Reflections on Trans Arguments

[LimeFinch]

I've noticed a lot of general discourse about trans people that is based on misinformation, some of it dangerous, most of it born out of ignorance, so here's a handy reference to counter some of the claims I've seen.

Trans People are extremist! That's wot I done heard!
Transgender extremism doesn't exist - it's just a right-wing talking point used to discredit legitimate healthcare and equality efforts.
https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/uk-un-view-trans-rights-much-needed-common-sense
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/11/hilary-cass-trans-children-review
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/02/gender-critical-beliefs-under-the-microscope

Puberty Blockers are Dangerous! My total lack of medical knowledge says so!
Puberty blockers are often lifesaving interventions. They're prescribed only after long assessments involving NHS gender clinics, parents, and specialists. They are fully reversible and shown to reduce the risk of suicide in young people with persistent gender dysphoria.
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/treatment
https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/tonic-psh-consultation-analysis-report.pdf
https://www.bmj.com/content/386/bmj.q1638.short
https://www.rcpch.ac.uk/resources/interim-service-specification-specialist-gender-dysphoria-services-consultation-response
https://www.rcpch.ac.uk/news-events/news/rcpch-responds-publication-final-report-cass-review

I Heard They're Changing Kids' Genitalia!
No people under 18 are getting genital surgery in the UK. NHS policy and private clinics alike restrict this to adults.
Indeed, more cisgender teens receive breast reduction surgery on the NHS than trans teens receive chest masculinisation surgery. The procedures follow similar approval processes, yet only one group is routinely scrutinised.
https://pure.johnshopkins.edu/en/publications/breast-surgery-in-adolescents-cisgender-breast-reduction-versus-t
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/02/10/revealed-thousands-of-trans-surgeries-carried-out-by-nhs/

They're in Women's Sports! I read it on teh internets!
There are only a small number of openly trans athletes competing at a professional level in the world, and none are dominating their fields.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/61346517
https://feeds.bbci.co.uk/sport/athletics/65051900

But, but, but, Women's Sports! No men!
Sex-segregated sports were historically introduced to exclude women, not because men were being beaten. The idea that it was about fairness is a myth.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/jun/13/how-the-fa-banned-womens-football-in-1921-and-tried-to-justify-it
https://research.birmingham.ac.uk/en/publications/health-gender-and-inequality-in-sport-a-historical-perspective

Ok, but Trans-women are Stronger. That ain't Fair!
There is no consistent biological advantage for trans women in elite sport. Oestrogen therapy significantly reduces muscle mass, strength and performance over time. Regulations often require minimum hormone levels and transition periods before competing.
https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/15/865
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/59312313

Trans-Women are Men!!!!!! Any fule knowe that!
Identity is personal. “Man”, “woman”, “boy”, and “girl” are social roles - that’s gender. Not to be confused with biological sex - male and female. No trans woman claims to be biologically female, and no trans man claims to be biologically male. That’s another right-wing straw man argument.
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/media-centre/interim-update-practical-implications-uk-supreme-court-judgment
https://www.stonewall.org.uk/resources/lgbtq-hubs/trans-hub/the-truth-about-trans

Trans History is Different to Women's History
The idea that trans women have a “separate history” to cis women echoes the same tactics once used to exclude Black women and disabled women from womanhood.
https://blog.bham.ac.uk/socialsciencesbirmingham/2024/03/08/international-womens-day-trans-women-cannot-be-left-behind/
https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/news/trans-and-disability-justice-how-are-our-struggles-linked
Tall women, Black women, trans women - these are all adjectives describing different types of women. Every woman’s experience of womanhood is unique. If you exclude trans women from being women, what condition are you using to define womanhood? There isn’t one necessary condition. So trans women cannot be excluded from womanhood on this basis.

