Daughter in early 20s lonely due to GC views

[Currentquandry]

My daughter is in her early twenties. She is GC and is struggling because so few of her peers have similar opinions. She is very lonely because of this. Are there any online groups she could join to give her a sense of community? She is also ND. Thank you in advance for your advice…

Just a reminder about this 'tolerance' of the younger generations that some posters are celebrating.

Remember this was the research project from July 2021

https://cps.org.uk/media/post/2021/cps-publishes-landmark-survey-by-dr-frank-luntz-on-politics-economics-and-culture-wars/

This is the part here that is important.

-Similarly, 39% see ‘cancel culture’ as a ‘bad thing’ which shuts down freedom of speech and honest discussion, compared to 26% who see it as a good thing.
-64% think ‘cancel culture has gone too far and that people should be able to express themselves without fear of consequences.
-29% of Britons have stopped talking to someone because of something political they said, and 22% have had someone stop talking to them.

And this by yougov

https://yougov.com/en-gb/articles/40111-cancel-culture-what-views-are-britons-afraid-expre

Other top views people are more reluctant to express are the belief that ethnic minorities in Britain have things as good as white Britons, with 31% who hold this view feel they can’t ever or mostly can’t say so, and transgender issues, which 29% of those who disagree with the statement “a transgender woman is a woman” feel they have to frequently keep bottled up.

the data is here

https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/YouGov_-_Cancel_culture.pdf

When you look at the graphic, the younger age group are more unsure as to what they can and cannot say for fear of judgement. 27% are 'unsure' along with 46% who say they stop themselves saying things.

73% of the younger demographic feels that they cannot discuss their true opinions. How tolerant is that!!!

Apparently though , we are to believe that that age group is the most 'tolerant'.

Sure, this age group might act as if they are tolerant of some issues, but I would be checking any claim of that closely because the likelihood is that they are not being honest about their opinions.

And yet... we are constantly told just how 'tolerant' they are. While any discussion in university around the issue of why female people need single sex provisions is protested and those 'tolerant' young people are seeking to drown out any person who doesn't agree that some male people can be female people in any way.

There is also a university study that showed the same dynamic.

TL/DR : Far from believing that younger people are more 'tolerant' than older people, in my opinion, it is more accurate to say that some younger people believe their intolerance is justified based on philosophical theories that are in turn based on supporting one individual's personal and subjective reality to be the universal material reality. That is not 'progressive' when it allows harm to female people collectively.

Well, you're on here talking about it. You have views on it. Does that make you entrenched?

No, but if there is context given that suggests it is because of their view on a particular topic, then I will go ahead and say it is due to how they express that view. Even the people with objectively abhorrent views have friends.

I judge you on the content and tone of your posts and the way you conduct yourself. I don't care if you agree with me or not. I can cope with intellectual disagreement and even enjoy a good debate. Some of the highests standard of discussion happens on this board which is why so many of us come here.

However, I don't like your style at all. I'll avoid your posts as much as possible going forward.

But you didn’t say that. You said you thought women disagreeing with you should be raped by a splintery rolling pin. And you’ve never heard the phrase “heads will roll”? Seriously. 😂😂😂😂

Are you deliberately trying to misunderstand, or what?
No, having views, whichever "side", doesn't make you entrenched.
🤷‍♀️

You posted the second response on this thread, you went straight in with your accusations that it is the daughter's fault, you didn't even attempt to get a clarification from the OP. There are plenty of threads on MN especially around the start of the university year who worry about they children being lonely and unhappy at university, do you go on these threads and say it must be their own fault?

This thread is another example of the negative reaction of the people that some posters have celebrated for tolerance.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5434092-new-female-single-sex-student-society-launched-at-cambridge-university?reply=148109576

Posters can search the Cambridge University Society of Women to find out more about their experiences.

I am very happy to list the women speakers in university events that have been heavily protested in a way that is intended to intimidate and silence, if anyone needs to look them up. And I mean intimidate and silence. Not discuss! Not debate! but to stop the event or to stop anyone hearing the words that the women want to say.

