Deleted/censorship on mumsnet now!

[HermioneKipper]

My thread asking about transwomen/transitioning/penises has been deleted.

Why are we not allowed to discuss this? It’s a genuine question and extremely relevant to the debate about transwomen entering female spaces.

There was no abuse of trans people that I could see aside from a few people attempting to derail by saying that they couldn’t see why women might be concerned about having to share their space!

This isn’t right

Undoubtedly the trans community do face greater discrimination that other communities

What, all of them?

Tosh.

What about women's oppression? You know - being subject to male violence, exploitation, workplace discrimination, barbaric rituals, silencing and so-on?

The other issue with the changing rooms etc is that while we can nearly always tell who is a woman or a trans woman, no woman is ever going to challenge someone who is likely to be so much bigger or stronger than them. Many women would be scared to do something like that and rightly so.

@suggestionsplease1

You are generalising about those who generalise that Mumsnet is generalising about our propensity as a group to generalise about things... in general.

And I generally disagree with that.

@LadyDanburysCane

Why, for example, are transwomen still supposed to be considered women with intact male genitalia, but transmen never keep their breasts?

@GromblesofGrimbledon this is because “top surgery” is relatively simple and non invasive. Removing breasts is really just aesthetic surgery when all is said and done while rather removal of the penis requires invasive surgery to relocate the urethra, create a vagina etc.

This is, with respect, nonsense. A mastectomy is not simple aesthetic surgery, and it is not possible to 'create a vagina' out of a penis.

@onelittlefrog

I think you make very valid points here.

MNHQ don't like generalisations.

Many Safeguarding and Child Protection policies and interventions are informed by recognition of a generalised risk. It is not possible to identify the individual risk characteristics of a particular adult male person on any given day. Thus sex-specific Safeguarding decisions in order to be effective must apply to all men equally including those who are nice, impotent, lonely, bald, surgical patients and/or fluent in Esperanto etc.
Women and girls cannot determine which individual adult male person represents particular risk, any inducement to suggest that they should/could only serves to inhibit what are important personal boundaries. Humans' pattern-matching capability serves a protective function.

History demonstrates that individual dangerous men go unspotted even within police, judiciary, education, church, medicine, social care etc where professionals have additional training to recognise such behaviours.

Claire Dimyon recently published detailed research:
(extract)
"UK Ministry of Justice (MOJ) Offender Management of Statistics – Quarterly (OMS-Q) Prison Population Statistics [2001-2020]

More than 99% of all Sexual Offenders are MALE, i.e., virtually ALL

Between 88-90% of all those sexually offended against are FEMALE

Female Sexual Offending – the exception that proves the biological male rape and sexually offending rule"

www.womenarehuman.com/transgender-sexual-offending-context-is-all/

It seems rather extraordinary on a feminism board within a parenting website to feel obliged at this point to add, of course not all men are like that. Nobody, to my knowledge, has ever claimed they are. That is not the point of Safeguarding, it exists to mitigate known risks to children and vulnerable adults.

@suggestionsplease1

Chickenyhead

What I don't understand, is how there are people on this thread vilifying posters for surmised the reasons a transwoman may keep their tackle, because women don't know how it feels to be trans.

However, it's OK than men know how it feels to be a woman in identifying themselves to be trans.

So one side can subsume the feelings of the other, without actual knowledge, but the other side must be silent.

Is this not the biggest double standard?

This is precisely how it works. Transwomen can espouse on what it is to be a woman but women are not allowed to discuss their opinions on trans.

---

I guess there's a slightly different origin to the speculation - for trans women talking about what they consider it feels like to be a woman that comes from a positive place for them, I imagine. They want to be women, it's aspirational, desirable for them (although of course it is easy to see how the explanations could be considered facile by some others).

Whereas for some others, especially on these boards, critiquing the possible thoughts, motivations of trans people - it's not generally coming from an identification process of feeling like they are trans, it's often coming from a critical viewpoint that is quite negative.

Mumsnet presumably don't have the same sort of problem with positive generalisations as they do about negative generalisations?

I wonder if this post will be deleted for generalising about people who are generalising about other people haha.

I'm not sure I agree.

I for one fully understand why someone wouldn't want to undertake such surgery, despite dysphoria, because sometimes a functioning penis may be better than the alternative.

