Endometriosis charity appoints trans woman as the new head of the organisation.

So let's sum up where we have got to with the rules and required practices.
We will all need tests to show if we are biologically male or female.
Then (presumably) we will have to carry those results with us.

Then people will use the facilities linked to their sex.
So transwomen and intersex women (who have female genitalia) will use men's toilets and changing rooms.

Women and transmen will use women's facilities.
So people who look like men will be in women's facilities.

Elite sport will test sex, so women born in countries with few facilities who have qualified in their own country may be excluded.

Transmen who test as female will take part in women's sports, be in women's spaces and in women's wards, even though they look like men

And this is fair and protects women????

Wrong Glorianny, get your facts straight. I have accused some TW of lying and cheating because they do.*

Glorianny says . . .
I don't think lying and cheating are accepted standards are they?

Absolutely not Glorianny.
That is why it’s so wrong that TW lie their way into female safe spaces, prisons etc , and cheat their way into female sports.

Or don’t you agree that doing that is wrong?

Definitely not acceptable standards for me.

Are lying and cheating acceptable standards for you?

Deviant in the context where you used it is a very unpleasant word, but if you’re happy to use it in that context- that’s your choice.

Mollygo
You have accused transwomen of lying and being cheats
deviant
departing from usual or accepted standards, especially in social or sexual behaviour.
I don't think lying and cheating are accepted standards are they?

Galaxy

Watchful waiting and addressing the other co morbidites that often run alongside this as recommended in the current NHS approach.

Glorianny this is the alternative.
Pity it didn’t happen at the Tavistock, despite many parents/professional pointing out children’s holistic needs were being sacrificed

Your sense of humour never fails to puzzle me, Glorianny, but we are all different, and I recognise that.

The waffle about unconventional women is just that, IMO. The ready access men have gained to what were safe spaces for woman may have increased vigilance about interlopers, but that is no reason to just declare a free-for-all.

'If there were not other solution' is the pertinent point of your last paragraph. One possibility is to understand why it is that so many children feel that they need to 'transition'. Is it because they are told that there are myriad genders, which confuses them? Is it children with a propensity to anxiety who threaten suicide? Are there other issues at home? Are the children actually gay, or gay-curious? Why has 'gender' come to matter so much to children over the past ten years or so? Is it more common amongst children who eat cabbage, or live near ponds? There are many possibilities, and jumping to medication as the first line of attack doesn't seem to me the best approach. Much more work needs to be done before deciding that medicating young bodies is the way to go.

Sorry
Are there also lots of people who have always been identified as men, or is it only a one way identification?

I haven’t said TW are deviant either. What an unpleasant word to use, but not surprising, Glorianny.

I say TW are male. I don’t lie about different sorts of women. Women are AHF, ergo TW are not women.

Glorianny says . . .
How do you propose that a female class will be established in sport without imposing unacceptable conditions on people who have always been identified as women?

I keep asking you to supply evidence of all these people who have always been identified as women outwith your usual CS and those from remote villages. Are there also lots of people who have always been identified as women, or is it only a one way identification?

Where is all the evidence that this is happening?
What proof is there that these people have been brought up as the wrong sex, apart from the celebrities whose new must have is a trans child?
(Even they acknowledge what sex their child is, or they couldn’t say they’re changing gender. So bringing up a boy as a girl or vice versa, they would be lying to their offspring if they say they are the opposite sex.)

I have made a suggestion of a means whereby ALL athletes or would-be competitors will be DNA tested from the start.
Competitors don’t suddenly arrive at competitions without having been selected during training, and they or their promoters will learn to expect that testing to happen in the same way as competitors are tested for drugs.* (Or don’t you approve of that either, G)
It’s a shame that the actions of some cheating TW have made this necessary, but actually, in the light of your claims about the myriad people who have always been identified as women perhaps it’s necessary.
All those trans who have been living peacefully, without cheating or using their trans status for malicious purposes would obviously not be affected by this.

Last time I mentioned this, you ignored it and suddenly reverted to talking about toilets.
Any chance you’ll stick to the subject this time?
Surely if this is going to be such a big problem, you would support the introduction of non-invasive testing right from the beginning of competitive life, to avoid disappointment for males who have been brought up as females, when they learn the truth?
169

Watchful waiting and addressing the other co morbidites that often run alongside this as recommended in the current NHS approach.

Doodledog

I'm not in court, and I am not an expert witness . There is no need to barrack me. I speak as a lay person who makes no claim to expertise in the various areas that impact on this topic.

1. I am not a biologist, but male-bodied people are those with male chromosomes, gametes, and well, male bodies. Their genitals may or may not be 'normal', but biologically they are male.

