Do I have a right to be angry about this? (Trans related)

[Nc109283485]

Nc for obvious reasons. This is a very personal issue to me which I am understandably sensitive about, so this may be why I feel this way. I am perfectly happy to be told I AMBU! I believe trans people deserve love and respect and a happy life just like everyone else. So why did this concern and anger me?

I have a condition called vaginismus which has been very traumatic and caused me lots of grief over my life. In my eyes it is a very personal and female problem. (Look if up if you're not sure what it is).

I have tried to join a support group on a social media platform to really get to the bottom of it and sort it out. I wont say which one as dont want to 'out' either myself or the group involved. My request was pending and a message sent. I assumed this was to confirm I definitely suffer from this condition and to make sure I wasn't some strange pervert, but no! The administrator messaged me to say that before I was accepted I would have to answer a 'test question' as this is a gender inclusive group. Will I be addressing group members as 'ladies, men or everyone'. The tone felt quite aggressive and if I did not pass this test I would not be admitted.

My first thought was are men allowed to enter this group? Do I really have to speak about my vagina in front of 'everyone'? Why not say hello ladies (and the occasional transman who currently has issues with their vagina) no I have to address everyone? Wtf?

I honestly don't know what to think right now but this group clearly isn't for me. But maybe I just need some re-education?

I get that you would be uncomfortable at the thought of potentially discussing your vagina if the group contained men (trans or cis).

However if when you join the group you discover that you feel uncomfortable you can leave.

You know so little right now other than a slightly 'policing' tone that you have interpreted from a written question which sounds poorly worded, and you are in an anxious state and generally feeling vulnerable given the issue at hand, so can you really trust your own judgement of that tone right now?

Just click 'everyone' and if you're admitted to the group you can feel for yourself if it feels right for you, if the people make you feel 'policed' or uncomfortable and you can leave if you want. It's not mandatory to stay.

You never know, there might be no transmen, there might be some. You might feel uncomfortable, or you might find that you really connect with a transman who is experiencing the same things as you in relation to their vagina and you feel comfortable discussing together. or not.

I think you would be foolish to turn down the potential of a helpful support group before you've given it a chance based on your interpretation of some wording.

When it comes to sport, if you put people into two groups bases on strength, stamina, weight etc, you are basically putting them into categories of male and female.

Not even that. You're putting them in categories of male and ... more males.
Height for height, weight for weight, males far outperform females. If you also include ability then your elite female athletes are somewhere down in the 10th division, not in pro sport. Even if an ability cut happens to be set at a level where elite women can compete, there will be far more men able to qualify. Your world championships would be 95% male. And likely strong but less skilled males vs less strong extremely skilled females. Why would women want to compete like that? Why would anyone want to watch it? It sounds dismal.
It was an absurd suggestion. (Yes I know not originally suggested by the poster I'm quoting).

All comes down again to who it benefits.

I even woken on testosterone would lose to men

Transmen would lose out the same way women would.

So when you mix categories you are screwing them and wonen over.

Leaving only males of course.

Why would anyone pander to males like this

As always, it's enlightening for people to see how trans ideologists will not concede one inch, lest everything unravels. Even to the point of saying really quite ludicrous things.

Thought you were just skipping past my posts now.

They already can compete in their sex category. Why do you think they cannot?

Because the issue of them competing was brought up so they obviously aren't competing where you want them to.

Translation: it doesn't affect me personally so I really couldn't give a shit if it ruins sports for women.

Translation is, it doesn't effect me personally so I haven't fully formed an opinion as yet. But I'm going to do the suggested reading and I will form an opinion.

Do you have opinions on things that you don't know much about because they haven't effected you?

Translation: Who cares about what the prison officer feels? It's all about the trans person here.

As I said, nobody should be forced.

When did I say that parts of the reproductive system define female

I genuinely can't remember if you did define female. I cant see but there are a lot of posts so I have possibly missed it.

What makes a person female for you?

This is a harder one to answer, but I will as best I can.

Obviously born as a female and have no wish to change. Those who have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria and who are, or are going to be taking steps to make physical changes towards no longer being a male.

In the way I wouldn't tell anyone that them having a boob job and going from an A cup to a double E cup means they are still flat chested, and they are appropriating the struggles those of us with big boobs have and will never understand the struggle we went through growing up and are just faking having big boobs and they don't count and shouldn't join groups etc, I wouldn't tell a transgender person that their struggle isn't real, its just a different struggle and a different way of getting there.

I know that you'll disagree, and have reasons for that, which are absolutely valid for you (and most on this thread) I have my reasons and they are valid for me, those I know and my life.

As I said, nobody should be forced

And prisoners won't get searched will they.

