To think “non-binary” is becoming a fashion statement for some people rather than a true identity?

[ByPoliteExpert]

Not saying it’s not real but the aestheticisation of it is creeping in.

You find it rude for someone suggest that you "maybe" decide to be kind?? Goodness - you must be an absolute treat to deal with. I feel sorry for anyone who has to deal with you in real life. If being kind, or suggesting that someone be kinder, is "offensive" and "rude" then we can correctly assume that the problem here is you.

As with many things to do with trans, kindness is a one-way street.

It is not kind to demand others deny reality.

It is not kind to deny others the language to describe that reality.

It is not kind to deny women and girls boundaries.

It is not kind to tell women and girls to shut up and shove over.

I dunno, some sort of humiliation fetish?

Provisions mean any service or facility or opportunity that has been designated as being single sex. Maybe you have missed the discussion where male people with a variety of transgender identities have accessed female single sex provisions. In the UK, it now should be clear that anything that is described as being for female people, even using the words women or girl, is only for female people only.

So, toilets, sports, changing rooms, prisons, refuges, rape crisis centres and services that have female only services, programmes meant to encourage female people to participate or reward female people for their performance, how many more would you like me to list?

"Presumably you don't care if a lesbian uses the ladies loos"

Why are conflating sexual orientation with gender?

Gender is a philosophical belief that an individual has that doesn't reflect material reality. No male person is a female person. And someone who has a non-binary identity is still in reality, male or female. If a female non-binary person is using a female single sex service, there is presumably no issue.

Sexual orientation is not a characteristic that in the UK, any person has a right to expect to have their toilets segregated by. That would be a clear case of illegitimate discrimination.

No person in the UK should expect to have the right to have access to toilets provided for the public to be segregated by sub group within their own sex class. As I said, this is clearly illegitimate discrimination and that segregation is not a basic human right.

What is a legitimate discrimination allowed for the protection of and the privacy of people is the segregation of spaces and services, based on sex class.

So, with your post you have shown that you don't really understand the difference between illegitimate and legitimate discrimination. Yet you have tried to make my opinion the one that is the issue here.

Toilets are separate cubicles, yet female people have needs to use the public spaces around the female toilet basins for a range of different toileting needs that cannot be done in the cubicle. This is not unusual for people who have to use public toilets regularly to come across. So, yes. It is a problem to have male people over the age of about 8 years old in the female single sex toilet.

Just because you don't see an issue, doesn't mean that the issue is not there or valid. And no female person gets to consent to allowing any male person into a public space that is open for female people on behalf of any other female person. If you feel you have that role, I hate to tell you that you do not.

Is it me or does it sound very much like @Caligirl80 is conflating lesbians with men? Which is rather homophobic to say the least.

Also, it is a very tired and meaningless tropish accusation to ask, imply or accuse any female person who has a concern whether they have a habit of checking genitalia. It says so much more about you than it does anyone else that you are making that accusation about.

Wonderfully, there is no need to check genitals at all. And it is actually irrelevant.

Because a male who has no penis or testes is still a male person and should not be in the space. After all, what is the difference between a male person who has lost his genitals due to injury or disease, and one that has elected to have extreme body modifications to suit his philosophical belief about his identity?

Should both groups of male people without male genitals be allowed access to female single sex spaces? Why? If not, why not?

And then comes the two facts that are always over looked. Firstly, a male without male genitalia can still commit sex crimes. Secondly, a male without male genitalia still has male physical advantages that means that they are a great deal stronger than female people. Just their grip strength alone is hugely more powerful. Maybe you did not know this.

Finally though, most female people can reliably identify the sex of a male person without ever seeing genitalia.

Female people are highly likely to identify a person's sex by the way they walk, their hip alignment, even where the joints are, even with clothes on, even with jackets on. And that is not even considering skull shape, and facial structure. Plus, any female person who feels confident that they will not be abused, can also ask the person and listen to that person's voice.

So, no. It genital check are not needed, they never were in the past, but some people think this is a clever way to shame others who they don't agree with. But it really just does show that the person making that accusation, suggestion, whatever, is really poorly informed.

I love it when posters make blanket statements to the effect of no one would do something "that immediately causes them to be treated horribly, to be demeaned and mocked and made fun of, and to be treated like a lesser human being???" They clearly have not actually made an effort to become informed about the group of people that they feel confident in making such blanket statements about.

Maybe these direct quotes will help readers to understand that this is just a few of the male people who have declared that they are female people. And this is their view of women and girls. There are so many more. Because male people who say they are female people like to self publish their views about how they view female people, and what it means to them to be considered female, a great deal.

Apparently, we should be welcoming these male people into our toilets.

Gosh, if only Twitter still allowed their porn images and videos to remain on the site. There were so many of those where male people, absolutely wanted to be humiliated .... as women.

