Trans rights are a part of women's rights

[ASugar]

Trans people don't negatively affect women's rights. They are a part of the women's rights. Both trans men and trans women experience oppression based on being female/a woman.

How can you assess anyone’s argument if you only believe in one based on sex and genitals.

I can confidently state that every single person who has ever existed in human history (or will ever exist in human history) - billions upon billions of people - has been born from a human female by means of her female reproductive organs and genitalia.

People with a female body like your mum and my mum form a female sex class. We have needs and vulnerabilities based on our sex class.
There are at least 3.5 billion of us currently in the world.

When we talk about women as adult human females, our sex class is probably the only thing that unites me, the Queen of England, a slave woman in Ancient Rome, Beyoncé and Malala Yousafzai.

As for how 'feminine' or 'masculine' the gendered presentation of these females is - these are the linguistically gendered words, not woman, man - their personality, interests, culture they live(d) in - well, I would guess that there are billions of combinations of those. As many as there are females.

Hence the only useful comparator for females / women is other females / women.

My experience is that the reason for that avoidance is that there is often very little demonstrated ability to engage in genuine discussion, beyond parroting mantras and unqualified statements, which everyone is meant to take as a matter of fact.

I agree with this, harsh but true.

Placwmarking.
So many entirely unproblematic posts being deleted here .
Quite surprising even on FWR.

Anyway I'll come back and read what is left of the thread later. Am off to have some delicious fruit loaf. Yummy Soreen.

It’s probably more about a new group of people who might not be so fixated (sorry) on definitions

Though it is also your fixation on certain definitions that is part of the problem. Even though those definitions are incredibly wooly, illogical and inconsistent.

Queen I suspect when you say made to feel unwelcome, what that really means is their argument is unable to hold up against the scrutiny of the very well informed posters here.
I have witnessed that so many times, many people like yourself pop on here to tell us all how mean we are and be kind, when asked the important questions they are never able to provide a response, instead resorting to name calling or flouncing.
As pp said, if your argument is sound in facts and evidence then you should have no problem putting it forward and being able to defend it, the problem arises when your argument is full of holes, or misrepresentation and posters here are easily able provide evidence to disprove said arguments.
BTW I am no where near as educated or articulate on this topic as many of these women, and I have never been made to feel unwelcome, just inadequate in knowledge which pushes me to learn more.

@Justhadathought

I highly doubt we will here from those that have been made to feel unwelcome , as they probably avoid the place like a plague

My experience is that the reason for that avoidance is that there is often very little demonstrated ability to engage in genuine discussion, beyond parroting mantras and unqualified statements, which everyone is meant to take as a matter of fact.

That is not how it works!

Fundamental ideological differences can mostly not be reconciled.
Then you both have to find a way to exist alongside each other with differences intact.

I suggest the only way forward is third spaces, services and provisions.

Using your logic can you evidence that people who have disengaged and left the group did it because of the reason you described above. Have you run a follow up study group asking participants for their reasons?

Or is there a CHANCE that they left because they felt unwelcome?

It is many people’s natural reaction even in ‘real life’ to disengage and leave the situation when under (real or perceived) attack.

Why isnt @Asugar being deleted of banned for using a slur that many, many biological women have said they find offensive and triggering and is in fact listed as so in the MN guidelines on this?

Note - we also did not invent the term trans. I think both cis and trans should stay in Latin and chemical isomers, where they belong.

Cis is a way of blaming women for their own subjugation.

Gender stereotypes are the cage that keep us all from being ourselves. Once we remove those tight restrictions people will be able to see that no matter what your sex you can wear/like/do/love anything you want.

Cis is the cage to keep in women and girls.

When I advocate for women, it is almost always centered on biology. The battle against blatant discrimination has largely been won in many countries. What we fight for now is the underlying structural discrimination. A world built for people who will never have to deal with menstruation, birth control, pregnancy, menopause, or breastfeeding. We can’t change the definition of woman because it’s essential to the fight.

I would also like to fight for the rights of transgender individuals. They absolutely should not face discrimination in housing, education, or employment. The best way to do that is through identification and data collection. Things like advocating for records to be kept with both sex and preferred identity. That would make it possible to provide proof that discrimination is happening.

It is many people’s natural reaction even in ‘real life’ to disengage and leave the situation when under (real or perceived) attack.

