Eddie Izzard

LumpySpacedPrincess

I work in a school trisher, what you are saying is not true.

I've worked in lots of schools LSP, some you wouldn't want to set foot in, and believe me it's true. Before the smoking ban there were the smokers in some loos, some were the preserve of gangs, some were used by dealers, some were meeting places (and boys went in them!). The kids knew which was which. The policy of locking them was introduced in some schools to try and contain the problems, of course this was complained about by some parents, but anyway as staff numbers dropped it wasn't possible to actually supervise them properly. Loos have always been problem areas in schools, the problems just shift.

In fact you don't have to give a reason simply say "No I don't want you to examine me".

Why should women have to do that?

In breast scanning, for instance, male nurses have not been employed to do this so that women patients will be more relaxed.
The same should apply to transwomen nurses.

trisher

LumpySpacedPrincess

I work in a school trisher, what you are saying is not true.

I've worked in lots of schools LSP, some you wouldn't want to set foot in, and believe me it's true. Before the smoking ban there were the smokers in some loos, some were the preserve of gangs, some were used by dealers, some were meeting places (and boys went in them!). The kids knew which was which. The policy of locking them was introduced in some schools to try and contain the problems, of course this was complained about by some parents, but anyway as staff numbers dropped it wasn't possible to actually supervise them properly. Loos have always been problem areas in schools, the problems just shift.

...and your solution is to rip up safeguarding regulations, deny girls privacy and dignity, because some girls are meanies? Mate, why don't you want women and girls to have rights, protections or boundaries?

Which brings us back to the gaping loophole in safeguarding that self ID will facilitate.
Someone very wise has said that the door opened by self ID will allow everyone else to follow in through that open door...

Girl Guides
Schools toilets
Public toilets/sports changing areas
Women's prisons
Women's refuges
Hospital wards

And it is most concerning that many of these public organisations have jumped ahead of the law by changing the wording in policies to say gender instead of sex in the hope that no one notices.
You could say self ID is already here.
It has been deliberately kept under the radar.

It hasn't been "kept under the radar" it has simply functioned as part of society for hundreds of years when people dressed as a different gender to the one they were considered at birth. There are a few documented stories in history of people discovered to have different bodies when they died and it can be assumed that many more instances were simply covered up. Surgery has been available since the 1930s, Jan Morris had hers over 50 years ago. Do you imagine that she was the only one? The fact is that crimes committed by trans gender people have been few and far between and yet they have suddenly become a danger. It's once again a case of people's fears of the different being played upon to make them lash out and discriminate. Allowing it to work is the biggest danger to all our freedoms.

trisher Transsexuals have been amongst us for a considerable period of time and most women have no problem with integrating them into female society.

A conservative estimate is that 90% of self-declated transwomen now have and intent to keep their male genitalia. Ie for 90% of transwomen their definition of being trans is to simply declare themself a woman, and possibly, though not neccesserily, present themselves to the world according to female gender stereotypes. Many of them scoff at traditional transsexuals.

So if 10 transwomen happen to share a female changing room, toilet, medical ward (including psyche wards where patients are locked in), women's refuge etc, then 9 of them are likely to be biologically male. Rapes and abuses are already happening, but are written off as 'a one off' and another 'one off'.

Safety aside, I find the definition of a women as being anyone who puts a dress on as offensive. If I were to present myself with the traditional appearance of another race and declare that made me of that race would that be acceptable?

There's a perfectly good alternative to self id, men who have gender dysphoria are medically assessed as such and have all the support and treatment they need or want. Men who simply want to conform to female gender stereotypes are allowed to by other MEN.

The historical background to this is interesting, trisher, but you bring it up every time. How about addressing some of the questions that you have been asked upthread instead?

In answer to your question about 'how would anyone know [that a doctor had a penis]' I asked:
Why would someone refuse to be examined by someone who looks like a woman, even if the idea of a man touching them would repel them if they knew?

What about a girl who is too embarrassed to ask if a doctor is a man in a dress?

What about religious objections that are not about presentation, but about sex?

