Where does this slug fest leave us? What is at the other side of this?

Women have been suggesting third spaces for years. Transpeople said no. There is no other compromise. Either women are entitled to single sex spaces or they are not. If transpeople want accommodations thst do not impact women’s rights, that’s on them to sort. Why is that women’s problem? What do you think women should “give”?

I have zero interest in being to told to “be kind” or “respect pronouns” when those two things are used as direct weapons to destroy women’s rights, sports, single sex spaces, dignity, safety and privacy.

Oh no, you couldn’t have been raped because everyone on this ward is a woman, a she/her.

Stop being so mean!!! Transwomen are women. Why would you object to she/her being your rape counsellor.

Transwomen are women even when using her penis to rape you and of course you must use she/her in court.

Transwomen are women, so why should she/her be banned from women’s sports.

And on and on and on.

I’m not playing that game anymore. Politeness is used to force women to capitulate to the desires of men. So no.

For the complete non-believers that there's something floating about or in minds that is called gender, the court cases simply shine light on the truth.
I don't care what clothes people wear, just don't ask me to pretend sex isn't real.

If that's a response to me, I'm going to reiterate that "men in dresses" is not gnc-ism.
Kaftans tunics kimonos, sarongs, frilly shirts, brightly patterned shirts, velvet or brocade jackets... Those are all options that men have tapped into.

No they havent. There has still been fuss over men in dresses and although it's more accepted than it was same sex attraction.

You make good points with your second and third paragraphs but with regard to the first: surely men and women have been free to dress as they like and sleep with other consenting adults for decades, haven't they? What the GII has done is make gnc-ism into a symptom of a condition. Which it wasn't before.
The other issue I have is that cross-dressing is fundamentally different from gnc-ism. Dressing up asa member of the opposite sex in clothes designed and coded for the opposite sex is more like extreme conformism. And that's without entering into the fetish aspects.

No. The whole point is that women haven’t been allowed to object to or even discuss this huge societal change; it has been imposed without consultation with the people most widely affected.

The court case is allowing people to say and hear things that were previously not allowed to be said or heard. That can’t be wrong.

Unfortunately we are a long way off the other side of this. When we finally get there I hope there will be more tolerance of people dressing as they prefer, have sex with anyone willing to have them but not expecting to be in women's sports, on women's shortlists or pretending they are actually women.

I am concerned that we may be moving towards a period where trans people face discrimination in housing or employment because they are seen as difficult to manage and troublemakers. Some are, some are not but anyone openly trans may be tarred with the same brush.

No-one has much trust in politicians but the class bias in this may encourage the rise of people like Farage and the tory party to be become more right wing in response. We dont need more extremism. I'm also concerned about a loss of trust in the NHS.

Apologies, haven't RTFT.
But it's not necessary to make any accommodations for trans people.They already have equality. "Compromising" means compromising women's rights and child safeguarding, freedom of expression and belief.
People with identities are not a special case or class of human being. They're not even a stable, definable cohort of the population. At best they are participants in a subculture - they have no particular right to be "recognised" or treated differently. The people who need psychological help should get it and everyone else should wind their necks in and stop imposing on the rest of society.
And we are not nearly at the end of the lawfare phase so it's a bit early to be looking beyond that.

I certainly think that there needs to be clear and robust discussion about the GRA. At this point, I cannot see the usefulness of that Act.

I too, think the only viable solution is an end to all this. I’d go further than ending the GRA though.

Medical transition is what set the rot in motion and started the normalization of the ludicrous notion that people could change sex in some way. It needs to stop. This is not a healthy response to people who hate their bodies or are delusional.

Obviously there are people who have already gone down that line and society will have to work out what it is going to do with those people, but this whole discussion is tinged with falsehood as soon as the term “trans people” is used.

There are transitioned/transitioning people I.e. those going through or gone through a medical procedure that attempts to make them appear more like the opposite sex. Nobody else is “trans”. It’s a meaningless term that has been weaponised as a stick for cross dressers to beat women with.

I can’t say whether, faced with a reasonable and friendly person in my workplace or elsewhere, that I would absolutely refuse to use the pronouns they wanted. I strongly suspect I would struggle with it and have a suspicion that anyone demanding it is unlikely to be reasonable, but until it happens, it’s difficult to say.

But the bottom line for me is that the whole thing needs to stop and we need a return to reality. Once that’s happening, then we can discuss what to do with those who have already taken irreversible medical steps. Until then, it’s more important to me to ensure women do not lose any of the rights they have gained.

Yes, it's a bad situation and nobody really 'wins'. We've noticed this over the years. Rolling back towards a more sensible position has only revealed the damage that's been done.

Plus the realisation of how deeply embedded sexism is in society and individuals can be depressing.

The only silver lining is the women you get to meet along the way. The very best people, ime.

Maybe not transexuals. Cross dressing fetishists have been exposing themselves to women since the year dot.

