Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Should trans people have fewer rights? ‘Not in our name’, say over 35,000 women

218 replies

BeeSouriante · 27/06/2025 19:56

https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/society/should-trans-people-have-fewer-rights-not-in-our-name-say-over-35000-women/

Actually 36,000 now. Heartening to see in these horrible times. It's always wonderful when you see people come out to stand in solidarity against the manufactured anti-trans panic.

Should trans people have fewer rights? ‘Not in our name’, say over 35,000 women

Women tired of being told that their rights are threatened by trans people are using a petition to stand up for inclusive feminism

https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/society/should-trans-people-have-fewer-rights-not-in-our-name-say-over-35000-women/

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/06/2025 08:48

GreenFriedTomato · 28/06/2025 00:24

Ah, I've just read the article. It claims instead of single sex, workplaces can have have mixed sex fully enclosed cubicles.
Well even if that is the case, it's still not the victory many are claiming. That the EHRC have backtracked and TIM can use the ladies again.

These people thrive on spreading misinformation. Their whole worldview is based on a lie, after all.

WithSilverBells · 28/06/2025 08:49

This GLP vs EHRC 'win' is a good thing. The EHRC will have re-learnt that their Guidance has to be absolutely crystal clear or it will be exploited by the desperate males trying to access women's things. Hopefully, they will take on board the feedback, particularly from organisations like Sex Matters.

Reminder, deadline for feedback from individuals or organisations is 11:59pm on 30 June - that's Monday!

DiamondThrone · 28/06/2025 08:50

Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/06/2025 08:48

These people thrive on spreading misinformation. Their whole worldview is based on a lie, after all.

A lot of them who have been taken in by Jolyon and various cheerleaders about a supposed "u turn" or "backtracking" by the EHRC are going to get a BIG shock when the official guidance is published.

TheOtherRaven · 28/06/2025 08:58

I think we're getting a very useful demonstration in many ways, yes. That women's needs, feelings, existence, everything, is only ever relevant to a man in this ideology when they are doing and performing precisely what he tells them to. Anything other than this pre programmed servicing is a sign of evil, they are broken service humans.

This isn't a healthy or functional or even a rational perspective, and yes, it's proving too that the only information that can be absorbed or considered is the twisted illusions from selected safe sources that go on propping up this personal world. There is no capacity to reason, to understand, to compromise or to even have basic respect for law. Or to see reality as it is. Hence the plopping and running posting.

It is sad, it throws a whole lot of new light on whether it was ever 'kind' to enable, and yes, it absolutely demonstrates to the EHRC exactly what kind of gatekeeping is going to be required to protect women from men who are so very determined to use them.

I imagine that the idea is that '36,000 say yes they're keen to take their clothes off and provide men with the experience of their bodies for those men's purposes' is supposed to mean the same as the line so often trotted about about 'most lesbians really want to sleep with men'. We're talking about half the human population. This is a ridiculously small percentage. And that's before anyone even starts looking at whether this actually was a representative group of women, because it very rarely is - in the same way as if you exclude all the actual homosexual women from a group for being homosexual, and then ask the women left if they're happy for their lesbianism to be bisexuality by another name you'll probably get a nice big statistic proving what you want. It's ridiculously childish.

If 36 women say yes and 1 says no, it does not mean that woman is a mean and nasty person who can now righteously be excluded while the other women revolve around the man and he can do what he wants.

It means that those 36 women and the man can go to the mixed sex space and have a lovely time together while that one woman - whose deeply held innermost feelings, intersectionalities, diversity, lived experience and all the other blethery words go completely ignored because she said no to a man - has a space she can use too .

You cannot exclude and use non consenting women, OP. Sorry. You can't. It is not a right men hold in law, and it is not a right any decent man would wish to hold in law. Women have rights as well as you. Which include being allowed to say no to you. You're going to have to make do with the consenting ones.

inkymoose · 28/06/2025 09:08

Plasticwaste · 27/06/2025 20:27

Not sure Bee will be back.

Bee has buzzed off.

That's what Bee always does. Drops some misinformation onto a new thread and then disappears, until a new bit of misinformation arises for them to plop onto mumsnet.