2. Evidence? I mean that if a man wants to use a female space, all he needs to do is say he is a woman, and lo! He has a free pass. I don't care about the finer points of law. I care about the day to day experiences of women, who just want to get dressed in private, or know that their teenage daughters are safe from peeping toms and potential abusers. I care about women who enter competitions or go for prizes (a large part of people's incomes in the Arts) which are designated as 'for women', but find that men can enter too. I care about vulnerable women in hospital, jail or in hostels who are traumatised already and then find that they are not safe from the men who put them there.

3. Children are not in a position to make choices that they may regret in later life. As I have said, I don't believe that threatening suicide is reason to allow things that would not otherwise be allowed. I have every sympathy if a child is distressed, but would prefer resources to be going to find out why there is a sudden wave of such distress that did not exist ten years ago than to go towards medicating minors.

4. You keep saying that as though you are the only one to know it.

OMG given the level of questions, misinformation and demands placed on me by more than one poster that is funny

I care about all those people too, but I am not naive enough to think that banning transwomen will protect any woman, especially any who do not fit the feminine stereotypes which will necessarily result from imagining it is possible to distinguish transwomen from natal women

If a child threatens suicide because they are being bullied at school you would expect the bullying to be dealt with. In an extreme case you would remove the child rather than put them at risk. If a child threatens suicide because they think they are the wrong gender you would of course ask for help and if there was no other solution accept medication for them. What is the alternative?

I think it's a lie to say men can become women. I dont think transwomen just do that. Lots of people tell that lie.

Galaxy

There is no evidence that gender affirming care helps avert suicide in children, mainly because there have been no long term studies, one of the criticisms of the tavistock.

The Tavistock may not have produced any studies but it is wrong to say there have been none. This link is to one and a list of studies is at the bottom. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32345113/
More research would certainly be welcome.

I don't think you are the only poster on this thread Galaxy And transwomen have been accused of lying and cheating, both of which would be regarded as deviant.

I'm not in court, and I am not an expert witness . There is no need to barrack me. I speak as a lay person who makes no claim to expertise in the various areas that impact on this topic.

1. I am not a biologist, but male-bodied people are those with male chromosomes, gametes, and well, male bodies. Their genitals may or may not be 'normal', but biologically they are male.

2. Evidence? I mean that if a man wants to use a female space, all he needs to do is say he is a woman, and lo! He has a free pass. I don't care about the finer points of law. I care about the day to day experiences of women, who just want to get dressed in private, or know that their teenage daughters are safe from peeping toms and potential abusers. I care about women who enter competitions or go for prizes (a large part of people's incomes in the Arts) which are designated as 'for women', but find that men can enter too. I care about vulnerable women in hospital, jail or in hostels who are traumatised already and then find that they are not safe from the men who put them there.

3. Children are not in a position to make choices that they may regret in later life. As I have said, I don't believe that threatening suicide is reason to allow things that would not otherwise be allowed. I have every sympathy if a child is distressed, but would prefer resources to be going to find out why there is a sudden wave of such distress that did not exist ten years ago than to go towards medicating minors.

4. You keep saying that as though you are the only one to know it.

No where have I said transwomen are deviant they are Male. I dont think all males are 'deviant' just that they have no place in womens spaces.

There is no evidence that gender affirming care helps avert suicide in children, mainly because there have been no long term studies, one of the criticisms of the tavistock.

Doodledog

But how you (or I, or anyone else) 'judges' others is neither here nor there when it comes to sport. Sport is not everyday life.

As long as someone is not flashing at me, changing the rules of organisations to which I belong so that they are no longer for women, or generally behaving in an 'alpha male' manner, I couldn't care less about their biology. It wouldn't occur to me to wonder, really, and if it were obvious (which is usually is) I wouldn't care. On the whole, though, it doesn't matter.

But that is not what's happening here. It does matter that the language no longer describes the female sex accurately. It matters that research into society in general and sex-based inequality in particular is flawed, and doesn't show how women hare disadvantaged. It matters that safe spaces for women are no longer available. And it matters that women are not able to have careers at the top of their class in sport, as the female class no longer exists. And that's without the impact on children who are encouraged to see their bodies as 'wrong', and to medicate those bodies when they are perfectly healthy - they matter.

I'm sick of saying this, but I am not opposed to transwomen at all. But the bottom line is that they are male, and when that matters they should be recognised as such. That may upset their feelings, but what about the feelings of the women that are being disadvantaged? We matter too.

