Coming out as transgender

What's "respect my sex if you want my X" got to do with the Tories in particular trisher? It cuts across all parties for me.
It seems a bit like you're using the nastiness of the Tory party in an validation of your point ie the women behind this movement are nasty Tories so don't give it any credence. Or have I got it wrong?

Doodledog

How often do I have to say that I'm not lumping everybody together, but lots of people are?

I have justification for the things I write, because they've been posted here on this site by other posters. So, frankly, stop pretending we're picking on you and see what others are writing. Then we might have a proper conversation.

Galaxy

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.

Perhaps because people don't really want answers like transgender wings in prisons- which are being set up.
Or a proper process for women's sport which doesn't discriminate against natal women.
Nobody who supports transrights has said there aren't problems but the gender critical don't want to listen to solutions.
There are an awful lot of right wingers on GN. You may not be one but some are and some just don't want to see Labour in power, so any excuse is latched onto.

Nannee49

What's "respect my sex if you want my X" got to do with the Tories in particular trisher? It cuts across all parties for me.
It seems a bit like you're using the nastiness of the Tory party in an validation of your point ie the women behind this movement are nasty Tories so don't give it any credence. Or have I got it wrong?

Look whose running the campaign linked to and then answer this question
What have the Tories ever done for women?
Far more important than the possibility of a penis on someone who looks like a woman.

I acknowledge your posts Galaxy, thank you.

It always amuses me when the gender critical come out with "how does a woman present" ? Or "I don't want to be identified by the way I dress" but also post "transwomen are easily identified" "transwomen look like men in a dress". Isn't there a little conflict between the two points of view?

volver

*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.

You don't have to answer. Just be aware what the silence implies. wow, I really don't know what to say to that, it feels threatening? intimidating? bullying?

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? I don't know what people would do in that situation, and neither do you, although I doubt any politician of any hue would be honest enough to say anything so clearly. I think most people are more intelligent and reasonable than you're giving them credit for.
Transgender rights are important and should be equal to any other human's rights. The problem occurs where transgender rights come into conflict with other groups. Whose rights take priority? There can't always be compromise. A single sex space cannot allow compromise. As soon as you allow male people, no matter how they present into a single female sex area it has become mixed sex. For the vast majority of places or aspects of life etc it matters not one jot. For those few areas where it does matter, health and criminal statistics are two such areas which are less frequently mentioned in the media, it needs to be strictly adhered to.
Obviously the economy, NHS, education, social justice are the most important aspects of government. I think the question about a penis is unnecessarily framed, but it is true that what you can't define you can't defend.
You said in an earlier post that it wasn't personal to me, yet you've made this post very personal. I won't vote Tory, LibDem or Green. I'm struggling with some aspects of Labour, if I don't vote Labour it will be a spoiled ballot paper or an independent who inspires me (if one is standing in my constituency)

Because pretending we cant generally identify sex is a lie. Nothing to do with clothes or presentation. If you look at someone who presents in a stereotypically female way at times, say greyson perry I am able to identify his sex. I dont have a superpower, most people have this ability.

And as I said before, I live in a safe seat, my vote wouldn't make a difference in the outcome.

I've already said it's a cross-party issue for me trisher.
Being perfectly capable of evaluating a movement myself, I'm in no need of your semantics and obfuscation as to whether or not these women are blue, red or sky blue pink with a finny haddy border.
Nor reminding "what have the Tories ever done for women?" like a bad Monty Python sketch.

I want all political parties to be respectful of my rights and sensibilities as a woman and to be shown to be so.

So, frankly, stop pretending we're picking on you and see what others are writing. Then we might have a proper conversation.

I'm not pretending anything. I am careful to speak for myself, and not lump all so-called 'gender critical' people together, is all. Perhaps you might stop telling me my motives? Then we might be able to have a conversation.

I'm sure that others will be equally sick of the lazy and inaccurate assumptions made against us, but will leave it to them to say so if they want to.

