what does it mean "live as a woman"?

[vivariumvivariumsvivaria]

I gather that in order for a male person who believes themselves to be feminine they have to "live as their acquired gender" for 2 years in order to get a GRC.

Is there a definition of how women live? Because I don't think I qualify.

Is this the same group of fawning women that kicked a woman who had had a stillborn child out because she objected to a MTF trans person using the group to role play a fake pregnancy and stillbirth?

Living as a woman, eh.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Is this the same group of fawning women that kicked a woman who had had a stillborn child out because she objected to a MTF trans person using the group to role play a fake pregnancy and stillbirth?

Ugh. I remember that. There's compliance because of socialisation and or/survival instincts and then there is sheer inhumanity and such wilful blindness that you shouldn't be allowed out alone.

Sometimes, people's minds are so open their brains fall out.

Jeeeeeeesus.

Who was the TW who had organised "maternity leave"? Had been faking a pregnancy in the office and planned a fake labour and a still birth? I remember that thread on here.

Was that in the US?

I did think that was an HR nightmare for when if it was to happen here.

Is it a hate crime to deny maternity leave to a person who's GIC says they are female?

Kindness. I don't know if there is a way to say 'males cannot become women' that is going to be considered acceptable to someone who thinks that TWAW. I am sorry if this upsets some people, but how are we to discuss the realities and implications of 'Transwomen are women' if we can't state things like this?

We're in a very unhealthy - even dangerous - situation if it's considered unkind to state facts or speak our minds, or unacceptable to state certain things/beliefs/words for fear of being considered 'unkind'.

Magdalen Berns said 'I'd rather be rude than a fucking liar'. I can empathise with that, although I do try to be both honest and respectful, the truth is that we have ended up in the ridiculous situation where the truth is seen as unkind, not nice, unsayable.

I don't think 'kindness' is always staying silent, acquiescing, avoiding certain topics so as not to upset people.

Sometimes kindness is very bloody difficult. It might mean asserting boundaries, saying 'no'. Sometimes asserting our boundaries does risk upsetting people.

If we are told someone's happiness relies on our tacit complicity, or on our acting a certain way, then refusing to comply or take part can look callous, rather than a simple decline of the invite.

I would say it's unfair to everyone involved to avoid difficult subjects, avoid speaking the truth, avoid confrontation or upset just to pursue some vague idea of being 'kind'.

Kindness has to extend to everyone, including women, otherwise it's not kindness, but special treatment, and elevating of one person's rights and desires over another person's. That is something else; not kindness.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4037973-Simulated-pregnancy-and-induced-lactation

Here's a link to the thread about TW planning a 'stillbirth'.

Oh god. That one. Such self absorbed, "validate me" nastiness.

I wondered at the time how traumatised the women he spoke to felt, once they were out the other side.

Magdalen Berns said 'I'd rather be rude than a fucking liar'. I can empathise with that, although I do try to be both honest and respectful, the truth is that we have ended up in the ridiculous situation where the truth is seen as unkind, not nice, unsayable.

But, to me, I don't think we have ended up with it being considered unkind. I think we've been firmly told it's unkind to stop us saying it.

Leveraged by untrue suicide statistics, and the collective belief that it incites violence towards tw. (Which hasn't yet been explained to me properly, to be honest. I would've thought it was more dangerous to keep up a pretence that was revealed at the last minute, than not pretend in the first place.)

It really is quite extraordinary to me how we could be stopped from talking by being called unkind, whilst our rights are being openly removed right in front of us.

Re. Kindness - men online are openly abusive and mock transwomen, but they don't get trolled and doxxed and harassed.
The standard of behaviour for women is higher; we have to be polite and kind and agreeable. Men can use the T slur and nothing happens. Not that I want to use slurs, but I'm sick of being told to be kind.
I don't give a fuck if some bloke thinks I'm mean.

All these groups being targeted and shut down, or women leaving. So sad.

And also, having thought about it, I resent lurkers popping up to tone police the women on this thread, when they're not apparently even willing to take part in the discussion. You think we're doing it wrong? Step in. Offer some solutions. Step up.

Tell us - how do we square the wants and needs of women with those of transwomen? How do we protect the rights of women while catering to the wishes of Butterfly?

@ArabellaScott

And also, having thought about it, I resent lurkers popping up to tone police the women on this thread, when they're not apparently even willing to take part in the discussion. You think we're doing it wrong? Step in. Offer some solutions. Step up.

