Anti-trans spin from RMW

wondering this also. I wonder if the Bar Standards Board would be interested.

Yes, this.

I was on an orthopaedic ward once with an arm thing, the woman in the bed next to me had a very badly broken ankle. In RMW world, these are like lego body parts and would make no difference whatsoever to anyone if one of us on the ward was male...

But... the hospital pharmacist came round to speak to her and pulled the curtain. Of course I could still hear every word. The plans for her surgery were complicated by an ongoing gynae issue she had, medication she was on, and related surgery she had been scheduled for before she broke her ankle. They had to get into all the ins and outs of her gynae history and it wasn't pretty. She had some difficult decisions to make.

I wouldn't have dreamt of saying anything even though my heart went out to her. It seemed like for dignity's sake the done thing is to pretend the curtain was a solid wall. But she brought it up herself later as it was perfectly obvious to her, too, that I would have heard. There was sisterhood and solidarity there even though I have not experienced what she had, quite simply, we were both women.

With everything that woman had to deal with - being airlifted off the side of a mountain, interrupted family holiday, scheduled badly needed surgery now postponed, mobility impaired for weeks or months etc etc - why the fuck should she also have her dignity and privacy compromised by having to discuss the inner workings of her womb in front of males?

And that was just a bog-standard day in orthopaedics with patients who are otherwise well and able to advocate for themselves.

I completely agree. As I've often said, the most effective boost for women's rights are TRAs talking.

Well spotted

I am all for RMW talking as often and as much as possible. The more someone talks, the more the likelihood of letting slip what they're really thinking.

Listened to the first couple of minutes. Two male tossers talking to each other. Not a woman in sight

Robin,

I'm going to admit I am having a really hard time getting my head around the whole gender identity thing, so if you're lurking on the board could you please help me to help you. Thanks.

This is the issue I'm having with the being in no doubt as to the gender of a person you are looking at as you mentioned in the article we are currently discussing.

If I see someone with a male voice, who obviously on physical appearance is a person of the male sex. How? how can I on just looking at them have no doubt as to their gender?

If gender is all about the feels, then how am I to know when the person with a full trolley rolls over my foot whilst at the checkout, wether to say excuse me sir? or Excuse me madam? could you move your trolley off my toes?

If the only thing this person is relying on is how they are dressed, still how do I know wether the person in front of me has a gender that matches their sex or not?

When I am standing there with my female voice, female body in jeans and tee shirt bought from the men's section of Sainsbury's with knackered nails, hair that hasn't seen a hairdressers in ten years, and make-up free, how do I work out wether the male voiced, male bodied person with killer nails in front of me has a female gender identity and would like to be addressed as madam? Or a male gender identity who just has slightly different style of dress from a large proportion of their peers and would like to be addressed as sir.

Because it can't surely all be about the fact that they are wearing clothes from the female section of Sainsburys that I am to use to gender them, whilst running the risk of misgendering them? which apparently is the most horrific, degrading, violent thing I can do.

BECAUSE THAT MAKES NO BLOODY SENSE

why don't I get this? What am I not understanding?

I know that no debate is the preferred option, but I think it really is time to sit down and have a debate.

Thanks

Boiled

Extraordinary isn't it? Robin sees women wanting to be in a female only environment when recovering from male violence as some sort of anti trans political strategy.

I know lots of people are now saying 'it's not all about you' but it's rather unnerving to see so many proponents of transgenderism genuinely believing it is.

Harrop this too didn't he. Gave an interview in the middle of his own hearing. And, iirc, said some equally misleading things.

I can't remember if the judge openly took a dim view, but it was generally considered ill advised and unprofessional.

Anf RMW has form. Didn't they try to engage Allison on Twitter, despite being counsel for the charity she was suing?

What R M White knows but will not say is that the only reason all these cases are being taken to court is to establish clarification of the law. This is because the Trans Lobbyists have been misrepresenting both the Gender Recognition Act and the Equality Act to everyone.