It is not discriminatory to say that male-bodied people can 'live as' whatever they like within the law, and be protected by law so that they can do so unmolested; but that when it matters, for reasons of safety, decency or fairness, that they should be treated as male. What is the problem with that?

You keep posting about "male bodied people" Can I ask who is included in that? Is someone like Caster Semenya who has female genitalia so hasn't the required penis "male bodied?". How do you identify these "male bodied' people?

What is your evidence that safe spaces are no longer available?

How do you propose that a female class will be established in
sport without imposing unacceptable conditions on people who have always been identified as women?

Medicating anyone no matter what their gender or sex to fit in with preconceived notions is wrong unless that medication is carefully supervised and used with the full consent of the patient, and a responsible adult if the patient is a child. However if a child is in such a state that they would attempt suicide, or resort to obtaining drugs through other methods prescribing medication may save a child's life

Transwomen are here. transmen are here, non-binary people are here. They aren't going to go away. They mostly live quiet unobtrusive lives and the concept that they do harm to women, are easily identified and are in some way deviant only fuels hatred, and harms not only trans people but any women who look or appear slightly different.

This explains it all very clearly faustusnotes.com/2019/06/30/gender-critical-feminist-praxis-harasses-natal-women-an-application-of-bayes-rule-to-bathroom-exclusion/

Not that it's relevant, but men also got the vote in stages.

The vote that women wanted was denied to them because of their sex, is that so hard for you to understand? Cropping their hair and wearing a shirt and trousers and saying they were men wasn't going to get them the vote. The women and girls in Afghanistan and elsewhere in the world are denied rights solely on the basis of their sex. Female genital mutilation is carried out on girls because of their sex. Saying they felt like boys wouldn't save them.

One of my main objections to women wanting to impose restrictions is their claim to be radical feminists. There is nothing radical in imposing restrictions it has been done so many times. Radical means progress.

So you object to rights for women because the people advocating for them 'claim to be' something you don't think applies? How odd.

I don't claim to be radical, FWIW. As I keep saying, I don't follow doctrines, but think for myself. I really can't imagine anyone but the most dogmatic rejecting an idea because of the nomenclature used by opponents, or in this case by the people who oppose them. It is TRAs who shout TERF, to define those who question their regressive policies. IME the women who support female rights don't see themselves as radical, but if they chose to define themselves as such I wouldn't change my opinion of them.

Even if we assume that biological realists do call themselves 'radical', have you changed your mind about, people being able to choose how they should be referred to? You have argued vociferously for the right to choose one's own definitions in the past. What's changed your mind? It can't be the 'evolution' of the language, surely? When that comes up on these threads the response to concerns about words not meaning what they have meant for centuries is that words can mean whatever the user wants them to mean - eg 'woman', 'mother', 'breastfeed' and so on.

Also, (and purely as an aside) 'Radical' doesn't necessarily mean progress. It is possible to have radical regression, such as in Iran when the Ayatollah's took over from the Shar, or when th Taliban took power in Afghanistan. In both cases there was radical transformation, but it certainly wasn't progress as I understand it.

Glorianny says . . .
Firstly the suffragettes were a relatively small number of women
So in G’s view, were they unimportant?
Now let me think. . .
Who is it who keeps using the word minority
e.g. when she wants to criticise people for not supporting the minority of athletes from remote locations.

Tut tut G. You need to be more consistent.

I’m consistent.

I know that
TW are male.

Not all TW intend harm to females.

Not all TW want to flaunt themselves in female safe spaces, posting selfies and saying “You can’t keep me out”

Not all TW lie to enter female sports in order to cheat females out of their just rewards.
Not all TW pretend to be female when a female attendant has been requested.

Not all TW suddenly decide to be TW when they’re about to be incarcerated for rape, and demand to be put in a female prison.

Not all TW gang together with TRA to threaten and injure females.

I think it’s important to acknowledge that the minority of TW do those things, and I condemn them for that.
The fact that the minority of TW do those things shows their lack of respect for females and for other TW.
But some women (AHF) support them, as is evidenced on this thread.

Trans Women Are Transwomen, Glorianny.

Rosie51

Glorianny Certainly women fought for the vote, but much like on trans issues today the views were not divided along the lines of gender, but far more on the lines of conservative and radical.

Once again are you using gender here to mean sex? It gets so confusing when you use it variously to denote 'presentation' 'feels like' 'lives as' which are all just personalities not specific like sex. Until relatively recently gender was just a synonym for sex, people seemed to think it a politer term.

Feminism | Definition ...
At its core, feminism is the belief in full social, economic, and political equality for women.

Woman noun definition
an adult female human being.

Feminism has its root in female.

Can't see anything about feelings in those definitions.

