Sorry, but this is important.

[pete01]

Your not allowed to joke. If you do! Your far right and just a evil as Aldof Hitler.

OMG

 

[morqthana]

If they were to commit a crime would they go into a male prison?

A good question.

Given that as a biological woman, it's allowable to exclude him from single-sex spaces dedicated to men, i.e. a men's prison, and that because the Supreme Court ruled that trans men can be lawfully excluded from a female-only service "where reasonable objection is taken to their presence, for example, because the gender reassignment process has given them a masculine appearance or attributes to which reasonable objection might be taken in the context of the women-only service being provided", he can't go into a women's prison.

This speaks to the point I'm trying to make, to the problem I'm trying to get people to accept needs solving properly.

And it's not a problem which can be solved by macho willy-waving, or whatever the female equivalent is.

It's not one which can be solved by denying science and claiming that sex is binary.

It's not one which can be solved by attitudes like this: https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/woman-and-sex-means-biological-sex.645099/post-5985710

I don't pretend to know the answers. I know it's not to allow anybody and everybody free range everywhere just because they say "I identify as a .....".

But I also know it's not ignorant prejudice and denial.

 

[pete01]

A good question.

Given that as a biological woman, it's allowable to exclude him from single-sex spaces dedicated to men, i.e. a men's prison, and that because the Supreme Court ruled that trans men can be lawfully excluded from a female-only service "where reasonable objection is taken to their presence, for example, because the gender reassignment process has given them a masculine appearance or attributes to which reasonable objection might be taken in the context of the women-only service being provided", he can't go into a women's prison.

This speaks to the point I'm trying to make, to the problem I'm trying to get people to accept needs solving properly.

And it's not a problem which can be solved by macho willy-waving, or whatever the female equivalent is.

It's not one which can be solved by denying science and claiming that sex is binary.

It's not one which can be solved by attitudes like this: https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/woman-and-sex-means-biological-sex.645099/post-5985710

I don't pretend to know the answers. I know it's not to allow anybody and everybody free range everywhere just because they say "I identify as a .....".

But I also know it's not ignorant prejudice and denial.

Should I take that as a no?

 

[morqthana]

Well let's see if we can unpick this. Hopefully without people trying to get me shut down because they fear reason prevailing.

People who argue that a trans woman is a biological woman or to be treated as such.

Re the first part, who has/is arguing that? Who has said that a trans woman is a biological one?

Can you provide any examples?

As for the second part, that's the problem to be grappled with. Who, and to what extent, and in what circumstances, should a trans woman be treated as if they were a biological one?

It's far from a straightforward issue, but that doesn't mean that it should be dismissed as rubbish by people who cannot, or do not want to, deal with things which are not straightforward.

It's also multifaceted - for example it could easily be that a trans woman who is not a sex offender, or violent misogynist, could be allowed to use female toilets and yet not be allowed to compete in female boxing matches. But how do we ever build a framework for all the determinations to be made if the debate is hijacked by ignorant prejudice and ridicule?

Offering breast feeding and other female only health and biological conditions to non biological women.

Not sure what that means - "offering ... female only health and biological conditions ...". I'm not saying that to TTP, but because I'm going to make an assumption about what you meant, and I apologise if I got it wrong.

So I'm going to assume you meant offering "female only" health services to non biological women?

If so, do you have any examples? I can't see how, even with the most determined will in the world, a medical professional could perform a smear test on a trans woman. Breast cancer screening I guess is another one, but

a) men can and do get, and die from, breast cancer

b) do you know for sure that trans women who've undergone hormone treatment to promote breast growth haven't increased their risk of the disease?

As I said, apologies if I misunderstood, but apart from breast screening and gynecology I cant think of any medical services which are sex based and wouldn't work for trans women. Likewise prostate cancer screening in trans men - there'd be bggr all point in that.

Or calling women who breast feed, people who breast feed.

Are you aware that trans women can breast feed?

If you don't want to call a trans woman a "woman", what do you want to call a trans woman who lactates if not a person who breast feeds?

As if thinking you are in the “wrong” body means you must be a biological woman or should be treated exactly as if you were.

Addressed at the start.

The issue is overwhelmingly with trans women, there will be far fewer circumstances where they will be justifiably excluded.

But to what extent is it a real issue, and not one which has been grossly exaggerated by the ignorant, the prejudiced, and the frothing swivel-eyed right wing media?

Importantly to what extent is it an issue which could not be properly, or more easily, dealt with in an environment not distorted by the shoutings of the ignorant, the prejudiced, and the frothing swivel-eyed right wing media?

I think most women would be alarmed at his presence in their changing room.

Even if they could see what's between his legs?

So in a private changing cubicle in a shared gender space probably.

And if one isn't available, like say your average gym or swimming pool?

 

[morqthana]

Should I take that as a no?

No - you should take it as a reasoned reading of what I actually wrote.

 

[morqthana]

why not, he would look more out of place in the womens showers.

Even when it's seen that he has a vulva and not a penis and scrotum?

And as he has that and not the other he'd look less out of place in the men's showers?

 

[fillyboy]

Well let's see if we can unpick this. Hopefully without people trying to get me shut down because they fear reason prevailing.