This is especially relevant in relation to single sex spaces. The JR about the situation in prisons exposed a massive loophole in the interaction between the GRA and the EqA such that some men can lawfully be placed in women's prisons.

This is the quality of law making that the Labour Party delivered to us.

I was fascinated by this part:

NM: The people at the heart of these tribunals tend to be in the professional class, a lawyer, a tax expert, and so on. Is this indicative of anything about the gender critical movement?
RW: These are professions in which public speech and opinion is important, the ‘talking’ professions. If you work for Amazon and your job is packing things into boxes, there are fewer opportunities to air your views on trans people. Traditionally barristers were a pool that generated quite a lot of politicians in the country.

So much classism on display here, and lack of awareness of privilege. Yes barristers generated a lot of the political class - any thoughts why that might be RMW?

And yes if you are not an important professional person I should imagine all you ever talk about is football

Writers like this, and articles like this, seem to imply there's an "anti-trans" army of cookie-cutter wimmin in matching feminista uniforms who hoard their stickers & placards along with their rights & have gold-command coordination & organisation of our comms & tactics.

They overlook that mostly we are just so many different women who share a common cause. I'm not an academic or lawyer. I'm not particularly brave, or political or strident. I'm not an intellectual (I don't know what the Flaubert references are about but I know how to Google). I'm not middle class or vocal or overly confident or financially well off. I'm anxious & uncomfortable about these threats to women's rights. But I will continue to do what I can to stand up for what I believe in.

Financially supporting women like Allison Bailey is a small but important thing I can do. I follow mumsnet FWR carefully so I can find ways to do my bit. Not anti-trans but most definitely pro-women. Not an army, just quietly determined.

Sarah Phillimore reported IIRC that Tribunal Tweets had a huge amount of views during the case.

I'm sure RMW will be along shortly to tell the silly wimms how we're all wrong.

If Maya knows about this, then Ben Cooper and Peter Daly will know about it. Which I imagine means that EJ Goodman will hear about it too.

I think they both might have a tendency to run the gamut of intellectual inquiry from A to B.

I was shocked by this. I had assumed that RMW knew that RMW did not pass. Few trans women do, after all. It really does require luck in your original body size and face structure, or an awful lot of surgery, to pass effectively.

I wouldn't assume that everything this person says is in good faith.

Very interesting podcast featuring RMW
cool2btrans.co.uk/cool-people-robin-moira-white/

Robin appears to have no clue about why women are bringing all these cases to court.

NM: In your opinion, what’s the motivation for this type of legal challenge – is it just about winning?

RW: There’s multiple motivations. These people know they might lose; if you look at the crowdfunding being run for the case against the rape crisis centre in Brighton, they say one of the reasons they are running the appeal is that they might lose and have to pay the other side’s costs. But they think it’s worth it to bring the issue into the public domain and grow their movement. And that has happened so far.

Robin thinks Sarah is challenging the Brighton rape crisis centre just to 'grow the movement'. Robin has no idea what it's like to be a woman, and makes no effort to try to understand.

Jeeeesus. That article is insane.

Robin refers to gender here, not sex. By gender, I think Robin is referring to Robin's gender presentation. It's not about passing. A person wearing a dress is obviously someone expressing a female gender.

It's odd how this only works one way. I don't think anyone has ever thought I might have a male gender, just because I was wearing a man's jeans and t-shirt.

I was shocked by this. I had assumed that RMW knew that RMW did not pass. Few trans women do, after all. It really does require luck in your original body size and face structure, or an awful lot of surgery, to pass effectively.

Yes, the BSB might well consider having a look at RMW's contribution to the article.

My guess - and it is only a guess - is that they’d only do so if there’s a complaint. At least, my regulator doesn’t go hunting stuff; they wait til a complaint comes in.

HSBC now work on voice recognition so hopefully that won’t happen.

Which I think was originally attributed to Carl Sagan.

It's your minds are so open your brains have fallen out.