Gender again. Sorry!

[AuroraSaab]

Do you think that every transwoman completely passes as female? Bearing in mind that many do not take hrt and the vast majority have gone through male puberty. Babies can differentiate between the sexes just by faces, never mind gait or movement. Women can often tell if the person walking near them in the dark is male or female just by silhouette and gait.

That's not the question though, is it? It doesn't matter how well someone performs femininity, it doesn't change their sex and it doesn't mean someone should have to accept care from someone of the opposite sex just because they 'look the part'. For their safety, privacy, and dignity, should people be able to choose a same sex carer or not?

 

[Unkraut]

Feelings are not the ultimate arbiter of truth, but neither should they be discounted as unimportant, they are very real to the people having them.

I would never say feelings don't matter - try saying that to some who is seriously depressed - but feelings mustn't be allowed to override external reality. They are by nature often transient, not the sort of basis for making important long-term decisions.

That's why we make space for things like religion, and faith, despite their being no 'evidence' to support these feelings based beliefs.

Saying faith is 'believing something for which there is no evidence' does not become true by dint of repetition. I've lost count of the number of times I have heard this though - especially by atheists whom I suspect could not produce evidence for this claim!

In the area of religion in particular feelings can be dangerously deceptive.

In our (still) patriachal society the feelings, passions aspirations and desires of men are still given primacy, of course.

Hence guys getting annoyed by the likes of Greta ...

Is it that patriarchal? This is constantly asserted. Equality of opportunity has been enshrined in law for decades, even if it has not always been achieved in practice. We have also got to the point where women can be appointed to posts simply because they are women. Positive discrimination is still discrimination. It can also be insulting to women as it implies they cannot get there by merit alone.

In Sweden, probably one of the most egalitarian countries on the planet, employment in STEM subjects divides about 80 to 20 for men and women. It might just be that the two sexes have different interests that are innate.

Greta being annoying, especially the how dare you speech was probably a unisex phenomenon amongst anyone over 30. (Or perhaps a bit older!)

He who shouts loudest, and longest and angriest - and has the biggest muscles, guns, political clout, loudest voice, and or biggest bank account, to impose his will on others shall ultimately prevail in the right wing 'conservative' world .. "

Looking at the footage of transgender activists closing down discussion of transgender rights it seems to me the (woke) left are very good at shouting and intimidating/bullying those who don't agree with them. Making accusations of hate. I think this is because the whole thing is based on a lie, and they cannot defend it. Similarly with all the malice that is found on social media when this subject is discussed, both pro and contra. Add to that legislation designed increasingly to silence those who are critical of transgenderism or seems to be making is harder for anyone who wishes to help those who want out (Canada, Australia).

That's the problem right there - humans and their 'nature' 🙄

Just as there are very 'unChristian' Christians"

Human nature is based in the end on (sinful) self-love. That doesn't mean none of us don't have legitimate interests we need to look after or that nobody ever does anything altruistic, but the subject of this thread to my mind shows how concern for others can get buried in asserting supposed rights.

Unchristian Christians - the (theologically) liberal bishops of the Church of England are currently being very good at this!! But I digress ...

 

[classic33]

Do you think that every transwoman completely passes as female? Bearing in mind that many do not take hrt and the vast majority have gone through male puberty. Babies can differentiate between the sexes just by faces, never mind gait or movement. Women can often tell if the person walking near them in the dark is male or female just by silhouette and gait.

That's not the question though, is it? It doesn't matter how well someone performs femininity, it doesn't change their sex and it doesn't mean someone should have to accept care from someone of the opposite sex just because they 'look the part'. For their safety, privacy, and dignity, should people be able to choose a same sex carer or not?

So having a female nurse, because the rules require it, present whilst undergoing what was embarrassing questions is perfectly acceptable in your book. As is having female trainee doctors round your bed, whilst on the ward. The days of being asked first seem to have disappeared.

Your argument on dignity seems to apply one way only, in your world. You've undergone surgery in a sensitive area, do you feel that you're entitled to demand that only those that you want round you, should be the only ones to treat you?
If yes, why?

Having venomous women vocally demanding that you be removed from the area, because you're there for the same treatment as them, is the most demeaning treatment ever received in any hospital. The medical staff were brilliant though. They kept the peace in the outpatients, as best as they were allowed, and they treated me the same as anyone else there for the same reason.