I don’t support the pronoun trend, there's no purpose or justification for it. There are two sexes, each with a pronoun, and that’s enough. Man and Woman serve a distinct purpose, adding more only creates confusion. Forcing society to adopt meaningless terms is an unreasonable expectation without a solid reason, and I’ve yet to hear one good reason for it.

This ideology is to harmful to go unchallenged, and all those who support it must be made to face up to the consequences of their decisions, and they only way to do that is by challenging them in court about the damage they've done.

They're to many vulnerable people, especially children, who are being sucked into this cult for a conversation to being about how to accommodate 'trans' into society.

The ideal outcome is one in which the GRA is repealed, and no-one is allowed to conceal their sex in situations where sex matters, or claim cross-sex sex-based rights, or discriminate against gnc people and believers in gender ideology. It should be possible then to accommodate trans people with (real) kindness and dignity - I think that Miranda Yardley or Debbie Hayton could cope with such a world, for instance - but for the rest it will demand a massive Gestalt shift.

We've got a very long way to go. Picking apart the law is a major task, and, although true believers probably make up fewer than one in five in the UK, key institutions have been thoroughly captured.

Pronouns are the least part of the problem. I'm more worried about institutional inertia, misogyny, magical thinking, and the other side's sneaky tactics.

PS I thought this would be a gardening thread🐌

they would often have been 'clocked' by women, but the women would have been too polite to say anything as long as the man kept his head down and made no attempt to engage. The man might even have believed he had successfully passed.

Too polite or too scared?

Don't know how keen I'd be to tackle someone bigger than me in a confined space who had shown that they were happy to transgress social conventions around toilets and ignore the feelings and dignity of the women in it.

The whole 'reasonable trans' thing is another crock of shit. They were ignoring women's rights. They were just quiet about it.

for a v long time transsexual men did not attempt to infiltrate women’s spaces

I would bet that transsexual men who have tried very hard to 'pass' have quietly and discretely been using the women's toilets for a long time, i.e. many decades. They would often have been 'clocked' by women, but the women would have been too polite to say anything as long as the man kept his head down and made no attempt to engage. The man might even have believed he had successfully passed.

Of course the transsexual men made absolutely no attempt to enter women's sports, women-only shortlists, women-only jobs, etc.

That was the 'live-and-let-live' status quo ante.
Sadly I doubt there is any way of going back.

We gave an inch and they took several miles.

The point also being that for a v long time transsexual men did not attempt to infiltrate women’s spaces so it was possible to live and let live. It’s been the shift to transgenderism including the expansion from adult men to children that has created and exacerbated our current situation.

Good for you for standing your ground.

But my points still remain. There will be situations where people will not be able to change their mind on using gender based pronouns to sex based in the workplace without the risk of it being to their detriment.

As you acknowledge, this is your personal choice to extend this courtesy. However, it also needs to be acknowledged that it has become policy in some workplaces and it is not harmless when choice is removed, or when the usage of language becomes coerced.

I asked up thread if there are any other groups where there philosophical belief that has not basis in material reality has been allowed by society, including workplaces, to make these language demands? Can you think of any other group?

Also, can you think of any other individual's identity (again not based on material reality) where this is allowed in the workplace?

And if not, why do you think that it is a sign of respect that people should extend to this group? Particularly in a work place?

@Taytoface
What I would want is an open debate on how to reasonably accommodate trans people, with some give and take on all sides

This is where your thinking is flawed.
Your default position in situations of conflict is to search for a middle ground which everyone can accept.
But in some conflicts, there is no middle ground. There is no reasonable accommodations that can be made. There is no give and take that is possible.
There is only "victory" for one side and "defeat" for the other.

The conflict is that many trans-identified men want full and complete access to all women's spaces (physical, legal and metaphorical). They want society to see them as women, 100%, for all purposes.
Whilst women want their single-sex spaces protected from all male people, including trans-identified men, at all times.

Only one side can win here. Any compromise is not acceptable to either side.

And the person who you were talking about knew you did this and accepted you doing changing the pronouns they expected to hear you, personally, use? Or did that person involved not know you have done this?

What about if someone didn't accept the change from your previous action? Have you wondered how that would be dealt with in the workplace? Do you think that there would be grounds for a complaint to HR about that change?

Is the change, when it is specific to a particular colleague, to be considered negative treatment when compared with past behaviour?

Adding that my union talks about the trans liberation movement going well beyond equality and inclusion. Like others, I was very accommodating in past years. Up until I noticed the damaging impact for children and the erosion of women’s rights and even the loss of language (no more breastfeeding or women or mothers).

And I think more work needs to be done to push the idea of what masculine means so that young men who do not feel they fit male stereotypes feel safe to express themselves without believing that they are trans.

This ^^ is huge. The utter harm to sensitive young men who don’t fit the Andrew Tate stereotype combined with online grooming/recruitment by older TW is staggering.