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

Torn - building on your question "how does a scientist treat a transgender male who has elected to become female".

On twitter recently there was a 'proud' transwoman posting about giving blood and recording their sex as female.

On here recently, someone recalled their husband's medical trial, with thousands of tests on females, looking like it was about to make a breakthrough on a significant signifier for disease on the samples provided...was almost derailed by a transwoman who decided to include themselves in the 'female' category. Which meant that noone could work out why this outlier meant the hypothesis was proved wrong, until the receptionist pointed out that a transwoman had signed up. (I realise this is anecdotal, but given the current aggressive push of 'I am female' by some high-profile transwomen, it would not suprise me).

How does science progress in the fields of medicine for biologically-sex specific diseases and conditions, if narcissistic (usually) males insert themselves where they shouldn't to validate their own sense of self.

it's almost like these (mostly) males don't give a shit, as long as their needs for validation and space are satisfied.

Torn I agree with you! You basically paraphrased exactly what I said at the beginning of the thread. The OP refuses to teach kids that socially and legally trans women are to be considered female. Pointing this out does not take away any of the biological facts.

I would just change your quote slightly:

How does a scientist treat a transgender male who has elected to become female? Socially and legally, they are to be considered as female. Biologically, they remain retain male anatomy. Is the scientist/teacher wrong for pointing out this fact? I believe they have a duty to point it out. A fact's a fact.

Rufus name and shame?

Kindly stop changing people's posts to prop up your sophistry. It's obnoxious and goady. They remain male. They cannot change sex.

The OP refuses to teach kids that socially and legally trans women are to be considered female.

She's a bloody biology teacher - she's not there to teach legal or social issues - that's for PSHE teachers. Her job is to teach biological facts. FFS.

I think it is relevant, bit if a thread diversion but relevant, STBXH has developed the belief that he is a woman trapped in a male body, in the last few years. As a parallel, he also started to truly, truly believe in the Singularity. That we will be living forever in digital form, in our lifetime, or rather at the end of it.

These are connected. A religious idea of souls, wish fulfilment and faith based upon an optimist idea of what "science" (science fiction) and AI might achieve, maybe, soon.

Religions are always based upon a projected idea of now. Where once it was Egyptians and their book of the dead, now it is fantasy bodies, being a creator who is lord over nature, and living a fantasy or in the matrix.

I was talking to a woman the other day who brilliantly wants to be a spider when she gets uploaded.

Daim how do you know they retain male anatomy? (They probably do having said that - most trans-women seem very attached to their cock and balls.) The original wording is the correct one since male and female refer to biology, not gender.

"https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2015/04/07/statistics-show-the-difference-in-rates-of-violent-crimes-against-women-committed-by-transwomen-versus-non-transgender-males/" is US statistics. Different culture. Not relevant to the UK. For instance it might be that trans people get poorer legal representation - most will need public defenders. Irrelevant.

The Daily Mail article is about the actions of people before transition. Irrelevant.

Toronto Sun. Again not UK. Irrelevant.

The Natasha case is very sad but also irrelevant.

In short, they are all irrelevant. If there is a problem, where are the UK statistics?

there hasn't been a single case in the UK of a trans woman using her trans status to sneak into a bathroom or changing room to assault somebody.

I haven't looked closely in the UK but THEY HAVE in other countries, and the reason is THEY'RE MEN with the same predispositions as any other man.

Yet there are at least 44 trans id biological males in prison for serious sexual offenses against women, who now CLAIM they're women and want to be housed with women.

Then there's Martin Ponting aka Jessica, who raped two females, who is now in a female prison.

Women and girls are legitimately afraid. It's misogyny to suggest otherwise.

Oh gosh no daim

I'm not doing that...plus i don't think most have done anything shameful

Except for the outright liars and goady fuckers...and honestly they have been masses of those ...although they dont seem to have much 'staying power' as such

So daim - as above in my examples, if that transwoman decides they want to take part in a clinical trial for females?

Who/how does anyone challenge them in the new world that the trans lobby want to see, where 'transwomen are women', you cannot question or misgender them? A scientist could be criticised for being transphobic in identifying the group they want to investigate.

