To ask for someone to actually explain how trans women are women???

[Lilyyulelog]

I genuinely would love a satisfactory explanation, one which gets to the point. Since becoming aware of the 'trans debate' I've yet to see one that makes any sense at all.

Or is it just that whether or not they are isn't actually the real issue? But surely it is...

The bottom line is the XY doesn't lie. Transwomen are men, and this self ID guff should not be allowed to go ahead. There is no such thing as a "cis" - there are men and women. Biologically, you will always fall into one or other category, there is nothing you can do about it.

Yes, women's rights are being eroded and if we keep allowing this sham to continue, goodness knows where it will take us. I feel very sorry for future generations if these TRAs aka MRAs get their way.

Testosterone levels than transgender athletes have to achieve to compete are well above those which non transgender female athletes will have naturally.

So they need to lower the acceptable level to be the same as nontransgender female.

I am getting tired of people who are deliberately and disingenuously choosing to stay misinformed as to the actual realities of self id and are just airily assuming that "xyz" circumstances will of course be exempt/personal preference/sorted out (...because the idea of it is so preposterous it surely can't happen as it stands?)

This is exactly the bloody problem! It will, unless we force the subject now.

Dungeondragon15 and the issue with school trips, do they just have to stop.

What issue? As I said, on the trips my children have been on the teachers and children do not share rooms.

And how do you think a refuge for example can distinguish "genuine" (for want of a better word) job applicants from any other?

Don't they do that anyway?!!

What are you expecting? The rape crisis centre to start asking lots of questions about why someone is presenting as a trans woman before hiring them? They are going to ask “Are you doing this for ‘ominous reasons’?”?

They cannot legally ask these questions! And even if they did how would they be able to tell whether the person is lying?

And then if they reject the trans person because they suspected that they might want to perve on women, they will have a massive law suit.

This is why, if the law is going to continue to let people change their legal sex/gender, the exceptions must be protected and strengthened.

As I said, on the trips my children have been on the teachers and children do not share rooms

This also includes pupils so my 13yo dd could find herself sharing with a 16yo natal male in a twin room.

@Dungeondragon15 What issue? As I said, on the trips my children have been on the teachers and children do not share rooms.

It is bugger-all to do with trans teachers. When there is a trans child in your child's school:

1. You will not be told
2. Even if you find out (say by looking at them, or it being a single sex school), you will be unable to speak out. You will be committing a hate crime if you do.

3., If there is a trip involving sleeping over, that trans child will be legally entitled to sleep, bathe, change, everything with the born children of their chosen gender.

You will not be told, you will not be able to stop it, you will not be able to change it. Your only option then is to withdraw your child from the trip if you have any worries about the above.

What is it about this you are refusing to see? Do you honestly think thousands of women are up in arms about this for shits and giggles? because we can't fill our lady heads with anything else? or just, maybe, there might be something in it?

Dungeondragon15: What issue? As I said, on the trips my children have been on the teachers and children do not share rooms.

You are now being deliberately obtuse. A PP explained it would be a male bodied child sharing with girls.

*And how do you think a refuge for example can distinguish "genuine" (for want of a better word) job applicants from any other?

Don't they do that anyway?!!*

I think you are asking a lot to expect a standard job interview to pick out someone who is applying for "ominous" reasons.You can screen out people with previous convictions,but what else? This isn't something organisations in other areas have found easy to do.

And then if they reject the trans person because they suspected that they might want to perve on women, they will have a massive law suit.

You don't have to give a reason for not giving someone a job. You just choose the person you think is the most suitable candidate. Even if an employer did give a reason it wouldn't be something that could potential result in a law suit (unless they were very stupid).

Gacapa

Transwomen are men. This is a morally neutral fact and there is absolutely nothing that can change it. Nothing at all.

Exactly.

To say transwomen are women is a lie.

Transwomen are transwomen. Perfectly worthy of dignity and respect just as they are. Being male is a prerequisite of being a transwoman. Transwomen are not women.

