Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

The National Lottery Fund will fund Mermaids - review published

204 replies

HandsOffMyRights · 19/02/2019 14:59

The National Lottery Community Fund (@TNLComFund) Tweeted:
Our review of proposed Mermaids UK funding is now complete. You can read our statement and a report on the review at: t.co/T7NCJuNcme twitter.com/TNLComFund/status/1097869829212643329?s=17

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
Igneococcus · 20/02/2019 07:02

This never happens in questions of physics or chemistry, it's always biology where everyone feels they know better or at least as much as the people who do biology for a living.

NeurotrashWarrior · 20/02/2019 07:04

I believe it's going to be 100k per year?

Lumene · 20/02/2019 07:09

"The Yogyakarta Principles of 2006 are a universal guide to human rights which affirm
binding international legal standards with which all States must comply"

This is incorrect no?

Yes incorrect.

Ali1cedowntherabbithole · 20/02/2019 08:52

Good article by Lucy Bannerman. It's a shame (though I understand the reasons) that it's not open to comments.

Bowlofbabelfish · 20/02/2019 09:01

See what I mean - you think you know better than the scientists. It's a well known medical fact, apart from to those in denial.

I am a scientist hera . A geneticist by training and research, who has spent many years looking at the genetic pathways which turn a fertilised egg into an embryo and then a foetus and beyond.

What you say is not true. The sex of an embryo is set at birth. Embryos are not all default female.

MillytantForceit · 20/02/2019 09:04

Re, 'This never happens with Chemistry...'

Homeopathy?

LizzieSiddal · 20/02/2019 09:05

Im still angry about this, this morning. The report states explicitly that more dc transition if supported by Mermaids rather than Gids, yet then says they believe SG when she told them they don’t push dc to transition.

Do they think we are stupid and won’t notice this inconsistency?

Igneococcus · 20/02/2019 09:22

*Re, 'This never happens with Chemistry...'

Homeopathy?*

I have said before that the trans discussions remind me of the homeopathy discussions I've had. I was told by some poster on a different board (not a British one) who is a fervent Homeopathy supporter and anti-Vaxxer that the fact that she had Leistungskurs Biologie (equivalent to GCSEs in biology roughly) made her as much of an expert in biology as I am with my PhD and decades of research experience. I can see the exact same pattern of discurs, with other people coming in saying it's not nice to challenge that person's firmly held belief. An article of faith is elevated to The Truth by people who have no understanding of their own limitations.

BettyDuMonde · 20/02/2019 09:24

Hera

You should go picket the science museum, they are spreading false information, according to you:

whoami.sciencemuseum.org.uk/whoami/findoutmore/yourgenes/wheredidyourgenescomefrom/boyorgirl/xorysperm

Seriously, how do you think they sex-select embryos to avoid M/F inherited conditions if all embryos are the same for weeks and weeks? Answer- they couldn’t, but that’s
OK, because you are completely wrong and sex is determined at conception depending on whether the X egg met an X sperm or a Y sperm.

happydappy2 · 20/02/2019 09:48

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Angryresister · 20/02/2019 10:00

If Mermaids are "working with " 5000 people that's a hell of a lot of money per person. Why haven't the reviewers seen the material that Mermaids deny?

FeministCat · 20/02/2019 13:16

Odd that posters have Hera have gone quiet. Must be rigorously compiling that research to show all embryos are female “for weeks”. Can’t wait to see the carefully curated list of tweets saying the same they rely on, over and above, you know, actual science.

It’s impossible to debate with people who don’t even seem to know the arguments of the side they are are arguing for. “Cross-sex hormones aren’t available until 16”. And? Mermaids has been campaigning for ages against the NHS guidelines of waiting until 16 for cross sex hormones, they see earlier and earlier chemical and surgical intervention as not problematic at all, because so what if a child chemically castrated or surgically mutilated realizes they are not trans after all, and most children do desist after all, small price to pay! Susie Green put her own child on blockers at 12, estrogen at 13, and took him to Thailand for new-vagina surgery at 16. She is on a mission to justify the horrible ways she encouraged the mutilation of her own child all because they did not fit stereotypes of what she though a boy should be, by encouraging the mutilation of other children, to be infertile, chemically dependent for life, and at severe risk of botched surgeries and lifelong interventions.

Children “want” lots of things. To be the opposite sex, to be a unicorn, to ask to eat off the floor like the family dog for a month, to get a tattoo like their grandma has, to have a tail like a monkey, to not go to school, to not eat their veggies, to have ice cream for breakfast. We don’t let children do whatever they want because we know they can’t make good decisions based on experience and maturity.

What madness has fallen that we allow children who still think of 20 year olds as old and wise, to sterilize themselves? To put themselves at increased lifelong risk of certain cancers? Or bone loss? To lower their brain maturity and intelligence by avoiding natural puberty? To opt to have immature sex organs? To be non orgasmic? (See the sad case of Jazz Jennings) To be forced to use more experimental surgeries with high risk of complications (again, see Jazz). What are the adults who are supposed to be looking after their children’s best interests thinking when they convince them they can be the opposite sex, that they can just borrow their sister’s uterus for making babies one day, that sexual stereotypes are a basis to not be the sex they are?

FeministCat · 20/02/2019 13:18

*neo-vagina. Not new vagina. Because Jackie Green does not and will never have a vagina.

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 20/02/2019 13:21

It’s impossible to debate with people who don’t even seem to know the arguments of the side they are are arguing for.

They don't actually know what we are arguing against, as most don't read the forum.

