Even Vera 😓

[Wavingnotdowning]

Even Vera 😓

Just watching tonight's Vera. Obviously men should be allowed in womens' hostels. Daren't make a comment out loud as the teenagers have swallowed woke hook line and sinker.

Just getting back to the thread, I am sure it has been pointed out but the link I posted has this guidance about males accessing female single sex spaces.

Example: A group counselling session is provided for female victims of sexual assault. The organisers do not allow trans women to attend as they judge that the clients who attend the group session are likely to be traumatised by the presence of a person who is biologically male.

Example: A domestic abuse refuge offers emergency accommodation to female survivors. Feedback from survivors indicates that they would feel uncomfortable sharing accommodation with trans women for reasons of trauma and safety. The provider decides to exclude trans women from the refuge. It compiles a list of alternative sources of support in the local area which can be provided to trans women who approach the centre for help.

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-and-guidance/gender-reassignment-provisions-equality-act

These are two exceptions allowed under the EA2010 where males can be lawfully excluded from female single sex spaces.

There is a court case due soon to test the exception for rape crisis group counselling session.

And no one has said that this mother is forcing a relationship.

why did you think that was an appropriate response?

Because you said it was “abusive” of the son to cut his mother out of his life. If he, as an adult, doesn’t get the choice to do that, he is by definition being forced to maintain that relationship.

My quotation marks were just to make it clearer what I was saying. I'm not mocking the idea that there are trans identifying people many of whom can feel very distressed. Using opposite sex pronouns supports and ideology which many (myself included) think is problematic. I think a man asking to be called she is committing an act of aggression because it hides the very real oppression women experience as a direct result of their biology, not their identity. I think it also solidifies the idea that ones identity must match one's body which then leads to extreme body modification and false promises that surgeona can change your body into one like the opposite sex. So you can accept that someone feels trans whilst drawing a moral conclusion which means that it is not a simple thing to use the other sex's pronouns.

I may be wrong but I thought the abusive part was about the sons attempts to alienate the mother from her community not just from himself. I agree that we all need to be able to make our own choices about who to relate to, even if others don't like our decisions and don't agree with our reasoning.

But you still essentially think the mother should be allowed to have her cake and eat it. She finds it problematic to use those pronouns. After several years, her children decide they can no longer handle that. She had the choice to find it problematic; they had the choice to stop accepting that. You’re saying that the mother’s choice somehow deserves more respect. It doesn’t. She has to accept that her choices have consequences - as do we all.

Would you care to clarify this?

Not particularly.

Who said her choice deserves more respect? I didn't say that. I'd be somewhat ashamed to raise a child who could not accept diversity from their own opinion and could not see the assumptions that, perversely, their own ideology is making about other people's identities but really I'd want them both to have their cake and eat it. I.e. to disagree about how respect and equality needs to be operationalised but to recognise a shared value beneath that.

I'm guessing you mean the idea that someone can't change sex is an opinion and not a fact? That always makes me wonder what people mean by sex when they say people can change sex and how that definition relates to the sexual dimorphism which underpins our species.

ok.

I think I have explained to readers clearly enough and provided a link to the EHRC guidance. They can read though that and follow the logic.

At this point the EHRC could be said to be ‘opinion’ until the law is tested regarding refuges/crisis centers. That will be happening soon.

Sex certainly cannot change. And gender identity is different to sex. Gender is a social construct. But if you want to believe people can change sex, that is your choice. However, spreading that kind of misinformation is very harmful to others.

”but really I'd want them both to have their cake and eat it. I.e. to disagree about how respect and equality needs to be operationalised but to recognise a shared value beneath that.”

yes. I tend to agree. That is how I have seen it work out.

Who said her choice deserves more respect? I didn't say that.

But you described her children as abusive for making their choice.

It was a stalemate. She couldn’t accept her child; her children couldn’t accept that decision. Her son made the choice to say “Change or lose me”. She had two options. But apparently giving her that ultimatum was “abusive”. That suggests you expected her children to fall into line.

Sorry. I am tired.

Just to clarify, there are other exceptions mentioned, of course. This is two relevant to this Vera episode.

No. I expect three mature adults to discuss it and come up with a solution that works to keep the family together.

Because they are adults.

No I didn't. I think you have confused me with someone else and possibly have read something intoned statement which wasn't what she meant. I've not used the term abusive.

I disagree that she couldn't accept her children. She didn't agree with their small p political views and they didn't agree with hers. He said change your language (she may not have changed her views) or lose me. It's very sad.

To add, I'd also find it very sad if the mother said 'your views are offensive to me tand i think they hurt children and women so change your language or lose me'. It's not one sided.

Of course that’s the ideal. But what gives you the idea that the mother was prepared to do this? The fact they things reached the stage where her children considered cutting her out doesn’t suggest she was particularly amenable to compromise.

Or it suggests the kids weren't. Or both. Indo think that's a bit of a leap.

No I said it was abusive . Because it is a child using coercive means (threatening non-contact for the two adult children and ostracism from the community) to force their mother to change her views.

I am saying that a solution can be reached.

It might be that the mother has changed her view but it is just as likely she is going along with it to keep the family together. It is abusive to threaten non-contact for a situation driven by ideological belief where a solution can be found that is unique to that family. Respect does have to go both ways.

And why do you so readily believe this abusive male’s version ?

Yeah, don’t bother. You don’t believe they are abusive, while I do.

Well if you know the answer, why make such loaded statements?

Having watched Vera from the outset, her comments calling an obvious male a "lass", and saying he should have been in a women's refuge were completely out of character. Vera has always exhibited commonsense - it is not commonsense to put men in women's spaces no matter how they identify.

It was also not believable as a plot line that the character who assaulted the "Rae" (Ray) character would have been in a relationship with a biological male.

All in all, it seems a feeble attempt at woke-ism which is really off-putting, particularly at a time when "transitioning" is increasingly coming under question as far as being ethical or necessary treatment for children.

Only just seen this. What's wrong with her saying that a trans woman should not have been in a men's hostel? It doesn't inevitably mean that she would end up in a woman's hostel, after all

A TW is a man. Men should not be allowed to deny a TW access to a hostel which is reserved for their sex. That would be unlawful discrimination because the TW (male) would be excluded just because they are trans identifying. Men need to broaden their concept of 'man' and recognise that TW are a subset of men. You don't get to exclude males just because you think they 'present like a woman' (I've put that in quotes because I've never seen anyone define the concept but it seems to be meaningful to some people). If you exclude the male because they identify as a TW, or treat them badly in the service/ make them feel or be unsafe, that's clearly transphobia. Vera was being transphobic in the real and meaningful sense.