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.

Why are people continuing to engage with those who have come here for the sole purpose of winding us all up and destroying mumsnet? You will not change their minds.

Mumsnet if you are not consistent then my newly created DD will be cancelled.

Kindly defeat the goady posts and the ‘cis’ posts.

Stay strong. Because only your complete destruction will appease certain people.

People like myself will stay with you if you stand strong.

Yet the same group of people repeat the SAME two arguments over and over and over on every single discussion:
1. Woman is an adult female
2. Women are at risk of predatory men attacking them in shared spaces like prisons etc
God forbid the definition of a woman is changed at some point, this group will have to find a new topic to obsess about.

God forbid women assert their beliefs and uphold their rights on a feminism board and god forbid those opinions and beliefs differ from your own.

Yes, I understand (as this group always repeats) I can go away and post on other groups if I don’t like it here. The issue is what if I want to be here, say what I think but I don’t want to have to fight through this gang mentality?

At least you have that option instead of having boards completely cancelled or being thrown off platforms for controversial yet factual views on biology. This isn't a gang but we don't always agree on things - this can be seen in previous threads, however, many women are here because they care about feminism and have similar foundational beliefs relating to that and the chances are if you are saying something opposed to that people will respond to you and possibly even in a similar way. The arguments on here are repeated often so some similarity is inevitable.

Imagine if other discussion groups acted in this way , someone posting about their marriage problem and a group of people (always the same group backing each other up) challenged the poster by demanding that ‘you define marriage’ . Define friendship, define everything.

If there was a number of lobby groups trying to redefine 'marriage' or redefine 'friendship' and if those definitions shifted like sand in the wind according to the most recent definition then yes I really would ask for definitions of those things otherwise I wouldn't be certain about what I was discussing. This is the basis of most discussions to be sure we are all talking about the same thing and not at cross purposes.

You do not represent me.

Who said we did and where? You might not like it but we represent a large number of women but each of our views is that of an individual which is why there has been debate within feminism; like the Suffragists and the Suffragettes.

Please stop monopolising this place and being condescending.
Stop asking everyone to define everything , people have a right to express their opinion without having to back it up by whatever
evidence you demand.

You are telling women here what to do but we are the ones being condescending? Ok, I see.

If you want your counter arguments to be taken seriously, back them up, if it is an uninformed opinion then people may well disagree - particularly if they know differently and there is no counter evidence. That is forum life - it happens on politics forums on philosophy forums etc. and is certainly not unique to debate on here.

This group is the worst PR feminism can get due to a number of individuals repeatedly refusing to open their minds

Being open minded like accepting your truth and ignoring our own, something which many of us have read around and discussed for years?

Why are people continuing to engage with those who have come here for the sole purpose of winding us all up and destroying mumsnet? You will not change their minds.

For the lurkers to see the quality of arguments on show.

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.

So you're saying that many women here are lost at sea and we need third and fourth wave intersectional feminists to show us the path of right. And agree that a woman is anyone who says they are.

Righty ho.

@Winesalot

Has this thread been completely derailed then?

Might I suggest a new thread Queen.

I’ve answered the question about prison places and trans participation in sports. I have been asked and I responded isn’t that related to the original topic?

Why are people continuing to engage with those who have come here for the sole purpose of winding us all up and destroying mumsnet? You will not change their minds.

You are right. I'm off. I should be doing something else anyway.

not the evidence that trans women are not a danger as a class to cis women as a class.

Putting aside the offensive cis comment. Where is the evidence that transwomen as a class are not a danger to women as a class? There's plenty of anecdotal evidence and the results of FOI requests to indicate that the opposite is true.

Personally, if it could be conclusively proved that the minute a man identifies as a woman he ceases to be a danger to women I'd be prepared to reconsider my objections to them in women's spaces (though not in sport) But surely the onus is on them to prove it? Or even provide some robust evidence?

At the same time I wouldn’t just blanket approach this and not allow trans women to compete-

Nobody is stopping transwomen competing in sports. Many transwomen compete quite happily even at an international level in men's sports ( American Samoa men's football team includes a transwomen) However, as males their bodies give them an insurmountable advantage over women according to numerous scientific studies, so including them in female sport is grossly unfair and exclusionary to women.

Prisons- I think it’s very, very difficult and there should be a third space. A new solution. There is trans person in my close circle and I can’t imagine what would happen to him if he had to be placed in a female prison. Most likely a full mental breakdown for someone who is already a very fragile person.I know he would chose to go to male prison although I can see the risks there too. I think everyone should be safe, I know it’s idealistic but I do think that. Everyone - women of course but also trans women who don’t want to be in male prisons.

Fabulous. Thanks for the answer. Not sure you would get much disagreement here for such as solution. I daresay, it might be controversial to others on twitter. But I think that I would be happy to support anyone who advocated that those who were transwomen had a facility that allowed them to live as they wished while not being included in the female prison. And for transmen if they were wanting to not be in the female prison.

Please stop monopolising this place and being condescending.

How strange. If I'm not interested in a post I just scroll on. There's plenty of room for all topics. I wouldn't dream of going on to a thread and asking women to stop monopolising Mumsnet because I didn't like the topic of discussion.

I don’t want to create this division, it already exists.You are a gender critical feminist I am a gender inclusive feminist ( or whatever the label is ). Aren’t we divided then

Not everyone who posts here calls themselves a feminist or identifies as such, but they are all interested in the rights and protections of women and girls.

Can I ask you what is your purpose in posting here? What is it you would like to achieve? You don't seem to have moved off from first base yet......

