Amendment to Data Bill to revert all gender markers and out all trans people

You mean you have a transhuman not a cat?

Bigot. Don't call your human a cat.

I think my cat might be trans - he has had his equipment removed and he insists on coming into the bathroom with me every time I go. I think he might be seeking validation.

womanisnotauniversaltermfactciswomanbiologicalborntranswomannonbiologicalbornintersexwomannotallofthesearewomanfactsometranswomanwantstobeaciswomanfactgoshthisiseasystatesomethingandthenjustsayfactorperiodorgrowup

Fixed it for you.

FACT

Maybe try not to use punctuation datun that would probably help with the cramp

Thanks Rufus. I'd written it out 95 times, but now I've got cramp

Cis Sharks and Loan Sharks.

Because we need to be aware that the use of the word shark puts them into the same group (because we are incapable of seeing the word shark repeated and can only see the word cis)

We clearly have a need to categorise them in the same group otherwise we wouldn't call them both sharks. Right?

The word shark only has one meaning obviously because transwomen are women and are the same thing because all other women are cis women.

OMG. I just realised homophones are bigoted!

I demand shark rights free from bigots and the abolition of all homophones from the English language to free it from discrimination. It's 2025 we shouldnt have homophones.

We've got to this level of none ironic, completely literal idiocy haven't we?
(With apologies to dyslexics who are actually not this bloody dumb).

Woman is not a universal term FACT

Cis - Woman (Biological Born)
Trans - Woman (Non Biological Born)
Intersex Woman
Not all of these are woman FACT

some Tran woman wants to be a Cis Woman FACT

gosh this is easy….state something and then just say FACT or PERIOD or GROW UP 😳

i think ive got this so everyone else can have the day off

It's amazing how transactivists really, really don't want to relinquish the term cis. Sorry, meaningless term 'cis'.

I've noticed it's been dropped in loads of places. It's hard to keep pretending that there are two types of women, cis and trans, when the Supreme Court just said no there isn't.

Cis cats... I'm all a fret now, does that mean my Labrador is a trans cat? Our daughter wanted a cat.

Oh fiddle, what to do?!

I always thought it was the construction industry scheme lol

So are cats now recategorised as ‘cis cats’?

Because how does work with cat gender?

Cis cat (biologically born cat)
Trans cat (non biologically born cat)?

Do we need to alert the rest of the world that their cats are now to be known as cis cats? Plus we need to make sure that people understand that they should not be letting their trans cats eat the mice and rabbits they catch.

How does this then work with those who identify as babies?

cis baby - (biological born baby)
trans baby - (non biological baby) ?

I really do think if we are to be bullied to accept the term ‘cis’, it needs to be applied to all gender identities (including those who identify as babies) in media usage and policy. Because if the word has the meaning those people trying to adapt it this usage, why isn’t it used widely?

Or is it that actually even those who use it understand it is all performance and not term that is based in any truth? That if they applied it to all gender identity terms, society would gain wider understanding that would significantly reduce what little support there is at the moment?

I think these words by Helleofabore bear repeating:

As an example, labelling me ‘cis’ is not neutral. It falsely categorises my beliefs and is not a neutral act at all. Calling me ‘cis’ coercively forces me to believe in gender identity and the theories that are foundational to them.

People are either male or female at birth that’s biology. The courts have backed biology so you remain male or female throughout your life. I do not acknowledge the term cis, I am female , I don’t need another label as female describes me.

The other significant issue with ‘cis’ is that its very usage forcibly categorises someone into having a philosophical belief that they may or may not have. It is very problematic for those who do not have a ‘gender identity’.

In fact, to extrapolate it out : if ‘cis’ excludes those who do not ‘identify as having a gender aligned with the sex they were born’ then the trans gender community would be fucking huge.

Because it would include everyone who doesn’t believe in gender identities at all. Not through deliberately self-categorisation as ‘agender’ but simply through rejection of anything to do with that philosophical belief that is the foundation for gender identity and the theories that shape those identities.

Because, the only commonality with all those claiming a transgender identity is philosophical belief. Not a medical 'problem' according to transgender people and academics and medical professionals who are transgender and shaping public awareness. No scientific and robustly established material facts.

So only philosophical belief.

And I would be pleased to know just what other philosophical belief should be given the power to shape a whole populations language to the extent that we are seeing these language changes being demanded?

If someone who was religious called me a non-believer, I cannot dispute that. Because it reflects my reality. I don’t believe in their religion so in their religion centred language that is what I am. It could be considered neutral in that respect. It doesn’t change my belief.

