Sandi Toksvig "doesn't get it", poor love....

Well, that's less than an hour ago 😁

When did you realise you had a gender identity
Earliest I remember being aware of it is around 7 ish

When did you realise you had a gender identity?

That you cannot see the impact of the categorisation in that scenario doesn’t surprise me. It seems to be either lack of understanding or determined blindness to me. I guess it could be something else but I haven’t worked out what.

The smoothing out of the impact that the female students face when reviewing top line data is pretty fucking obvious. That smoothing obscures the reality of those girls needs.

Mighty = higher, stupid autocorrect

But having a gender identity, whatever that means or is like, can’t change your sex. It doesn’t make you the opposite sex, even if that’s what you “identify” with. Why can’t people just have the gender expression of their choice, while accepting that they will remain male or female? So for example if you’re a feminine man who doesn’t like the gendered expectations placed on men and is drawn to stereotypically feminine things - fine, enjoy those things, as a man. But why on earth should women be expected to accept that such a person is a woman? Stereotypes and feelings do not decide your sex.

Furthermore, people who identify as the opposite sex do not match their “identified’ sex/gender statistically. Males who identify as women continue to commit violent and sexual offences as the same or greater rates as men in general, much much higher rates than women. So why should women be made to share protected spaces with them? It’s makes no sense and obviously the overall outcome is worse for women. They are put at greater risk, lose out in sports etc while the reverse situation doesn’t harm men at all. Ironically, a clear difference on the basis of sex. Not gender.

@BinturongsSmellOfPopcorn Yes. There's so much that can undermine or muddy a survey. I'm not a mathematician or scientist, but would have thought maximising precise and relevant data must be fundamental principles. So, by all means, add on the additional consideration of gender identity - addition is inclusive. But that's not what's happening. Hard-won, desperately needed data collection on the female body (read "Invisible Women") is not only being rejected, but is being posited as being actively damaging to other demographic groups.

That's misogyny on steroids. When the potential impact on female health, safety, wellbeing and quality of life is so substantial, I can see no other explanation. It's just... WOW.

Sounds to me that you have a gender identity. I don’t have one of those, just a sex-based reality.

I do, I find it interesting how we're all different.
I have "sex based reality" too, and a strong gender identity too, I'm trying to imagine not having that and what it's like, suppose you're the same but the other way round 🙂 (as in trying to imagine having a gender identity as well, that is)

Yep. Wondering whether or not to challenge this one. I'm at one remove, making it difficult, but it's infuriated and upset me. Whatever the degree, girls are losing out to some degree - and all in the name of "progress".

And given that there are threads about top NHS hospitals electing to record gender identity instead of sex at the very same time I'm typing this post, it seems more than fair to assume that my example isn't unique, or even unusual.

But without knowing which answers come.from girls you can't disaggregate the data by sex, so you will miss the pattern.

Some unknown people want a longer break for unknown reasons - maybe they just don't like lessons; maybe they have the classes before and after break a long way from the loos. If you don't know what the problem is you can't put in measures to address it, and might just dismiss it as a few outliers with nothing in common that actually needs dealing with.

Great explanation of how easily data can become corrupted in the name of “inclusivity”, putting females at a disadvantage.

Hypothetical: tutor group of 15. 8 boys, of which 2 are trans (female) & 7 girls, of which 2 are trans (male), and in which the females in this group are all struggling with their hygiene needs & the males aren't (not an entirely unrealistic scenario if there's an issue with break times - ref. theatre queues at intervals!)

Identify as girls / identify as boys question. Results show 75% of boys find break times sufficient for their needs & 29% of girls find break times sufficient for their needs. Conclusion: OK, this is interesting - let's investigate further, & we may take action accordingly (but we don't feel especially obliged to - phew!)

Male / female question. Results show 100% of boys find break times sufficient for their needs & 0% of girls find break times sufficient for their needs. Conclusion: Shit, this is clearly a real issue impacting female students because of their biology, & we must take action immediately (& we really can't avoid doing so - the parents would play hell after seeing these results!!!)

Different outcomes. Girls disadvantaged.

You can argue about degree: it's not by much, the trend is still clear etc. But why would anyone argue about degree? It's still a disadvantage, relative to what used to be. That's, arguably, ethically indefensible.

You can argue about my example: it uses specific, small numbers to make a point etc. But why would anyone argue about an example? There's still a possibility - probability - of data being corrupted to a greater or lesser degree, and that possibility didn't used to exist. That's, arguably, ethically indefensible.

