What is a lesbian?

No longer acceptable, thank goodness.

Do you believe, for instance, that men should only be cared for by males, if they so wish. And that gay men, should only be cared for by other gay men?

Fleurpepper I don't know. I have not discussed this with her. but since her papers say she is female, legally, and a MRS married to a man and you could not ever see the difference- why would that be an issue. If your niece gives intimate care to a woman who has requested a female because they won't be able to tell, she is being deceitful and dishonest. Your niece knows they are biologically a male, no matter what the outside looks like. Dishonesty is dishonesty even when it comes in a pretty package. Would you be OK with a transwoman who can't pass and is very obviously male being prevented from giving the same intimate care? The comparison with feeding a vegan or vegetarian something made with an animal product because they'd never know the difference is absolutely relevant. If not knowing the person giving you intimate care is a transwoman doesn't matter, why would unknowingly eating animal products matter?

A Lesbian is someone who is sexually attracted to females. Some may, or may not, be attracted to trans females. trans females would be transmen. In order to be a tranwomen you have to be male, no born female can be a transwoman, it's an exclusive category! If the word female is now going to be appropriated by transwomen then there is no descriptor to describe that half of the sex binary that provides the large gamete in sexual reproduction.

Fleurpepper

Do you believe, for instance, that men should only be cared for by males, if they so wish. And that gay men, should only be cared for by other gay men?

Yes I think men should be able to request intimate care by another male, and I'd not put transmen in that category. The carer's sexuality is none of anybody's business, so no I'd not allow the request for a gay man or indeed a heterosexual man.

My post was about your insist that because your niece ‘passes’ for female it doesn’t matter that her clients don’t know. I don’t see the comparison to feeding meat to vegetarians as nonsensical- if they don’t know they are eating it, what’s the difference? To me it is the same logic.

Sorry - I missed a page there, and the point had already been made.

Exactly Doodledog It is the same logic, it's the "what they don't know can't hurt them" logic.

Rosie51

Fleurpepper

Do you believe, for instance, that men should only be cared for by males, if they so wish. And that gay men, should only be cared for by other gay men?

Yes I think men should be able to request intimate care by another male, and I'd not put transmen in that category. The carer's sexuality is none of anybody's business, so no I'd not allow the request for a gay man or indeed a heterosexual man.

But fact is, in most care home and hospitals, this is just not possible.

Fleurpepper

Rosie51

Fleurpepper

Do you believe, for instance, that men should only be cared for by males, if they so wish. And that gay men, should only be cared for by other gay men?

Yes I think men should be able to request intimate care by another male, and I'd not put transmen in that category. The carer's sexuality is none of anybody's business, so no I'd not allow the request for a gay man or indeed a heterosexual man.

But fact is, in most care home and hospitals, this is just not possible.

Well that's for males to fight for. While there is an abundance of females in care homes and hospitals there is no need to deny females who request intimate care from a female. Many will not care if they are helped by a male or female, but for those that do care, for any reason, this should be accommodated or the reason why it's not possible given. They shouldn't be duped into thinking they are being cared for by a female when in fact it's a male.

They shouldn't be duped into thinking they are being cared for by a female when in fact its' a male exactly Rosie anymore than a vegetarian should be duped into eating meat because they've led to believe it in't.

Fleurpepper

Who are you to tell them it is not true. It is not genetically true- but it is in every other way. And it does mean they can live, work, have sex, with men or with lesbians if all agree- and even marry.

Come and discuss this with my niece- married to a man. You could meet here anywhere and have NO idea she was born a man. And she works in a care home- looking after women and men.

You keep quoting your niece. Your niece is a male, but does your niece walk round saying I am not a male?
Most people I know never mention their sexuality at all, apart from TW who announce they are women.
I’m not interested in whether I can tell. As Glorianny, in her current and previous names has said, you can’t always tell by looking, not even when the acquaintances are tall, muscular and deep voiced.
I’m more interested in whether males lie to get into places where they shouldn’t be as in the OP.
I find it very difficult to grasp that anyone supports males lying, especially if they would not condone lying in any other circumstances.
I’d ask the same question as Smileless2012, in a slightly different format.
If your niece was asked directly, “Are you a TW?” would your niece lie or tell the truth?

