Well done to the Nurses who stood up for Women’s Rights

The only prerequisite to being a transwoman is that you have to be born male in the first place.

We do have problems with pronouns because English only has 'she' 'he' 'it'.
I think there are languages with more variation.
On the other hand, English is a living language. Should we devise more pronouns to accommodate societal changes?
I know, Pedants' Thread.
Am I brave enough.
Thanks Cossy, that's what I thought.

He, she and it cover everything, surely? In fact, as far as sexually reproducing life-forms are concerned he and she (plus his and hers) covers everything. Sex is what matters, not whatever 'gender' is supposed to mean.

One of the great developments in English was the dropping of masculine and feminine for objects that are neither.

Gender is a linguistic device in some languages. That's all.

Have all these nurses been allowed to return to work?

Galaxy

Again even the explanations are mired in sexism.

Yes-dressing as a woman?
What does that mean?
The fact is that men pretending to be women seem to think it involves wearing what men think women should wear!

In the same way as men pretending to be women try to portray the way they think women should be.

Except they invade safe spaces of the opposite sex, do women do that?

Demand medical treatment for female conditions that males can’t possibly have. Do women do that?

Film themselves in female toilets to prove they’ve been in there and can’t be prevented from doing so. Do women do that?

Saying you are something you are not means you are living a lie.

Keeping that lie to yourself and not using it to cheat or upset others is one thing. In the past, since we are told frequently that trans have existed for ages, that is what they did.

Using that lie to the detriment of others and attacking them for refusing to accept your lie, reflects exactly the sort of person you are.

Galaxy

Again even the explanations are mired in sexism.

"sex assigned at birth"... (sigh)

Other than the atypical rare occasions where the ambiguity requires specialist evaluation, isn't sex noted at birth?

Maybe it's just a word-choice and means the same thing, however it can give the impression that biological sex is fluid - and can be 'assigned'.

TerriBull

I've just read in the DM online, apologies, for a source that sometimes skew the truth, most unacceptable, a bit like that other large, but conversely well respected news outlet the BBC who have known to do the same, but for the right reasons, of course. Anyway moving on, some may remember the case of the nurse who was suspended for calling a transgender paedophile "Mr" who incidentally racially abused her, never mind, seems that's not as important as her not using the convicted paedophile's preferred pronouns.

Jennifer Melle who has already been disciplined by St Hellier Hospital in Carshalton, Surrey for her offence could now be sacked for speaking out about her ordeal. Having also been referred to the Nursing and Midwifery Council as a potential risk for allegedly breaching its conduct policy, which states that nurses should not express the truth their beliefs to people in an inappropriate way. This senior nurse of 12 years experience, had the indignity of being escorted from the premises during her shift and immediately suspended for speaking out about her treatment. She told the Mail on Sunday "I am devastated to have been suspended for whistle blowing, despite being the one placed at risk, I am the one being punished" She now faces a disciplinary hearing with her employer where she will be informed of the action against her which could mean she loses her job.

Why are people not out protesting in the streets about these ludicrous, frankly loony, decisions and demanding that those responsible for her suspension and possible sacking should be the ones who are fired?

🤬

I despair that common sense - and any biological education - seems to have completely disappeared.

Cossy

Ilovecheese

What does "lived as a woman" mean?

It means “she” lived her life as if she was female? I’m not sure what you mean, Rose dressed as a woman, had a woman’s name, in their head they were female?

But at the same time tried to get their partner pregnant?

I'm not sure that living as a female includes that criterion.

I like to use 'observed' at birth, because that's exactly what happens. Given that babies can be sexed while in utero, and most parents these days opt to know the sex of their unborn child, there is absolutely no 'assigning' to be done.

Magenta8

I am going to make myself very unpopular with when say what I think.

My understanding is that Rose had been using the women's changing room since 2019 and it was only in 2023 that a small group of nurses decided that it was an offence to their dignity as women to have to share a changing room with a trans male.

Rose strongly denies that she looked at the women in a creepy way. Incidentally, do they mind sharing a changing room with lesbians who might look at them while they change?

I find many examples of the way trans men trample on women's rights very offensive, for instance wishing to compete against women in sports.

On the face of it I find it hard to summon up a great deal of sympathy for the Victorian sensitivities of these snowflake nurses.

.Wouldn't call the nurses snowflakes personally - it takes guts to stand up for a principle, & it wasn't a foregone conclusion they would win the case.

However it's sad that some on here are spreading aspersions against Rose's behaviour, the tribunal was at pains to state that she had done nothing wrong & hadn't looked at anyone in a creepy way. She probably did all she could to violate their privacy as little as possible.

I think those statements were born out of a desire to feel as though they had a strong case, & weren't transphobic, & some of the nurses exaggerated by "remembering" feeling looked at when in fact there was no basis for that.

We are in a much better position than we were 2 years ago with this issue. This result only reinforces it. But I wish people wouldn't repeat some of the allegations that came up in the hearing & were found to be untrue, I find that either misguided or cruel.

Dickens

Galaxy

Again even the explanations are mired in sexism.

"sex assigned at birth"... (sigh)

Other than the atypical rare occasions where the ambiguity requires specialist evaluation, isn't sex noted at birth?

