Is JK Rowling pushing the boundaries too far?

That is current NHS guidance VS, it is not staggering at all.

VioletSky

Doodledog

However elsewhere it is entirely up to the organisation involved to distribute their staff in such a way this does not impact anyone's rights.
So how does this work when a woman wants a female rape counsellor as she doesn't want to discuss her rape with a man, or wants to swim in a pool with other women (ie people with female bodies) as that is what her religion insists upon, but a transwoman insists that transwomen are women and claims a right to be there?

Again women's rights to safe spaces is protected under the equality act and must be honored by organisations and individuals

If you are referring to what Glorianny posted upthread, no, they are not protected. That was couched in such vague terms as to be impossible to comply with. Plus, as has been said on this thread already, too few people understand the law for it to be enforced on a day to day basis.

puberty blockers not pubic blockers

But don't women have the right to be and feel safe when accessing toilets when they need too, without having to worry that a man identifying as a woman may access them too?

I agree with this proposal as I agree with 18 being the lower age limit for social transitioning. Gender dysphoria is extremely rare and I don't believe that young people should be able to for example take pubic blockers and bind breasts before they are sufficiently old enough to make that decision and be aware of the potential harmful consequences of doing so.

I also don't agree that their female under the age of 18 peers should have to accommodate them.

Rosie51

Thank you for your answers VS
However does But I don't in anyway blame trans people or think they should lose rights because predatorial men found a loophole to exploit. I blame the perpetrator of the crime mean that you are saying a transwoman couldn't commit the crime of rape, or are you denying that transwoman the right to be trans because they've committed a crime? I'm a bit confused that you use 'predatorial men' to describe someone who presents as a transwoman.

I am answering with my feelings about rapists which are not logical of course and thankfully I am not placed to make such decisions.

Lawfully in this country, rape can only be committed with a penis. We know that women can and do sexually assault other women... So yes someone with genuine gender dysphoria is potentially capable of such...

It's a difficult question, I did my best

It would take someone vastly more qualified than me to assess such a perpetrator

I believe there is now a trans prison which resolves the issue of where to put a violent trans person and keep women's prisons safe

They would potentially lose their rights as trans women Smileless that they currently have. To someone who views them as men, that might not matter

To trans women who we would then be saying must use a men's room, this has serious repercussions on their basic human rights... Ie to be safe and to be able to access a toilet when needed

And that is only one potential outcome. He would also like to ban the rights of young people socially transitioning before 18. This is not gender affirming treatment, this is social transition. The impact this could potentially have on the mental health of our young people with gender dysphoria is staggering

We really must focus on fully understanding gender dysphoria and its cause before making such a potentially harmful decision

Thank you for your answers VS
However does But I don't in anyway blame trans people or think they should lose rights because predatorial men found a loophole to exploit. I blame the perpetrator of the crime mean that you are saying a transwoman couldn't commit the crime of rape, or are you denying that transwoman the right to be trans because they've committed a crime? I'm a bit confused that you use 'predatorial men' to describe someone who presents as a transwoman.

Sunak wanted a review of the 2010 Equality Act making it clear that sex means biological sex rather than gender.

This proposal would result in the protected characteristics of gender reassignment now only being protected for those who've gone through the full surgical procedure "of changing sex attributes".

This proposal would also remove trans peoples rights to access single sex spaces based on self identification. Access would require a GRC or having undergone medical transition.

I asked earlier what rights the trans community is being denied, that everyone else has. Men who do not identify as women do not have the right to access women's spaces, so if this proposal came to fruition, trans women would be being denied the right to do something that men don't have the right to do either.

Er most countries are very urgently looking at 'gender affirming' care for children. It looks as if there will be criminal prosecutions in Italy re puberty blockers. Sunsk is not alone in his stance, its NHS policy not to affirm.

MissAdventure

I used to work with a young woman who had exclusively female care staff.

One of those staff transitioned fully to male (this was a very long time ago) and realised that it was now inappropriate for him to give personal care to a teen female.

No fuss, no arguments, it was just how it was. (And saved HR a huge headache, no doubt)

This! This is how we need to be respectful of each other's rights as individuals

I find her very arresting.

Elegran

You have clamed that trans rights are being removed, VioletSky

Smileless posted "They do have the right to have their pronouns respected in the workplace and for GRC, they have the same right as anyone else to be protected from being bullied and harassed and they are not having their right to gender affirming treatment denied." (though people who do NOT want to publish their pronouns in their workplace, but prefer to be pronoun-anonymous for whatever reason, have been hounded for refusing)

Could you please read Smileless's post to yourself in a neutral tone, VioletSky instead of as an attack. What other specific rights can you think of?