Tell us - how do we square the wants and needs of women with those of transwomen? How do we protect the rights of women while catering to the wishes of Butterfly?

Yes, drive-by scoldings are pretty common on these threads.

drive by scoldings

love that.

Tuck and roll, girls, tuck and roll.

I am looking forward to seeing some excellent well considered and fresh suggestions forthwith.

Because we have proposed third spaces, something other transitioned males have started campaigning for. And been told that is undesirable. And Butterfly’s suggestion all along has been that they would continue as per their usual . Ignoring the needs of vulnerable women. Completely.

And getting back to the topic of the thread rather than just safe spaces.

I look forward to new suggestions for how to include transitioned males and non binary males into the definition of woman.

Because, frankly, the previous forced changes are causing lots of trouble and the issue is now coming to much wider attention because of the negative impacts, those being denied by lobby groups and many trans activists, although we know not by all trans people by any means.

Either way, every single day I am meeting people real life that are horrified at the forced changes to language and the forced access to single sex spaces, sports and opportunities set up to progress females (particularly young females) and what is happening to our teenagers and children.

I notice lately that our usual activist posters have stopped trying to gas light us by telling us we are the extreme group that has minuscule numbers. (I remember one of posters telling us there was only 2 or 3 thousand GCs (their term) in the UK. ). But we are still being told to be kind, to be nice even with posters who have not been nice except on a very superficial level.

Quite unsurprising to see those making those comments to not contribute anything else.

But maybe they haven’t had time and will now.

Shouldn't the question be

What does it mean to live as a man and why does the current definition exclude so many men that they think they must be women ?

thinkngaboutlangcleg sigmund Freud spent a lot of his life mulling over what women want.
I heard an interesting discussion once, a social worker said "its believed that the father of Freud sexually abused his daughters which Freud had witnessed. Its believed he was in denial and formed his theories that females actually wanted their fathers penis" never researched it, but may be of interest how this came about and how it was evidenced.
Which is quite concerning if this was the case, given Freuds theories form the basis of a lot of child development.

@Helleofabore I second that. The only coherent thinking is coming from the regular posters here. Others pop in to tell you off, or tell you to be kind, but don't contribute anything to the discussion.

I came to this board originally (years ago) to see what all the fuss was about, and used to hope someone would post an alternative pov or constructive suggestion. But they really don't. Because they can't. They shout insults or slogans, or they waffle about feelings. Neither of those approaches is any help in making policies that protect women and girls, or indeed trans people.

If there is a workable (i.e. coherent, laws can be based on it, keeps women and girls safe) compromise between "Woman = adult human female", and "Woman = anyone who feels they are a woman" (fucking ludicrous and downright dangerous), I'd love to hear it. I'm not holding my breath though.

@twinklystar23

thinkngaboutlangcleg sigmund Freud spent a lot of his life mulling over what women want. I heard an interesting discussion once, a social worker said "its believed that the father of Freud sexually abused his daughters which Freud had witnessed. Its believed he was in denial and formed his theories that females actually wanted their fathers penis" never researched it, but may be of interest how this came about and how it was evidenced. Which is quite concerning if this was the case, given Freuds theories form the basis of a lot of child development.

I've read that Freud's early studies unveiled a lot of women who had suffered psychologically due to being abused by their fathers. It didn't go down well with his target market so he changed tack.

If there is a workable (i.e. coherent, laws can be based on it, keeps women and girls safe) compromise between "Woman = adult human female", and "Woman = anyone who feels they are a woman" (fucking ludicrous and downright dangerous), I'd love to hear it. I'm not holding my breath though.

I'd like to hear it too. Before anyone submits their solutions, please check your workings and confirm it is kind and treats the following with respect:

•men and women with CCSDs (it is not acceptable to tell people with genetic conditions that they're not quite human, so don't say they're not female or not male to suit someone else's convenience),

•the personhood of women with cognitive disabilities that mean they don't have the capacity to ponder their gender identity (who are all someone's daughter)

•women in prison (who are all somebody's daughter). There are 12 women's prisons in this country, and six of them have got women and baby units in, totalling a maximum of 70 places for babies under 18 months old to stay with 64 mummies for their own benefit. I'll expect this solution not to shit on the babies of incarcerated women more than they already are.