There are a lot of social media voices who would already challenge you on the transphobia you've just shown when you described that anatomy as 'male'. When to them it's erm, it's a female penis, no it's a 'clit on a stick', no it's just a different type of 'clitoris' ...you see, language is important.

A scientist says "no sorry, you've retained your male anatomy, you're not a woman, you can't take part in our clinical trial" Transphobic!

Do we have to reconstruct the whole world around them, so clinical trials linguistically tangle themselves up to explain they are only looking for people with - erm, well, what?'

Cos we can't call the differences "female and male anatomy", as the linguistic deception has already crept towards transwomen shouting at us that they have always been biologically female.

I do not believe a science teacher is obliged to enter the realm of teaching about society. They're paid to teach science.
If children are asking questions, I don't see the harm in explaining that there are legal and social implications regarding transgender people, but scientifically, there's only male and female, and neither can become the other. Of course, there are rare instances of genetic mishaps, but these are very rare anomalies.

As stated earlier, the flat earth brigade or moon landing conspiracy theorists aren't mentioned in physics lessons (despite them existing), so why should transgender people be mentioned?

If a teacher was asked how two lesbians have a baby are they supposed to say 'they can't!' And end the conversation?

A decent teacher would say something along the lines of 'one of the women needs male sperm to get pregnant but both women can legally be the child's parent

This is an essay that may help some people understand why women are objecting to changes that have been made in law and how those laws are interpreted. The comments will give you a sad.
kateharding.net/2009/10/08/guest-blogger-starling-schrodinger%E2%80%99s-rapist-or-a-guy%E2%80%99s-guide-to-approaching-strange-women-without-being-maced/

"She's a bloody biology teacher - she's not there to teach legal or social issues - that's for PSHE teachers. Her job is to teach biological facts. FFS.angry"

Exactly. And the biology is that sex is not bimorphic but is a bimodal spectrum with male and female representing the sets around each peak and a possibility for each person that sex is mis-assigned. That's the science.

one of the women needs male sperm

MALE sperm you say? What if that sperm identifies as female you transphobe.

Yes daim, that's biology.

But you're trying to name the categories of 'male' and 'female'.

Transwomen are starting to claim those categories - you will be being transphobic if you are saying transwomen aren't 'female' and haven't always been.

What about my clinical trials example? How does a scientist filter out transwomen who will skew clinical data without being transphobic or using transphobic language such as 'you're not a woman'/'your anatomy is not female'?

Just a FYI.

I've made my point as to why women and girls fear men in their private sex based spaces and why these fears are legitimate. I do not want to participate with transactivists any more in derailing this thread.

Males are different to females in every cell. Disorders of sex development are a red clownfish herring.

Oh gibberty gibberty gibberty....

Did no one ever tell you about the birds and bees when you were a child? You need one Male of the species, and one female. There is no other combination at all in any way shape or form that will result in offspring. And even your D grade GCSE in biology should have taught you that much.

"As stated earlier, the flat earth brigade or moon landing conspiracy theorists aren't mentioned in physics lessons (despite them existing), so why should transgender people be mentioned?"

Because the incidence of gender variance is probably as high a 1 person in 20 and, in the long term, probably at least 1 person in 100 (perhaps more) will transition. It is hardly unusual these days

Don't blame you at all mancheeze!

Not all humans are fertile.

I've not heard any trans person object to the use of 'male' and 'female' anatomy when correctly anatomy. Where has any trans person said this?

Trans women object to being called men and trans men object to being called women. There's a big difference between this and describing anatomy.

No, the biology teacher would simply explain that two women cannot reproduce.
In the same way, that same teacher would say 'a biological man cannot become a biological woman'

Of course, a teacher is likely to broaden the scope of a conversation for a short while, but they aren't going to get into a debate for very long. They can have a general 'chat' with children in an off topic manner, but that's as far as it goes.

Kids will ask all sorts of questions - could time travel be possible in the future? could we eventually grow wings? could a man ever become a woman?
One day - maybe. But first, stop chewing gum, and let's concentrate on the here and now.