New anti-trans legislation in North Carolina

[SlowFJH]

Of course it's been driven by the religious right wing. But it does aim to achieve what many posters here appear to advocate - namely that biological males can only use men's toilets and changing rooms etc. Biological females must only use women's toilets and changing rooms. Will it gain wider support?

I read Enthusiasm 's post as being about the term "living as a genetic woman" which a male person cannot do, unless you mean that he will conform to societal expectations on women and would like to be perceived by others as female. This is not living as a "genetic woman" but as a social stereotype of a woman. There will be no shared aspects of living as a biological woman as the biology is of the opposite sex.

I am not sure what Nina really means about living as a genetic woman it's nina's claim

Should have made that clearer

www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/29/gender-bathrooms-cooper-union-college-new-york

"While some proposals are rooted in privacy concerns, others are based on fears, not shown to have any basis in reality, that freer restroom access invites sexual predation on women and children. And even privacy concerns, transgender advocates note, are based on the misconception that trans women and men are not “real” women and men."

Well, that's us adult human females (formerly known as women) told then. No problems re safety, no concerns re privacy because trans women are real women (as opposed to adult human females (formerly known as women).

Sorry, but I'm fed up with this shit. I thought we were a generation past 1984. But newspeak is alive and well.

JAPAB people can make the claim to be what they want

I do not have to agree and play along with someone's delusional ideas that they are a woman because it's simply not true

They can call themselves whatever they like Cherry, Shelia, Anna whatever but when it is necessary to seperate sexes and when there needs to be a distinction then I shall refer to them as transwomen or use their name

I am not going to call them women as that is a lie and shall not refer to them as she, her as that is also not the truth but also will not use he as I understand for some that is offensive so shall just use the name they now use

grimble

That Guardian article is truly depressing. Pioneering my arse.

Well at other points in my life I too haven't had periods, or pregnancy worries, and, in a few years, hopefully I'll menopause and won't have those worries again...

Don't hear me yelling about saying that women having periods is exclusionary though, because it's ridiculous, and we all know it's ridiculous.

I can't remember if this has been linked to already

Oh, but hang on, coco, The Guardian says fears of sexual predation have no basis in reality.

So the article you linked to is obviously a lie

Silly women, fearing that men will attack them in places where men have traditionally attacked them.

You notice the Guardian isn't opening this article for comments.

These women will be saying that men rape them next.

When everyone knows every time a woman says she was raped, she's lying.

Jesus. And these fuckers consider themselves progressive.

I'm not sure the Guardian can be considered progressive these days. I've read it for 30 years but it's mightily pissed me off recently. I can't think what to read instead though.

The Guardian is not progressive. It's the organ for the regressive left.

Th guardian stopped being progressive some time ago - th have really shown their true misogynist colours recently. Appalling rag.

Men - the only opinion you're allowed to have in this is to work with other men to make male spaces safe for gender non conforming men. You do not get to tell women what "woman" means or that our desire to maintain sex segregated space is unreasonable. Get your own fucking house in order.

God the ending to that article is so ridiculous "I'm going to tell you something that will shock you...many of the bathrooms in my house are gender neutral..." How silly is that? For a start surely that should be "all" not "many"? And the sarcasm is entirely misplaced, because I assume that she doesn't feel at risk from men in her own home, and if she does, then the bathroom is the least of her worries. It totally misses the point, and there is an arrogance to the whole thing that I find properly shocking. Just because some women feel fine about gender-neutral washrooms, it doesn't follow that most women do. And in a student faculty there will be an awful lot of young women not daring to voice the fact that they feel intimidated into going along with it.

"I'm going to tell you something that will shock you...many of the bathrooms in my house are gender neutral..."

Mine too, but then it doesn't contain a row of urinals and it isn't open to the public.

Tbh I'd quite like segregated toilets with men in the house

It's so fucking offensive.

All these young women are being told that their fear, caution, disbelief, spidey-sense - all of it - is invalid.

If they take any notice of their own instincts at all, they are bigots on the wrong side of history.

I feel so sorry for them. They're being bullied and gaslighted by all the mainstream media which presents itself as progressive and decent.

Their only options are to embrace cognitive dissonance, repress their uneasy suspicions that this might all be a load of bollocks and get very angry with anyone who touches a nerve by expressing out loud, the unthinkable, or to line up with bigots and pearl-clutchers on the wrong side of history.

How many of us wanted to do that when we were young?

The media are so clever.

If they take any notice of their own instincts at all, they are bigots on the wrong side of history.

Yup, right up until the moment where they are attacked, and then they are criticised for NOT paying attention to their spidey senses.

But all public space isn't male space at all. A troll told me so.

"Some biologically female people will not experience some of the factors you have listed,"

This has been answered to you, personally, so many times on MN that it's not funny anymore.

I don't remember raising it even once, let alone many times. The "answer" must have slipped by, because it is reasonable to point out that some biological women have not or will not experience X, when the lack of this is being used to dispute another person's womanness (whether what is being disputed is the "being" or "living as").

JAPAB - funny you should mention X. Because that is what undermines your argument.

The definition of the word "woman" in English is identical to the scientific description of the phenotype displayed by humans with the genotype of two X chromosomes.

Of course not all women have the same experiences in life

But I am going to share far more similar experiences if you are talking about socialisation

If you are taking about biological my experiences will often be similar. I have had regular sometimes painful periods since I was 14, I have worried about being pregnant and not becoming pregnant, I have miscarried and had a termination, I have carried to full term and had an emergency cesarian section I hane not yet reached perimenopause but I shall someday

Many women may have
shared a similar pattern to me NO one who was born a male will have

Some women have not have been able to have children, will not have had periods this will no doubt cause much distress and may be down to medical issues or reasons that remain unknown but it is not because they were born male

The definition of the word "woman" in English

I'm pretty sure I know what JAPAB is going to say about definitions.

I don't have periods any more. I had a total hysterectomy, no ovaries, tubes, cervix, womb.
But I'm still a woman without them because I don't have, or ever had, a dick.

coco you are a "woman" because even though you have had those organs removed, your genotype still contains the genetic coding for them.

You didn't have an X chromosome removed from each of your cells along with your uterus!

So how does our sexually dimorphic species reproduce then JAPAB?