How Long Before We Look Back In Amazement

I can see *this one overturning science in a way that will eventually affect us all (by all I mean women - if we are still allowed to use that word in the way I interpret woman as a biologist)

I see this as a complete rewrite of biological reality. It seems small now but will have an enormous impact. When I was studying biology back in the 1990s there was a big extreme right wing religious push to erase evolution from the biology textbooks. Now in 2020s there is an extreme left wing cult like push to erase biological sex from biology textbooks. Luckily in the 1990s science stayed in science and religious belief in religious studies. I can see the one overturning science in a way that will eventually affect us all.

@Ivyonafence but as a lawyer - aren’t you worried about how laws are being set and equality acts are being interpreted in law NOW. When it crosses your desk it may be too late.

I feel the same way. Literally only hear about this apparent existential threat in the dark corners of Mumsnet.

Has not impacted my life or that of any woman I know in any way.

I've worked as a lawyer in DV for over a decade... there are many systemic issues that impact vulnerable women that need attention. I can't say this one has crossed my desk yet.

@thewayround I completely get your points.

To explain however the reason I am currently focused on this issue - even if it doesn’t affect me personally YET one jot - is because legislation is being passed, interpretations of the Equality Act is going into law, dictionary definitions are being changed, sports guidelines are being written. These are big fundamental things that will take an extraordinary effort to push back on once it starts to affect a lot of people

Eight women die every day in the UK from alcohol-specific deaths, the majority of them from alcoholic liver disease.

I agree with you @FlirtsWithRhinos. There will be losses and gains but there will be a recognition again.

Someone also posted on another thread today, pictures of women in 60s/70s Afghanistan - so recent yet so different!

Your vision makes me weirdly depressed and hopeful at the same time Flirts.
It's good to look at things in a panning out/an arc of history way.
I think things tend to be cyclical rather than positively progressive.
Fascinated to find out in a podcast interview with Helen Dale recently, how much more standing (some) women in the Roman empire had than the suffragettes- and how they fought (cleverly) for their democratic rights.
I also often think of the female 4th century Greek philosopher/mathematician Hypatia, battling for (and viciously destroyed by) the science over faith issue .
We are living through one of the many key moments for women in history, and it's weird to think we probably won't live to see the outcome.
We can be pretty sure it will all come round again though

I think we will pass through rather than go back. There's too many public statements made to undo them now.

So the concept of gender will probably stick and over time we will get used to categorising people by different types of self defined gender at least socially. The body modification will become less common as the roles become more everyday. "Woman" may never return to a single sex group.

At the same time, the impact of our sex (society's sexism and the different physical capabilities) will lead to an "evolution" whereby we again recognise and accept that people AFAB do have distinct needs, and political movements for and recognition of single sex rights will arise again. They may well be exactly the same people who currently demonise "terfs" , and those people will never realise they are fighting for the exact same thing they used to fight against because their mental framing of terfs was so far from the reality.

Optimistically, I hope this ultimately stabilises in a culture that is much more open in terms of people's presentation and personality while recognising single sex needs and rights.

Mumsnet deleted my post you replied to. All I was saying was look into the funders. In Ireland it is the same people who fund pharma. It's there in black and white.

Mumsnet why did you delete that post? No names were mentioned at all.

I didn't even mention the new God of pharma in the original one. If as I suspect you are taking funding and censoring on their behalf, shame on you.

Sorry @MarshaBradyo

That response wasn’t to your post though 😐
it was to @DameMaud

Tbc @thewayround , I wasn't criticising you for that (and I realise you might not be saying I was) I have complete appreciation for focussing on issues that are personally meaningful. Probably a poor choice of quoting section from you on my original response.

My confusion was about your engagement with the OP/thread that seemed a bit odd/read a bit as if possibly suggesting people might be blowing things out of proportion.

Exactly!!!

That was my point In response to posters criticising me for this particular issue not being a focus of mine

Just putting here what FOJN wrote in the other thread ('will we die out?'), as it's relevant here too, and what I've now adopted as a personal mantra:

No amount of delusion can change reality, a lie at odds with reality cannot be sustained.

Ok. I get the snowball effect.
I just found it curious as I tend not to post on threads unless they strike a chord with a personal area of interest or concern, or provide useful info, or that I can share relevant info to, or to debate a point of conflict, or to reassure ech other in this oasis from the craziness. With that in mind, I couldn't make sense of why you were commenting despite such seeming disinterest in the topic.
I guess we all post for different reasons, and I couldn't work out where you were coming from on this.
I can see why people thought you might be being dismissive. It is an emotional and often personally affecting issue for most of us on here, and there's lots of scope for misunderstanding too.
Thanks for responding.
I'm still a bit befuddled tbh though!
Maybe you're just saying there's no future amazement for you to ponder!

Depends what you mean by less harmful? It's all shits & giggles until they start demanding to be taken for a walk & eat their food from a dog bowl 🤔

Lol nice misinterpretation of my post. Obviously alcoholism affects those who are directly impacted by it. But many people have no experience of alcoholism in the same way that you are not impacted directly by trans activism. When you campaign for support in relation to alcoholism, presumably you are trying to reach those who are not directly impacted and rely on a person’s empathy and understanding. Same applies here. It’s fine if you just don’t give a shit but if that’s the case it is weird that you take the time to post here.

We can be worried about both issues. Both impact everyone. Both are serious.

It's ok to recognise both as major problems but put your energies into the one you know most about/have most opportunity to be impactful/are most immediately affected by.

There's no need to fall out over this.

I don’t think you need to change your focus, we can all care about different things imo

If you have your primary issue and some of us care about this that’s fine

So they should be ignored and all women’s focus on this?

It's already happening but it's played down or minimised!