Worrying Increase in Transphobia

[PorcelinaV]

https://www.thepinknews.com/2023/09/09/transphobia-uk-press-media-negative-coverage/

An increase in transphobic sentiment among the British public has been fuelled by hostile coverage of trans people from the right-wing press, argues data journalist Ell Folan....

Unfortunately, newspapers still have a great deal of influence on the public and political agenda in Britain, and nowhere is this more obvious than in how perceptions of trans rights have changed.

As recently as Feburary 2021, an absolute majority of British voters (51 per cent) agreed with the statement “a transgender woman is a woman”, including 6 in 10 women. Just 34 per cent disagreed. But after years of negative coverage from the press, those numbers have changed.

In April this year, only 33 per cent of voters agreed that trans women are women, with 47 per cent disagreeing....

It is clear that the media plays an important role in shaping public perceptions, and unless their negative coverage is corrected and refuted, public opinion will continue to worsen.

The world isn't neatly divided into "LGBTQ+ people and their allies" and "TERFs gender critical feminists".

Most people are none of those things.

Again, you have been asked to support your statements

Do you stand by your blanket statement you made here:

two wrong don’t make a right and therefore no one should support trans discrimination sighting examples of bad behaviour as why.

these are not real trans people.

they are the most gentle souls around .

Are fully diagnosed gender dysphoric males ‘the most gentle souls’? Yes, no?

and here:

the challenge is their are idiots and people who abuse.

so there are examples here that people are using where people have done wrong hiding under the trans flag being used to excuse discrimination of others.

Do you understand that not all discrimination is ‘negative’ as your have asserted (intentionally asserted or not)?

Do you understand that discrimination against male people, ALL male people (including over a certain age where needed) is the premise of safeguarding?

Therefore, males with trans identities are not being ‘discriminated’ against illegitimately and illegally. Female people are having their legal positive discrimination rights upheld. If you cannot accept the difference, I can explain it further. I believe I explained that the word ‘discrimination’ is often misused to be a purely negative thing. I am happy to go through that further.

Please stick to addressing the discussion at hand and stop framing challenges to your opinions as bullying.

Cis is essentially a double negative.

@Talltall i have said all along people should be properly diagnosed

Diagnosed with what? By who and how?

Can you now point out the hatred being ‘spouted’ here?

Please be very clear.

I fully encourage you to post your clear posts pointing out the ’hateful and horrid’ posts. Show us exactly what you mean.

If you keep making vague accusations, no one will be ‘educated’. Isn’t that what you told people on another thread to get? Educated.

please educate us.

It makes me laugh when we get these earnest explanation.

If cis means on the same side as and trans means on the opposite side of, you seem to be saying that cis woman means the same as a woman and trans woman means the opposite of a woman.

There are plenty of people who would agree with that but I do not think this is the argument you are trying to make.

I don't need a word to describe myself as not trans, any more than I need a word to describe myself as not Chinese, not Jewish or not allergic to peanuts. Indeed, on the subject of "not Jewish", most religions do in fact have words to describe people who are not part of their religion. These words are only ever used by the members of that religion to describe those not in it, never by people who are not in that religion to describe themselves. It's the same with cis. The only people who use the word cis are trans people and people who appear to have made being a "trans ally" a fundamental part of their identity.

Outside that particular bubble, it will never catch on.

Cis doesn't mean "not trans" it means fenale bodied and identifies as having a feminine gender identity.

If you don't believe in universal gender identities and have no internal sense of gender beyond an intellectual understanding of one's biologial sex and a cultural understanding of the sexist assumptions that people will therefore make about you (regardless of the extent to which each aspect of such stereotype is true) you aren't cis. And this is the actual status for the vast majority of the population who TRAs will offensively label as Cis without actually checking. It's become so offensive because it's generally applied to people who the speaker hasn't asked about or listened to their own self-definition and is used as shorthand for "sub-persom who should shut up and be rold what to think by we special people"

It's a Latin prefix co-opted by a social science researcher in 1994 in order to refer to women as a sub set of their own sex class.

