NHS U turn on trans terminology

Glorianny

Rosie51

Glorianny Well jolly good I've always said the legal provision was there. So I was right.

You've also always followed that up with a gleeful "how are you going to enforce it, genital inspections?" so I think your smugness at knowing the legislation is somewhat misplaced.

No I haven't I have said that if you try to limit access to public toilets or facilities you cannot do so based on appearance. That in fact there is no way to do so and trying to do so is not only impossible it's restrictive and will impose restrictions on women their dress and appearance.

The law is one I have always supported that places where women need a space free from transwomen are legally possible.

And how do you tell the difference in the places where you support the law? If it can't be done on appearance what measure are you going to use? Or is it a case that transwomen should have more integrity and self police their own exclusion?

As Smileless says Yes, the legal provision is there but because of the actions of a few, they are being ignored. I don't need a sign in every shop I go into to remind me that shoplifting is an offence, and a trans woman doesn't need one to tell them that without a GRC it's illegal to access safe spaces for women.

It is legally possible if trans women obey the law. Unfortunately some don't.

Rosie51

Glorianny Well jolly good I've always said the legal provision was there. So I was right.

You've also always followed that up with a gleeful "how are you going to enforce it, genital inspections?" so I think your smugness at knowing the legislation is somewhat misplaced.

No I haven't I have said that if you try to limit access to public toilets or facilities you cannot do so based on appearance. That in fact there is no way to do so and trying to do so is not only impossible it's restrictive and will impose restrictions on women their dress and appearance.

The law is one I have always supported that places where women need a space free from transwomen are legally possible.

Jessica Triff, the voice of reason and experience. We need to hear from her and other sensible members of the trans community.

I know two trans women and from their appearance, I knew they were trans before that was confirmed. Can we always tell based on appearances, no we can't and the recently aired 'Miriam: Death of a Reality Star' is testament to that, although one of the male contestants said within I think about 24 hours that 'she' was a man and was ridiculed by his fellow contestants.

That is not the issue though. A man should not be entering women's safe spaces etc just because he 'feels' like a woman and because of the fear caused by Stonewall and TRA's, this has happened and women are rightly concerned that it could happen, despite having not experienced it themselves.

Thank goodness that the requirements in England needed to be given a GRC remain and that having one doesn't mean carte blanche access to every where and everything set aside for women, if there are justifiable reason(s) for refusal.

Yes, the legal provision is there but because of the actions of a few, they are being ignored. I don't need a sign in every shop I go into to remind me that shoplifting is an offence, and a trans woman doesn't need one to tell them that without a GRC it's illegal to access safe spaces for women.

They know but some simply don't care and make life so much harder for the law abiding and considerate members of their own community.

Glorianny Well jolly good I've always said the legal provision was there. So I was right.

You've also always followed that up with a gleeful "how are you going to enforce it, genital inspections?" so I think your smugness at knowing the legislation is somewhat misplaced.

My ‘heid’s nippin’ ‘, as we say in these parts.

Now, I have never been referred to as a ‘cervix haver’ or a ‘person who menstruates’, and, come to think of it, I don’t remember the last time I was referred to as a woman. Presumably my inter departmental hospital correspondence refers to me as a 72 year old woman, but, other than that, I can’t think of a situation where it would be necessary.
Am I the only one who is wondering if any of these situations which cause such arguments ( or discussions, if you prefer) have actually occurred? Has La Leche League been bombarded by requests for help from ‘ transwomen’ who are struggling to breast, chest, boob, or tit feed their babies?
In how many cases where activists are campaigning for certain things is it actually an issue, or indeed likely to become one?
As far as I can see, a lot of it comes down to people making a song and dance about language ( see ‘my pronouns are…..’), and quoting things like ‘misgendering’ or being ‘non-inclusive’, when the situation has not actually happened.
To me, if a man or woman wants to live their life looking and acting ( as far as possible) as the opposite sex, then let them, they’re doing no harm. It’s when the demanding to use single sex spaces happens that problems arise, isn’t it? And, let’s be truthful, how often does this happen? I suspect that trans issues may be a bandwagon on to which quite a lot of people are jumping for their own reasons.