Lolasaurous · 20/02/2019 13:41

It's actually so wrong to assume kids know the difference between gender non-conforming and trans as someone wrote here, and to simply affirm children as trans, to be unquestioning of why they think that and if it's right, because you think "they know". Children can be, are, very pressured about gender stereotypes, about what is supposedly "a boy thing" and what is supposedly "a girl thing", based on what they see and hear around them, and what they're taught, consciously or subconsciously. Muuuuch more pressured than adults. And peer pressured into fitting in with whoever is around them. Mocked and bullied if they step outside the box (by children, and adults, including parents and other family members) even so little as a boy liking the colour pink. A boy will hear from that that boys aren't supposed to like the colour pink, and can be confused about themselves. We should be challenging this type of thing, not saying you can change yourself to the opposite to stop it. A kid who didn't fit in and didn't know anything else could think they have to transition and would want to take that opportunity in difficult times, such as being mocked or bullied. It's hard being a kid as it is, most don't want to stand out as different and will be affected by social pressure, and they simply may not know it's ok to be who they are, as they are.

I just watched on a tv show (not related to trans issues), girls aged 9-10 saying playing football was for boys and then later learning that girls can play football, which she said she literally DIDN'T KNOW. Another girl who was into football saying she wished she was a boy because she likes the "boy games" of playing tig (tig ffs!), and football and basketball, she didn't think girls did/could, she thought that those things were for boys only, and she didnt like make-up and wanted to wear jogging bottoms and a hoodie instead of a sequined flowery t shirt which she said she was being forced to wear. She shouldn't have been forced to wear that. She should have been allowed to wear what she wanted, to learn that girls can wear what they want.

I will not support anyone or any group which pushes or endorses gender stereotypical nonsense, I will not support anyone or any group which pushes or endorses the idea that kids are trans if they don't conform to sexist gender stereotypes which we're socialised and conditioned into based on our sex, I won't support anyone or any group that agrees with such notions, for example that a girl playing with toy cars means she's trans and should be a boy, or that a boy playing with dolls is trans and should be a girl. Anyone that endorses such crap should be ashamed of themselves. You don't want to let kids be who they are. We do.

howmanybiscuits · 20/02/2019 14:47

The Yogyakarta Principles of 2006 are a universal guide to human rights which affirm
binding international legal standards with which all States must comply

Where does this come from? Is the National Lottery saying this?

howmanybiscuits · 20/02/2019 14:47

(And yes, it's incorrect! The Yogyakarta Principles are not in any shape or form "binding".

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 20/02/2019 14:57

Where does this come from? Is the National Lottery saying this?

Yes. In Section 5 (Overarching legal framework), section 5.2 states:

"5.2 The Yogyakarta Principles of 2006 are a universal guide to human rights which affirm
binding international legal standards with which all States must comply; these are in
relation to sexual orientation and gender identity. The Principles were updated in 2017,
and are since then referred to as Yogyakarta Principles plus 10. Paragraph D of Principle
32 states:
“Bearing in mind the child’s right to life, non-discrimination, the best interests of the
child, and respect for the child’s views, ensure that children are fully consulted and
informed regarding any modifications to their sex characteristics necessary to avoid or
remedy proven, serious physical harm, and ensure that any such modifications are
consented to by the child concerned in a manner consistent with the child’s evolving
capacity;”10"

AyeRobot · 20/02/2019 15:34

Did they form them in Yogyakarta because "The Costa Coffee Tamworth Services Principles" wouldn't have the same gravitas?

MillytantForceit · 20/02/2019 15:42

"The Principles have never been accepted by the United Nations and the attempt to make gender identity and sexual orientation new categories of non-discrimination has been repeatedly rejected by the General Assembly, the UN Human Rights Council and other UN bodies. In July 2010, Vernor Muñoz, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education, presented to the United Nations General Assembly an interim report on the human right to comprehensive sexual education, in which he cited the Yogyakarta Principles as a Human Rights standard. In the ensuing discussion, the majority of General Assembly Third Committee members recommended against adopting the principles."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogyakarta_Principles

NeurotrashWarrior · 20/02/2019 16:07

Just wanted to link something Fionne has mentioned in relation to 'certain charities'.

and another article raising yet more safeguarding points regarding links to anime porn and by extension, 'drag.'

Great thread by Fionne mentioning certain charities www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3513209-great-thread-by-fionne-mentioning-certain-charities

SeaRabbit · 20/02/2019 17:23

strong suspicion that a lot of MPs are just as ignorant about science as our new MN friends.

Well in 2012 they were rubbish at simple probability, with 47% of Tories, and 77% of Labour MPs not knowing the probability of getting two heads if you spin a coin twice:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19801666

Homestar · 20/02/2019 20:54

Mr Gilligan is a malicious bully who picks on the group that he feels is the least likely to challenge him.

I just saw this on Gilligan's Twitter thread and I had to get some exclamation marks out of my system.

I don't want to go and get a Twitter account just for yelling at people but THE GROUP LEAST LIKELY TO CHALLENGE HIM. Yes, they saying that in the context of a transphobia accusation. Yes, they are saying that trans people are the group least likely to challenge him. They literally wrote that.

The victim complex is UNREAL, it's insane. Like, fuck off, you're not a bunch of sweet little damsels in distress retiring to your fainting couches to cry when your delicate Princess-and-the-Pea feelings are injured. You're a giant mob of terrifying bullies namecalling, shaming, intimidating, doxxing, issuing death threats and enacting literal (literally literal) violence when your delicate Princess-and-the-Pea feelings are injured.

ugh, I'm still annoyed. Maybe I should go kick some furniture while doing some GameStop Ma'am rage grunts.

ToeToToe · 20/02/2019 21:00

I hear ya, Homestar Wine