Rosie51 I have posted many times that I know for certain the sex of very few of the people I meet. I wonder do people really prove their sex to you?
I always use gender because that is what I mostly see. You apparently can see the biology and sex of people, I can't. I don't think I have ever confused gender with sex.
In fact I find it very hard to remember any times when I have had to prove my sex, or when my sex was judged by anyone.

Perhaps you can explain to me quite what I should do to ascertain the sex of people I meet

Glorianny Certainly women fought for the vote, but much like on trans issues today the views were not divided along the lines of gender, but far more on the lines of conservative and radical.

Once again are you using gender here to mean sex? It gets so confusing when you use it variously to denote 'presentation' 'feels like' 'lives as' which are all just personalities not specific like sex. Until relatively recently gender was just a synonym for sex, people seemed to think it a politer term.

Feminism | Definition ...
At its core, feminism is the belief in full social, economic, and political equality for women.

Woman noun definition
an adult female human being.

Feminism has its root in female.

Can't see anything about feelings in those definitions.

Mollygo

^As Mollygo pointed out, when the suffragettes were fighting for women to get the vote.^

Yes, That minority group of women who fought for the rights of all women (AHF) against those males who thought they should not have those rights. And in those days, like today, those males were supported by some women who were happy to be subjugated.

You ignored her excellent post. I wonder why?

That’s easy.

Didn’t fit with what she wanted it to say. 🤣🤣🤣

That’s another familiar strategy. G has already said that she ignores my posts.
Though it did make her swerve from TW in sport to TW in toilets.

The reason I ignored the post was because it is largely so inaccurate that I couldn't be bothered to pick all the holes in it.
But since you ask here goes.

Firstly the suffragettes were a relatively small number of women who were criticised and unrecognised by many women, some of whom wanted the vote- they were suffragists, and some of whom thought women shouldn't have the vote. Gertrude Bell being a prime example.
Then the suffragettes were actively and effectively supported by some men. Men like Henry Brailsford who formed the Men's League for Women's Suffrage

Although the suffrage movement was in favour of women's suffrage it was not largely in favour of universal suffrage. A few organisations like the Women's Labour League campaigned for that. But most of the women wanted the vote on the same basis as men at the time. Which actually meant working class women and men would not meet the requirements and would not have the vote.
When the first suffragette histories were written the most active suffragettes who set fires and bombs were left out.
Certainly women fought for the vote, but much like on trans issues today the views were not divided along the lines of gender, but far more on the lines of conservative and radical.
Conservative women wanting either no vote, or a limited vote and radical women wanting universal suffrage. One of my main objections to women wanting to impose restrictions is their claim to be radical feminists. There is nothing radical in imposing restrictions it has been done so many times. Radical means progress.

Rosie51

Just as she can't show one instance of where I have misgendered CS, but persists with the lie rather than apologise. I don't misgender transpeople, I stick to names or neutral pronouns.

I have been accused of that too, but like you I try to avoid using pronouns when speaking of transpeople online. To do otherwise buys into the colonisation of the language that I see as destructive.

In 'real life' I will call someone by whatever name they prefer, and if using their pronoun in their presence I will do likewise. I would do so in their absence too, in a situation where I know the person concerned, eg in a work situation when referring to a trans student. It's just manners to do so. When I don't know the person, and particularly online when the discussion tends to be more about the situation than the personality, as I say, I avoid using pronouns as much as possible.

All the same, I have been accused of misgendering and calling transwomen 'men' on here. I don't. I use 'male-bodied', or whatever is appropriate to the context. I am more likely to slip up in speech than in writing, but the wrongful accusations confirm to me that a lot of what we say on here goes over the heads of those who are determined to show that anyone questioning the wisdom of self-id being taken as an actual change of sex is a boorish transphobe with a side order of racism, homophobia and bigotry. I honestly no longer believe that our posts are read any more - they are skimmed in the hope of finding a comment or phrase that can be pounced on and fashioned into an attempt at a 'Gotcha'.

Just as she can't show one instance of where I have misgendered CS, but persists with the lie rather than apologise. I don't misgender transpeople, I stick to names or neutral pronouns.

As Mollygo pointed out, when the suffragettes were fighting for women to get the vote.

Yes, That minority group of women who fought for the rights of all women (AHF) against those males who thought they should not have those rights. And in those days, like today, those males were supported by some women who were happy to be subjugated.

You ignored her excellent post. I wonder why?

That’s easy.

Didn’t fit with what she wanted it to say. 🤣🤣🤣

That’s another familiar strategy. G has already said that she ignores my posts.
Though it did make her swerve from TW in sport to TW in toilets.