Coming out as transgender

But the question "Can a woman have a penis?" is not without subtle undercurrents.

Most people would answer no, a woman can't have a penis. I suspect. But does that mean that people with gender dysphoria who in day to day life are indistinguishable from the opposite sex should be made to use the toilets of the sex that do not identify as? Even if they present as a woman and dress that way? Should they have to use the Gents?

The politicians who are not answering this in a way that is as straightforward as you think they should, are not stupid, and they are not anti-women, generally. They understand that there is a lot more to this than just "Can a woman have a penis".

So, is answering the question the way you want more important that ruining the economy?

Also politicians who are lying and they are lying (as everyone can see) isnt something we want more of.

Toilets can be solved easily and anyone has been involved in this know that its prisons refuges sport crime statistics that are the issue. We dont segregate those places by how people dress (who cares) we segregate by sex.

So the 6-word question that everyone is being urged to ask is naïve then, isn't it? Reducing such a complicated and important topic to a yes/no answer is disingenuous.

Still nobody saying that they'd sacrifice the economy for this, I see.

Even if they present as a woman and dress that way? what does this mean? I'm a woman, how do I ensure I'm presenting as a woman? How do women dress? Is there a uniform I've not been party to? Who decided the standards for 'present as a woman and dress that way' Nobody consulted me or any woman I know.

As Galaxy says toilets are easily addressed, it's all other areas where single sex is required that are the minefields. When the mantra is transwomen are women then transwomen are expected to be allowed access to women (female) only spaces. And yes we know the law allows for some restrictions but if organisations are too frightened of being labelled transphobic, or if they have believed Stonewall's interpretation of the EA, then it doesn't happen.
In my area my vote wouldn't matter however cast, we're a safe seat so I may spoil my ballot paper for the first time in my life unless we get an independent who I feel I can vote for. I don't care they wouldn't stand a chance of being elected it would cast my vote in a positive way.

So, is answering the question the way you want more important that ruining the economy?

It's not about answering 'the way I want', and it's not a binary choice between being honest about sex and ruining the economy. I would like the person I vote for to understand biological differences, to be able to balance female rights and trans rights, and to be able to 'not ruin' the economy.

The answers I would like to hear would be along the lines of 'No, a woman can't have a penis, but a transwoman can, and both women and transwomen have rights. The challenge is to balance those rights, and we intend to carry out a full review by X date with a remit to . . .'

and

When it comes to the economy, we will renationalise transport and utilities, and build X number of social housing which will come with guarantees that they will not be sold.

or similar.

I know that they are not yes/no answers, but the first answer is a qualified no, and the second (about ruining the economy) wasn't a question, so that was more difficult.

In my area my vote wouldn't matter however cast, we're a safe seat so I may spoil my ballot paper for the first time in my life unless we get an independent who I feel I can vote for. I don't care they wouldn't stand a chance of being elected it would cast my vote in a positive way.

Doesn't answer my question though.

Is it more important that a politician says women can't have penises, than protecting the NHS and giving places to Ukrainian refugees?

Its not naive. Wes Streeting answered it quite competently the other day I thought. If you change the definition of women to include men dont be surprised if people ask questions about that. If you are unable to answer those questions it might be worth thinking about whether there might be issues about the idea that has been put forward that you can 'change sex'.

Cross post Doodledog.

I have answered yours question I said labour for example shouldnt have touched the subject. Monumental stupidity. They surely saw what happened in other political parties with regards to this.

OK, we're getting somewhere.

So what we want politicians to say is quite complicated, it's what DoodleDog wrote. But the way that the debate is presented, in the Daily Mail of all places, is "CAN WOMEN HAVE PENISES? COME ON, TELL ME NOW!!! YES OR NO!!^

I have seen on this site, people writing things such as "its only the big hairy men who want to transition." or "Keep out of my space if you've got dangly bits, or I'll come for you" Paraphrasing, but only just.

So when some people talk about phobia, and bigotry, its again naïve to protest that there is none of this going on. Because we see it every day. All trans people get lumped in the same group, portrayed as predatory old men after our children. And is it any wonder that people just trying to get on with their lives feel discriminated against and at risk?

Doesn't answer my question though.

Is it more important that a politician says women can't have penises, than protecting the NHS and giving places to Ukrainian refugees?
No of course it's not! I shan't be voting Tory OK? What's important is that a politician acknowledges there are conflicts of interest and that women (females) need certain protections. Are you saying that protecting the safety of women and girls is the lowest priority of all for you? You haven't answered the questions in the first part of my previous post, any chance you could?

Some posters would be berating you for demanding answers, luckily I'm not one of them

You have never heard me say any of those things so maybe you could stop 'lumping people into a group' too. Sone of the worst homophobia and racism I have seen has been by some who argue TWAW . There is bigotry everywhere. I think telling women that their sex is unimportant is bigotry to be honest.
I dont think wanting single sex spaces is bigotry, in fact I think taking those spaces away is misogyny.

DiamondLily

Whatever MPs, and Johnson, think about transgender, it looks as though they are going to have to nail their colours to one of the masts soon.

Three biological women, female activists seem to starting an organisation/movement insisting that they say, before votes are cast.

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-10674135/Three-women-launch-significant-female-movement-Suffragettes.html

As this is posted here again I make no excuse for the same comment. A woman's movement created by an ex Tory councillor and an ex company director who dragged in a heroine of the gender critical to give them street cred. The Tories must be seriously worried. Basically it comes down to this which is worse a few women with penises, or poverty and starvation,which is what many in the UK are facing now.

