Transgender people can be turned away from female only spaces government says

Legal challenge then? And let’s see how it pans out. And then repeat. Every. Single. Time. Every time the rights of women are put last.

Yes. We need some kind of central set-up - like the Centre for Women's Justice re VAWG - who work out which cases to bring and then set up crowdfunders for each.

I would certainly contribute to every single campaign that forced public sector entities to comply with their equality duties with regard to the protected characteristic of sex.

There is also vaginismus which can be treated via inserting things, it can come about due to traumatic sexual experiences, aongst other things.

The existence of this condition also doesn't mean that men can literally become female through surgery.

"I'm going to go out on a very short limb here and say that some vaginas need dilating, that neo-vaginas regardless of the reason for their creation, can also need dilating. See how difficult that wasn't?"

And this proves that men can physically become female how, exactly?

Oh dear lord MeetTheNewAccountSameAsTheOld. Are you 12?

I don't have to explain anything to you! .

😂

When we talk about "women" or "men" or "girls" or "boys" we are talking about the general characteristics of a group.

You know this I think.

The practice of pulling in rare or specific examples of people in those groups who do not share some of the general characteristics to invalidate the group as a whole, as being a group at all, is something that is done all the time.

The existence of women who are infertile does not mean that the classification of female as the ones with the capacity to gestate a baby is incorrect.
The existence of girls and women who do not menstruate does not mean it is incorrect to say that female humans are the ones who menstruate.
The existence of intersex people does not negate the fact that humans come in 2 sorts - cocky and cunty - for the minor point of our actual species existing at all. Plus intersex groups have told you to stop it and back off.
Now the statement that "women do not need to dilate their vaginas" is held to be incorrect because some women have cancer.
Is the statement "women have breasts" also incorrect as some women have to have them removed due to cancer?

This approach is all really offensive.

please don't bring very sick women into the conversation, in order to try to prove that men can literally transform into women with a bit of surgery and a lot of positive thinking. It's offensive to women for you to reduce our bodies and their functions this way, especially women who are ill.

"No one has said that a woman dilating due to gynaecological cancer is wrong. Or shameful. At all."

Really? Then explain the following from the poster above:

"Women don't have to regularly dilate their vaginas to prevent them from closing up. . .

. . .But it's also quite obvious, that this is a uniquely transwoman experience, not a woman's."

How much easier would it have been to have simply stated that you misspoke, and that some women do indeed have to dilate and that there is no shame to it, and it does not make them less or, or not a real, woman.

You sound very cross. It's a great shame that I don't believe for a single second that you are cross on behalf of the woman who has gynaecological cancer.

Women who have to dilate because they have had gynaecological cancer? Of course there is no shame to that. I don't know why you suggest there would be.

Furthermore, I don't think there is any shame to transwoman such as Juno dilating their neo vagina.

Again, this idea of shame is coming from you, not me.

Transwomen dilating are experiencing something that is unique to being a transwomen.

Women who dilate because of cancer are experiencing something that is unique to women.

It's not complicated, despite you trying to make it so.

The Juno article you posted, Datun, is fascinating.

I agree, I really like Juno. I found this very thought provoking too:

i-d.vice.com/en_uk/article/kzxjnw/i-havent-failed-to-pass-as-a-woman-i-want-to-look-transgender

I’m amazed they admitted it langcleg

Legal challenge then? And let’s see how it pans out. And then repeat. Every. Single. Time. Every time the rights of women are put last.

"The vagina is not an organ which requires dilation. In rare cases due to illness, treatment for illness or psychological reasons it could be required."

How rare? Do we know? Do the actual numbers matter?

In one sentence: vaginas don't require dilation. In the next: vaginas can need dilation. Which is it?

I'm going to go out on a very short limb here and say that some vaginas need dilating, that neo-vaginas regardless of the reason for their creation, can also need dilating. See how difficult that wasn't?

Made a statement, didn't invalidate the lived experiences of women to do it.

Have they replaced that recently, LangCleg? Or is it the first time you've looked?

First time I've looked. But they can't just replace sex (a protected characteristic) with gender just because they feel like it, any more than local authorities can. If they've failed to carry out impact assessments on a protected characteristic, there's a good chance they have acted unlawfully. Hence the potential court challenge. I imagine there are similar circumstances in institutions all over the country.

There is no shame to it, and needing to dilate a vagina does not make anybody less of a woman, and that making an implication or statement that it does is just wrong.

No one has said that a woman dilating due to gynaecological cancer is wrong. Or shameful. At all.

The distinction has been made between the female condition in general and the post surgical maintenance of an implanted facsimile.

Stop appropriating women’s health issues.

No impact assessments whatsoever.

But the silver lining to that particular gung ho, woke virtue signalling cloud is that it has opened the door to the legal challenge under the Public Sector Equality Duties.

Have they replaced that recently, LangCleg? Or is it the first time you've looked?

Obviously if it's gender that is protected then it's fine.

Sex, different,and what the actual law says.

Datun

Ah.

So you won't retract or refine your sweeping statement that "Women don't have to regularly dilate their vaginas to prevent them from closing up".

