Men only job

What would happen if a woman applied saying she identified as a man?

OP I suspect that she'd get a similar response to Man Friday activists at the men's swimming pond.

but rape isn't more horrific for fertile women then it is for infertile women, children, etc etc which is what the original post about it said!!!

No, that is not what I said. The link to my original post: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3715684-Men-only-job?msgid=90835112 and also a screencap.

Please point out where I differentiated between fertile and infertile women, bearing in mind that a woman in OED is an "adult human female" and a woman under the EA2010 is a "female of any age".

You have fabricated an argument and ascribed it to me. This is known as the "straw man fallacy". It indicates a lack of valid counter-argument on your part, because you wouldn't resort to the straw man.if you had an actual argument. The argument you have fabricated is designed to make me look bad: this is called "poisoning the well". Your tactic here is to twist my words out of recognition to make the evvil terves look bad, and you're hoping that no one will actually bother to go back upthread and re-read what I actually wrote. FWR regulars are used to these tactics.

1. As Fraggling has already stated, rape is always an appalling attack upon a person's dignity, mind, and body.

2. As Fraggling has already stated, a pregnancy adds another layer of awfulness to that. A Northern Irish women would have to find money to travel to England or ROI if she were raped and became pregnant, on top of the trauma of the rape. It's not rocket science to see how a rape leading to pregnancy is objectively harder to deal with than a rape not leading to pregnancy, if all other aspects of the rape are the same.

3. I state, having taken two pregnancy tests in my life whilst praying both times to any deity that would listen that the result is "not pregnant", that the victim's fear of the rapist making her pregnant adds another layer of awfulness to a rape. Imagine the married woman who is raped and is frightened that if she falls pregnant, her husband will think that she has been unfaithful. Imagine the Northern Irish girl, with no money to pay for travel to England, praying after her rape that her period will come.

4. No one male, whether transwoman or otherwise, has to face this fear because males cannot become pregnant. That doesn't mean that the rape of males isn't appalling, it is, see point 1. But we should not ignore that males do not have the additional layers of awfulness imposed by the fear of pregnancy and pregnancy itself.

5. Almost all women are justified in fearing rape-induced pregnancy. Most females are fertile at some point in their lives. Many infertile females believe that they are fertile until they find out otherwise when trying to conceive. Some "infertile" women are misdiagnosed and turn out to be fertile after all. Fallopian tubes can become untied. The female victim only has to believe that she's fertile to experience that stomach-churning fear of unwanted pregnancy with her rapist's baby. The argument that an infertile woman has a less-bad rape than a known-fertile women is bollocks because unless a woman has had a hysterectomy or bilateral oopherectomy, she is justified in thinking that she might be fertile and so has every reason to fear pregnancy from rape. I have an IUS, the most reliable contraceptive on earth bar vasectomy, and I still worried about pregnancy in my last relationship.

I agree with Fraggling that someone who can't see this is devoid of empathy towards women, to a sociopathic degree.

There is a common thread amongst trans privilege activists of trying to minimise the impact of pregnancy on women's lives. Denying that pregnancy and the fear of pregnancy exacerbate the horror of rape is an example of this, and it is misogyny.

I am assuming that is what Luftballon is getting at, though, Fraggling? Taking it on trust here that Luftballin is indeed intersex as that’s what he or she has said.

The trans activists don’t want third spaces, because trans women do not feel their identity as laydeeez is validated unless they, and their penises and testicles - are in women’s spaces.

Not sure the intersex community will be keen.

Lots of statements saying leave us out of this.

I’d be prepared to say that people who have taken opposite-sex hormones or had surgery have made themselves artificially intersex, if you like , Luftballon.

And the answer is, they can't, and everybody knows that.

Why not a third space, a middle ground. Why not 'expand the bandwidth' of what it means to be a man as happened in the 70s and 80s?

The answers to those questions, the conclusions, are very interesting when you sit down and think about them.

'Sex is biological – male, female or intersex.'

Right, so how does a man become a woman?

If any man can just say he is a woman, what stops abusive men making that claim?
Mammals cannot change sex. Women have needs and rights based on our sex, not our gender presentation

A transgender woman is, well what it says on the tin. Can you explain in what way a trans woman is a woman? Sex is sex and gender is just stereotypes.

Besides ’gender’ is as useful as describing people by eye colour.

If you look at the stonewall umbrella ‘trans’ seems to cover 80% of the population so it doesn’t mean very much.

My question is why don't people on here think transgender women are women? That's what the post became about really quickly with people shouting rapists and liars when talking about trans women. I can't do this anymore but maybe will start another post in the future where more people can tell me I'm a disordered liar lol that sounds fun

99luft balloons

Normally threads on mumsnet stick to the OPs question rather than becoming something else completely. The question was answered in that there are single sex exemptions in the equality act. People rock up to shout transphobe and bigot at posters and we get derailed as a results but generally the apprach here is to stick to the OPs subject.