Trans-Women are Men in Dresses! I read it in the Daily Mail!
Crossdressing is not the same as being trans. Many cis men crossdress and are not trans.
https://fiorry.co/glossary/crossdresser/

But Anybody can be Trans in an Instant! I'm scared!
The risk of coming out as trans due to internalised homophobia and sexism is a real thing but is not as common as many would have you believe. That’s why the NHS has a structured care pathway with long waiting times and assessments. No one can simply walk in and access hormones or surgery. Many people are left in limbo for years unless they are in crisis or suicidal.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/referral-pathway-for-children-and-young-peoples-gender-services-community-and-hospital-paediatric-services/
https://transactual.org.uk/trans-lives-21/

Organisations are Convincing Kids They're Trans! Think of the Children!
No one is trying to “convince” people they’re trans. If you feel deep discomfort with the sex you were assigned at birth, you might be trans - but that’s for you to explore, not for anyone else to decide. The queer community is generally very good at spotting people who are dealing with internalised issues - no one wants anyone to transition unless it’s truly needed. This whole “kids being convinced” thing is another empty scare story.
https://transactual.org.uk/healthcare-professionals/inclusive-healthcare/
https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/referral-pathway-for-children-and-young-peoples-gender-services-community-and-hospital-paediatric-services/

Now, I'm very aware of the MN reputation for shutting down the threads - and removing the accounts - of anyone who doesn't go along with the anti-trans-hate-cult, but for the short time this thread remains up it's worth taking some time to actually look at the links, to think about the status of trans-women in the current society, and consider how this judgement - and the subsequent interpretation of the same by those who are a little hard of thinking - might reflect on us as self-assumed rational, reasonable human beings.

What is it to "attack an identity"?

In my opinion it can only mean of of two things -

(1) Along the lines of "you are not British!". "Well, my parents and gransparents were all born in Britain, and so was I, and I have a British passport and live in England. You can deny my identity all you want, but I identify as British and I am British!" This form of attack is meaningless, water off a duck's back.

(2) Along the lines of "you are not black, you have white skin - your parents were clearly caucasian!" "Well, my parents and gransparents were all white, but I identify as black so I am black". This form of attack might hurt, because if the white person with a black racial identity is deluded then the denial hurts, and if they know they're not black and are pretending it angers them because they want to be able to dictate theirr aspirational / dishonest identity to others..

I think men and women who claim to be trans do and should have exactly the same rights as men and women who don't claim to be trans, not least the right not to be experimented on by medical professionals with questionable ethics.

I'm going to step away from this. Thank you for the support from some posters, and understanding from some others

Have you heard the expression "the truth will out"?

In my view, pretending that you believe that a girl is a boy might appear kind, but it is actually one of the cruellest most dangerous things you can do. You cannot suppress the truth forever, and they would have been better off to have been told "no" the first second they said it.

Yes that would be an equally pointless conversation. But you are again making assumptions about what someone might wish to discuss with you. Yawn.

If by trans rights you mean the right to wear what you want, call yourself what you want, be seen professionally and socially for your own qualities not sexist steroetypes and enjoy what you want as long as it's legal and you aren't forcing others into particpating, I'm right there with you.

However if by trans "rights" you mean the extra rights TRAs promote, the right to lie to others about your sex because you believe your personal inner projection of yourself as the opposite sex is more "real" than anything they might care about your actual sex for, to falsify legal documentation in service of that, to require others to perform as if the lie were truth up to and including deceiving others whether or not they believe it, and even though they may find it offensive and demeaning to act as if it had merit, then I'm sorry, but yes I do think those rights should be eliminated, because those "rights" are at heart all about forcing other people to submit to the trans person's idea of gender and what is or is not part of being a man or woman regardless of how other people may see themselves.

And that IMO is ugly, morally bankrupt, and unbecoming of anyone who wants to consider themselves a reasonable human being.

