Trans women

@Mldgebbe
I don't think deportation in those circumstances is "legal" and nor should anyone. It's against natural justice, breaches the deportee's human rights etc. Any acceptance of what done on any level will just allow it all to be swept under the carpet or for people to say it's all their fault because they didn't have the right documents.

Cis is what males call women to 'other' us.

SmG has been adamant that if the law says that a person transitioned from male to female it becomes a fact that we are breaking the law to dispute. By saying it is not possible to change ones sex by having cosmetic surgery and documents altered Feminists are transphobic.

Feminists do not agree.

I'm still confused about @SupermatchGame 's assertion that transwomen are not male. Can you elaborate? Can female human beings be transwomen? And if so, what is the difference between "cis" and "trans" women?

@Pratchet "I would have said she. But 'being nice' to people who are being utterly vile to you and trying to take away your rights is suicidal."

This is so true. I tend to use the chosen pronouns of anyone but I think that I have just been brought up not to offend. I think it is important not to think anyone is the good one or bad one in this. I don't hate or fear trans people at all. I know trans people and care about them. I also know and care about other women and feminists.

I think the lovely Magdalene says it better than me. Women who are gender critical are not witches hiding around a corner. And in answer to the OP I don't frown on anyone. But I don't want sex-based protections removed.

The ones where they were deporting people because they did not have the correct documentation without which they had no right to stay here. One poor women got stuck in Jamaica for years.

@Mldgebbe what were these "technically" "legal" Windrush deportations?

Well that's why we got in such a mess with wind rush. I understand that technically the deportations were legal. But sometimes there is a dsicrepency between law and what the population feel is right. Law works best when it is aligned with the general belief of the population. It can nudge population ( as smoking laws have done) and Sometimes that means difficult issues can bash around in the courts for years and sometimes it means that laws are changed. What is right in law at one point in time may change.

"If the court says something is right, then it's right. That's how the legal system works."

• Jesus. What a load of utter guff Super. And you say you have critical thinking skills? There's your problrm right there.

You said it Pratchet I will pronoun in birth sex only, not only here but in all discussions of or with TIM's. I will not be made to lie - ever!

Yes, exactly, Pratchet: But 'being nice' to people who are being utterly vile to you and trying to take away your rights is suicidal.

We are women, and we are saying NO to this attempted bullying and coercion.

Why the constant attempts by TRAs and allies to shatter women's boundaries?

I would have said she. But 'being nice' to people who are being utterly vile to you and trying to take away your rights is suicidal.

@SupermatchGame I can't comment on the video you mention as I have not seen it.

I actually find it very disturbing when male criminals are referred to as 'she', it is dishonest.

But for regular people, it doesn't mean that people will necessarily 'misgender' people when they meet them. All this policing women and how they speak actually pushes me further away from feeling sympathetic about trans issues. And I think that is actually quite sad.

Men have argued for many centuries that obedience is their natural right and entitlement. Far as I know they still put it in their marriage contracts. It is the basis for the aggrieved entitlement world view that prompts them to violence when they are deprived of the obedience they consider their due.

It isn't all that often that women can indulge themselves in plain truths openly stated, so I am not surprised that they take pleasure in the experience.

If it's a human right to be referred to as your preferred gender it is absolutely not. The rest of your argument then it doesn't come with any conditions - because that's the point of human rights. The only 'condition' is that you're human is therefore null.

If the court says something is right, then it's right. That's how the legal system works. absolutely not the case and nor how the law works. If something is legal, then it is legal. But a court is not the arbiter of what is morally right.

One would think there was never a bad law, or judge, or legal system, or court, in the whole wide world.

That's the thing though - the right to life, the right to food, shelter, freedom from torture, freedom of conscience, freedom of belief, freedom of speech... by comparison, "And I assert my human right to get called by my chosen pronouns" - that's the point at which I just think someone is being an attention seeking fool.

Yes, it's nicer to live in a society where people are on the whole polite and kind to one another, but not if that politeness and kindness is coerced (at which point it becomes meaningless), and certainly not if it comes at the cost of free speech.

'indulging' in misgendering trans women as some sort of secret luxury is so utterly bizarre!

Italian I see it on here all the time. You can see the enjoyment some people get from misgendering. Watch Posie's latest videos you can see the glee in her face and laughter in her voice as she misgenders Jenner and Munroe; impersonating the south park Jenner with a masculine voice and saying "Mnroe". (=a) They seem to do it like it's some sort of hobby. It is prejudice and bullying and it's spectacularly clear to see.

It was about the lack of places online which still allow critical thought. So your clever clever reply you jumped in with just made you look silly.

Eresh It's what is meant by critical thought here though. Sometimes critical thought is a (thin) disguise for misgendering and TWAM over and over again.

the enforcement of this politeness, regardless of the actions of the transwoman in question, that I object to.

Fermat I think that's a difficult one. If it's a human right to be referred to as your preferred gender then it doesn't come with any conditions - because that's the point of human rights. The only 'condition' is that you're human. They don't depend on anything other than that.

I would find it difficult and I probably would have done exactly the same thing as Maria MacLachlan. But that doesn't mean it's right. If the court says something is right, then it's right. That's how the legal system works.

@Mamaryllis they sound mega shit! I'd not bother with the feedback then! But i wonder if your speaker actually put more people off then actually made anyone feel better about 'trans inclusiveness.' though it sounds like her job was more making people think things about her

Our HR aren’t very... amenable. The last time I made a formal approach to them after an HR arranged session (which was ironically a feedback session about the results of an anonymous employee survey) I spent an hour and a half in a private meeting questioning the way the session had been handled (HR demanded outing of anonymous responses criticizing management in front of our management team) our department was told we would no receive no support from HR and should sort ourselves out. I’m not convinced that providing session feedback is wise

sorry not "or's Liner" - It's Lindt www.tesco.com/groceries/en-GB/products/266726834

Yes critical thinking of course. I do lots of that as well.

It's the pleasure and delight in misgendering that many on here indulge themselves in like some sort of irresistible habit I was referring to.

That wasn't actually the point being discussed. It was about the lack of places online which still allow critical thought. So your clever clever reply you jumped in with just made you look silly.

@FermatsTheorem what a brilliant and clear answer.

The idea of women 'indulging' in misgendering trans women as some sort of secret luxury is so utterly bizarre! When I want to indulge myself or's Liner black chocolate with sea salt for me!

Nope. No complaints. I made the point unequivocally (verbally) to my boss that I objected to the assumption that we were in need of training on the subject. But she knows that there are a raft of gender-based policies at work that I am concerned about, as they impact biological women negatively by prioritizing trans individuals. She recognizes my concerns. Her boss arranged for the training sessions via HR, so at present we are at an impasse.

I would never dream of misgendering a transwoman I encountered in RL (and I do know and regularly chat to two transwomen who are very nice people). It's the enforcement of this politeness, regardless of the actions of the transwoman in question, that I object to.

Let me repeat the question I asked you upthread, Super. Do you think a rape victim should be forced to refer to her male bodied attacker by female pronouns while giving evidence in court? (Thinking of Davina Ayrton, the person in Sheffield who went on the run, the rapist who had to be moved from a women's prison for molesting the other inmates - it does happen).

After all, Maria MacLachlan was instructed by the judge to refer to the male-bodied individual who assaulted her as "she" while giving evidence, despite the fact that effectively being forced to police your language while giving evidence must significantly add to the stress of appearing in court and run the risk of prejudicing court proceedings by confusing the witness, jury, and making the witness artificially less credible as they continually hesitate in giving their testimony