What is "trans" and why does it justify undoing sex in law, society, culture and history?

[FlirtsWithRhinos]

In the Trolls thread @Tandora and I discovered that in a recent thread she had thought she was very clear about what "trans" is while I thought she was simply describing symptoms that could have many causes and did not justify why these symptoms should be treated as actual material facts by others.

• Trolls thread with our interaction on this page: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womensrights/5420701-a-little-piece-of-insight?page=15&reply=147554941

• my question on the earlier thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5420701-a-little-piece-of-insight?page=15&reply=147554941

Clearly I missed something in that earlier thread but I can't go back because it has reached its post limit, so rather than derail the trolls thread, I am restating my question here.

Looking forward to @Tandora engaging with my questions to help me understand what I missed about her position in the original thread.

__
Tandora · 02/10/2025 21:28
Right- this is your question. which is why im trying to explain what being trans is. It's entirely relevant, the reason people can't comprehend the issue is that they simply can't comprehend what it is to be trans.
_

FlirtsWithRhinos · 02/10/2025 23:13
But Tandora you haven't explained what being trans is. All you've done is played the old TRA game of "Not that" when anyone else tries suggest an definition, any definition at all, that appears to fit the random claims you are making that feeling very wrong in the sex you actually are is somehow interchangeable with being the sex you are not, or that a characteristic of the mind somehow overrides the reality and consequences of differences of the body for both the trans person and for others.

You have made all sort of hand wringing emotional claims on behalf of trans people, and roundly insulted everyone who doesn't accept your argument of "they just are, alright" as closed minded and uneducated (which frankly would be hilarious to anyone who'd ever met me), and yet never once explained exactly why this thing makes the differences of sex and the social consequences of those differences, facts that are entirely and unproblematically accepted as real in all other circumstances, suddenly inconsequential and irrelevant in the face of a trans person's mental self image.

So I'll ask you again.

What is "being trans" Tandora?
Is it being one sex but with a deep and aching wish you were the other sex, maybe like a blind person has a deep and aching wish to see, or a lonely little girl has a deep and aching wish that she had been born as one of the popular kids instead?

Or is it actually being, in an innate mental way, in ways we don't yet understand, the other sex, implying that sex is not in fact a descriptor of the body but of the mind?

Because take away the emotional manipulation and neither definition actually justifies the demands being made of women in its name.

Neither definition changes the fact that people with female bodies do exist and do face social and physical consequences because of those bodies, and neither a man's deep feeling that he should have had a female body, nor a man's deep feeling that women don't need to have a female body, changes the embodied experiences and needs and self knowledge of the people who actually have a female body one iota.

Because these are things that are entirely to do with the experiences of women, and so no experience or feeling, no matter how genuine, of a man is relevant to them.

And regardless of which definition you go for, in fact regardless of any definition you go for that places more weight on a man's idea of himself as a woman than the embodied fact of female existence, outside his own mind he is simply not relevant to who women in the original female sense are and what women in the original female sense need at all.

No definition of woman that is stretched to include male people is more relevant to the needs and experiences and reality of female people than the simple old fashioned sex based definition and there is sinply no way round that.
face of a trans person's mental self image.

So I'll ask you again.

What is "being trans" Tandora?

Is it being one sex but with a deep and aching wish you were the other sex, maybe like a blind person has a deep and aching wish to see, or a lonely little girl has a deep and aching wish that she had been born as one of the popular kids instead?

Or is it actually being, in an innate mental way, in ways we don't yet understand, the other sex, implying that sex is not in fact a descriptor of the body but of the mind?

Because take away the emotional manipulation and neither definition actually justifies the demands being made of women in its name.

Neither definition changes the fact that people with female bodies do exist and do face social and physical consequences because of those bodies, and neither a man's deep feeling that he should have had a female body, nor a man's deep feeling that women don't need to have a female body, changes the embodied experiences and needs and self knowledge of the people who actually have a female body one iota.

Because these are things that are entirely to do with the experiences of women, and so no experience or feeling, no matter how genuine, of a man is relevant to them.

And regardless of which definition you go for, in fact regardless of any definition you go for that places more weight on a man's idea of himself as a woman than the embodied fact of female existence, outside his own mind he is simply not relevant to who women in the original female sense are and what women in the original female sense need at all.

No definition of woman that is stretched to include male people is more relevant to the needs and experiences and reality of female people than the simple old fashioned sex based definition and there is sinply no way round that.

_

@Tandora I don't have much free time this afternoon. Please don't take slow replies as bad faith and be assured I will be coming back to this thread when I have to engage properly as I really appreciate you wanting to explain this to me.