Standard bingo responses

narrow view of gender - thats nonsense. Gender critical women are critical of gender stereotypes. The only way to be a woman is to grow from a juvenile human female unto an adult one. Othef than that do what you like, wear docket boots or heels or trainers, a dress, a boiler suit, a bow tie or a ball dress, have long hair or short hair or no hair, wear make up or not. It is TRA who have a narrow view of gender equating female stereotypes around dress and presentation with living as a woman which is frankly insulting

trans rights being curtailed - im sure you can tell us which legal rights have been removed as opposed to TRA being told to stop appropriating legal rights that were never theirs in the first place

There are a lot of pretty harsh views posted on these boards so I can't think that my little comments would bother anyone.

As you seem to view any post which states facts as harsh, it's hard to see how women can be, to your mind, 'kind' enough unless we agree to ignore and not talk about the very obvious issues with self id etc (on the sex and gender board specifically. Heaven forfend).

You came onto a board you know nothing about, made very rude posts about the posters on here (bizarrely after reading the frankly unhinged OP), had a wee cry when called out about your wrong assumption and are now trying to row back.

And if you are fighting against the right for women to retain their legal rights to single sex services, spaces and sporting categories, then I'm afraid that you anti women.

i see.

So reasonable discussion is now grinding someone down?

Well done.

What do you wish to discuss? I'm certainly keen to hear good arguments. There's a good chance I'll agree with you on almost everything up to the point where sex doesn't matter any more or where women don't need legal or social recognition.

@LostInCatsFur
If it helps you understand this forum a little better here's some background.

The GC people on this board generally:

Understand the difference between people who are trans, and TRAs ( trans rights activists ) who may or not be trans. To be vehemently against the methods and behaviour of TRAs is not the same as to be against trans people. While I can't speak for the @TooSquaretobehip I suspect if you asked them what they meant by "being pro-trans = anti-women" and to elaborate that. you woul;d get some variation of they don't object to the existence ot trans people, but there are places where the rights of some trans people, especially males wanting access to female single sex spaces, results in a conflict with female single sex spaces rights.

This board gets a HUGE number of TRAs coming to stick it to the TERFs. We get a variation of, posts telling GC people off for being evil human beings, sly bad faith threads that seem to start off seemingly in good faith but a few posts down the line it become obvious it was a bad faith attempt at a set up. There's a few other variations, but we get a lot of it over and over and over and over. Common themes are starting a thread in bad faith, personal insults, gish galloping, a really condescening attitude like this thread OP, and refusing to answer any counter points, again like this thread OP. This thread OP is actually a really good example of a few different common bad faith aspects. Although a collective running a single account is a new one. While I'm sorry to hear you've been upset by relies here, some of your replies did seem to have a bit of attitude, and the CG peeps here all think "ohh god here we go again" when it feels like another new name has turned up with attitude. We've seen it a million times before. Apologies if we've got it wrong. But we're not all that bad. VERY rarely someone turns up representing a trans position in good faith, and that's when this board shines it's very best. The GC crowd here enjoy a good faith respectful debate far more than fighting the never ending TRA trolls.. If you really want to discuss aspects of your situation I think you'll find you get a good response if you make a new thread. You might even find some resources that help you. The women here love providing resources to other women.

Which brings me to my last point. How about an example of that? Here's a thread by a young female to male trans person, who came here to find out what we were really like, and got a very respectful reception despite the attempts by some bad faith actors to derail it.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5326486-thank-you-from-a-trans-lurker?page=1

Your finding it upsetting isn't a reason for us to stop talking about it.

A young relative of mine announced 'trans!' some years ago now. I've had a few conversations with her about it over the years. I struggle to use 'he'. I want to suggest that coming off 'T' might reduce the health issues thay have been cropping up, but I suspect that would cause a ruction so I keep quiet - and feel like a coward.

I love this young person. But I remain 100% certain that humans cannot change sex, that this is a social contagion which is damaging (often vulnerable) young people, that it blows open enormous holes in safeguarding, and is dangerous for women. This was painful for me to get my head around.

So I genuinely sympathise. But the days of 'no debate' are long gone. We struggled hard for the right to be able to talk about this, and we're not giving it up because talking about it is far too important.

However much TRA's want to obscure the fact, a male in a female space or service makes it mixed sex.