TheAutumnCrow · 28/06/2025 09:12

Kucinghitam · 27/06/2025 20:27

Yet another attention-seeking thread from the attention-seeking obsessive. Yet another live demonstration of why female people are correct to not want male-persons-of-gender sucking all the oxygen out of their spaces.

I don’t understand why he does it other than for Reddit screenshots. It seems such a meagre life to lead. Quite threadbare.

mangoglow · 28/06/2025 09:18

Trans people have the same rights as anyone else. However males who choose to identify as women do not get to be recognised as actual women under the law or access to women's single sex spaces, sports or to represent us because they are male. These sex based rights only can belong to women who are biological women, i.e. female. Trans identified males are not a subset of women or a type of woman they are men who choose to identify as women and out of politeness people go along with it but they are still men regardless of any body modification they choose to have or cross sex hormones they may take.

A tiny minority of women signed a petition on something they likely have given very little thought to and are just going with the crowd or are just being kind while not understanding that by doing so they are surrendering their own sex based rights (not to mention the many delusional men who likely signed this). None of that means that most people agree with this, 3 times as many people signed petitions to make it a law that fish and chips be served in old newspapers or that Raccoons should be allowed to be taken on walks! This petition means nothing and most people albeit silently agree with the gender critical stance even increasingly young people, sorry it's over for the fella's who want to trample all over women's rights and spaces.

FlirtsWithRhinos · 28/06/2025 09:20

TheAutumnCrow · 28/06/2025 09:12

I don’t understand why he does it other than for Reddit screenshots. It seems such a meagre life to lead. Quite threadbare.

Astroturfing. Trying to create the impression of grassroots support by amplifying every teeny article/opinion piece in vanity self-published projects then linking back to those references and so on. These days wouldn't be surprised if it's also an attempt to influence the AI models by poisoning the well of information.

gingerelephant · 28/06/2025 09:45

People all have rights as people - make and females have equal rights, there is no other gender so any other group of people who choose different names have either less or more rights.

Dwimmer · 28/06/2025 09:53

BeeSouriante · 27/06/2025 19:56

https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/society/should-trans-people-have-fewer-rights-not-in-our-name-say-over-35000-women/

Actually 36,000 now. Heartening to see in these horrible times. It's always wonderful when you see people come out to stand in solidarity against the manufactured anti-trans panic.

So you are saying men have signed a petition saying they should have access to women’s rights?

Dwimmer · 28/06/2025 09:54

A tiny minority of women signed a petition

How do you know they were women?

Datun · 28/06/2025 09:58

Dwimmer · 28/06/2025 09:53

So you are saying men have signed a petition saying they should have access to women’s rights?

😁😁😁

it's so futile.

These few people agree with those few things, isn't an argument.

Shortshriftandlethal · 28/06/2025 10:10

This is all politics for the social media age.

Most people are not politically minded, nor particularly well versed in critical thought and yet they are still subject to social media imperatives - delivered in little memes and tropes which one is invited to 'like' or 'dislike' to signal their chosen identity, tribe or belonging.

The 'Be Kind' imperatives are everywhere too.

BaronessEllarawrosaurus · 28/06/2025 10:15

I find it interesting that bee thinks 36k is a significant number. I think it shows how little thought bee gives towards women that bee doesn't even realize how small a percentage it is.

TheOtherRaven · 28/06/2025 10:16

The endless niggling and manufactured statistics does however prove that women saying no is an ongoing, severe problem.

If it was all really 'no women really want rights or single sex spaces apart from you few dried up old hags that nobody likes and the law's on our side', why bother coming here at all and trying to force compliance or to convince people?

DiamondThrone · 28/06/2025 10:21

BaronessEllarawrosaurus · 28/06/2025 10:15

I find it interesting that bee thinks 36k is a significant number. I think it shows how little thought bee gives towards women that bee doesn't even realize how small a percentage it is.

They're not all women. Actual women, I mean.

Boiledbeetle · 28/06/2025 10:27

DiamondThrone · 28/06/2025 10:21

They're not all women. Actual women, I mean.

