To think that for medical reasons it is important that transgender people are correctly sexed

[MenstruatorExtraordinaire]

Saw this doctor on This Morning being called a bigot by Piers Morgan

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7227479/Doctor-sues-government-sacked-trans-views.html

Religious views aside, I think he raises an important point.

I've seen several cases recently where transgender people have been incorrectly identified by medical staff leading to their death/serious injury or the death of a baby.

Surely the solution is to retain their correct sex on medical records, birth certificate etc with a TG marker.

So AIBU to think that for medical reasons alone it is important that transgender people are correctly sexed?

*Surely the solution is to retain their correct sex on medical records, birth certificate etc with a TG marker.

So AIBU to think that for medical reasons alone it is important that transgender people are correctly sexed?*

This was the original AIBU

Why the sarcasm though? I can't remember the last time a Dr called me by my name, other than when I was an inpatient for a week recently, and 1 Dr would call me by my first name.

Other than that they just say hello. No name. My name is used to call me into the room, but no title is ever used, so where is the problem?

Calling someone John Smith or Mary Jones isn't lying is it, if that is their name?

Why in such a situation would you not humour someone if not doing so might upset them?

Humouring to avoid upsetting - which is what you do to toddlers to stop a tantrum and you need to get home OR what used to happen in cartoons when someone had severe delusions ‘Yes of course you are Napoleon Bonaparte, come along now and have your lunch’.

Rather shot yourself in the foot with that one, haven’t you - it’s an admission that we are being asked to play nice, to pander to a delusion.

They say the onlooker sees most of the game, which is another way of saying "Never forget about the lurkers".

I've come late to the party but I think the gender critical have a lot to thank Xarra for. Absurd claims, an absence of intellectual rigour or coherence, a whole harvest of straw men... Xarra has a memorable and prolific posting style.

The replies though? That's where the lurkers were in luck. Nothing like a preposterous assertion to offer scope for the well crafted rebuttal.

I have a mental image of loads of GC posters using Xarra like one of those wooden springboard as they engage in ever more lucid acrobatics. Not surprised Xarra has gone quiet. Must be exhausted.

JellyfishAndShells

If the patient's legal name is John Smith, even if they were born Mary Jones, please explain why a Dr should not be required to call them John Smith?

As a lurker, I am in awe of the GC feminists who have continued to put forward their views with such calm, rigorous arguments and intelligence on this thread. As on so many others of this kind.

I agree with you Prawnofthepatriarchy

It's not about humouring, or being nice, or courtesy. It's about compulsion. It's about giving a whole swathe of men, the power to force you into not just lying, but lying that is detrimental to women.

This man is insisting on using the ladies toilets, and going in the women's ward. Is completely different to saying this woman is insisting on using the ladies and going in the women's ward.

Because it is obscuring the fact that it is a member of the cohort who commit almost all sexual crime and almost all violent crime.

Until male violence is addressed, men will continue to be a threat to women. And obscuring that fact is detrimental to women.

So the answer is no.

Case in point re female erasure in case anyone was devoid of sense and needed some proof...

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3633741-where-is-my-space?pg=4&order=

TRA do like to go on about ‘erasing’ trans lives.

But actually, it’s a cunning reversal. Women are being erased- as a sex class, as a rights group, at work, in sport, in ad campaigns.

When ‘woman’ means anyone who eats a dress and like lippy where does that leave the millions of women who don’t fit the gender stereotype but still suffer oppression and abuse because of their SEX attributes.

Women’s rights are being erased

Women’s sport it being erased

Women’s identity (the identity that actually there are a million ways of being a woman in the modern world, none of which is better than the other) is being erased.

Who am I? I don’t know. Because I’m not a cis woman but I am apparently not allowed to be just a woman. The is too exclusionary. I love how everyone else is able to give me labels but I’m not allowed to claim my own identity for fear of hurting a man’s feelings.

‘Wears a dress’

Not ‘eats a dress’. Stupid auto correct!

