Does anyone else feel that the tone has changed on this board?

[ViceLikeBlip]

This board has been incredibly important to me, especially when I felt like I was losing my mind because no one else seemed to see a problem with self ID, and everyone else seemed to believe TWAW (or, I now realise, everyone else was too scared to suggest they might not believe TWAW).

You guys helped me rationalise my thoughts, and realise I wasn't some awful transphobe, and I've been really grateful to be part of this community. And I really felt like I belonged: we were pro women's rights, not anti trans rights, and we didn't believe that all transwomen are dangerous perverts but rather we recognised that dangerous perverts do exist, and they will readily take advtange of any loophole that gives them access to women.

More than anything, you guys have been an absolute mine of information - facts, stats, latest developments, and you've pointed me in the direction of news articles and twitter rows that I never would have seen otherwise. I'm genuinely grateful for this.

But recently the mood seems to have shifted significantly. There seems to be a lot of open animosity and ridicule towards all things trans. The recent outcry about M&S letting some people put their pronouns on their name badges felt uncomfortably close to clamouring to have M&S "cancelled".

I guess I used to feel like this was a safe space where I was with like minded people, but now I don't think everyone on here can hand-on-heart maintain that they're not anti-trans anymore, and it makes me very upset to see this shift happening (and happening quickly).

It's one thing being concerned about elements of trans people's rights and how they intersect with the rights of others, there's another altogether to say you're against the concept of transness.
The concept of transness is open for discussion, in so doing nobody ceases to exist. The concept of homosexuality can be discussed without me disappearing in a puff of smoke.

If you said the same about gayness, you'd quite rightly be called a homophobe.
By a homophobe, no doubt.

One is about accepting yourself as you are, as a same sex attracted person in a world that is often hostile.
The other is about reinforcing gender norms, claiming to be in the wrong body* and demanding everyone change their language, laws and sexual orientation to suit you.

arguing that there's no such thing as a safe space and nobody's entitled to one while also arguing that the evil transes are taking safe spaces away

Apples and oranges. A prison cell is not the same as a discussion group. The former has to be somewhere a woman can be physically safe. The latter might be somewhere an individual claims dissent makes them feel unsafe. Not the same thing and it's disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

• this in itself is a religious belief and is also offensive to people with disabilities

And if you are referring to physical 'safe spaces' for transpeople, then third spaces are an obvious answer to balance the rights of everyone to be safe. But that's not allowed to be discussed - it's 'transphobic'. So women must be forced to capitulate.

There are multiple "safe" spaces across the internet pitched at people who believe that transwomen are women, transmen are men, and non-binary people are non-binary. MNHQ even created a new feminism chat for it here.

This, however, is a discussion and debate space and they're allowed to exist too.

I'm not asking for the world to be made a female-only space. I just want some female-only spaces to exist. See the difference?

P.S. being gay is not like prescribing medication to children to disrupt their physical development.

Here's why.

extract

For years, Sharissa Derricott, 30, had no idea why her body seemed to be failing. At 21, a surgeon replaced her deteriorated jaw joint. She’s been diagnosed with degenerative disc disease and fibromyalgia, a chronic pain condition. Her teeth are shedding enamel and cracking.

None of it made sense to her until she discovered a community of women online who describe similar symptoms and have one thing in common: All had taken a drug called Lupron.

Thousands of parents chose to inject their daughters with the drug, which was approved to shut down puberty in young girls but also is commonly used off-label to help short kids grow taller.

In interviews and in online forums, women who took the drug as young girls or initiated a daughter’s treatment described harsh side effects that have been well-documented in adults.

Women who used Lupron a decade or more ago to delay puberty or grow taller described the short-term side effects listed on the pediatric label: pain at the injection site, mood swings, and headaches. Yet they also described conditions that usually affect people much later in life. A 20-year-old from South Carolina was diagnosed with osteopenia, a thinning of the bones, while a 25-year-old from Pennsylvania has osteoporosis and a cracked spine. A 26-year-old in Massachusetts needed a total hip replacement. A 25-year-old in Wisconsin, like Derricott, has chronic pain and degenerative disc disease.

www.statnews.com/2017/02/02/lupron-puberty-children-health-problems/

Women are not support humans who must shift over in order to validate trans women's desire to be included in single sex spaces.

