Transwomen - pseudumenopausal symptoms due to hrt - asked to approve work policy

all sexes

When I say women, I am referring to those who the majority of people of all sexes in the world understand are women.

The suburban effort to purify the definition of woman in the UK has seen a little adoption in the US by religious extremists, but the remainder of Europe (and nations of the UN recently and unsurprisingly) are quite progressively inclusive of all people's lives in their understanding of sex and gender.

No, diabetes and migraine are both covered under the disability part of the Equality Act. Menopause isn't a disability as such, but it impacts only one group with protected characteristics.

You've lost that bet.

That is my life I guess. There were a handful of people who violently objected to my living my own life as a child, adolescent and youth in their presence. Mumsnet suggests that everyone else in the world would find my life offensive a whole lot more in real life if they weren't being held hostage by the Grand Trans Cabal That Controls Everything™.

Maybe it is you that should be focused on your own life and not concerned with being offended by people living their lives?

Exactly.

Is the menopause policy going to include men weaning off steroids or painkillers? No. Because it has zilch to do with the menopause.

I think it pathologises menopause. Our bodies are responsible for a range of symptoms that impact performance, some of them age-related, some of them not. Do we need a diabetes policy? A migraine policy? An 'ageing and its effect on performance' policy?

Menopause is responsible for a range of symptoms which impact performance. As menopause affects women of a certain age, and age discrimination is rife, women are more likely to be forced out of work or denied promotion because of 'performance issues'.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that I do not think there should be a menopause policy. What is it for? Menopause is different for every woman. A good workplace should have a 'feeling shit at work' policy and line managers should be open to conversations with their staff about a range of accommodations to help them to stay in work whatever their problematic symptoms and irrespective of the cause.

The trouble is, when you say 'women', you sometimes mean men.

Plus, framing things that are demonstrably true as an 'opinion'.

It's just bizarre. As though identifying himself as a fantasist is an argument.

I'd be interested to know what the evidence is like for this and how complete. What's the evidence like for other important groups? Has the research been done? Policies like this shouldn't just throw out ideas without them being solidly evidenced, so a simple thing to check is whether any evidence is cited and if you have the ability, have a quick look at it and check the quality/relevance.

But crucially, is any of this actually relevant for the policy? Is any special provision made for black or disabled women compared to all women? If so, can this be justified? What are trans women actually being offered? If there are special provisions for some groups and not others there is potentially a legal risk if it isn't really firmly justified. On the other hand, if none of this actually results in anything concrete in the policy it's just verbiage/activism and you can just make a comment along the lines of 'does this add anything to the policy?'. 'It would be simpler to cut these parts because they don't relate to any concrete provisions in the policy'.

i bet you don’t know other actual women who’ve been on HRT for as long as you have.

And describing men as women is incredibly offensive and an erasure of our experiences. Do better, appreciate other people, don’t appropriate someone else’s life for yourself in some tone deaf fairy tale you want to live in. Live your own life and be proud of what that is. Embrace your diversity, respect others.

@onepostwonder I have a question that I'd genuinely like to hear the answer to. If there was one policy that applied solely to biological women, relating to accommodations that may need to be made for women coming into menopause, defined as the process of the decline and cessation of monthly periods, then another that solely dealt with transidentifying individuals (whether biologically male or female) who take hormones to aid their transition to their desired gender, relating to accommodations that may need to be made for these individuals, would you be happy? Would you feel that was equitable? If you wouldn't, why not?

No it doesn't, because you can't cross sex boundaries. You can enhance existing structures within the male body to make them more prominent, and diminish others to make them less prominent. You can give hormones that reduce natural functions of the male body such as sweating. You can even cut some structures off and create and line cavities that mimic female organs. But none of these cross the boundary of sex. They simply modify existing anatomy and physiology.

So, onepost is still trying to make the word 'realist' an insult.

It is rather amusing. Poor chap.

🤣🤣🤣

It can be perfectly legitimate to exclude some groups of women. If a policy is discussing women with physical disabilities, it is perfectly reasonable to exclude able-bodied women. And men. If a policy is discussing pregnant women, it is perfectly reasonable to exclude post-menopause women. And men.

This does not mean the policy is not diverse. Considering the needs of women of different ethnicities, ages, education, financial status etc is diversity. Considering the needs - sorry, the wants - of men who cannot, by definition, experience any of the issues the policy addresses is not diversity. It is selfish intrusion and colonisation.

That is not an "NHS Policy Directive".

It is a policy for a local Ambulance Service. It is neither an NHS Directive nor definitive and we are not obliged to regard it as either accurate or helpful to women.

To be fair, if my uterus ever started producing eggs, I might need to contact a medical textbook.

I would also make sure I was using the terms Trans Identifying Men , and Trans Identifying Women to emphasise that TIM are men ( and therefore do not go through menopause) and TIW are women who might go though menopause .

It always helps to remember that the phrase trans woman is specifically designed to muddy the waters and confuse the unwary.

Men who take cross sex hormones are not replacing hormones, they are adding hormones to their bodies to mimic the secondary characteristics ( primarily breast development) that women develop during puberty.

Fundamentally for me, the fact is that Transwomen do not go through menopause. Some TW will be advised in later years to reduce or stop the hormones they are taking, that is not menopause, it is not comparable and trying to force team it into this policy would be the same as saying that anyone who stops taking anti-depressants should be covered under the menopause policy because they have been taking a long term medication and withdrawing has side effects. There could very well be a valid argument for your workplace to implement a policy that addresses the implications of withdrawing from long term medications, but that isn’t the menopause policy.

And this NHS policy would be giving misinformation based on 'menopause -like' symptoms. Those 'symptoms' are not menopause and can be experienced by other people who are also not going through 'menopause'.

Giving inaccurate information about menopause is a significant issue for female people.

When your uterus stops producing eggs, give us a ring.