@teawamutu

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.

'Never mind logic, reason or what you know to be true - The Baddies also believe that. You don't want to be one of The Baddies, do you?'

Seen it done SO many times before, and if I may say so, done far better.

Propaganda techniques:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_techniques

Trans ideology and justification is like playing bingo with this wiki page.

Why are people continuing to engage with those who have come here for the sole purpose of winding us all up and destroying mumsnet?

Oh dear. Destroying mumsnet. Paranoia setting in?

There is trans person in my close circle and I can’t imagine what would happen to him if he had to be placed in a female prison.

I totally get this. The most obvious answer is a separate facility.

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.

Waiting. Just hanging around, wringing our hands, clutching our pearls and waiting for the shiny happy libfem youngsters to help us find our way. Not raising awareness of injustice or campaigning for change. Not making sure the safeguarding of children doesn't get swept under the 'progressive' carpet. Not donating thousands and thousands of pounds to numerous groundbreaking legal cases and judicial reviews or calling public bodies to account.

Just waiting. In our hotbed.

@ASugar

I'd like to make it clear I have not reported anyone for discussing their pronouns or anything like that. I've only reported two people who I felt at the very beginning were transphobic. The rest haven't been done by me.

This is puzzling me @ASugar .

You say that didn't report anyone but two, fair enough I believe you. But there were lots of deletions before your announcement.

Who do you think were the mysterious strangers making those reports and how would they know your preferred pronouns beforehand?
This is geniune question, I'd really like to know who you think was doing it and why.

As an aside, Lipstick Alley is always a refreshing read.

It is not the job of feminism/feminists/FWR to always, in every situation, be nice/be kind/be ‘supportive’ of every individual. Nor is there any obligation on our part to be accepting of every notion, however misguided. Where we see the need to challenge, we will do so.

Here we engage in robust discussion, with arguments based on reality, fact, and interpretation of actual, quantifiable data. We rely on critical thought and analysis, not soundbites or woolly, vague, indefinable word salads that have no discernible meaning.

You have to be able to qualify and/or quantify your assertions to back them up, if you are to be taken seriously. If that is too robust for you then you genuinely do not have to participate. But don’t try to claim that we’re not willing to debate, or that we haven’t welcomed discussion.

Sometimes extremely difficult discussions have to be had. Difficult truths must be told. However much that vexes you, that is what happens here.

Human rights are human rights.

Women’s rights (and protections in Law) are women’s rights (and protections in Law).

Trans rights are trans rights.

Sex is immutable - unchangeable fact.

Sports- very difficult , I would imagine some form of testing before competing ? I really don’t know what the solution is. I think in some cases this might disadvantage female -born contestants ( trying to avoid the word cis apologies not sure what terminology you prefer) . At the same time I wouldn’t just blanket approach this and not allow trans women to compete- it is their human right to do it. Nothing here is black or white for me. I would never want to be the person who campaigns against their right.

Do you agree with the current move to have allowed males with these benefits to participate knowing that already women and girls have lost opportunities because of this inclusion? For example the scholarships and sponsorship opportunities lost.

And, if there was an accurate way to measure this and the result was still that the advantages could not be eliminated, would you still continue to push against a movement that effectively harmed women?

There is now a growing bank of evidence that females are incredibly at risk playing contact sport and this is elevated even more with the inclusion of males. Do you accept that scientists and researchers who are experts are saying this is a problem?

@Erkrie

There is trans person in my close circle and I can’t imagine what would happen to him if he had to be placed in a female prison.

I totally get this. The most obvious answer is a separate facility.

Thank you for understanding. It’s too complex an I do agree with a separate facility but would the group affected agree with this? It’s one of those debates that will carry on for years to come.

Oh dear. Destroying mumsnet. Paranoia setting in?

Unfortunately, it's a stated aim of some trans activists (I don't mean you). They're not remotely likely to succeed, fortunately. They're more of an irritant, like horseflies.

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

Part of that oppression consists of people telling women that their feelings of comfort, safety and dignity are unimportant; or that women should automatically make way for others; that women's rights should really about people other than women ; that women's voices are ignored, and female experience is devalued.

All of which you yourself are doing.

Why don't you campaign for third spaces, services and sports; then everyone could have their safety and dignity needs met?

Forcing people; trying to actively colonise their spaces; their language; their culture, and the entirely re -define it without their permission; and then forbid them to talk about this........This is the very definition of oppression.

not the evidence that trans women are not a danger as a class to cis women as a class.

Whilst not all men offend obviously, it is clear that male pattern violence does not reduce when a one identifies as a transwomen.

fairplayforwomen.com/transgender-male-criminality-sex-offences/

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.

No, this is entirely wrong. I don't have a gender identity - and goodness knows I tried - but I'm happy to accept that other people experience a strong inner sense of gender and that the thing others call gender identity therefore exists in that sense. I can't really call myself non-binary because that implies I do have an identity which is between masculine and feminine, rather like asking an atheist if they're Protestant or Catholic. I suppose "agender" is the closest definition of my own experience, and if I was compelled (and I'm not a fan of compulsion) I'd use that.

I find "cisgender" offensive because on the currently accepted definitions, it is a person whose inner self aligns with "culturally determined masculinity or femininity." It will be a cold day in hell before I, or many other feminists, accept that we have an inner self which conveniently aligns with patriarchy's interests in the form of culturally determined femininity.

That definition is Stonewall's, so it is the one widely accepted in the UK.