Hollyoaks - well this is creepy!

What an interesting idea!

That trans people should be treated differently from others with the same gender identity.

Should Stefoknee be treated differently from actual 6 year old girls after all Stefoknee, even though a middle aged man, identifies as 6 years old so there's no difference is there?

Should Rachel Dolezal be treated differently from actual black people when it comes to measures to equalise black people. After all she identifies as black what difference is there?

That trans people should be treated differently from others with the same gender identity.

You miss the point @ForCoralFox - transwomen and women don't share a "gender identity" any more than they share a sex.

Women don't have a "gender identity" (unless they are trans-identifying women). Us bog-standard, common or garden women don't possess anything so exotic as a "gender identity" - we are just women.

We neither need nor want a "gender identity" - we just are. Sitting here, awash with X-chromosomes, large gametes and more female secondary sex characteristics than you can shake a stick at - and not a "gender identity" in sight.

Who woulda thunk it?

With this answer to oldcrone's question about :

"So if they agree with us that people can't change sex and that trans people should have the same rights as everyone else, what do they disagree with?",
You seem very focused on binary genders with this statement.

Surely you don't believe that we think that people with cat gender identities should only be treated the same as other people with cat gender identities? Or that Neptunians are only treated the same as other Neptunians.

Do you see the flaws in your overly simplified statements yet? There has been many of them that are flawed. Yet you still claim to not understand why sex becomes important. Yet seem to have no regard for all the other gender's outside your mentions of the binary genders. And you don't even really seem to see the need to protect non-binary female people either.

Do you honestly see non-binary female people as not requiring sex based protections that feminists are campaigning for? Your efforts for the week seem to constantly fail to recognise female people's needs in your determined efforts to gain your unthinking and overly simplistic view of 'equality'.

Tell us fox, do you think that non-binary female people still need to be able to compete fairly and safely in sport? ie. in the female category if they have not been taking testosterone? Can you give us an honest and direct answer, please?

Reader's Note:

Science and medicine have a deep and proven understanding of sex. There is no way for any human being to change sex. Even nearly every single person with rare conditions that are considered differences of sex development conditions can be reliably sorted into the correct sex category.

This is done using a combination of aspects of the person's body and ultimately it is whether the body is formed to produce small or large gametes. And this is regardless of whether the body successfully has, is or will in the future produce those small or large gametes. The body will not have working ovaries and testes at the same time.

This argument about 'no one knows their chromosomes' or 'it is no one's business' is simply thought terminating phrases used to distract from the reality. Generally, by puberty each human being will know whether they are male or female. If there is an issue, it will generally be discovered at that time. Sometimes, it is later. It is also very rare that there is an issue. There is a minuscule number of people with a DSD that are also trans.

Human beings can also fairly reliably over a short time correctly sex a male person who has not received puberty blockers. And sometimes even then. It may be more difficult with extreme facial surgery, where a face is peeled all the way back and all the male cue bones are shaved, cheek implants added, the area between the nose and the lip shortened, the hair line changed etc. Even then, it is not necessarily successful in real life. However, there is always, always the gait, the skeletal proportions and other variables including voice that remain identifiable cues. Female humans have a higher success rate in removing their female cues from their body.

Yet, extreme trans activists will utilise one group's unique medical condition to try to convince people that sex is not reliably stable and immutable among humans. And that particularly women and children cannot correctly sex a male person with high accuracy in real life interaction.

But also, as I and others have pointed out, there ARE times when it IS another person's business as to what sex another human being is. To dismiss this is ultimately harmful and it is ignorant.

The 'I don't understand why posters here think it's so important' is because this poster refuses to engage with the countless explanations across different threads now. This is determined ignorance at this point, whether this poster intends it or not.

Also sure sign of someone who will be ranting again three posts further on.

"I'm leaving"
<slams thread>
<comes back trying to pretend they didn't forget their phone>

Well if nothing else it's consistent.

Explains why a man blatantly grooming a child on Hollyoaks is not an issue for Fox.

Fox clearly doesn't believe in boundaries.

.

Gosh,who saw this coming?

So why do you support them going into single SEX spaces, then?

"ForCoralFox
No one thinks people can literally change sex, they just think that gender identity is more important."

There it is folks! Welcome back to the loos.
Btw does anyone else think fox sounds like a British butler in an American film?

Funny that while they will claim Boudicca was trans because she led an army into battle, and Joan of Arc was trans because she had short hair, they don't seem to be laying claim to any of the (vanishingly rare) female murderers, even though that the type of killing they committed is much more a man's type of crime.

I wonder why?

"You must be aware that gender critical feminism is very much a minority view."

Apart from the incredibly patronising tone, this statement means nothing when it's coming from an echo chamber. I know plenty of professionals who wouldn't dare to speak their minds on this issue. So you can't count how many people are GC when they're all scared of losing their jobs.

I have no problem if people who identify as the same gender are treated the same.

I do fundamentally disagree that a person like me, who is female by sex, suffers the social and physical consequences of that sex and therefore needs the rights and protections put in place for my sex and the sex specific language to describe my experiences but does not share the feeling of gender experienced by trans and self-identifying cis women is being forced to choose between keeping my language, rights and protections as a "woman" and thereby being lumped into a gender identity I don't in reality feel and furthermore consider to be activelysexist and offensive, or giving up the name "woman" to the gender identitarians and thereby losing access to the rights and protections that were supposed to be there for people of my sex.

