Until we organise as well as the transactivists we're not going to stem the problem

And no offense meant for fudged terms etc v sleep deprived

Bagel - if you try 4thwavenow, fair play for women, gendercriticaldad, peachyoghurt, gendertrender, Miranda Yardley, MagdelenBerns that will start you off with a good range of gender critical viewpoints, and you will see who they are following.

Japanese I have no problem with anyone identifying as anything for any reason. If a man wants to identify as a turnip and go fight the galexy because he believes in spoon he's more than welcome imo.

But female/male can not be identified into. That's fact. And sex segregated areas should remain sex segregated for that reason. Language used to talk about those experiences is already defined and in use and is in no need of redefinition as it describes facts, not value or anything else, just science. And medical treatment should remain for those with medical diagnosis, ie gender dysphoria. And first line treatment should be therapy before anything else.

But I don't think it actually matters why someone feels they need to identify differently, as in I don't think that's our areas to be dictating, as female experience, spaces, and language arn't 'theirs' to be dictating. I think the focus needs to remain on that, that we are protecting female rights and issues, not barging our way into others. Because that's what TRA's are doing to us (menstrual blood is pomegranit pee pee!!) that we are obejecting to.

I realise that this is a bit nasty, but is there any way of tying in concerns re the bill to questions of security / terrorism - can't have all these randomly and radically changed identities floating around!

I've requested the details of my MP's next surgeries and asked for a meeting.

I wish I didn't have to make sure this was all anonymous, unfortunately I fear my professional registration and therefore my job may be at risk if this all goes the way it seems to be at the moment. Locally it's not such an issue but I can't be vocal on social media as 'me'. Sad times indeed.

Placemarking with interest. Have been reading all the threads with interest esp since the Jenni Murray article.

I'm on Twitter so would be grateful if someone could list any people on Twitter who would be good to follow re. this issue - as a starting point.

Stopmakingsense

There are so many layers to transgenderism. But the transactivists are generally split into two. One is cross dressing men with a fetish and the other is young liberal kids with an ideal.

Whilst I agree with everything you have said, you cannot ignore the more unsavoury side. I realise that equating young gender nonconforming, confused children with late transitioning fetishists is ludicrous (and it is this which leads to the polarising of opinion), they nonetheless are both considered under the trans umbrella.

And it is the latter who have all the clout and all the power.

The two brothers who made the Matrix series have both come out as transwomen. Previously they had both frequented BDSM clubs, quite openly and one is in a relationship with a dominatrix. I really don't care what someone does in their spare time, but I do care when it starts to affect policy. Incidentally they are now being feted for their bravery as being the first 'women' to write a successful film trilogy.

Caitlyn Jenner is a poster girl for the movement. Another very powerful person. Another who boasted of stealing her daughter's underwear.

Frank Maloney - again, a powerful former man. Who subjected his wife to domestic violence. Again, being feted in the media as 'brave' and being splashed across talkshows.

Where else would you ever get people who steal their children's underwear, indulge in sadomasochism and beat up their wives being used as an example of 'bravery' and enlightenment?

If a campaign about the negative effects on children has a knock on effect to this element, then all to the good. But no one should ignore where the money and power is coming from and why,

This is exactly it; we stand for the rights of transpeople who want to change gender due to body dismorphia.

We do not stand of the rights of men who want to dress as a woman and access women's spaces, and have to treat them as 'women' if they say we are.

Most people do not realise there is a difference. The language has been hijacked.

How do we address this? I have written to my MP. Is this mentioned in the private bill, I cannot access the wording for some reason.

Irenethequaint. Read the act. It is not just about employment. I support transgender people sharing the same rights at work, so long as they don't supersede others' rights.

I wrote to my MP, he shares my concerns about children/teenagers being encouraged to transition, (this is my primary concern as my family are directly affected - only now are the full ramifications sinking in) and he contacted Justin Greening who replied to him. There was a positive paragraph on how gender non-conformity should be encouraged, then a more woolly "freedom to explore their identity in an environment that is open to diversity" which can "help children challenge negative gender stereotypes". Then a paragraph about how puberty blockers are reversible and used only with caution. I followed this up directly with her, saying among many other things that puberty blockers may not be psychologically reversible and then got a reply from a health policy person, about health policy for transgender young people. i.e. what is appropriate if a young person is "definitely" (my emphasis) transgender. Nothing about if a young person is not actually transgender (whatever that means) and is actually confused/anxious/autistic etc. This is a policy based on a belief that being transgender has a biological basis (that treatment should be somatic, not psychological).

