I wasn’t a Birthing Person and I didn’t Chest Feed

That’s my worry Elegran. That simply the suggestion trans issues can be segregated will be seen as transphobic.

It is the same posters regarding trans issues here as on the Feminism thread, so you would hope that they would appreciate themselves that dominating two different threads isn’t appropriate when they are essentially continuing the same discussion between very few people?

I am not a militant feminist but...
Has anyone noticed that none of these "reguations" are address to "people with willies"? Why aren't any of these rules apply to them? How do we address them?

In this day and age those who shout the loudest get heard. It doesn’t matter if they are in a minority or not. It is an abusive situation and very unfair. Forget trying to be heard above them, no chance.

I'm quite willing to discuss other issues for feminism and have posted a number of links on the other thread about what I consider real feminist issues
What I can't do is allow the real misinformation being posted on GN to stand unchallenged. The person posting it may not be anti-trans but the language used and the misapprehensions raised fuel and empower anti-trans feelings
So
Doodledog This difference is not taken into account by recent moves to allow anyone to declare their gender as being whatever they wish, sometimes different on one day from another. My concerns centre on the fact that men can declare themselves to be women and there can be no argument. As 'women', they can join sports teams, be transferred to women's prisons, join all-female shortlists, count in statistics that measure biological factors in terms of male or female, and can assume positions of power over vulnerable women in rape suites, domestic violence refuges or other sensitive settings. This, combined with the creeping changes in language, threatens to eradicate women as a sex, as we will become subsumed into a 'non-male' category.

No one apart from a very few individuals is asking for this right, trans people want the right to legally change gender without the need for the process they currently undergo. It would involve a legal process possibly with registration or a court hearing and the issue of a Gender Recogniton Certificate. The idea that all the trans community want to change gender at will is one that is being spread as anti-trans propaganda. Extreme views are never representative of the whole.

This concern is nothing to do with gender, and nothing to do with those who live their lives as someone of a gender different from their birth sex. It is about the ability of men to declare themselves to be women without any attempt to change their sex, which requires medical intervention
Once again the emphasis is on transwomen and transmen are being ignored. There is a trans community and it isn't all men wanting to be women.

Casdon

It is the same posters regarding trans issues here as on the Feminism thread, so you would hope that they would appreciate themselves that dominating two different threads isn’t appropriate when they are essentially continuing the same discussion between very few people?

When you are followed from thread to thread (against the rules of Gransnet), and goaded with phrases like 'the brigade have gone to ground' because 'they were called out on the other thread' it is difficult not to respond.

I can't speak for others, but I left the feminism thread because it was getting boring, but was followed onto this one with the above jibes. It seems that there are two options - either let the misinformation spread by the goaders pass unchallenged, or respond to them.

I would love to see all trans issues kept to one place, which people (including me) could ignore or get involved in as they see fit, but I can't see it happening.

To be fair, though, this thread is about trans issues, isn't it? The whole chestfeeding thing has come about because of the desire to be inclusive of transpeople.

As advised by a poster up thread, I understand the terms "mother" and "breast feeding" are not being erased . Of course Midwives should be able to use their discretion as to the appropriateness of language in the context of whoever they are dealing with on an ad hoc basis. I don't think anyone is arguing against that. I still think there is an over emphasis on semantics. As I understand it, a birthing person will be an individual who has transitioned to male, not completely as they still have their ovaries, womb etc. So in a way they are neither one thing or the other. Do they actually want to be a man, if they still have the desire to give birth, seems a bit of a paradox to me A transwoman, someone who was born male won't be able to conceive and give birth, no matter how loud they shout, about natal women privilege. So the actual number of potential birthing people therefore are likely to be miniscule, why can't all this be handled quietly on a one to one basis between such a patient and those responsible for their care without making public pronouncements. Whoever is implementing those ought to know terminology is a very potent force right now and can inflame further the
uneasy relationships that already exists between the majority of women and the vociferous trans lobby hell bent on making sure they have access to all areas of natal women spaces and to be fair to the wider transwomen community don't represent them anyway, but do much to besmirch all of them. One only has to read this thread and umpteen others on MN to know that many just see loaded implications behind the nonsensical "chest feeding" for example and see it as yet another insidious way of making the majority bend to the accommodate an infinitesimal minority rather than acting in the interests of cohesion and the greater good.