I support 3rd spaces if trans women feel they need protecting from males that aren't trans

@Waitwhat23

Do you genuinely not understand the difference between a 'safe space' online in terms of discussions being dictated in order that feelings aren't hurt, and an actual, physical 'safe space' where women who are vulnerable, undressed or needing a single sex space for a variety of reasons have a safe space to do so? Really?

The extraordinary homophobia of gender ideology re-defining homosexuality as same sex attraction and not its actual (legally protected) definition which is same sex attraction means you are a massive hypocrite.

Of course I do. The poster I quoted however said "I would argue there's no such thing as a safe space anywhere in this world". Which seemed like an odd thing to say, in context...

I also never said I was against safe spaces for natal/cis/whatever term won't get me shouted at women, or third spaces as a solution. I'm all for them.

Just tickled me how inconsistent the tone is on here, sometimes.

@Waitwhat23

Do you genuinely not understand the difference between a 'safe space' online in terms of discussions being dictated in order that feelings aren't hurt, and an actual, physical 'safe space' where women who are vulnerable, undressed or needing a single sex space for a variety of reasons have a safe space to do so? Really?

The extraordinary homophobia of gender ideology re-defining homosexuality as same sex attraction and not its actual (legally protected) definition which is same sex attraction means you are a massive hypocrite.

Typo - should read -

The extraordinary homophobia of gender ideology re-defining homosexuality as same gender attraction and not its actual (legally protected) definition which is same sex attraction means you are a massive hypocrite.

Scarpa 23.05
It doesn’t work to change the subject in Uduhoun’s words from ‘trans’ to ‘homosexual’.

Trans is about perceived identity

Homosexuality is a sexual orientation

The trans ideology looks for transgressions into women’s rights and protections, is encouraging very young people to believe they are in the wrong body and possibly harm themselves, and is making language meaningless.

Homosexuals simply want to have relationships with other homosexuals based on their sex.

I found some responses almost gleeful in their righteous indignation.

After so long of this nonsense, I can fully understand this. Gender ideology is nothing more than a joke to anyone who does not subscribe to it.

And calls to boycott - that's absolutely akin to "cancelling". And it reminded me precisely of everything I hate about the worst elements of extreme trans rights activism.

Yea, I am not a fan of this, but a) again understandable when the other side have been doing it so long and b) actually this has been going on for a long time (Lush was a long time ago). Maybe you notice it more because it is more forceful.

What do you really want? It almost sounds like you want a place where everyone agrees with you perfectly. If that is the case, maybe you subscribe to gender ideology, there is all out conformity there.

I've never seen any group so crushingly awful at analogies and metaphor.

I wonder if that isn't a fairly significant observation.

@scarpa

(Also - the absolute hypocrisy of multiple people on this thread arguing that there's no such thing as a safe space and nobody's entitled to one while also arguing that the evil transes are taking safe spaces away... pick a lane!)

I hate to break it to you; but the internet is not a literal "space", just a metaphorical one. I know it seems like it exists in space; but really it's just an illusion created by your computer screen. It doesn't actually physically exist like you can, you know, go in and change in it, or have a wee in it, or get your cervix examined in it. Even if you're playing Animal Crossing.

HTH x.

@TimOTey

there's another altogether to say you're against the concept of transness. If you said the same about gayness, you'd quite rightly be called a homophobe

It's not the same though is it. Transitioning causes physical harm to children. Brittle bones, heart failure, potential early death. And there's no evidence to suggest transitioning actually helps many children in the long term. Its not transphobic to be worried about the harm that gender ideology causes women, and children.
Being gay doesn't impact on other people's rights. And it doesn't impact on the individual physically. A pretty poor comparison imo.

