Older generations show resistance to trans rights

[Inauthentic]

"Millennials and Gen Z tend to be overwhelmingly supportive of trans people, having grown up in a more inclusive environment, while older generations show far more resistance to trans rights, likely intimidated by the speed of social change."

Is this your experience?
There appears to be an overwhelming support for gender critical beliefs on Mumsnet.
Is it because it's mainly older generations engaging in this debate?

How old are you and what are your views?

I am 45yo and I mostly support trans rights (with the exception of trans athletes competing in woman's events and I agree puberty blockers is a grey area)

Female children access female toilets by themselves. So, tell us again, why are 'children' s services different'?

Why are you so in favour of making female single sex spaces less safe for female people because you advocate that male people should be access those spaces without any evidence at all that those male people are any safer as a group than any other male person in the UK?

And can you provide any evidence that that group of male people at any stage of transition is a lower risk of committing a sex offence than any other male person in the UK?

And if you can evidence that this group has a lower risk profile than the rest of the male UK population, can you provide the evidence that they have the same risk profile or lower than any female person in the UK?

If not, why are you telling female people that their boundaries should be lowered to suit the feelings of a group of male people?

ForCoralFox

So if you believe that transgender people haven’t changed sex, wouldn’t that make YOU a transphobe?

‘I only know one person who is openly transphobic, by which I mean does not accept trans men and women are really men and women’….

’I don’t think that many people who support trans rights think that people can literally change sex. I don’t, and neither do any of the trans people I know. I don’t know where this conviction comes from’…

• double post

Has anyone defined what they mean by "trans person" yet?

Whether anyone finds them distasteful or not is neither here nor there.

The only category that includes both us and them is "humans".

According to wikipedia

A transgender person (often shortened to trans person) is someone whose gender identity differs from that typically associated with the sex they were assigned at birth.[1]Some transgender people who desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another identify as transsexual.[2][3]Transgender is also an umbrella term; in addition to including people whose gender identity is the opposite of their assigned sex (trans men and trans women), it may also include people who are non-binary or genderqueer.[4][5][6] Other definitions of transgender also include people who belong to a third gender, or else conceptualize transgender people as a third gender.[7][8]The term may also include cross-dressers or drag kings and drag queens in some contexts.[9] The term transgender does not have a universally accepted definition, including among researchers.

The term transgender does not have a universally accepted definition

Because it's meaningless, when we really dig down into it.

Take even the first definition there:

'someone whose gender identity differs from that typically associated with the[ir] sex'

What is 'gender identity'? Generally it's described as 'a feeling'. The idea that certain 'feelings' should correlate with either sex is regressive at worst, questionable at best.

Feminists have spent the past fifty years or more trying to question the idea that a person of either sex should act or behave or think or feel in one way or another.

Plus, of course a person of either sex cannot logically know what it is like to 'feel like the opposite sex'.

It's by definition impossible. They can only imagine.

1. I am 67 and believe it was a huge mistake to close so many mental institutions. That is where those born with dicks who insist on using womens' toilets rightly belong. This trans stuff is just another bandwagon. I don't care what brainwashing nonsense is in various heads. An autopsy would identify a male from a female. Wonder if they're still allowed to put the truth on a death certificate?

I would be cautious about accepting a definition written by someone who believes that sex is assigned at birth.

The ideology is built on lies and untruths and thank god most people are calling it out for what it is.

For me it boils down to this, and I welcome posters like Fox, Mishy, Dadjoke with their misogyny and gaslighting as it just shines light on the absurdity of this movement. Keep posting.

Has anyone explained what 'trans rights' mean yet?

@ForCoralFox

So because you are ok with gender neutral facilities anyone who isn't is a bigot?

And if tomorrow suddenly all restrictions were taken away what do you think will happen?

I would be cautious about accepting a definition written by someone who believes that sex is assigned at birth.

Well quite. I think that the OP said she thought that very few pro-trans-agenda people believe a person can change sex. So where is the sense in saying that sex is 'assigned' when it's clearly innate? Saying that gender is assigned at birth is equally ridiculous. Doctors observe and record biological sex at birth, they do not say 'This baby is going to have a preference for pretty dresses and mascara'.

The NHS is supposed to aim their literature at those with a reading age of about 9-11 if I remember correctly. it's supposed to be straight forward and easy to understand, especially when it's information being disseminated to large groups of the population rather than tailored individual letters.

So people with prostates and people with cervixes wouldn't cut it.

Hear hear.