Glorianny says
Personally it doesn't bother me. Anyone's genitals are their own business I don't want to know about them. 🤣🤣🤣

She’s the one who mentions them.
She’s the one who mentions people watching in the same posts as being able to tell who is or isn’t trans.
Oh and then there’s the strong, tall, muscular, deep voiced people who we can tell are women or are men, but some people don’t have that skill.

Doodledog

Well well. More tides are turning. If anyone has examples of incorrect guidance being given about single-sex spaces, there is a call for them to be reported. Full details on the link, but two things stand out for me, which I have emboldened. A GRC is still required to be legally recognised as the opposite sex, and it has been acknowledged that there are many misconceptions about self-identifying people having rights of access to opposite-sex facilities. What we need now is for these misconceptions to be put to bed. They have sneaked in because of 'No Debate' and the fear that Stonewall caused by the threat of organisations having their 'Diversity Champion' status withdrawn for non-compliance with their dogma. There should now be a public information campaign to make everything clear, and prevent situations such as the one in Monsoon where shop assistants allowed a young man to try on a prom dress in a changing room where women and girls (including many Muslims) were also shopping for their prom dresses. The shop staff were under the impression that he had a right to be there, and were justifiably afraid of negative publicity. Everyone needs to know that there is no obligation to make all facilities unisex, and that customers can expect staff to know this too.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/call-for-input-incorrect-guidance-on-single-sex-spaces-and-gender-self-identification

Where certain conditions are met, businesses and other organisations can legally provide single and separate-sex services. This includes services such as toilets, changing rooms, and female-only fitness classes, which may exclude transgender people of the opposite biological sex who do not have a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC). Where it is justified, they may also be able to exclude transgender people with GRCs. In some cases organisations believe they are required to allow self-identifying transgender people to access these services.

The Gender Recognition Act 2004 enables people who have a diagnosis of gender dysphoria and who have lived in their acquired gender for at least 2 years to apply for a GRC, which changes their sex for most legal purposes. Transgender people without a GRC legally remain their birth sex.

Well jolly good I've always said the legal provision was there. So I was right.

Mollygo

Callistemon21

But mostly it's unimportant because it's not the point at issue. It's not whether a woman looks more like a man - it's whether that person is a man.

Precisely.

Exactly-
and I still think it’s weird if Glorianny spends her holiday time trying to spot trans.

I don't spend my holiday time trying to spot trans Mollygo unlike you it really doesn't bother me. I spent a few pleasant times drinking coffee in various countries, watching the passing people, and noticed what a wide variety of dress women were wearing regardless of age or any other factors.

And yes it should matter to all of us because judging anyone by appearance can only lead to restrictions and less freedom for everyone but most especially for women. Pretending it won't is simply closing your eyes to the very real outcomes of ideas that promote division and discrimination.

What do you imagine will happen when it becomes generally believed that a transwoman is easily recognisable? It certainly won't promote gender free dress or appearance in any way.

As for Doodledog's constant complaint that I am the only person who keeps asking about genitals I have asked the still unanswered question how anyone will tell transmen or transwomen from their appearance. Personally it doesn't bother me. Anyone's genitals are their own business I don't want to know about them.

Well well. More tides are turning. If anyone has examples of incorrect guidance being given about single-sex spaces, there is a call for them to be reported. Full details on the link, but two things stand out for me, which I have emboldened. A GRC is still required to be legally recognised as the opposite sex, and it has been acknowledged that there are many misconceptions about self-identifying people having rights of access to opposite-sex facilities. What we need now is for these misconceptions to be put to bed. They have sneaked in because of 'No Debate' and the fear that Stonewall caused by the threat of organisations having their 'Diversity Champion' status withdrawn for non-compliance with their dogma. There should now be a public information campaign to make everything clear, and prevent situations such as the one in Monsoon where shop assistants allowed a young man to try on a prom dress in a changing room where women and girls (including many Muslims) were also shopping for their prom dresses. The shop staff were under the impression that he had a right to be there, and were justifiably afraid of negative publicity. Everyone needs to know that there is no obligation to make all facilities unisex, and that customers can expect staff to know this too.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/call-for-input-incorrect-guidance-on-single-sex-spaces-and-gender-self-identification

Where certain conditions are met, businesses and other organisations can legally provide single and separate-sex services. This includes services such as toilets, changing rooms, and female-only fitness classes, which may exclude transgender people of the opposite biological sex who do not have a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC). Where it is justified, they may also be able to exclude transgender people with GRCs. In some cases organisations believe they are required to allow self-identifying transgender people to access these services.

