Don’t bother applying for a job if you think people can’t change sex, NHS trust tells health official

[MidCenturyClegs]

uk.news.yahoo.com/don-t-bother-applying-job-162233187.html

The wonderful Kate Grimes expressed interest in a non-exec position at the Tavi this year and was told to not waste her time as she holds gender critical beliefs. Peter Daly has been employed. Wow!

Trans people consciously want to be able to socially live as women, nothing about that wish itself is a "delusion". This is all just you trying to dictate how others should live their lives.

We're only trying to dictate to them how they should live their lives where it intersects with women's lives, because they're trying to dictate how women should live their lives.

If they're saying that any male should be able to compete in female sports, and any male should be able to be placed in a female prison, then that is dictating women's lives, and of course there's going to be pushback.

This is having a massive impact on women. Billions of women's actual lives and safety being harmed for millions of men who "consciously want to be able to socially live as women".

Their want does not trump women's needs.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

You are a fan of analogies, Lekisa. Should we tell anorexics they are morbidly obese? Or people who believe they hear voices that someone wants to kill them that they are correct?

If someone does hear voices, do you constantly yell at them "THERE ARE NO VOICES, YOU ARE DELUSIONAL!!"

If this would be your approach, you would absolutely NOT be qualified to treat patients experiencing these ailments

The key differences is that anorectic patients do not want to be fat, people haunted by auditory hallucinations do not want to experience such.

Whereas you are trying to deny people the things they want, because trans people's existence is uncomfortable to you.

Your motivations are entirely selfish.

'Dysphoria is amplified by you refusing to respect trans women as women. Simple as.'

I am pretty much happy to respect that the fact that groups of people have belief systems that I think are ridiculous (for me this is Jehovah's Witness, Church of Scientology). I have a good friend who is a JW and I've politely told him to bugger off when he once tried to recruit me. He's still a good friend.

So why do I have to believe that transwomen are women when they are clearly not, and never can or will be? The oddest part is that knowing this makes me responsible for someone's distress? I'm sure my JW pal was disappointed that I would not accept this belief, but he didn't lay any blame on me?

"You have no qualms about triggering trans women's dysphoria by calling them "men", and anyone who is like you is therefore unqualified."

Just as, if I were a psychologist or a mental health professional, I would not affirm someone's belief that they were actually Rasputin, or someone's belief that the voices from the TV were actually real; in no other realm of medicine do we actively encourage the patient's inner and personal untangible beliefs to the detriment of their long term health.

The phrase "being cruel to be kind" is actually true in this case.
We are selling people up the river. Promising an unachievable fantasy, and what is often a lifetime of surgical and hormonal complications. And at the end of it all they are still in the same body they started out in, with a few modifications.
Trans women are NOT women and telling them that they CAN be, is the ultimate gaslighting.
What is wrong with trying to treat the cause of the problem, rather than the symptom?
Why should a man's belief that he is a woman be treated any differently than a man's belief that he is Rasputin / Queen Victoria / Napoleon?
Or is that where healthcare is headed - affirm everything and everyone no matter what the long term implications are, for fear of "triggering" them.

If someone does hear voices, do you constantly yell at them "THERE ARE NO VOICES, YOU ARE DELUSIONAL!!"

Do you think people would do that at the Tavistock Clinic?

If someone said "I hear voices in my head and they are saying I need to take over your house or we will all be killed, you'll have to sleep on the street", do you think people would just stand by and say "oh of course, the voices are correct and you must have my house"?

Whereas you are trying to deny people the things they want

"I want doesn't get". We learn these things in primary school. Well, some of us.

@MidCenturyClegs
For the same reason you have to accept a gay married couple as a married couple, even if you're a homophobe who does not see gay marriage as legitimate on the basis of "biological reality" (e.g. "not a real marriage cause can't produce kids").

I doubt she is a homophobe. Denying that there is such a thing as exclusively same sex attraction, that's homophobia though.

@RVN123
“The phrase "being cruel to be kind" is actually true in this case.”

Not really. You're just putting your own ideological framework above the needs of trans patients.

You want trans people to not exist by converting them back into cis people who "accept their sex".

