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.

Actually, I think it would be really awesome for the trabs community if there was a test that could definitively prove thst someone was trans. Instead of putting children on medical pathways on no evidence, they could test, abd if positive, go from there. It would also stop people just self identifying as trans, as without a positive test, they could not claim to be trans. So there you yo @Tandora , that would be a practical application for your “research”. I look forward to your findings.

Yes, this. Every poster on this site repeatedly posts links to relevant research supporting their position and explaining how it informs their opinion. I’ve a raft of links saved to my PC as a result.

If we are missing an important, clinically significant, swathe of research that counter evidences what we are concluding - then surely those who keep saying ‘there is research/evidence that says [the opposite]’, they should be linking it, not saying - you’re not reading the right research, you need to go find the stuff I am referencing?

I just don’t understand why, if there are creditable, peer reviewed contemporary papers to justify these alternative positions, why they can’t share them here?

I do not want any man in WSSS.

Using the definition in law as clarified by the Supreme Court, I am entitled to that.

I have trauma as a result of rape (which I’m using to justify why my position has changed), other women who don’t want it have religious reasons, or domestic abuse reasons, or just because they don’t want to.

In terms of sport, the sporting bodies are rolling back on inclusion - mostly for safety reasons. My brother plays rugby and I’ve watched him play many times. There’s no way any woman could go up against him and he’s a 40-something bloke playing at club level.

I used to be on the side of let the trans women into toilets what does it matter it does no harm. I really did.

And it’s been eye opening how little care or thought or really how little of anything I matter in terms of my needs as compared to the needs of men.

I totally accept trans people exist. But that’s almost irrelevant to my discussion - legally and physically (without extreme body modification surgery) they are men and they shouldn’t be in WSSS.

I would happily campaign for a unisex third space (technically fourth but) but that’s almost irrelevant isn’t enough. Why not? Why is their upset and trauma at being outed so much more important than mine around people knowing what happened to me? And they do know - he’s bailed. He has conditions not to contact me and for my safety his photos has been provided to my work security team, his car reg is to flag on their cameras and I’ve had to move to a different building that has access control.

And the lack of sympathy for people like me who have a simple, legally allowed need, and the slurs (some deleted by mumsnet, some still standing) that have been put against me haven’t in any way made me change my mind.

I really am ashamed of myself for being of the “be kind” and I’m struggling with that because there is nothing that is enough except complete acceptance. And I can’t do that.

Pretence doesn't come into it.

If one man is allowed to use a facility, then legally it follows that all men are allowed to use a facility.

The problem is not one of pretence, but that there is no objective way to say what 'trans' or 'gender' mean.

This is why, in practice, 'inclusive' services just ask people to use the facility where they feel most comfortable, and courts and media have used preferred pronouns, even when it seems obvious that somebody accused of rape is just trying to game the system after their arrest.

If a man identifies as gender fluid for a couple of hours this afternoon and decides that today he would like to use the feminine gender changing room at the gym, who is to say that he is doing anything wrong?

in the Wii spa case, the conclusion was that under the law Merager had a right to strip off in a women's spa, and therefore he was not guilty of indecent exposure.

https://lamag.com/news/wispa-suspect-not-guilty-on-all-nine-counts-of-indecent-exposure/

Your preferred option of services for 'women + trans women' and 'men + trans men' isn't enforceable in law, and doesn't account for non-binary people, who make up a large proportion of the trans community.

The only possible options are single sex or mixed sex shared services or single user unisex services.

I have spent about 5 1/2 or 6 years with "learning about, trying to understand and combating the insanity of TQ+ ideology" being one of my most important interests, partly because I enjoy it but partly because fighting TQ+ ideology is the most righteous cause of our age.

In that time I have listened to a LOT of trans people talking on video amongst themselves, with journalists and with opponents.

Trans people are "who they say they are". Trans people are "people who identify as trans". Self ID is everything, even amongst people who claim that some people who self-ID as trans such as transmaxxers are not trans.