Which is ironically why many women are feeling excluded from any debates about womanhood outside of MN and actually excluded from many provisions that were single sex, are now inclusive, but not of them.

It is not women's job to make everyone feel welcomed and taken care of. This is a place where people discuss women's rights. Pretty much the whole of the rest of the net is a very safe place for anyone not gender critical. Also in the interest of balance: can you sign post me to any sites or groups about inclusive feminism or focused on trans rights who are welcoming to and careful to hear and include gc women? This is a mutual expectation, right?

QueenCoconut

Could I ask you what your views are on male bodied people being incarcerated in women's prisons is?
Could I also ask you what you think of male bodied people competing in girl's and women's sport please?

@purpleboy

Queen I suspect when you say made to feel unwelcome, what that really means is their argument is unable to hold up against the scrutiny of the very well informed posters here. I have witnessed that so many times, many people like yourself pop on here to tell us all how mean we are and be kind, when asked the important questions they are never able to provide a response, instead resorting to name calling or flouncing. As pp said, if your argument is sound in facts and evidence then you should have no problem putting it forward and being able to defend it, the problem arises when your argument is full of holes, or misrepresentation and posters here are easily able provide evidence to disprove said arguments. BTW I am no where near as educated or articulate on this topic as many of these women, and I have never been made to feel unwelcome, just inadequate in knowledge which pushes me to learn more.

I get what you’re saying. On the flip side when you say someone is unable to hold up - that is just your group perception though , based on the fact that no one agreed with that person. It doesn’t make their argument invalid. I don’t have anyone to back me up but that doesn’t mean that what I have to say is less relevant. As an example now it is me versus I don’t even know how many of you- you are ready to keep going and challenge my posts until we run out of space I guess? At some point people have to leave , go back to work/ looking after children/ real life. They also might see there is nothing to accomplish , perhaps they just wanted to tell you how they feel and that was the only purpose? Perhaps one person will question their behaviour out of a few hundred - I guess that’s always something, So the poster leaves and you as a group then hail victory and say oh well another one ‘popped up here’ and disappeared because we proved smarter.

Cis is misogynistic

It is way of making marginalised, abused, ignored women and girls seem like a class of oppressors.

I have never heard trans women online talk about so called cis women with anything but contempt. The misogyny is so blatant.

Using your logic can you evidence that people who have disengaged and left the group did it because of the reason you described above. Have you run a follow up study group asking participants for their reasons

It is not a group you join...It is a forum for discussions.

Observation, over time, has evidenced that very few who pop in to put everyone straight, or to suggest 'kindness' as a solution, are able to really engage in considered debate. When it is attempted, it is usually very apparent that the arguments are not only inconsistent, but rely very heavily on ideological articles of faith or blind acceptance - and so are not robust enough to withstand any challenge.

This forum is a meeting place for people from a wide and diverse range of backgrounds and experiences, and is one of the main forums for discussion of this issue as it effects women and girls.

@Asugar Mumsnet Women's Rights forum is a hotbed of gender critical feminists who are still waiting for the third and fourth wave of intersectional feminism to carry them towards the shore. They don't believe that gender identity is something that's been accepted and studied by the scientific and medical establishment. When someone here says "they don't have a gender identity" they don't mean they are no-binary or agender, they literally believe that it doesn't exist. Because of this, they find "cisgender" a term used in more than 30,000 uncontroversial scientific papers offensive, the offensive being that it acknowledges that gender identity is real and trans women are women, as if it makes them somehow less of a someone.

They are in the same camp as the religious right and quote articles from right wing papers disparaging transgender people. They patronise trans men by saying "you're one of us, really." When discussing the danger of trans women as a class, they rely on anecdotes, not the evidence that trans women are not a danger as a class to cis women as a class.

A huge proportion of the threads here are directed at trans women rather than the primary sources of female oppression.

The prevelance of gender critical feminists in the UK is not reflected in Ireland, the States or most of Europe. They lovingly quote Germaine Greer who once said that transwomen "‘ghastly parodies’ of women" and Bindell who said "I don't have a problem with men disposing of their genitals, but it does not make them women, in the same way that shoving a bit of vacuum hose down your 501s does not make you a man." The thing is, most of the posters here would agree with the sentiment, if not the wording of those quotes.

For an overview from an American perspective of why gender critical feminists have such a big platform here but not say in Ireland, read this article. CW: contains the T-word.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

As you can see the very first point is definitions and meanings of terms.

