Yet again, a woman asks for something and her motives, her background, even whether she is telling the truth are questioned. It's depressing.
We don't know the facts of this case (and I hope the investigation happens quickly) but the bare bones of what happened seem to be that a patient asked a private hospital to ensure that she would be treated in a female environment, or at least that the staff treating her would be female. She paid her money on that basis, so a contract was in place, yet her wishes were disrespected.
The case was picked up by the media, and the response is to jump to the conclusion that the woman was wrong to ask in the first place, that she must be prejudiced at best and racist at worst (??) that she may well be lying about her motives (implying that the general public has a right to question her motives) and the sympathy goes straight to the male-bodied nurse who decided to ignore the wishes that the patient had requested and paid for.
The point, which stands despite the misogynist attempts to discredit the woman and make assumptions about her motives, is that she asked for something that the hospital agreed to (and either took or was prepared to take her money for providing), but her wishes were over-ruled. The hospital clearly didn't consider her wishes unreasonable - if they had they needn't have agreed to them.
I mean- I don't get it. I have never had any doubt about my sexuality, even if I grew up with boys and was a bit of a tom boy. But female I am, through and through.
Fleurpepper, your sexuality and the games you played as a child are unconnected. As is the fact that you had male relatives or friends. You are female through and through because you have female gametes. If you didn't, you would be male. There is no in-between.
As to whether someone would 'get away with' posing as a member of the opposite sex if they looked more 'natural' in the role - well yes, they probably would. But that is the point! Transwomen are not women. They are transwomen. The vast majority do not pose a threat to women (or men for that matter). But unless you believe that women should have no right to decide for themselves who touches them and no right to refuse to allow men to touch them intimately that differentiation is fundamental. Your niece can go about her lawful business as she pleases, but she is not a woman, as she was born with male gametes. She can pursue the vast majority of professions, but care needs to be taken when it comes to those few that involve intimate contact with women when they are vulnerable. Not all women will be concerned about contact with male-bodied people, which is fine, but those who are should have their wishes respected. Surely someone who finds so-called 'gender' norms important enough to want to change their whole life because of how they 'feel' will understand that so do many women, and that some of those women will not want intimate contact with male-bodied people they don't know? And that their reasons for this are not for others to question. They feel as they do, and that should be enough.
Oh, and can we please stop generalisations about lesbians? Lesbianism is about sexuality, and as such lesbians are as different from one another as straight people, gay men or any other group. It really doesn't matter if any poster is gay, straight, bi or anything else - we can all use speak for ourselves when it comes to sexuality. Trying to play trump cards is pointless.