Unsurprisingly, many women object to being told that they are a subset of their own sex class.

that is linguistic bollocks in the same way as calling people who think a man in a dress is still a man is "transphobia"

The term was coined with the specific intention of stopping people using transwoman rather than trans woman. I am a woman not a cis woman and no amount of bleating about it from anyone will make that any different.

I suppose they need a word which implies that everyone has a gender identity which may or may not match their genitals, and that people whose identity matches their genitals are the privileged oppressors.

Without these two assumptions their entire ideology and justification for trans people using the spaces they believe match their identity falls apart.

Let’s go through and establish the thinking here:

“i didn’t disagree with you just stood up to the post saying discrimination is wrong”

I have just posted about this as it is an important point. You seem to be stuck only viewing discrimination through the lens of being negative for society. That is a falsehood.

To be clear though, I don’t believe that I, or any other poster on this thread, has stated it is ok to negatively discriminate against trans people where there is no corresponding conflict between a demand from a male trans person and the established needs of any female person of any age or gender.

If you believe anyone has advocated for this, cut and paste their entire post and go through it.

”i have not said people should not be safe guarded”

You have stated that no trans person should be ‘discriminated’ against. That is counter to safeguarding. You may not have intended to say that, however you have.

Now, can you describe how to safeguard women and children WITHOUT discriminating against trans people?

Remembering that discrimination as a word is NOT a negative thing.

”i have said using rate examples does help”

I assume this is supposed to be ‘race’ examples. And posters have pointed out to you upthread that your analogy there is racist in itself. There is NO comparison between race and sex. Do you want the posters to re-post their posts and explain further? Just ask. They will.

“I do t believe is self identification but I am still being harassed and bullied”

You have been challenged by people asking you to explain and pointing out where you have made blanket statements and how that works in reality when your assertions are used. If you cannot answer, admit that you cannot answer and stop then accusing posters of hatred and of posting hatred.

And those accusations by the way constitute abusive behaviour. Did you ever think that through?

Saying ‘you don’t believe in self ID’ isn’t some kind of shield to prevent people questioning you and your ideas. Who ever gave you that impression? Considering you have then equally accused some people who also disagree with self ID as bigots in your first post on this thread.

I am not saying you accused MN posters of this, but the hypocrisy still stands. You wish to remain unquestioned and have your beliefs unchallenged. yet will level accusations at others in ‘your’ group. Do you see the hypocrisy there?

So, if you agree that there is no proper diagnosis then it stands to reason that there will be people who aren't actually trans but say they are? And those people who aren't actually trans could well be accessing female only spaces by merely saying they are? Which is really the whole point of the arguments made here, that men can state they are female, access female only spaces and cause harm. So, we keep men out ,don't we?

I don't need a word to describe myself as not trans, any more than I need a word to describe myself as not Chinese, not Jewish or not allergic to peanuts. Indeed, on the subject of "not Jewish", most religions do in fact have words to describe people who are not part of their religion. These words are only ever used by the members of that religion to describe those not in it, never by people who are not in that religion to describe themselves. It's the same with cis. The only people who use the word cis are trans people and people who appear to have made being a "trans ally" a fundamental part of their identity.

Yes! Perfectly put @MargotBamborough

@Helleofabore

let it go
your self rationalisation is terrible.

there is a world of different in someone diagnosed by mental health doctors and being trans and on hormones with body affirming surgery or on a path of that compared to people self identifying and saying they are a woman. That true for safe guarding situations.

if you do t see that and put all trans people male or female from birth in the same pot I worry for you.

not please leave me alone

gently: you are not being bullied. This is a discussion forum, and while it isn't ivory-towers-academia when someone makes assertions they are expected to back them up.

See the previous poster who dived into the claim about the LGB Alliance members being only 7% gay/lesbian.

If you come into a forum to discuss, expect discussion. if you make wild claims, expect to have to back up those claims.

