Trans women and single-sex spaces

Elegran

Rosie51

Doodledog

Sex, even

And in my excitement I put 'woman' instead of sex

A mere slip of the brain. That is nothing - in my post at 09:51:51 I put "woman" instead of "man", which made a pig's ear of the meaning of my whole post.

I did notice, but knew what you meant!

I'm the Queen of typos.

Knittingacat

Women's and men's voices are on a spectrum in terms of choir ranges. There are men who can sing soprano or alto, just as there are women who can sing alto or tenor (or rarely bass). So I can't see that gender identity would be a problem in a choir.

IMO it would only be a problem if it was a women’s choir, which would mean men have to lie to join it. If you already have any I wouldn’t have known members (except you obviously do) with no problem so far, there’s probably no need to do anything.

Many of the new choirs starting up in the North West, including the one I go to, are mixed and you decide which range you prefer to sing, so if you want to be something you aren’t it doesn’t matter.

I agree with Lathyrus3 though, that they have a different timbre, but unless they’re singing solo, the audience are unlikely to know.

Knittingacat

Women's and men's voices are on a spectrum in terms of choir ranges. There are men who can sing soprano or alto, just as there are women who can sing alto or tenor (or rarely bass). So I can't see that gender identity would be a problem in a choir.

Men singing in a sopranist range are singing falsetto.

Women, too, can sing falsetto but, imo, it is not as pleasant to listen to as a male falsetto.

Allira
😄😄
The Bee Gees just wouldn’t have sounded the same if they’ve been women.

Mollygo

Allira
😄😄
The Bee Gees just wouldn’t have sounded the same if they’ve been women.

Nor Frankie Valli. Loved both.

It was the Bee Gees I was thinking of, Mollygo! 😁

There used to be an argument about girls singing in Cathedral choirs namely that their voices did not gel (?) well with boys’ voices. I’m all for equality but I do like what I think of as the unique quality of boy soprano voices in English choral music.
Other nationalities of choir such The Vienna Boys Choir just don’t have that ethereal quality. Oh dear does that make me xenophobic as well?

I hope that no one assumes they may now legally discriminate against trans women, those protections remain. Trans women may not be directly or indirectly discriminated against, nor harassed based on their status. I fear we will see rather a lot of that in the coming days.

No we assume that we are able to accurately describe what a woman is and it doesn't include men.

Does that mean you may walk up to a trans woman and call her a man or would that be deemed harassment? I would wait for clarity were I you.

Smileless2012

Do you know why this issue has become a talking point Cabbie and why up until recently it has never been an issue, not just for you and your friend but for transgenders in general?

It's because women weren't being subjected to men claiming to be women while displaying their genitalia in women's changing rooms. It's because lesbian speed dating meetings hadn't previously had trans women insisting that they be allowed to attend. It's because women fighting for the retention of safe spaces for women, weren't being threatened and intimidated by trans activists. It's because never before had a rapist, now claiming to be a trans woman been referred too by his defence counsel and the presiding judge as she (Lexi Secker).

None of the aforementioned relate to your friend or to the over whelming majority of those who live as their preferred gender, but this has and continues to happen and it has to stop.

Well put Smileless! The issue is so much bigger and far reaching than any individual example. The complete absence of strategic common sense in some of the things that organisations have put in place/allowed to happen are quite gob smacking!

I tend not to do that luminance, so I am probably going to manage without that advice.

I was once chatting in a group and asked the question how do you define a woman. They said I was silly and it was obvious but when I persisted it was not as easy as they thought. Some said pull their pants down and look, others said being able to have a baby, others said XX chromosomes and a few went further and said the genes within the chromosomes.
We never came to a definite definition.

Luminance

Does that mean you may walk up to a trans woman and call her a man or would that be deemed harassment? I would wait for clarity were I you.