Despite utterly bizarre claims that sex is a spectrum or the misappropriation of serious medical conditions in order to argue the right of males to access opposite sex spaces, sex is immutable and someone's inner sense of gender doesn't trump women's rights to safety and dignity in the spaces and services which were created for their use and enshrined in the EQA2010.

So however much arm flailing there is, if you are demanding that such spaces are made mixed sex to pander to the feelings of men, then you will face pushback from women. Soz.

@JsmeLegie
I agree with you. I don't have a trans daughter, but my daughter does have trans-identifying friends and the amount of negativity they are facing has escalated massively since the SC judgement.

That isn't the same thing as me saying the SC was wrong, but the very, very real fact is that many people have a very narrow view of gender and are prepared to aggressively assert that view when they falsely feel it is under threat. The SC judgement has only been seen by many as legitimizing their attack on the identities of some of the trans community.

I think what LostInCatsFur is further worried about is that an online space that's supposed to be a haven for open and free discussion is infected by a sizeable number of people who are fanatically obsessed with the idea that trans rights should be curtailed - and maybe eliminated altogether.
It's a legitimate fear. Such behaviour is ugly, morally bankrupt, and unbecoming of anyone who wants to consider themselves a reasonable human being.

Why are they facing negativity?

• against them as humans (not appropriate)
• because the SC judgment has given people confidence to stand up and reclaim the rights that were being removed (to speak honestly / to own the definition of woman as women / to have female single-sex spaces without men in them etc.) and therefore in doing that those extra rights that some trans people were grabbing / the bullying / the oppression is now being pushed back - and some don't like that?

I am seeing very little negativity against trans people - instead, a lot of compassion - however I am seeing that people rightly are resetting the balance - if that is being defined as negativity against trans, then that is playing the victim inappropriately - the SC Judgement defined no new law - it confirmed the existing and removed no rights from the trans community - it confirmed they retained all their rights - they just aren't going to be allowed to carry on pinching rights from others!

Actually I think a lot of people on here have a very wide view of gender - the belief is that gender is societal-based and a snapshot in time as to how society sees men / women - there is no issue or concern with people redefining gender - if men want to put on high heels and make up - they are simply returning to society's understanding of gender in the Regency era - by doing this they widen the understanding of male gender... That is very different to the belief that a man can biologically become a woman - which is sex and has nothing to do with gender. This debate is about sex - gender is an external reflection of reality - you can neither fully define it, nor contain it - it is observed, not formed - it therefore can not be under threat and equally you can not transition between genders - as an observation it is defined by what men / women do - you don't somehow choose to be in one or the other - your biological sex defines the gender you help to create.

Identities of the trans community are simple:

• born a male = man
• born a female = woman

anything else is made up and not real - have whatever play fantasies you wish in your own space (nothing wrong with comicon and dressing up in sci-fi costumes - or children dressing up as a princes to go to Disney World), but don't expect the rest of society to suddenly be forced into accepting that you are now that identity - you aren't, you are still male / female as born.

no-one wants to curtail trans rights...

• a 'trans-woman' is a man and has all the rights of any other man - neither more nor less - and the same vice versa.
• there is concern to ensure that the rights to a childhood are maintained for our children
• the right to not be abused physically / mentally
• the right for women to have single-sex spaces
• the right for girls to not have boys in their changing rooms
• the right for lesbians to choose to only have relationships with other women (those born female)
• no-one is removing rights - instead it is rebalancing and re-establishing the rights that have already been removed.

Ultimately there can not be any such thing as a trans person - you can not transition, it is biologically impossible - so the whole discussion is rightly being reframed back into real biology and truth - and the law has been confirmed to support that. This means:

• rights back to those from whom they were removed
• compassion and support to those who genuinely have body dysmorphia - which is a mental health condition, not some magical sex change...
• truth being spoken in loving, but sometime blunt and honest ways.