Erase how? Because such shrinking violets aren’t getting, say womens roles in politics or nicking women in business awards, or even being crowned school ‘prom queen’ and having their photos in national news papa era.

@LordProfFekkoThePenguinPhD

Well exactly. It’s all a land grab.

I’ve said it before- celebrate trans. Have awards for trans visibility and trans leadership and trans sport. But don’t just march into the spaces and support women have slogged for centuries to establish and demand to take over.

Being born female is still a massive disadvantage, even in the western world. Giving up what we’ve won at this stage is a massive step backwards.

There’s definitely a difference between males who want to be women (or close to) and those who want to be Betty boop/an anime/Xenia/porn star

But we aren't talking about access to single sex wards, women's toilets or awards for women are we?

We are talking about a patient's medical records and how an HCP addresses an individual patient. That is the issue here.

Why can't there be a policy for how patients are addressed and then separate policies for accommodation on wards or toilets used? You don't have to have one rule that covers everything.

If a trans woman has a GRC do you still think the Dr should address them as Mr so and so? And all of your other objections remain except the patient has legal status now so how do you propose the drs address that?

It's less about what should or shouldn't happen, and whether it's politic to use certain words in certain situations. And more about the compelling.

"If you don't you'll be fired".

If you say you won't in the future, you'll be fired.

It's utterly mediaeval. Recant, recant.

And on that note, the word bigot has become synonymous with murderer, rapist, Nazi.

Since when was being bigoted a reason to fire somebody?

Since when was being bigoted a reason to fire somebody?

I guess it depends on how it is expressed and who you are bigoted against.

And many of us face "compelled" speech at work - I can't tell customers or colleagues what I think of them, if a customer asked that I call him Mr Bligh's I would be in trouble if I persisted in calling him John for example. If you know how someone wants to be addressed what is the problem with doing it? Or if you really can't face it then don't call them anything. If the patient asks you call them "Miss Smith" I can see no reason why you would insist on calling them "Mr Smith". Just don't use their name or any pronouns.

"Good afternoon, have a seat. Now what seems to be the problem". What is wrong with that? How has anyone been compelled to say anything against their beliefs?

Why can't there be a policy for how patients are addressed and then separate policies for accommodation on wards or toilets used? You don't have to have one rule that covers everything.

Try telling TRAs that. Any disagreement with their agenda is labelled transphobia and the conversation is shut down.

If a man can enforce the use of pronouns which are wrong according to their biological sex then why would any accept that they should not use facilities, participate in sports, or have access to spaces which are specifically for the biological members of the female sex??

The issues cannot be separated.

How has anyone been compelled to say anything against their beliefs?

Try addressing that to the DWP who have fired somebody for non-compliance! Not us.

The issues cannot be separated.

This powerful article, Pronouns are Rohypnol sets out the con job that inaccurate pronouns do on us.

Compare these two sentences:

Angie was told she's not welcome in the women's changing room.

David was told he's not welcome in the women's changing room.

See how differently you react to the two sentences. And if Angie/David is a man who identifies as a woman the change of pronoun creates a false picture.

Anyone reading the first sentence would be baffled as to why Angie wasn't welcome.

Anyone reading the second sentence would think David's exclusion was entirely reasonable.

Pronouns have a profound effect on our perceptions. They're neither harmless or trivial.

TRA do like to go on about ‘erasing’ trans lives.

But actually, it’s a cunning reversal

As is everything they say. Not only does it serve them well politically, they get a kick out of it. The more outrageous a reversal the better.

Repeatedly calling someone sir when they've been asked not to? Yes, they should be disciplined for that.

"Disciplined" is rather a mealy mouthed way of saying "fired".

Who was it that said - ‘enjoy your erasion’? Was that the quote?

Shon Faye

"I'm a woman because I say I am. You've lost. Enjoy ur erasure"

Gender fluid? Use the one you identify as currently. Simple.

No. It isn't. And it's not acceptable. I'm guessing you're quite young with all your second hand trans propaganda and "many genders" foolishness.

I used to like a bit of erasure in my clubbing days.
m.youtube.com/watch?v=RiKVjS3gR88