Possible, very simple, solution: include the male/female and an optional gender identity question - all needs addressed, plus the additional benefit of possible insight into whether trans-identified females/males are struggling more (eg. due to toilet avoidance / stigma).

But the key point is that, in just this one example, in this survey, girls were redefined and they did did become less. As less is a relative term, there's simply no argument with this - their data and needs are being treated as less important than they were in recent years, and this inevitably means these needs become less visible.

There is nothing other than biology that makes someone a woman. It's not pink and blue brains, it's not liking stereotypes, biology is it.
Never said it was liking stereotypes, never said it was pink and blue brains (women can like sci fi, space, mud and wrestling, football or whatever.
Just there's clearly something else as it's not just "biology" and what body parts we have for some
I personally find it fascinating

You can't expand on it because it makes no sense. There is nothing other than biology that makes someone a woman. It's not pink and blue brains, it's not liking stereotypes, biology is it.

Saying there's 'something else' is no different to people being sure there's a god/soul/whatever but not being able to prove it.
I bet you'd soon object if religious people were in charge and making laws that affected everyone based on them believing whatever the bible says.

Ah, Screme - that’s ok, I I won’t tag you. Thanks for providing a nugget of insight. Sounds to me that you have a gender identity. I don’t have one of those, just a sex-based reality.

I’ve always been live and live but if a transwoman is declared to be a woman, just the same as a biological woman, then that actually does makes me feel like less of a woman. It confuses me. I’m only a woman because of biology
Well, that just shows how we're all different then, doesn't it as it's not just my biology for me.
There's more.
If I could expand on that and define I'd presumably be a millionaire so don't at me 😬

Now, because of the opening question and the small numbers involved, any disadvantages suffered specifically by girls in a particular tutor group due to their timetable may well not be identified
They'd still have asked all the girls though, so if anyone did have additional toilet needs due to their sex (periods for example) that'd still be taken into account as those voices would have been recorded too?

I’ve always been live and live but if a transwoman is declared to be a woman, just the same as a biological woman, then that actually does makes me feel like less of a woman. It confuses me. I’m only a woman because of biology. I don’t understand what other ingredient can make someone a woman. A TW doesn’t have the biology, so how can their womanhood be anything other than a polite fiction we’ve all bought into? As I’ve said before, I probably have more in common with the average man on the street than I do with a TW.

Re: I'm not being redefined though. I don't magically become any less of a woman if trans people are accepted for who they are and more visible.

Case in point - something I found concerning just this week.

A friend's daughter received a survey from her school seeking students' input on the length of break times to ensure the timetable is meeting different students' needs. One key question was: "Do you have enough time to use the toilet currently during the school day?" Survey results are to be analysed by tutor group (of about 15 students each).

The opening question was: "Do you identify as A) a girl or B) a boy?" There are a significant number of trans students in the school, apparently.

Think about this, @ScremeEggs. Please think about it, and more than the teachers who designed the survey presumably did.

10 years ago, the opening question would have been male/female, and consequently the data would have exposed any issues that girls (in the sense of the old definition, of female), have relative to boys due to their obvious additional toiletting needs.

Now, because of the opening question and the small numbers involved, any disadvantages suffered specifically by girls in a particular tutor group due to their timetable may well not be identified.

These girls ARE being re-defined, in the most literal* sense possible. These girls ARE "becoming less" in a very real sense, too - they're no longer recognised as a unique group with particular needs, and as a result these needs are no longer being assessed and addressed. Everything* you say isn't happening in the quote above is, actually, happening - and in just this one instance that I came across within just the last 5 days.

(Oh, except the magically bit. Cos there's nothing magic about it, and this trite tone in response to girls' needs being obscured in this way feels depressingly dismissive).

And if you think I'm wrong, @ScremeEggs, what do you think a man is identifying as when he says he identifies as a woman?

I'm only going by what they have said themselves. And I believe that this reinforcement of regressive stereotyping affects all women.

And the answer to my question @ScremeEggs is?

One of the reasons that interviewers don’t challenge this stuff is that people just like @ScremeEggs start complaining about how mean and hostile journalists are etc

Errrm. . nowhere have I done anything like that, keep making stuff up though if it makes you feel better 🙄

It's an odd phrase to use, when what these men actually want is to try to force everyone else to believe that they are something that they are not and can never be.

Syes, it does affect me, and all other women
No, it affects you, because of the way you view trans people and why you perceive they're "doing that" (as a stereotype type)
You don't speak for all other women.
We're not a hive mind