If you honestly believe the definition of trans you have given then it suggests you have not listened to trans people, or you have and you have dismissed them as not trans.

If you honestly believe the definition of trans you really need to start by educating 75% of people who think they're trans that they're not, then educate the TRAs, then finally you can start to try to educate normal men and women who now that sex is real and matters what trans is.

How is a fear of people who are not trans entering spaces and predating on women and children transphobic?

I thought the correlation with homosexuality was from a study done at least six or seven years ago, maybe more.

There was another study, I believe, which showed something like areas of the brain that correlated with self obsession. There were similarities to anorexia, iirc.

Obviously a lot of these people are obsessed, and do think they're the opposite six.

The issue is, they're not.

In view of sheer number of responses now having swamped my point, I want to repeat the fact that nobody who was not born female can feel female, same for male. They can only know what they think it would be like to feel female.

Trans identification to me, and I have spoken to a few, is at least as much about a visceral dislike of what they are than a desire to be something which they can only imagine.

@Tandora, I don't believe that science will ever find any physical difference between trans and gay. The key difference between trans and gay is the body dysmorphia of the trans people.

And until you address the elephants in the room of contagion, particularly among teenage girls, autogynophilia in men, and the legitimate fear of physical violence from male bodied people by women, all your explanations progress us not one inch.

How is it not rational or evidenced when it's one of the fastest growing porn genres in porn hub!

Opposite six? Sox? Sorry 🤣🤣🤣🤣

For once I agree.

I was born in Britain to British parents. I have a mole on my left buttock. These are both cold hard facts.

I identify as British because the cold hard fact of my Britishness is important to my sense of self.

I do not identify as having a mole on my left buttock because a mole on my left buttock is of no importance to my sense of self.

Its impossible to identify as something you're not. A trans person can identify a trans (ie, a person who identifies as trans can identify as a person who is trans, because the definition is circular), but they can't identify as a woman when they're a man any more than they can identify as an articulated lorry being driven by Bobby Davro.

I really am ashamed of myself for being of the “be kind” and I’m struggling with that because there is nothing that is enough except complete acceptance. And I can’t do that.

Ach, don't fret about that Taztoy. For most people realising the implications of this ideology is a journey. Hence the term peak trans.

It's admirable that most people start out being kind. That's the way you want human nature to be.

I really wish I hadn't just learned that fact! WTAF?!

Thank you.

Im genuinely finding my “new” view on it difficult - partly because it’s rooted in my trauma response and I found the slurs that I was using my rape as an excuse to be transphobic honestly just abhorrent. I’m not. I’ve really struggled with this new me in lots of ways and this is definitely one of them.

100%... I would imagine that most on this board started TWAW, bekind, and then learnt what it meant

Don't listen to a curated / edited video on youtube with selected questions by a journalist, or a conversation between people who have a very different frame for thinking about this issue.

Go talk to a trans person in the real world. Ask them in-depth:

what does being trans feel like? How did you know you were trans? How does this affect you? How is it "possible" to know you are a woman/ man? Do you know your "birth sex"? Etc. etc.

Etc.

I have done this to the extent I found it was possible for me to meet these people. Every one of them described a visceral hated of their bodies. One of them described his conviction that he was supposed to be a home maker and his satisfaction with life as a home maker.

As a female who's rejected being a "home maker" since my mother tried to dress me in pink frills, I found the argument that people like them were "born female" to be built on sand.

The trans idea of being a woman is built on a stereotype that many women reject, so how does that work, then?

I don't talk much about trans female to male because, like the one I know quite well, they just get on quietly with living as a male.
.

Ok. So suppose I do that.

how does that change what the law is in the U.K.?

what solution do you propose to the current issue of the many women who don’t want a small number of men in their spaces for whatever reason?

Why is a unisex space not acceptable as a third (fourth) space?