I'm not talking about medical transition. I'm well aware of the risks and share many of the concerns of posters here about physically transitioning before the age of 18.

I'm talking about the fact that this poster's entire point seemed to be, why can't they just not be trans.

In line with what OP said originally, there seems to be a growing number of people (not just here) who, even assuming a world where trans people only had third spaces that didn't infringe on sex based protections whatsoever, where nobody under 18 medically transitioned, etc etc, all the direct and specific concerns stated here, would still just dislike the concept of trans people because they don't agree with it and think it's not natural.

The tone has shifted, as far as I've seen. It's spikier, more hostile, more barbed jokes about five o'clock shadows and so on (and that was on this thread - not very gender critical to suggest women couldn't have a beard, when my own XX self is sporting quite the set of whiskers now ...). No, nobody owes niceness and everyone's entitled to be angry but it's what's driving that that I think is concerning - hence the comparison with Section 28. It was all ooh it's damaging the traditional family unit, it's bad for children to know about homosexuality, you'll all get AIDS, they're being indoctrinated into the gay cult. Until more and more of it just seemed like it boiled down to "...and I don't fuckin like it.".

I do not dismiss the many valid concerns of people with the prevailing view on this board. Some of those concerns I agree with. But I have noticed that there is an undercurrent of those who at best are shifting toward "My concerns have morphed into dislike of trans people generally because I've decided to position myself at odds with everything they want" (I blame the internet for making everything so black and white, here), or at worst, hijacking legitimate concerns to conceal just genuine transphobia.

Just tickled me how inconsistent the tone is on here, sometimes.

There’s no inconsistency.

would still just dislike the concept of trans people because they don't agree with it and think it's not natural.

I've haven't ever seen anyone post something like that. Im sure it would be deleted if they did. It seems to me that the concerns that women have here are entirely centred around safety and rights, for both women and children. I suppose there may be the occasional plopper who might post something nasty, but that often seems to be for screen shot material only.

Not RTFT entirely sorry.

This whole thing is a total shitshow for women and girls. In this post I mean vagina havers who are juvenile, or adult. In the interests of inclusivity I may use the new language in places.

Ok so the idea that women and girls (bodies with vaginas) who are 'cis' are privileged.

Not that at anyone knows who is cis without asking them personally. As usual. We are deemed to be what others say we are.

But yes. Privilege.

This idea is an utter kick in the face for women and girls globally. Now, and through history.

We have been chattel. We still are in law or in practice around the world.

We are given in marriage as children. To adult men.. Raped. Having children while our bodies are too young. Child marriage is legal/ practiced all over the place. It is legal in some USA States. Not 15,17..12..13.. Kids.

In UK rape in marriage was only criminalised in early 90s.

In Afghanistan we have once again been barred from working. Have to cover. Girls education- nope.

We are massive casualties of war, civil unrest. Those who come to 'help'. Rape, abuse. Girls. Women.

Around the world when men who decide we are theirs. Decide to hurt us. Rape us beat us. Strangle us. Throw acid over us.. Torture us, murder us.

The concept of male ownership runs deep. All over the world. Everywhere.. Sometimes overt sometimes blatant.

So much so much too much to even attempt to start to list.

We SUFFER. in so so many ways. Everywhere. For all the history we know.

Who are we?

Women, girls? No. Redefined to mean. Anyone who says so. Only for a week? That's fine. It's... Not a big deal. Claim those as yours whenever you wish. Opt in. Opt out.

Female? That's going...

So now. People with vaginas.

People with vaginas subjected to mass rape in power struggle.

Menstruators taken and traded on sex markets. In the news- one person with a vagina set herself on fire in the hope that she (they?) would die to stop the rape.. Or would be so disfigured they wouldn't want her.

Deaths of the impregnated due to unsafe abortion increases globally.

In Pakistan another school for young people with cunts has been attacked. Juveniles with ovaries dead estimated to be high, many more injured.