There was even a documentary that students would not allow to be screened. This one linked below. That has many socialist and leftist feminist women speaking.

https://adulthumanfemale.info

This is not tolerance at all. It is the very opposite and it has a negative impact on those young women in University.

There is an assumption that I often see, that people with trans relatives or friends will be all in favour of trans demands and gender identity thinking. This is absolutely not true, and there are many parents, spouses, siblings and children of trans-identifying people who come to the conclusion that it is damaging nonsense. It's not GC talking points that are unpalatable to us, it's the overriding of women's rights, the authoritarian demands to use genderist language or be ostracised, and the physical damage (potential or realised) of "GAC" to loved ones.

It is very painful when someone you love denies reality and demands that you see them not as they are, but as they say you must see them, throwing away their actual history and substituting a fable. You can only see people as you see them. Being required to see them in any other way is pretence.

I'm sorry to hear your relationship with your relative is so poor, I hope it improves.

Yes, the "othering" and "monstering", the painting as all the same "enemy" narrative that was mentioned upthread in relation to extremism.
It's actually interesting when you see it, whether it's on here or other threads/subjects when it comes to any prejudice or bigotry. (Not calling everyone on here bigots before someone predictably and deliberately tries to misunderstand)
They all seem to play the same script.

That… doesn’t make sense. If people with repellent people ‘even have friends’ then how can it be that op’s DD is the problem here?

If you’re someone who’s into certain hobbies (art, drama or whatever) or certain subcultures, people may be less welcoming (to put it lightly) to GC views and you’re going to feel pretty isolated. Any diversion is seen as hate speech. So the type of people you might be interested in boding with dont want anything to do with you

I do think that you are perhaps missing the trend that indicates that actually, the opinions of the age group you are referring to is also now changing with greater knowledge of what the issues are and how negatively female people are being impacted.

Here are two data sets asking the same question and it is broken down by age group for the UK. There is a stark difference between the answers from 2018 and 2024. I expect that the next tracker poll that YouGov will do, will show a significant change again in the direction of that acceptance that you are relying on from that age group.

https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/Transgenderdata2018.pdf

https://ygo-assets-websites-editorial-emea.yougov.net/documents/YouGov-Transgenderstudy2024.pdf

For instance just for the 18-24 age group:

Do you think transgender women should or should not be allowed to…

Take part in women's sporting events?2018 in italics, 2024 bold
Should be allowed 39 31% 2018 - 2024 this is decrease by 8%
Should not be allowed 37 53% 2018 - 2024 this is increase by 16%
Don't know 25 15%. 2018 - 2024 this is decrease by 10%

Use women's changing rooms? 2018 in italics, 2024 bold
Should be allowed 61 42%. 2018 - 2024* this is decrease by 19%
Should not be allowed 21 40%. 2018 - 2024 this is increase by 19%
Don't know 18 18%. 2018 - 2024 *no change %

Use women's toilets? 2018 in brackets vs 2024 bold
Should be allowed 66 47%. 2018 - 2024 this is decrease by 19%
Should not be allowed 18 39%. 2018 - 2024* *this is increase by 21%
Don't know 16 14%. 2018 - 2024 this is decrease by 2%

Use women's refuges? 2018 in brackets vs 2024 bold
Should be allowed 69 55%. 2018 - 2024 this is decrease by 14%
Should not be allowed 15 31%. 2018 - 2024 this is increase by 16%
Don't know 16 14%. 2018 - 2024 this is decrease by 2%

I really don't think that you are up to date with the general opinion of young people. I think those trends will be going the same direction with the next YouGov polling for this specific tracker, because we have seen it already with other organisations who have commissioned the same questions being asked by other professional polling organisations recently.

Here is one
https://sex-matters.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Omni-Sex-Matters-polling-March-2026.pdf

The majority of 18-24 year olds don't believe that a person with a gender identity should use a single sex provision that is not for their sex but should either use a mixed sex provision or the single sex provision for their birth sex.

