To think that if a man has had bottom surgery they should be put in a woman’s prison?

[Bex5490]

Genuinely interested in this and not trying to goad just want to understand.

When people talk of the threat of a man in women’s spaces, I assume the danger is because of their penis.

So if that’s gone then should they be categorised as a woman?

I’m kind of of the opinion that if you’re willing to put that much effort in (as in penis removal) regardless of your chromosomes, I’m happy for you to be called a woman…is this wrong?

They are, thank you for recognising that.

We don’t speak about transactivism (as I don’t with any of my long term friends - nor politics or religion). But practically, they don’t partake sports against women (they aren’t sporty at all), they buy clothes online and they use the disabled toilet when we socialise. They know what they are but they live as who they feel, whilst respecting that not everyone is easy with that. Our circle of friends are full of admiration and I’m glad they got the help they needed years ago.

The BBC steadfastly called Scarlet Blake a woman. Not a transwoman, a woman.

Blake is male.

I feel for transgender people like your friends who respect other's comfort and boundaries because the transactivists have created a lot of ill feeling that I'm sure impacts them. There is a way we can all happily coexist, it just requires an additional space and respect from both sides. I would happily have used pronouns in the past, unfortunately I would now refuse because it's become a fight for women's rights and conceding language impacts the fight. I can still see people as individuals and treat all decent individuals well but as a woman I have to fight for my rights now, and pronouns has become a part of that. I think protection of biological women's rights in law and a third space would reduce hostility significantly.

No idea whether Scarlet Blake has retained his penis or not, btw, because it is irrelevant. He's a disturbed and violent male and needs to be in male prison.

(He has been microchipped because he identifies as a cat, but nobody suggested he should be sent to the cattery.)

Well then they used the incorrect term didn't they.

This is a very balanced and compassionate view, thank you. I agree with you and I don’t use pronouns either.

It was built and ready to go at Downview. Then it was decided that this option was transphobic as it was ‘othering’.

Just like a third option for toilets was suggested many years ago by feminists and rejected.

When you think about why the demand for access for female single sex spaces remains. If it is safety, the options suggested would work, if it is to make some males feel they are accepted as being who they say they are, then the safe third option will be rejected. I am sure many reading along will have opinions on why the safety option is continually rejected.

“I think protection of biological women's rights in law and a third space would reduce hostility significantly”

I don’t think many posters would disagree actually. Along with providing children with gold standard mental health support and not creating life long medical patients, from previously healthy bodies, based on an identity. If they are an adult, and not accessed as in any way vulnerable, then mental health support still should be provided but if they choose to transition then that is an adult decision and hard to stop. But children are so vulnerable here.

But sadly, those very things you mentioned have been the sticking point all along.

My friends were lucky to access the MH and medical support that they did in their 20’s.

I think it needs to be recognised that identifying as something and being that thing are not the same.

damn. Small screen and auto carrot. Assessed not accessed.

Yes, protecting vulnerable children is essential!

I agree, those are the sticking points which is why I think biological women's rights need to be protected by law because I don't see the extremist transactivists backing down until that is the case, even then they will challenge it.

I know a third space is reasonable, that transgender people have a right to exist, that they have a right to safety, that they have a right not to be discriminated against. They do not have a right to take away biological women's rights to safely, or to take away language to describe our own sex class, and they do not have the right to discriminate against and silence us. For me all of this is just common sense. I don't understand why the world has gone so mad that it even needs to be stated, let alone fought for. The trans lobbyists got to the important people and organisations and now the madness needs to be overturned sanity restored and protected by law.

This one for anyone who hasn't seen it -

murrayblackburnmackenzie.org/2023/08/07/clarity-matters-how-placating-lobbyists-obscures-public-understanding-of-sex-and-gender/

Every word of this and I too cannot believe the world has gone so mad that this is not self evident.

regardless of individual circumstance all Trans people should be treated and categorised as the same…

From a legal and practical point of view, how do you draw a clean line anywhere other than along the biological divide? How do you distinguish legally between Runnie's respectful, fully-transitioned passing friends with a GRC; those who pass but don't have a GRC; those who have a GRC but don't pass; those who have a GRC but no surgery (regardless of how well they pass to the casual observer); those who have surgery but no GRC (again regardless of passing); those who have taken hormones but no surgery; those that have done nothing; ... ? There are too many independent factors. Laws cannot be made on a case-by-case basis.

