Are women discriminated against due to their biology?

[Mumofgirlswholiketoplaywithmud]

Kirsty Blackman MP doesn't think that there is much discrimination occuring to women due to biological differences. Do women ever get discriminated against due to issues such as pregnancy?

@NiceGerbil

Anyone got a link to the thread she tweeted on?

I'm not on Twitter and not very good at it.

mobile.twitter.com/KirstySNP/status/1375013146675544064

Yes, this happens, but I think that the question is in some ways not the best question. We have the legal frameworks for the most part to deal with it, and it's widely disapproved of socially.

The better question IMO is, do women as a group have a need for specialised consideration in the law or within society and social institutions due to their particular biological make-up.

I think the absolutely clear answer to that is yes, and it will be yes even if we were in some sort of idealist utopia. reproductive class creates a different set of needs and considerations in some areas, it's been true in every human society for all time, and it will always be true.

'We have the legal frameworks for the most part to deal with it, and it's widely disapproved of socially.'

Are you serious?

The legal frameworks don't function and it's definitely not disapproved of socially.

twitter.com/KirstySNP/status/1375010670958288896?s=20

This is the "is there research " tweet

Thank you

@NiceGerbil

'We have the legal frameworks for the most part to deal with it, and it's widely disapproved of socially.'

Are you serious?

The legal frameworks don't function and it's definitely not disapproved of socially.

I would agree that it's difficult to get it to work well, which it has in common with a lot of workplace law, unfortunatly.

But as far as being disapproved of - I'd stand by that. Most people don't approve of sex discrimination at work, around things like getting fired over pregnancy. There's certainly a minority that doesn't give a shit, and there are employers who are self-serving, but generally it's almost an assumption by many that such things don't happen unless they've experienced it directly. That's because it is socially disapproved of, if people thought it was fine they wouldn't think that way.

The point being, it's a recognised problem, there are institutional efforts to control it and it could perhaps become more effective in that regard - some jurisdictions manage it better than others for whatever reason so it seems possible.

But there's never going to be a time when the nature of being female doesn't create a different set of needs for women compared to men. So even if employment laws were perfectly observed, there would be a need to consider women as women.

It's not a dissolvable category in the same way a socially constructed one is, there is no revolution that will make men and women the same in some Marxist explosion of classes. (Unless you are into transhumanism and artificial wombs and such but I think that's very much a niche perspective.)

@SmokedDuck do you mean for equality there has to be a difference between men and women, because we are different so have to be acknowledged as different ? X

How can women ever be equal when one half of humanity is condemned to bear the children of all humanity.

Condemned?

That's an odd word to use.

It depends upon whether you regard bearing children a burden or a privilege!

Some women are deluded into thinking their biology hasn’t played a part in their lives. They think themselves superior to other women.

I had a smidge of this - motherhood opened my eyes.

Yes, as a young working woman in the 80s. I remember being asked if I was planning a family or, after I had my first child, was I planning on having more children. Were men asked these questions at job interviews? I think everyone here knows the answer to that one.

That tweet really does demonstrate an incredibly high level of ignorance and lack of critical thinking. Not everyone is strong on reasoning, that's ok, but I do think inability in that area makes you unsuitable as a politician, given the amount of understanding of complex issues and decision making required in the role.

I think the most worrying thing about this tweet is that Kirsty Blackman is an elected MP, but doesn't understand the concept of discrimination.

I would guess that most discrimination is not direct, and that a large amount isn't even intentional.

If a work place canteen only services pork sausages for lunch, their intention may just be to take advantage of a special offer on pork sausages, but they are still discriminating against people who can't eat pork because of their religion.

When an organisation (let's call it 'parliament' or 'Kirsty Blackman's workplace'), doesn't allow for staff to go on maternity leave, it's probably because it hasn't occurred to them that maternity leave might be necessary, not because they hate women. However, they are still discriminating against women.

How can Kirsty Blackman have lived in the world, let alone been worked as an MP and not understand this?

I’ve been trying to figure out what she thinks is happening since last night.

My best guess is that she either thinks that:

Girls who later turn out to be trans identified and therefore boys/men are being subject to FGM, and this is worse than girls having FGM, because in addition to having their clitorises cut off or their labia sewn up, they’ve been misgendered and boys should not be subjected to FGM because they’re boys and that’s transphobic.

OR

Trans identified boys, so transgirls who have been mistaken for girls have been subject to attempted FGM, only for it to have been thwarted when there turns out to be no clitoris to cut off or vulva to sew shut, and this is bad because, as no FGM occurred, on account of there being no FG to M, the perpetrators aren’t being punished properly.

Additional punishments should be put in place for the trafficking element that doesn’t exist, because trafficking is wrong.

I’ve really tried to follow the logic here. There is none.

It's not a dissolvable category in the same way a socially constructed one is

Agree - and the pandemic showed this.

The situation changes, it impacts women and men differently, and we have to renegotiate. I think the most clear recent example is access to the MAP when Covid restrictions were introduced.

I’ve really tried to follow the logic here. There is none.

From the screenshots, KB introduced the completely inappropriate term 'trafficking' into the question of FGM herself.

@MissBarbary

I can't get my head around her thinking? Is she saying people trafficking girls for FGM don't know that they are female?

No idea- there's a few stabs at it on Twitter and I think the closest might be that a "perceived girl" is a child with a vulva who is "perceived" to be a girl but identifies as a boy. Ergo FGM affects (trans) boys and men too.

Its almost as though it would be good to have a trans inclusive sex category!

There was another thread about this yesterday, which has screenshots of responses by Nimco Ali and Hibo Wardere to KB's tweets.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4201960-Kirsty-Blackman-SNP-on-diversity

Its almost as though it would be good to have a trans inclusive sex category!

Yes! I'm not sure why she would think we would exclude a group of girls from legal protection?

I can't understand her original tweet here. She is saying discrimination happens on the basis of actual sex? It does, doesn't it? Which is why it's dangerous to obscure what 'actual sex' you are as that leads potentially to boards being balanced as they are 50% men and 50% transwomen.

Most people who are female are perceived as such so what is she saying? It's our responsibility to try and change how we look so we are perceived as male? That as we don't do that then it's all our fault and we should put up and shut up?

She's drawing a false dichotomy. 99.9% of the time "actual sex" is the same as "perceived sex". Women and girls are discriminated against because of their actual sex as correctly perceived by the discriminator.

What is this weird fashion for acting as though it's really difficult to distinguish between the sexes? It's a basic skill that most toddlers have mastered.

Most people who are female are perceived as such so what is she saying? It's our responsibility to try and change how we look so we are perceived as male? That as we don't do that then it's all our fault and we should put up and shut up?

Effectively, but I don't think she understands what she's saying herself.

So I should get a mastectomy to avoid discrimination? Because that's the minimum surgery required if I am not to be perceived as female .

Bloody hell.

I think the only explanation for this level of foolishness is that she's desperately trying to bury yesterday's tweet and doesn't know that when you're in a hole you should stop digging.

twitter.com/ripx4nutmeg/status/1375030663305367552