Transgender people can be turned away from female only spaces government says

[mammyoftwo]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5880533/amp/Women-allowed-bar-transgender-people-female-changing-rooms-toilets-ministers.html?ico=amp_mostReadNews

Apologies for the source, it's from the daily fail. However, if true it's definitely a victory worth celebrating!!

Women who need to dilate are aware that it's not standard as it's something they didn't have to do before they got ill, and something most women do not have to do.

Agree with others about the semantic deliberate cross-purposes and the one leg stuff.

I very much doubt that women who are ill and need to dilate see this as "standard" I would imagine they are pretty pissed off about the whole thing not least the being ill side of things.

Oh and btw, I have had vaginoplasty surgery. On my vagina. No dilators involved so can't take part in that weird side convo.

It is inaccurate, offensive and highly appropriative to refer to transsexual bottom surgery as vaginoplasty - the correct term is neovaginoplasty. I'd appreciate it if you used that in future, snappity and wakame.

"Yes, agree with RogerAllamsFangirl . It's completely obvious what Meet is doing here."

Yes, I'm pointing out that repeatedly claiming that women don't need to dilate, and that dilation "is a uniquely transwoman experience" is wrong.

I do have stretched ear lobes though. That involved a dilator and lube.

I had to dilate

I didnt feel any shame and i dont have a problem with it being known as a fairly rare thing for women, as a class, to do

Its more 'upsetting' to have someone going on and on about it as meetthenew is doing

Just in case anyone is unaware due to endless flailing...

The Public Sector Equality Duties are mandated by law. Public bodies are required by law to assess and account for impact on the legally protected characteristics The characteristics that are protected by the Equality Act 2010 are:

age
disability
gender reassignment
marriage or civil partnership (in employment only)
pregnancy and maternity
race
religion or belief
sex

There is no such thing as an appropriate term with regard to this. Any public body failing to apply the correct characteristics in EqA is acting unlawfully.

I agree Lang. Not only is the gender critical point made, it is continuously made, without any further input from me, at least.

And yes, impact assessments were always something that should have been highlighted.

As ever, the devil will be in the detail.

But at least, even raising the question of assessment, gives rise to the premise that it is necessary. There is an acknowledgement here, and that is reassuring.

I can't envisage any circumstances in which it would be lawful to exclude from a female space a trans woman with a female birth certificate and who has had vaginoplasty. I am personally dubious but maybe exclusion of someone without a GRC or surgery would be possible, but excluding a woman with both is such a high barrier I cannot personally see it ever happening.

omen who need to dilate are aware that it's not standard as it's something they didn't have to do before they got ill, and something most women do not have to do

Abso-fucking-lutley

Everyone has said their piece about this and i would be grateful if it could be left now

If having cancer is standard and normal then why do we treat people for it?

Cancer is caused by abnormalities of cells (as far as I'm aware - not a doc).

These are not dirty words. Part of a person can be abnormal, unsusual, non standard wihtout meaning whatever you are trying to get at about the whole person.

I myself have birth defects, which would and have been described as abnormalities, this is a fact. What is there to get upset or annoyed about?

But at least, even raising the question of assessment, gives rise to the premise that it is necessary. There is an acknowledgement here, and that is reassuring.

Yes. It's a Titanic-sized ship, Datun, but it is slowly and perceptibly turning. That is why every single thread started here that provides illustration of this fact is derailed to toilets and spectrums of sex and the other canards.

We need to spread the message and keep things on topic. Things are looking up!

I can't envisage any circumstances in which it would be lawful to exclude from a female space a trans woman with a female birth certificate and who has had vaginoplasty

Which, I imagine, is exactly what the impact assessment will look at.

Like I said a few posts back, we need to stick to the point in hand which is that this is a useful acknowledgement from government that for the time being single sex exemptions will be retained where they are necessary and proportionate.

(On the derail - what can I say to the grossly offensive posters other than "keep up the good work"? You're being spectacularly offensive to women, and anyone who has a vagina they were born with - whether or not they've ever needed reconstructive surgery, for instance after childbirth - will be pretty pissed off by your attempts to appropriate their biology. Own goal all the way.)

Will leave it now

Agree about the tendancy of councils to rewrite the law, I wonder where they got the idea to do that from? One council we know it was deliberate.

Is Scotland on that thread about getting in touch with the ones who got it wrong?

Using the word "vaginoplasty" straight after I politely request that you don't - as it is inaccurate anyway - is rather rude.

A fairly balanced article on the matter from the Guardian :

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jun/25/no-plans-change-law-single-sex-spaces-uk-transgender

There is no such thing as an appropriate term with regard to this. Any public body failing to apply the correct characteristics in EqA is acting unlawfully.

I disagree. The choice of word - sex or gender - isn't going to determine a case. What matters is the meaning of the word.

Thank you sardines

I vow to not derail the rest of this thread.

Agree about the tendancy of councils to rewrite the law, I wonder where they got the idea to do that from? One council we know it was deliberate.

It's another bad aspect of the neoliberal way of outsourcing everything. Councils bring in some external lobby group to do everything for them and some of those groups are not up to the job and provide wrong or partisan advice - not just about women's rights; about everything. A public service ethos has disappeared from the public sector - it's now just about paying someone to tick your boxes for you and not noticing or caring when they've ticked the wrong ones.

Using the word "vaginoplasty" straight after I politely request that you don't - as it is inaccurate anyway - is rather rude.

How, when it is the medically appropriate term?
marcibowers.com/mtf/mtf-services/grs/

Nope.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26096123
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8988784
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213307017300308

Like I said a few posts back, we need to stick to the point in hand which is that this is a useful acknowledgement from government that for the time being single sex exemptions will be retained where they are necessary and proportionate.

Exactly. And while we should remember that it's fairly lukewarm, it has been reported as such by most of the main outlets now. This is progress. The Grauniad would have completely ignored it a year ago.

BeyondFemaleElitist

I also had a vaginoplasty for an almost third degree tear, and removal of internal cysts due to tonnes of life saving stitches. It's ridiculous that they equate the two.

We need to spread the message and keep things on topic. Things are looking up!

I agree, although, in the interests of fairness, I will still, occasionally, encourage transactivists to put their point across.