the law as it stands on sex

CIS woman with capital letters could stand for “Can’t Identify Sex” women.
CIS women for me are those who are unable to acknowledge that sex is immutable.
For those who wish to flaunt their maleness in places and occasions where they’re not entitled to be, claiming to be women, CIS is a great appellation.
For me, I’m fine with biological female, natal woman or biological woman.

Wouldn’t it be good if the discrimination against biological females, natal women or biological women could be ruled out by CIS women with as much enthusiasm as the CIS women apply to transwomen?

Galaxy

No thanks Trisher. I feel the women campaigning to retain single sex spaces are doing ok so far, dont think they need that kind of advice on strategy.

Single sex spaces still exist Galaxy they are protected by law. But I am constantly being told the law isn't being applied properly, if that is so no amount of campaigning will ensure it is always applied properly.Identify as cis-woman, ask for a cis-woman, no danger of any mistake or any transwoman appearing. What's more important anti-trans campaigning or protecting women?

Mollygo

CIS woman with capital letters could stand for “Can’t Identify Sex” women.
CIS women for me are those who are unable to acknowledge that sex is immutable.
For those who wish to flaunt their maleness in places and occasions where they’re not entitled to be, claiming to be women, CIS is a great appellation.
For me, I’m fine with biological female, natal woman or biological woman.

Wouldn’t it be good if the discrimination against biological females, natal women or biological women could be ruled out by CIS women with as much enthusiasm as the CIS women apply to transwomen?

I don't agree with discrimination on any grounds Mollygo It's one of the reasons I dislike the posts on here, because they say things which encourage discrimination and that feeds hatred, which leads to violence.

Actually we seem to be doing ok thanks for your concerns trisher, still some way to go but sports prisons etc have responded to the campaigns so not going to change tactics now. Thanks though.

Oh and cis women seems to mean (although correct me if I am wrong, its frequently a moveable feast) that your gender identity aligns with your sex. I think gender is oppressive and damaging to women (and men) and relies on sterotypes so its not someyhing I want to use.

I'll return to my question way up thread which no-one seems to be able to answer.

At what point does the penis not require penetration into orifices or substitute orifices, such as a hand, for sexual stimulation and satisfaction?

As a possessor of an orifice designed by nature for the job it is important to me to know when an active penis has been rendered inactive and therefore not subject to the whims, vagaries and unknown agenda of a possessor of attached, fully operational penis - PAFOP.

I've checked the requirements needed for a GRC - yet another acronym - and it seems that just by saying, as a PAFOP you intend to transition to a non fully operational penis, that is enough to get you a certificate.

So, again, down to trust.

A GRC really isn't worth the paper it's printed on if it's based on evidence as flimsy as someone's word.

That is my view too, Galaxy.

I would also like to say that I can’t speak from experience here. I have never been in a situation where I have been raped and then presented with a transwoman wanting to examine me. Like so many of the situations described on these threads it is (fortunately) still the sort of thing that is likely to happen rarely. In any case, even if I had been in that situation and not cared that the examining doctor was male-bodied, that would not give me the right to make that decision for others. Just as the people on this thread (who, I assume- forgive me - are also talking hypothetically about whether or not they would mind in those specific circumstances) have no right to force their own feelings onto others.

As a woman, though, I have enough empathy to know that there is a good chance that I wouldn’t be comfortable with it, and my point is that (regardless of what I personally would do) I feel that women should have the right to make a choice.

Not to have to weigh up whether the doctor in front of her is likely to have a penis. Not to have to even think about that. Not to have to pluck up the courage to challenge the situation- to know who to speak to, to risk the embarrassment of being wrong, to add to the trauma she is already suffering, but to be respected when she asks for a female doctor, if that is what she would prefer.

Why is that so hard (for ‘some people’) to understand, or if they do understand, why would they not afford a fellow woman that respect? Why is her trauma less important than the potential embarrassment of a trans doctor who has chosen (out of all the medical specialties available) to go into gynaecology and work for the police?

Cross posted, Nannee - not ignoring you. Fair question. You won’t get an answer though- we still haven’t been told what ‘presenting as a woman’ means.

VioletSky

I will ignore the barbs for sake of an important problem with your answer

If a person has a GRC (gender Recognition Certificate) then they will be legally female and their workplace will likely have polices in effect that protect that.

So your problem is not resolved.

It also means I can't answer your followup question Rosie

Now, I do think that your medical or mental health needs matter more than your fears or concerns about trans people. Although of course I an emergency situation you wouldn't be in a position to do much about it unless you get it inscribed on some sort of braclett... Although I would hope they would save your life rather than respect that...

