Next step in overriding female rights!

Galaxy

I am not criticising for you not wanting to be part of the discussion, it wont have any impact on me either way. If you think I have broken the law by stating people cant change sex please report my posts.
It is not possible to change sex, men have no place in womens spaces, etc, etc.

I didn't say you had broken the law Galaxy. You said "Gender critical belief is protected in law". I agreed but explained the law doesn't stop there. It wasn't personal nor did I word it as if it was: it was just a law we should all be aware of - legally (an area you introduced) how we speak is as important as what we say.

PN

On the other hand you do seem to need to criticise me for not wanting to be part of what I perceive to be discrimination and hate speech.
I don’t need to criticise you for either of those things PN.

The discrimination against females by this doctor is plain for all to see. If you don’t accept that, that isn’t my problem.

His inability to acknowledge biological fact is a matter of great concern in a doctor.

If you’re not interested in any discussion on GN there is no obligation to contribute.

Hate speech?

Witzend

Must say I find it astonishing that a doctor calls biological sex a ‘nebulous’ concept!

From politicians* it’s one thing, but I’d never have thought a doctor would need a crash course in basic biology!

A GCSE in Human Biology might be sufficient to learn the difference.

What exactly do you feel constitutes discrimination or hate speech on this thread, PoliticsNerd? Most of us who have commented have merely cited examples of what has been given in evidence during the tribunal.

It is not hate speech to state that a human person cannot change sex, PoliticsNerd.
People can use their preferred gender, of course, but sex is immutable.

The question is whether those who do change gender should bully others and why. Why do men who have committed rape with their penis then decide they wish to live as a woman?
Could it be that they are trying to avoid justice ?
Likewise men who fail at sport then decide to compete as women. Why?

Surely if they want to live as a woman they surely like and respect women and I would think most do. But some do not, they continue with their male entitlement which is unfortunate for the majority who want to fit in.

Although, as I said, I think there are interesting counter arguments to be made, I am not interested in this type of discussion.

Speaking for myself only, of course, if I am not interested in a particular discussion I tend to ignore that thread or threads.

PoliticsNerd are you threatening us?

Must say I find it astonishing that a doctor calls biological sex a ‘nebulous’ concept!

From politicians* it’s one thing, but I’d never have thought a doctor would need a crash course in basic biology!

I am not criticising for you not wanting to be part of the discussion, it wont have any impact on me either way. If you think I have broken the law by stating people cant change sex please report my posts.
It is not possible to change sex, men have no place in womens spaces, etc, etc.

Galaxy

Politics Nerd it is not 2016 anymore - your approach just doesnt work anymore. Strangely enough we dont need your permission to discuss this - MN made their position on gender critical debate very clear years ago. Gender critical belief is protected in law - so yes I can freely say men cant become women and you cant change sex.

I don't think I said either that you needed my permission, or that you can't say what you want to say.

On the other hand you do seem to need to criticise me for not wanting to be part of what I perceive to be discrimination and hate speech.

Just one point. Those expressing philosophical beliefs are protected by law. However, those on the receiving end of those freely expressing their beliefs are also protected by various laws that limit how the can be delivered. Even Gransnet is not above the law.

The post focuses on an individual's personal information (medical history, place of residence, sexual orientation, age) in an irrelevant and potentially intrusive manner.

Oh come on, at least be accurate. Dr Upton was the one who introduced all the above in his reply to counsel. I did not. Another poster referred to it as verbose which you disputed. I questioned why he'd introduce these factors when there was no evidence anyone had ever asked him about any of them, rendering his answer verbose in my opinion too.

It rejects of a person's self-identified sex by making definitive statements on a complex scientific topic.

Perhaps you'd like to take up your argument with Professor Robert Winston who also categorically says you cannot change your sex. It might be unpalatable to Dr Upton, but even he knows his "I'm not a robot therefore I'm biological. I'm female, therefore I'm a biological female" is rubbish. An anonymous DNA test would come back as biological male. Surely you want a medical doctor to be grounded in fact not fiction?

Politics Nerd it is not 2016 anymore - your approach just doesnt work anymore. Strangely enough we dont need your permission to discuss this - MN made their position on gender critical debate very clear years ago. Gender critical belief is protected in law - so yes I can freely say men cant become women and you cant change sex.

Rosie51

PoliticsNerd is there any evidence any patient has ever asked for Upton's details regarding his medical history, place of residence, sexual orientation or age? I'd call that being verbose when all he needed to say was he thinks his lying about his sex is none of their business. And he is lying, no mammal let alone human has ever changed their DNA from male to female. Sex is determined by DNA not feelings.

The posters on this thread seem more intent on attacking me for not wanting to reply to this post than giving valuable facts, so I will attempt explain.

This post contains elements that could be considered discriminatory and could potentially promote hate speech. I have no wish to encourage more of this.

The post focuses on an individual's personal information (medical history, place of residence, sexual orientation, age) in an irrelevant and potentially intrusive manner.

It rejects of a person's self-identified sex by making definitive statements on a complex scientific topic.

It uses dismissive and belittling language. It's important to consider that using such language can contribute to a hostile environment and invalidate the experiences of others.

Although, as I said, I think there are interesting counter arguments to be made, I am not interested in this type of discussion.

I hope he is having some sleepless nights over the forensic examination of his phone. He'll have to pull up his 'big girl pants '. None of this less than edifying spectacle is doing the situation of trans people any favours.

Now a huge delay as NHS Fife didn't produce necessary requested documents. Dr Upton's phone has been requested for forensic examination.
What's the betting NHS Fife will try to settle before the tribunal resumed in July. July!! a long wait.

Mollygo

Any extreme prejudice alleged by PN, could equally well be the extreme prejudice against females, exhibited by the doctor in this case.

Well, yes, quite.

Thank you Allira. It's rather depressing that accepting reality is so unacceptable to those who think feelings override the scientific facts that they happily malign others.

Sorry - I meant Rosie51!

That does apply to others on the thread too.

Doodledog

Rosie is not extremely prejudiced. Far from it - she has a sound knowledge of biology and can point out the facts in a detached and scientific manner without insulting or casting aspersions on other posters.

Also, Upton's statement is just that - a statement. It is evidence of nothing. Also, as the case is about sex ('gender' is irrelevant here) then people not enquiring about his holidays or favourite colour means about as much as not asking about his sexual orientation or age.

I agree.

Mollygo as far as I know has never displayed prejudice, only biological truth.

Any extreme prejudice alleged by PN, could equally well be the extreme prejudice against females, exhibited by the doctor in this case.

Galaxy

What extreme prejudice are you talking about. I believe men cannot become women.

... looks like we're back to that old chestnut again... arguing the case from the stand-point that biological sex is immutable makes you transphobic or an extremist (((sigh))).

Depressing isn't it?

Now we have to wait until July.
Fife NHS Health board have caused this delay by not providing all the documents requested in a timely manner.

The nurse manager today continued with her car crash course of evidence, and she is a Band 8 with a £53+k - £60+k salary. This tribunal beggars belief.

I do know a trans woman doctor. He's very tall and wears high heels so towers over everybody. He's very domineering and is a Consultant so a big cheese.
I'm not shy but I'd be scared to say anything. I find him very intimidating. If he's in the Ladies I'll leave (not that he notices or cares).

His behaviour and his dismissive attitude to female rights means patients may be more likely to ask about the sex of their doctor.

If you can’t trust a doctor not to lie either outright, or by action, or to respect the patients, what does that say about the doctor?

Thank you Doodledog.