There are lots of legitimate reasons not to undergo surgery and I don't think anyone should be forced to do so. I felt that most of the thread was in agreement to some degree. It actually wasn't a thread full of hatred as implied, although no doubt expected.

I don't think it 8s irrelevant when assessing risk to women however, as the scope under the transgender umbrella is far wider than the former transsexual umbrella, which many accepted.

Things are different now. We need to talk about that.

@LadyDanburysCane

Why, for example, are transwomen still supposed to be considered women with intact male genitalia, but transmen never keep their breasts?

@GromblesofGrimbledon this is because “top surgery” is relatively simple and non invasive. Removing breasts is really just aesthetic surgery when all is said and done while rather removal of the penis requires invasive surgery to relocate the urethra, create a vagina etc.

Yikes. I agree that one surgery is more technically complicated than the other.

But to say that a double mastectomy is merely aesthetic is not true. Removal of a benign mole is aesthetic.

There were very few posts breaking the guideline

Clearly not true, or else the whole thread wouldn't have been deleted.

I thought the tone & approach overall wasn't appropriate. I didn't post and hid the thread at that point. Onelittlefrog makes good points.

This is an example of a post I find objectionable.

That post of mine you're objecting to is me saying that it's unhelpful to generalise rather than understand that there are different groups under the trans umbrella. You win today's top irony prize EarringsandLipstick.

I always think it's instructive to notice posters who preface their contributions with 'I'm GC but' and then regurgitate TRA talking points and agree with whatever perjorative nonsense a TRA might be flinging out on the thread. I enjoy that they tend to call this 'nuance' when it's simply 'transparent'.

this is because “top surgery” is relatively simple and non invasive. Removing breasts is really just aesthetic surgery when all is said and done while rather removal of the penis requires invasive surgery to relocate the urethra, create a vagina etc.

Many thousands of women who have had a double mastectomy would strongly disagree with such a claim.

@LadyDanburysCane

Why, for example, are transwomen still supposed to be considered women with intact male genitalia, but transmen never keep their breasts?

@GromblesofGrimbledon this is because “top surgery” is relatively simple and non invasive. Removing breasts is really just aesthetic surgery when all is said and done while rather removal of the penis requires invasive surgery to relocate the urethra, create a vagina etc.

I must tell my friend, who has a genetic risk of breast cancer, that "top surgery" is totally different from a mastectomy, and is simple, non-invasive and aesthetic. In fact, much the same as having your eyebrows waxed. She can probably have one in her lunch hour on Monday.

MishyJDI seems to think that all trans people are incapable of respecting rules and social norms. Mishy thinks trans people have some inherent tendency to disrespect policies with impunity. You shouldn't be generalising about trans people like that, Mishy. I'm sure there are lovely trans people who respect the need for women-only spaces and services, and won't use such facilities. If they can do it, so can others. That's how most of society functions Mishy - by people respecting the rules that are in place.

this is because “top surgery” is relatively simple and non invasive. Removing breasts is really just aesthetic surgery when all is said

And the many women who experience life limiting nerve damage and discomfort would probably disagree.

Many thousands of women who have had a double mastectomy would strongly disagree with such a claim

I actually cannot believe how misogynistic and denying of women's bodies, selves, experiences and lives it is.

That's fucking offensive - but few notice because women are used to being treated dismissively, offensively and with real hatred.

When it happens to other groups, more noticeably connected with the male sex, suddenly people listen.

I asked the question last night on was princess Diana murdered after hearing a reporter on the radio say it and it got reported and taken down. Like what was so offensive about that?

How would you know if a penis entered the bathroom? Would there be an inspector? None of the bathroom proposals make sense unless there is policing and inspections. Which will never happen.

Gosh, are you saying that some males identifying as females would plan to break the law so that they can access spaces where women and children are undressed? These are the lengths they will go to to insert themselves into those spaces? Is that what you're saying?

Do you think that's ok?

There may be many excellent reasons why surgery is not undertaken. That is not the point. The point is that it needs to be openly and honestly recognised that we are talking about intact, sexually functional males with a wide range of reasons within transition, who are in female single sex spaces. And that in prisons, women have been sexually assaulted, harassed and intimidated through this by these intact natal male prisoners, women are declining to enter refuges or accept rape crisis support because they are too afraid to use a space with natal male people in it, and women for reasons including other protected characteristics are excluded from women's spaces and therefore any space at all, in order that natal male people may have their preferred choice of provision.

