Freddy McConnell appeal today (Transman who wants to be registered as their child's father) *Title edited by MNHQ*

[MrsSnippyPants]

Haven't seen anything about this and it just popped up on Sky News. Hearing continues tomorrow

Newspaper report here
www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/transgender-man-who-gave-birth-21629478

Freddie genuinely believes that Freddie is male. While being pregnant, while giving birth, Freddie continued to believe this.

It’s astonishing, isn’t it. As mothers we’ve all felt the incredibly powerful feelings that happen during pregnancy and after giving birth. I would genuinely like to know and understand how Freddie managed those feelings whilst believing they are a man.

If some women have penises and some men have vaginas, then some men will have babies, therefore it is a male thing to do.

But it is also a female thing to do. If everything can be done by both men and women, then living as a woman is indistinguishable from living as a man. Therefore no transgender person can be 'living as a woman' or 'living as a man', because there is no way of distinguishing between these two states.

In order for transgenderism to make sense, there must be things which only females can do or only males can do, so that a man can 'live as a woman' or a woman can 'live as a man'. What are those things?

Reading some replies on freddys twitter page the renowned and hallowed dr adrian harrop is being mentioned in replies... knew his slimy self would be able to keep his neb out of this story

I can only get my head round it at all by assuming that Freddie doesn't feel like Freddie assumes women are supposed to feel. If you feel not-a-woman, what does that make you? Not-a-woman = man.

Vice versa for transwomen.

What baffles me about the whole thing is that when I was growing up in the 60s and 70s gender stereotypes were gradually being challenged. What happened to make so many people revert to the old straitjacket of strict gender roles?

Freddy McConnell, who lived as a man before giving birth
If Freddie was living as a man throughout 9 months of pregnancy, what can "living as a man" possibly mean?

We've got used to seeing this expression, including as a requirement in the Gender Recognition Act. But as someone asked on another Mumsnet thread, about "living as a woman", what does it actually mean?

It can only mean adhering to stereotypes.

But as someone asked on another Mumsnet thread, about "living as a woman", what does it actually mean?

The Scottish Bill guidance as advised by James Morton & Scottish Trans Alliance is:

“always using female pronouns; using a female name on official documents such as a driving licence or passport, or on utility bills or bank accounts; describing themselves and being described by others in written or other communication using female language.”

www.scottishlegal.com/article/blog-shifting-sands-on-the-definition-of-woman-in-scots-law

I'm struggling to understand what is meant by 'female language'

If Freddy believes language is so fluid and meaningless then Freddy should be sacked as a journalist as no one would have any idea what his articles actually say. Indeed one could presumably take him to court for libel regardless of what he wrote is you understand the meaning of the words according to your own personal belief to be something different.

Interesting points about language definitions. Freddy knows full well the power of language and its meanings, but all bets are off if a woman giving birth can be described as a man giving birth,

If Freddie was living as a man throughout 9 months of pregnancy, what can "living as a man" possibly mean?

Isn't that the whole point of all this, to change the legal meaning and dictionary definition.
A man can get pregnant,a woman can have a penis.These two things are certainly intertwined with the push for the word mother being erased via surrogacy.
For all the positives that have been happening in the last few days, I think we may be asleep at the wheel.
They don't discuss or take a break,they shoehorn,and they lobby.
What do local councillors in Ireland,where i am from,or local MPs in the uk have to do now?
Take calls from people who are worried about Convid-19.Not many other people want to bother them with their issues,Who will fill that gap in calls?
These people are organised, they have been doing it for years.

It seems small, but the thing that always strikes me that says all of this is not in good faith is that along with all this business of losing all distinction in the language of male and female, there is never for a moment a discussion of what words to use to replace them to talk about sex. Very rarely do activists or supporters try and claim there are no sexual differences between those who carry children and those who impregnate people. And yet they don't accept man or woman or male and female to designate those groups. So how is anyone supposed to talk about them when they are relevant?

Has consideration ever been made of Freddie ever detransitioning in this case?
Just think of the legal clusterfuck that would cause if Freddy had won, not to mention the emotional toll on the child

TRAs don't want the inconvenient truth of biological sex talked about because it highlights what they try to deny. No replacement words wanted, only appropriation of the old ones. It's like Newspeak in 1984 in which vocabulary was reduced right down. If there's no word to descrbe the truth, no discussion can be had about, no dissent can be registered.