So you think people who don’t believe in gender ideology should be compelled to lie then, and if they don’t they are ‘passive aggressive’? Describing a trans woman as a man is factually correct.

What about rape victims? Or any victims of male violence, abusers who say they identify as a woman, what if they refer to their abuser as a man, are they being passive aggressive? Why do their feelings come second to validation?

Also, no not ‘everyone’ knows that a trans woman is a biological male who sees themselves as a woman (whatever this actually means). There are many bad faith actors. How can you, or anyobe, tell the difference?

Laws cannot be made on a case-by-case basis.

Laws also cannot, or shouldn’t, be made on feelings either.

My DS had thought this! He ended up saying 'whatever!' and sliding away from the conversation. I think many are confused. I also think the confusion is intended.

"Trans" should not be referred to as a subset of women. Because they are not and will never be women. Therefore I refuse to use those two words together. Men can call themselves whatever they like but it will be a cold day in hell before I acknowledge or validate their fetish or delusion as fact. I use factual pronouns and correct biological sex irrespective of the delusion of someone who is mentally ill.

Therefore anyone who is born a male will always be a male so I will always refer to that man as a man. Likewise with women. They are born female and I will correctly refer to them as women. It's important to be clear and not allow a dangerous ideology to distort fact and biological reality.

The idea that "trans" is in any way real, is a harmful and dangerous delusion. We shouldn't validate that harmful ideation by continuing to refer to men as "trans" subset of women. Indulging this delusion and surrendering even that aspect of our speech and pronouns is detrimental to enforcing our boundaries and the line we will continue to hold.

A man is still a man. I can put a light bulb up my a*rse and call myself a lamp. Doesn’t mean I can light up the room. If a man wants to become female I will happily call him “she” or whatever title he wants me to call him, doesn’t mean I need or will ever view him as such, he is still and always will be a male.

Yabvu
Penis or no penis, you cannot get away from the fact he will always be a man in every other respect.

So you think people who don’t believe in gender ideology should be compelled to lie then, and if they don’t they are ‘passive aggressive’? Describing a trans woman as a man is factually correct.

Describing women as "people with uteruses" and mothers as "gestational parents" is also factually correct but many women object to those terms and find them offensive and would rather be called a woman.

So a trans woman being called a man is factually correct but offensive, because they are a transgender woman and the terms people want to be referred to by other people matter. So I really don't see the difference and I don't believe for a minute that no one understands what the problem with this is and why it is offensive.

But really, once a transgender woman takes hormones or has surgery, they aren't actually the same as a biological male anymore anyway they are something slightly different. Their brain is literally different when scanned with an MRI so you cannot deny trans women are different from men on a biological level. Of course they aren't women either, but that's not really relevant to the point that it is correct to call them a trans woman because a trans woman is different to a biological woman and a biological man.

So no one is compelling you to lie, they are asking you to refer to them using their chosen terms, which is the respectful thing to do in a civilised society, and it's not a lie to call a trans woman a trans woman because that's what they are. It would only be asking you to lie if they were asking you to call them a biological woman, which they are not.

Assuming that you are a woman, if you had had a hysterectomy, would you be happy to be put in a men's prison (assuming you had committed a crime)?

Because it's the same thing

So a trans woman being called a man is factually correct but offensive, because they are a transgender woman and the terms people want to be referred to by other people matter. So I really don't see the difference and I don't believe for a minute that no one understands what the problem with this is and why it is offensive.

Of course there is a difference. Women are women, "trans women" are not 🙄 whether it offends them that people speak plainly has no bearing on it. Not everything is about what they want, sometimes clarity is needed.

So no one is compelling you to lie, they are asking you to refer to them using their chosen terms

They're not "asking", they're demanding. And expect there should be consequences for disobedience.