As for the treatment not being what I expected, I went with no expectations on what any medical treatment would be like.

I recently mentioned being born with a disability, and the views that many hold with regards that particular disability. Many of the same "issues" you've brought up on this thread, are what I've had to put up with over the last half century. You are spouting pure hatred on this thread, that's my opinion only though.


I'll go off on a tangent here, previously raised the issue, but you never answered. Given that the state, Department of Justice and prison service don't hold the numbers of people who have a GRC issued by the court service, where did you get your "official" figures from?

 

[theclaud]

For clarity, I didn't say Keen/Parker 'looked like a drag act'. I mean she is literally a drag act. HTH.

The term "drag" refers to the performance of exaggerated masculinity, femininity, or other forms of gender expression, usually for entertainment purposes.

This is what she looks like when not performing, btw.

 

[Unkraut]

For clarity, I didn't say Keen/Parker 'looked like a drag act'. I mean she is literally a drag act. HTH.

The term "drag" refers to the performance of exaggerated masculinity, femininity, or other forms of gender expression, usually for entertainment purposes.

This is what she looks like when not performing, btw.

View attachment 2915

The one on the right or the one on the left? ...

 

[AuroraSaab]

So having a female nurse, because the rules require it, present whilst undergoing what was embarrassing questions is perfectly acceptable in your book.

No, you should be able to have only male carers or medics if they are the people you feel comfortable with.

Your argument on dignity seems to apply one way only, in your world.

No, I can well believe that, say, an older male in a care home might wish to have intimate care only from other males. Or that a male rape victim might want only a male counsellor. Their wishes should be respected.

Having venomous women vocally demanding that you be removed from the area, because you're there for the same treatment as them, is the most demeaning treatment ever received in any hospital.
Many of the same "issues" you've brought up on this thread, are what I've had to put up with over the last half century. You are spouting pure hatred on this thread, that's my opinion only though.

I am sorry that you haven't always received the care you deserve. I would hope you might understand that many women's attitudes on this issue is informed by their own experiences in the same way that your attitude is.

I'll go off on a tangent here, previously raised the issue, but you never answered. Given that the state, Department of Justice and prison service don't hold the numbers of people who have a GRC issued by the court service, where did you get your "official" figures from?

You're right. If someone has a GRC I understand they are counted in the women's prison stats. Similarly, where police forces are recording by gender identity, we don't have the true figures on the split between male and female arrests. We should record this data accurately. It's important.

197 transgender prisoners, 40 in women's jails. Plus those with GRC's, who are included in the women's stats automatically.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.in...ners-women-jails-government-b2200573.html?amp

 

[AuroraSaab]

For clarity, I didn't say Keen/Parker 'looked like a drag act'. I mean she is literally a drag act. HTH.

The term "drag" refers to the performance of exaggerated masculinity, femininity, or other forms of gender expression, usually for entertainment purposes.

This is what she looks like when not performing, btw.

If people, male or female, wish to perform stereotypical femininity (or of course, stereotypical masculinity), that's entirely up to them surely.

By your logic though any male wearing red lipstick with dyed hair or a wig must also be a drag act, including transwomen. If Kellie Jay Keen is a drag act then the appearance of many transwomen must also be a costume, an unreal performance of exaggerated femininity, a drag charactature. If your policing of appearance and your criteria for 'drag artist' applies to KJK it should apply to everyone. Doesn't seem very progressive though.

 

[icowden]

Here's something interesting and illustrative of the issues with this topic.

I was listening to the News Quiz on Radio 4 this week. One of the topics raised was Scotland's Gender Recognition Bill.
Three comedians and a journalist (Helen Lewis) trying to make jokes whilst explaining/ensuring that they have absolutely no opinion of their own either way on the matter. They did joke about the toxicity around the issue and Helen raised the interesting theory apparently doing the rounds that the SNP were advised throughout and but the European Human Right commission that this bill would conflict with existing equality laws and that ratifying it is very politically useful for the SNP as they can claim yet again that this is why they need independence.

Starts at 20:30 if you just want the bit about the bill:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001h612

 

[AuroraSaab]

Too late to edit the previous post. The inserted graphic was older figures. 2019 I think.

The EHRC have been in contact with the Scottish government for months so they knew it was a conflict. You'd think the Indy ref would be the reserved matter they'd make a stand on.