I assume it means I can safely describe a transwoman as a transwoman, a biological male and also use the correct pronouns if I'm uncomfortable using the wrong ones. I don't expect Galaxy is in the habit of walking up to any stranger and declaring her opinion of them.

Galaxy

Which poster is far right on here PN. If you continue to make allegations like this I will respond in kind. I am all for equality.

I was wondering which one of us is far right too!! 🤔

The law has been changed, there is now no need for any anti-trans rhetoric do we agree? Biological sex has been changed, this affords women their birth gender protections in single sex spaces and likely sports too. So we can all go back to allowing trans people to live quietly as who they are? Or are there further rights you would like to take from trans people?

Jackiest

I was once chatting in a group and asked the question how do you define a woman. They said I was silly and it was obvious but when I persisted it was not as easy as they thought. Some said pull their pants down and look, others said being able to have a baby, others said XX chromosomes and a few went further and said the genes within the chromosomes.
We never came to a definite definition.

Well now they have it a woman is a biological female.

I have wondered if people that have a problem with the definition of woman also struggle with other definitions. Do concepts such as sun, water, table, cow, mare, doe cause the same angst?

Luminance

The law has been changed, there is now no need for any anti-trans rhetoric do we agree? Biological sex has been changed, this affords women their birth gender protections in single sex spaces and likely sports too. So we can all go back to allowing trans people to live quietly as who they are? Or are there further rights you would like to take from trans people?

The law has not been changed, please try for accuracy. The law has been clarified for the hard of understanding. I copied this post from a KC on the other thread but will repeat it here.

I've copied this over from X. There are so many implications from this ruling.

Colin Wynter KC
@QcWynter
Final point. Once the Supreme Court has ruled, its decision states what the law has always been, not what it should be from date of judgment onwards.
This has implications for cases concluded, cases currently being fought, employers' trans access policies & lots more.
Huge

Well done Supreme Court! Common sense at last!
The implications of this ruling is immense, and will affect many, many decisions already made by the NHS, schools, businesses, sports organisations and competitions, etc which will have to be reversed. But it'll be worth it for my granddaughters (and me) to live their normal lives without fear, at least in this respect.

Why would anyone make that assumption Luminance?

Like you Rosie I assume it means I can safely describe a transwoman as a transwoman, a biological man and not be accused of being bigoted and trans phobic.

Luminance

I hope that no one assumes they may now legally discriminate against trans women, those protections remain. Trans women may not be directly or indirectly discriminated against, nor harassed based on their status. I fear we will see rather a lot of that in the coming days.

What is discriminatory about being able to refer to women and know that it means an adult human female, and not an adult human who has decided they are female?

I hope no-one assumes that preferring clarity of expression is indicative of prejudice, as it really isn't. For reasons I have never understood we have to point out that we are not transphobic over and over again on here, and it's tedious. There is not a link between wanting women's spaces to remain for women and being phobic, discriminatory or otherwise prejudiced, never mind being someone who would harass another - why would you assume that there is?

Luminance

The law has been changed, there is now no need for any anti-trans rhetoric do we agree? Biological sex has been changed, this affords women their birth gender protections in single sex spaces and likely sports too. So we can all go back to allowing trans people to live quietly as who they are? Or are there further rights you would like to take from trans people?

What rights have been taken from transpeople? Can you please name even one?

Luminance

The law has been changed, there is now no need for any anti-trans rhetoric do we agree? Biological sex has been changed, this affords women their birth gender protections in single sex spaces and likely sports too. So we can all go back to allowing trans people to live quietly as who they are? Or are there further rights you would like to take from trans people?

Please do change "The law has been changed" to "The law has been clarified"

Luminance Biological sex has been changed would you care to enlarge on this momentous statement? Millenia of sex being binary and immutable has been changed, really?

Rosie51. Yes but what is the definition of Biological female.

Sun is the star we orbit, Water is H2O Cow has a known DNA. All these things are defined and can be tested for. What is the test for woman? I accept that there is one I am just asking what it is.