I don't know what people would do in that situation, and neither do you

I agree. That's why I'm asking

I'm not invested in how you personally vote Rosie51, so you don't need to keep telling m based on party lines. But whether you like it or not, there are a significant number of people who say they would never vote for a party that doesn't know what a woman is. So my questing is valid; does that take priority over everything else? Would people subsume any concerns about the economy, or the NHS, or defence, because of this one issue? Do people think its that important? Perfectly reasonable question.

Doodledog

*So, frankly, stop pretending we're picking on you and see what others are writing. Then we might have a proper conversation.*

I'm not pretending anything. I am careful to speak for myself, and not lump all so-called 'gender critical' people together, is all. Perhaps you might stop telling me my motives? Then we might be able to have a conversation.

I'm sure that others will be equally sick of the lazy and inaccurate assumptions made against us, but will leave it to them to say so if they want to.

I'm sure that others will be equally sick of the lazy and inaccurate assumptions made against us, but will leave it to them to say so if they want to.

There are people on this site who make comments that, if they were transferred to other minority groups, would be instantly identifiable as hate speech, or at the very least discrimination. I have mentioned two above.

So, protestations about how you're all the victims of false accusations don't cut it. Instead of making it all about you, acknowledge that there are transphobic people. It's really not that hard.

So my questing is valid; does that take priority over everything else? For most, probably not. In combination with any other concerns they may have it could be a tipping point.

Theoretical question. Why should any woman vote for any party that can't define what a woman is and has no interest in securing her rights or protections, and furthermore describes her as a bigot, dinosaur and worse for thinking they should view her concerns as valid? You don't have to answer but...............

Nannee49

I've already said it's a cross-party issue for me trisher.
Being perfectly capable of evaluating a movement myself, I'm in no need of your semantics and obfuscation as to whether or not these women are blue, red or sky blue pink with a finny haddy border.
Nor reminding "what have the Tories ever done for women?" like a bad Monty Python sketch.

I want all political parties to be respectful of my rights and sensibilities as a woman and to be shown to be so.

How is it semantics or obfuscation if one of the women was a Tory councillor and one of the others was a director of 3 companies? Are you suggesting I made it up? Or that these women are not likely to have Tory sympathies?
Their claiming connections to the suffragettes is interesting but perhaps unintentionally revealing. The suffragettes managed to get votes for middle class women in 1918. Working class women didn't have the right to vote until 1928
plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

Rosie51

^So my questing is valid; does that take priority over everything else?^ For most, probably not. In combination with any other concerns they may have it could be a tipping point.

Theoretical question. Why should any woman vote for any party that can't define what a woman is and has no interest in securing her rights or protections, and furthermore describes her as a bigot, dinosaur and worse for thinking they should view her concerns as valid? You don't have to answer but...............

Well, you're making quite a jump there.

Accusations that every party member who is circumspect about how they phrase things to avoid the wrath of the gender critical is a misogynist who doesn't care about women. (I'm learning the jargon, forgive me if I've got it wrong)

Its extreme and its exaggerated.

Its extreme and its exaggerated. so? It's a theoretical question about theoretical parties. I note you don't answer the question, why should women vote for them?

I'm not claiming victimhood - not at all, and nor am I going to fall for your 'all about you' line ?.

I am saying that everyone who disagrees with you is not speaking with one voice, and suggesting that you stop suggesting otherwise. There are others involved in this debate, and not all answers are directed at you personally.

I repeat - I speak for myself in order to avoid suggesting that there is some sort of party line on this issue, as was suggested recently when two posters said opposing (or possibly contradictory) things and both were asked to explain themselves. 'Get your answers straight', wasn't it?

If you want to make it clear that you are speaking only about transphobes, you could say so. You are flitting between personal comments/questions and denial that you mean them to be personal. You asked Rosie a direct question, for example:
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? as though she could possibly know the answer, and then played confused when she pointed out that she didn't know, and neither did you.

It wasn't a general question - you even followed it with 'you don't have to answer. Just be aware what the silence implies', with its dark suggestions of complicity with nefarious agendas, and you certainly appeared to be pressing her for an answer.

What do you think? Are you happy to vote for a party that would sell out women's rights to informed consent about who is touching them, their rights to safe spaces, and to single-sex categories in research, data and policies? Where do those things fit in your priorities? What if the party you support has views that conflict with your views on these issues but are in line with your thoughts on other things?