So anyway, how are you going to resolve your issues at the doctors surgery *under the laws, legislations and equalirlty protections we have now*

Of course you won't answer my question VS you thought your second question was a gotcha.

So what you're telling me, and you're quite happy with, is that I can be deceived by a transwoman at will. Fine, perhaps we'll have to adopt a policy of asking to be examined by a biological female, although no doubt you're already working on a way around that.

Now, I do think that your medical or mental health needs matter more than your fears or concerns about trans people. Although of course I an emergency situation you wouldn't be in a position to do much about it unless you get it inscribed on some sort of braclett... Although I would hope they would save your life rather than respect that... You are being deliberately offensive, I see through you and I'm certain others do too. I do not fear transwomen, for an intimate examination I would prefer a female (biological sex, not legal fiction) doctor. I've already said in an emergency you don't request your doctor and have confirmed being seen by a male gynaecologist, when I gave informed consent. I do not need any sort of bracelet, and I think you're being dishonest and very unkind in the way you're responding.

This scenario was presented as a theoretical situation, which might be even more important to a woman of certain faiths and cultures. Do you think maybe you are racist or even an antisemite because you don't care about their concerns and are taking glee in saying there is no resolution?

If some are of the opinion that a TW is a woman, then maybe you're right Rosie and in certain circumstances we should specify 'biological female'.

I would not expect to be presented with a TW if I specifically requested a woman/female which is why I posted earlier (yesterday!!) about the importance of language.

If common sense prevailed, and everyone accepted that a man can never be a woman, then we wouldn't have this potential problem would we.

I, fortunately, have never been sexually assaulted in any way, nor have I (thankfully) ever needed a women's refuge. I was involved with refuges, through work, but have no personal experience.

However, I saw how traumatised some of those women were, after fleeing violence - some of it horrendous. Many had been raped by their partners. It was a biological female environment for a good reason. And places like that need to stay that way.

I had a brilliant male gynaecologist - he delivered my daughter, and (10 years later) performed my hysterectomy. I trusted him with my life, no problems at all.

He presented as a middle aged man, he was a man - no confusion there. He examined me intimately on many occasions, with no concerns from me.

But, I would say that the basis of any good patient/medic relationship is trust.

If I felt that I was being misled or lied to about the gender of whoever was examining, that trust, for me, would be gone.

Galaxy

Oh and cis women seems to mean (although correct me if I am wrong, its frequently a moveable feast) that your gender identity aligns with your sex. I think gender is oppressive and damaging to women (and men) and relies on sterotypes so its not someyhing I want to use.

Hang on don't you want to use trans for transwomen? That means your gender has changed doesn't it? So if it's OK to use trans which refers to gender why isn't it OK to use cis?

Very similar experience of a male gynaecologist DL. I saw him throughout my first pregnancy although he didn't deliver DS, but he did perform my hysterectomy.

I knew I was being attended by a male and that's the point isn't it.

I didnt decide on the term trans trisher I dont have that power. I believe gender is a range of stereptypes and expectations of women (and men) causes lots of damage. Not sure how else I am supposed to express this. I dont believe what you believe.

VioletSky

I find calling trans people a man in a dress offensive but I don't cry about it

But I'd don't have the right to police it others and neither do you

It has literally no meaning other than this side

I have also seen its use ignored when posters like Elegran use it so there is no weight behind claiming offense I'm afraid so I'd let that one go reallyb

Violetsky I used the term "cis women" very reluctantly (and I said so in the post) because I wanted what I was saying in that post to be absolutely clear to those who are pushing that term. Rather like saying bow-wow to a toddler because that is their word for "dog".
Grown-ups understand that "woman" means "adult female human" and the extra "cis" is not needed. That is not denigrating "trans women", who need the "trans" because they are men. Being men isn't a crime, so they should have no need to deny it.

Exactly Smileless it's all about informed consent. 'Some people' seem to think that deceit and deception should be acceptable in medical practice, and actually take delight in that.

Well here’s a thing.
I trust everyone on here except VioletSky and trisher.
I find them creepy manipulative and misogynistic. They are playing, winding up and embarrassingly think they are clever. But I have met some very inspiring women on this thread. Thank goodness.

grannygranby

Well here’s a thing.
I trust everyone on here except VioletSky and trisher.
I find them creepy manipulative and misogynistic. They are playing, winding up and embarrassingly think they are clever. But I have met some very inspiring women on this thread. Thank goodness.