So you either think that the rules that protect prisoners and staff should be abolished in the hope someone volunteers or you think its ok that drugs jd weapons get brought in so as to avoid the whole dilemma of who searches them

Obviously born as a female and have no wish to change. Those who have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria and who are, or are going to be taking steps to make physical changes towards no longer being a male.

Interesting that 1) you don't actually define female - "born female" is NOT a definition 2) you exclude tw who don't have gender dysphoria and who are not making physical changes - this is transphobic according to current thinking.

Why do you insist on answering every question as if there are unlimited resources in hospitals, an infinite number of binary fluid officials who are quite happy to do whatever they need to do? Could you just maybe address the real life problems that people have pointed out to you?

Why do you insist on asking questions then, when I give you an answer, you dismiss them

There wouldn't need to be infinite numbers of anything. I keep being told that trans people make up a tiny minority, so why would there need to be infinite numbers rather than, say, one room per hospital and one guard?

It was an absurd suggestion possibly so, I'm going to do some reading tonight.

Do you have any idea the kind of people it would attract if you gave them the right to operate outside of safeguarding procedures ?

Do you want trans people searched by people like that?

I am not dismissing your answers but with each answer you are just demonstrating how little you know of this topic - or indeed of society.

one room per hospital and one guard?
This is not how hospitals or prisons work!! Your "plan" for hospitals - where would this room be? On which ward? What about ICU? One room per hospital would be hugely discriminating to trans people who would then very likely receive a lower standard of care as they would not be in a specialist ward, not to say anything of the isolation. Why do you think it is acceptable to propose a lower standard of care for trans people? It's not.

Why do you think it is acceptable to propose a lower standard of care for trans people? It's not

Well quite

To think we are the bad guys because we want safeguarding procedures to be applied and proper care.

Safguarding isn't for fun. It protects everyone. If you remove it to avoid having to acknowledge that sex is real all that will happen is it puts people in danger. Maybe even kills them.

No good can come of making safguarding optional.

Lemon do you believe humans can change sex?

Do you believe your daughter is transforming into an actual man through use of binders and hormones?

Did you believe any of this before your child started talking about maybe being trans?

Safguarding isn't for fun. It protects everyone. If you remove it to avoid having to acknowledge that sex is real all that will happen is it puts people in danger. Maybe even kills them.

YY.

Interesting that 1) you don't actually define female - "born female" is NOT a definition 2) you exclude tw who don't have gender dysphoria and who are not making physical changes - this is transphobic according to current thinking.

I'm trying not to say anything that would be deemed to be offensive tbh.

How about - observed at birth to have a vagina.

I know that some of my thinking is deemed transphobic. You have all assumed a lot about my views (including calling me TRA and racist) because I am willing to use inclusive language, don't believe trans people should be kicked out of trans inclusive groups, and think provision should be made for trans people in all walks of life.

Do you have any idea the kind of people it would attract if you gave them the right to operate outside of safeguarding procedures ?

Safeguarding procedures change and adapt all the time to accommodate new situations.

There are people in every job who could use it for their own purposes.

demonstrating how little you know of this topic - or indeed of society.

Here we go again, you don't like what I am saying so you need to try and patronise me.

There are some aspects of this, such as sport, that I don't know much about, do you know everything about every aspect of absolutely everything?

Your "plan" for hospitals - where would this room be?

I would personally plan for one on each floor of the hospital and change things about a bit. ICU is mixed sex anyway (certainly the few that I have been in). Of course we can't go changing things about to accommodate trans people though even though the feminists on this board are always saying 'create a third space'.

Do you believe your daughter is transforming into an actual man through use of binders and hormones?

I never said that my loved on was my child, nor did I say whether that person is male or female.

Do I belive that my loved one is who they say they are? - yes

Did I believe it before they came out? - it was so long ago that it wasn't something that was on my radar either way.

Safeguarding procedures change and adapt all the time to accommodate new situations

They tighten up. Get added to. They don't get removed entirely.

They tighten up. Get added to. They don't get removed entirely.

Why would adding to this safeguarding procedure to accommodate trans individuals mean removing it?

How about - observed at birth to have a vagina.

This directly contradicts what YOU wrote above about some women not having a vagina so how can you use it as the definition of woman?

So, wht should a trans person be searched by anyone who's whole position is to ignore everything we know about safeguarding, sex segregation, chaperones, limitations and search vulnerable people ?

How will that help them?

Men search males.

Women search females.

For safety privacy ajd dignity.

What kind of man would volunteer to search biological females?

Think abiut it fir a secind.

I think the intersex thing should really be put to the side. It's not relevant. There are two sexes, sex is binary, not on a spectrum You are either male or female. There are only two sexes in humans. People have potential to be either large gamete producers, or small gamete producers. No one produces both; no one produces something else.