NB. Your niece is married -so your niece would obviously not go to a lesbian speed dating even where males had specifically been asked not to attend, which was, despite all the deviations, the origin of this thread.

Doodledog

My post was about your insist that because your niece ‘passes’ for female it doesn’t matter that her clients don’t know. I don’t see the comparison to feeding meat to vegetarians as nonsensical- if they don’t know they are eating it, what’s the difference? To me it is the same logic.

And the same idea that lying is acceptable.

Denying trans women are women will go exactly nowhere towards preventing predatory males lying to get access to changing spaces or toilets

The very fact that people believe trans women pose a general threat in anyway towards their wellbeing when they are no longer male and have no history of ever being predatory is just, well it is an extreme view isn't it

Continuing to misgender people who have done no harm to anyone is just unnecessary and cruel

GRCs exist

Chaperones exist

Anyone qualified to do a job where a patient does not have a good reason to specify a need for a particular person to care for them should never need to disclose that they are trans and they aren't lying by doing so

Apparently trans people have no need to announce they are women but you would force them to announce they are trans or accuse them of lying of they do not tell you the gender they were assigned at birth

There is no logic here

Why do people condone lying by males VS?

Do you condone lying in any other circumstances or only by TW using their status to cheat or lie?

I shouldn’t have to wonder whether the female assistant I have requested has been denied me by a lying male.
A truthful male would simply not appear.

I shouldn’t have to wonder, as I sit down at a lesbian speed-dating event, where males (TW are male) have expressly not been invited, whether the person facing me will turn out to be male, nor should I be referred to as transphobic for refusing him as a liar as well as a male.
Hot are not dogs they are sausages in a bun, TW are not women, they are transwomen and transwomen are male.

Denying trans women are women will go exactly nowhere towards preventing predatory males lying to get access to changing spaces or toilets
Which is not what we are talking about. All the same, the principle that males can enter women’s spaces does mean that predators will come in along with the harmless ones - of course it does.

The very fact that people believe trans women pose a general threat in anyway towards their wellbeing when they are no longer male and have no history of ever being predatory is just, well it is an extreme view isn't it
No. It is an extreme view to believe that magic words make someone ‘no longer male’. As I have said, personally I would differentiate between fully transitioned transwomen and self-identified ones when it comes to most safe spaces, but not when it comes to intimate touching - where that is concerned I believe that women have a right to agency. Lying to us on the grounds that the liars don’t think it matters because we would never know is entirely unacceptable and disrespectful. It is attitudes like this which are patriarchal and misogynistic. Believing that women have no rights over their own bodies is a medieval attitude that is, in my view, incompatible with feminism.

It may be that most women won’t mind (who knows?) but if 0.1% of women would prefer not to be touched intimately by males then that 0.1% should have the right to a blanket opt out, and the other 99.99% should be able to give or withhold informed consent on a case by case basis.

Continuing to misgender people who have done no harm to anyone is just unnecessary and cruel
It is not unnecessary if it is acceptable to lie. It would become less necessary if such lies were illegal and women had the right to make choices of their own instead of men deciding what they think should be acceptable to us.

GRCs exist
Agreed

Chaperones exist
Agreed.
All the same, the whole point of a chaperone is to protect vulnerable people from the possibility of harm, and that chaperones exist recognises that a threat exists. How does the act of saying ’I am a woman’ neutralise that threat? How is a man a threat but a self-identified transwoman not a threat?

Anyone qualified to do a job where a patient does not have a good reason to specify a need for a particular person to care for them should never need to disclose that they are trans and they aren't lying by doing so
Of course they are lying. If someone doesn’t want to declare that they are trans they shouldn’t go into jobs where intimate touching is necessary. Most jobs don’t require it - one wonders at the motivation of those who seek out roles where bodily contact is integral. And who are you to decide whether someone else has ‘a good reason’ to specify anything?

Apparently trans people have no need to announce they are women but you would force them to announce they are trans or accuse them of lying of they do not tell you the gender they were assigned at birth
This makes no sense.

