AIBU to think Maya scored a victory for common sense today?

[DancesWithTortoises]

twitter.com/MForstater/status/1402922169559044096?s=20

news.sky.com/story/maya-forstater-woman-who-lost-job-over-transgender-views-wins-appeal-against-employment-tribunal-12329249

The law just cannot be allowed to tell people what to think.

Hurrah for Maya!

I’ve already said this upthread - it’s the level of compromise you’re prepared to give. So women and menstruators?

Don't be so rude. I've already stated women need to be included in this as the majority target market. Ask transmen what they want to be referred to as. Rather than asking me whether they should be referred to as menstruators. Which I think is unlikely.

It's really not that hard.

@Datun

Trans is a gender identity, not a sex. Period products are based on sex.

According to my, legally protected, gender critical belief. 😁

Ok. Is that likely to happen, do you think? Are you going to spend the rest of your life annoyed that teanspeople are acknowledged?

@Erikrie

I’ve already said this upthread - it’s the level of compromise you’re prepared to give. So women and menstruators?

Don't be so rude. I've already stated women need to be included in this as the majority target market. Ask transmen what they want to be referred to as. Rather than asking me whether they should be referred to as menstruators. Which I think is unlikely.

It's really not that hard.

I’m asking what you personally are happy with. Datun managed to answer. Feel free not to if it’s too irritating for you.

@Datun

Trans is a gender identity, not a sex. Period products are based on sex.

According to my, legally protected, gender critical belief. 😁

Hooray!

This is really boring.

What trans people? Acknowledged by whom?

@LangClegsInSpace

This is really boring.

Agreed. And weird.

Me personally? Just women.

Me too.

@Datun

What trans people? Acknowledged by whom?

Datun, please, do we have to do it like this?

Trans people, acknowledged in the statement ‘women and people who menstruate’. Will you be happy only if it says ‘women’ with no mention of trans people?

Why would I choose the wording that is added to women in order to develop a format of wording that includes the people who dislike "woman"?

@LangClegsInSpace

This is really boring.

You still haven’t said what was weird in that earlier statement. And again, nobody is making you take part in this conversation.

Maya won! Hooray!

Datun, please, do we have to do it like this?

Apparently you do. 😁

Just women is fine with me.

I’m asking what you personally are happy with. Datun managed to answer. Feel free not to if it’s too irritating for you

I told you what I was happy with. Women to be included.

@Datun

Datun, please, do we have to do it like this?

Apparently you do. 😁

Just women is fine with me.

So no acknowledgement of trans people? Do you think that’s likely? Will you be happy otherwise?

I liked this bit of the judgment:

If a person, A, is treated less favourably by her employer, B, because of A’s failure to profess support for B’s gender identity belief then that could amount to unlawful discrimination because of a lack of belief.

Wonderfully clear

I'm with Datun on this. 'Women' covers absolutely everybody who needs to use menstrual products.

I don't particularly mind if female, menstruating people who don't identify as women want to lobby manufacturers of these products to add something else to their marketing, but it's not for me to campaign for.

In fact, given that there's a clear plurality of views amongst biologically female people who don't identify themselves as women, it's not something I, as a woman who does not experience conflicting (or indeed any) gender identity, should be wading in on.

It's completely up to them to represent any additional wording they'd like to sanpro manufacturers.

Women and whatever anyone else wants.

Except I'd probably be worried that too many words in a sentence put off the less literate. My grandad is semi literate. I can guarantee he'd stop reading a sentence that read 'men, transwomen and non binary prostate owners'.
He needs. Men 18-80. Get your prostate checked by your doctor every 1-5 years.
Simple. Direct.
In my view the best thing would be an asterisk and then adding whatever you needed to as a footnote.

Because I guarantee there are people like my grandad who'd fall through the cracks. I don't think people literate enough to want menstruaters are likely to fall through the cracks in the same way.
It's not my place to say. I actually think we'd all be just a shade happier if we accepted reality, stopped propping up stereotypes and became fine with being gender non conforming without needing a label.
DH has great legs that would look good in a dress on a nice warm day.

But failing that, if people want to cling to gender ideology they need to realise material reality is the most important thing. Cancer doesn't care how you identify. Pregnancy. Fgm.
So sex should be priority.

Except I'd probably be worried that too many words in a sentence put off the less literate

Very true.

Well if you think that the word women covers all adult human female then there is no need to single out transmen as a special type of woman

Your excluding no one , not transmen nor tall women nor lesbians nor climbers

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

This is an excerpt from a video by transwoman and youtuber Natalie Wynn, otherwise known as Contrapoints.

Would someone who thinks terms like "menstruator" are inclusive like to tell me how many times a transman, who doesn't, should put up with being referred to in this way?

I've never been of the opinion that the dehumanising language was to cater to transmen. Since when have adult human females managed to change great swathes of marketing, just on their say so.

It was to decouple the word woman from their biology, in my opinion.

Which is why putting the word woman on these products is not going go down well, however many add-ons you put to cater to the transmen who don't want them and weren't asked.

@CorvusPurpureus

I'm with Datun on this. 'Women' covers absolutely everybody who needs to use menstrual products.

I don't particularly mind if female, menstruating people who don't identify as women want to lobby manufacturers of these products to add something else to their marketing, but it's not for me to campaign for.

In fact, given that there's a clear plurality of views amongst biologically female people who don't identify themselves as women, it's not something I, as a woman who does not experience conflicting (or indeed any) gender identity, should be wading in on.

It's completely up to them to represent any additional wording they'd like to sanpro manufacturers.

And if they decide on ‘women and bleeders’?

@MouseyTheVampireSlayer

Women and whatever anyone else wants.

Except I'd probably be worried that too many words in a sentence put off the less literate. My grandad is semi literate. I can guarantee he'd stop reading a sentence that read 'men, transwomen and non binary prostate owners'.
He needs. Men 18-80. Get your prostate checked by your doctor every 1-5 years.
Simple. Direct.
In my view the best thing would be an asterisk and then adding whatever you needed to as a footnote.

Because I guarantee there are people like my grandad who'd fall through the cracks. I don't think people literate enough to want menstruaters are likely to fall through the cracks in the same way.
It's not my place to say. I actually think we'd all be just a shade happier if we accepted reality, stopped propping up stereotypes and became fine with being gender non conforming without needing a label.
DH has great legs that would look good in a dress on a nice warm day.

But failing that, if people want to cling to gender ideology they need to realise material reality is the most important thing. Cancer doesn't care how you identify. Pregnancy. Fgm.
So sex should be priority.

Absolutely, I think that’s a fair point.

@Aposterhasnoname

Transwomen are transwomen and that’s a perfectly fine thing to be. They have their own needs and experiences which are different to womens. Denying their existence and lived reality is what’s causing the harm to them here.

I struggle to articulate how I see trans people and how I’m usually excepting but I find the debate challenges my boundaries as a woman. You’re post really puts down where I am with it. Thank you! I’m not anti trans, I want people to feel comfortable as themselves but without removing my identity. Tolerance doesn’t have to mean sacrifice.

I've never been of the opinion that the dehumanising language was to cater to transmen. Since when have adult human females managed to change great swathes of marketing, just on their say so.

It was to decouple the word woman from their biology, in my opinion.

Which is why putting the word woman on these products is not going go down well, however many add-ons you put to cater to the transmen who don't want them and weren't asked.

This is a very good point, and I think you’re likely right