Eddie Izzard

The abuse was from transwomen.

The fact is that, since self-id of sex is now being widely accepted, no-one can know if those people are simply misogynistic men.
They clearly acted as if that's what they are.

trisher

Doodledog I have answered these before because I didn't say what you wanted me to is not "not answering". I'm sure there is a term for badgering someone in the hope that you will get the answer you want but anyway here goes.
1. Of course there are and the answer is rigorous and thorough risk assessment which keeps people safe and constant reassurance. Not a blanket ban on transwomen.
2.I think this is anoher way of asking 1 so the same answer applies.
3. I have answered this before and asked about how precisely this would work (whiich you never answered). Personally if someone has transitioned I will accept them as a woman. If someone presents as a woman but the person being examined is not comfortable with them for whatever reason then they are entiitled to ask for someone else (which means they needn't accept anyone with a masculine appearance). Are you saying that every medical professional can never be permitted to go through transition because a patient might object to them? That doesn't seem fair.

No, you have not answered before - you have sidestepped or ignored, then when I gave a metaphorical equivalent you fixated on that and kept going on about what you called my 'obsession with food'.

My questions 1 and 2 are not versions of the same thing - your answer to 1 means that you can use it to avoid answering 2.

1. I have not said that the answer is 'a ban on transwomen'. I have said that non-transitioned men should not pretend to be women, which is not the same thing at all.

2. This is a separate question - Do you think that the concerns of women should be put second to the wishes of transwomen? Or to put it another way, should those who are seeking acceptance and mean no harm (which I am sure applies to the vast majority) be willing to put aside their wishes for the couple of years before they transition, and not enter single sex spaces where there are vulnerable women? This would not mean that they could not live in the other gender, just that they would not go to specific places in specific contexts for a pre-determined timescale.

3. I asked about the ethics, not about how it would work. If something is not ethical, how to make it work is not really an issue. The question is not about whether transwomen should be allowed to be in intimate professional situations with natal women, but about whether it is ethical for this to happen without the knowledge of the patient, so that she can make an informed decision about whether to go ahead.

Any abuse as I said before is wrong. I'm sure there are transwomen, women, transmen, men, non-binary, young people, old people etc who are abusive. It is always wrong. How many times do I have to say that?

I think my reply before adequately covered the ethics but anyway here goes.If the transwoman believes she is a woman and the patient has asked for a female ,the transwoman may very well believe she is meeting the patient's demands. So she may not feel that any revelations are needed. From the practitioner's viewpoint then it will be ethical. If the transwoman believes it isn't ethical then she will probably reveal her situation anyway.
Undoubtedly from the perspective of the wider public there will be different views about this with some like you insisting it can't be ethical and others disagreeing.
Personally I think it is if the transperson has become the gender they aspire to.

trisher we don't legislate for the many because of the extremism of a few.

Oh but we do, time and again in various scenarios. At any airport we have to remove shoes, belts , empty our pockets etc and walk through a scanner. I've had the indignity of a pat down and that special xray machine thing. Why? Because there are a few nutters that would like to cause harm to a plane and its passengers. The other millions and millions are just lawfully going about their business.

A few men are a danger to women, so all men are barred from the few women only spaces. Also for dignity and privacy reasons where the single sex space is preferred.

A few women are paedophiles, and a greater number of men are paedophiles but all adults are subjected to screening and a DBS check before being able to work with children and other vulnerable people.

The legislation we all have to comply with and the hoops to jump through when moving our money about or opening an account applies to every single one of us because a minority are involved in things such as money laundering.

I was one who mentioned women's refuges, but I didn't at any time question the abilities of the staff who run them. I merely raised the question of some abused women being severely traumatised or triggered by having to share the accommodation with a male bodied person, no matter if that person identifies themselves as a woman. I said that most refuges will not allow male teenagers to stay with their mothers and female siblings. I understand that to be because they have male bodies. You said you had no idea why that was and wouldn't even try to guess why they weren't admitted.

With regards to your transwoman medic, she may very well believe she is a woman, but she will also know she is not female. Her genetics haven't changed, born with male chromosomes she'll die with male chromosomes. If anyone requests a female practitioner then she knows she doesn't qualify, unfair as that may seem.