Yes? YES?

This is all about US. Those who have apparently been deemed an identity.

Who does this happen to? Let's think. In the new language.

Cis? No. It's not about gender.
Women/ girls? No. It's not about identity.
Female people? Hmm. Never used. On its way to redefinition. Feels like a pointed attack on trans people esp those who ID as women.

So.

Menstruators.
Ovulators.
People with a cervix.
People who would expect to go through menopause.
People who might need an abortion.
Bodies with vaginas.

Yay?

Split us down into subgroups?

And yet. Inconsistent. Why?

Why no headlines saying eg.

'juvenile people with vaginas being sold into prostitution'...?

'adults with fallopian tubes subject to gang rape by invading forces'.

Where is the US? Women. Girls. All our history struggles. Present massive issues around the world? There is no us. Just. The ones with cunts.

Yes I'm fucking livid.

If you can't see why then come and tell me why I'm wrong.

', even assuming a world where trans people only had third spaces'

They are refused. Exclusionary. No good. TW in women's prison was supported bringing a court case that not being treated as general was unfair discrimination.

'that didn't infringe on sex based protections whatsoever, where nobody under 18 medically transitioned, etc etc, all the direct and specific concerns stated here, '

Ha no chance it's done all over the place. So this is a massive hypothetical.

'would still just dislike the concept of trans people because they don't agree with it and think it's not natural.'

Go and talk to some evangelical types. Knock yourself out. Get really enraged. Problem with this sort of BOOM ha gotcha. Is it doesn't work if it's just waaayyy off the mark.

scarpa
I agree that "eww, trans" is not very nice, not very grown up, and not very pleasant for anyone to read. However, those posts could be reported for moderation.
Also, is every "eww, trans" actually hostility or is some of it a reaction to weird behaviour and inappropriate public fetishes? If I read the accounts of men who go fishing in sanitary bins for used towels and tampons as masturbatory aids, I'm not "eww" - ing at their wig or their new pronouns, but their behaviour.
Plenty of people disapprove of gay men cottaging, including other gay men. Is that homophobia or just disapproval of the practice of having sex with strangers in public toilets?

Is it even "eww, trans"? Is some of it just "why trans"? In which case analogies to homosexuality really don't work. Like many other lesbians I have been appointed Official Spokesperson and get asked all kinds of nonsense, some by unfriendly types, some by well-meaning types. How many times on average do you think a lesbian gets asked "how did you know you were a lesbian" in her life?

I don't know a single lesbian who's ever threatened suicide over it.

Lastly, looks. Let's face it, the reason "hon" became a meme was because unconvincing transvestite men (as the public would view them) publicly compliment each other on their looks. Men who want to dress up like whatever they thought the hottest women from their teenage years wore, who don't spend the time, who don't bother shaving their face half the time - this is relevant because women are judged on appearance all the time. These individuals, be they transvestites, transwomen, non-binary transfeminine whatever, are never judged in the same harsh light women are. So yes, when some of them look ridiculous, wearing clothes that don't fit, ABBA - esque blue eyeshadow and a beard, we can laugh at them. Their appearance is the whole point. Their appearance is what they believe womanhood is. Cheap eyeshadow and a mini-skirt. That's our humanity to them. So yes, we can laugh at them, and I don't feel bad for it.

[quote foxgoosefinch]@scarpa

(Also - the absolute hypocrisy of multiple people on this thread arguing that there's no such thing as a safe space and nobody's entitled to one while also arguing that the evil transes are taking safe spaces away... pick a lane!)

I hate to break it to you; but the internet is not a literal "space", just a metaphorical one. I know it seems like it exists in space; but really it's just an illusion created by your computer screen. It doesn't actually physically exist like you can, you know, go in and change in it, or have a wee in it, or get your cervix examined in it. Even if you're playing Animal Crossing.

HTH x. [/quote]
Thanks - helpful as always, Foxgoose.