As with my previous post - compassion can sit alongside truth, biology, reality & the law - none of which need to be compromised to be compassionate. Compassion does not mean having to agree to and support a lie that sex can be changed, so yes the fact that the truth is blunt and not what the trans community want to hear may hurt, but we need to find ways to support those communities to live with the truth, not against it.

I think you will this video insightful OP:

And if you're going to post grammatically incorrect, made up Latin phrases, at the very least use Pratchett's Latatian which has the benefit of actually being a clever 'pune' on words.

Bloody hell, you went for it there.

'infected by'. We're not germs. We're ordinary women who happen to think that humans can't change sex, and that believing that they can is dangerous for women's rights.

'fanatically obsessed' or, as I would see it, worried and concerned.

'that trans rights should be curtailed' I'm not sure any of us sees it like that. There IS a conflict of rights, and that is where we wants 'trans rights' to be limited. We don't want men in women's changing rooms or women's prisons. Please explain why having them in those places ISN'T a safeguarding nightmare. So long as 'trans rights' don't fuck women over, they can fill their boots.

'Such behaviour is ugly, morally bankrupt' You think being concerned for women's rights and safeguarding and sporting opportunities and representation is 'ugly and morally bankrupt'? O-kay.

'and unbecoming' HAHAHAHAHA Perhaps not the best word to use when arguing with a bunch of arsey feminists.

Yours,
'a reasonable human being'

Edited for inevitable typos.

It should be open for discussion whether trans rights should be curtailed when they take away other people’s rights eg. the right to single sex services, spaces, sports.

That’s all this is about.

Other people have rights as well, and a balance must be struck.

Generally what is referred to as trans rights is special exemptions to use single sex spaces belonging to the other sex. This is more rights than other people have, trans people have not changed sex, and other users of these spaces have the right to a safe, single sex environment where they have that right in law.

Adn what I am worried about is that an online space that's supposed to be a haven for open and free discussion is infected by a sizeable number of people who are fanatically obsessed with the idea that women's rights should be curtailed - and maybe eliminated altogether.

That isn't the same thing as me saying the SC was wrong, but the very, very real fact is that many people have a very narrow view of gender and are prepared to aggressively assert that view when they falsely feel it is under threat.

We [the Royal We] do NOT have a VERY NARROW VIEW OF GENDER.

Some of us broke the NARROW VIEW OF GENDER in the 1980s and were often the first WOMEN in MEN's jobs and roles paving the way for the next generation. Some of us had flat top haircuts in the 1980s. Some of us wore DMs to school in the 1970s. Some of us refused to do Home Economics and would only do METALWORK and WOODWORK and went into ENGINEERING and spent 20 years getting grief for it.

We have the widest view of GENDER that it is possible to have. We just don't want KIDS STERILISED, MUTILATED, BREASTS BOUND and PENISES CUT OFF because kids want to be GENDER NON CONFORMING.

Fucking hell, how many more times do we have to repeat this?

Alternative perspective.

Women have spent the last decade being bullied into silence, being told that we have to agree that trans women are women because this is the only correct position and there will be no debate about it. It has been drilled into us that if we put our heads above the parapet and say, "Actually, we're not OK with all this", we are at risk of being fired and losing our livelihoods, no longer being able to feed our families, losing business opportunities, losing our close friends and family members who will find our bigoted and hateful views totally unacceptable. It has been made painfully clear that we will not have the support of our bosses, our HR managers, our unions, our healthcare professionals or our MPs. If we are publicly any less than completely supportive of gender ideology and all that it entails, we can expect to get the JK Rowling treatment, only without the huge net worth and ability to get proper security to protect us from the people who would threaten to rape and kill us for saying that women deserve female only spaces.

And then in April the most senior judges in the country said, in a very reasonable and fair judgment, that this is wrong. That women are female people and trans women are male people, that women exist in law and that it is reasonable for us to have some single sex spaces and services from which the opposite sex can lawfully be excluded.

And once the highest court in the country spoke the truth, they made it OK for ordinary women and men to speak the truth too.

