Next step in overriding female rights!

Upton wants to continue his pretence that he is a woman.
If he entered the male changing rooms they would probably laugh at him when he started applying his mascara and lip gloss.

"It supports your bias, whilst denying anyone else’s."

How does it do that? Mollygo. I certainly wasn't my intention.

Another though re Dr Upton: what does it say about his male colleagues that he won't use the male changing rooms? Surely the male doctors, nurses and paramedics are safe enough to be around?

👏👏👏 Brilliant post Doodledog. You have articulated my own thoughts far better than I could have.

GrannyGravy13

eazybee

Pointless philosophising about the nature of physical change is obscuring the real issue here, which is why anyone would deny another person personal privacy.
The wish to intrude on someone dealing with the consequences of a heavy menstrual flow, necessitating intimate hygiene, the same as a person dealing with vomiting or suffering diarrhea, is unpleasant and intrusive.

Any normal person would have left discreetly.

Totally agree

Me too.

I'm not sure of your hypothesis, PN. Is it that there has been a sudden and accelerated evolution of humans to reverse millennia of biology? How and why do you think this has happened? Why is it so bound up with the 'feelings' of those concerned, as opposed to the changes in environment and so on that have driven evolution up to now? What is the benefit to society? Most evolution is about survival of the fittest. How does having the female sex replaced (or diluted) by people unable to bear children benefit the species? Would it not be evolutionarily more practical to reduce fertility if a reduction in numbers were the driver?

Is it not more likely that the push to remove women as a sex class is political rather than a force of nature? If women are no more, men can dominate entirely, as there is nowhere we can go, nothing we can be, and nothing we can have for ourselves - men can access all areas of our lives and if we complain we are discriminatory, or even criminal.

I expect a reply that answers none of these questions but instead looks for a loophole in something I have said that can be twisted into a 'Gotcha'.

I am not claiming that every person who identifies as a trans woman is a misogynist or a predator. But it is a documented fact that some well-known predators and misogynists have adopted a trans identity explicitly because our misogyny-ridden society has decided that the male predator's feelings about his identity are more significant than women's safety.

Transgender Ideology Isn't About Dignity. It's Warmed Over Misogyny. (Opinion NEWSWEEK 2023))

Read it:
It's about a book written by the author's father, Jack Holland, titled Misogyny: The World's Oldest Prejudice

She says, about her father's book:
His book had a distinct liberal bias, but the nearly 20 years since he died have shown that even in an ultra-permissive, sexually free secular society which has loosened the bonds of family and abolished patriarchal norms, even then, misogyny finds a way to destroy women and girls.

www.newsweek.com/transgender-ideology-isnt-about-dignity-its-warmed-over-misogyny-opinion-1799266

eazybee

Pointless philosophising about the nature of physical change is obscuring the real issue here, which is why anyone would deny another person personal privacy.
The wish to intrude on someone dealing with the consequences of a heavy menstrual flow, necessitating intimate hygiene, the same as a person dealing with vomiting or suffering diarrhea, is unpleasant and intrusive.

Any normal person would have left discreetly.

Totally agree

Pointless philosophising about the nature of physical change is obscuring the real issue here, which is why anyone would deny another person personal privacy.
The wish to intrude on someone dealing with the consequences of a heavy menstrual flow, necessitating intimate hygiene, the same as a person dealing with vomiting or suffering diarrhea, is unpleasant and intrusive.

Any normal person would have left discreetly.

^ "Don't ask, don't question, dont challenge our absolutist thinking. "^[sic]

It's the opposite. It is questioning what we are being told. Some organisations teach that if a male goes into work that day and decides they are female, they have access to all the female protected spaces. They are told this in their LGBQT training courses which I believe are created through stonewall. This is where problems lie. Interpretations of law being misunderstood or twisted to fit a particular narrative. Gender specific laws are in place to protect women in particular because we are or can be vulnerable - otherwise, why the laws in the first place?

I don't think anyone has issues with people diagnosed with GID (I may be wrong but I have never got that impression from these debates on GN)

What is it about biological fact that you dispute and/or do not understand PoliticsNerd ?

It is impossible to change one’s cells or chromosomes, a humans sex is in every single cell of everyone’s body.

Putting on a dress, taking hormones and in some cases having one’s penis and testicles removed with a surgical procedure to make a fake vagina (which has to be kept open by having an insert in for hours each day), will not and cannot alter one’s chromosomes.

I am all for dressing how you like, but please do not expect me to accept a man in a dress as a biological women because it is a down right impossibility.

That’s such a funny post PN.

It supports your bias, whilst denying anyone else’s.

Of course nature changes, but changing it by cutting off bits, adding bits or simply identifying as something you are not, and using that identification in a way which harms others is not nature evolving.

People’s willingness or unwillingness to accept lies is also evolving.
There are only two biological sexes, and sex is immutable.

I am not and will never be a 2m leggy blonde, but saying I am, harms no one except me, because I can never be what I want to be.

On the other hand, cloning someone’s identity, claiming to be them, dressing like them and demanding to be accepted as them is harmful.

I'm really not sure these continuous personal attacks, simply because I don't agree outright with your bias on this subject, are getting us anywhere, or are within the ethos of the forum.

Mankind has changed a great deal since we first appeared on Earth – arguably our biggest, most fantastical change. It is fascinating to contemplate where we may go in the future.