And then there were the porn live streamed videos and images of masturbation of male people complete with apparently working penises and breast development in the female toilets. Complete with female people with children toileting those children next door and the sounds of female people in the toilet too.

But then we would be told, that no one should be categorising an entire group as being harmful based on just a few...

Well... then we would need to get into a discussion about just why ALL male people are to be excluded from female single sex spaces. Because indeed, strong and robust safeguarding DOES indeed treat the sex classes as being the same risk for entry into those spaces to use as a public person. So, yes... indeed... all male people, no exceptions, get treated the exact same way.

Otherwise, my lovely male family members who I trust completely should be also allowed to come into female single sex spaces. They wouldn't hurt anyone, surely it is discriminatory for them to excluded?

Wait until they find out about transmaxxers and eunuchs !

So many sub groups, all under the one umbrella.

Noone is talking about sexuallity just the.made up gender identity of non binary which people do claim and then make demands of everyone else about language etc because being non binary is oh so special 🤪

"Because indeed, strong and robust safeguarding DOES indeed treat the sex classes as being the same risk for entry into those spaces to use as a public person. "

Because indeed, strong and robust safeguarding DOES indeed treat those within the sex classes as being the same risk for entry into those spaces to use as a public person.

In this context telling someone to be kind is telling them to shut up and stop complaining about the destruction of women's rights and safeguarding, so no i won't be kind about gender ideology nor should anyone else

You think that you can tell others to be 'kind' when you have tried to shame posters who have valid concerns about female single sex provisions remaining single sex?

I think this is a great example of hypocrisy myself.

You're preaching. It's arrogant and unpleasant.

You seem very confused. No one is talking about gay people and sexual orientation. ‘Identity’ is not a sexual orientation. People who claim a special identity are currently riding roughshod over the rest of society and it’s laughable to claim otherwise.

I suggest you spend a bit of time reading around the subject a little before making more angry, totally uninformed posts.

Then you could provide some examples of this ‘vindictive unpleasantness’ you claim to have seen. Good luck!

No male person can ever experience life as any type of woman or as a person who is not either male or female.

They can only ever experience life as a male person who believes they are a woman or who is not the male person they are. Also, the use of the adjective 'trans' in the term 'trans woman' is a false usage, and non-binary does not reflect material reality, why should any person have to comply with such a request to use such terms.

Even when a male person 'acts' like a woman, those male people are acting as they believe a 'woman' should act. When they act like someone who is not male, it is how they believe someone 'not male' acts ... which conceptually according to material reality, must then be how they believe a 'female person' acts.

Even if they are treated 'as a woman or a non-binary person' (whichever they identify as) by some people, they are being treated as a 'male who presents as a woman and believes they are a woman' or someone 'not male - which again must conceptually be 'female' as not one person is neither male nor female. Their every reaction is based on that. Not on them being female in any way.

Even when they have extreme body modifications if they are identifying as female (or a non-binary feminine person), it is to be their own concept of what a female looks like to them. It is not what a female is.

How can it be?

The only way a person can experience life as a woman, is to have a female body, formed around the production of large gametes, even if it doesn't produce those and to navigate their life based on the decisions they and society makes that revolve around them having that body.

A male can conceptualise what it might be like to be a female, but that is all it ever is - their concept of being female.

They may do it because they don't feel they fit into how they conceptualise how a male person interacts with the world (ie. their own stereotypes around being male) or they do it because they want to be seen as a female (using their own stereotypes of how a female navigates life). It really doesn't matter though. Their motivation is irrelevant to the outcome. And I consider the outcome can only be described as misogyny.

Which is that they will always be just a male who believes they are something they are objectively not.

How can the material reality be any different? This is why someone's gender is only based on someone's philosophical belief. There is no biological marker that indicates a gender identity. And philosophical beliefs are fine for people to hold. However, not one person in the UK has to comply with another's philosophical belief.

The logic cannot be any different than that I am afraid.

Thanks for explaining that your child does not want any therapy. Why is this, do you know? I am of course aware you cannot force them, but if it was my child I would insist. I too also an adult when I was anorexic and I'm glad that a friend insisted I should seek help.

I know that if I refused to affirm, their well being would decline. And that is sufficient for me to accept my DC has a non binary gender identity

I totally get that, but surely you realise that the improvement does not prove that your DC has a NB identity?

Aren't we all non binary? Sometimes I want to wear a dress and high heels and dance round my handbag. Sometimes I want to play video games and drink beer in my tracksuit. Isn't it just being human? In a quest to not assign to socially dictated gender norms, non-binary is a term that relies on socially dictated gender norms.

Yep.

You're wrong there.

It’s almost as if a go-to mental health prescription for autism and/or depression in teenagers is a gender identity. But when started at or around the same time as anti-depressants, who is to know why really mood improves?