Rosie51

^Doesn't answer my question though.^

Is it more important that a politician says women can't have penises, than protecting the NHS and giving places to Ukrainian refugees?
No of course it's not! I shan't be voting Tory OK? What's important is that a politician acknowledges there are conflicts of interest and that women (females) need certain protections. Are you saying that protecting the safety of women and girls is the lowest priority of all for you? You haven't answered the questions in the first part of my previous post, any chance you could?

Some posters would be berating you for demanding answers, luckily I'm not one of them

Its OK, I'm not being personal.

Even if they present as a woman and dress that way? what does this mean? I'm a woman, how do I ensure I'm presenting as a woman? How do women dress? Is there a uniform I've not been party to? Who decided the standards for 'present as a woman and dress that way' Nobody consulted me or any woman I know. Somebody who most people would look at and think was a woman? Who might feel vulnerable going into a men's toilet?

Are you saying that protecting the safety of women and girls is the lowest priority of all for you? That standard of debate doesn't even merit an answer.

I suspect many having voted in the shower now in charge are desperately finding another reason why they will vote for them again,
We could look at what the Tories have done for women in the past and which party has really fought for women's rights.

Galaxy

You have never heard me say any of those things so maybe you could stop 'lumping people into a group' too. Sone of the worst homophobia and racism I have seen has been by some who argue TWAW . There is bigotry everywhere. I think telling women that their sex is unimportant is bigotry to be honest.
I dont think wanting single sex spaces is bigotry, in fact I think taking those spaces away is misogyny.

No Galaxy, I've never see anything like that from you or most of the other people here. But I have seen it from a significant minority.

So protestations of how other people are bigoted too doesn't negate the fact that there are people who are bigoted about trans women. And straw men arguments about me not caring about women's safety (which I know wasn't you) don't help the cause either. It makes the people making the comments look extreme, and not very tolerant.

So a little bit of acceptance that some of those who are concerned about single sex spaces and all the rest of it can also be bigots and make negative assumptions about people, wouldn't go amiss.

Are you saying that protecting the safety of women and girls is the lowest priority of all for you? That standard of debate doesn't even merit an answer.

Pot. Kettle. Black. Given this was your question to me
Is it more important that a politician says women can't have penises, than protecting the NHS and giving places to Ukrainian refugees? Come on!

Quite. Last time the excuse was 'Anyone but Corbyn.' I wonder what the excuse will be this time? Oh yes, 'I can't vote for someone that things TWAW.'

Ad infinitum.

Yes thats right trisher we are all tories.
You arent debating though volver you are mostly just shouting bigot. As I pointed out toilets are easily solved, mixed sex and single sex. Or individual cubicles enclosed with sinks. I always find it interesting that the debate is pulled back to toilets and the tricky issues of prisons sport etc etc that people ignore.

Sorry volver I cross posted there and didnt see your response. That goes both ways as I have said I have seen bigotry go both ways.

I take back 'you arent debating' I didnt see ypur post

Galaxy

You have never heard me say any of those things so maybe you could stop 'lumping people into a group' too. Sone of the worst homophobia and racism I have seen has been by some who argue TWAW . There is bigotry everywhere. I think telling women that their sex is unimportant is bigotry to be honest.
I dont think wanting single sex spaces is bigotry, in fact I think taking those spaces away is misogyny.

Agreed, Galaxy. 100%.

I object to being assumed to be bigoted, and to the assumption that I hold reactionary views straight out of 'gammon' central casting. I don't. I am concerned about women losing rights and agency, and believe that the rights of transwomen are in danger of eclipsing the rights of women. I would like to see a dialogue about this, but every time I try (or see others try) there are screams of 'transphobia', or snide and unpleasant digs and insinuations.

I have never felt that transpeople are akin to predatory old men, and I strongly object to the insinuation that I might think that. In fact, I am utterly sick of the bigotry and lack of nuance in the posts of TRAs on here who fling about accusations of homophobia, racism and so on with absolutely no justification. It's lazy, ignorant and baseless.

I do my best to remain calm in these discussions, even though I am bored of saying the same thing to the same people over and over, but right now I feel like lying down in a darkened room.

How often do we have to say that we are not transphobic?? That we know and care about transpeople? That it is not transpeople who are the issue, but the TRAs who push into women's spaces, take over women's roles, dominate women's events and so on?? That the trans cause is harmed, not helped by the so-called 'allies' who tell us to 'be kind' and accuse us of holding offensive and unconscionable views that we have spent our lives opposing??

I am now going to the bottom of the garden to bang my head against the wall. Apologies if this post has covered or ignored things that others said whilst I was typing it.

And let's be absolutely clear about this. It is a class and privilege issue because women earning less are still earning less. Although the number of women sitting in board rooms has increased. If you want to do something for women get them decent part time pay
Around 25% of female employees had hourly pay below the voluntary living wage rate (as set by the Living Wage Foundation) at April 2020, compared to 18% of male employees. At April 2020, the living wage was £10.75 for people working in London and £9.50 for those working outside of London.11
The Resolution Foundation reports that 57% of low paid employees in 2020 were women, and women, particularly those working part-time, have therefore been the biggest beneficiaries of a recent reduction in low pay. The proportion of women working part-time in low pay fell by 7% between 2019 and 2020.12
researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06838/SN06838.pdf

Rosie51, do you understand how arguments work? Debate, that kind of thing?

The 3 women are asking the penis question. There are people on here saying that they could never vote for a party that doesn't know what a woman is. So I think my question is justified. If someone won't vote for a party who they say doesn't know what a woman is, will they then vote for a party that says they do know what a woman is but sorry, we're going to sell off the NHS?

Because while transgender rights are very important, having a working economy and an NHS that is fit for purpose is important too, too important to be sacrificed to the Culture Wars.

You don't have to answer. Just be aware what the silence implies.