Letter in The Guardian from Transexuals saying self ID not the answer

[invisibleoldwoman]

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/may/04/standing-up-for-transsexual-rights?CMP=share_btn_fb

I agree pencils I don't think 'thank you' but I do think 'good for you' because we are united by a common enemy.

Their letter makes me hopeful that there might be a way through this where we can all have rights which don't impinge on one-another. I'm not sure how, but at least we have a grounding to start to work it out now.

PencilsInSpace So much more eloquent than I could have put it, this is in the main my view.

Yes, I have had a strong opinion on this thread, not so much at the letter, I've already said the TS who wrote it have a right to fight for their own rights. My argument is people who come here for not always genuine reasons. No-one should be stopped from posting here, but no-one who does post here should not expect to be called out for bad behaviour. It seems my calling out of two posters for that reason is not popular with some - tough!

Bloody-minded.

W is dangerous because they aim to do away with society's sex-based system and move towards a gender-based system. As there appear to be almost as many possible gender identities as there are individuals, the logical extension is the complete abolition of sex-based segregation, which is dangerous for women.

I hate it when males come on here throwing their weight around and feeling entitled to police the conversation with no respect for the culture, the women or the feminism of the FWR board that they've decided to squat in.

Why don't they fuck off to some other site? Is the thought that springs to mind.

Whittle thread here. I found it very informative.

It would be like me saying ‘yes I believe in fish and monkeys, and I believe that we can have monkeys with gills.’

Don't think that works as an analogy - fish and monkeys are not 2 categories of one species. A fish can't be a monkey. But a human can be male or female. Or intersex in some cases. (ie where sex isn't clear, not '3rd sex').

it’s no longer legally necessary and it was never scientifically correct. The GRA was always a legal fudge.

It's still necessary because people are entitled to get married as their acquired sex. There will also be times people need a corrected birth certificate to protect their privacy.

Anyway I’ll ask again, and I’m sure I’ll be ignored again do you believe that humans can literally change sex?

I'll answer you again if you like? No - not in terms of chromosomes. But yes in terms of hormones, some biochemical aspects, some physiological aspects, legal status and sometimes in day to day perception.

Why don't they fuck off to some other site? Is the thought that springs to mind

Because as in life, they don’t want to risk picking on another male, or males. Women are a safer target. Same old, same old.

Can you name those respects?

I've had a go ^

flowersonthepiano In general terms I don't have a problem with men here, be it TIM's or biological men, especially if they want to learn about feminist issues. For example, if a man comes here, reads the threads then wants to join in/ask questions about what they've read, that's fine. What I really do hate is men coming here and telling women how to do feminism.

Sage words babelfish

I'll answer you again if you like? No - not in terms of chromosomes. But yes in terms of hormones, some biochemical aspects, some physiological aspects, legal status and sometimes in day to day perceptio

That’s not answering the question. It’s saying the thing ‘changing’ is taking on some superficial physical aspects of the other thing. The superficial appearance does not change the actual classification of the thing.

It’s like asking do you believe a fish can change into a monkey and saying ‘well you could put a fish in a bowl in a tree...’

It’s a yes or no answer - can humans change sex? Not gender, not appearance, not legal designator, not ‘being polite and naming however a person wants to’ - actually changing sex, so that a male becomes a female. can that happen?

Because you clearly don’t believe it, but will tie yourself in knots to avoid saying so.

I'm not sure who you are asking "can humans change sex?" too.

But I'll answer incase you are addressing everyone.

no humans can not change sex.

Whittle thread here.

I'll have a read, thanks.

It’s saying the thing ‘changing’ is taking on some superficial physical aspects of the other thing. The superficial appearance does not change the actual classification of the thing.

I think it's saying that you can change as much as realistically possible with modern surgery and medicine to help an individual bring their body in line with their gender identity. At what point have enough things changed in order for their classification to change in a broader sense? Not just 'what chromosomes do they have'. I think most western societies have answered that really.

You still aren’t answering the question though. Has that person actually changed sex.

If you believe it, the answer is yes.
If you don’t, the answer is no.

It’s a simple question but it cuts to the heart of the debate, because as far as I can see, the rights of half the population are about to be flushed for a position that nobody actually believes is true.

At what point have they changed enough to be the opposite sex? It can’t happen. You’d need every nuclear cell in the body to have a chromosomal change, then rewind the developmental program back to the two cell stage. Or possibly even the second of conception. It can’t happen.

do you believe that humans can change sex? Yes or no?

Nucleate sorry, not nuclear.

In many respects yes Barmer. In some, no.

There's only one respect that counts in being female. That's the one where you're of the sex able to produce ova. And not of the sex able to produce sperm.

Just saved the sw thread before it gets turned into swiss cheese

Just saved the sw thread before it gets turned into swiss cheese
huh?

Have the courage of your conviction supermatch. - if you believe humans can change sex, say so, in simple yes or no terms.

Well you know, you can't be too careful when the thought police are having a read.

That’s not answering the question. It’s saying the thing ‘changing’ is taking on some superficial physical aspects of the other thing. The superficial appearance does not change the actual classification of the thing.

If I dye my brown hair red, it's still brown hair.

And what PencilsInSpace said.

Re " can someone change sex". To me this is a kind of " it depends " question; my answers , today at least, are;
Can a human change biological sex ? No
Can a person IN EFFECT, for most purposes, "change sex"? Yes, it is possible, a nd quite a few people try hard to do it.
Soi the answer is both yes, and no ( obviously no, in many senses) but the more relevant question might be ; does it really matter all that much, if everyone is civilised about it and behaves considerately to all?

It does matter. It's not that people can change sex for most purposes except biologically because that's a nonsense. It's that people can be treated as if they were the opposite sex. As a kindness