I don’t think transpeople should have to announce anything unless their trans status gives them access to the bodies of vulnerable women and girls.

There is no logic here
You said it.

If everyone on here chanted the magic words it would make no difference to the fact that transwomen are men. We dont have that power I am afraid.

No announcement needs to be made. A female patient in a hospital or care home environment, or the care home residents family, specifically state that any intimate care must be carried out by a woman.

A trans woman nurse or carer doesn't have to announce they're trans. They know what's been requested by her, or her family on her behalf, so ensure when it comes to intimate care they aren't the one who provides it.

Seriously - what percentage of jobs involve personal or intimate touching of others? How is it asking too much for people who don’t want to have their trans status known (assuming it’s not obvious in the first place) to simply find roles without such a dimension?

But if someone's trans status is obvious Doodledog and someone requests they are seen by a woman, they would then no doubt be accused of being transphobic.

Iam64

Gloryanny, wanting women to retain rights isn’t the same as being anti trans.
Which bit of my post ‘can’t be true’

Misogyny versus feminism
As I said the perception of feminism as something which only seeks to make women the focus of any rights is and always has been incorrect. Yes the equality of the sexes is and always has been one of its aims, but never its total focus. The poor, and children were concerns for the first feminists. Those women were responsible for making councils provide meals for the poorest children long before they got the vote. Sadly many of those aims and achievements are now forgotten.
Feminism has since moved on but one of its core beliefs is that human rights is not a hierarchical system where one set of rights is pitted against another, that's pure patriarchy. It's quite possible for women to have their rights protected and to support trans people.
So the idea that there is some form of misogyny going on is wrong. There are two forms of feminism arguing. One of them embraces patriarchal systems but chooses to call itself "radical" (although it is actually much more reactionary). The other recognises levels of privilege and oppression differ, and seeks to find a system where all rights are respected and no one is subjected to discrimination.
Sadly labelling and identifying transwomen as some sort of enemy has repercussions which will be, and is being, felt by all women.

If someone has no problem receiving male or female care, of course they do not need to know

It doesn't matter

Some religions and traumatized women may have stipulations about care, then those stipulations can be fulfilled if possible, of not they may need to be informed that their stipulations cannot be fulfilled here so they can go elsewhere.... They still do not need to know

Saying trans people cannot do certain jobs in general is discrimination under the equality act

Are trans people supposed to just stay at home unless they are wearing a flashing sign above their heads?

Smileless2012

No announcement needs to be made. A female patient in a hospital or care home environment, or the care home residents family, specifically state that any intimate care must be carried out by a woman.

A trans woman nurse or carer doesn't have to announce they're trans. They know what's been requested by her, or her family on her behalf, so ensure when it comes to intimate care they aren't the one who provides it.

I doubt if most people or their families would prefer someone to sit in a pool of shit and wee waiting for a natal woman to turn up and change them. And then there's the damage that would be caused. Who'd be responsible for the resulting burns and bed sores?

Smileless2012

But if someone's trans status is obvious Doodledog and someone requests they are seen by a woman, they would then no doubt be accused of being transphobic.

Even more concerning is that in that circumstance,
A. if females working in a place, supported the opinion held by a few on GN that it’s OK for males to lie, the females might not agree to treat the client to show solidarity with their male colleagues.

B. As happened to a family member, when a blatantly male TW was assigned to a female MH ward with vulnerable females, nurses were afraid to do anything for fear of the transphobia threat.

Or if someone needs an ambulance and a trans person is closest, surely they wouldn't let them die over a belief

I think we all know "it's quite possible for women to have their rights protected and to support trans people" because that's what the majority of us do and are fighting for.

Trouble is, although it's quite possible it isn't happening is it.

What's been happening is rights that women have fought long and hard for are being ignored and the reasons given are that trans people should be supported. Of course they should, but not at the expense of another demographic.

I can't imagine that anyone contributing to these discussions is unaware of the core beliefs of feminism, being feminists ourselves. You've posted "human rights is not a hierarchical system where one set of rights is pitted against another, that's pure patriarchy" and yet, you as a feminist appear to be doing precisely that.