Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Deleted/censorship on mumsnet now!

777 replies

HermioneKipper · 06/08/2021 10:34

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

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
TinselAngel · 08/08/2021 19:50

I haven't said a thing about trans rights though, why would I discuss that here?
Read again, I said trans widow's rights.

Imasoulman · 08/08/2021 21:41

@TinselAngel

I haven't said a thing about trans rights though, why would I discuss that here? Read again, I said trans widow's rights.
"If you are getting (polite) short shrift here it is because many other posters of a similar background and viewpoint to **yourself have come on here already to do what you are trying to do. We've seen it before and each time it's expected that we're being graciously provided with a new viewpoint.

We know where the arguments are headed and it's not in the direction of women's rights (and certainly not trans widows rights)."

If you read again you will notice that you say -
"We know where the arguments are headed and it's not in the direction of women's rights (and certainly not trans widows rights)."

The inference from that is that I am pushing the trans rights agenda is it not ?
Unless there is another group involved ?

I would be interested to know what you think I am "trying to do"

Imasoulman · 08/08/2021 21:55

@ZuttZeVootEeeVro

*I don't claim to be a woman, I wish I was but I'm not and that's a fact that can't be denied. I am a transwoman...*

Gender devotees have managed to invent maybe a hundred words for different genders, yet the men who know that they aren't women, but like to be seen as women, choose to use a word that uses woman to describe themselves. What are the odds?

You do realise that I didn't come up with the term ?

I was perfectly happy being transexual until about 25 years ago when someone used the term in a book and it became part of the English language.

Imasoulman · 08/08/2021 22:07

@R0wantrees

Imasoulman Do you think it 'unkind' of women or children to accurately describe an adult male as a man?

How about when an adult male has disclosed his autogynephillia, should women and children feel inhibited in accurately describing him as a man?

When women and children accurately recognise male sex and adulthood, these two significant features are indicated in the noun, 'man'.

It could be unkind depending on the circumstances but certainly not unreasonable.

I am constantly trying to separate Transsexual people from the others under the general trans umbrella, I don't think I could be clearer on my views on that.

Do you accept that Transwomen and Transmen genuinely do exist ?

TinselAngel · 08/08/2021 22:12

I would be interested to know what you think I am "trying to

I think you are arguing for women to be inclusive of transsexuals but not self IDers.

This is contrary to trans widow's rights given many of said transsexuals are our exes.

R0wantrees · 08/08/2021 22:21

Dr EM archive thread via Twitter

"Every topic and point occupying debates today has been raised and debated for decades."

twitter.com/PankhurstEM/status/1211654889228640257

(screenshots from Dr Em's archive thread 1969-1981)

R0wantrees · 08/08/2021 22:28

Previous thread OP Sunkisses wrote:
'BBC Open Door programme 45 years ago on transsexuals - a real jaw dropper
I did a search of Mumsnet and couldn't see any other posts about this extraordinary 1973 discussion show which was produced by transsexuals 45 years ago where they were given free-reign, free from editorial control. Four transsexuals are joined by a psychologist and an MP.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06c83f4/player

Where to start? Maybe with the show's producer and host, Della Aleksander, who is the most bizarre of all the participants. Della starts by claiming that a "chastened and wiser" Adolf Hitler and Queen Victoria have said, through a medium, that "there was a special role for me, in the reconstruction following a world wide collapse in 1978-79". Della also claims to have been sent from another world where the sexes don't exist and that transsexuals are the only model of a "higher race"! Della also claims to have founded the neo-Nazi sounding European National Movement in South Africa whilst serving in the Army there (I couldn't find any info on them, but they sound well dodgy to me).

Della also seems utterly confused, mis-using the terms 'bisexual' and 'intersex', and appearing to think these words mean transsexual, and that the appearance of nipples on a man means 'we are all transsexuals'. Della is, thankfully, corrected by the psychologist at 33.53 mins in who states that it is important to use the correct terminology, but Della wafts such trivialities away by saying "I don't want to get bogged down in medical questions". The MP, Leo Abse, argues against the 'trans umbrella' (before this term was invented by Stonewall etc) at 36 mins in.

There is clear evidence of autogynephilia (AGP - the sexual fetish of a man loving himself as a woman) at 33.23 when Della says the "sex act" is a "transsexual one", as "one attempts to become and absorb the beloved".

