I am a science teacher teaching secondary sex education and genetics

[Clairetree1]

Ever single time. Every single time. Every single time.

I am being asked how men turn into women.

I say they can't. They turn into transwomen. These are men who change their bodies to be as much like women as possible, but are still men.

Every single time I teach pregnancy I am asked how men can do it.

Every single time we go through genetics I get a shocked response for saying "this is male, this is female"

Every single time I make any distinction between male and female I am asked "are you allowed to say that?

I equate being ordered to teach that men can become woman to previous generations of teachers being ordered to teach nazi race science.

I am quite sure I will be sacked one day

I see no problem with referring to male anatomy and female anatomy but if you start defining a woman simply by her sex organs it can start to get very unpleasant.

Transactivists say this a lot. As though they have hit upon some kind of feminist Achilles heel.

I've never understood it. How is it unpleasant? What's unpleasant about the able to distinguish the sexes, based on sex differences?

I see no problem with referring to male anatomy and female anatomy but if you start defining a woman simply by her sex organs it can start to get very unpleasant.

So you agree the person in the photo you posted is a woman? We appear to be getting somewhere!

Never fails, does it?

Women - We're concerned about males being in our spaces.

TRA - What about the trans men? This one has abs!

Women - WTF does this have to do with anything?

TRA - ...you're all bigots

I see no problem with referring to male anatomy and female anatomy but if you start defining a woman simply by her sex organs it can start to get very unpleasant.

Again back to class vs individual. A woman is of the class that has a vagina (a real one) a uterus, ovaries etc. And produces ovae as sex cells. individual women may have lost any or all of these as part of medical treatment for example - they are not some kind of ‘gotcha’ for TRAs - they are still of the class that has such organs.

Just as men are of the class that has a penis, testicles and produces sperm cells - an individual male who has lost these through accident, injury etc is still a male. He is still part of that class of males.

(Apparently a mastectomy and lots of crunches change your chromosomes. Who knew?)

Still waiting for a concise description of how humans change sex...

I see no problem with referring to male anatomy and female anatomy but if you start defining a woman simply by her sex organs it can start to get very unpleasant.

Should that individual need to be admitted to hospital and not disclose her biological sex, then crucial drug dosages and lab tests might be calculated according to male parameters rather than female ones.

That would be a great deal more 'unpleasant', because it could result in death.

So yes, in all essential aspects that is a female. Who has surgically and chemically manipulated her body to appear male. That's not the same as actually being male.

pythagonal no - I agree the person in the picture was born with female anatomy. That does not make the person a woman.

Nobody is saying that a women is just her physiology and men are just theirs. It is the term used to depict which sex class they belong to.
When I say I am a mother I am not saying that is all I am. When I say I am a psychologist I am not negating the fact that I am also a mother.

Also TRAs - everyone else is "triggered" by discussion of "parts", right? People will get upset if I drop dire warnings about this?

That does not make the person a woman.

So you’re saying that this person was born a woman and is no longer a woman?

How does that work? How does one actually change sex?

How do the XX chromosomes in nucleate cells become XY?

Indeed, how does one change sex, precisely, from a medical perspective? At what point in the transition process has a person's sex changed?

If the answer isn't "as soon as they declare their gender identity" then be aware that Stonewall probably thinks you're a bigot too.

This person in the picture is an out and proud trans model Aydian Dowling

I was not aware of Aydian, although to be fair there are a lot of models that I don't know much about unsurprisingly. Being a model ( of either sex or whatever gender they identify as) means that someone has a role in either the fashion or advertising industry.

For a long time I have found it distasteful when an individual involved with modelling becomes the subject of intense discussions about their life etc. Historically especially the case with women.

Of course some models have used their success well as a platform to campaign about issues.
cf The 'I'd rather go naked than wear fur' campaign.

Presumably *Daims' if you are very aware of Aydian, you may know if they have a GRC?
This of course will be an additional point of legal relevence in your asking if they are female.

What's unpleasant about the able to distinguish the sexes, based on sex differences?

Exactly, Datun! There's some very weird woman hatred going on.

You begin to wonder how the human species managed to propagate for thousands of years. How did they know which ones to fuck?

Were homosexual people who were forced to hide their sexual orientatation for thousands of years, just a bit fucking deluded about which sex they were attracted to, because it's not actually possible to clearly determine male from female?

Aydian is American so having a GRC isn't relevant but I know a couple of trans guys in RL who have a GRC and who are now legally male.

Legal changes to definition of woman/female:

Scotland:
(extract from Fairplay for Women article)
"Last year while we were all looking the other way and distracted by the UK government’s proposals to reform the Gender Recognition Act the word woman was stolen from us. It was sneakily done by the Scottish parliament and hidden behind a smoke screen. That smoke screen was The Gender Representation on Public Boards Bill.

The Bill introduced the ‘gender representation objective’ – a target that women should make up 50% of non-executive board membership.

The purpose of this bill was admirable. It was to help women overcome the institutional sexism we suffer due to our sex. Positive action to redress the imbalances that have arisen from centuries of historical disadvantage. It was to acknowledge the reality that institutionalised inequality and sexist attitudes stop most women from reaching their full potential in public life. Financial barriers, income inequality, the gender pay gap, sexist attitudes, gender stereotyping, women’s disproportionate share of caring responsibilities, the undervaluing of women’s paid work, and media portrayals of women, to name but a few influences, all play a role in the sexism that prevents a fair number of women being involved in public life.

But in a cruel twist of irony it was also to be the perfect trojan horse to steal the very meaning of the words woman and female from us."

fairplayforwomen.com/scottish_stole_woman/

You begin to wonder how the human species managed to propagate for thousands of years. How did they know which ones to fuck?

Fuck everyone and hope for the best? I mean, they also keep saying that classification by sex is a product of Western imperialism (and appear to be oblivious to how jaw droppingly racist a statement that is).

Obviously it's a woman 🤔

They aren't legally male. They have the right under the law to be treated as if they were male.

daimbars

pythagonal no - I agree the person in the picture was born with female anatomy. That does not make the person a woman.

The person has gone out of their way to mimic the opposite sex. Are you saying the definition of a man is a woman who goes out of her way to look like one?

Does this apply across the board?

Appreance is everything to TRA. They want to put everyone in little boxes according to what they look like.

Re the individual above...OK, so, I'm guessing identified as a snake or fish or dragon based on the scales, but what snake has enormous bushy sideburns?

So confused.

Transmen are female, biologically. They have the right to be treated as Male in certain circumstances if they have a GRC.

Biologically they remain female.

If you think are actually Male now I’d like to ask you again how do they change sex?

Still no answer to that one from anyone I asked. It’s almost like the answer is ‘you can’t.’

Current legal challenge in England & Wales re definition of 'mother' on child's birth certificate:

www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/uk/baby-will-not-legally-have-mother-if-transgender-man-wins-legal-fight-36987153.html
(extract)
"The youngster is the child of a single parent who was born a woman but now lives as a man after undergoing surgery.

Lawyers have told a judge that he had been biologically able to get pregnant and give birth but had legally become a man when the child was born.

They say the man wants to be identified as the child’s “father” or “parent” on a birth certificate.

But they said a birth registrar has told the man the law requires people who give birth to children to be registered as mothers."

thread discussing case:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3271504-Transgender-man-gives-birth-and-wants-to-be-recorded-as-babys-father

If they were born female, they remain female.

The legal thing is a nonsense argument. Passing a law does not make something true, or right.

There have been a host of flawed and downright evil laws in history. Are you going to defend those too? Slavery? Race-Segregated education policies? The Second Amendment?