To think that scholarships for women shouldn't be open to men?

[HermioneWeasley]

So, scholarship to support women in STEM - a massive issue for all societies that we're not harnessing th talents of half our populations in this area.

But if you "identify as a woman in a way that's meaningful to you" you can apply.

What the ever loving fuck?

Another example of the damage being done to actual women, by saying that "woman" is a feeling in a man's head.

Who are they to say he's not trans? How would they know?

I don't know Venus. I got that he wasn't, from the fact that this transwoman journalist (I think it was the Guardian), was quite cross about the appropriation, in a sort of it's not fair, what are we going to do if we can't identify ourselves with skirts. It was sort of dirge like and moany but at the same time very very earnest.

I mean it was fucking tiresome as well

I think I remember that article if it was the guardian one I'm thinking of. It got a pasting in the comments. Mostly total ridicule by people who were clearly male, funnily enough. But it's only radical feminists who are terrible transphobes, natch.

Meanwhile I'm looking forward to tonight's Modern Family episode, though am profoundly disturbed that an 8 yo is transgender (and an actor - though that's because I can't abide most child actors)

That's put me right off Modern FAmily, and I was such a fan.

*fascicle" - I disagree - women in middle eastern countries have far lower status than women in the west and patriarchy, male violence and aggression are likely far worse but we have all of the same problems here, just to a lesser extent.

And I struggle to believe that the Victorian system was only about propriety - women had every reason to be genuinely fearful of using facilities with men given attitudes towards women were so much worse then - women were seen as property and blamed for men's poor treatment of them. Women who were raped or sexually assaulted were seen as fallen every bit as much as women who consented to premarital sexual experiences. A woman who became pregnant by rape lost her social standing and her chances of a good marriage, which was all a lot of women could hope for in life at the time.

And yes, there is no legal deterrent but that was part of the point of what I wrote. There is no law to say that men cannot enter the women's toilets in the amnesty international example either and yet amnesty has found overwhelmingly that just putting a sign for "woman" and one for "men" on the toilet doors makes women safer. Yes, some people who pass as the opposite sex will use the toilet that doesn't match their sex but sex segregation is still effective in making women safer. There is little research on this as it isn't needed. The system of sex segregation works. There will be research if it stops working.

Sorry for the derail guys - back to the scholarships chat...

*rattusn" - there is a very clear and fixed definition of the term "woman" that I am confident you will find in every good quality dictionary compiled by professional linguists that exists. I have personally checked 7 English dictionaries and three each for the two other languages I speak. They all say the exact same thing. The defining feature that all women have in common is their female reproductive system which is a system which should develop, in the absence of any illness or anomalies, to release eggs and gestate and birth offspring.

Even where a female reproductive system is incomplete or partially/completely non-functioning it is still distinguishable from a male reproductive system or intersex anatomy (which features elements of both the male and female system). A female reproductive system with a bit missing or a component that does not fulfill its natural function is still identifiably female and is objectively different to a male reproductive system or intersex anatomy (even where they are incomplete or partially/completely non-functioning).

So a person with XX chromosomes and a vagina but missing a womb and ovaries is still female as there is evidence of a female reproductive system - in the same way that a car missing a wheel and a hand break might not work but if you were to ask 100 people what it was I very much doubt you'd find anyone that didn't use the word "car" in their answer, even if they might add a few adjectives or adjectivals such as "incomplete" or "that can't be driven". It doesn't make sense to claim that just because it doesn't have all of the features needed to be a fully complete and functional you might as well call it a bike.

Intersex people are by definition partially female and so are almost always accepted as women/girls if that's what they wish even if you can argue that technically they aren't. What most of us "bigots" object to is the people who meet the definition of the term "man" absolutely perfectly telling us (who meet the definition of the term "woman" absolutely perfectly) that they know what it is to be woman better than we do and that we're transphobes for objecting to their new nonsensical definition that robs us of our ability to describe the sex based oppression we face.

Incidentally, are you aware that the term "biological female", which you used in your post of 22:50:02 (28/09/16) is now widely considered to be grossly transphobic in many circles? I have been met with absolute fury from dozens if not hundreds of people online for using this term and yet you deemed you needed it to describe yourself and with good reason. If you truly accept every element of the view you are promoting you will need to kiss goodbye to such terms. If a man can have a vagina and a woman can have a penis and if we are forced to accept the former as male and the latter as female then female biology can only exist in the mind of bigots and transphobes. This post isn't intended to sound nasty - I just don't think you fully understand the ideology you are promoting or the thought processes of the people that it comes from. Your use of this term alone make that quite clear to anyone who's had any significant interaction with the trans community online.

ice are you seriously suggesting that the best (only?) way to tell who is a man and who is a woman is to stick them in an FMRI scanner and see how their empathy circuitry responds to painful stimuli?