I actually never see a conflict between acting in the interests of the individual or a minority and the greater good. In fact I would argue that it is the actions of minorities and individuals that serves to advance and protect the greater good. So an individual oppressed by a piece of discriminatory legislation will lobby for that to be changed and will therefore advance the rights of all . When a child was I felt mistreated during a council process I asked my local councillor to ensure the council signed up to the UN Rights of the Child and so an individual case changed things for the many.

Once again the emphasis is on transwomen and transmen are being ignored. There is a trans community and it isn't all men wanting to be women

In this particular context I think that, in trying to explain a viewpoint specifically related to concerns that impact on natal women ....(ie *My concerns centre on the fact that men can declare themselves to be women and there can be no argument. As 'women', they can join sports teams, be transferred to women's prisons, join all-female shortlists, count in statistics that measure biological factors in terms of male or female, and can assume positions of power over vulnerable women in rape suites, domestic violence refuges or other sensitive settings*) ....it was entirely appropriate for the reference to be specifically to transwomen.

I am sure that transmen also have concerns that women can declare themselves to be men and also have rights of entry to "male" domains etc, but that is not what was specifically being responded to.

And there was me thinking breast/chest...take a look at this...

beajaspert.substack.com/p/lets-form-an-alliance

Madgran that information is completely incorrect. The law states that anyone with a Gender Recognition Certificate can be denied access to single sex places if there s a justifiable reason for doing so. So it could be argued that women would not access rape services if they feared a transwoman would be present and the service would restrict access.

There were problems in prisons but there is now a trans gender prison unit www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47434730.

The law is quite clear on this. If it is not being correctly used that isn't the fault of transwomen.

My understanding is that it is not acceptable to ask if the man is a ‘trans woman’ so how does that work, in law?

MBHP1 just as rape centres and women's refuges are able to ask and enquire into the history of natal women entering them they can ask transwomen about theirs. It's how they do risk assessment.

So what happened to the the Equality Act 2010 exemptions in the case of prisons. We’re they actually acting out with the law by having men who feel they are women in the same spaces as women?
The problem that occurred in prisons was addressed by providing segregated spaces for women and men who feel they are women. This proves it can be done.

Do we have to wait for more tragedies to occur before the Equality Act exemptions are properly put in place, it seems many have been led to believe it is ok to have ‘unisex’ everything when it is not and who led them to this belief?

However getting back to the meaning of language being changed, I am interested in what folk think of the content of the link I shared in my last post?

It is possible that a transphobic might be concerned about anything and everything to do with the trans community - I wouldn't know, as I am not one.

I explained my own concerns about the potential change in the law, which centre around men being able to declare themselves transwomen, which is, as Madgran77 says, directly relevant to 'natal' women. Thank you, Madgran for reading what I actually said, and not twisting my words to suggest an entirely different aganda.

This deflection and gaslighting is what made me leave the last thread, and I am leaving this one now. Please note that whatever you say in future posts on this thread will have had no bearing on my leaving now, trisher, and don't come onto yet another thread to say that I have left this one because of something I haven't even read yet.

trisher

MBHP1 just as rape centres and women's refuges are able to ask and enquire into the history of natal women entering them they can ask transwomen about theirs. It's how they do risk assessment.

So the man who feels he is a woman who did not declare this on his job application for manager of Stirling Rape Crisis, does not have a GRC, was appointed and is still in post, is what?

The Prison service has apologised for makng mistakes www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/prison-service-apologise-mistakes-allowed-15271851

MBHP1 he is a man. He will only become a woman when he has a GRC. Perhaps his role is purely administrative.

So do the unfortunate men who develop breast cancer now have chest cancer? And if human babies chest feed do ungulates groin feed their young? Just asking.............

If someone breaks the law, if someone misrepresents themselves, if someone misuses the system for their own ends it is not a reason to change the system.

