If you avoid the feminist section then at least read this article

[RedthroatedCaracara]

because all females need to be aware of this

And there's no need to have an attack of the vapours because it's a Daily Mail link. For all their multitude of shortcomings, the Mail at least have the guts to publish articles that stand up for women and girls.

Thanks for this, feels sane to read others who feel the same

@WeeSisters

If I complained about a male being in the female changing room, and that male identifies as a woman, then that is very much a harassment case. It is in my work policy that trans colleagues should use the facilities with their chosen gender, and objecting to that is harassment.

Hang on, a minute ago he was flashing you!

@montysma1

It's a huge issue. A mother of 4 kids in Scotland, called Marion Miller is currently facing prison for daring to state that a woman is an adult human female. And that's before the Scottish Government has enacted the insane GRA bill which removes sex as a protected characteristic and its even more demented hate crime bill which will criminalise women who dare to speak up.

For anyone still visiting from outside the echo chamber, just for clarity, MM has been charged under the malicious communications act for a series of tweets and actions aimed at a particular individual who found them threatening and harassing. Now, you could argue if you wanted (and I'm sure some will) as to whether her behaviour actually was threatening and harassing - but it is absolutely categorically untrue that she has been charged just for saying that a woman is an adult human female, nor has anyone ever been charged just for making such a statement.

@Quaggars

This suits those who wish to silence women and want this to go under the radar

I'm not wishing to silence women at all, I am one.
You cannot MAKE people agree with you, however much you try to make it so.
I'm a woman too.
I don't want women to be silenced.
I don't like the narrative on here that's pushed that we're all the same, and if only we knew what was going on we'd suddenly all change our minds and automatically agree with everything on here!
It smacks of people thinking women can't know their own minds.
If they don't agree, it's because they haven't educated themselves on the issues at hand, or because they're a man.

i'm not trying to make anyone agree with me.

Why do you think that this issue is only relevant to feminists and not to all women (all people for that matter)?

Lots of women who don't identify as feminists might not be aware of these issues that are very relevant to them. That is the point I am making. Why are you worried about them reading an alternative opinion to yours and making their own minds up?

@Pumperthepumper

I agree. I call my trans colleague by their new female name and am happy to respect their pronouns. However, if you still want sex segregated sports and prisons, that would have you marked as transphobic.

Your statement is pretty much exactly the same as JK Rowling’s article which had her so vilified, as nothing less than 100% acceptance that TWAW is good enough.

Oh yes. One has to agree that twaw for all purposes, otherwise that makes one a transphobe. There's no picking and choosing what's acceptable. It's all. Or be a transphobe.

*Did I say subset? I can’t remember and it’s a fast moving thread.

I meant, if someone wants to identify as a woman - by changing their name,say, or asking to be called ‘she’ - fair enough.

As soon as we start grouping people by sex class - and by that I mean sports, prisons etc - that’s where transwomen are not included. I think this is how most people feel.*

Yes you did, you said that transwomen are a subset of women.

Your views are gender critical if you believe that sex is the determining factor.

I have no problem with preferred names or pronouns either but I do have problems with even minor changes in the way we use language. This might be because my children are autistic and I live with the fact that clear language is important!

@lifeturnsonadime

*Did I say subset? I can’t remember and it’s a fast moving thread.

I meant, if someone wants to identify as a woman - by changing their name,say, or asking to be called ‘she’ - fair enough.

As soon as we start grouping people by sex class - and by that I mean sports, prisons etc - that’s where transwomen are not included. I think this is how most people feel.*

Yes you did, you said that transwomen are a subset of women.

Your views are gender critical if you believe that sex is the determining factor.

I have no problem with preferred names or pronouns either but I do have problems with even minor changes in the way we use language. This might be because my children are autistic and I live with the fact that clear language is important!

I’m well aware I’m gender critical, I said so upthread. My issue is not, as I said, with the trans debate. It’s that Sarah Vine being paid to pretend ‘mothers’ is being erased is nonsense.

Just want to clarify the preferred pronouns and clear language point as this might appear hypocritical.

I am happy to call an individual whatever they wish to be called as it doesn't impact on others.

Clear language in relation to sex based issues and rights is important because it does impact others. People who are trans know which sex they are otherwise they wouldn't be trans.

It's not only Sarah Vine who is pointing this out.

It may not impact you but there was an autism charity referring to women and girls as people with cervixes. I can't find the link but I've seen it. As the mother of an autistic pre-teen I find that really problematic.

If it had said girls/ women and transboys/ transmen it would be better. My daughter at the moment has no idea that she is a person with a cervix as she has learning difficulties. I will of course navigate her through this but there is a risk some women and girls will miss out on essential healthcare due to this kind of thing.

Why are you worried about them reading an alternative opinion to yours and making their own minds up

I'm really not, why do you think I'm wanting to silence, or worried people will have an alternative opinion?
People can make their own mind, I've consistently said in all my posts that people do themselves.
People who don't want to read about it though - why not respect that, instead of running in and metaphorically bashing them over the head with a rolled up newspaper?
People who do want to read about it can find threads themselves, we're not helpless.