So what does this mean?:

Clearly, there are not only females who are XX and males who are XY, but rather, there is a range of chromosome complements, hormone balances, and phenotypic variations that determine sex.

Also from the NHS:
Sex is biological – male, female or intersex.

On behalf of the majority of intersex people, please stop calling us disordered.
oiiinternational.com/2614/on-third-sex/

Well standard men as a group are the worst if you're a woman or a girl, or indeed a man or a boy.

Especially when it comes to sex offences.

The idea that strandard men might be on some sliding scale between male and female and so all the sex differentiated stuff is irrelevant is, well its novel.

Who says using the term hermaphrodite is wrong, outdated, old fashioned and insulting and that the term intersex is new, fashionable, acceptable and non-offensive?

Who decides this? The NHS?

As Squirrel says there are sexes that are opposite, i.e 2 sexes, this means it is binary.

It's really not that difficult.

I am sure you and your mum have had a tough time of it. I read a wonderful book by Alice Dreger about the trails and tribulations of such conditions as yours, Galileo's middle finger. I can recommend it. Maybe you have already read it.

However, this conflation of variations of sex development with transexualism won't convince women that male to female transitioners are no longer males, we know too much about it and have experienced too much of the other conditions that cause this phenomenon to be willing to believe it. That may seem cruel but its not really, it's just a natural and nuutral part of our understanding of human life.

Nothing.

It's a distraction.

The hope is that people will be so bamboozled by the papers they'll get caught up in it and get distracted from the obvious in your face stuff.

Which is that

Mammals and most plants and animals come in male and female
That the reason for that is reproduction which at a species level is the be all and end all, and that humans are very good at
That 99.999 of everyone in the world knows damn well what male, female, girl, boy, man, woman mean
And that attached to those sexes are expectations, cultural norms etc that result in a shittier time for women and girls across the world generally
That women and girls tend to be smaller, and have specific needs and concerns related to our biology
And that as a result some things have been carved out in a world built by men, for men, to make things a bit better
And that now there is push back against these gains

Ooh, standard men. They're the worst..

But SRY is not a simple on/off switch, it’s a precisely timed start signal

Do you think this is the alledged gotcha? Using electronics langauage for embryo development somehow proves that the word female means male and female, and the word female means male and female?

Nope.

I don't think standard men should be allowed in women's spaces, I think women should be allowed in women's spaces. That includes trans women and women like me whose mum was told when I was born they could not say what sex I was @Water100

Its not more complicated; a disorder of sexual development does not create a third sex. It creates people with a disorder.
There is no third sex. If there were, there would be a third type of gamete.

WTF has any of that got to do with transgenderism let alone transphobia?

That isn't from the nhs. It's from a paper.

It also doesn't say what you think it says.

I want to know why you think the existence of intersex people means that strandard men should be allowed to access to all the things previously set aside for women, on their say so.

This is mumsnet, most of us have made babies. Seen them in the womb, even may have had amnio tests at an early stage to detemine the sex. None of that text above is any sort of explanation of how males are females though.

World Health Organisation:

Clearly, there are not only females who are XX and males who are XY, but rather, there is a range of chromosome complements, hormone balances, and phenotypic variations that determine sex.
www.who.int/genomics/gender/en/index1.html

Scientific American:
Nearly everyone in middle school biology learned that if you’ve got XX chromosomes, you’re a female; if you’ve got XY, you’re a male. This tired simplification is great for teaching the importance of chromosomes but betrays the true nature of biological sex. The popular belief that your sex arises only from your chromosomal makeup is wrong. The truth is, your biological sex isn’t carved in stone, but a living system with the potential for change.

Why? Because biological sex is far more complicated than XX or XY (or XXY, or just X). XX individuals could present with male gonads. XY individuals can have ovaries. How? Through a set of complex genetic signals that, in the course of a human’s development, begins with a small group of cells called the bipotential primordium and a gene called SRY.

A newly fertilized embryo initially develops without any indication of its sex. At around five weeks, a group of cells clump together to form the bipotential primordium. These cells are neither male nor female but have the potential to turn into testes, ovaries or neither. After the primordium forms, SRY—a gene on the Y chromosome discovered in 1990, thanks to the participation of intersex XX males and XY females—might be activated.*

Though it is still not fully understood, we know SRY plays a role in pushing the primordium toward male gonads. But SRY is not a simple on/off switch, it’s a precisely timed start signal, the first chord of the “male gonad” symphony. A group of cells (instrument sections) must all express SRY (notes of the chord), at the right time (conductor?). Without that first chord, the embryo will play a different symphony: female gonads, or something in between.

blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony-science-to-justify-transphobia/

Picture is from NHS.... but yeah you guys all know better!!