Complaints against Baroness Nicholson being organised

Cosmetic surgery is not routinely provided on the NHS.

It may occasionally be provided on the NHS for psychological or other health reasons. For example, the NHS might pay for:

breast implants – if you have very uneven breasts or no breasts, and it's causing significant psychological distress

nose reshaping – if you have breathing problems

ear correction surgery – if a child needs it, or sometimes, if an adult has prominent ears that are causing significant distress

female breast reduction – if you're very distressed about the size of your breasts and they're causing problems like backache

male breast reduction – if you've had a condition called gynaecomastia for a long time, other treatments have not worked, and it's causing considerable pain or distress

Generally, most people who want cosmetic surgery will need to pay for it privately

Reconstructive or plastic surgery is often available on the NHS. It's different from cosmetic surgery because its main aim is to repair and reconstruct missing or damaged tissue and skin after an illness, accident or birth defect.

Plastic surgery includes procedures such as rebuilding a woman's breasts after a mastectomy (an operation to remove a breast), and repairing a cleft lip and palate.

Yes, you should be denied. I'm not all that invested in whether you 'learn to be happy with what you've got'. I think that it would be good for you if you could do that but ... whatever; that's your issue.

Likening lesbians' sexual orientation to apartheid would probably qualify...

Would all the people who are condemning the Baroness’s comments 10 years ago please explain why it’s ok for the head of Stonewall to have expressed homophobic views under 10 months ago?

Well, precisely. University squash courts have showers. There are female ones. Why wouldn't a 17 or 18 year old student share a squash court shower facility with a, say, 30, 40, 50 or 60 year old female lecturer? They are organised by sex not age.

back when Ben summerskill was CEO of stonewall he said many times that a minority of LGB people especially lesbians did not want equal marriage because they saw it as a patriarchal institution they wanted nothing to do with. That was why there was such a fierce internal debate within stonewall at the time as to whether they should back it
Linky

The dictionary definition is a dislike of or prejudice against gay people.

like calling them sexual racists, would that quality?

What a bizarre response.

I'm female; ergo I share the gym showers with teenage girls. Where else would you like me to shower? Or them for that matter?

Having cosmetic surgery for whatever reason is one thing, but men having cosmetic surgery on their genitals and thinking that makes them women and gives them the rights of women is another entirely.

//

And for medical staff to be complicit in something which will never be a reality is pretty mind boggling really.

The dictionary definition is a dislike of or prejudice against gay people.

^^

This

It doesn't compare. At all.

Honestly. Can any one of those criticising the baroness for standing up for women and children, explain what they actually mean by homophobia, instead of, you know, advocating for it??

Wasn't Stonewall ambivalent about same sex marriages because tax changes could impact the economy? They also haven't apologised for Nancy Kelly's comments about lesbians , comparing them to sexual racists.

But couldn't a man also marry another woman to protect his assets if he wanted to disinherit his children and their mother?

Sorry, what's the 20-year-ago thing everyone's referring to? Didn't she vote against same-sex marriage in 2013 ie just under 10 years ago? And make the comments about lesbians at the same time?

She did explain on twitter that she voted against same sex marriage because she anticipated that it might impact on the rights of women and children - thinking that a man could marry another man to protect his assets if he wanted to disinherit his children and their mother, maybe?

But those fears proved unfounded. Gay marriage became law, via a democratic process. She does not campaign for the law to be overturned.

However, the process by which women's rights are currently being eroded and children are being given unproved medical treatments is not democratic in the slightest.....

You mean, like, a repentance speech?

Yes. Mature people can do that.

I do want to see the exact context that she has said what was quoted though, hence asking for the full article to be posted. How often are we seeing clipped bits of quotes taken out of context being used against people?

But I really don't understand why there is need for 'purity' in how someone thought three decades ago to monster them now when it is actually pretty clear that she doesn't think that way at the moment.

Surely people should be saying something like, 'this is a great example of how someone has seen enough and had enough experience to now be fully supportive'?

That activists are not taking this view is actually a sure sign that all they are doing is attempting to silence women who disagree with them on other issues.

I mean, really.... they should be very careful in taking this tack. Because we all know that there will be public reverse ferreting soon, and frankly these activists will look like the hypocrites they are when people point out their previous statements....

Purity spirals are hell!

Well said.

Has she ever put out a statement denouncing her bigoted views from back then? It would be excellent to have something to throw back in the TRAs faces to show that she has grown as an individual.

Repairing an injury caused by radical surgery is not cosmetic. It's reconstructive surgery.

I disagree with what Baroness Nicholson said nearly 30 years ago about same sex marriage.

I agree with what she is saying today about women's and girls' rights.

These two separate thoughts have not caused my brain to implode.

Only if you are someone determined to misinterpret what people say.

I don't believe that one person on this thread has said that someone who needs reconstruction should be 'happy with what they've got'.

But turning a penis or a piece of intestine into something that replicates the look of a vagina, can only be cosmetic.

Maybe you should actually explain how this is NOT cosmetic and is actually reconstructive you might get your message across.

Want to tell us how this surgery is not cosmetic?

Having cosmetic surgery for whatever reason is one thing, but men having cosmetic surgery on their genitals and thinking that makes them women and gives them the rights of women is another entirely.

Exactly this.