Can we have a general Trans thread?

[Brugmansia]

Sorry for another trans thread and I feel this is a bit of an imposition given I don't post really.

Anyway reading FWR over the past few months has re-radicalised me. I've been reading lots here and wider.

Anyway just now been watching TV and there's been some stuff that's given me the rage but didn't seem to fit in existing threads or it's own thread.

Anyway thing that gave me the rage.
On BBC3 program on transgemder teen's the doctor just said "creating a vagina". Are doctors redefining vagina as pocket rather than a passage? Makes me want to screem.

Also Sarah Ditum being no platformed.

widow it's not assault if the patient consents. However some women request a female HCP to carry out that treatment. If a transwoman carried out that treatment without informing the patient that they were trans then that could constitute assault under the current law.

How about you drop the goady fuckery, slow? And argue in good faith, if you're capable of it?

noeffing - is there anything about a duty to disclose in the GCR? Wouldn't that render it pointless?

Noons wants access to anyone's medical history

We dont want the definition of women bastardised so that it includes men. That way, we can be reasonably sure that when we request a female HCP that we will get a female HCP and not a TW. And we would like the law to support that expectation

Would those who think they should have the right to know their HCP's medical history and reject them on the basis of it (where their sex is concerned), also support that HCPs should declare their sexuality (lest a patient may feel uncomfortable being examined vaginally by a lesbian) or other completely private matters?

Why should it? The two things are clearly not the same.

Why should they

YY Shortcut.

I'm going to quote Cote's comment from upthread, because I think it absolutely gets to the root of the issue:

"The difference that is amazingly still passing over your head is that one is just a simple everyday interaction (selling them a product) and the other is penetrating a woman's vagina as she lies spread-eagled and mostly naked.

Yes, I would agree with you that it is unreasonable to try to pick and choose who serves your lunch in a restaurant, cuts your hair at a hairdresser's, or sells you a dishwasher in a store. Because these acts, although carried out by a stranger, don't have the potential to feel like rape.

This is not something you would understand without a vagina, I suppose. And that is why, in these subjects, No Vagina = No Opinion. "

Seriously Slow, why should you think that you get to be the arbitrer of who gets to stick their hands up our vaginas?

Would those who think they should have the right to know their HCP's medical history and reject them on the basis of it (where their sex is concerned), also support that HCPs should declare their sexuality (lest a patient may feel uncomfortable being examined vaginally by a lesbian) or other completely private matters?

Why should it? The two things are clearly not the same

I just felt that was too stupid a question, to warrant a reply

This feels like derailment under the guise of debate.

Is slow not a woman?

You're right, but I was interested to hear what WidowWadman's rationale was.

That last to Shortcut's 22.57 post.

I agree with you Watchers.

Several posters have suggested not. They might be, I don't know. Could be a man come to share their manly wisdom. Could be a libfem woman of the sort who posts to explain that lesbians who don't want "lady penises" inside them are transphobic. I don't particularly care either way. They're just being deliberately obtuse and offensive.

widowwadman disclose what? I don't get your point.
As it stands at the moment, patients have the right to request care from a person of the same sex as themselves. End of discussion.

Would those who think they should have the right to know their HCP's medical history and reject them on the basis of it (where their sex is concerned), also support that HCPs should declare their sexuality (lest a patient may feel uncomfortable being examined vaginally by a lesbian) or other completely private matters?

My smear provider is a lesbian and I care not. However, the reason I know is that she has pictures of her family on her desk and will say, "my wife" every now and again. I think she is aware that it could be an issue for some people and is therefore nice enough to be open.

For me it's not about random attraction to my lady parts. It's familiarity, understanding the vulnerability, understanding the geography and knowing that, "this might be uncomfortable" is a lie. It might hurt and she's had enough to know.

Being a lesbian (or heterosexual/gay man) is really irrelevant, because a HCP does not get sexual feelings from caring for a patient. A vagina or a penis is just a body part to them, at least when they are at work.
What matters is the patients feelings and whether they are comfortable and feel safe with that person giving care. I never heard a patient even mention a nurse/doctor's sexual orientation, though I suppose it could happen. Similarly I don't think people worry or care if the woman in the toilet is a lesbian, but some would be concerned if the person next to them was a transwoman.

I wouldn't want my smear done by a gay man, but I'd have no problem with a lesbian. I'm not worried that a person may be sexually attracted to my vagina. I'm just more comfortable if the person poking around my vagina has experience of what it's like to live with a vagina. I don't think that's unreasonable.

It's not unreasonable at all, Jessica. People have their own reasons.
The point is that a patients rights and wishes should always come first.

I think that the risk calculation that Slow is attempting is wrong, or at least very incomplete. Part of the concern is that women who have experienced sexual assault (so a very large percentage of all women) might well rather than take the risk of having a smear test by an unexpected man in the guise of a woman would simply not have the test at all.

I moved to Canada a few years ago, and here smears are done by GPs instead of practice nurses. We were unable to register with a GP for a very long time (massive shortage here) and I put off having my smear done for a couple of years, even though my last test was equivocal because of the risk of the GP not being a woman. There is no way I'd have a smear done by a man unless it was an absolute medical emergency.

So the risk of women not being confident in having a female HCP on request is not just that they might be assaulted or traumatised, but also that they might miss vital tests and run the risk of invasive treatment for later diagnosed cancer, and possibly die.

Oh and there are a hell of a lot more practice nurses than gynecologists.

"Guaranteed woman" and "assault" were used by PPs.

"Rage"..
Even a quick read of this thread suggest there is a lot of anger. ..
Some examples...

Referring to a fellow human being as "that"

Comments like "Fucking freaks", "I don't think I can deal with this shitty world anymore"

and "I would have no objection if his dick was cut off without anaesthetic"

This "debate" between radical feminism and the trans community is being seen by mainstream as a particularly nasty fight with some issues, risks and fears (on both sides) being deliberately exaggerated.

As mentioned earlier, I may be completely wrong. Perhaps the best solution is to get even angrier, even more offensive and aggressive...

Slow, I think we might all be a bit more receptive if we saw you on Twitter telling these trans activists to be less aggressive. Or are we the easy target?

Freaks has been to 1 or 2 specific people, named people, stephonknee and that italian one.