Thanks grannygranby calling others names because they don't agree with you seems to be the only way the gender critical on here can manage to justify the hate and distrust they spread. Probably for the most unthinkingly but non the less dangerously.
I find views which would punish one section of society because of the actions of a few people dangerous and worrying.
I find people who don't acknowledge a law that exists and who see the actions of a few activists as representative of a whole dangerous and worrying.
I find people who spread hatred and division dangerous and worrying.
If that's creepy, manipulative and mysoginistic well I share these beliefs with some very eminent people. So I'll stick with them.

Galaxy

I didnt decide on the term trans trisher I dont have that power. I believe gender is a range of stereptypes and expectations of women (and men) causes lots of damage. Not sure how else I am supposed to express this. I dont believe what you believe.

This is why I get confused by the posts about fears of women not being able to wear front-fastening jeans, or being examined/questioned if they 'present' in what is assumed to be a masculine way.

Either you see those things as important, or you don't.

I also see 'gender' as a purely social construct, and couldn't care less if women wear jeans or men wear pink or whatever. If we are bringing in experiences from our respective youths, I was a teen in the 70s, when so-called 'gender-bending' was mainstream. Bowie, Sweet, the New York Dolls, (the list goes on) were popular idols, and it gave way to punk, which was built around Equal Ops shocking of the older generation. Then New Romantics carried on with Adam Ant and other pretty boys in frilly shirts. It's no big deal, and hasn't been for 50 years or more.

Trans ideology is not about breaking down sartorial gender norms, as that is old (bipperty bopperty) hat. It is about reversing the path of feminism, which has broken down so many gender norms. Women work, and (as individuals) get equal pay for equal work. Men often look after children (some don't even see it as 'babysitting' ) and share, rather than 'help with' the housework. There is still a long way to go, but women have made strides since men wouldn't be seen pushing a pram in case their masculinity was doubted.

Why turn all of that back and insist that someone 'presenting as' a sex can't be doing so as a member of the opposite one? How is that progress?

No they just hold different views to you granny and thats ok. I dont really trust anyone on the internet and I dont expect anyone to trust me. I could be princess anne for all anyone knows.

I would concur grannygranby. I'm frequently astonished by the sheer level of intelligence, research and knowledge that most of the contributors on this subject have shared here. They check their sources carefully before posting and stick to scientific facts to support their views instead of deviating off down rabbit holes of obfuscation, whataboutery and passive aggressive platitudes of being kind whilst actually being anything but.

trisher, please explain what you mean by 'the gender critical on here' spreading hate?

That is one hell of an accusation, isn't it?

Galaxy

No they just hold different views to you granny and thats ok. I dont really trust anyone on the internet and I dont expect anyone to trust me. I could be princess anne for all anyone knows.

Truth

Enough to think about here without looking for meanings that aren't there in everything...

You are always direct... Easy, we don't agree but that's ok

I'm not so direct because I'm trying to be polite.... Consistently reading my words twisted and being insulted doesn't make for a comfortable discussion where I can safely talk as myself.

Shouldn't have to overthink what I say.

Thank you for not participating in creating that sort of environment

I find views which would punish one section of society because of the actions of a few people dangerous and worrying

What I can’t understand is how the people posting that sentiment don’t see that it applies if you use ‘actual’ words.

I find views which would punish females because of the actions of a few people dangerous and worrying.

But because it’s not protecting trans, they feel it doesn’t apply.

The same poster put, “I don't agree with discrimination on any grounds Mollygo.
It's one of the reasons I dislike the posts on here, because they say things which encourage discrimination and that feeds hatred, which leads to violence.”

Again, the claims of discrimination apply equally to the way females are being treated and it is the TRA who are responsible for most of the current violence.

things which encourage discrimination and that feeds hatred, which leads to violence.

My concerns are about the hatred and violence perpetrated or threatened bt TRA and by a few transwomen like Karen White or Veronica Ivy or the other transwomen who claim to be women simply in order to access female safe places in order to harm AHF women.
I do discriminate against them and I’m willing to admit it.

Saying you dislike discrimination and violence if you only apply it to the group you support and deny it by words or actions for the group under attack by the people you support makes a nonsense if your claims.

VS I'm not so direct because I'm trying to be polite.... Consistently reading my words twisted and being insulted doesn't make for a comfortable discussion where I can safely talk as myself.
really? No reply to my post earlier this morning? Not even an apology for repeating again your ridiculous assertion that I 'fear' transwomen? And as for the bracelet suggestion...........

I do think you should examine your conscience as to why you don't think even religious or cultural obligations for a woman not to be intimately touched by a man she's not married to aren't worthy of respect. It does present as racial and religious prejudice.