To think MN needs its feminists?

[crunchymint]

Sites like MN need its users to generate content. We are its product. All services need something unique about them to differentiate themselves from the competition. At one time what differentiated MN from its competitors was that there were more intelligent discussions on here.
Now the same type of discussions happen on MN as elsewhere.

What differentiates MN from its competitors are the large number of feminists on here. That is what is unique about this site. To keep going as a decent ongoing commercial concern, MN needs its feminists. Otherwise it has nothing to differentiate it from other sites.

N.B What differentiates NM is that its local sites are far superior to any other site.

Intimate spaces and refuges etc I can see, and would support, a case for an exemption of, similarly with sport (although I don't watch sport and have no interest in it so I'm not that bothered about it).

There won’t be any exemptions.

The problem is that if sex is replaced with gender in the EA as there is already a push to do and self ID comes in, there won’t be any exceptions, because the sex based protection will go. There were multiple bits of legislation that got rolled into the EA - right now there is a push to replace sex (a protected characteristic) with gender. That will torpedo every single bit of law that protects you as a woman and it will blow child safeguarding out of the water.

Here’s another example of where there won’t be exemptions: women’s prisons. Men will be able to self ID into women’s prisons and be housed in the general population. There aren’t enough places to keep them segregated. They will be washing, and sharing space with female prisoners. There is already one person in prison in the UK who has used this to have sex with female prisoners in prison.

I do not think this is OK.

Leaving transwomen out of it for a moment - this is about MEN being able to use loopholes to access women. And children. And they will. Almost all the UK safeguarding rules were brought in in response to specific cases where children were harmed, to close those loopholes. For example - nationwide linking of the databases that we used for DBS checks.

Even if every transwoman in the country is a law abiding citizen, the change in the rules will allow men to access spaces and there will be no right to challenge, no gatekeeping, nothing. that is the problem

The conversation to the doctors should go "I want a biological female to carry out my smear". "OK" end of.

We should have to take time off work, turn up to an appointment, wait as they are always running late to then be presented with a male. To then have to make a fuss and turn them down. Surely that is more hurtful to the person in question.

"Shouldn't"

No-one "must allow" any HCP "access to their body" for any reason, at any time

Rat: don't be disingenuous. The woman who was faced with a self id woman for a check up was indeed not forced to allow h** to touch her. However she had to leave without having the test.

So unless male transpeople stop presenting themselves when women have asked for a female, the choice is suck up self id, have an argument at a vulnerable time, or miss the test.

Where did self id woman come from? Some weird auto suggest? Self id HCP I meant to say.

I would support self id if everyone was able to self id as they liked but biological exemptions in sports, healthcare, prisons etc were strengthened.

Not sure how old fashioned transsexuals would feel about this however. It would kind of make the whole thing pretty meaningless.

The problem is that if sex is replaced with gender in the EA as there is already a push to do and self ID comes in, there won’t be any exceptions, because the sex based protection will go. There were multiple bits of legislation that got rolled into the EA - right now there is a push to replace sex (a protected characteristic) with gender. That will torpedo every single bit of law that protects you as a woman and it will blow child safeguarding out of the water.

Where are you getting this nonsense? Whether a trans person shares your sex, your gender, your religious beliefs or whatever else you might both have in common under the EA... we will still be able to separate them from you when necessary on the basis of their gender reassignment.

The sex exemptions in the Equality Act are under attack. Let's not pretend otherwise. These reassurances are intended only to help push through self ID. It's worked on some feminists. Doesn't work on lots of us.

We should have to take time off work, turn up to an appointment, wait as they are always running late to then be presented with a male.

What a massive, massive price to pay to allow a trans person to go peacefully about their lives and do their jobs in the way that causes them the least distress. It's too much I tell you, too much to expect a woman to rearrange her appointment so that a tiny minority of the population might enjoy that basic right.

I'm sure I read on here so many posters saying they were "pro trans rights"; I'm not sure how they can say that when they won't even defend those rights over a woman's right to not be inconvenienced.

I think it's important that you specifically acknowledge it hesmyworld, given that you were critical of the behaviour and to some extent the views of GC feminists who disagree with you.

We shouldn't describe a woman being presented with a non biological female for a procedure when she's asked for one as merely being inconvenienced. We presumably all know it's possible she might be quite a bit more than that.

Do you not think it would be more hurtful to that person to be constantly refused in this way than to accept that those people who have requested a biological female only might actually be entitled to that. Presumably the male presenting as a woman would be able to work with those people who hadn't specifically requested a female.

Rat: don't be disingenuous. The woman who was faced with a self id woman for a check up was indeed not forced to allow h to touch her. However she had to leave without having the test.

Unless there is a lot more to this story it's hardly a tear-jerker is it. Woman delays non-urgent test? Please.

No HCP should put their own validation ahead of the needs of a patient.

Do you not think it would be more hurtful to that person to be constantly refused in this way than to accept that those people who have requested a biological female only might actually be entitled to that.

It's not for me to say that the trans population would prefer to not be able to change their legal sex than to have to occasionally face rejection for it.

As I've said, as it stand you can request a female HCP. If someone has the legal right to be known as a female, the health service could allocate them as your HCP. If, despite that, you suspect they are not a natal female - and that makes you uncomfortable - you can refuse the procedure. Whilst not a perfect solution for either party, this seems eminently fair all round.

Rat the fact that you keep referring to women's responses to a male person being foisted on them in place of a female HCP as 'inconvenience' shows that you understand almost nothing about the responses that some women might have in this position.

it's not about the 'inconvenience' of rearranging an appointment. It could be genuinely traumatic for many more women than you realise.

It's an incredibly privileged blinkered way to think, to assume that every woman (or girl) has the confidence and self-assurance to speak up for herself in these situations.

Ever heard of 'freezing'?

Unless there is a lot more to this story it's hardly a tear-jerker is it. Woman delays non-urgent test? Please

Wow. Let this post stand. Here's the story, for anyone interested.

Woman has to to delay test for early signs of cancer

Unless there is a lot more to this story it's hardly a tear-jerker is it. Woman delays non-urgent test? Please.

This dismissal of women's experiences is really awful.

There has been a huge campaign to try to increase take up of smear tests and this is doing nothing but damage, and all you are doing, Rat , is repeatedly sneering at and dismissing women's experiences and difficulties.

Your tone is horrible

No HCP should put their own validation ahead of the needs of a patient.

They're not. They're just living their lives. Just because it does not fit in with your outlook does not mean they don't have the right to do so.

They are Rat, but of course you are free not to care.