Totally agree with PPs that the language has been changed without women's consent and to our detriment.

The 'ladybrain' argument is interesting. But there seems to be too much overlap between males and females for it to be useful IMO.

You can't accurately identify whether a person is of the class that produces eggs or sperm based on their personality. Certainly, having 'male' brain traits does not prevent women from getting pregnant, menstruating or going through the menopause. Transwomen 'feel' like women and yet most of them are capable of producing sperm.

You are now being deliberately obtuse. A PP explained it would be a male bodied child sharing with girls.

If they were a child, I wouldn't have a problem with them sharing. There are usually several children to a room so I don't see what difference it would make.

You don't have to give a reason for not giving someone a job. You just choose the person you think is the most suitable candidate. Even if an employer did give a reason it wouldn't be something that could potential result in a law suit (unless they were very stupid).

Again, I’m afraid you’re just wrong there. If the trans person can show to an employment tribunal evidence that they could have been rejected because they were trans, then the burden of proof shifts to the employer to show it was for other reasons (eg another candidate had objectively better qualifications).

And if the employer had been asking the trans person at the interview all kinds of questions about why they were trans and whether they were just pretending to take advantage of women, I would bet my house on the trans person winning at the Tribunal.

Dungeondragon15: If they were a child, I wouldn't have a problem with them sharing. There are usually several children to a room so I don't see what difference it would make.

Ok, fine. We'll all accept 13, 14, 15, 16 year old male bodied child sharing a bedroom with our daughters.

I completely agree with the worries about the proposed changes to self ID being liable to abuse by individuals that want to access woman’s spaces for abusive reasons, and I’m glad of these threads raising my awareness of that.

But I do wish people would stop the “trans women aren’t women” thing. It’s inflammatory and deliberately offensive and makes these threads transphobic.

But I do wish people would stop the “trans women aren’t women” thing. It’s inflammatory and deliberately offensive and makes these threads transphobic.
Or it’s truthful and factual, how are they women?

Hoooochy - What if women find it offensive to be told that transwomen are women? What if we find it offensive to be told what women are; to have something that we are born and live as redefined for us?

Presumably that is irrelevant and we should all just change our minds or shut up and keep quiet like good little girls?

And if the employer had been asking the trans person at the interview all kinds of questions about why they were trans and whether they were just pretending to take advantage of women, I would bet my house on the trans person winning at the Tribunal.

It would be pretty stupid to ask those questions. Whatever the law states, it's virtually impossible (unless a potential employer was very stupid) to prove to employment tribunals you have been discriminated against by job interviewers. That is why hardly anyone spends the time and money trying to sue. Out of interest, how many people take employers to employment tribunals because they didn't get a job and how often are they successful?

" I do wish people would stop the “trans women aren’t women” thing. It’s inflammatory and deliberately offensive and makes these threads transphobic"

No it is not any of those things to say "Transwomen are not women".

Transwomen objectively are NOT women, based simply on dictionary definitions of those terms.

Woman = Adult human female.
Female = Of the sex that can make eggs or bear young.

Are transwomen OF the SEX that CAN make eggs or bear young? No. So, they are not female.

As per the dictionary definition of 'woman' above, if they are not female, they can't be women.

Transphobia would be "Transwomen are disgusting. I would never be friends with one", for example.

Do you understand the difference?

hooochycoo
But I do wish people would stop the “trans women aren’t women” thing. It’s inflammatory and deliberately offensive and makes these threads transphobic.

But you can't explain how a trans woman with a penis, testicles and a prostate gland is a woman?

It would be pretty stupid to ask those questions. Whatever the law states, it's virtually impossible (unless a potential employer was very stupid) to prove to employment tribunals you have been discriminated against by job interviewers.

But you were just advocating that rape crisis centres should question candidates who present as trans women to figure out who had “ominous reasons” for being there!

100 years of women's rights erased in 2 years. I could fucking weep.