Women and anyone with a cervix

That is called 'cultural appropriation' and it is not evidence of cavemen being 'trans'.

Do better.

Fucking ridiculous. Women as ever have to accommodate everyone else's delusions.

I firmly believe 'biological women' would cover it.

Native American tribes have a long history of formally acknowledging gender non-conformity. Bearing in mind Native American history stretches back 30,000 years.

Tribes such as the Lakota, Navajo, Crow etc have different names and concepts of gender non-conformist roles. The Paiutes had “Tudayap” which referred to people who dressed like the other sex. The “Winkte” in the Lakota tribe were men who “want to be like women”.

This has been hijacked by the trans community as “two spirit” concept which is modern, spurious & “Pretendian” imo.

Because everyone is 'biological' apparently.
(Yup, literally, a real conversation I had with someone once 🤯)

I think it is a simple question of tolerance. Gender dysphoria is a recognised condition. Within the boundaries I have set out, I will accommodate trans-people as much as I can.

I think it is a simple question of tolerance. Gender dysphoria is a recognised condition. Within the boundaries I have set out, I will accommodate trans-people as much as I can.

I think it is a simple question of tolerance. Gender dysphoria is a recognised condition. Within the boundaries I have set out, I will accommodate trans-people as much as I can.

So if these people were “born in the wrong body” then that is for them to get help with. It does not mean they get to claim to be the opposite sex or demand others go along with their delusions. Would you go along with an anorexic saying they were fat?

There is no magazine. Y'all fall for this sort of inflammatory OP every time.

Thanks. I do believe that some men and women were born into a body that they just do not belong in

What does that even mean? What happened? Where is the body they do belong in?

Thanks. I do believe that some men and women were born into a body that they just do not belong in. I also believe that some people do not really identify as any particular sex. I am now approaching sixty and this is not new, it has always been the case in my lifetime. I want to be supportive to these people as far as I can. I am not sure that just continually saying you are a man/woman get over it gets us very far in this debate.

Thanks. I do believe that some men and women were born into a body that they just do not belong in. I also believe that some people do not really identify as any particular sex. I am now approaching sixty and this is not new, it has always been the case in my lifetime. I want to be supportive to these people as far as I can. I am not sure that just continually saying you are a man/woman get over it gets us very far in this debate.

Or we could just send a clear message to men that they are not age never will be women and therefore need to stay out of all female spaces. And vice versa for women who claim a trans identity.

I have a male friend who has a cervix. And no, it doesn’t make him a woman. He has had top surgery but due to serious long term illness is unable to have bottom surgery.

It really doesn't bother me, im baffled by people's rage at inclusive language

Which post? MN doesn't give the opportunity to just look at one person's posts so can you please give an example of a caveman 'living as a woman'.

Thanks. I think we need to be clear about the balance here between the rights of women and those of the trans community. I have absolutely no problem in using requested pronouns and the language here is not concerning to me. Some people will strongly identify as male when they were born female. What we need to be clear on is that a female changing area should be for biological women only and that in certain limited other cases such as personal care, rape support and in some cases prisons should be based on biological sex. There is a reasonable path here and the sooner we get clear guidance, the better.

But that language supposes that all women are female. In their bid to be inclusive, they are either going to get a lot of males claiming trans identity rocking up, as they believe they are women, or they are being transphobic and stating all women are female. That is where this mangling of language gets us.

That gives us a history of gender non-conformity - but one which never includes redesignating the gender of the person. They are simply given a separate label.

That’s great. So that gives us the precedent of men, whichever gender they express, being treated as men then?

We have proof of tribes going back into ancient times that had designations for more than 2 genders - with names for men who live as women or women who live as men for example.

However, whatever the historical culture - these persons were not termed the gender they identified as.