How the erosion of LGBT rights effects female sex based rights.

Lampy123678 · Today 16:01

+ + No-one has said that trans people shouldn't be allowed to get pregnant. Posters have correctly stated that trans women can't get pregnant because they are of the male sex. + +

I wouldn't have said that if I haven't seen some GC posters say it and I have.

Well, none of us seem to have read that, so could you link, please?

Re testosterone, I believe it's a discussion between the patient and their doctor and ultimately down to the patient as it's their body whilst they are pregnant.

So, if a pregnant mother was taking crystal meth, you'd be fine with that? After all, it's her her choice, right? How about Thalidomide? It's currently used to treat leprosy. Any other damaging drugs, or is it only testosterone you think is fine.

Domperidone is thought to be safe to give to women to increase breast milk production. Men are not designed to lactate. We have no idea about the nutritional value of chemically induced "breast milk" in men so no I do not think we should support someone who wants to "breast feed" but isn't biologically designed to do so. The needs of a baby always come before an adults want for validation.

Hang on a second. I never said that women fighting for sex based rights are wrong per se. I said they shouldn't be platforming people who are supported by right wing groups or parties or women who support abusive men to do it.

It's allowed under technical circumstances and women are at risk of prosecution should they not follow the technicalities.Vulnerable women being abused have vastly reduced access to the legal routes of abortion. It should not be taken for granted that the right to abortion is a given until it's decriminalised and more feminists should be devoting their time and platform to the issue.

And none of them think attacking the bodily autonomy of others will ever bite them on the bum.

In the same way that many women (orignal sex based meaning) don't think that undermining the legal and social existence of Women as a sex class that excludes male people will ever bite them on the bum? Even though that bum is already getting nibbled away as we see women losing out to colonising men (original sex based meaning) in our sports, in our prizes, in our professional bodies, in our reserved physical spaces, in our equality measures and targets...

It's both hilarious and heartbreaking to see people who believe they are "feminists" wokring so hard at making what it's reasonable for women to expect from society shrink smaller and smaller just to avoid having to say No to men.

Well firstly the science doesn't show that at all but even if it did, do you believe in interfering with the bodily autonomy of others or not? Should we be taking away the children of biological women who smoke in pregnancy ?

I am aware of the legal technicalities yes. However abortion is allowed in the U.K. and no one in the government is trying to stop that (which is what the OP is stating as fact)

Some do though.

Re testosterone, I believe it's a discussion between the patient and their doctor and ultimately down to the patient as it's their body whilst they are pregnant.I don't support smoking or drinking alcohol in pregnancy but it doesn't mean I think women should be made to stop smoking or drinking whilst pregnant because I don't believe in chipping away at bodily autonomy.

Would that be because the "breastmilk" that transwomen produce is full of chemicals and bad for the baby?

How on earth do you intend to measure the effects of any government policy on women if we can't actually define what one is? How will you gather data on the effects of austerity on women?

There are no women's rights if we are not recognised as a sex class.

Perhaps if you knew more about the issues you wouldn't reduce women's concerns to public toilets.

I wouldn't have said that if I haven't seen some GC posters say it and I have. There are some very nasty people who get a free pass on here again because they believe with the overall "GC view" regardless of if they're being nasty. Some think transmen shouldn't be allowed to get pregnant. Some think trans women shouldn't be allowed to breastfeed. It doesn't cross their mind that the medical assistance they're arguing against also supports biological women who are adoptive parent for example. None of it gets called out because they all agree in principal against trans people. And none of them think attacking the bodily autonomy of others will ever bite them on the bum.

Maybe you need to go and have a read on here and see people arguing that trans people shouldn't be allowed to be pregnant...

There aren't any, of course, although there are discussions over transm taking testosterone whilst pregnant, to the known detriment of the developing baby. Testosterone is teratogenic, which means that it causes defects, including deformed genitals in girls and anovulation, which is a major cause of infertility.

Do you support that?

I'm baffled at how women are losing the right to "do STEM" as I'm not sure that is something that is specifically referenced in equality laws.

You mean except the GC people who do court the support of right wing groups? And Nazis? Or the several threads on here encouraging women to vote Tory because of their opinions on GC issues regardless of how awful they have been to women? Ok..

A simple example is JK Rowling publicly supported Johnny Depp despite knowing his abusive towards Amber Heard.

The Tories have done absolutely f*ck all for women or our rights. Austerity has been deadly for women in the UK. Austerity in general I feel is responsible for many issues GC feminists are so worried about because they aren't funding the services that should be keeping dangerous inmates out of women's prisons and there isn't any bloody funding going to crisis centres. They have done nothing in their years in power to decriminalise abortion and it took over a decade for the buffer zones to be passed and even then they watered it down. I take issue with "feminists" encouraging people to vote for them as though it is in women's interests when it's not. Just because they say what you want to hear about public toilets while doing NOTHING to progress women's rights.

I asked you if you were talking about children or adults. You still haven't answered.

The confusion with pregnancy arises when someone claims to be so distressed by the reality of their physical body that they need to undergo radical body modification for their own wellbeing but then feels comfortable doing the most female thing of all.

I don't think they should be stopped but I do have questions about how any medication they are taking may affect a baby and why the NHS should fund reassignment treatment when a planned pregnancy seems inconsistent with a diagnosis of gender dysphoria.

No-one has said that trans people shouldn't be allowed to get pregnant. Posters have correctly stated that trans women can't get pregnant because they are of the male sex.

There will always be a small group of people making noise about this.

Thats a world away from it being debated as government policy.

Please show evidence that this has been debated by the government/parlament

I'm not sure what you are finding so confusing and want clarified. I believe in bodily autonomy. I think people should make decisions about their own bodies regarding their healthcare and that the state and it's political opinions shouldn't interfere. What is so hard about that for you? Maybe you need to go and have a read on here and see people arguing that trans people shouldn't be allowed to be pregnant if you're so confused about why I think some GC people fight against bodily autonomy.

Protecting women's rights should not be contingent on women accepting the sexist misogyny of gender identities.

The people who connect the two are acting in bad faith. They may spout forth about feminism and equality but by their actions betray that that they do not see women as deserving social support and legal protections in their own right, but only as a reward for their support of more important causes.

But everybody is limited to various forms of healthcare unless they are Gillick competent and in the same way that doctors can prevent treatment if they believe that it is not in the best interests of the patient.

Why won't you clarify what you mean?

Adults are free to pursue medical treatment if they choose to.

The Cass report made it very clear that there was insufficient robust evidence to support social or medical transition of children.

Do you think we should provide treatment which maybe harmful?

Don't you think that gender confused young people deserve well researched health care?

She also just publicly supports men who abuse women so there's that too.

Really? Link, please.

It does when an anti abortion right wing politician quotes you whilst passing an anti lgbt piece of legislation and you say nothing. She also just publicly supports men who abuse women so there's that too.

There's a difference between me and a right winger both like X. Of course that doesn't make us the same. But if the right-winger is boosting my online profile or expressing support for me publicly I'd happily tell them to do one and not want to be associated with them.

I'm sorry, I didn't see your edit before before I quoted you. I'm referencing GC posters and politicians arguing against access to trans healthcare. I think, while perhaps we'll meaning, arguing to limit the bodily autonomy of others is dangerous to women and girls. It makes bodily autonomy seem like a privilege and not an absolute right.

But you have called JKR a supporter of an abuser, and have made the same 'mistake' that you have claimed others have by linking completely different issues.

Just because someone on the right right is GC doesn't mean that someone that is also GC supports all of their policies or beliefs.