Nature offers constant changes within every species; some continue to thrive, while others fail because they are limited in some way. People either develop or don't develop certain conditions because genes are passed down. If a person thrives because of those changes, those genes will continue. There are also in-utero disasters, some of which end life early, and some that can be lived with.

I have no idea if this is relevant to any of those questioning their sex but neither do you or anyone else at this point in time. Being sure of anything shuts down the enquiring mind. Being sure of anything without proof makes fools of us.

Your credo seems to be "Don't ask, don't question, dont challenge our absolutist thinking. ". I truly hope I never reach that stage in life.

Yes, the person who liked to start an argument to promote supposedly superior abilities.
Different tack?

Galaxy

What stops me being 6ft tall because I say I am ( I am 5, 3).
It is funny that those who constantly talk about misinformation on social media, embrace this belief system.

I wish I'd known that I could simply choose to identify as a 6ft tall skinny supermodel...
(Sorry, just trying to lighten the mood a little after all the arguing for the sake of arguing!)

Aveline, the poster using the name Volver has gone……..

I well remember Volver. A person who would argue about anything, not just this topic. I thought she'd gone.

Rosie51

Does anyone remember Volver who expressed similar interest in understanding the complexities of this topic? Turned out her lack of knowledge was fabricated since she eventually revealed she had friends or was it relatives that were transgender. I'm getting very similar vibes.

Absolutely. I’ve been thinking that for a while. Same reluctance to answer direct questions.
PN I don’t find your posts or your attitude difficult to understand. I do understand your reluctance to answer.

This thread is about a man who pretends he is a woman and victimises a female who dares to object to him using his fantasy to the detriment of the very beings he is pretending to be.
Once again, a male deciding that his rights override those of females.

Mollygo

PN, you want a discussion about why we should accept a male lying that he is a female, being happy to make women feel uncomfortable, or take up female safe spaces, or spout waffle like sex is nebulous? Go ahead.
Enough people have posted the views on this subject already.
You have posted your views.
What would you like to add to the discussion?
I’d like to know if you think we should accept all lies, or only those told or acted by TIM when using the lie to the detriment of females?

No Molly, I'm sorry you find my posts so difficult to understand. My fault if you can't.

Does anyone remember Volver who expressed similar interest in understanding the complexities of this topic? Turned out her lack of knowledge was fabricated since she eventually revealed she had friends or was it relatives that were transgender. I'm getting very similar vibes.

PN I am not trying to play games or dismiss the claims of experts like Robert Winston. At this point I neither agree or disagree with them. I don't have enough information to make that decision. I doubt if anyone on here does. Asking questions is my way of trying to understand the complexities of this topic.

I am not so arrogant to think that I as a layman can challenge the lifetime's work of a specialist like Sir Robert Winston. In the same way when I had my latest bout of cancer I felt my oncologist's experience of 30+ years of experience in the field vastly outweighed my layman's knowledge. (This despite my 3 variations of cancer versus his not ever being personally afflicted) I think if you were really totally honest you'd admit that no amount of evidence would ever be enough. Your sympathies lie with the transgender doctor not the biological females affected. Robert Winston is regarded as one of the leading experts in the field, if his evidence isn't enough for you then I doubt such evidence exists. That's your choice and while I can respect your right to hold such views I cannot in honesty respect those views. 'None so blind as those that will not see' springs to mind. I'm still not convinced this isn't some indulgent gameplay from you. It will certainly affect how I view your reasoning and opinions on the political threads and elsewhere. I don't expect that to trouble you for so much as a nanosecond.

Well put Allira.

I think you might be right about the games too.

I am not trying to play games or dismiss the claims of experts like Robert Winston. At this point I neither agree or disagree with them. I don't have enough information to make that decision. I doubt if anyone on here does. Asking questions is my way of trying to understand the complexities of this topic.

Why do you call Dr Winston's statements of facts claims?

You can agree or disagree with him but the information is out there if you care to do some research.
There is nothing complex about the fact that biological sex in mammals is immutable. Nor can a human child become a cat, an adult a llama.

There may be many permutations of what people perceive as their gender or even what mammal they believe they may be but that is their choice.
It does not make it a fact that their sex has changed, it is just their preferred gender.

PN, you want a discussion about why we should accept a male lying that he is a female, being happy to make women feel uncomfortable, or take up female safe spaces, or spout waffle like sex is nebulous? Go ahead.
Enough people have posted the views on this subject already.
You have posted your views.
What would you like to add to the discussion?
I’d like to know if you think we should accept all lies, or only those told or acted by TIM when using the lie to the detriment of females?

I appreciate your perspective Rosie51, but you seem to be missing the point of a constructive discussion.

*You directly accuse me of bad faith, science denial, and avoiding the core arguments.
*You imply intellectual inferiority by highlighting the "superior knowledge" of others and questioning my understanding.
*Your tone suggests impatience with my questions.
*You show a complete disregard for my point if view, presumably because it doesn't agree with yours, and the suggestion of a need to "avoid" questions shows you have closed your mind to differing views.

I am not trying to play games or dismiss the claims of experts like Robert Winston. At this point I neither agree or disagree with them. I don't have enough information to make that decision. I doubt if anyone on here does. Asking questions is my way of trying to understand the complexities of this topic.

Instead of seeing my inquiries as avoidance, perhaps see them as an opportunity for deeper conversation. I’m genuinely interested in discussing why certain arguments resonate with those on this thread.

Mollygo Well PN has been told several times that it's Upton's male biological sex that stops him being female, but apparently can't assimilate that.