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

Be fair, this new clarification has made it incredibly complicated trying to find a way to continue to give the men what they want.

My family member is the most kind, gentle person you could wish to know.

Neither kind nor gentle if your family member is demanding people set aside their reality to uphold your family member’s fantasy, if they are predating on the language and spaces of the opposite sex, or denying same sex attraction - which was what your lovely protest was all about.

The thing is that whether knowingly or through lack of understanding, you turned up to support a movement that is characterised by the denial of women's voices, needs and life experience, that demands women (in the original female sense) lose their legal and social existence, that says a man's external projection onto us of what a woman is and feels is more authority than us desrcibing our own lives.

Please do more research about what the cause you are supporting really wants.

It's not being nice to sad people who wish they were the opposite sex and making sure they are safe from attack.

It's male rapists in women's prisons because if "woman" isn't exclusively female, of course some women will be rapists so it's transphobic to reject them as women just for behaving like the most vile of men.
It's an all-male board being gender equal if half of them are trans women.
It's Dr Beth Upton saying he is a biological woman and therefore entitled to perform intimate procedures on women who asked for a female practioner.
It's a dead rat nailed to a rape centre door because they were a female-only space.
It's Sandy Peggie being disciplined at work not because she asked Dr Upton not to get changed in the ladies changing room but because she stopped changing while he was there. He complained because she did not take her clothes off for him.
It's women's sportwear being advertised by Dylan Mulvaney doing a typical man's impression of girls being bad at sport instead of one of the many great sportswomen.
It's Andrea Chu Long explaining sissy porn made "her" trans because the essense of a woman is blank blank eyes and an expectant hole and that's how she wanted to be.
It's Kathleen Stock walking to work past posters demanding she be hanged.
It's JKR receiving enough rape and death threats to paper a room.
It's https://terfisaslur.com.

I'm sure your child is lovely but you are supporting evil in their name.

Good for you.

i will keep fighting for the rights of actual women!

Thanks for mansplaining feminism though 👍🏼

Officers in Sussex were told the 'complexities of this ruling are far greater than has been publicly acknowledged.'

By complexities he means cowardice. It's simple, men cannot strip search a woman.

The problem with the police is, they're too shit scared to tell the men that.

Just got an urgent request from Sex Matters asking us to email our MPs today!

https://sex-matters.org/posts/updates/urgent-action-email-your-mp-today-on-the-data-bill/?mc_cid=64c1a15509&mc_eid=f5aa4cab23

Ye gods, we're back in that time machine again

All.of those words and all you did was totally ignore the issues around only having corrupted data on which to build, fund, run a society on

It doesn't matter what you want. Society cannot accommodate it. You cannot replace your sex with your gender. Having both your sex and your gender clearly recorded on governmental data, NHS etc would ensure you get the best, most appropriate care and society gets data itvcan rely on - including what levels of care and accommodation really are needed for trans individuals

So why not sit down with a nice cup of tea, break put the good biscuits and decide what itbis you really want... affirmation or appropriate, efficacious care?

I remember telling a police officer when he was standing between me and the screaming protestors (literally screaming so no one could hear the women speaking) that what these people were screaming was so unreal that it felt comical except for the stated violence etc. They were yelling slogans that had no alignment with what was being discussed on the day. It was completely fabricated and disconnected from reality. But someone told these protestors that is what we believed. And when we tried to point it out to the protestors they didn’t want to listen.

Adding this link here: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14677801/JK-Rowling-FUND-womans-case-sue-police-stripe-search.html

As the police refuse to change policy to the law, and require that men who identify as women be permitted to strip search women as part of their 'respect' for the man's identity choices. Something no other man is allowed to do. Can you imagine that experience for a woman? To be forced to submit to a man's hands on her, to undress for him, in full knowledge he's a man but she has to join a pretense that he isn't? And women police officers still required to search men who identify as women. We know from women officers that this can happen with said man smirking and making sexual comments: the abuse and assault still goes from man to woman regardless of 'identity' and the 'respect' is always one way too.

From the article:

'Rank-and-file officers – especially women – are said to be fuming at the leadership's response. One Northumbria officer said: 'The messaging we're getting as officers reveals a stunning lack of urgency. There's no rush to review policy.' She described the NPCC's stance as: 'Keep calm and carry on – we hate this ruling and are looking at options to circumvent it.'

A female officer said the lack of acknowledgement for women's concerns made her feel like she 'just doesn't matter at all.' She added: 'There is no contrition. No recognition of the harm done to women's rights and the homophobia demonstrated by the embrace of gender ideology and the conflation of sex and gender.'

This is what you were marching for if you joined that protest. That women's bodies are something that you want enforced to submit to men's use, with women legally restrained and gagged from resisting. That's the truth of it however much you hide behind sad rhetoric. Your hands are anything but clean.

The thing that drives me mad is that they don't even censure you on what you do do, but on what they've been told you do. They are literally not talking to you, but to some scarecrow in their mind!

Done

https://sex-matters.org/posts/updates/urgent-action-email-your-mp-today-on-the-data-bill/

I hope that is what it is Seethlaw. But I guess the issue comes about when they then feel inclined to censure others who do understand that there are extremists who are the ones driving the agenda while knowing there is a group who do respect the needs of everyone else and are wanting to find equitable solutions.

Yes, I can understand the human nature behind that.

But the bit I wish people would grasp is that it doesn't really matter whose name they're doing it in, those are the people who want access.