No different from homophobes who tried to "cure" homosexuality and make gay people "accept their place in the natural order".

For the same reason you have to accept a gay married couple as a married couple, even if you're a homophobe who does not see gay marriage as legitimate on the basis of "biological reality" (e.g. "not a real marriage cause can't produce kids").

And what does that "acceptance" involve, exactly?

Do we have to pretend they're the opposite sex? Do we have to believe them when they say they conceived a child naturally?

If they were making similar demands - if gay men were insisting on going to women's prisons or competing in women's sports - there would be similar resistance.

There is not similar resistance because there are not similar demands.

You want trans people to not exist by converting them back into cis people

Again, the "cis" framing has no meaning to anyone outside your bubble. Do they exist as trans or "cis"? How can they be "converted back into "cis" people, even within your ideology?

“Do we have to pretend they're the opposite sex?”

You should treat them as women and set aside your personal belief that "woman" must always refer to sex.

“Do we have to believe them when they say they conceived a child naturally?”

Literally no trans woman says this, you've never actually interacted with trans people before (not without barraging them with your ignorant presumptions anyhow), and it really shows.

You should treat them as women and set aside your personal belief that "woman" must always refer to sex.

No thank you.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

You want trans people to not exist by converting them back into cis people

Again, the "cis" framing has no meaning to anyone outside your bubble. Do they exist as trans or "cis"? How can they be "converted back into "cis" people, even within your ideology?

It's called forcing someone into the closet.

You want to force trans women to conform to the role of a "man", no matter how miserable or suicidal it makes them.

Same thing as forcing a gay man to live as a straight man.

Do you believe that gay and lesbian people have the right to be exclusively same sex attracted, Lekisa?

You should treat them as women and set aside your personal belief that "woman" must always refer to sex.

Why should we? Just because they want us to? And you call us selfish

You want to force trans women to conform to the role of a "man",

Do I? What is the "role of a man"?

Name calling and abuse is all you peeps have, when it comes down to it.

I'd also note that Lekisa has a whole bunch of hateful and wrong beliefs about us, but I wouldn't advocate discriminating against Lekisa because of them.

Lekisa is entitled to hold these hateful beliefs. But Lekisa is not entitled to enact those hateful beliefs to discriminate against us. (As we're having to establish via the Forstater case - due to the increased prevalance of blatant anti-woman hate from organisations.)

[quote Lekisa658]@MidCenturyClegs
For the same reason you have to accept a gay married couple as a married couple, even if you're a homophobe who does not see gay marriage as legitimate on the basis of "biological reality" (e.g. "not a real marriage cause can't produce kids").[/quote]
Terrible analogy.

If two women marry each other, tell me this, I would congratulate them and the conversation continues... They may even show me their rings!

If a male tells me he is a woman it is a lie.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

You want to force trans women to conform to the role of a "man",

Do I? What is the "role of a man"?

Self-explanatory. Calling them a "man" is forcing that role on them.

"Man" is not a role, any more than a "woman" is.

That's the entire point of our belief.

It's a statement of biology and nothing more. A man (male human) can play any role. But they can't be female, any more than they can be a dog.

There's a three-way fight here

(a) genderologists - men should be able to play the "woman" role, women should be able to play the "man" role
(b) right-wing - men have to play the "man" role, women have to play the "woman" role
(c) gender critical - there should not be any roles

If Lekisa wants to argue against group (b), then Lekisa should go and find some members of group (b). We're group (c) here.

Because this is a feminist forum, so we don't think women should have to play a "woman" role. The clue's in the name.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Name calling and abuse is all you peeps have, when it comes down to it.

Refusing to treat trans people as equals and let go of transphobic definitions is transphobic.

Just as refusing to treat gay people as equals and let go of homophobic definitions is homophobic.

But Lekisa is not entitled to enact those hateful beliefs to discriminate against us. (As we're having to establish via the Forstater case - due to the increased prevalance of blatant anti-woman hate from organisations.)

Lekisa disappeared for a while when I referenced Maya's appeal judgement, and I'm not sure which gay cake case Lekisa was referring to earlier because the recent one in the U.K. which went to the European court upheld freedom of belief and not having to say things you are ideologically opposed to.