You're happy enough to use those women as a shield to try and excuse your behaviour, but apparently don't care enough about them to amend your statement, regardless of the fact that it has been repeatedly pointed out that needless sweeping statements like yours can only lead to women experiencing more stress, anxiety, and shame at having to need to dilate, through no fault of their own. Likewise you don't wish to address either your implication that real women don't dilate or the statement you made reinforcing and confirming that implication, "But it's also quite obvious, that this is a uniquely transwoman experience, not a woman's."

Yes, I would imagine that the people watching are not particular impressed at a poster on a Feminism board wilfully erasing and belittling women's experiences, and then doubling down on that position when called on it.

How much easier would it have been to have simply stated that you misspoke, and that some women do indeed have to dilate and that there is no shame to it, and it does not make them less or, or not a real, woman.

I can do it.

Happy to do it.

There are an unknown number of women who need to dilate for a variety of health reasons. There is no shame to it, and needing to dilate a vagina does not make anybody less of a woman, and that making an implication or statement that it does is just wrong.

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jun/25/no-plans-change-law-single-sex-spaces-uk-transgender

There is also a piece in the Guardian about sex work in the trans community, who are now deemed as working-class, this is blamed on NHS under funding and waiting lists.

Lots of passing the buck going on in Scotland.

And, wouldn't you just believe it, the information about public sector equality duties on the Equality and Human Rights Commission's website has replaced sex with gender:

https//www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/public-sector-equality-duty-scotland/public-sector-equality-duty-faqs

Yes, and most transgender people won't legally be able to Self-ID as Self-ID is usually described because they won't be able to sign the Statutory Declaration.

A while back, but why not?

Ireland's says this:

"I do solemnly and sincerely declare that I have a settled and solemn intention to live in the preferred gender for the rest of my life, understand the consequences of the application, and make this application of my own free will.”

I could sign this is good conscience as I have very masculine habits and mode of dress and don't intend to change. I'm not sure what else 'live in the preferred gender might mean' - perhaps it's something one day and another the next?

Humans are not plug and play. Or lego. Or plasticine.

And a vagina is a lot more than random soft tissue and has considerably more functionality. I think women should take the time to learn everything they can, not only about the gross anatomy of their reproductive systems but also the microanatomy and the functional processes. The female reproductive system is a marvel. Evolution is a thing of wonder!

The vagina is not an organ which requires dilation. In rare cases due to illness, treatment for illness or psychological reasons it could be required. A neo vagina always requires dilation, as it is not a vagina and does not have the same natural characteristics.

inevitably follows that anybody who does dilate must be a fake "woman".

There's no such thing as a fake woman. Tut.

HappensInHumans
Yes, I've just read this. I think we need to demand a proper Eq Assessment.
At the recent women's &eq committee meeting there was some acknowledgement that depts weren't carrying them out properly. It would be deeply embarrassing if the same was said of the women's & eq dept. They should lead by example.

"To appropriate the medical treatment of a woman going through a painful, physically and mentally gruelling cancer treatment and say that it’s the same as a transwoman dilating an implanted organ facsimile is absolutely disgraceful. It is beyond words."

As that is not what I've said I'm wondering what your point is.

My point is clear. There are women who need to dilate. Sweeping statements as above, "Women don't have to regularly dilate their vaginas to prevent them from closing up", and posted elsewhere on this board do nothing to help those women or any woman who may need to go through that experience.

Erasing the lived experiences of women to make a "gotcha" point about trans people is wrong. Period.

Trying to claim that the statement posted isn't erasing the lived experiences of women. Likewise.

Trying to take the fact that a poster on a Feminism board completely erased the experiences of an entirely unknown number of women, and twist it into some sort of failed attempt to invalidate my point that the statement made erases the experiences of those women and places additional stress, anxiety, and shame on those women should they happen across such statements. Oh yes, definitely likewise.

MeetTheNewAccountSameAsTheOld

Oh dear. A woman dilating because she has had cancer is going through a uniquely female experience.

A transwoman who is dilating their neovagina to stop it closing, isn't.

And yes, this appropriation of women's explicitly female gynaecological issues, is repugnant.

But in the interests of transparency, furthering people's understanding, and the journalists who are taking notes, do please, carry on.

As it happens, not true. There are women who do have to dilate their vaginas and for a great many of them the shame of it prevents them from speaking out about their experiences. Comments like the one above does not help with that nor does claiming that "But it's also quite obvious, that this is a uniquely transwoman experience, not a woman's

The woman in the link you posted has had treatment for gynaecological cancer involving radiotherapy. I won’t go into details of what that involves, it’s googleable, but it’s gruelling, physically and mentally and often leads to serious damage long term/permanentto the reproductive tract.

To appropriate the medical treatment of a woman going through a painful, physically and mentally gruelling cancer treatment and say that it’s the same as a transwoman dilating an implanted organ facsimile is absolutely disgraceful. It is beyond words.

I’m suddenly seeing these appropriations spring up - last week it was infertility. This week it’s gynaecological cancer. What next?