The loss of freedom of speech, of sidelining women and biology

Women can have a penis will follow them throughout the election. Forgetting what I believe on this issue, how can they do this to those living in poverty who need a labour government.

Here's a link to that Times article about Suella Braverman.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/91e2714e-dde6-11ec-bcbd-e35b52e0266c?shareToken=c1b9ffb0e9f596187a415d9ae7f97d97&fbclid=IwAR16KzgEHJ1AJQXE_6x1_2E4ib9TJSnoObUIV8oGJUvC34QNLmWtXFElBB4

It also says -
[Nadim] Zahawi is drawing up guidance for schools on how to support children with gender dysphoria with input from the attorney-general.

This month he told The Times that schools should accommodate trans children and suggested they could allow, for example, pupils born male to use girls’ lavatories and changing facilities when they are not in use by others.

I hope that Braverman is able to make Zahawi see sense.

Galaxy

The utter breathtaking self indulgence of Stella Creasy.

What's happened?

Shes all over the telegraph saying jk rowling is wrong women can have a penis.

So who do we vote for? A party who lies, cheats and is thoroughly dishonest, but recognises biological facts and isn't willing to erase women on the Stonewall alter? Or a party who believes that women do have a penis and are deliberately erasing every safeguard that has been achieved and putting women at risk?

It's akin to political suicide isn't it. How many are going to put the welfare and security of the country into the hands of a party who a) who have members including the current leader who can't define what a woman is and b) have members who believe that a woman can have a penis?

Why is Zahawi doing this when it looks to me as if this is against current legislation in schools?

And Debbie Hayton?

" None of that means that genuine transpeople (by which I mean those who just want to get on with their lives living as though they were a member of the opposite sex) should be treated as anything other than full and equal members of society. It is not transpeople in general who are the problem. It is trans rights activists and their 'allies' - the extremists who want to change the language and insist that transwomenarewomen, but women are 'cervix havers', and that men should be able to access women's spaces just by saying that they are female"

Copied from upthread.

I don't agree with militant type behaviour for any cause - but thread seems veering toward all 'trans gender stuff is nonsense'
And I don't agree with that either.
And of course it doesn't suddenly appear at adulthood, most people are well aware before then.
So I have no issue at all with reversible measures before then - children wanting change of name, wearing other clothing etc or of teachers having training in supporting these children.
Most schools here have unisex uniforms anyway which is much better.

The Cass report is saying social transition is not a minor intervention so I think I will hold fire on my view in that. Obviously people can wear anything they like as that has nothing to do with what sex you are.

As it’s a chunk of my post you’ve quoted, I’ll reply, but others might disagree.

I don’t think that ‘all transgender stuff is nonsense’ although I could write that in blood and there are those on here who would tell me that they know what I think better than I do.

I think everyone should live their best lives, and if that means living as though you are of the opposite sex, then so be it. I don’t think that people can become members of the opposite sex, though, and where there are conflicts of interests or clashes of rights between women and transwomen I would always want concessions to be made by the transwomen (or by men, as that is what transwomen are). Where there are no clashes of rights (and nobody has yet explained what rights transpeople are being denied), I have no issues with ‘ordinary’ transpeople.

Cross-posted, Galaxy. I agree.

Unisex uniforms are indeed much better.

Some names are unisex but not all so changing to a name associated with the opposite sex is clearly part of an actual belief in being the opposite sex, which is not healthy for a young child.

3rd person pronouns are not unisex so, again, a change is associated with an actual belief in being the opposite sex, and is not healthy.

A child who is treated, for a number of years, as being the opposite sex to their real one is likely to reach puberty with the firm belief that they must have medical treatment to help them more closely resemble that sex.
That medical treatment could, in fact, damage their health.

The avoidance, wherever possible, of sex-based stereotypes would go a long way to giving children a much healthier attitude to their physical sex and to their sexuality as it develops.