At 26 mins in one of the speakers, Rachel Bowen (the working class northern transsexual with dark hair), says that having a female birth certificate is a "status symbol". Another of the transsexuals, Laura Pralet, at 27 mins preposterously claims that "we are not a minority", and "I have never been a homosexual", even though Laura lives with and has married a man. Laura also says their husband is never happier when they are "in the kitchen", and at 31 mins in says they wanted to become a woman as "women have the best deal anyway".

It's absolutely fascinating and well worth a watch."
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3327193-BBC-Open-Door-programme-45-years-ago-on-transsexuals-a-real-jaw-dropper

R0wantrees · 08/08/2021 22:38

Dr EM via Twitter,

"This made my eyes pop. It is a letter to the Guardian in 1983 complaining that they are silencing women on the trans issue!

Women have been complaining to the Guardian for almost 40 years that they are being silenced on the trans issue, that acceptance of transgenderism was being forced on them. The archives blow holes in the narrative that before the modern TRAs we all just accepted it."

twitter.com/PankhurstEM/status/1211992287758172160

Deleted/censorship on mumsnet now!
vivariumvivariumsvivaria · 09/08/2021 01:14

SecretTransTwitterEngineer
"as a trans person who is now pretty much 100% that they'll have SRS. .
..and that means electrolysis in places that I really really don't want anyone to be."

Secret - please don't. I am an HCP and work in a clinic that picks up the not-quite-success-stories.

Leeze Lawrence campaigned to have hair removal prior to SRS on the NHS for a reason. It doesn't work.

Please do your homework, don't accept what the gender clinics or online forums say. If a neo-vagina gets hair regrowth then there isn't much anyone can do to manage that. I'd advise you to speak to Leeze, but, sadly, she passed away recently.

Imasoulman · 09/08/2021 10:01

@TinselAngel

I would be interested to know what you think I am "trying to

I think you are arguing for women to be inclusive of transsexuals but not self IDers.

This is contrary to trans widow's rights given many of said transsexuals are our exes.

In my ideal world yes that is what I would like to see, but this isn't just my world so I can't have things set up to please me at others cost.

I'm here because I'm interested in women's rights, I see the injustice and it makes me angry.
I read these posts because they are often raw and outspoken in a way that you don't see in other places.

I don't understand whst "trans widows rights " are though? Are you looking for a different goal than the other women here?

I hope you realise that I am not against anything you do with your support group, I think it's great that there is space for people going through the same thing to be able to talk.

There was really only one point you made that I couldn't accept, it's a shame you didn't feel able to discuss it.

R0wantrees · 09/08/2021 10:33

I have my own definition of what "transexual " means so for me its easy to differentiate.
I'm old enough to remember the "good old days " when the difference was clear.

Women Speak Scotland
June 23, 2021
'The Trans Umbrella Is Older Than You Think'
(extract)
"Press For Change is the organisation that is pretty much solely responsible for the Gender Recognition Act being passed in 2004. They championed the use of the term ‘trans’ precisely because it made no distinction between ‘transsexual’ and ‘transvestite’. Christine Burns:

‘Until human rights campaigners like us came along, talking about umbrella concepts, this diverse community had got along with a relatively stable lexicon for many years. There were ‘transvestites’ and ‘transsexuals’ – TVs and TS’s in the community shorthand – and that was more or less the only language you needed to know for more than a generation since Harry Benjamin had coined the latter term in his book ‘The Transsexual Phenomenon’ in 1966.

‘Our successes as a campaign were grounded in progress made for people who fitted the clinical definition of transsexual. At the heart of this was a tacit understanding that people in positions of power might be persuaded to change laws for people with some kind of clinically underwritten status – something they couldn’t help being. This is why ‘Transsexualism – The Medical Viewpoint’ was seen as strategically important and why all the key court cases had rehearsed the developing scientific understanding of a basis for us being born or developing this way. It was also why the government would expect to include a medical definition of ‘transsexual’ in the forthcoming employment protections they planned to consult upon.

‘We knew in our hearts at that time that policymakers and judges weren’t yet sophisticated enough in their understanding to contemplate rights for people whose difference appeared self-identified or impermanent or maybe even optional. That didn’t mean we weren’t going to try where possible. There was a valid freedom of expression case to be made for people to be able to present in whatever way they wish. But we were also pragmatists, careful not to frighten the horses at this early stage. (Note, however, that in the Equality Act 2010 – which replaced the Sex Discrimination Act – the requirement for having been medically diagnosed was finally removed).