As an example, labelling me ‘cis’ is not neutral. It falsely categorises my beliefs and is not a neutral act at all. Calling me ‘cis’ coercively forces me to believe in gender identity and the theories that are foundational to them.

That is not forgetting that in recent years it has also become clear that the term ‘cis woman’ has been used to incorporate male people with differences of sex development. Those who have masculinised using the testosterone their bodies produces from testes.

I believe that happened because of that other problematic phrase ‘assigned female at birth’ . It is problematic because it too was unsuccessfully repurposed in another false attempt to support a philosophical belief as being something more than just belief.

The term cis woman was said to mean ‘a person assigned female at birth who identified as the gender they were born’ or ‘identified as a woman’. It is quite interesting really as you see the not subtle political manoeuvring in these artificial word changes.

Either way, it was a scientific term that has been wrongly repurposed. It was never meant to describe human belief systems and it fails dismally in that role.

But do keep cracking on with attempting to bully others into agreeing with you. How is that working for you?

CIS

It's all sciencey and scientificalised and everything. That's us proved wrong and no mistake! I'm so glad, I always thought it meant Co-Op Insurance Services.

How about you treat females with kindness and compassion? And defend OUR rights?

“Cis - Woman (Biological Born)”
“Trans - Woman (Non Biological Born)”
“Intersex Woman”

I am rather surprised that you pulled this offensive whopper out while claiming datun to be the one who is uneducated.

Your logic is flawed here. And it is offensively so.

The category you have termed ‘intersex woman’ relates to whom? Because all people with differences of sex development (they are not ‘intersex’) are either male or female people. They can be reliably categorised into male or female with testing using modern techniques. Which means they are in the ‘biological’ category.

Yet, you have offensively claimed with your grouping that they are not biologically ‘women’ or ‘men’.

But either way, your attempt to force the word woman to be a descriptor for any male person is incorrect and always was. Woman is a noun that was a clear category description for human female people. It never referred to male people. Attempts to forcibly change the meaning has not succeeded.

The noun for a male who holds the philosophical belief that they are in any way ‘female’ is the category label ‘transwoman’. This language fuckwittery in adding the space is only a political campaign and it hasn’t changed the meaning of the word in reality. Obviously, the space was meant to make people believe that a male person could be a woman. With ‘trans’ being falsely treated as an adjective with the same grouping as tall or bald. But the logic doesn’t work.

Any attempt to include the opposite sex in the word makes the word completely meaningless.

Your post was a lesson in how to make words meaningless.

Oh yes, those poor men getting a hard time from women defending their human rights! How very dare we speak up and defend our rights! How dare we! Poooooor men.

It's a shame you can't support females and our needs to safety, privacy and dignity. But of course it's all about the Mens Rights movement.

Any MALE, poses a threat to women, @WaffleParty , no matter how brainwashed you are to think a fully intact male in a dress, like a wolf in sheeps clothing, suddenly becomes no threat to women, because he has re-labelled himself. How foolish of you. Especially considering there are actual transwomen in jail for RAPING women. Numerous transwomen in jail. So you're clearly ignorant of the facts.

It's so convenient that there has been soooooo much coverage of the numerous vile, bigoted and hateful signs, as well as men urinating on feminist statues, in papers, in print, on camera and on tv, and you conveniently 'didn't see it'. I call bullshit. You must have walked around with your eyes glued shut.

What about the challenges females are up against? You don't learn about those from reading these threads? Or you disregard them because you simply don't care about the oppressed sex class?

You clearly didn't see any coverage of it.

Recognizing trans women as women doesn’t erase or override anyone else’s identity.

Yes it does. Just as recognising Rachel Dolezal as an African American over-rides the actual lived experience and oppression that African Americans face.

It expands our understanding of womanhood to include the diverse ways it is lived and experienced. That is not an insult—it is progress.

Only a male could be so arrogant, so entitled, and so utterly offensive to say recognising males as women is 'progress'.

You don't get to colonise the word woman and enter our safe spaces for a fetish. You DON'T get to over-ride our language, our rights and our spaces. We say NO. You're a male. A man. A member of the oppressor sex class. Just as a fox does not get to identify as a hen and enter the hen house, you don't get to identify into our oppressed sex class when you have no actual lived experience as girl growing into a woman. Your posts reek of Male Privilege and Male Entitlement, and you, are the reason we are pushing back. We are telling you no. NO. That's it and that's final.