This is the same for every piece of legislation you will find.

Go have a look.

Without definitions the law ceases to function.

Yes, and I think this is why the laws around trans issues and how they relate to women's rights are so problematic, as the legal definitions of key concepts as "gender reassignment", "gender" and "transition" aren't particularly clear.

The GRA is not fit for purpose for two legal reasons.

One is to do with definitions. The other is how it clashes with other areas of law.

It needs rewritting not to remove rights but to clarify the law and prevent injustices happening all round and the need for judges to sit and decide about where poor drafting of law is a cluster fuck.

A GRA is a legal fiction. It was written as a legal fiction for certain circumstances. Its now slipped and usage of the term trans has changed (thanks to lobbying and lobby groups outside the law rewritting this). The secrecy clause in the GRA is at logger heads with legitimate aims excemption within the EA. And go much further than the DPA and GDPR (both of which allow disclosure of private information in the public interest under certain circumstances).

As a result we have a situation where it is in the public interest (which includes for both trans people and women) to identify sex and GRC holders / transitioners without GRC within the prison service to protect individuals (both trans and women) adequately but we can not do this and we are getting all sorts of interpretations, harms and an inability to risk assess because the data is non-existant and can not be collected anyway.

Hence a break down in the system, failures of duty of care and harms done to vulnerable groups - potentially at the expense of a vulnerable group who are also being exploited with criminal intent.

No one wins with this.

It only highlights the need for well thought out definitions which reflect reality rather than producing this stupid concept of legal fictions but protect all parties as much as is reasonably possible.

Thats the reasonability of law makers, who have had a massive dereliction of duty and are unwilling to admit that they have spectactularly fucked up on this and its harming everyone every day they fail to find a backbone and acknowledge how good law is essential no matter what area it covers otherwise people get harmed or injustice occurs.

It utterly beggars belief that anyone who believes in any kind of human rights fails to acknowledge this. Its an abandonment and complete lack of understanding of rights (noting here that the current leader of the opposition also just happens to be a trained and experienced human rights lawyer).

It. is. not. good. enough.

We deserve better politicians of all stripes.

QueenCoconut I think in life we just have to accept that there are lots of groups that we think we might like to join, only to go along and find that it's not our cup of tea after all. It happened to me with the NCT when I had my first baby, which I found made me feel pretty inadequate as a mother instead of more confident. One of my dds pestered like mad to join a local dance group because some of the girls in her school went, but she discovered that in reality she wasn't really that interested in that style of dance.

It's about knowing when it's appropriate to push for change and say - I think this group could be improved by x,y,z. And knowing when pushing for change is actually pretty inappropriate because the group is simply not in line with your particular interests and you'd be better finding a more suitable one.

It's horrible when we feel we don't fit in, but one of the joys of the internet is that we can find and connect with likeminded people very easily. Life's too short to spend arguing with strangers over fundamental differences of opinion.

Why is it that women talking about their own rights, when those rights are under extreme attack, are described as "obsessed"?

Damn sure I'm "obsessed" with my own rights, both as a woman and as one who experiences same-sex attraction.

It is many people’s natural reaction even in ‘real life’ to disengage and leave the situation when under (real or perceived) attack.

But you joined here and started posting. And now you're telling us we need to agree with your terms and your premises to make you feel welcome. Isn't that a bit... presumptuous? No one forced you to talk to us. There's the whole wide queer and happy internet for you if you want to talk to like minded people.

and say oh well another one ‘popped up here’ and disappeared because we proved smarter.

I find it unbelievably dispiriting that women who need sex based rights, will suffer without them, and are desperately arguing to be heard as those rights are under constant, constant attack, are viewed as nothing more than busy in some kind of personal computer game.

When someone here says "they don't have a gender identity" they don't mean they are no-binary or agender, they literally believe that it doesn't exist.
No, I believe it exists in the same way that religious belief exists.

They are in the same camp as the religious right

Categorically untrue.

I feel like I’m in some sort of parallel universe reading this thread. One things for sure, mumsnet HQ are clearly terrified of the backlash they are receiving on Twitter judging by the amount of deletions on this thread. Many people have rightfully asked to not be called cis which has been ignored by the op repeatedly, yet op’s comments stand. Mumsnet won’t last much longer if they alienate the very people it was created for.