The two quotes from this thread I was referring to were:

"Why does anyone need a "safe" space anyway?"

"I would argue there's no such thing as a safe space anywhere in the world."

I was being a bit facetious with my comment, but it was an odd choice of wording, that's all - I'm sure they were referring to digital spaces not needing to be safe, in a way I presume they do in fact think physical ones should (thanks for explaining the difference, I keep trying to eat food I see in adverts and it's really hurting my teeth chewing through my phone case).

But digital safe spaces exist, too - I'm absolutely not arguing this should be one for, as in this context, trans people, but on a broader level it shows an interesting disconnect between the digital and physical spaces people inhabit that I think might explain the perceived shift in tone online in this conversation that OP (and others on this thread) have noticed. In fact it's the case on the internet generally - people don't believe it's real.

What that does to discourse and debate is not always good. Harm can be done online as it can in physical spaces.

More of a philosophical point. Will take care not to make facetious comments again 😘

I think the dream for some TRAs is:
Men (XY and XX, selfID)
Women (XY, selfID)
&
Cis (XX, no choice, put up and shut up)

Nah.

Men
Women (who used to be men)
Non people.

The end.

True, but perhaps we'll get a symbol, I was going to say an X, but I expect a 0 to show nothingness.

I'd like to point out that the only reason GC women in particular have taken to referring to themselves by their reproductive capacity is in defence against TRAs insisting that TW Are Women, Are Female etc.

As women, we HAVE to have some frame of reference to talk about ourselves as natal females - and sometimes the only way to do that is to refer to ourselves by our reproductive organs/biology, regardless of how functional it is. We do not want to do this, but we are often forced into it to maintain the separation.

"Cis" is a bollocks term, hijacked from organic chemistry and meaning nothing in biological mammalian terms. I will not use it to refer to myself or any other human. If some "nice, kind" people wish to use it, then sure, that is their prerogative - but they don't get to push it onto me or anyone else who rejects it as the bollocks it is.

TRAs and the trans ideologists are the huge proponents of reducing us to our reproductive organs. "Menstruators, bleeders, cervix havers, birthing people, birthing bodies [FFS!]" - these are all the words that are "preferred" by the "inclusive" group. Women/girls is the appropriate term - but it doesn't include TW, who insist that they should go without the T prefix and be known as "women" - so they get all offended because their biology isn't covered.

The amount of gaslighting and DARVO that comes out of the trans ideology is horrifying. The number of women who fall for it is more so.

It's one thing being concerned about elements of trans people's rights and how they intersect with the rights of others, there's another altogether to say you're against the concept of transness. If you said the same about gayness, you'd quite rightly be called a homophobe.

I am a lesbian and I have always known that the concept of ‘sex change’ is both misogynistic and homophobic, ‘sex changes’ were originally given to gay men as a type of physical conversion therapy, so they could better fit into a misogynistic and homophobic society. There was never anything remotely progressive about it. Now it is not just gay men, lesbian women, heterosexual males with AGP, children and young people are all undergoing various medical interventions, it is just as regressive as it ever was. More so even, as now more people are being harmed by it, and it is harming women in society, it’s being sold as ‘progressive’ when it is the direct opposite.

Gender ideology itself dehumanises women, it reduces women to stereotypes males can adopt, feelings males can have and procedures males can undergo. Homosexuality doesn’t dehumanise any group of people.

Gender ideology claims a heterosexual male can be a lesbian woman, so it is lesbophobic, and harmful to lesbian women. It also can function as it always has, as a type of physical conversion therapy for homosexuals, who have trouble accepting themselves as gays and lesbians. Therefore, gender ideology is homophobic.

Section 28 called, it wants its talking points back.

Rejecting the misogynistic and homophobic gender ideology is the progressive thing to do. Rejecting gender ideology is rejecting homophobia and misogyny, it is the complete opposite of section 28. It is gender ideology and it’s followers silencing debate that is like section 28.

would still just dislike the concept of trans people because they don't agree with it and think it's not natural.