This is obviously unfair, unsafe and unworkable for female people. The probable answer is that in order for degree of transition to be properly irrelevant, and to ensure equality of fairness, consideration and inclusion for both male and female people, and recognition that the Equality Act holds 9 equal protected characteristics and not just one, there must be third spaces. And female only spaces must be gatekept for the needs and inclusion of females who are unable to use the mixed sex spaces. And the gatekeeping must be able to stand up to those who will not voluntarily respect or care about the inclusion and needs of natal female people.

Earrings - Undoubtedly the trans community do face greater discrimination that other communities.

Please justify this statement, because it's a sweeping generalisation that I personally don't see to be true in the outside world, & it disrespects other groups of people & their lived experience.

I was going to say, 'actually don't bother because it's a derailment', but isn't this EXACTLY what's being discussed here? That a generalisation like Earrings' will be allowed to stand while others are deleted, sometimes causing the deletion of an entire thread?

Are some generalisations better than others? Where is the line drawn?

@JustAnotherPoster00

No male bodied people should be allowed to enter female spaces, no matter how they present or 'pass'.

Without being able to peer in their underwear how would you know?

You can keep on givng this answer but it never sinks in. Challenging women based on physical appearance could result in a good handbagging too. The GC argument is like a stuck gramophone record.

@Artichokeleaves

There may be many excellent reasons why surgery is not undertaken. That is not the point. The point is that it needs to be openly and honestly recognised that we are talking about intact, sexually functional males with a wide range of reasons within transition, who are in female single sex spaces. And that in prisons, women have been sexually assaulted, harassed and intimidated through this by these intact natal male prisoners, women are declining to enter refuges or accept rape crisis support because they are too afraid to use a space with natal male people in it, and women for reasons including other protected characteristics are excluded from women's spaces and therefore any space at all, in order that natal male people may have their preferred choice of provision.

This is obviously unfair, unsafe and unworkable for female people. The probable answer is that in order for degree of transition to be properly irrelevant, and to ensure equality of fairness, consideration and inclusion for both male and female people, and recognition that the Equality Act holds 9 equal protected characteristics and not just one, there must be third spaces. And female only spaces must be gatekept for the needs and inclusion of females who are unable to use the mixed sex spaces. And the gatekeeping must be able to stand up to those who will not voluntarily respect or care about the inclusion and needs of natal female people.

That is a fine post, Artichoke.

I'm sure I've been told on here before that the majority of women IRL support transwomen in their spaces the bigoted are in the minority.

How are they still running around with that 'most oppressed group' line.

Is both possible?

I for one fully understand why someone wouldn't want to undertake such surgery, despite dysphoria, because sometimes a functioning penis may be better than the alternative.

Whenever this, or related discussions, happen, one fundamental point that is essential to discuss is that most trans people do not have gender dysphoria in a meaningful sense of being a condition that would be diagnosed by a medical professional. If you don't believe me, look up the statistics about the prevalence of gender dysphoria and compare them to the prevalence of being trans.

Those who would seriously consider going through gender reassignment surgery because of gender dysphoria are a small minority of trans people.

@FluffyBattleKitten

I wrote a post a while back expressing the sentiment that agp is basically being condoned by schools through affirmation model and the lumping together of gender dysphoria, identity and agp. Not saying all trans are agp, but that the affirmation of trans flies directly opposite in how schools deal with similar things. I predicted my post would be deleted because of the agp mention, but was shocked to have a strike for stating a fact-that similar 'conditions' are not treated the same way in schools. Think it's pretty poor I was deleted and issued a strike. I think parents have the right, within reason, to know what their children are taught. Especially when mental health and healthy bodies are concerned. But because I mentioned agp the post was automatically deleted and strike issued.

I don't think I should get a strike for this either because I have not made 'sweeping generalisations' and have stuck to the ago rule as mentioned on this thread by hq.

I now haven't mentioned that since or similar points due to fear of being deleted. I use Mumsnet for the special needs section and can't lose that particular lifeline.

But I do think it's relevant I have professional concerns that have effectively been silenced.

Well you can now say the dreaded word as long as not generalising. So hopefully your post will remain.