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

Daim
What I will accept is there are definitely biological differences between women and trans women. Despite these biological differences I am willing to treat a trans woman exactly the same as any other woman

This is just lunacy. The biological differences between a woman and a transwoman are the same differences that are between a woman and a man.

And by the way, the way you are treating the women here on this board with your goady bullshit and lack of concern for women's boundaries is pretty fucking shoddy.

What you are saying is you are unwilling to treat trans women the same as any other woman and will in fact consider her to be a man. So we won't ever reach an agreement.

• How many times do you need to be told that a person can't change sex. There is no magic spell. No abracdrabra. No magicians masquerading as surgeons. If you want to call a transwoman a woman, feel free. Just don't expect the rest of us to do it. Why should we lie?

OK, why is it irrational to say that men (males) have an advantage of size and strength over women (females)?

Why is it irrational to say that men (males) do not gestate, and women (females) do?

Why is it irrational to say that men (males) can rape women (females) who cannot?

Why is it irrational to say that men (males) have historically had more say in the setting up of institutions than women (females), and that therefore funding to address this is useful?

Major autocorrect error! nor do my fellow travellers

daim

Irrational means 'not logical or reasonable'. We do logic and reason pretty well on here.

Assigned you can do what you want but if you deliberately and repeatedly mis-gendered a trans person at work you would probably get the sack. Does that not worry you at all? Or make you question your conviction?

"Fertile, mature eggs have been created from mouse skin cells in the lab for the first time. They have even been fertilised to create seemingly healthy pups. The feat suggests it is only a matter of time before the same is achieved in humans, opening up the possibility of new fertility treatments, and the potential for two men to genetically father a baby together."

Source www.newscientist.com/article/2109305-eggs-made-from-skin-cells-in-lab-could-herald-end-of-infertility/

The claim that mammals including humans born without ovaries cannot produce an ovum is scientifically wrong. They can.

I can't sack myself Daim, I work for myself. Damn eh?

But nice threat. Is this how you treat all women who don't agree with your dogma?

Seriously crack a book

But surely this depends on the context? Religious analogy:

If I work with Sara, who is Christian and I constantly criticise Christianity (or insert your religion of choice here) in the office in front of her that is unprofessional and unpleasant of me and it could be argued that it creates a discriminatory atmosphere in the office which disadvantages her.

If I critique Christianity on mumsnet, in general terms, then although I’m doing the same thing the context is very different. I’m not creating an atmosphere that would personally disadvantage someone - I’m expressing my right to freedom of belief.

It cannot be illegal to state that in general transwomen are Male. To do so is to codify a belief system.

Creating an office dynamic where an individual is singled out due to their transgender status would be wrong, and I believe would be covered under the EA.

.

It will be interesting to see an employment tribunal on this one. I daresay it won't be long. When that one hits the Daily Mail, there will be lots of eyes wide open

Fertile, mature eggs have been created from mouse skin cells in the lab for the first time

No they havent. An ovum has been enucleated and a nucleus from a different individual has been inserted. The ovum itself was created by a female mouse.

www.slideshare.net/gurustip/genetic-engineering-and-biotechnology-presentation

Assigned it's not a threat it's the law. Deliberately mis-gendering someone at work is a sackable offence. It is seen as acceptable on this board as everyone does it but outside of Mumsnet it would be really quite shocking.

oh ok Ive read it now

Not sure you're right there, Terfulike: looking at the abstract, it says 'The female germ line undergoes a unique sequence of differentiation
processes that confers totipotency to the egg1,2. The reconstitution of these events in vitro using pluripotent stem cells is a key achievement
in reproductive biology and regenerative medicine. Here we report
successful reconstitution in vitro of the entire process of oogenesis
from mouse pluripotent stem cells. Fully potent mature oocytes were
generated in culture from embryonic stem cells and from induced
pluripotent stem cells derived from both embryonic fibroblasts
and adult tail tip fibroblasts. Moreover, pluripotent stem cell
lines were re-derived from the eggs that were generated in vitro,
thereby reconstituting the full female germline cycle in a dish. This
culture system will provide a platform for elucidating the molecular
mechanisms underlying totipotency and the production of oocytes
of other mammalian species in culture.'

Sounds a bit more than cloning by insertion into a mature ovum to me.

Mind you, it makes bugger all difference to the debate on hand.

Good analogy Bowl

The claim that mammals including humans born without ovaries cannot produce an ovum is scientifically wrong. They can.

Please quote us the section of the article you linked to which says that.

Woman says she is a cat trapped in the wrong body - she hisses at dogs, hates water and claims she can even see better at night

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/12127067/woman-says-she-is-a-cat-trapped-in-the-wrong-body.html

Do you agree that making it a sackable offence is a proportionate response, Daimbars?

If so, do you have any internal feeling for who you would call female and who male? How feminine (and on how many days of the week) do you need, to draw the line? Is it name only, or a bit more than that?

If the honest answer is 'I'd call them female if they were threatening to get me sacked for not doing,' well, I think we can mostly sympathise with that one.

The men who live as dogs: 'We're just the same as any person on the high street'

www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2016/may/25/secret-life-of-the-human-pups-the-men-who-live-as-dogs

"Deliberately misgendering someone at work is a sackable offence. It is seen as acceptable on this board as everyone does it but outside of Mumsnet it would be really quite shocking"

I wouldn't deliberately misgender someone at work?

Bowl of babel's analogy is a good one, IMO

Don't know where that ? came from!

Frankly, using that Nature paper to demonstrate that 'mammals born without ovaries can produce an ovum' is like saying 'Look! Pigs CAN fly!' without mentioning that you needed to use an aeroplane for it.

Which law says that misgendering is a crime Daim? Which law says that misgendering is a sackable offence?

Please quote or reference those laws.