The Gender Recognition Act 2004 enables people who have a diagnosis of gender dysphoria and who have lived in their acquired gender for at least 2 years to apply for a GRC, which changes their sex for most legal purposes. Transgender people without a GRC legally remain their birth sex.

Iam64

Callistemon21

If there is a man who is lactating and trying to breast feed a baby and having problems - then he probably needs to see the consultant who has prescribed the hormones and other drugs, that have helped to induce prolactin... his problems have bugger all to do with the problems of millions of breast-feeding women.

And he is thinking more of his own rights than those of the baby he's experimenting on.

Thank goodness for the posters here telling it like it is,
How anyone can indulge their own needs to the extent they will take multiple hormones in order to produce a tiny insignificant amount of toxic ‘milk’ for a baby who needs nourishment -
And to have their attachment needs as well as their physical needs met consistently by a human adult who recognises the needs of the child are paramount and will remain paramount

Where is the lactating mother?

Interesting Dickens, good to hear about Jessica

When the TRAs insist that TWAW - no debate - I notice that when challenged, their rhetoric, sometimes graphically reproduced on placards, is - frequently - overtly violent and sexual. Their 'answer' to those who disagree with them is to threaten violence, and in some cases (thankfully small) rape.

This kind of toxic activism - the "I punch TERFS" fanaticism - is typical of the challenged male than the female.

I have read that some transwomen who themselves oppose this kind of radicalism, are ostracised and condemned by these activists - they are "bootlickers".

Jessica Triff, a Canadian transwoman who has been interviewed by CBC had this to say about transwomen and the rights of women.

"Trans woman" no longer means what it did. It no longer refers exclusively to an individual who has gone through therapy, hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgeries. This presents a greater risk to women in certain areas and it is reasonable to discuss these issues and come up with solutions and safeguards to prevent abuses and minimize risks to women's safety and infringements on their rights.

Inclusion in women's spaces must be reasonable, rational and arrived at through good faith discussions and debate. Acceptance of limitations and exceptions to that inclusion is just being respectful of the differences in our lived experiences, physiological needs and the historical and ongoing oppression and inequality women face today.

She would be regarded as a "bootlicker" by the TR activists - I think hers is the voice of reason. Too frequently drowned out. I would like to hear less from the TRAs, and more from those like Jessica. Because I don't believe she's a lone voice, but unfortunately, some of the media thrive on hysterics, so calm and rational debate gets completely side lined. And it gives a false impression of the trans community as a whole.

Callistemon21

^If there is a man who is lactating and trying to breast feed a baby and having problems - then he probably needs to see the consultant who has prescribed the hormones and other drugs, that have helped to induce prolactin... his problems have bugger all to do with the problems of millions of breast-feeding women.^

And he is thinking more of his own rights than those of the baby he's experimenting on.

Thank goodness for the posters here telling it like it is,
How anyone can indulge their own needs to the extent they will take multiple hormones in order to produce a tiny insignificant amount of toxic ‘milk’ for a baby who needs nourishment -
And to have their attachment needs as well as their physical needs met consistently by a human adult who recognises the needs of the child are paramount and will remain paramount

Callistemon21

There is a theory (untested, unproven) that we are living in a programmed computer simulation, a simulated universe.

It sounds farfetched but then so do some of the things happening on our Earth just now.

There is a theory (untested, unproven) that we are living in a programmed computer simulation, a simulated universe.

It does sometimes feel that we are, at least, living in a parallel universe.

If a man can become a woman on the basis that he says he feels like one - then medical science, biology, DNA as we understand it, chromosomes, gametes, the whole shebang - is completely negated and discarded in favour of a handful of men's feelings?

I'm sure lots of people are not happy to conform to the stereotype of their sex, I'm not, it's restrictive, oppressive and depressing. And I can understand that a man might want to wear clothes that are loose and flowing instead of trousers, etc, etc - or a woman wear trousers that enable her to do things a dress or skirt restricts her from doing; I'm also sure that young children might be appalled at their developing bodies which force them into an adult world they are not yet equipped to deal with, one which over-emphasis 'sex' in adverts, entertainment, the media - not to mention the unwanted attention that it sometimes engenders from the opposite sex. I also believe that there are those who truly suffer from body dysmorphia, or DSD. I believe this has been going on for hundreds of years - long before we ever coined any terminology to express these feelings... but this is quite different from those minority of men who are insisting that we agree with them that they - with their full genitalia, etc, are women, on the basis that they say so, or 'feel' like one.

