Latest from Mridul Wadhwa

Because that's not how equality works.

trisher

Because that's not how equality works.

???????

Why can't we stay with the terms mother, pregnant woman etc and those that wish to be referred to by another term can request that?
Because that's not how equality works.

If you are changing something for a certain time you need to ensure that the new more inclusive term is known and understood by everyone so it needs to be written into policies. The old words will still be there and can still be used.

If you think there is equality in using dehumanising language about women I don't know where to start.

Rosie51 using mother, pregnant woman etc. is offensive to some people because that excludes them. It has excluded some women for years-e.g. those unable or unwilling to become pregnant.
BUT Now it excludes men, and some of them don’t like it. Sadly some women support the men’s “if I can’t have it then nobody can have it” attitude. This is then followed by the, “If women can have something that I can’t, then I’ll call myself a woman so I can have it too!”
These people do so much harm to people genuinely coping with gender dysphoria who just want to change gender -but accept that it does not change their sex.

Mollygo Transmen are the ones who want to be birthing people and I believe you think they are women, so where do men come into it?
It'spart of the perceived ideology on here "Men are doing it all" but it isn't true. There are wmen who choose to be transmen or even non-binary and no man is telling them what they must be.

trisher

Buck Angel is entitled to use whatever language he wishes. Why aren't other transmen?

Black Angel wouldn’t be a pseudonym, by any chance, would it?

When transmen give birth, they are female, not male. Men can’t give birth no matter what they call themselves.

trisher

If you wanted to use the terms Doodledog you would still need to add woman or man to trans . But in any case there is already a term for people who do not want to be known as man or woman it is non-binary. And woman is not a term for a sex it is a term for gender.
It isn't that long ago that feminists were arguing we should get rid of the word woman. I remember those discussions.

Woman or man added to ‘trans’ was, of course, implicit. I agree that you are being deliberately obtuse, which is what always happens when you are unable to answer a question- you tie people up in knots while they go back to reword old posts.

I wasn’t referring to non-binary people- there is already a term for them. And woman = ‘adult human female’, and female is a sex. I suggested on one of these threads ages ago that there could usefully be a different term for gender, to avoid confusion, but apparently that wouldn’t suit either - it’s TWAW or nothing.

That’s fine then.
Transmen can be birthing people. I would happily refer to a transman as a birthing person.
As long as if that’s agreed for transmen, then females who want to can be called mothers, or pregnant women, and have the right to be called that including in maternity wards and on forms and at appointments instead of having to accept what trans want.
Actually the perceived ideology on this forum isn’t men are doing it all-except perhaps in your mind.
“There are women who choose to be transmen or even non binary and no man is telling them what they must be.”

Again, you miss the point of the discussion-deliberately or because you simply don’t understand.
The point is that some men-claiming to be women are eroding women’s rights, telling women what they are entitled to, or how they should feel, falsely applying for a job that was specified as for a woman, claiming to be women because they can’t succeed as men.
I agree with what was posted earlier, that we should use female or male, transman or transwoman. I wonder what MW would have put on the form.

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202109/medium-126860-screenshot-2021-09-26-at-17-36-14.png https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202109/medium-780304-screenshot-2021-09-26-at-17-38-20.png https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202109/medium-713052-screenshot-2021-09-26-at-17-36-49.png

In case you don't possess a dictionary trisher They are all respected dictionaries, all agree on adult human female as a definition of woman. Sex not gender.

Mollygo 16.22
Rosie51 using mother, pregnant woman etc. is offensive to some people because that excludes them. It has excluded some women for years-e.g. those unable or unwilling to become pregnant.
BUT Now it excludes men, and some of them don’t like it. Sadly some women support the men’s “if I can’t have it then nobody can have it” attitude. This is then followed by the, “If women can have something that I can’t, then I’ll call myself a woman so I can have it too!”
17.35
Actually the perceived ideology on this forum isn’t men are doing it all-except perhaps in your mind.

You might be accused of trying to gaslight me

Really? If I knew what that meant . . . We are more up to date here. We use electricity.