True. They could all be men. To quote the TRA stance "we just can't tell!"

WhereYouLeftIt · 28/06/2025 10:29

Bee doesn't know the difference between 'rights' and 'privileges'.

TheAutumnCrow · 28/06/2025 10:38

FlirtsWithRhinos · 28/06/2025 09:20

Astroturfing. Trying to create the impression of grassroots support by amplifying every teeny article/opinion piece in vanity self-published projects then linking back to those references and so on. These days wouldn't be surprised if it's also an attempt to influence the AI models by poisoning the well of information.

So it’s quite important that multiple posters clearly say, ‘what a load of unevidenced, debunked old shite?’ to the goady poppers and astroturfers?

I hope MNHQ understands this.

FeistyCat · 28/06/2025 10:38

Nobody has ever said 'trans' people should have fewer rights....

So that petition is all for nothing then.

FlirtsWithRhinos · 28/06/2025 10:40

@BeeSouriante

As a trans woman you clearly do not believe "womanhood" is dependant on being female, as evidenced by the simple fact that you believe yourself, a male person, to be a woman.

So given that, I really do want to understand why is it so important to you that a group of people who you don't even belong to, who have nothing to do your definition of "woman", who by number alone have historically been marginalised, exploited and abused more consistently than any other group of humans, whose problems are different to the problems you may or may not face, be denied legal rights, social acceptance and even our own name and language with which to speak of our own experiences?

Why is it so important to you to take away the tools we need to fight our historic and onoing marginalisation, abuse and oppression, things that are nothing to do with you or womanhood as you experience it but are centred in our female bodies and how society treats us because of them?

It seems axoimic to you that female people must lose their rights for trans people to be safe but I really really do not see the connection here. It's not like female people don't actually exist or anything 😂 we are real, our bodies are real, and sometimes our bodies are a really significant factor in what happens to us so removing our rights and protections and the language to talk about that really does hurt us. So I just don't get what is wrong with acknowledging that and allowing us to continue to have female-only spaces, rights, resources and opportunities for those times that our sex is significant and does make a difference.

Can you explain?

Because honestly, I'd really love to know

MarieDeGournay · 28/06/2025 10:42

DiamondThrone · 28/06/2025 08:48

Oh, they're doing that already.

Also criticising GCs for "reducing everything to sex", saying "Sufragettes fought for women not to be defined by their sex", that they're just thinking of the poor wimmins who will be affected by being a bit butch, etc etc.

But we see them.

Thanks, I've added 'appropriating the Suffragettes' to my short but growing list of examples of reversals, i.e. things that have been said to challenge TRAs, which they are now reversing to use again the 'GCIM' , e.g.

-we are displaying 'cognitive dissonance'
-we have a deliberate Dentons-style strategy of bowdlerising our beliefs to be more mainstream-acceptable
[that one was in one of Bee's articles - which are turning out to be quite useful sources of evidence of TRA misinformation and DARVO, thank you Bee.

RedToothBrush · 28/06/2025 10:45

MarieDeGournay · 28/06/2025 10:42

Thanks, I've added 'appropriating the Suffragettes' to my short but growing list of examples of reversals, i.e. things that have been said to challenge TRAs, which they are now reversing to use again the 'GCIM' , e.g.

-we are displaying 'cognitive dissonance'
-we have a deliberate Dentons-style strategy of bowdlerising our beliefs to be more mainstream-acceptable
[that one was in one of Bee's articles - which are turning out to be quite useful sources of evidence of TRA misinformation and DARVO, thank you Bee.

I love that men think they can be suffragettes.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/06/2025 11:15

WhereYouLeftIt · 28/06/2025 10:29

Bee doesn't know the difference between 'rights' and 'privileges'.

Or “rights and entitled demands” or “rights and being a brass necked chancer” or rights and colonisation and appropriation”

Dwimmer · 28/06/2025 11:23

Sufragettes fought for women not to be defined by their sex

Suffragettes fought for women’s LIVES not to be defined by their sex - in other words they were gender critical

Swipe left for the next trending thread