TL;DR: The issue is not that people who share a gender identity be treated the same, it's that people who don't share that identity have to accept being lumped into an identity anyway or lose access to the rights and protections that were supposed to support their sex.

He'll be back once the conversation moves back to an older male grooming a young female child, derail again and flounce again.

I see I missed yet another flounce this morning 😂

It is a method of operation though flirts. There is no engagement. Hence I have now started to simply cut and paste previous posts. Because they get ignored with no engagement and then the same misrepresentations or misinformation is posted again, either in the same thread or another.

“I'm not arguing any more this morning. I've heard the same arguments repeated over and over and it's just so tedious that I haven't even got the energy to type any more.”

Again, a sure sign of someone who lacks the ability to self critique or who has a degree of self awareness. Posters carefully explaining, posters posting evidence, posters pointing out flaws in understanding all dismissed while the poster complaining about tedious arguments posted over and over is actually the proponent of posting the same misrepresentations and misinformation and exaggerated claims over and over.

I wrote quite a long post to you explaining exactly why It's so important to find a way to accomodate what people feel.is their gender identity without overwriting the history and reality of sex by redefining language. You didn't even bother acknowledging it.

Is it possible that the reason you don't see why things you disagree with matter is because you fail to register when people are explaining the reasons things matter?

I really do get the sense you are more interested in countering the strawmen your ideological peers have educated you in (stuff like "there's hardly any GC feminists and they are all right wing", which is sinply laughable to the women here are are GC and left wing) than engaging with anything the people you think you are arguing with are actually saying!

The comparator for a trans person is someone of the same sex who does not have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.

“But anyway, why does it matter if people can or can't change sex? I don't understand why posters here think it's so important. Just let people be. Their chromosomes and hormones are their own business and don't matter.”

This above was posted as well on another post.

I will just post this from another thread where I and others spent considerable time trying to point out how legitimate discrimination under the EA and under safeguarding risk assessment works to fox. I see that they still wish to stay on extreme transgender rights activist mode in broadcasting their misinformed and polarised stance. One that allows for no deviation from the ridiculously dismissive and harmful claim that I bolded above.

However, Sex is absolutely real and it is proven. Gender identity has been proven to be only a philosophical belief and is changeable, sometimes in constant flux.

There is one form of ‘negative sex discrimination’ based on sex that feminists have long fought against such as female people being excluded from employment, education, activities etc based on their sexed body. This is considered illegitimate discrimination and is harmful to female people.

There is also the necessary form of discrimination that is used for calculating safeguarding risks which is also based on sexed bodies, but the only 'negative' impact it has is to exclude one sex from a space designated as single sex for safety purposes. This discrimination has been the basis of sex segregated spaces since those spaces became available to public life. This form of discrimination is a legitimate form
of discrimination as it benefits all female people through improving safety and their privacy and dignity. Incidentally, male single sex spaces are also allowed using this type of discrimination as well.

The EA allows for this type of legitimate discrimination. Because without that discrimination, female people are negatively impacted by trans people being treated as if they were the gender they declare they are.

The statement, “That trans people should be treated differently from others with the same gender identity.”, is like the usual mantras we see. It is far too simplistic and it never comes close to acknowledging that sex is sometimes more important that gender identity. Therefore there are times when sex needs to take priority making this statement unworkable.

But that is the point. Making it is unworkable is the point. Nothing but full acceptance is to be allowed. Remember too that we are told ‘Their chromosomes and hormones are their own business and don't matter.’ This is demonstrably false. IT IS OTHER PEOPLE’S BUSINESS TO KNOW THE SPACE THEY EXPECT TO BE SINGLE SEX IS NOT SINGLE SEX.

People who dismiss the need for legitimate discrimination are, in reality, misogynistically dismissing the needs of some of the truly most marginalised people in the UK. Women and girls who are vulnerable with no support and who need single sex spaces to heal from trauma and be able to live without the devastating combination of several axis of oppression.

Where is sex important?

Single sex spaces
Single sex health care
Female sports
Roles set aside for a specific sex that is considered applicable under the EA.

Here are just four instances.

Shall we ask fox to tell us why male athletes should be allowed to compete in female sports categories?

Operation : Let them speak! Is going very well with this poster I feel.

Very well indeed.

Yes, tolerant and kind, whilst going behind their friend's back to moan to fox about how jealous they are because they still have to talk to this absolute pariah.

And the tolerance and kindness of fox feeling gratified by it 🤣

Crikey!

What would you call it? You keep giving joke answers, or dodging the question.

Why are you here?

And Fox and Friends feel ever so ‘tolerant’ when the reality is they are anything but.

But the word ‘tolerant’ means something very different to them vs the rest of the English speaking world.

I see this post as a signal of this poster’s absolutism and polarisation of thought. Maybe their reading comprehension too.

I have not used words expressing my ‘total confidence’ at all. I have pointed out that a lack of self awareness, as shown on these threads, combined with a known issue with people of many opinions not saying anything out of fear.