Public figures are understandably afraid to voice an opinion and face the kind of vitriol J K Rowling gets. Gary Lineker for example has an opinion on everything except the Women's sports issue. Unless you're 'too big to cancel' like Rowling or Ricky Gervais, the hassle isn't worth it.

 

[winjim]

Here's something interesting and illustrative of the issues with this topic.

I was listening to the News Quiz on Radio 4 this week. One of the topics raised was Scotland's Gender Recognition Bill.
Three comedians and a journalist (Helen Lewis) trying to make jokes whilst explaining/ensuring that they have absolutely no opinion of their own either way on the matter. They did joke about the toxicity around the issue and Helen raised the interesting theory apparently doing the rounds that the SNP were advised throughout and but the European Human Right commission that this bill would conflict with existing equality laws and that ratifying it is very politically useful for the SNP as they can claim yet again that this is why they need independence.

Starts at 20:30 if you just want the bit about the bill:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001h612

You've only got to look at this thread. Why do you think I've essentially given up contributing? You can't make jokes, you can't even admit you don't have all the answers, you can't even try to keep the discussion relevant to a limited and specific aspect of the situation without having your words twisted, opinions ascribed to you that you don't hold, having your own sex flamed, your arguments diverted into meaningless whataboutery. There's no point.

 

[winjim]

I will add, if you'll permit me the self indulgence, that it can be somewhat gratifying to see my words twisted so much and for so long that they eventually end up bending back on themselves like a weird gender fluid Möbius strip. That's quite fun.

 

[AuroraSaab]

My issue Winjim is that you never specifically, in detail, say what you think. I think you said you would regard transwomen as women in some situations but not in others. But you don't want to expand on what that even means never mind which situations. What we get is a lot of 'it's complicated .... nuanced....', which takes us absolutely nowhere.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Because I'm just as tired of yours and others obfuscation on the issue as you are of your big list. It's probably time to let this thread go back to sleep then.

 

[theclaud]

If people, male or female, wish to perform stereotypical femininity (or of course, stereotypical masculinity), that's entirely up to them surely.

By your logic though any male wearing red lipstick with dyed hair or a wig must also be a drag act, including transwomen. If Kellie Jay Keen is a drag act then the appearance of many transwomen must also be a costume, an unreal performance of exaggerated femininity, a drag charactature. If your policing of appearance and your criteria for 'drag artist' applies to KJK it should apply to everyone. Doesn't seem very progressive though.

LOL. I was just flagging up the irony. I mean, there's a raft of viciously homophobic 'obscenity' legislation being put forward in the US, fuelled by the insane moral panic Keen and her ilk are stoking around, er, the terrifying prospect of men in dresses reading stories to groups of kids - but cosplaying as some sort of 50s fantasy wife to reassure Republicans that you're on the side of the heteropatriarchy arises naturally from your XX chromosomes or something...

 

[Bromptonaut]

Do you think that every transwoman completely passes as female? Bearing in mind that many do not take hrt and the vast majority have gone through male puberty. Babies can differentiate between the sexes just by faces, never mind gait or movement. Women can often tell if the person walking near them in the dark is male or female just by silhouette and gait.

That's not the question though, is it? It doesn't matter how well someone performs femininity, it doesn't change their sex and it doesn't mean someone should have to accept care from someone of the opposite sex just because they 'look the part'. For their safety, privacy, and dignity, should people be able to choose a same sex carer or not?

The bolded bit summarises the difference between the views of GC feminists (I'll avoid the term TERF) and those of us on the other side of the aisle. So far as I am concerned a fully transitioned Transwoman is a woman.

The existence of Trans people, whether or not they have a GRC under either the current law or any proposed version of self ID, poses some practical issues for the rest of society. My view is that government should identify what the problems really are, what risk, if any they pose to other members of society and, based on a Probability*Consequence matrix order those risks and the proportionate mitigations required.

The so called Haldane case (Lady Haldane is the Judge; the normal protocol is to use the name of the parties) is a bit of an oddity. It seems that one part of the Scottish Government was pursuing a point about trans people on public bodies without those piloting the Gender Recognition Reform Bill being sighted on the issue as it affected their Bill's interaction with the Equalities Act.

At the moment it's a decision of the Outer House of the Court of Session. I suspect it will be appealed to the Inner House and perhaps onwards. Once it's finally decided mitigation may need an amendment to the Equalities Act. Or perhaps just guidance in the light of a more nuanced decision by a more senior court.