"Are you one of the people who believes trans people have an innate cognitive impairment that causes them to perceive themselves to be the opposite sex to their body? I appreciate their self perception is real and genuine, but nevertheless a trans woman in reality is a male bodied person who has no experience of the lived reality of being female, and therefore no need for the spaces, rights, protections and opportunities of female bodied people, and to give these things over to him in the belief that his need for mental safety is greater than the need of women for physical or mental safety, or even just for self definition, is a great injustice to female people.

sex is real and has material consequences for women both physically, and, because of patriacial social structures and norms, socially, financially, emotionally and politically.

We need sex specific supports to help us mitigate this, and we need sex specific language to allow us to express and make sense of our experiences, and we need the social, legal and moral right to stand up and speak as women about our experiences, our priorities, what we need, and have it known and understood that we are specifically female.

A movement that seeks to support trans people by destroying the supports of female people is not a movement for justice. If you are truly a good person, you must find another way."

You end up realising that proponents of this ideology, however rational they might sound originally, will go to any
lengths to force women to accept it.

Look what we have from Tandora. The repeated statements that all they want is for women to understand what trans means, backed up by science, 20 years blah blah blah. Post after post claiming they just want people to understand. What did they say? 'Just acknowledge it's possible'.

But when the right button is pressed the leap is immediately to and that's why you have to have men in your spaces. If not you're a transphobic bigot, etc.

Tandora has invested a considerable amount of their time trying to make inroads into women's refusal to accept the ideology. From DSDs, to it's like being autistic, to just acknowledge it as possible, it's science, etc.

Most people don't give a flying fuck what makes men believe they're women.

The issue is they're not.

to be honest, I am often surprised quite how long certain people will take on these boards trying to persuade women, fondly believing that they are the one, they have the argument, the manipulative skills. Weeks, years sometimes.

Unfortunately for them, their crusades generally have the opposite effect.

People really only go one way on this journey.

The last trans woman I spoke to was a sex offender with severe mental health issues 🫤.

When you find yourself in a position whereby you think you have provided a clear and comprehensive explanation and others suggest you haven’t, if you are committed to informing or educating them, you need to start at the point that they are at, and move forward from there, checking in along the way.

A analogy is helping someone who believes a half multiplied by a half is 1. This is a common misunderstanding that can be difficult for people to move on from. It typically arises from thinking of multiplication in terms of addition rather than scaling. By understanding what underpins their error, and then shaping your explanation to help move their thinking on from the point it is at, ‘education’ becomes far more effective.

Posters on this board call the human differentiation of reproductive role is ‘sex’. Using this definition, it is simple to categorise 99.8% of the population as male or female. These posters also believe that in some contexts, sex is significant and access to specific provision should be determined by sex (as defined above).

To use the half x half analogy, ‘education’ needs to start from this point. Is the phenomenon of there being 2 reproductive roles wrong? Is the idea that it is legitimate and proportionate to segregated by this phenomenon wrong? Is it both?

Applying this approach from my perspective: I think Tandora does recognise that there is a material phenomenon relating to two reproductive roles within the human species. I think should would accept that around 99% of the human population has reproductive capacity at some point in their adult life, and that individuals do know which role they would play (or what form of contraception to use) if the were to be involved in reproduction.

I think Tandora believes that ‘sex’ as defined and understood above is not a valid or useful category to apply to include or exclude people from provision - it isn’t deemed to be a legitimate aim to exclude all from the ‘small gamete group’ and include all from the ‘large gamete group’. Before I can understand where I need to intervene to support ‘education’ of Tandora, or Tandora’s education of me, I need to better understand why this segregation is deemed to be a illegitimate aim.

This is all that needs to be said really.

The more Tandora explains what she believes "trans" is, the cleaner it is that it does not justify the demands being made in its name.

Female people also exist, and our needs and our voices also matter.

But that would only be one trans persons view. That may not correlate with another’s. Unless you are saying trans people are one hive mind who all think and feel the same? I’ll just wait for the research list you’re sending me and go from there thanks.