Re the first part, who has/is arguing that? Who has said that a trans woman is a biological one?

Can you provide any examples?

As for the second part, that's the problem to be grappled with. Who, and to what extent, and in what circumstances, should a trans woman be treated as if they were a biological one?

It's far from a straightforward issue, but that doesn't mean that it should be dismissed as rubbish by people who cannot, or do not want to, deal with things which are not straightforward.

It's also multifaceted - for example it could easily be that a trans woman who is not a sex offender, or violent misogynist, could be allowed to use female toilets and yet not be allowed to compete in female boxing matches. But how do we ever build a framework for all the determinations to be made if the debate is hijacked by ignorant prejudice and ridicule?




Not sure what that means - "offering ... female only health and biological conditions ...". I'm not saying that to TTP, but because I'm going to make an assumption about what you meant, and I apologise if I got it wrong.

So I'm going to assume you meant offering "female only" health services to non biological women?

If so, do you have any examples? I can't see how, even with the most determined will in the world, a medical professional could perform a smear test on a trans woman. Breast cancer screening I guess is another one, but

a) men can and do get, and die from, breast cancer

b) do you know for sure that trans women who've undergone hormone treatment to promote breast growth haven't increased their risk of the disease?

As I said, apologies if I misunderstood, but apart from breast screening and gynecology I cant think of any medical services which are sex based and wouldn't work for trans women. Likewise prostate cancer screening in trans men - there'd be bggr all point in that.




Are you aware that trans women can breast feed?

If you don't want to call a trans woman a "woman", what do you want to call a trans woman who lactates if not a person who breast feeds?




Addressed at the start.




But to what extent is it a real issue, and not one which has been grossly exaggerated by the ignorant, the prejudiced, and the frothing swivel-eyed right wing media?

Importantly to what extent is it an issue which could not be properly, or more easily, dealt with in an environment not distorted by the shoutings of the ignorant, the prejudiced, and the frothing swivel-eyed right wing media?




Even if they could see what's between his legs?




And if one isn't available, like say your average gym or swimming pool?

No - you should take it as a reasoned reading of what I actually wrote.

Even when it's seen that he has a vulva and not a penis and scrotum?

And as he has that and not the other he'd look less out of place in the men's showers?

Have you ever considered taking up a hobby?

 

[morqthana]

'Recruiting' might have been a clumsy choice of word, or not, I'd have gone for 'encouraging'.

The organisations you list are in the business of helping and supporting transgender people.

Not "recruiting".

And anything other than hostility, denial, and condemnation does not count as "encouragement"

 

[morqthana]

.

 

[King Billy]

'Recruiting' might have been a clumsy choice of word, or not, I'd have gone for 'encouraging'.

Why do people feel the need to exploit emotive words that intentionally exaggerate the issue?
And why do they feel the need to weaponise children in their arguments?

Children have been "weaponised" by both sides of a toxic debate about transgender rights,

Children 'weaponised' in toxic trans debate, Cass says

Clinician Dr Hilary Cass says "people at the extremes" had caused a lot of distress for young people.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[King Billy]

Have you ever considered taking up a hobby?

Anything to add to the debate, or are you simply trolling with ad hom comments?

 

[morqthana]

Why do people feel the need to exploit emotive words that intentionally exaggerate the issue?
And why do they feel the need to weaponise children in their arguments?

Because they do not want, or cannot manage, any "debate" which is not a polarised confrontational shouting match. See my analogy of how people who criticise Israel are treated. See how anybody who points out that there are organised child exploiters apart from just Asian gangs gets categorised as a Muslim rape-gang enabler. See how if you point out that the scientific facts are unequivocally that sex is non-binary you get categorised as someone who wants any man who says "I'm a woman, dontcha know" to be allowed to walk around women's changing rooms with his **** in his hand.

 

[JohnD]

... any man who says "I'm a woman, dontcha know" to be allowed to walk around women's changing rooms with his **** in his hand.

Most of us have established that people who are not women are not entitled to access places and events that are exclusively reserved for women. Regardless of what they hold in their hands.

It is not a complex medical issue.

Transactivists don't like that fact.

Doctor Upton and Doctor Henderson resisted it, and were aided by Trans enthusiasts.

 

[morqthana]

Thanks for the helpful quote abridgement.

Most of us have established that people who are not women are not entitled to access places and events that are exclusively reserved for women. Regardless of what they hold in their hands.

And most of us are not arguing the complete opposite of that.

But we would like to know what you mean by "women" - how you define them. You seem extraordinarily reluctant to say.

Do you mean that a woman is someone who's been told she is?

Or someone who hasn't been told she is but feels that she is?

Or do you have some biological definition you want to use?

It is not a complex medical issue.

Neither is the fact that sex is not binary.

Transphobes don't like that fact.

 

[morqthana]

But most importantly, how does something like this:

Most of us have established that people who are not women are not entitled to access places and events that are exclusively reserved for women. Regardless of what they hold in their hands.

It is not a complex medical issue.

Transactivists don't like that fact.

Doctor Upton and Doctor Henderson resisted it, and were aided by Trans enthusiasts.

help with creating a framework which allows society to fairly, without prejudice, deal with transgender people?