And having been recently terfed out of a WhatsApp group for the crime of not agreeing that JK Rowling is worse than Hitler, I would suggest that the people who welcome their opponents and are more than happy to debate them are a lot more likely to be on the right side of history than those who attempt to censor and cancel their opponents.

I’m 62 and I can’t believe what the world has come to

I’m a millennial and support trans rights. No one should be discriminated against on the basis of their chosen appearance.

I’m also strongly gender critical. A trans woman is male. That doesn’t mean he should be discriminated at work or in any other place, other than a women’s only space which he isn’t entitled to be in.

Interesting that the push for explicitly biological words such as 'people with cervixes' doesn't match with the drive to use 'chest feeding' instead of the more biological breast feeding.

I think this thread has thoroughly debunked the theory that GC beliefs correlate with age.

I'm also much less inclined to listen to a biologist who chooses to use Wikipedia to reference their thoughts.

I identify as 21 and I shall be very hurt and report you for a hate crime and literal violence if you dare to question that. OK biological reality may suggest I'm a bit older than that but my "need and right" to be 21 is no different to claiming to be the opposite sex. Oh and if you are sexually attractive and I decide I want sex with you but you refuse you're not only ageist but an age phobe and need to re-examine your prejudice.

Love it. Well said 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

Right, so, taking this as a common definition, let's start by looking at some of those assumptions and ask some questions to get deeper.

• What is a "gender identity" and how do you know you have one? How would I know if I have "male" or a "female" one? How does "gender identity" differ from "old-fashioned sex stereotypes for either sex"? Where does the full range of human personalities fit into this? Is there such a thing as a "male" or "female" set of personality traits?
• In what way is sex "assigned at birth"? Who performs this apparently universal task, what arises from it, and what evidence do you have for this? How does the concept of "sex assigned at birth" fit with the established fact that biological sex is determined at conception and can and usually is observed in utero?
• When someone "identifies" as being a member of the opposite sex, what are they identifying as or with? And is "identifying" the same as being? If I identify as black, for instance, is that the same as BEING black? If I identify as a 6 year old, is it the same as BEING a six year old? If I identify as a woman or man because I feel I am, even if my biological sex is the opposite of how I identify, is that the same as BEING one? And are there serious issues that can arise from treating people as if they ARE something if they just "feel" like it inside or "identify" as it?
• Are things like race and age in my examples different from sex for some reason, and if so, why?
• If I am biologically female but don't, say, feel I fit with "feminine" stereotypes of womanhood, am I even permitted to call myself a woman? Should I be defined as "non-binary" or "a man" instead? If all women who don't feel they fit feminine stereotypes did this, would that make the word "woman" more or less aligned to traditional sex stereotypes, do you think?

Well that's a load of bollocks, isn't it? Transitioning from one sex to another... Human beings, like all mammals, can't change their sex.

Getting back to this original post, I think that what inauthentic is missing is that there has now been numerous polls that show that people in the demographics that they refer to are not discussing their true opinions with even their friends and family, let alone with peers and social groups. So, how the fuck would OP know or the author of that article they lifted this quote from know what the true opinions of those demographic groups are.

Happy to post one of the polls if people are interested but there is more out there.

I think that anyone who believes that statement lacks the critical thinking ability to analyse what it is really saying. The poll show that the older people are actually more tolerant of people with differing opinions than the demographics that are referred to. That doesn't mean however, that older people cannot understand the difficulties of balancing different groups' needs and that they cannot push for equitable solutions to be found.

The statement in the original post seems to regurgitated crap stereotypes with no evidence at all. I am not yet sure whether the OP thought it was a clever 'gotcha' or whether they genuinely have no fucking idea of what has happened where the tolerant are some of the most intolerant people in the UK when you start to peel away the layers of ideologically driven philosophical belief and consider material reality.

So to summarise Fox et all: it's nice to be supportive of marginalised people and language doesn't really matter all that much. It seems it's transphobic to say a transwoman isn't actually a woman, even if we all know in our heads that a transwoman isn't a biological woman. And because everyone is self-censoring face to face, the people 'supporting trans rights' think everyone else probably is too.

My issue is that although language does often change over time, there needs to be agreement about the change and usage. That general agreement hasn't happened with the word woman.

It would be far more logical to allow people to change nationality based on what they identify as than sex.
For starters nationality is man-made and therefore not physically impossible to change like sex.

Funnily enough I doubt any of the brits supporting self identity for men to become women would support self identity for anyone who would like to become british because they "feel like they are".. which would be far easier to understand as its just a cultural definition not a physical attribute.