‘I cannot recall exactly how we reached a consensus inside Press for Change. It wasn’t written down in email correspondence – it arose in telephone or face to face conversations, including the long calls I was now having with Claire McNab on Sunday afternoons before setting off for another hotel. Somehow or other, however, we arrived at a consensus that if we maybe all used the word ‘trans’ as an umbrella term – and words like ‘transsexual’ only when we needed to be more specific’ then maybe some of that would catch on gradually.

‘And so that is what we did. From there on, without fanfare, my essays and our web content discreetly began to use this language. Claire took the opportunity during the move of the PFC website to revise the existing content in the same way.

‘In the weeks and months ahead people would sometimes ask what the word meant or why we were using it. Then we would explain the rationale and suggest why we thought it was important. The change was gradual. In fact it took years for the word to begin sounding familiar and to hear it in other people’s language. In 2002 when we were consulting over government press releases to announce the forthcoming Gender Recognition Bill, the officials still weren’t convinced that enough people understood the new word to use it. Yet today most people seem to embrace the word naturally – when they are not simply calling themselves men or women.’

(From Christine Burns: Pressing Matters Vol. 1)

Throughout the history of trans rights campaigning there has never been a time when transsexuals and transvestites were not working together, involved in the same groups, pursuing the same aims, or at least intertwining their aims in mutually beneficial ways. All that happened in the mid 2010’s is that they started being open about this and stopped pretending it was all about rights for a tiny number of transsexuals." (continues)

womenspeakscotland.com/2021/06/23/the-trans-umbrella-is-older-than-you-think/

Deleted/censorship on mumsnet now!
SamiReed1 · 09/08/2021 13:44

@BluebirdsSong Just a question; why do you think mens and ladies toilets exist?

Helleofabore · 09/08/2021 14:08

SamiReed

Despite numerous attempts to by pass the MN ban hammer, I don't think that particular bird is singing on this stage anymore. They will not be able to answer your very excellent yet simple question.

LazyViper · 09/08/2021 15:02

The more derailers hop onto these discussions, the more obvious it becomes that narcissism and egocentricity play a large part in TRAs’ refusing to take on board what women and girls are saying.

Everything is centred on men’s preferences or requirements. Everything.

‘Women and girls need female-only spaces’ is about women and girls. Nobody else. But TRAs make it about an absence, an exclusion, discrimination against what is not there. The absent people become the point, hovering over the conversation like spectres. But they are not the point of that statement. The women and girls are the point.

‘Women and girls need safe spaces as they are vulnerable as a sex class to males’ is about women and girls. The TRAs twist this into being about discrimination or phobia or #notallmen or TWAW, because males have to be the centre of everything, every single time, in every discussion.

The more I read that sort of post, the more I wonder if they even see women and girls as people at all. Perhaps they consider us mere plot devices in the narrative of their lives.

Deliriumoftheendless · 09/08/2021 15:09

I keep saying it, but the reaction from TRAs really made me see how there’s many out there do not believe women and children deserve any rights. Because they are so convinced of this they can’t accept anyone else believes it and it MUST be “all about them.”

Then a poster pops up who illustrates this to a t. It’s as unreal to them as me demanding chairs have rights not to be farted on

Datun · 09/08/2021 15:15

@LazyViper

The more derailers hop onto these discussions, the more obvious it becomes that narcissism and egocentricity play a large part in TRAs’ refusing to take on board what women and girls are saying.

Everything is centred on men’s preferences or requirements. Everything.

‘Women and girls need female-only spaces’ is about women and girls. Nobody else. But TRAs make it about an absence, an exclusion, discrimination against what is not there. The absent people become the point, hovering over the conversation like spectres. But they are not the point of that statement. The women and girls are the point.

‘Women and girls need safe spaces as they are vulnerable as a sex class to males’ is about women and girls. The TRAs twist this into being about discrimination or phobia or #notallmen or TWAW, because males have to be the centre of everything, every single time, in every discussion.

The more I read that sort of post, the more I wonder if they even see women and girls as people at all. Perhaps they consider us mere plot devices in the narrative of their lives.

That's exactly it. Women are a resource, a tool. We are supposed to provide a service. Uncomplainingly. It's just expected.

