Can you all just lay off trans people

[cjferg]

There is a difference between sex and gender. Some people's align, other people's don't. Some people are biologically female, and their gender doesn't match that and vies versa. Some people don't have a gender. Why do you care so much?

One of my best friends in school was biologically a female. When he 'came out' to me as trans and explained how he had never felt comfortable in his body all I thought (and anyone who knew him) was that I wasn't surprised and that it made a lot of sense and we all got on with our lives. This was about age 17 and he said he had known this since he was a kid (not saying that any kid who says they want to should be able to willy nilly block their hormones, etc, btw)
It wasn't just about 'presenting as a male'. He was actually a male in a female body.
Yes, when he started presenting as male he felt a lot better. I remember he didn't want to go to our prom because of all the dressing up, etc. until we suggested he wear a tux, and it was amazing to see him so comfortable.
But still he hated having tits and having to wear a binder (can be done safely if you get a proper binder and don't just use bandages or w/e so don't even start)
It wasn't enough to just stuff the front of the trousers.
I repeat, he was a man trapped in a woman's body. Not just a cross dressing woman, not just in an experimental phase.

I have another friend who is biologically a female but they don't have a gender. They are known as 'they' not 'he'or 'she' and knowing them you would in no way think that they are either male or female, again not just about looking a certain way.

I also see a lot of people on here ranting about trans people and they literally only care about transwomen. Genuinely, what has happend to you that you feel so threatened at the thought of someone with a penis being the same gender as you?

Stop ranting about how men are going to use it as an excuse to perv on your kid in a changing room. I'd bet quite a lot that more women will perv on your kid in a changing room than men pretending to be trans will.

Gender is evolving all the time there are no definitive rules to being a man or a woman.

For every thing that you think being a woman is, there will be a woman who disagrees with you.
You say that being a woman means having a uterus - does that make people who've had theirs removed for medical reasons not women?

If being a woman means the ability to have babies then does that mean infertile women aren't women?

If you think being a man is the ability to grow facial hair does that mean that men who can't aren't men?

I read about a woman who had poly cystic ovaries and had a luxurious, thick beard and moustache as a result. Does that mean she is a man or less of a woman? Or should she have continued to try and shave and wax it off and be ashamed of it rather than accept herself the way she was and rock the beard?

Seriously, we've come a long way from being a woman meaning you're your husband's property and having to squirt out babies and clean your whole life. Why are you so determined to go backwards?

Stop using the teeny possibility of a man pretending to be trans to invade women's spaces as a vehicle for your hatred and open your mind enough to at least try and understand the issue, because it might be your kid. It might be your dad. It might be your bff 4eva. If that were the case would you ostracise them from your life and declare them a fraud, or have a little empathy and try and support them through something potentially life changing.

drops mic

Silly ladybrains banging on about material reality instead of their fee fees.

Ah, I see. It is not worth enquiring as to the contents of a woman's mind; it's all about her bits.

You really can't disregard the phenomenon of human consciousness as "fee fees" an expect to be taken seriously.

As for trans people suffering, they sure are.

However they are certainly not suffering because of us.

It is not feminists who abuse and intimidate transwomen. It is not feminists who assault transwomen, rape them and murder them. It is men who are doing these things, not women.

Funny how there isn't a slur for the men who actually do hurt trans people.

Sex is sex is sex, is male and female, not a problem with that. But "woman" refers to gender, which isn't sex, so can protect people on the basis of either, surely?

No it can’t. Right now for example your employer can’t just fire you for being pregnant because being pregnant is a state that ONLY affects women (biological sex.) it’s not because they’re being kind during pregnancy it’s because state x is only happening to sex x.
If biological men are suddenly included in that ‘group of people who can become pregnant’ then the sex protected category is meaningless because that state can now be attained by men or women. And the protection is lost.

This is why women are revisiting self ID. The vast vast majority of us don’t care if men want to dress any way they like. The vast majority of us think that gender stereotypes are restrictive and need busting. The vast majority of us think live and let live. The vast majority of us have no desire to make other people’s lives harder or hurt or discriminate against them. What we are worried about and what we can see happening is a stripping away of very hard won legislation that protects women from Male violence

Every single sex protected law - gone. Think about that.

Imagine if people were campaign to reverse laws on racial discrimination.

What's your personal internal experience of womanhood not based on your body or treatment by others?
And how do you identify that as womanhood not personhood?
Genuinely interested. Being a woman to me is literally just plumbing.

I find it interesting too; it's hard to find people to have a conversation with who don't have an agenda! All I know is i always knew I was a woman, or perhaps I was just happy enough in myself and with my body, but I didn't FEEL like a woman until some time in my twenties. Some time between my mum dying and my marrying then divorcing a total prick. I totally own the word "woman" now!

I think it's a bit like the question "when did you feel like an adult?" It's different for everyone, but you often know if you do or don't, and sometimes people can't imagine how the two could "feel" any different!

A woman is an adult human female

Who do you think wrote the Dictionary? Who do you think gets to change it??

Well done for sticking to the TRA manifesto OP.

Make a lot of spurious ill conceived statements accusing all and sundry of transphobia then fail to engage in any sort of rationale debate.

Never mind the that all of your points can be disputed by unequivocal facts.

Let's not let inconvenient truth get in the way of "feelings" shall we?

Well here's a newsflash - my "feelings" matter to.

Yet I'm not trying to take protected rights from the Trans community. I'm happy to support their rights to equality and respect.