Doodledog
I think everyone should live their best lives, and if that means living as though you are of the opposite sex, then so be it. I don’t think that people can become members of the opposite sex, though, and where there are conflicts of interests or clashes of rights between women and transwomen I would always want concessions to be made by the transwomen (or by men, as that is what transwomen are). Where there are no clashes of rights (and nobody has yet explained what rights transpeople are being denied), I have no issues with ‘ordinary’ transpeople.
Well put, except that the rights that some (and only some) of those claiming to be transpeople feel they are being denied are the rights that have been discussed so often on these threads.
Right to cheat in sport
Right to override the rights of females
Etc, etc, etc.
The concessions should always be made by the males when not doing so is unfair or damaging to females.

Ah, yes. I assumed (wrongly) that transpeople were claiming that there were human rights being denied to them in a discriminatory manner, not that they were referring to taking women's rights for their own.

Whenever I've asked, I've either been ignored or there's been a cut and paste from the HRA or similar, which wasn't enlightening at all.

During covid we were told to follow the science; global warming we are told to follow the science. Science tell us that we remain the sex we were born, this is at cellular level, we cannot alter this. Why are we ignoring the science? If we can ignore the science here why should we follow the science in other cases?

saltnshake I couldn't agree more! It's like banging your head against a brick wall at times. Lord Robert Winston, that expert in sex and reproduction, is apparently less knowledgeable than some posters we've had on threads here and others elsewhere. He asserts you can't change sex and there are only two sexes. Some are certain they know better.......

Doodledog

As it’s a chunk of my post you’ve quoted, I’ll reply, but others might disagree.

I don’t think that ‘all transgender stuff is nonsense’ although I could write that in blood and there are those on here who would tell me that they know what I think better than I do.

I think everyone should live their best lives, and if that means living as though you are of the opposite sex, then so be it. I don’t think that people can become members of the opposite sex, though, and where there are conflicts of interests or clashes of rights between women and transwomen I would always want concessions to be made by the transwomen (or by men, as that is what transwomen are). Where there are no clashes of rights (and nobody has yet explained what rights transpeople are being denied), I have no issues with ‘ordinary’ transpeople.

doodle dog i did not at all mean that you were saying all transgender stuff is nonsense - just that it had crept into the thread - last 2 posts before this one do seem to be saying that, for example -

I quoted your words because I agree with them and you put it well and I think the distinction needs to be made between militant trans activists and transgender people or issues in general

I think a lot of 'clashes of rights' gets avoided if one has non stereotyped or gender divided starting point - unisex toilet cubicles, uniforms etc
There is still stigma and discrimination and misunderstanding against trans people and I think that is something worth being 'non militant activist' about

Rosie51

saltnshake I couldn't agree more! It's like banging your head against a brick wall at times. Lord Robert Winston, that expert in sex and reproduction, is apparently less knowledgeable than some posters we've had on threads here and others elsewhere. He asserts you can't change sex and there are only two sexes. Some are certain they know better.......

I dont know who Lord Robert Winston is. What is he an expert on?

aside from transgender issues, some people can be born not entirely one sex, not everyone is XX or XY - is he discounting them in his 'only 2 sexes' statement?

I dont think anyone sees trans gender identity as a 'scientific' issue - more an issue of human pyche which of course is very much more complex than simple biology.

and of course you can socially and to some degree physically, change gender if you want to.

The government seem to be speaking with a forked tongue, nothing new there, I know.?

The Home Office is drawing up these plans, for the police:

"Plans to encourage more people to complain to police about anti-trans hate crimes could criminalise comedians such as Ricky Gervais, campaigners have warned.

The Home Office is in the process of drawing up a new hate crimes strategy that aims to 'increase the reporting of all forms of hate crime', including those relating to gender identity.

Those in favour of the proposals, which would see 'perpetrators' accused of 'non-crime hate incidents', hope people will feel better protected from harm.

But free-speech campaigners fear the new drive could see comedians criminalised for telling jokes, particularly about the rise of transgender ideology.

The plans are being developed despite a court ruling last year, which ordered police to stop recording gender-critical views as non-crime hate incidents, which are declarations of wrongdoing added to someone's criminal record.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10864075/New-hate-strategy-criminalise-comics-like-Ricky-Gervais.html

AussieNanna

Rosie51

saltnshake I couldn't agree more! It's like banging your head against a brick wall at times. Lord Robert Winston, that expert in sex and reproduction, is apparently less knowledgeable than some posters we've had on threads here and others elsewhere. He asserts you can't change sex and there are only two sexes. Some are certain they know better.......