And for each question about whether they, personally, would prefer a mixed sex solution or a single sex provision just for their sex - every question that age group answered with a majority saying 'single sex'.

Anyone believing that young people are not in majority agreement with the much older generations when the discussion around single sex provisions is directly and specifically asked would be mistaken.

WRN has a group for young women.

Indeed. I went to a University Open Day with my DD (not one you’ve listed but in the same town as one you’ve listed) and it was pronoun badges, unisex toilets, progress flags and safe spaces galore. Didn’t feel like an environment one could safely say out loud ‘women don’t have penises’ without being roundly shunned.

You mean the OP's daughter's GC views?

I guess she got them the same way I got mine: by being the kind of person who takes a deep interest in people and ideas and society, and noticing that for some reason a set of ideas around human sex, and specifically the insistence that people can change their sex, started getting a lot of unexpected and disproportionate traction some years back.

Anything out of the ordinary like that prompts the likes of me, and possibly the OP's daughter, to find out what's going on and why and then to make a rational decision about whether it feels like a good idea or not, from various points of view, including what impact it has on me, as a woman and as a lesbian.

So after lots of research, looking at history and science and biology and human rights and legislation and so on, taking great care to refer to sources that are responsible and verifiable, I decided that the key concepts in transgenderism: that human sex is changeable, and/or that some people have an inherent 'soul' that in some way is different from their material being, don't hold up when looked at objectively.

The social group 'women' has been, across cultures and millennia, defined by being biologically female, so the claim that it should include biological males who say they are women, 'TWAW', is as illogical as it is sexist.

I noted that all these unconvincing ideas were often expressed in ways that were ahistorical [like rewriting lesbian and gay history e.g the Stonewall Riots] and unfair [like denying groups like women, or lesbian and gay people, the right to self-definition and self-determination - 'TWAW' and 'No L&G without the T'.

I also noted a high level of aggression, threats of violence including rape and death, physical intimidation, and sometimes actual violence, not as a last resort when decades or even centuries of peaceful and legal methods have been tried and have failed, but as a first resort.

These are not associated with any reasonable, pro-social human rights movement I know of - especially the early deployment of threats and violence.

I can't speak for the OP's daughter, but it was through that sort of research, thought, analysis, etc. that I got my 'gender critical views'.

https://sex-matters.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Omni-Sex-Matters-polling-March-2026.pdf

I suspect that the OP's daughter shares the opinion that the majority of her age group share - that they either want single sex provisions for their sex (not based on gender identity at all) or for those with transgender identities to have access to a mixed sex provision as an alternative.

Great post @MarieDeGournay

I assumed the OP had given as much clarification as she thought necessary

What exactly is extreme about human biology? What is extreme about fighting to retain women’s rights? It wasn’t women who declared NO DEBATE.

It’s tough shit if people don’t like the fact that more and more women are speaking up now! But women saying “no” is not extremism in any way shape or form even if it makes dimes men very sad or angry.

They don't have universally repellent views, they have objectively abhorrent views. Incels can be an example of this. Their views on women are objectively abhorrent, but they aren't repellent to people who share them. What can be repellent to people who share their views is how they express those views or their compulsion to insert it into every subject.

But it’s not exactly been strongly condemned either…..lots of things are “unnecessary”. I’m not sure it’s a word I would use in response to the graphically violent and sexualised example of TRA hatred that was posted. ‘Unnecessary’ probably wouldn’t be in the top 100 words I would use.

Well, I didnt mean on here, per se. I meant on Bluesky. But yes. You know the rule - women complaining about men's violence is worse than men's threats of violence.

Its always been the case. Women who make a fuss are classed as just as bad if not worse than men abusing women.

Christ are those three still banging on? I read the thread with interest for the first few minutes this morning but soon had to rest my rolly eyes.

Banging on 😂
Nobody's forcing you to read the thread, you know.