces and are excluded from any toilet facility unless there are some single sex ones respected for the use of those women? This respect and care is a two way thing, we can't just vanish or erase those women who can't do it. And it's hardly kind or inclusive or feminist to not see and recognise the diversity of need here.

This is a women's rights forum. Women are going to stand up for those women: not going unquestioningly along with what is best for trans people regardless of the issues it raises for women is not 'being against trans rights'. If it is, then the pursuit of those rights is rather gynephobic really, because it sees women's needs and issues as lesser and worthy of contempt rather than equality of care and consideration.

The right to call themselves trans without mock or ridicule

You're going to have to evidence that, since I've never seen that allowed to stand. I've also not seen women here have any problem with anyone calling themselves whatever they choose. The issues tend to arise when there is a mocking and ridiculing of women who want the equality of right to call themselves adult human females, to sustain sex based rights, and to reject labels they do not identify with or agree with, such as 'cis'. Either this respect has to work both ways, with the same values for everyone, or it's probably not going to work, is it?

The right to use medical intervention if that's what they want to do

I don't think you'll find anyone on a women's rights forum who don't feel that adults are entitled to do whatever they want. I think you're referring to the Keira Bell case, and concern over child safeguarding and the ethics of children making very significantly life altering choices of medical intervention. Complicated question, as the judges established and will establish again in court. But anyone who cares about children would naturally want this scrutiny. It's hardly being against their rights, in fact quite the contrary.

The right to use certain pronouns

Which has to be balanced with compelled speech. Very complex issue, there is a balance of people's rights here because if you want one form of speech to be respected on one side because of feelings, needs and identity, then there has to be mutual respect that the person on the other side of the conversation has feelings, needs and identity too.

The right to change gender

Again you'll have to evidence this, as I'm not sure what this means. Anyone is free to be any gender they choose, obviously, it's not something under anyone else's control nor should be. MN as a whole is pretty passionate that anyone of any sex can be or do anything. If however the right to change gender means the right to access all sex based spaces by choice instead of by sex then obviously there are issues there for women who need single sex spaces.

Again, it's about a balance of consideration and answers that work for everyone. One person cannot have absolute freedom at the expense and limitation of another: there cannot be freedoms for one person to do as they please while telling another person that they may not have the same freedom or consideration.

Women having sex based needs does put limits and difficulties around absolute self identification of sex. It's something that needs balance and discussion and answers found that work for all. It's not 'hate' or being 'anti trans rights' for women to speak about their needs and point out conflict. Surely if it is then it's gynephobic to attempt to suppress and silence women from equal consideration and mention of their needs?

And some inclusive policies are turning out to be harmful to some women. Who have rights too. For example the seven women whose sexual assaults were being discussed in court yesterday following the inclusion of transwomen prisoners in prison. Those women matter as much as the transwomen do. Don't they?