However equality isn't achievable when your "method" to achieve it involves taking rights away from women, who without the help of the trans community I might add, has had to fight, campaign and fundraise for legal protection you wish to undermine.

#FactsNoFeelings

Sex is sex is sex, is male and female, not a problem with that. But "woman" refers to gender, which isn't sex, so can protect people on the basis of either, surely?

Let's unpick that.

This is how the equality act defines the protected characteristic of sex:

11Sex

In relation to the protected characteristic of sex—

(a)a reference to a person who has a particular protected characteristic is a reference to a man or to a woman;

(b)a reference to persons who share a protected characteristic is a reference to persons of the same sex.

The explanatory notes say:

Effect

54.This section is a new provision which explains that references in the Act to people having the protected characteristic of sex are to mean being a man or a woman, and that men share this characteristic with other men, and women with other women.

So if you want 'woman' to mean something different from sex you'll have to rewrite the EA from the very basics. To act as if the word woman means something different yet still try to use the current law as it is lands us in a scary muddle. See for example AWS. If Labour succeed in opening AWS to self-identifying transwomen without rewriting the legislation, this sets a dangerous precedent for every single sex-based exception in the EA.

But "woman" refers to gender, which isn't sex

Remind me when this was debated and legislated please? If 'gender' here means the social construct, why would we want to protect such an oppressive system. If we take 'gender' to mean the belief in some people's heads that they feel like a man or a woman then that is already protected along with all the other beliefs in people's heads under 'Religion or belief'. Is there a reason why you think this specific belief should get preferential treatment?

At the moment 'gender reassignment' is a protected characteristic. There are proposals to change that to 'gender identity'. I'm not in favour of that because I don't see why a belief in gender identity should be privileged above any other belief, religious or otherwise.

I would be in favour of protecting gender expression / gender non-conformity. I think that would go a long way to breaking down oppressive gender and I can't see a downside.

Just to note - 'Pregnancy and Maternity' is a protected characteristic in itself and you are protected up to 6 months after birth. Being sacked / not hired / not promoted because your employer thinks you might get pregnant is sex discrimination though, not P&M discrimination.

Thank you pencils. That what I wanted to say. You put it much better !

And the idea of protecting the non gender conforming community in separate and specific legislation that goes not strip rights from other groups is one I think feminists generally would be happy to get behind.

Right now the TRA movement is going for a zero sum game - their rights at the expense of ours. That’s not ok. There must, surely, be a way of legislating to protect trans people that does not damage anyone else’s rights.

The fact that TRAs are pursuing this zero sum game just says to me that they dont actually like women at all - it’s just another act of Male violence.

That fails everyone. It fails people who suffer from gender dysphoria and it fails women. No one wins from this - except predatory men. That’s not the outcome I want.

It is not worth enquiring as to the contents of a woman's mind; it's all about her bits

OK now this suggestion that radfems are obsessed with people's 'bits' is starting to get up my nose.

We are not obsessed with anyone's bits. We have observed that society treats people with one set of bits differently from people with the other set of bits and we would like this to stop.

We did not create and we are not maintaining the cultural allocation of status based on bits. We are pointing it out because we object to it.

I think it's a bit like the question "when did you feel like an adult?"

In some ways yes. Lots of children 'feel like' they are adults and don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to do adult things.

Lots of the time I don't 'feel like' an adult but I am one and will be held responsible for my actions as an adult.

Adulthood has a material reality though (although of course the age where the law says adulthood begins varies from country to country) and we treat children and adults differently in law. Womanhood also has a material reality. Feelings are just feelings. We should respect each others' feelings as far as we can without giving away our own rights or harming our own wellbeing. This is manners though and should never be legislated upon.

Being sacked / not hired / not promoted because your employer thinks you might get pregnant is sex discrimination though

Yes, I've tried to make this point so many times.

I'm 42. I'm TTC my first. I'm trying so hard not to let my work think it's even a possibility that I'm going to have a child.

I clung onto my job through a transfer and restructure.

You really can't disregard the phenomenon of human consciousness as "fee fees" an expect to be taken seriously.
Of course I do not expect my mockery of specious criticism to be taken seriously. Nor have I taken you seriously, for days Rat. Your arguments are specious and transparent and patently absurd.

You can't force people to be religious, and yet trans are effectively doing the same as forcing religion on people. By forcing women to accept them, they are in fact forcing women to accept trans reality. Something that you said you think is wrong.

MrG I rather do think I think my arguments through, or rather you certainly haven't said anything that would lead me to think otherwise.

Whilst some people may want to force women to accept trans reality I'm only looking for comprises that refect tolerances; allowing them to live within their reality.

I'm not saying I know how to achieve this without encroaching on women's rights, but I certainly don't think "transwomen are men, I'm right, you're wrong" is the starting point of tolerance.

Good luck Ereshkigal. One good thing the women & equalities committee have done is reported on the rise in P&M discrimination. It's worse now than it was a decade ago.

Right now the TRA movement is going for a zero sum game - their rights at the expense of ours. That’s not ok. There must, surely, be a way of legislating to protect trans people that does not damage anyone else’s rights.*

I agree with you Back

Your arguments are specious and transparent and patently absurd.

Except for all those people who agree with me.

You want them to live within their reality in spite of the fact that their "reality" is a fantasy?
This sort of specious bs is why I do not take you seriously.

Believing in a flat earth does not make it true no more does agreeing with you mean you are correct in your bliefs.