That is as far as I am able to go I think - I won't risk alienating my child by openly campaigning, but I could cry with relief that you wonderful people are so passionate and articulate.

As discussed upstream - the issue is not about transgender people, but transactvists. And a campaign that could generate headlines about all transwomen only wanting to gain access to women's spaces for a sexual fetish does not get my support.

But is about the fact that ideology is driving medical and educational policy.

Biology, evidence and facts matter. Teaching children that there are blue brains and pink brains is wrong. Teaching from the earliest age that a boy can wear and do whatever he wants, wear girl's clothes is not wrong - it is challenging gender stereotypes. So when a boy dressed like a girl uses the boys' toilets, that is fine. He is still a boy. When a girl dressed like a boy uses the girls toilets, that is fine, she is still a girl. Then perhaps those children will grow up without the prejudices which have led to this madness. That will be a long time coming.

Regarding self-identification I have to say that, given that may child may persist for now, purely from their own safety (and to allow a route back if they decide this was not a good path to follow) I think there is a case for allowing this to happen without them being obliged to seek permanent medical changes in order to get a GRC. The policy that works for this is for everyone to use the services and facilities of their biological sex, and for it to be a hate crime and transphobic to suggest otherwise. Then we don't get rapists described as women, and girls can object to a getting undressed in front of someone of the opposite sex. So (as my kids seem to understand it) gender can be an expression of identity which is independent from biological sex, so that eventually this can all fade away.

"To be protected from gender reassignment discrimination, you do not need to have undergone any specific treatment or surgery to change from your birth sex to your preferred gender. This is because changing your physiological or other gender attributes is a personal process rather than a medical one. You can be at any stage in the transition process – from proposing to reassign your gender, to undergoing a process to reassign your gender, or having completed it."

But this is about being protected from discrimination - e.g. losing your job because you're trans. What it means is that you're protected from discrimination even if you haven't got a GRC yet. Not that you can legally self-identify as the opposite sex.

Very sad state if affairs when people feel the need to be anonymous, says it all really.

Ignore that bridge dweller you lot!

Great posts, thanks for the anonymity ideas

Although I'm not really sure I want to be anonymous tbh.

I'm writing to my mp today and created a twitter acc

.

I have a question about twitter anonymity: I can't sign up without it making me use my mobile number 'so my friends can find me' and it texts a code to this number so I can't create an account without it.

Is there a way around this?

Autogynephilia could be one reason a trans-woman would insist on a woman doing a medical examination.

It really has come to a pretty pass when a good deal of people with a sexual fetish are hiding under a legal umbrella of gender dysphoria. And the general population has no clue.

Gender dysphoria should remain a cornerstone in the diagnosis of trans. Trans-people have lobbied to have it taken off.

Why? How are they managed to persuade Parliament that identifying as a woman means nothing?

Iris

THIS is causing the problem:

You can be at any stage in the transition process – from proposing to reassign your gender, to undergoing a process to reassign your gender, or having completed it

No one has any way of knowing whether the person is on a genuine path or not. And I believe, in the transgender report, it was even more woolly.

In real life, a transgender person is anyone who says they are. Because no one has enough ammunition to challenge it. The default position is to give in to any and all demands.

The legal definition of the word woman needs to be set in stone. Otherwise 'sex discrimination' can't talk about 'women' as a sex.

In terms of twitter, etc I agree with the previous poster about certain things being more eye-catching to the general population than others. The first thing is the definition of the word woman to include anyone who says they are.

The time for reasoned argument is over. Sensationalist sound bites and triggering people's' sense of outrage is the way forward.

The CPS link is not mandatory for schools, I agree. But the secretive way they have included such loaded wording is an example of how this ideology is infiltrating.

Lisa mugglebridge might be amother name to try & ask if she would put a petition out their.

Iris the process will simpley require a self cert, and as it's so simple people could pressumabley self certification back when they felt like it.

And what about 'gender fluidity' will there be a box to tick for that buzz word?

So how do you go about changing gender, just write to passport office etc and tell them you are now a man even though I have a fully functional female body? If I then got pregnant could i insist I'm treated on the male ward of the hospital? If I'm a male offender, with a fully functional male body I could then access a female prison?

Iris, that's as maybe, however under the equality act:

To be protected from gender reassignment discrimination, you do not need to have undergone any specific treatment or surgery to change from your birth sex to your preferred gender. This is because changing your physiological or other gender attributes is a personal process rather than a medical one. You can be at any stage in the transition process – from proposing to reassign your gender, to undergoing a process to reassign your gender, or having completed it. (EHRC)