Your perception of the perceived ideology differs from mine. Is that against the rules?

The confusion around sex and gender is becoming greater by the day, and it will continue while we have people in the public eye getting into a flurry over simple things.

Having watched Ed Davey on Marr last week and then Keir Starmer yesterday, it is obvious that for many, the level of knowledge that some adults seem to have about their own body is pretty poor. Or more likely, they do know but have backed themselves into an ideological corner.

Ed struggled three times with the concept of Woman-Adult Human Female and without prompting launched into a discussion on transwomen. Then Keir couldn't bring himself to discuss the the fact that only women have a cervix. In fact he said

“ Its not right to say only women have a cervix”. And that claiming only women have cervix's was "something that shouldn't be said". Why is that I wonder, is having a cervix a secret that women keep?

Personally, I'm now looking forward to what Boris has to say. Should be fun.

We had the Lancet struggling recently offering information to “bodies with a vagina” and now, a particular transwoman on Twitter offering to show their cervix. Id give money to see that!

And of course, the person who started this thread- a transwoman (male) CEO of a rape crisis centre expecting those bigoted (female) rape victims toe the line.

Never has female anatomy been discussed so publicly and in so much detail by people who don't seem to understand the particular plumbing involved. Maybe we need Eddie Izzard in girl mode to spell it all out for us. Might cheer us all up.

Oh and Emily Thornberry has, allegedly, stated on Twitter that her cousin has a cervix and he's a man. I bet her cousin was pleased that this information has been shared

Apart from outing her cousin, they both show a remarkably poor knowledge of human biology.

A friend diagnosed with cervical cancer at a very young age hasn't got one any more. Has she ceased to be a woman? Of course not. These politicians aren't the only people who are confused.

Hurray! Another vote against the groups that want to relabel women as cervix havers!

I don't get too upset about the issue of men identifying as/becoming women. But I wonder, do we need to find another name for men because some women identify as men and have procedures to make them appear more like men. It all seems a bit one-sided to me.

I think we just need to stop panicking and let things be. Trans people aren't going to cause the harm some people imagine There was much the same hatred and misleading information circulated about homosexuals at one stage. They were going to destroy civilisation with their alternative lifestyle. Turns out most of them want marriage and a family as traditionally as possible.

Please stop conflating trans issues with gay rights. They are not the same thing at all, and the implication is that anyone concerned about the ways in which women's rights are under threat is akin to a homophobe of the past, which is not true.

I have yet to meet a gender-critical feminist who is not supportive of transpeople living unmolested lives, supported by protective legislation and attitudes. We are not the same as banner-wielding homophobes misquoting Biblical passages or beating people up on the streets, so please stop making those links.

Eloethan

I don't get too upset about the issue of men identifying as/becoming women. But I wonder, do we need to find another name for men because some women identify as men and have procedures to make them appear more like men. It all seems a bit one-sided to me.

It is very one-sided, Eloethan.

I think there would be a lot more opposition, if it were men whose spaces and identity were being compromised. The fact that it is women who have to move aside plays right into the hands of misogynists who want to perpetuate a patriarchal society. It also means that a lot of (most?) men ignore the debate and many of those who are aware of it write it off as objections by 'hysterical women'.

I think we just need to stop panicking and let things be.

Here we go again. Telling women to shut up and keep their opinions to themselves. Misogyny at its best.

Doodledog I firmly believe that as soon as there are any impacts on men the opposition to some of these 'rights' (which are more akin to extra privileges) will increase greatly.

Like you I abhor the linking of trans rights to gay rights and the implied homophobia. Gay people being sacked for being gay, unable to rent property for being gay, being denied equal marriage status were all despicable. Once these equalities happened, not one single aspect of my life changed. My single sex places remained single sex, when I requested a female to carry out my smear test it was met. My muslim friends were still sure a women's group contained only the female sex. Now try all that with transgender rights as are being demanded. And for some individuals like Pip/Philip Bunce they have an all areas access pass because of being able to switch from man to woman and back again on a daily basis. ?