I have never heard of a female person making a threat of rape. Someone who does that does not identify very closely with the category of 'woman'.

trisher we don't legislate for the many because of the extremism of a few
I think you'll find we do, and it happens in most countries.

I don't think there is an ethics committee in the land that would say that to deny informed consent to one person on the basis of the aspirations of another is remotely ethical.

Where are all the women who are so offended for being mistaken for a man?
On the whole it isn't at all offensive to women. It is a man's eye view that it must be.
Unless a woman is a bit older and maybe wearing a lot of make up then some might think the woman looks like a man in drag. But that's different isn't it?

I have to add that I lock my front door every single time, not because my neighbours are burglars but to stop any opportunist from taking advantage.
The same goes for sex based exemptions, it has to be done for the greater good.

From a 2018 newspaper report :

She said: “If you erroneously believe that there are men wanting to infiltrate your life in order to kill you and that is on your notes and that is why you are in a female unit and you suddenly discover a male-bodied person in a six-bed bay...I was terrified. Genuinely. Absolutely.”

www.lancasterguardian.co.uk/news/lancaster-mum-fear-men-locked-hospital-ward-transgender-patient-653048

There is no suggestion that the transwoman in question was dangerous.
However this woman patient was in a female-only psychiatric ward because her illness caused her to be terrified of men, and the transwoman was clearly a man.

The NHS trust does not seem to be aware of the single-sex exemptions in the Equality Act, probably because they have had 'equality and diversity training' which didn't mention them.

trisher ‘As some transgender people are waiting over 2 years for surgery, you are presenting them with a Catch 22 situation. Is that really fair?’

Most human beings have restrictions on their whole lives simply because of who, where what they are. Someone may ache to be a ballet dancer but their build and/or ability isn’t conducive to it. Others may yearn to live in another country but stand no chance as they don’t meet the requirements, unrequited love must be painful, people thwarted because of congenital or sudden illness or disability, alcoholics are free to walk into a bar but are not really free to drink alcohol without unfortunate consequences, etc etc. We’ve all got restrictions, some are life long which may or may not be a result of discrimination but are no less disappointing to the soul, and we’ve just got to bear them. Two years is nothing.

The blurring of language is insidious. The use of gender and sex has become interchangeable. Most of the time we do not notice or think twice.

We finally watched the Call the Midwife Christmas special last night. Not quite sure what year it depicted last night but probably the early sixties.

The birth towards the end was lovely, the support midwife prepared the cot and paperwork. There was a brief shot of the blank wrist/ankle band that would be put on the baby. There, in black and white instead of sex there was the word gender.

I'm pretty sure that in the sixties the NHS hadn't had any instructions to change sex for gender. I checked the wrist labels of my own children born in the 80's and sure enough, sex not gender

So had some young person the BBC made a mistake and assumed that the use of the word gender in these circumstances has been around forever or was this a tiny way of changing perception? Who knows?

petunia
Your last paragraph on the wrist label with 'gender' on it. It is historically inaccurate for starters and I don't believe it was an error. The BBC has form on those sort of deliberate mistakes.

Izzard was on Lorraine Kelly show this morning. Bizarrely, the conversation centred around Donald Trump and his lying to the people.
Izzard got a bit tearful though when Kelly said how she fully supported him/her in the struggles of transgenderism.
It was quite touching really, referring to how we are all female foetuses at first. I am sure farming communities and food production, horse racing, puppy farms, endangered species experts, zoos, are perfectly aware what the scientific realities are.

If the goal for science is for humans to become a single-sexed species then I'm not sure where we are heading.

In the end for me, it is all about safeguarding for children and vulnerable people.

Safeguarding, safeguarding, safeguarding.
Lisa Muggeridge has some excellent youtube videos on the historical context of this essential feature of civilised societies. Her most recent playlist of videos are quite short, 7 - 10 minutes but are well worth a watch.

In the article posted by SueDonim on page one, the capitalised parts are tongue in cheek. Read it in Izzard’s manner and it’s obvious.

Rosie51

trisher we don't legislate for the many because of the extremism of a few.