Yes Musicgirl and the strangest thing is that those TW who cause the problems are the ones who want to cancel things specific to what they aspire to be. It’s as if they say, for example
Safe spaces for females? -I know that I’m really not a female so if I can’t have it, why should they?
Or
Males are usually stronger than women (AHF) after puberty, so I can be an even better woman than they can, even though the truth is I’m not female.

Sorry or. Fat fingers syndrome.

At last. Now it’s time for other areas to follow. Recently, the National Austistic Society had a leaflet explaining growing up, the bodily changes that are occurring to young people on the spectrum. When it came to the biology for girls and women, it kept saying “people who menstruate,”r “people who have a womb.” It is not, and never has been “people” who menstruate or who have wombs, it is girls and women. I tried to tell the NAS precisely this, but was not able to because of a computer glitch. The sooner this dangerous nonsense is eradicated the better. In the last hundred years, women have won many hard-fought battles to be treated as equals to men, but the transgender ideology appears to be on a mission to eradicate womanhood altogether.

There is a theory (untested, unproven) that we are living in a programmed computer simulation, a simulated universe.

It sounds farfetched but then so do some of the things happening on our Earth just now.

Callistemon21

^If there is a man who is lactating and trying to breast feed a baby and having problems - then he probably needs to see the consultant who has prescribed the hormones and other drugs, that have helped to induce prolactin... his problems have bugger all to do with the problems of millions of breast-feeding women.^

And he is thinking more of his own rights than those of the baby he's experimenting on.

Surely, the only way a biological man could produce any sort of nourishment, via the nipple, would be because of artificial hormones?🤔

Biological men do not produce milk.

Who, whatever sex they think they are, would want to put that into the body of a newborn infant?

Sometimes I think civilisation is going backwards.🙄

TerriBull

Small steps, but I'm not entirely sure we've turned the corner completely. La Leche League an organisation many will have heard of, set up to help new mothers establish breast feeding, are being bullied to allow trans women to enter their domain. Are there no women only places this tiny minority, but ever so loud and entitled people won't seek to infiltrate. Some women for all manner of issues, feeling intimidated, modesty, religious reasons, are not going to feel happy about having a man present.

I think, if I’d have sat near a biological man trying to feed a child via ‘milk producing breasts” he hadn’t got, I’ve had ended up dropping the baby, in a cross between bemusement and laughter.🙄

Biological men cannot breast feed a child, however much they might protest.

Thankfully, my kids were born in a different era. It’s unfair to expect biological women to have their space used for nonsense like this.

If there is a man who is lactating and trying to breast feed a baby and having problems - then he probably needs to see the consultant who has prescribed the hormones and other drugs, that have helped to induce prolactin... his problems have bugger all to do with the problems of millions of breast-feeding women.

And he is thinking more of his own rights than those of the baby he's experimenting on.

Bravo Doodledog!

With regard to La Leche - I cannot believe what is happening. The number of men who lactate and attempt breast-feeding is so small, it's so rare - any problems or issues they had / have would be specific to them - entirely unconnected with the problems that LL was set up to deal with.

This is nothing more than men - in the guise of transwomen, and under the superficial banner-mantra of "be kind / be inclusive" attempting to disempower women by colonising all their spaces, their natural functions, and the very language itself. I makes me bloody hopping mad.

If there is a man who is lactating and trying to breast feed a baby and having problems - then he probably needs to see the consultant who has prescribed the hormones and other drugs, that have helped to induce prolactin... his problems have bugger all to do with the problems of millions of breast-feeding women.

Aveline

Thank goodness for Doodledog. She says it all!

👍

Caleo

Dickens wrote:
"But mostly it's unimportant because it's not the point at issue. It's not whether a woman looks more like a man - it's whether that person is a man."

It would be terribly bad manners to enquire of any person what their genitals or breasts look like!

It would be terribly bad manners to enquire of any person what their genitals or breasts look like!

I think you are missing the point.

It's not about appearances - it's not about asking a woman to prove she's a woman.

The point is that biological women's protected spaces should remain so by law which would automatically exclude men - however they are dressed.