Because, let's face it, it's not about spaces. It's about the women in those spaces. If all the women got up and left, en masse, and went to a different space, it would be the new space that becomes the focus. Without women and girls to provide validation the space is useless. The presence of women and girls is crucial.

ArabellaScott · 09/08/2021 15:33

I've heard that explained before, Datun, but for some reason it only just sunk in.

PurgatoryOfPotholes · 09/08/2021 15:46

This cartoon comes to mind.

Deleted/censorship on mumsnet now!
Datun · 09/08/2021 16:26

@ArabellaScott

I've heard that explained before, Datun, but for some reason it only just sunk in.
Yes, I know that feeling. It's like you think the scales have truly fallen, and then, clang! A whole bunch more drop off.
ifIwerenotanandroid · 09/08/2021 18:56

LazyViper -- from my experience of narcissists, you're right. Here are some of the reasons I've been constantly reminded of narcissism from the moment I, let's say, became aware of these issues.

  1. The total lack of humour, originality & creativity.
  1. The self-obsession.
  1. Seeing others as bit-players in the N's life, never seeing them as full human beings & people with lives, needs & feelings of their own.
  1. Seeing everything as a limited supply which the N must make sure comes only to him. (Could be money, attention, rights, gifts...)
  1. Taking what belongs to others, just because the N wants it. (Someone described an N as an amoeba-like blob, spreading out over others & their possessions etc.)
  1. Not allowing anyone else to be in the spotlight; deliberately sabotaging this to put the spotlight back on the N.
  1. Having a false self image WHICH MUST BE PROTECTED AT ALL COSTS. Everyone is required to shore up this self-image, at whatever cost to themselves. (Someone once described it in a family setting as the N being a black hole around which the rest of the family warps itself.)
  1. Lying & gaslighting to hold onto power, saying whatever they think works for them at that moment in time. The next minute or the next day, they'll say the exact opposite. Everyone else is expected to take whatever they say right now as the absolute truth, accept it & live by it - & never to mention or even notice that the opposite was apparently the truth just now.
  1. DARVO & victim blaming. Nothing is EVER the N's fault. The N is always the victim, even when they're the aggressor. A sociopath was quoted as saying that they wanted other people to feel sorry for them, because it makes those other people easier to manipulate. I found this quite astonishing, given that most people hate others pitying them.
  1. N's are often said to be trapped at an early stage of development, about 3-6 years old.

  2. The need to control everything, which saps the life & joy out of everything.

  3. Repetitious behaviour & language, especially when it's not having the effect the N desires. They never seem to learn.

  4. A belief that anyone who stands up to the N is a threat to them & so whatever is done to them is completely justified.

  5. Getting joy out of purposely spoiling things for others, entirely pointlessly. Being obsessed with doing this to a nominated person or set of people.

  6. Being so stupid &/or focussed on the wrong things that the N is sometimes his own worst enemy, in that if he were to back off a little, give a little, do things slightly differently, he would get a much better result - FOR HIMSELF, even, let alone other people. But he cannot. He cannot act in his own best interests.

This is, of course, not aimed at any specific people, though it comes directly from the handful of narc's I've had the misfortune to know at close quarters. It's about the similarities to those narcissistic traits which I've been aware of over the last few years, in large & small ways, in this discourse.

HermioneKipper · 09/08/2021 22:35

@ArabellaScott

I've heard that explained before, Datun, but for some reason it only just sunk in.
@Datun’s explanation summed it up really well for me too. It’s all just terrifying though. I feel quite sick at how far this is all going
OP posts:
PurgatoryOfPotholes · 09/08/2021 22:55

Ray Blanchard tweeted on this subject today. Maybe he reads mumsnet.

twitter.com/BlanchardPhD/status/1424787283866226695?s=19

Datun · 09/08/2021 23:20

Datun’s explanation summed it up really well for me too. It’s all just terrifying though. I feel quite sick at how far this is all going

I don't think this is anything new Hermione. Women have always been seen as lesser than, and, to coin a Mumsnet phrase, regarded as service humans.

This is just a new means of getting them to validate men.

What I don't think these men reckoned with, was quite how many of us would start to malfunction. 😁

HermioneKipper · 09/08/2021 23:37

@Datun maybe it’s nothing new but I guess my eyes have only truly been opened to it recently and the extent to which things are going.

Well it certainly isn’t something I’m going to lie down and accept. For myself, my daughter and other women

OP posts:
HermioneKipper · 09/08/2021 23:38

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.