Oh but we do, time and again in various scenarios. At any airport we have to remove shoes, belts , empty our pockets etc and walk through a scanner. I've had the indignity of a pat down and that special xray machine thing. Why? Because there are a few nutters that would like to cause harm to a plane and its passengers. The other millions and millions are just lawfully going about their business.

A few men are a danger to women, so all men are barred from the few women only spaces. Also for dignity and privacy reasons where the single sex space is preferred.

A few women are paedophiles, and a greater number of men are paedophiles but all adults are subjected to screening and a DBS check before being able to work with children and other vulnerable people.

The legislation we all have to comply with and the hoops to jump through when moving our money about or opening an account applies to every single one of us because a minority are involved in things such as money laundering.

I was one who mentioned women's refuges, but I didn't at any time question the abilities of the staff who run them. I merely raised the question of some abused women being severely traumatised or triggered by having to share the accommodation with a male bodied person, no matter if that person identifies themselves as a woman. I said that most refuges will not allow male teenagers to stay with their mothers and female siblings. I understand that to be because they have male bodies. You said you had no idea why that was and wouldn't even try to guess why they weren't admitted.

With regards to your transwoman medic, she may very well believe she is a woman, but she will also know she is not female. Her genetics haven't changed, born with male chromosomes she'll die with male chromosomes. If anyone requests a female practitioner then she knows she doesn't qualify, unfair as that may seem.

Rosie51 you are mistaking the nature of the legislation and the difference between administration and legislation. Possibly I should have said we don't legislate against the many because of the extremism of a few.
But here's the difference the law at airports is not a law against individuals, it's a law about what may be carried on airplanes and in the administration of that law everyone is searched
A law which legislates against the many because of the few would say something like because some Muslims were terrorists all Muslims would be legally debarred from flying. Think something like the laws Trump tried to introduce at the beginning of his presidency to debarr people from certain countries entering the USA. It was widely condemned as unacceptable.
Nor are DBS checks an example of legislation against the many because of the few. An example comparable with that being proposed for transpeople would be if we banned all men from working with children because most paedophiles are men.
As regards women's refuges I trust the staff working in them to run them.
Medical practitioners I'm sure will usually work for the best experience for their patients whatever their gender.

Is it fair to assume Izzard was tearful because exhausted physically and emotionally to the extreme because of doing so many marathons and following them with a show later?

This is a symptom of physical and mental exhaustion not of transgenderism

Missingmoominmama you are also completely missing the point but it's nice you found those parts of the text amusing.

The capitalised comments were not Izzard's.
They were added to the account by someone else, to draw attention to Izzard's selfishness and lack of awareness of how life is for actual females.

But you found them amusing.

Far North
Is Eddie brave in asking for she/her pronouns and staying in girl mode?
After watching Lorraine Kelly,
Izzard openly stated he didn't mind if people used he or she.

And then Lorraine said she throughout the rest of the interview.

No indeed Eddie, you are not compelling people to use your pronouns.
You have managed to get them to do it all by themselves.

Little Red Riding Hood said "Grandmother, what great power you have.
"All the better to manipulate you with, my dear" the wolf replied.

I thought Eddie Izzard was looking decidedly poorly when I saw him on Lorraine. Hope not.

Kim19
I thought so too, putting yourself through so much physical duress takes a toll. No surprise to see such an emotional reaction, it is a normal physiological response.

Yet we are seeing media people blindly following the pronouns narrative, that they themselves must be in the wrong, mustn't upset certain people, not even Izzard.

Izzard claims not to be compelling others to pandering to pronouns.
I disagree.
I believe Izzard has used I don't mind if people call me he or she as a device to get the intended result without openly admitting the real intention.

Genius really.

Can anyone do links? The Daily Mail has an interesting article about concerns raised by medics about what one refers to as a fashion, not scientifically based. The numbers of girls and young women coming forward wanting surgery to transform into males is growing.

FarNorth- where did I say that I found them amusing? I thought that they were written by Izzard to highlight the absurdity of those views. I got that wrong, but I really can’t see where I said that I was amused by it, so there’s no need for you to be so condescending.

Izzard's job as a comedian is to push our buttons not our boundaries.