I dont know who Lord Robert Winston is. What is he an expert on?

aside from transgender issues, some people can be born not entirely one sex, not everyone is XX or XY - is he discounting them in his 'only 2 sexes' statement?

I dont think anyone sees trans gender identity as a 'scientific' issue - more an issue of human pyche which of course is very much more complex than simple biology.

and of course you can socially and to some degree physically, change gender if you want to.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Winston,_Baron_Winston
If you read his entry, you'll see he is better qualified on the subject than any of us posting here.

There are only two sexes. DSDs where there is a variation of the XX or XY chromosomes still follow a pathway to either male or female, they are not some mysterious 3rd, 4th or more sex. People with disorders of sexual development constantly ask not to be brought into the trans debate, but apparently their wishes aren't to be respected. A Nobel prize awaits the first person to scientifically identify a third sex and their role in reproduction, the only reason for us to have two sexes.
Nobody can change sex, it's immutable, but for saying that some people have been hounded out of their jobs, and you surely can't have missed the venom aimed at J K Rowling for stating that fact?

One of our prisons has had a probable inevitable consequence around allowing biological men, with a penis, to demand to go into a female prison, without segregation, because they identify as a woman.?

A biological male murderer, who is TW. has been caught having drunken sex with a female prisoner.

The TW has now been moved:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10864613/Transgender-murderer-caught-having-drunken-sex-female-inmate.html

Completely predictable.

Prison can't possibly be a fair situation to house men with women, especially when those men have committed violent crimes.

Transgender wing? Great.
That is where all transwomen prisoners should be, unless they prefer to stay in men's prison.
Dealing with transwomen (male) prisoners is not women's job.

Aussienanna "Gender" is all the trimmings that surround the role of the sexes, - the way they feel about being male or female, how they usually dress and act, what is expected of them socially. That varies from one person to another and can indeed be changed so that the person presents (to themselves as well as others) as the opposite sex.

However, their sex is in every cell of their body, and in whether they contribute eggs or sperm to the making of a new human being. That cannot be changed, whatever is done to the body externally or what happens to the internal feelings. The number of people born intersex is a very small proportion of the population.

Socially anyone can live how they wish. The problems begin with a catch-22. Anyone can, without altering their body and its reactions at all, decide by self-ID that that they are now not men, but women, and can access any space or facility reserved for women.

However, anyone who questions whether an individual who claims this really has applied for a certificate of gender re-assignment runs the risk of being accused and charged with harassing that individual by invading their privacy.

There is thus no way of knowing for certain that they do have that certificate until it has been seen, and there is no obligation on them to actually produce it, and there is a penalty if the challenge is made to someone who then does prove to have a valid certificate. This means people are reluctant to raise a challenge.

Any Tom, Dick or Harry could walk into the communal changing room of a ladies dress shop, pretend to be trying on clothes, and enjoy the free striptease show taking place around them. An 18-year-old got a lot of publicity recently by doing just that - and by getting a public apology from the shop after an assistant made him wait for space in the crowded changing room instead of giving him preference. He was later said to be definitely male (and happy to stay that way) and doing what young men (and old) have been doing for thousands of years - getting into forbidden territory to watch women take off their clothes.

It is mostly this kind of ambiguity that makes some people object to legislation without intensive and honest debate - which is being stifled by the current exhortations to "be kind". Being kind is good - but legislation must cover and restrain those who might take advantage of that kindness.

Rosie51
Nobody can change sex, it's immutable, but for saying that some people have been hounded out of their jobs, and you surely can't have missed the venom aimed at J K Rowling for stating that fact?
There are some who don’t believe sex is immutable, just as some don’t believe the Earth is round. They turn a blind eye to the venom aimed at anyone who tells the truth, preferring to believe and tell lies and support liars. I wonder if they do that outside the subject of sex?

Be kind is meaningless. It means different things to different people.