Some people are infertile, but that doesn’t make them sexless.

Humans are also bipedal. They have two legs. Sometimes a baby will be born with one leg, or no legs, or three legs. This doesn't mean that there is a spectrum of the number of legs a human has.
Intersex people actually do not like being part of the trans debate.
The incidence of intersex abnormalities is very small and a completely different issue.

So to answer a question, what makes someone make or female? Their genetic makeup and their DNA.
Ridiculous surgeries aside, this can never be changed. Adding bits on, cutting bits off, reshaping bits here and there, creating surgical spaces (not vaginas), shaving tracheas, widening pelvises.........crack on. If I wrap an apple in an orange skin, its still an apple.

This directly contradicts what YOU wrote above about some women not having a vagina so how can you use it as the definition of woman?

If someone was born without a vagina (not a contradiction I just didn't list every single eventuality, and before you come at me saying the same thing, I never asked you to, all I asked was to tell me what you would class as a woman and if you were comfortable with women who fall outside whatever the specification was to be ousted from womanhood, which i don't recall getting an answer to actually).

I have a broader definition of woman that you do so would be happy for someone with no vagina, womb, too much testosterone in their body or any number of other medical conditions to be referred to as woman.

There are always going to be medical issues, accidents, mental health issues and more besides that mean people aren't categorised in a neat little box anymore. I couldn't possibly list every one of those things.

Just reprising a post I made earlier on another thread.

Recent studies show a spectrum of male to female attributes, rather than an either/or.

No, they really don't they show that, as has been known for a long time, sometimes things go wrong with sex development after conception, or in the genetic makeup of the embryo, which means that it develops abnormally. The sexual development pathway it should follow is defined at conception by the X or Y chromosomes your biological father contributed to your mother's egg. But sometimes things go awry and the embryo develops towards the opposite sex pathway.

It has zero to do with trans identity issues, and everyone is either male or female despite these variations, and there are only two gametes humans can produce, and both are needed for reproduction. Only biological male people can impregnate and only female people can produce ova. Your ideas are pure ideology, not fact. Hope that's helpful to you.

In humans, females inherit an X chromosome from each parent, whereas males always inherit their X chromosome from their mother and their Y chromosome from their father. Consequently, all of the somatic cells in human females contain two X chromosomes, and all of the somatic cells in human males contain one X and one Y chromosome (Figure 3). The same is true of all other placental mammals — males produce X and Y gametes, and females produce only X gametes (Figure 4). In this system, referred to as the XX-XY system, maleness is determined by sperm cells that carry the Y chromosome.

https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/the-sex-of-offspring-is-determined-by-6524953/

What kind of man would volunteer to search biological females?

What kind of man wants to become a gynecologist?

I think the intersex thing should really be put to the side.

I haven't spoken about intersex people.

If I wrap an apple in an orange skin, its still an apple.

However if it was sitting in a fruitbowl, looking like an orange and you ask someone if they wanted an orange, you would accept it if they declined because they don't like oranges, because in your mind it is an orange and should be treated as such.

Do I belive that my loved one is who they say they are? - yes
My apologies for misreading what you wrote about the person's relationship to you.

I wonder where you draw the line on affirmation. I am thinking of other areas of life where people believe things about themselves that outside observers would say are objectively false and where the belief is damaging to the believer and potentially people around them.

What if someone you loved was drinking heavily regularly but told you they do not believe themselves to be an alcoholic? Would you buy them alcohol? Would you affirm their belief?

What if an anorexic person told you they genuinely believed themselves to be fat? Would you affirm this belief?

What if a loved one joined a religious cult and began to believe in an imminent apocalypse? Would you affirm their beliefs? Would you stop paying into your pension? Would you start believing what they believe?

What about someone who had been in a string of abusive relationships who tells you the new guy is lovely though you have red flag alarms going off all over the place? Do you affirm her view of him?

I am trying to get my head around how you rationalise affirming an objectively false belief and how far you would take that logic.

I think the intersex thing should really be put to the side. It's not relevant. There are two sexes, sex is binary, not on a spectrum You are either male or female. There are only two sexes in humans. People have potential to be either large gamete producers, or small gamete producers. No one produces both; no one produces something else.

Some people are infertile, but that doesn’t make them sexless.

Humans are also bipedal. They have two legs. Sometimes a baby will be born with one leg, or no legs, or three legs. This doesn't mean that there is a spectrum of the number of legs a human has.

YY. I have never seen trans ideologists offer any reasonable explanation of why the existence of medical intersex conditions supports their sex role stereotype based beliefs. It's just gotchas and special pleading.