People who are truly progressive reject gender ideology as it is regressive misogynistic and homophobic. What is truly progressive is being a non-conforming man, or a non-conforming woman, and not claiming that makes one less of one’s own sex or more like the opposite sex, its nothing to do with anything being ‘natural’ or not.

@FlyingOink

scarpa I agree that "eww, trans" is not very nice, not very grown up, and not very pleasant for anyone to read. However, those posts could be reported for moderation. Also, is every "eww, trans" actually hostility or is some of it a reaction to weird behaviour and inappropriate public fetishes? If I read the accounts of men who go fishing in sanitary bins for used towels and tampons as masturbatory aids, I'm not "eww" - ing at their wig or their new pronouns, but their behaviour. Plenty of people disapprove of gay men cottaging, including other gay men. Is that homophobia or just disapproval of the practice of having sex with strangers in public toilets?

Is it even "eww, trans"? Is some of it just "why trans"? In which case analogies to homosexuality really don't work. Like many other lesbians I have been appointed Official Spokesperson and get asked all kinds of nonsense, some by unfriendly types, some by well-meaning types. How many times on average do you think a lesbian gets asked "how did you know you were a lesbian" in her life?

I don't know a single lesbian who's ever threatened suicide over it.

Lastly, looks. Let's face it, the reason "hon" became a meme was because unconvincing transvestite men (as the public would view them) publicly compliment each other on their looks. Men who want to dress up like whatever they thought the hottest women from their teenage years wore, who don't spend the time, who don't bother shaving their face half the time - this is relevant because women are judged on appearance all the time. These individuals, be they transvestites, transwomen, non-binary transfeminine whatever, are never judged in the same harsh light women are. So yes, when some of them look ridiculous, wearing clothes that don't fit, ABBA - esque blue eyeshadow and a beard, we can laugh at them. Their appearance is the whole point. Their appearance is what they believe womanhood is. Cheap eyeshadow and a mini-skirt. That's our humanity to them. So yes, we can laugh at them, and I don't feel bad for it.

I see your point about some of it. I'm sure you could argue that some people who've developed straight up dislike of any group did so off the back of actual concerns - I fucking hate all swans because they can potentially BREAK YOUR ARM, as an extremely silly example - you can see the route to it. But it still ends up being just a wholesale dislike or hatred that has no place.

Mumsnet absolutely does a cracking job of moderating the overt stuff. I've seen some shitty comments removed in nanoseconds and fair play to them for that. Unfortunately a lot of comments are a lot more insidious and just-deniable and faux innocent. And so when they get challenged by the occasional person on here, you get met with "Moi? No, no, I was merely making a very innocent statement" - when they're still doing, as you say, an "eww" thing.

I'll disagree on your last point, because I don't think laughing at anyone does any good - and steps over the line for me.

Congrats on being named one of the Official Spokeslesbians. My cousin was also named, but I believe as all lesbians also know each other, you'll be aware of that 😉

I'm heterosexual and always had heterosexual relationships, but the idea of a lesbian having to accept heterosexual sex or face being called a bigot makes me go "ewww".

I am allowed to select men only without lesbians calling me names, TW are allowed to select women only if they wish, why is it only lesbians who have no selection rights?

I'll disagree on your last point, because I don't think laughing at anyone does any good - and steps over the line for me.

Maybe it's not a productive thing to do, but I think it's understandable. I think in some cases the audacity has to be called out, and the double standard needs to be called out. If Silvio Berlusconi can call Angela Merkel an "unfuckable lardarse" because she isn't pretty or slim enough for him despite being the (formerly) most powerful woman in Europe for many years, then a man dressed in something massively inappropriate who calls himself a lesbian can be laughed at for looking ridiculous.

I don't get into it but I see it a lot on Radblr. And for young women raised on selfies and photoshop and porn and twenty-step makeup and skincare routines it is a slap in the face to see a "whole-ass man" both appropriate your identity and demand validation for minimal effort.