I see I'm not only misogynistic I'm now gaslighting people.
I really haven't posted any personal abuse. I have corrected falsehoods such as the concept that self ID would enable anyone to present as they wish and to change gender daily. That's not what trans people want.

Deedaa I have no idea. I don't pretend to understand transmen, they may have objections to the word "breast". If they have how does it harm anyone to accommodate their wishes?

Doodledog

It is possible that a transphobic might be concerned about anything and everything to do with the trans community - I wouldn't know, as I am not one.

I explained my own concerns about the potential change in the law, which centre around men being able to declare themselves transwomen, which is, as Madgran77 says, directly relevant to 'natal' women. Thank you, Madgran for reading what I actually said, and not twisting my words to suggest an entirely different aganda.

This deflection and gaslighting is what made me leave the last thread, and I am leaving this one now. Please note that whatever you say in future posts on this thread will have had no bearing on my leaving now, trisher, and don't come onto yet another thread to say that I have left this one because of something I haven't even read yet.

I am sorry you feel you are once again having to leave a page.

As I am relatively new to GN I don’t know how common this is but I find it unacceptable. The ‘trans champions’, I can see, are at the mental gymnastics again and anyone who disagrees with their trans ideology will be declared transphobic. I don’t understand how they can’t see what the majority of other women see and their determination to make attempts to gaslight us all makes me suspicious.

Anyway have a look at the link I have shared in one of my posts, I would be interested in your view and it is directly related to the point of this page.

Goodness me , we are ALL Humans , if no one is hurting or coercing another human to behave or do anything they do not want too, then leave folks to love however they want within the confines or the laws of the land.

trisher

MBHP1 he is a man. He will only become a woman when he has a GRC. Perhaps his role is purely administrative.

He is the manager. So if I had a need to access this services I could not challenge his authority and I would need to know about his existence! If he were an admin he would have access to my files!

Your idea of how this is all working is not my experience nor has it been the experience of the women who were sexually assaulted in prisons. The state did not protect them from men who feel they are women. Too late once the assault has taken place!

Also, how does your statement that he is not a woman if he does not have a GRC fit with your previous points about self identity and fluidity folk?

Perhaps we would be best to use PM if we are to continue this avenue of discussion because this page is specifically about how we define things in language.

Madgran77

*Once again the emphasis is on transwomen and transmen are being ignored. There is a trans community and it isn't all men wanting to be women*

In this particular context I think that, in trying to explain a viewpoint specifically related to concerns that impact on natal women ....(ie *My concerns centre on the fact that men can declare themselves to be women and there can be no argument. As 'women', they can join sports teams, be transferred to women's prisons, join all-female shortlists, count in statistics that measure biological factors in terms of male or female, and can assume positions of power over vulnerable women in rape suites, domestic violence refuges or other sensitive settings*) ....it was entirely appropriate for the reference to be specifically to transwomen.

I am sure that transmen also have concerns that women can declare themselves to be men and also have rights of entry to "male" domains etc, but that is not what was specifically being responded to.

"Concerns that impact on natal women" "As women they can join sports teams be transferred to women's prisons" I think many of us have read about Karen White, who transitioned whilst in prison That person's rights clearly trounced those of the two vulnerable women they sexually assaulted once they had been allowed to transfer into a woman's prison. In spite of having a history of sexual violence against women, it appeared their desire to reside in what should have been a women only space was paramount. I accept that there are also vulnerable transwomen who would be subject to male violence and probably shouldn't be in an all male space, but surely each person's history should be brought under scrutiny before such a request is granted.

It does appear the furore is always around the transition from male to female. I suspect most natal men wouldn't feel threatened or vulnerable if they were in a male only space with a transman, if indeed it were apparent in their physical appearance that they were once female. I have yet to hear a transman making vociferous demands anyway, about accessing male only spaces, maybe they still retain that characteristic more commonly associated females acquiescence. Conversely, and whilst it's present in a minority of transwomen, one can't help pondering the fact that the combative transwomen hell bent on accessing women only spaces, still retain the one characteristic more commonly associated with male behaviour, aggression and display it openly, so is it any wonder why natal women don't want to share areas where they may feel vulnerable with them.