In other words, the only way to know someone is trans is if they have been professionally investigated and certified as trans. After all, a person can claim anything, and it is impolite to pry into people's personal lives.

Good to know.

Did you read, digest and understand that @Tandora is a survivor of sexual violence too? But her experiences don’t count because your views on gender identify politics don’t align?

It is possible to be a survivor of sexual violence and not be transphobic.

i read this post as saying if a woman requires space away from men to help her deal with trauma she is transphobic

is that really what you mean?

As I pointed out upthread, transphobic is an entirely inaccurate descriptor.

Manphobic is much more accurate when it comes to women's same sex spaces.

Also, Tandora should not assume that they have the right to speak for all victims of sexual violence. Tandira's response to sexual violence is not more valid than anyone else's.

It is possible to be a survivor of sexual violence and not be transphobic

This.

I did read that, and am very sorry that happened to her, but it doesn't give her the right to give away access to biological female only spaces for other women. Or male only spaces for men.

Just because her reaction to what happened to her differs from other women's does not allow her to blithely assume all women/men are ok with allowing opposite sex people into single sex spaces.

Like that Doctor in the states who spent his career promoting lobotomies and then, as the evidence of harm mounted, literally could not let his position go.

But there is an additional problem here - in 2025 'trans' just doesn't mean what 'transsexual' meant 20 years ago.

I'm genuinely interested to understand how scientists studying this have accommodated this change. Logically, you would have to continue to use the same definition for your research, but would that be acceptable? Does everyone just pretend there isn't an inconsistency or can the difference in definition be made clear?

I read this post as saying if a woman requires space away from men to help her deal with trauma she is transphobic

is that really what you mean?

So you're saying that any sexual abuse survivor who wants single sex intimate spaces is TRANSPHOBIC?

Really?

Have a bit of a think about that before revealing such hatred of women

Also no one here has shown themselves to be transphobic. Apart from possibly Tandora with her definition of trans.

I am sure that there are sadly many sex abuse and sexual violence and other violence survivors who have differing opinions.

The issue of course, is that just because one female person with that background says they are accepting of male people in a female single sex space, that doesn’t mean their acceptance overrides another’s distress. If someone is distressed at the inclusion of a male person into a female single sex space which the space was developed to protect, their distress is very pertinent to the final policy decision.

I've never sought to speak for all victims of violence .

It's others who seek to do that- to speak for survivors of SGBV, to speak for women.

I'm here to explain my knowledge of what it is to be trans and to challenge the widespread misunderstanding and prejudice promoted on mumsnet about being trans. Thats all I'm here to do.

But you have no more knowledge of a nebulous delusion than anyone else. You just claim to. The rest of us admit we don't know. Because we can't.

I'm not advocating that we gatekeep the issue- I'm just explaining what being trans is.

You just implied that someone who responded differently to you as a result of sexual violence is 'transphobic'

We can all see that post, right there, in black and white

You know when a witness in a tribunal says something absolutely fucking batshit and Naomi Campbell just says ‘I’ll deal with this in submissions’?

which translates as, your views are bonkers and you’ll never change your mind but I’ve given you ample opportunity to demonstrate that to the judge, the panel and the press

that’s where we are today I think

That's your opinion / conclusion and you are entitled to it- of course .

Im not here to defend myself or my credentials, im here for a discussion about what it is to be trans for those who wish to engage in it.

It is not transphobic to want single sex provisions to remain single sex and exclude all male people over the age of 8 years old if a child needs to access a provision or full exclusion where not.

You're not though. Or we'd understand you. Maybe disagree, but understand.

Nope. I agreed that it's possible to be both a survivor of sexual violence and also not be transphobic.

There are a lot of people on this thread who use their experiences of SGBV as a justification for transphobia.

"I've never sought to speak for all victims of violence - quite the reverse, I sought to dismiss and ignore the most profoundly traumatized victims of violence because it does not suit my incoherent MRA agenda"

I think @Tandora and @Plastictreees genuinely do believe that women who require single sex spaces are transphobic because such women should fully believe that transwomen are women (to resurrect a blast from the past). Not believing with all your heart that some men are really women marks you out as an infidel transphobic

Your second paragraph is both not true and disgusting.

'gate keeping' has negative connotations, but if you are explaining who is trans, you are also explaining who isn't trans, and many people who currently identify as trans are not included in your definition.

The more you pin trans to a physical diagnosis, the tighter the definition has to be.

God, it's getting more gross with post.

How dare you