None of this is bullying. But your reaction to a bit of relatively gentle probing (ie not being screamed at in the face by a male-bodied person 2 feet taller than you in the full view of the inactive police) is concerning. It's something a friend of mine mentioned at the weekend, the discussion was about a friend moving his daughter into a flat, that he fully pays for, for uni. Taking her there, 2 trips to IKEA on a saturday, building the furniture, unpacking her stuff, taking her shopping etc etc. When some of us said he should have let her do the shopping and building and just dropped her off and left with a wave and a smile, it cropped up that a) that is exactly what most of our parents did and b) isn't it worrying how the current Uni generations have zero robustness about them.)

it is deeply concerning to me that a minor disagreement, in writing, on a forum populated mostly by women, can bring out gobsmackingly weak cries of "bully!"

Out of all the boards on MN this one is moderated the most robustly. I'm not seeing many disallowed posts and assume therefore that the posters are on the right side of the rather strict (in this corner at least) MN rules.

How is that true for safeguarding situations?

You do realise that there are literally no situations in which a trans person is going to be asked to prove that they have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria, other than (currently) to get a gender recognition certificate? And that there are no situations in which a trans person must produce either a diagnosis or a gender recognition certificate in order to access single sex spaces for the opposite sex?

TallTall

You don’t seem able to engage at all, yet you accuse people of hatred and bullying.

Have you even read my posts? You don’t seem able to engage with the complexity of this issue. Yet you are telling me that my ‘self rationalisation is terrible’. FFS.

Please take us through what you intend to mean here. It is actually not coherent and I think you need, for once and for all, to explain how ‘true trans’ people are diagnosed, and why they should be exempt from safeguarding (ie discrimination)

“there is a world of different in someone diagnosed by mental health doctors and being trans and on hormones with body affirming surgery or on a path of that compared to people self identifying and saying they are a woman. That true for safe guarding situations.”

Or keep posting it and we will continue to question you about what you mean. It is a public board and you don’t get to decide who does and who doesn’t post here and the substance of what they post.

We are here, we are asking you questions on the appropriate board. Just as it is your choice to post, it is our choice to post as well.

However, you are the one making baseless and emotionally manipulative accusations directly attacking posters here.

just for info, btw: last time i looked saying that people need to be diagnosed (with a mental health disorder) in order to be trans is considered highly transphobic because the TRAs (stonewall et al) are pushing for the purely Self ID model of trans. Nothing else. It is being denied that it is a mental health issue and therefore doesn't require diagnosis.

I think you mean well, and i think you want to be kind but i don't think you have really considered a lof of what you "think" and write.

If you consider posts are bullying you, report them. If you feel able to substantiate to us, the posters on this thread, these accusations of bullying, please quote the posts and name the poster. Then we can look into it. Because bullying isn't allowed or desired.

Let me spell this out.

The very issue with extreme trans ideology is the fact that is ISN'T inclusive.

To be inclusive, you have to take steps that mean your changes to society don't also unwittingly exclude people.

When you insist that men can become women you do the following in practice in certain situations:
You exclude women of certain faiths
You exclude women with a history of trauma
You exclude homosexual women
You exclude women in sport and education
You exclude women from the right to be safe from sexual assault in situations where they are in the care of the state and can not remove themselves from the situation

Why because they:
Because family members no longer allow them in public spaces where they undress
Because they self exclude or banned because they do not feel able to participate or because it provokes a trauma response - in certain scenarios this could be life threatening if this involved healthcare
Because they do not trust the situation or feel the male socialisation on display crushes them in some way
Because women are threatened or harassed for not wishing to except penises in their dating pool. This one is harassment and is clear cut homophobia
Because they can no longer compete with the physical nature of the sport at that level - this may cost them financial reward or scholarships to education

To be inclusive you MUST recognise these pitfalls and accommodate them. Otherwise you disadvantage women on the basis of sex because males become the default and women lesser. This is sex discrimination.

Not only this but you also can do harms to anyone who is vulnerable to the ideology by not providing adequate protection to ensure they are fully informed and can consent to medicalisation.

In this way, people who are disabled, who are minors or have mental health issues may fall foul of inadequate protections.

If your society then doesn't recognise detransition and the harms caused by transition these people are further harmed.