That's a metaphor, not advocating violence before anyone starts

People who don't want to read it in AIBU don't have to. A person isn't compelled to read anything they don't want to. I don't click on any thread on AIBU if I don't think the title is interesting or relevant to me.

Moving it from AIBU puts it somewhere people might not find it if they do not ordinarily identify as feminists.

There are at least 1,000 different articles I rate higher than this in coherenly putting forward the argument against the erosion of women's rights.

And I'm only an occasional visitor to FWR on Mumsnet, there's just so much more better stuff out there.

@lifeturnsonadime

It's not only Sarah Vine who is pointing this out.

It may not impact you but there was an autism charity referring to women and girls as people with cervixes. I can't find the link but I've seen it. As the mother of an autistic pre-teen I find that really problematic.

If it had said girls/ women and transboys/ transmen it would be better. My daughter at the moment has no idea that she is a person with a cervix as she has learning difficulties. I will of course navigate her through this but there is a risk some women and girls will miss out on essential healthcare due to this kind of thing.

She’s not pointing anything out though, the only evidence we’ve had so far that it’s happening is the welsh HR policy document. Although if you remember the link to the charity please do post it.

*21:43LurcherLot

montysma1

It's a huge issue. A mother of 4 kids in Scotland, called Marion Miller is currently facing prison for daring to state that a woman is an adult human female.
And that's before the Scottish Government has enacted the insane GRA bill which removes sex as a protected characteristic and its even more demented hate crime bill which will criminalise women who dare to speak up.

For anyone still visiting from outside the echo chamber, just for clarity, MM has been charged under the malicious communications act for a series of tweets and actions aimed at a particular individual who found them threatening and harassing. Now, you could argue if you wanted (and I'm sure some will) as to whether her behaviour actually was threatening and harassing - but it is absolutely categorically untrue that she has been charged just for saying that a woman is an adult human female, nor has anyone ever been charged just for making such a statement.*

Woah. You DO NOT know that for a fact. Nobody knows exactly why she was charged.

lifeturnsonadime

Might it have been this tweet from Autistic UK?

"Doherty et al. (2020) found that Autistic people were "significantly less likely to "attend on schedule for screening programmes.""

"It's crucial that Autistics with a cervix attend their smear appointments. Info about the process can be found here:"

twitter.com/AutisticUK/status/1351183014760509448?s=19

Nobody knows exactly why she was charged.

Exactly
Doesn't stop threads on here stating things on this case as fact though does it, so why just point it out then?

It may not impact you but there was an autism charity referring to women and girls as people with cervixes. I can't find the link but I've seen it. As the mother of an autistic pre-teen I find that really problematic.

Was it these?

twitter.com/AutisticUK/status/1351183014760509448

''Autistics with a cervix''

Sorry, x post with Purgatory

[quote PurgatoryOfPotholes]lifeturnsonadime

Might it have been this tweet from Autistic UK?

"Doherty et al. (2020) found that Autistic people were "significantly less likely to "attend on schedule for screening programmes.""

"It's crucial that Autistics with a cervix attend their smear appointments. Info about the process can be found here:"

twitter.com/AutisticUK/status/1351183014760509448?s=19[/quote]
Yes I think so. I'm going to dig further because I saw more than just that tweet.

@Erikrie

Genuine question.I read a lot about this on MN, but how much of an issue is it really in the actual world?^

Well this has come from Stonewall who have been working hard behind the scenes to get the protected characteristic of sex removed from the equality act, this is part of their drive. Hence then getting into organisations to change the language that they use. As a singular issue, you'd think it wasn't important, but when you know what Stonewalls end goal is, then actually, it really is. After all, if women no longer have the words to describe themselves, and sex is no longer a protected characteristic, then they no longer have legal sex based protections. Which would impact every part of our lives, from safeguarding to health. Why would any woman want that removed? You may not have noticed it in the real world, but if stonewall had managed to get away with this, then you certainly would have done at some point. When it's too late.

Not sure I have ever seen Stonewall put out a statement that they are trying to remove sex from the equality act. Where do you source their push here? Sex exclusion is valid in the equalities act where there is a legitimate need. Never heard Stonewall say they want to get rid of that.

Mishy try here:

www.stonewall.org.uk/women-and-equalities-select-committee-inquiry-transgender-equality

Not sure I have ever seen Stonewall put out a statement that they are trying to remove sex from the equality act. Where do you source their push here? Sex exclusion is valid in the equalities act where there is a legitimate need. Never heard Stonewall say they want to get rid of that.

Because it doesn't come with a banner saying "we are removing sex from the equality act". They are doing it by stealth, by trying to change the meanings of words and misrepresenting the law and crying "transphobia" at expressions of biological fact. And thanks to women who were alert to this and not sticking their heads in the sand, their efforts are being thwarted.

Relevant piece:

"A review of the Equality Act 2010 to include ‘gender identity’ rather than ‘gender reassignment’ as a protected characteristic and to remove exemptions, such as access to single-sex spaces"

"attack of the vapours"?

I mean, I'll try not to be too hysterical. Maybe it's my period.

I agree with the premise, that to remove the word mother is insulting and counterproductive, but it's a real shame to convey that message through phrases traditionally associated with misogyny.