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.

@Kit19

"if your feminism centres men its not feminism" fixed that for you

THIS.

I missed kaineus’s posts last night, and really enjoyed reading them this morning. Thoughtful and civilised. I had high hopes that the thread could be productive with posts like that. But what baffles me is that posters who purport to be trans allies don’t seem to have noticed that contribution and this morning have apparently scrolled right by them and would prefer to continue to just focus on how awful FWR and the women here are, and how we’re immune to reason or human kindness.

Huh.

I think there is a real cognitive dissonance there about how these are real people, not some ideological bogeyman out to spite their rights.

Of course they're real people, and you'll find a lot of sympathetic comments here about children and young people who hate their bodies enough to want to make extreme, irreversible changes to them. But please don't attack us for wanting to try to prevent those children from making mistakes that they will have to live with for the rest of their lives.

I am female. I am an adult. I am not being discriminated against if I am refused access to a service which is only provided to children.

We have (single sex) protections and provisions made for biologically female women under UK law.

Gender being disconnected from someone's sex means separate provisions and protections are required. The needs are separate and different.

Gender being essentially a social construct which is concerned with ideologies and how people think individually, I would say, requires provision which is centred in psychology. It should be aimed at easing the internal discomfort felt when someone feels their gender doesn't match their sex. Which is an unease over their body at even the cellular level (since sex in in our DNA). If we can ease that discomfort then there is much less of a problem. My thoughts are that, since gender expression can be pretty varied and fluid between the sexes, there is no real need to feel a mismatch. It is important this is tackled, for peace of mind, since we cannot eradicate or change our very DNA.

Eteri

The script never changes an inch, it's like pressing the button on a talking doll and at this point it's just boring. There's no productive conversation to be had on the topic here.

What would you consider a productive outcome to the conversation?

Can you put yourself in our shoes and understand the concerns we are discussing?

Can you specify exactly what you would like women to consider from your side of the table?

Do you think women are right to want to have an open conversation about this matter?

Oh, and we needs to ease 'society's discomfort' regarding seeing gender expressions that do not fit into traditional sexual stereotypes by making provisions to ensure gender expression is not discriminated against.

However, this needs to be done whilst maintaining single sex protections and provisions. Since gender and sex are disconnected and distinctly different, as I said, there needs to be separate provision for each.

If your feminism doesn't include all females, its not feminism.

Feminism isn't transexclusionary. It's for females, for the liberation from sex based oppression and the chains of gender roles.

Sounds awfully familiar. As do the arguments and fears of safety.

It's not remotely familiar. Women are not in power, males are not an oppressed class.

Women are statistically at risk from male people. We also need single sex spaces for our privacy and dignity. This is the view of most women in the U.K., who are only comfortable with males in their changing rooms and toilets if they have had gender reassignment surgery.

Why do the feelings of a small group of male people count more than the concerns and feelings of a large proportion of women, who make up half the population and have unique needs not shared by males?

@Kit19

"if your feminism centres men its not feminism" fixed that for you

It's not though. That is the thing. But the echo chamber on here of parrots creates a cacophony of noise that makes one not see the wood for the trees...

@Sophoclesthefox

I missed kaineus’s posts last night, and really enjoyed reading them this morning. Thoughtful and civilised. I had high hopes that the thread could be productive with posts like that. But what baffles me is that posters who purport to be trans allies don’t seem to have noticed that contribution and this morning have apparently scrolled right by them and would prefer to continue to just focus on how awful FWR and the women here are, and how we’re immune to reason or human kindness.

Huh.

Yes, seems deliberately provacative.

*provocative

Seems best not to engage.

It does.

mishi, are you genuinely saying that racial segregation and sex segregation are the same thing? Do you really think that?

So your position would be mixed sex everything, always- sports, prisons, refuges, changing rooms, hospital wards, everything. No single sex provision anywhere at any time?

Is that right?

I think there is a real cognitive dissonance

There is a whole host of cognitive dissonance surrounding trance issues. Being transgender is like cognitive dissonance in that there is a dissonance between the gendered mind and the sexed body.

The only way to solve the issues is to be at peace with neurological diversity which means people's brains do not fall into neat categories and neither do people's gender expression. This is an individual and a societal issue. It is societal when society discriminates against those with neurological diversity (which also in turn could possibly affect that diversity through epigenetic changes in brain physiology) and the resulting diversity in gender expression.

Although we can not determine the sex of people's brains very easily due to neurological diversity, we can determine through out genes. Gender and sex are different and separate from each other.