Antibles. I’ll pop this in here, it was sent to me yesterday and it keeps rattling round my head, I’ve put it on another thread already but think I could add it to every thread on here.

Noam Chomsky said in 1998:

The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum—even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.

If everything can be done by both men and women, then living as a woman is indistinguishable from living as a man. Therefore no transgender person can be 'living as a woman' or 'living as a man', because there is no way of distinguishing between these two states.

Indeed.

It's funny how Hannah and Jake knew what sort of person they'd need to grow a baby for them, what with biology and sex being such an irrelevance and all.

True that dick Kerr.

How weird is it that despite the politicians and people who shout TWAW
Wonder how they can sort this out in their minds that only women can have a baby

You would kinda think it would be a total head fuck for them 🤷‍♀️

describing themselves and being described by others in written or other communication using female language.”
is part of the criteria so, if l describe myself as a dolphin, and make sure everyone else talks about and any mention of me is written as a dolphin, whether or not
they believe it (remember if I say they must and they don't it's misdolphining) then am l legally a dolphin?

They don't want to accept the reality of "female" as a unifying group Goosefoot. When I've seen the question asked "well how to we describe the collection of people formerly known as female" the answer is invariably "there's no need". The argument seems to go that when people talk about women they are usually using it as short hand for a specific biological function, and that in order to uncouple the term woman from biology all you need to do is just refer directly to that instead. Hence "women" or "females" stop being a collective group and become a thousand fractured variations of "menstruators", "pregnant people", people with cervixes" etc. As if the Venn diagram of people with these attritubes was not, 99% of the time, a circle. For some I think it's a passive arrogance and misogyny as they fail to think about any needs this group could have which requires them to be discussed as an actual group made up of actual complete humans and not just a disembodied selection of body part. For others, mostly males with and without trans identities, I think it's part of a much more active hate driven attempt to dehumanised us and divide us. Like a sort of modern day tower of babbel, if we are all separated into different tiny sub groups it's harder to organise around or even articulate our rights. It's no surprise at all to me that since we started seeing an increase in language like "cervix havers" we've also seen an increase in language like "vessel" and "carrier" used in debates around surrogacy and abortion. That's why the TRA line about "reducing women to their body parts" by defining us by our biology is so obviously absurd, as its very clear that their position is obviously the one having that effect. It's so obvious in fact that I'm convinced at this point that it's deliberate.

What baffles me about the whole thing is that when I was growing up in the 60s and 70s gender stereotypes were gradually being challenged. What happened to make so many people revert to the old straitjacket of strict gender roles?

Another 60s child here, @Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g ! But it's not many people is it? It's a very small group of activists with an agenda who, by some amazing sleight of hand, have attracted huge funding and profile. All the new parents I know (admitting I don't know any trans parents, but do know many gay parents) constantly challenge gender stereotyping for their DCs.

Olly some people are capable of truly jaw dropping levels of cognative dissonance. My SIL is very anti stereotypes and will constantly buy books on feisty heroines for my neice, toys that encourage her into STEM. Yet she's fully TWAW and when challenged on it will confidently say that "most women" conform 100% to gender stereotypes. This belief seems to be largely based on clothing. During this argument she claimed that we were both "woman gender" (whatever the fuck that is) because she was wearing a dress and had long hair, and I was wearing pink. The fact that we are both scientists with a variety of masculine and feminine interests didn't seem to have occurred to her. Nor did she think that claiming gender stereotypes were biologically innate was incompatible with claiming they were socially constructed. They were also both immutable, and something we should be challenging through feminism. It was honestly like talking to someone from a young earth creationist religion, where they try and argue that science simultaneously proves, and is yet useless to investigate, God. Just staggering dissonance and failure of logical thinking.

"because she was wearing a dress and had long hair, and I was wearing pink."

So would she say that these Bros fans male or female?

And if it's their hair that gives them their gender identity, what can we assume about Duran Duran, because their hair looks pretty similar.

Live Aid, 1980's. Bananarama sneak in. Nobody knows they are female. That is why they have been allowed to sing.

How many men did Freddy meet staying on the postnatal ward?

If someone believed that they are pretty unique in the whole history of the world - there’s a reason.