You also unwittingly end up harming trans people by giving them false expectations of what transition can do

That can lead to legitimising the idea that you have changed sex which can endanger their health (and potentially the health of others)

Shouting BIGOT rather than addressing these issues is about as excluding as it gets.

It excludes these voices from the conversation. It removes agency and says these people are not stakeholders in society. It instead elevates trans people to untouchable status which can lead to abuses of power and harms that stem from that. And this favours men over women.

It is a men's rights movement to the detriment of women.

If you want to be inclusive and nice to everyone you MUST understand this, engage and find more nuanced solutions which are clunky but recognise that this isn't about certain groups making CHOICES to discriminate. This is about a lack of choice due to lack of power.

If you give unlimited power to another group it changes society. To assume this is for the benefit of society and be blind to when people say this is causes harm isn't inclusive. It is quite the opposite.

And it's definitely 'unkind'.

It shows a massive amount of ignorance and arrogance to say that people saying there is a problem and should shut up and put up. It is definitely not inclusive. It's controlling and it's actively full on abusive. Often the tactics to enforce it are emotionally abusive.

Telling women they need to 'reframe their trauma ' rather than listen to them and understand their lack of agency and feelings of powerlessness is encapsulates this in its purest form. Removing women's support networks and saying they must comply, accomodate or suffer alone in silence is barbaric.

And still it doesn't mean that gender is sex and that you can change sex.

Transwomen will STILL remain men. And transmen will STILL remain women. Regardless of the paper trail or what they say.

Because sex remains and sex is real and sex is immovable. It is the wall of reality.

NO ONE should be the collateral damage to this belief system which does not reflect Reality.

Do NOT spout bollocks about how inclusive it is to say transwomen are women and transmen are men. It's nonsense. It's a thought terminating cliche that harms and excludes.

It's still a man,drugs and cosmetic surgery will never change that.

Were you not delighted with the coverage in the media of double trans rapist Isla Bryson. Personally I think his pink jacket, peroxide blond wig, and unforgettable pink leggings was a stand out trans vindication moment when he was sentenced to be sent to a woman’s jail. There must have been about 100 articles about him at least as his obvious male tackle in his choice of tight leggings which showed him in all his trans glory. It was also covered in your beloved Guardian.

I've been having a think about actual subsets of women -

• women who can whistle 'The Flight of the Bumblebees', at time.
• women who like to, when eating Maltesers, lie on their back and blow upwards so the Malteaser hovers and then catch it and crunch with relish.
• women who get a real sense of satisfaction at drawing a really straight line, freehand
• women who like to turn to the last page of the mystery book they are reading to find out what happens
• women who prefer coffee to tea

Men who 'identify as women' are a subset of men.

Cis is all about identifying believers and heretics. It is about linguistically removing power from those labelled as cos and transfering it to those labelled as trans.

It is a way of forcing trans religion onto everyone.

Women get shat on by this, because in practice it's a men's rights movement which gives power over women to men. And legitimatises this.

It removes the power to speak the true for women. It removes their ability to challenge inequality and discrimination they may face.

Cis is a word that's offensive for this reason.

And it's a word that should be fought at every step and exposed for what it is.

It is NOT simply a neutral descriptive word. It is packed with political intent and power. It emotionally manipulates.

@RedToothBrush

you saying let me sleep this out is extremely egotistical rude and patronising

The very issue with extreme trans ideology is the fact that is ISN'T inclusive.

I never said it was did I.
so you are ranting out load and not against me.

I have clearly said different and there should be appropriate diagnosis. By consultant medics.

so please if you want to find some else to should at try a mirror and should at that person you see and stop shouting at rational people trying to sort a rational way though this challenge to avoid discrimination and achieve balance.

also please refer the the original post which was about discrimination.

unless you support discrimination. I do t in any form so the appropriate balance is needed to maximise safety and care.

Cis is all about identifying believers and heretics. It is about linguistically removing power from those labelled as cos and transfering it to those labelled as trans.

It is a way of forcing trans religion onto everyone.

100%. A while back a poster coined it as an acronym "compliant individual signalling".