The Sarah Jane Bakers of this world may not be speaking on behalf of decent trans people, but it's the Sarah Jane Bakers who want the access.

And galling tho that might be for people who don't want access, and don't want him speaking on their behalf, it's irrelevant to those women who are protecting their spaces.

I appreciate your contributions to these threads. My stance is that the very concept of transgenderism is sexist, but I also know that we live in a sexist world.

"I think that some people are not able to acknowledge the disconnect between their beloved family member and the behaviour of other activists."

I did that myself. I'm a peaceful trans person, and I know other peaceful trans people, so it was easier to dismiss the not so peaceful ones, than to consider that maybe there were activists being truly horrible in my name.

So I'm not surprised that close ones of trans people, who usually don't even get to witness that terrible behaviour in person, would not be able to properly engage with it on the rare occasion they do see it.

Plus @IleftmybaginNewportPagnell this isn't just about the different tactics, of women and TRAs, violent or otherwise. There is that, of course. And if anything proved our point, it has to be that these men are violent and are campaigning for access to unconsenting women.

But the issue is, we don't have to prove our point. Our point is, and always has been completely legal.

Men do not have the right to access women only spaces, and they never have. If you find that upsetting then you are supporting the loss of women's rights.

Because, they are pie. Men are either in, or they're out.

A lesbian is either a woman, or both sexes. Women's sport is either for women, or both sexes. And the same goes for changing rooms where women are taking their clothes off, and toilets, where they are specifically quite vulnerable.

Please, try and understand, women are not therapy for men. We are not here to fulfil their requirements. We're not their shield, we're not their comfort blanket, and we're not their mum.

it's completely unacceptable misogynistic, and bloody regressive to expect all women and girls to compromise their safety for the sake of a handful of demanding men.

Trans-identifying people, or trans-privileges advocates, don't need to be individually harmful. The entire ideology is dangerous.

It is mentally and physically harmful to children and vulnerable adults to convince them that they can change sex.

It is dangerous at a sociatel level to encourage belief in falsehoods, both in the form of un-verifiable metaphysical concepts, but also directly falsifiable lies.

It damages trust in institutions, in data integrity, in the very language we use to communicate. It breaks freedom of speech, thought and expression.

These are all separate harms to the ones that are committed by individuals as a result of the ideology.

As well as taking on board @ArabellaScott ‘s excellent post, I’d suggest looking at Bayswater Support for a different perspective.

I would definitely try to keep your family member away from violent men like Sarah Jane Baker, @IleftmybaginNewportPagnell

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12299927/amp/Man-tortured-trans-activist-brands-dangerous-violent-individual.html

I think what we are seeing, and I have now come across more than one poster who claims to have been at that protest who declared it was so enriching and positive, is disconnect. And I have seen numerous posters use the word chalk to describe the damage to the statues as if that makes a difference.

Firstly, maybe those people were in a section of the protest that was parents protesting. I have yet to see a good account of exactly what outcome those parents were chasing in the protest. It seems like it was just a general support effort by the parents which then has inadvertently added to the initial protest.

Then, there is then the dismissal of the violent and intimidatory tactics of that male centred group. The, ‘I didn’t see it’ or the ‘that is terrible… but look at your disgusting words on this thread!’ dismissal.

I think that some people are not able to acknowledge the disconnect between their beloved family member and the behaviour of other activists. And so they demand that we dismiss the extreme activists and only think about the lovely people while also still often demanding that their loved one receives special privileges to use provisions not meant for them.

I am still in two minds about this. On one hand, I suspect some of those who come to censure and shame want their loved one to have the benefits gained by those using extremist, and violent and intimidatory tactics. So they will make a declaration of renouncement while continuing to use softer tactics to achieve the end goal.

Or else, there might be people out there who really have no idea about the violent and intimidatory tactics being used because they are truly isolating themselves off from any negative news.

I suspect what the answer is, but I am open to the second.

Quite.

It was a protest solely and explicitly against women's rights.

Also @IleftmybaginNewportPagnell, it's one thing not seeing these displays of violence and threats on the day, maybe you were in a different street.

It's quite another not seeing all the news reporting splashed across the papers and social media over the following week.

Ministers were having to answer questions about it! Arrests were made.

If this completely passed you by, might I suggest that you are in the very definition of an echo chamber?

You didn't appear to believe the women on here either!

Information isn't getting through to you, I'm afraid. I would check what you are filtering out.

Thank you, I’m aware and will continue to be.
I’m leaving just to get on with my day really!

Indeed, it's the first rule listed in the Rules of Misogyny -

'Women are responsible for what men do'

You appear to have left, which is a shame.

I'm sure you care very deeply for your family member. I understand.

Transactivism, as well as the well funded lobbying organisations like Stonewall and Mermaids, includes some highly dangerous and unstable people.

These activists have attacked, vilified, threatened and abused women for many years. Many women here have first hand experience of their aggressive and violent tactics.

I suggest you look into them a bit. Try Sarah Jane Baker for a start. Imprisoned for kidnap and torture and attempted murder.

The movement includes a risky mix of young and vulnerable people and ... others.

Wishing you all the best and I hope your young person comes through okay.

I’m just a mum. You know when you support and love your children? Remember that?

Very emotive. Surprisingly children are not always right and it's up to parents to guide them through life. Ask yourself this question. Why were you on a protest march about a legal judgement that clarified a long standing law? The judgement didn't change the law, so what were you protesting?