That seems a bit complicated to me.

Also, a transman cannot know what it feels like to be kicked in the balls so I'm not sure where you're going with that?

Excellent post sixpence

Lexicographers really don't seem to have any difficulty with 'woman' or 'female'. Words do sometimes evolve but misuses which make their meaning unclear are never helpful.

Superbly explained, Sixpence.

Superbly explained, Sixpence.

hermione I am suggesting that exactly as much as I am suggesting we all walk around naked. ie. not at all.

Given my attempts to point out to WW that saying our societal attitudes to public nudity aren't helping us, isn't the same suggesting we all walk around naked all the time, have fallen not so much on deaf ears, but on a mind apparently incapable of dealing with the subtlety, I am not hugely hopeful of engaging in any serious conversation on the issue.

I don't understand why TA refuse to accept any position but that TW are women, no caveats etc, it appears to be somewhat self defeating in the long run.

But I find it far more dispiriting that feminists can't cope with the idea that sometimes, not always, not even often, but sometimes, TW could be logically grouped with women because sometimes they are suffering the same discriminations and sexist societal biases....because, well in the end it is going to be self defeating to not accept the occasional valid cases and make it 1000 times easier for people if they have valid evidence of transphobia in feminism.

Just because the other side are behaving like idiots and claiming everything is black and white, doesn't mean feminists have to do the same.

No but like we should walk round in the nude and get rid of presentational stereotyping altogether. It might not stop rape but the TRAs be like wtf imma write to the guardian

not automatically buzz cutting boys hair, while growing girls hair at 1-2yo might stop presentational stereotyping on meaningful way....not having gender segregating school uniforms might help....

not wearing clothes at school would appear to achieve the opposite in making it absolutely clear all the time.

gender stereotyping in schools is terrible and the primary cause of low STEM uptake at A-level.

Yet many schools have actual rules insisting that male and female children MUST wear different things....let alone having items of uniform that one gender would see as beneath their dignity (dresses).

There have been studies on this, and schools that don't have separate uniforms for boys and girls and who make conscious efforts to never split on gender lines for activities show less bias in teacher perceptions of achievement (you know that thing where teachers report girls doing 10% less well at maths than they actually are, and boys are reported as 10% less good at reading than they actually are).

All of which is why people with a penis presenting as female are likely to have suffered the discrimination that lowers female rates in STEM, more so if they have done so since child hood.

So a trans person at a gender neutral school would just what - have different hair and a different name and that's it they're a different sex?

ice I agree that TW and women both face discrimination , but they don't come from the same place any more than I have something in common with black, disabled or gay men because they are also discriminated against

TW face discrimination for being trans / non gender conforming . It's more akin to homophobia than sexism.

To recap your post:
Gender stereotyping exists.
leading to girls getting worse treatment than boys.
ans you conclude that boys 'presenting' as girls (I think you mean boys adopting feminine stereotypes) suffer the same discrimination as actual girls?

Which would hinge entirely upon the premise that people genuinely believe that boys in girls' clothing are exactly the same as girls and get mistreated accordingly.
And yet, everything we see suggests that such kids get privileges that girls don't - their rights supersede the girls' rights at every turn.

It would be great if men worked dresses the way women wear trousers. But some transactivists object to the idea. They don't want presentational neutrality because of validation they require.

wouldn't the advantage of a gender neutral school be that all the issues around being TG disappear. Why should you have to change your name even? If girls aren't boys are uniformed by the parents into stereotyped haircuts, no need to change your hair either. No battles over which toilet to use, no battles over who changes in which room, no arguments over uniform code.

As long as any bullying gets stamped on HARD, it sounds like a great outcome for TG and even more importantly for all the girls, who would like to be given an equal chance at maths and all the boys who would like to be given an equal chance in reading.

Ice being some transactivists object to what you suggest because they can't validate themselves through presentation. I'm sure you been on line. Presentation is like an obsession. I mean that's why we get accused of not being as good women, for not bothering with all that crap.

Nn sometimes I do bother with that crap but yknow it's a bit hit and miss

hairy I know two boys who are, as far as I know, not transgender but who present as female simply by dint of wearing pink occasionally and having long beautiful hair.

I see people treat them as female, I see people tell them to get down from being to high in the trees while letting the cropped haired boys climb wear they like. I see them told to stop being so noisy and sit down and behave while the other boys get 'oh boys will be boys'. I see people hand them the princess picture to colour in instead of the dinosaur....

Obviously their parents and close circle of friends don't do those things...but if they were TG they would too. So yes, presenting as female does lead society to stereotype you even when you have a penis. How long do these boys need to be passed the princess, and told to stop climbing before they are likely to start thinking they really shouldn't be so brave/confident/good at maths?