How is it ethical to mislead people like this? You may have no objection to being intimately examined by a man, but there are many women who do object, and their rights are being swept aside.

I later compared it to giving a beef burger to a vegetarian and saying it was soya, but this was also ignored. I would be very interested to hear how you respond to any of this, as well as the questions put to you by others on this thread.

Historically there were sound reasons for someone to go under the guise of the other sex. Women were not allowed to enter into many of the areas of life men were. Homosexuality was (and in some countries still is) illegal. Interestingly in countries where homosexuality is not accepted but being trans is, the proportion of the population reporting as trans is higher.
You often conflate objections to the trans narrative with homophobia trisher but there is evidence that it is sometimes the only viable alternative. And how about Lesbians who do not wish to sleep with someone with a penis who are accused of transphobia - how is that not homophobic?

How many times do I have to say that most trans people want to have a legal system for self-iding but not one that designates them as psychologially damaged or needing medical treatment (although they may choose to undertake that they should not be forced to). If gender dysphoria is a mental condition as some believe, there is no other mental illness which requires enforceable medical treatment unless the individual involved has committed a crime, usually a violent one. What you seem to be saying is because some transgender people may be a danger, or the issue may be used to access spaces with criminal intent all transgender people must be subjected to unnecessary interference. If we carry that to its ultimate perhaps we should incarcerate all males between that ages of 16-25 because that's when they are more likely to be involved in violent crime. It's not only bad law, it's nonsense.
Doodledog I can't be bothered to read all the rants on here about public toilets and so called women's spaces. There have been transwomen in them for ages. The woman standing next to me may be a transwoman. I don't know and you don't know.
As for the discussion about transwomen and examinations I have said you can refuse to be examined by anyone, quite how that is ignoring you I don't know.
If someone really wants to know what genitalia the person examining them has it would manifestly be discrimination to limit this disclosure to transwomen only. There may be men who would prefer to be medically examined by a man with a penis. I have no objection to anyone being asked to state what genitalia they have if a patient wants to know. Choosing not to answer must however remain their right. It is then up to the individual to decide if they wish to proceed or ask for another practitioner.

And how about Lesbians who do not wish to sleep with someone with a penis who are accused of transphobia - how is that not homophobic?
This aspect of the 'debate' is one that illustrates the anti-feminist nature of a lot of the arguments put forward by the translobby.

The Incel attitude that women are sexual objects with no right to refuse a man is extended to lesbians who are accused of transphobia if they reject a man in a dress because he says he is a woman. It beggars belief, really.

trisher, the fact that you can't be bothered to read about 'so-called women's spaces' says it all, really.

It is the fear of these spaces becoming 'so-called' that worries so many women.

I repeat - yes, one can refuse to be examined by anyone. Nobody is disputing that. But how would a woman know that her examiner was actually a man unless it was obvious? Why would she think to question it, or ask? What if she is young and scared? What if she is worried about causing offence by asking if the apparently female doctor is actually male? What about people who have religious objections to being intimately touched by men other than their husbands? Or rape victims who are terrified? Or just someone who would prefer a to be examined by a female. It is simply not for you to over-ride all of those objections by saying that they might never know, and if they don't there is no issue.

Would you give a meat dish to a vegetarian who assumed that it was meat-free? If not, why not?

You often conflate objections to the trans narrative with homophobia trisher but there is evidence that it is sometimes the only viable alternative. And how about Lesbians who do not wish to sleep with someone with a penis who are accused of transphobia - how is that not homophobic?
Really! Please post examples of this.
I have always said that all sex should be consensual and anyone can refuse to have sex with anyone else for any reason. I'd be grateful if you could eiither produce evidence for where I have said the things you accuse me of, or apologise and ask GN to withdraw your post. I find it completely unacceptable hugshelp

trisher Nobody is suggesting anyone is forced to have treatment. I'm saying women should not be forced to share intimate spaces with biological males. If transpeople who wish to maintain male biology wish to consider themselves female that is their business, and they should be entitled to the use of a third space if other biological males cannot accommodate that.
There is a difference between suggesting all males need to be incarcerated and not allowing them all into female spaces. I find any narrative that exaggerates the objections to self id while minimising the effect it has on women rather interesting. Often accompanied by a reluctance to engage in debate with anything other than their own script.

trisher

"The people really opposing trans rights are in fact often right wing Christian extremists who believe that abortion and gay marriage should be banned as well"

I see this as conflation of trans ideology and gay rights. I did not say that you said sex should not be consensual, I asked you to consider the situation with regards to Lesbians.