Maybe it's just a word-choice and means the same thing, however it can give the impression that biological sex is fluid - and can be 'assigned'.

Yes, exactly Dickens.

In fact, the criteria for deciding that a person is inter-sex has been proved to be fluid too. Some claim the number worldwide is 1.7% of the population, some even higher but most clinicians and medical experts dispute this and say that the figure is far lower, probably 0.017%
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12476264/

However it's sad that some on here are spreading aspersions against Rose's behaviour, the tribunal was at pains to state that she had done nothing wrong & hadn't looked at anyone in a creepy way. She probably did all she could to violate their privacy as little as possible.

A case of 'he said, she said'.

We weren't there and nor were members of the tribunal.

Living as a female and trying to get your partner pregnant?

That really endorses the lie that Rose wanted to be female!

Mollygo

Living as a female and trying to get your partner pregnant?

That really endorses the lie that Rose wanted to be female!

And some men, I'm sure, don't even realise that they may be making a woman feel uncomfortable by the way they look at them.

The fact remains, he has no right to be in there at all. Whether he stared, turned his back or whatever he did, women would feel uncomfortable changing in front of a man who was not their partner.

Mollygo

Living as a female and trying to get your partner pregnant?

That really endorses the lie that Rose wanted to be female!

... choosing the aspects of "living as a female" that suits.

Perhaps not so much 'living as a female' then, rather the patriarchy doing what it's always done - being the arbiter of what is and what isn't 'allowable' and overriding women in the process.

The only common defining factors I can think of as living as a female would be menstruation and at a later stage the menopause and how those phases affect individual women as to the symptoms. Everything else is variable.

Rose was doing something wrong simply be being in a female spaces, I view any man who does that as dangerous, they don't believe in women's consent. I also view those who enable men like Rose as cruel and partly to blame.

TerriBull

The only common defining factors I can think of as living as a female would be menstruation and at a later stage the menopause and how those phases affect individual women as to the symptoms. Everything else is variable.

I remember a young woman on TV who said she had been born without a woman.
She was most definitely female.

It is chromosomes which define male and female and a very, very few people may have a mix of sex chromosomes. Most of those would not realise anyway.

woman
No. Autocorrect again.

Womb.

TerriBull

The only common defining factors I can think of as living as a female would be menstruation and at a later stage the menopause and how those phases affect individual women as to the symptoms. Everything else is variable.

Well said.

Allira

Mollygo

Living as a female and trying to get your partner pregnant?

That really endorses the lie that Rose wanted to be female!

And some men, I'm sure, don't even realise that they may be making a woman feel uncomfortable by the way they look at them.

The fact remains, he has no right to be in there at all. Whether he stared, turned his back or whatever he did, women would feel uncomfortable changing in front of a man who was not their partner.

Well, presumably Rose felt uncomfortable changing in the "Mens" & asked the Trust what alternative provision there was. They had said that the appropriate thing to do was to use the "Womens". So its a bit unfair to say Rose had no right to be there when that was where her managers had told her to change.

The Trust was at fault here, and no wonder given some of the nonsense that was current at the time. But they should have used more commonsense when dealing with staff who were genuinely stressed about sharing the changing room, rather than disciplining them for sharing their concerns.

The situation was in no way Rose's fault. I believe that some people are inherently transgender & that must be a lonely path to tread, I would not want them to have to hide their gender from society becasue it doesn't match their biological sex. Allowing trans women in single sex spaces is all very well in an ideal world, but it does compromise womens' rights in the real world, where a manipulative minority could use the trans label to get access to those spaces and endanger women.

Transwoman have been around for a very long time. How did they manage to exist without upsetting women.

It's a recent development for some transwoman to become a nuisance to biological women demanding women make way for them. A very male trait in my view.
It must also be irritating to those transwoman who do not want to cause problems for women and live their lives mindful of not distressing others.

AGAA4

Transwoman have been around for a very long time. How did they manage to exist without upsetting women.

It's a recent development for some transwoman to become a nuisance to biological women demanding women make way for them. A very male trait in my view.
It must also be irritating to those transwoman who do not want to cause problems for women and live their lives mindful of not distressing others.

Well said.

Cossy

Lathyrus3

Another thing we have to challenge is the conflation of trans with gay.

And the using of examples of gay experiences in discussing trans issues. They are not valid.

The LGBT+ was always a conflation.

No figures re crimes, particularly crimes of a sexual or violent nature are valid so there is no point referring to them.
Not until the misrecording of male crimes as female is rectified.

They are completely valid when talking about “discrimination” which always rears its head whenever trans are discussed.

Given that they form under 1% of our current population it’s quite likely that it is not them committing sexual and violent crimes against women.

It is not valid to compare discrimination of one group with a completely different group because the root causes of discrimination will be different, the nature of the discrimination will be different and the impact c the discrimination will be different.

To group two completely different groups under the same umbrella was always nonsensical, but was politically and financially expedient for the declining Stonewall, whose aims in the country had largely been achieved.

It was always a cynical ploy and one that has caused a great deal of distress and persecution within the Lesbian and Gay communities they still purport to represent.

Calling on Gay experience to validate trans experience simply reveals that the trans lobby lack their own validation.