•women in psychiatric wards (the convicted rapist Karen White who attacked women in the female prison where KW was placed, was there, IIRC, for raping a woman on a locked psychiatric ward ). Every single woman in a psychiatric hospital is someone's daughter.

•women who have been subjected to sexual assault and fear male bodies near them when they're partially undressed

•women with religious beliefs that mean they choose or feel obliged to cover their bodies in the presence of men they're not related to

•elderly women who only want female carers cleaning their vulvas. That could be you one day.

This is not intended as an exhaustive list.

I hear "be kind" a lot, but telling me to be kind isn't going to get you what you want. I'm being that to people you haven't thought of yet. What you need to do, is convince me to be unkind to all the groups listed.

I'm going to reiterate something for those at the back. This is a parenting site, the home of the This is My Child campaign about children with disabilities. If your approach necessitates throwing disabled people under the bus, you are Not In The Spirit of Mumsnet.

Haranguing me to do so will get you nowhere, because I am a hardened veteran of the wheelchair spaces on buses threads from AIBU.

*totalling a maximum of 70 places for babies under 18 months old to stay with 64 mummies forthe babies' ownbenefit.

SEVENTY places?

Seriously? that's it? For the whole of the UK or the whole of England?

SEVENTY?

Jesus. This stuff just gets worse and worse. The women who land up in jail really are the ones that no one gives a shit about, aren't they?

Yup.

extract

Out of twelve prisons in England and Wales there are six with a mother and baby unit.

Bronzefield
Eastwood Park
Styal
New Hall
Peterborough
Askham Grange

With an estimated 17,000 women in the criminal justice system thought to be mothers, places on an MBU are highly sought after. There are limited number of spaces with only a 64 mother and 70 baby spaces which means that many applications are rejected.

(continues)

The process to apply for a place can be long and complex which means that the mother and child/ren can be separated for a long time before a decision is made. Even in the unlikely event that a mother is granted a place, you can only look after your child until they are 18 months old.

Lucy Frazer QC MP and Minister for Prisons and Probation addresses this issue in the 2020 Review of operational policy on pregnancy, mother and baby units and maternal separation, stating that she wants to speed up decision-making, suggesting that to introduce it before sentencing will mean that mother and child are not separated for too long.

The number of places and facilities are just not enough. Many women are losing their children, some being jailed for petty crimes, which in turn can be devastating, leading to mental health problems, repeat offending and general contempt and mistrust in authority.

“It’s hard to get into this unit,” says Emma. “When I first came to Eastwood Park they made clear on the juvenile wing that my behaviour had to be spotless if I wanted to get a place here. That meant not getting into arguments with anyone, which is hard when you are cooped up with a load of other women in such a small space. You can see that from watching Big Brother. People fall out about anything.”

According to a number of studies, women are far more likely to self-harm and commit suicide in prison than men. The alarming rise in self-harm and suicide during the COVID pandemic due to prolonged isolation and reduced (sometimes non-existent) visitation proves the devastating effects of women not being able to see their families.

COVID-19 outbreak has had a detrimental impact on prisoners. By June 2020, children had not been able to visit their mother in prison and the 13 children residing with their mother in MBUs have not seen anyone outside of the prison.

Lack of visitation during the pandemic has now been reported to be a breach of Article 8 of the Human Rights Actwhich states that a child has the right to family life; and Article 2 of the United Nations Convention on the rights of the Child (1989) which states that a child should be protected by the state from discrimination or punishment for the activities of its parents. It is also argued that this is a breach when children are not being considered during the sentencing of its mother.

Continues: backintosociety.co.uk/2021/04/12/prison-mother-and-baby-units-in-england-and-wales/

Jesus wept.

I've got a ball of something really uncomfortable in my throat - I think it must be rage.

So, these women, more than half of whom have head injuries because some bloke battered them hard enough to leave permanent damage - if they are unfortunate enough to be convicted of low-grade crime also lose their babies, and their babies their mother during the most important stage of development?

It's inhumane.

I'm so sick of this shit. Those women and those babies matter. I don't know much about the justice system, other than it doesn't seem to address the reasons that the women are offending in the first place, but, surely having pregnant woman in jail is a GREAT opportunity to help her, and therefore help her baby?

I'm so cross. We spend all this time talking about the needs of male people who want to wear lipstick - crack on, mate, but please, do it in your own spaces. The women are busy dealing with all this CRAP, we don't have time for your ego.