The Supreme Court judgment has not legitimised hatred against trans people. It has legitimised the truth. If you experience the truth as hateful, the problem is you, not the people who speak the truth.

And the truth is that humans cannot change sex, and sometimes sex matters.

You would struggle to find anybody on this forum who believes trans people shouldn't have the same rights as everyone else. If we believe trans rights should be curtailed, it is only because trans people currently have rights that no one else has, and many of us believe that trans people's rights need to be brought back into line with those of other groups.

Trans people have had rights that no one else has had both officially and unofficially. Officially, they are still the only people allowed to have a piece of paper with a legal fiction on it, which enables them to retrospectively falsify their birth certificates and hide their previous identities even from the Disclosure and Barring Service. Unofficially, they have been granted access to spaces and services for members of the opposite sex, even though this has never been legal, as confirmed by the Supreme Court. And now they are complaining that because they have been allowed to behave as though they had these rights for the last fifteen years, they should be able to continue doing so. The human rights version of squatters' rights, if you like.

Well, no.

Anyone who wants trans people's rights to expressly trump women's rights in law now needs to campaign for that, debate it in public under the scrutiny of the House of Commons, the House of Lords, the media and the voting public, and if they successfully manage to convince the right people that one trans woman is more important than a hundred women, bring about that change through democratic means rather than by stealth.

I get that trans people are upset because society has finally said "no", and "actually we don't believe trans women are women and we never did". That must hurt.

But being called bigots for wanting female people to exist in law and have single sex rape crisis services hurt too.

What an unbelieveable waste of time all that 'ground breaking' was. I despair.

This times a million.

So much DARVO on one post. Where to start?

Thr Supreme Court judgement was carefully thought out by the best legal minds in the country and reflects fact and reality. If these facts clash with trans identities then it’s the identities that are the problem here.

Have you heard the story of the 3 Little Pigs? Well trans ideology/identities are like the house made of straw. It doesn’t stand up to the tiniest bit of scrutiny, has no discernible logic and is entirely fact free. The house is made of straw and built on a foundation of sand.

In fact I would go so far as to say it is a belief that is not Worthy of Respect in a Democratic Society. I think there is a very good reason why despite vast funds available (I’ve been listening again to the highly informative Inciteful Sisters podcast, the StillTish episode - she’s been investigating the funding sources of the trans lobby and it is quite mind blowing how deep it all goes), that no legal case has been brought that would establish trans ideology as WORIADS, because they can’t. It isn’t.

an online space that's supposed to be a haven for open and free discussion is infected by a sizeable number of people who are fanatically obsessed with the idea that trans rights should be curtailed - and maybe eliminated altogether

It’s only very recently that women on Mumsnet have been allowed to even use the word ‘he’ in relation to a man that wishes he was a woman and many have been banned for less. It IS a space for open and free discussion but you don’t like what we have to say.

Your use of the word ‘infected’ is highly offensive and belies your wish for ‘free and open discussion’. You don’t want ‘free and open discussion’, you just want everyone to agree with you. Then you make wild accusations about things we haven’t said to try and silence us again. #nodebate is over.

Trans people have the same rights as everyone else- the current set of demands are privileges which will not be granted and where previously granted under duress, are being revoked. The house of straw has been blown down.

I really can’t fathom what you’re expecting from us. No one on here (except the trans activists) is going to agree that people can change sex.

Everything else flows from that.

Obviously vulnerable people like your child with this serious and debilitating mental health condition have the sympathy of most on here. It is expressed frequently and sincerely.

I know a couple of girls who identify as boys and I’m devastated for what they’ve done to themselves and the future impact it will have on their lives - they are victims in this. But we have to be able to call out the people who are driving this - and some of them are trans.

It sounds like a social media break would do you good though. Maybe process some of the things you have learned here and use it to help your child.

(I’ve been listening again to the highly informative Inciteful Sisters podcast, the StillTish episode - she’s been investigating the funding sources of the trans lobby and it is quite mind blowing how deep it all goes)

I'm going to look this up, thanks @BundleBoogie