@Sophoclesthefox

I missed kaineus’s posts last night, and really enjoyed reading them this morning. Thoughtful and civilised. I had high hopes that the thread could be productive with posts like that. But what baffles me is that posters who purport to be trans allies don’t seem to have noticed that contribution and this morning have apparently scrolled right by them and would prefer to continue to just focus on how awful FWR and the women here are, and how we’re immune to reason or human kindness.

Huh.

Yes, it's really telling, isn't it. Almost like some of them aren't interested in listening to trans people at all. Here either to scold or to promote a male supremacy agenda.

while there are plenty of posters whose concerns are purely based on protecting cis women's rights

//

To be fair if you take the damn cis out of that statement I've no problem falling into that category

Just had an interesting personal dilemma - doing my will and want to leave a scholarship fund for women in my profession where women are under- represented and/or face sex based discrimination and/or career obstacles. Then I thought well how would I feel if my professional bodies applied this to include women - those who have not lived through those sex based disadvantages etc. Then I remembered we are still, just possibly allowed to use ‘mother’. Then I thought well what about those women without children. Ffs it might all go to my local cats’ home at this rate.

‘To include trans women’ that should read. Was being careful about the space to the exclusion of the word. Apols.

Mishy

The civil rights movement did not require anyone to deny biology. It didn't require people to change their language. It didn't mean throwing safeguarding out of the window. It didn't insist in a pathway of medication and potential surgery for young people.

Therefore, like comparisons to homophobia, comparing this debate to race is actually pretty fucking racist and offensive. Natal women are the same biologically regardless of colour. A TW is not.

If feminism should include TW can anyone provide examples of what TW have done to forward the cause of all women's rights, not just those with a penis?

See then maybe we could start to consider this idea that were apparently all the same.

@gardenbird48

Eteri

The script never changes an inch, it's like pressing the button on a talking doll and at this point it's just boring. There's no productive conversation to be had on the topic here.

What would you consider a productive outcome to the conversation?

Can you put yourself in our shoes and understand the concerns we are discussing?

Can you specify exactly what you would like women to consider from your side of the table?

Do you think women are right to want to have an open conversation about this matter?

I usually come into these conversations (often by direct request) to answer questions about what the reality of raising a transgender child who suffered with severe cbd and began medical transition in early teens is. I never come to these discussions with a specific agenda: I am cautious not to use trigger worlds (transphoia, terf, or cis), I don't raise to the bait even when posters ask (purposely) ignorant or intrusive questions, or 'accidently' misgender my dd, but without fail, before long, the mask starts falling away spiel starts about how disgraceful it is that I don't force my dd to use the mens toilets and how my dds particpation at camps/school is ruining it for other girls, and 'what about MY daughter's wants and safety?' and then acting fastidious when I ask them the same question. It's a pointless conversation, and I'm not engaging in it any more.

@MishyJDI

All this talk on "third spaces".

I'm sure South Africa up until the 1980s and America into the 1960s had such third spaces for non white people.

Sounds awfully familiar. As do the arguments and fears of safety.

Bigoted views are often rehashed and packaged in the same ways. It is with hindsight you can see them for what they are.

All couched up as "critical debate". Just change trans for the word gay or black in any of the commentary on Mumsnet and the feminism board to do with trans people, and you can see how bad some of it truly is. (And this is the stuff that the mods do not delete first!)

Until Mumsnet addresses this, my answer would be a firm "No". Mumsnet is not a safe place for transgender people or trans parents.

Waits for incoming abuse and baking recipees :)

Not reporting, as I don't really do reporting, but just letting you know that 't3rf' is considered a slur on MN, PP.

Or is it? 'C1s' seems to have 'clithered' back in...

In the attached photo - they don't seem to be reproduced when using the quote feature!

Ok Eteri no probs if you don’t want to engage. If you change your mind and want to address my questions that would be great but no worries if not.

Maybe someone else could help me out with what cbd is? I’m not aware of that term (other than the legal cannabis products)

GardenBird48 personally Id consider it a productive convo if I could get an insight, understanding, empathy into others way of thinking.

I have changed my opinion on many things on these boards due to decent debate.

But that never, ever happens here as the language some use changes constantly, words have no meaning to some TRAs and can be given as proof of an attack, based on a meaning of that word they have made up, and wont share. It happened last night with one who was after twitter screenshots.

We can not have any conversation with people who insist words mean whatever they want them to mean, they wont tell you what they think the words mean, but they can and will use those new meanings as evidence against you.