I did not feel attacked by *Smileless and haven't said that. I always read comments in a neutral tone. It is very hard for me to engage when people aren't actually listening to me

Other requested information has been shared

I do have other things going on in my life and may not immediately answer questions especially when the thread moves fast and coming back to it means missing comments by accident

www.theguardian.com/society/2023/sep/07/sunak-has-not-dropped-plan-to-ban-children-from-changing-gender-identity-says-no-10

I read at the pace I read

www.theguardian.com/law/2023/apr/05/what-would-changing-the-equality-act-mean-for-trans-people-and-single-sex-spaces

Doodledog

*However elsewhere it is entirely up to the organisation involved to distribute their staff in such a way this does not impact anyone's rights.*
So how does this work when a woman wants a female rape counsellor as she doesn't want to discuss her rape with a man, or wants to swim in a pool with other women (ie people with female bodies) as that is what her religion insists upon, but a transwoman insists that transwomen are women and claims a right to be there?

Again women's rights to safe spaces is protected under the equality act and must be honored by organisations and individuals

I left the thread for a few minutes to type a post and found that the discussion has moved to another angle, where people seem to have heard (or not heard) different accounts.

SO WHICH TRANS RIGHTS HAS SUNAK SAID HE WOULD REMOVE? so that we can know exactly what we are now discussing. It is impossible to reply logically to a post which only tells you half of the news they are in outrage about.

Autistic people are individuals, let's just put that out there, we are different based on a variety of factors and influence.

I have read the research done on trans people and their differences on a genetic and potentially hormonal level so logically I believe this is happening for a reason. Logically I also know that there are men who have a women fetish and are not who they pretend.

Your other question I have also answered many times and I don't understand why people don't give me a fair hearing. Traumatised women should never be expected to worry about pronouns in court. It should have no bearing whatsoever to the case and any rapist cannot go to a female prison absolutely... Perhaps someone who can lawfully lose their freedom ought to lawfully lose a GRC too

But I don't in anyway blame trans people or think they should lose rights because predatorial men found a loophole to exploit. I blame the perpetrator of the crime

Galaxy

What did Sunak say?, I havent heard him say anything particularly startling on the gender issue, it's quite possible I have missed it as he isnt one of my go to contributors on this subject.

Sunak stated that a man is a man and a woman is a woman. He said it was common sense. It caused outrage by some of the trans community.

However elsewhere it is entirely up to the organisation involved to distribute their staff in such a way this does not impact anyone's rights.
So how does this work when a woman wants a female rape counsellor as she doesn't want to discuss her rape with a man, or wants to swim in a pool with other women (ie people with female bodies) as that is what her religion insists upon, but a transwoman insists that transwomen are women and claims a right to be there?

You have clamed that trans rights are being removed, VioletSky

Smileless posted "They do have the right to have their pronouns respected in the workplace and for GRC, they have the same right as anyone else to be protected from being bullied and harassed and they are not having their right to gender affirming treatment denied." (though people who do NOT want to publish their pronouns in their workplace, but prefer to be pronoun-anonymous for whatever reason, have been hounded for refusing)

Could you please read Smileless's post to yourself in a neutral tone, VioletSky instead of as an attack. What other specific rights can you think of?

I used to work with a young woman who had exclusively female care staff.

One of those staff transitioned fully to male (this was a very long time ago) and realised that it was now inappropriate for him to give personal care to a teen female.

No fuss, no arguments, it was just how it was. (And saved HR a huge headache, no doubt)

What did Sunak say?, I havent heard him say anything particularly startling on the gender issue, it's quite possible I have missed it as he isnt one of my go to contributors on this subject.

I have missed the stuff re Rishi Sunak.

Violetsky, it doesn't happen though as people who work in care settings do not necessarily understand the nuances of laws and this is why it is clear regarding female only personal care. In instances where a paramedic is called there is usually always someone else present anyway (for the sake of imagination)

This isn't dismissive of people who work in care settings, it is to important to have clarity, like we have in safeguarding in both care settings and education.

VioletSky may I ask a question? You say preferred pronouns should be used and respected, it's only polite social etiquette. Do you then agree with the current position whereby, in court, a rape victim is compelled to call the vile individual who violated her, 'she' and refer to 'her penis'? Do you sanction what is figuratively the legal system raping her again?

I suspect you're on the milder end of the autistic spectrum, but someone like my grandson who is severely affected by autism and other co-morbidities says what he sees. How can that be wrong? Is he to be condemned for telling the truth in some situations when he is admonished for telling a lie in others?