You are happy to ask others these questions. Are you willing to share your own views?

Rosie51

^So my questing is valid; does that take priority over everything else?^ For most, probably not. In combination with any other concerns they may have it could be a tipping point.

Theoretical question. Why should any woman vote for any party that can't define what a woman is and has no interest in securing her rights or protections, and furthermore describes her as a bigot, dinosaur and worse for thinking they should view her concerns as valid? You don't have to answer but...............

Well actually that's a very good question. There is no doubt that the majority of legislation benefitting women has been passed by Labour governments, yet some still persist in voting Tory. There is no doubt that women suffer most from the low pay and insecure employment offered by zero hours contracts yet some women still vote Tory.
There is no doubt that the Labour party has the highest number of women MPs and they now make up more than 50% of the MPs. Yet some women persist in voting Tory.
You do wonder in the face of such obvious bias why any woman would.

Oh, the literalness.

(Is that a word?)

Anyway. Can you send me some links please to the parties that call women bigots and dinosaurs and have no interest in their rights? Made up stuff, paranoia and assumptions doesn't count.

While you're doing that, I'll go and find the posts, the actual real posts from actual real people, that are bigoted about trans people. (Actually, I won't. You'll have to trust me on that.)

Getting back to the MP in question; If I lived in his constituency I wouldn't vote for him because of his dodgy and nasty business, his lack of responsibility to his constituents, his lack of consideration for his family, and because he is a Tory. His sexual habits and tastes, as long as they are legal, do not enter into my consideration. So, although I don't have the luxury of a meaningful vote due to living in a very safe Tory seat; would I vote for a Labour/LibDem/Green candidate if I thought they were a better prospect for all of society but were unable to convince me of their stance on TG rights? Yes, because the rights of everyone to a decent standard of living, a safe place to live, a functioning NHS and educations system, clean water would over ride any concerns I may have about the definition of a woman. Frankly, someone who cannot feed their children or keep them warm probably doesn't give a flying fig for whether a trans person 'feels included and comfortable'.

David Lammy is the dinosaur quote.

I am saying that everyone who disagrees with you is not speaking with one voice, and suggesting that you stop suggesting otherwise. There are others involved in this debate, and not all answers are directed at you personally.
The irony in this paragraph is overwhelming.

If you want to make it clear that you are speaking only about transphobes, you could say so.
How? Big flashing letters? It seems that’s the only way some people will understand that this is what I’ve been doing since about 8am this morning.

It wasn't a general question - you even followed it with 'you don't have to answer. Just be aware what the silence implies', with its dark suggestions of complicity with nefarious agendas, and you certainly appeared to be pressing her for an answer.
I’m sorry. I’m going to laugh now.

And since you are badgering me for what I think, I’ll tell you that I vote for parties that have the closest set of priorities to mine. I don’t ascribe nefarious agendas to parties that have some differences from me. I look at the entirely of their policies. I don’t make fantastical extrapolations about their policies that make me look like I’m paranoid.

GillT57

Getting back to the MP in question; If I lived in his constituency I wouldn't vote for him because of his dodgy and nasty business, his lack of responsibility to his constituents, his lack of consideration for his family, and because he is a Tory. His sexual habits and tastes, as long as they are legal, do not enter into my consideration. So, although I don't have the luxury of a meaningful vote due to living in a very safe Tory seat; would I vote for a Labour/LibDem/Green candidate if I thought they were a better prospect for all of society but were unable to convince me of their stance on TG rights? Yes, because the rights of everyone to a decent standard of living, a safe place to live, a functioning NHS and educations system, clean water would over ride any concerns I may have about the definition of a woman. Frankly, someone who cannot feed their children or keep them warm probably doesn't give a flying fig for whether a trans person 'feels included and comfortable'.

Sorry to divert again GillT57, but I had to answer what has been said about me. I think your post is excellent, BTW

Sorry that wasnt clear. You asked which political party called women dinosaurs well it was David Lammy, and said we were hoarding rights. It didnt go down well.