I am really not staying on such a stupid thread where I am being accused of things I have never said. Where apparently the phrase so-called women's spaces used by me to draw attention to the fact that you are actually already sharing them with transwomen, you just didn't know it. That you will continue to share them with transwomen because you won't know and that your ideas are not only wrong but you are posting misleading inaccuracies. You also choose to demonise people and pretend to do so with feminist intents. Well carry on pretending, only don't expect me to argue with you any longer. You are free to wage your discriminatory war and to deny people the right to live as they wish simply because of your prejudices. Not that it will make that much difference, there will still be transpeople living amongst us. They may, because of the hate and bile being spewed out, and used by others more violent than GNers, be subjected to more violent attacks, but that is nothing to do with you of course.

hugshelp are you saying right wing Christians don't oppose trans rights, gay rights and abortion. Because they do. And many of the court cases in the US brought against trans-rights have been funded by far right Christian groups. It isn't conflating objections. It's facts.

Lesbian sex like all sex should be consensual I really don't understand why you expect me to differentiate it isn't something I woud ever do. Why would I?

No trisher. You did not point out that right wing Christians often oppose trans rights, gay rights and abortion. You said, "The people really opposing trans rights are..."
The inference is different.
Also most people on here who are disagreeing with some of your thoughts are not opposing transpeople they are standing up FOR women's rights. And I see zero evidence that anyone who has posted here is not supportive of gay rights or a woman's right to choose.

Is lesbian sex consensual if one of the couple is trying to pass?

Is it persuasion?
Is it coercion?
Is it consensual?

Some very blurred lines there, trisher.

Pun intended.

Iv`e got no time for him so i couldn`t care less.

The people really opposing trans rights are right wing Christian groups because they are funding it. You may not like it but it's true. They operate with huge financial resources in the US and are moving them over here.

trisher

The people really opposing trans rights are right wing Christian groups because they are funding it. You may not like it but it's true. They operate with huge financial resources in the US and are moving them over here.

Yes, you keep saying this, and nobody has disagreed.

Would you please answer my questions about consent to examinations. For reference:

In answer to your question about 'how would anyone know [that a doctor had a penis]' I asked:
Why would someone refuse to be examined by someone who looks like a woman, even if the idea of a man touching them would repel them if they knew?

What about a girl who is too embarrassed to ask if a doctor is a man in a dress?

What about religious objections that are not about presentation, but about sex?

How is it ethical to mislead people like this? You may have no objection to being intimately examined by a man, but there are many women who do object, and their rights are being swept aside.

I later compared it to giving a beef burger to a vegetarian and saying it was soya, but this was also ignored. I would be very interested to hear how you respond to any of this, as well as the questions put to you by others on this thread.

to draw attention to the fact that you are actually already sharing them with transwomen, you just didn't know it. That you will continue to share them with transwomen because you won't know well if they look like Eddie Izzard I will know anyone looking less like a woman I can’t think of I think the mans an attention seeker and yes he’s a man for sure, he cannot expect to be a ‘he’ one week and accepted as a ‘she’the next,
I have nothing against any sex, any person male or female, I have no problem with gay or lesbian or trans but if a man continues to keep his penis he’s a man no matter what he says just the same if a woman remains built like a woman she isn’t a man
If a woman or man go through the process (very difficult, painful, long and uncomfortable process) to change their sex then they are what they want and need to be but if they just want to play at being the opposite sex and change this way or that when the mood takes them then they are having a laff