How Long Before We Look Back In Amazement

[TheShellBeach]

..................over the fact that we had to go through all the transwankery. That we had to fight and fight over such an issue. That some men were allowed to do this to us. That even a lot of women could not see the harm this was causing women and girls.

I mean, surely there will come a time when we can look back and say "I remember that - it was awful - thank goodness people saw through it eventually." How long will it be?

Yeah righto!

Poster ignores that the NHS trust is named, delivers more shaming along the lines of ‘moral panic that does not impact on me so I will shame you all for discussing it’ or ‘you should be discussing my topic of interest’ and then announces they will leave the thread.

Plus ca change

If not this poster, someone with a very similar personal story has done this before on threads.

Either way, for readers this thread might be helpful.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4696270-nhs-ayrshire-arran-policy-supporting-trans-service-users

Plus regarding female prison estates, it is not just female prisoners at risk. It is female prison guards having to monitor or search male prisoners who identify into the prison. While not in the UK, a female prison worker in Toronto has shown the risk if these policies are not written properly before publishing. Her case for PTSD from having to watch a male transitioner on suicide watch for a shift has just been ruled in her favour. She had to watch this male go to the toilet and had to observe their genitalia. And she had to watch while they masturbated knowing that she was watching.

www.canlii.org/en/on/onwsiat/doc/2022/2022onwsiat1544/2022onwsiat1544.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQALVHJhbnNnZW5kZXIAAAAAAQ&resultIndex=5

To some posters the number of women and children who are acceptable collateral is n+1. As long as it isn’t ‘their’ loved ones.

There is always something more important than pushing back on laws and regulating policies while they are being created.

And there is always an opportunity to shame people discussing the rights of women and children on a feminism board.

It's been quite a while since a really good "post the evidence, - EVIDENCE - there's no evidence - EVIDENCE - see, it's all made up, I'm leaving now" flounce.

It is hilarious to see it necessary.

Imagine a male bodied person exploiting a care situation to abuse a vulnerable female #thethingthatneverhappenshashappenedagain
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/care-home-worker-put-private-25714622

This is why same-sex care matters.

The following case study represents a scenario experienced in a health setting. Concerns expressed by NHS staff specifically relate to inpatient accommodation for transgender patients, typically where accommodation is segregated by sex (female and male only wards). These concerns tend to fall into three areas – identifying the most appropriate accommodation for a transgender person, the potential hostility of other male or female patients towards the transgender patient and the fear that sharing a ward with a transgender person will in cause upset to nontransgender patients. Often, where inpatient care is planned, ward managers opt to accommodate transgender patients in single-occupancy rooms where available to avoid potential difficulties. Adopting this position as a default in itself could be discriminatory. Patient placement needs to be done with the full engagement of the patient involved and on a case by case basis.

Inpatient Scenario:

A nurse is summoned to a patient’s bed in a female ward. The patient appears to be agitated. When asked what’s concerning her, the woman explains she didn’t expect to be sharing the ward with a man and points to the bed opposite. She states it’s inappropriate to have ‘him’ in the ward with the other women. She tells the nurse she can’t relax and wants ‘him’ removed from the ward. If this doesn’t happen she’ll make a formal complaint – the hospital has a duty of care to look after her and they’re not taking this seriously by putting her in this situation. The nurse listens and tells the woman she’ll see what she can do. She says that she understands having a Trans person on the ward will be upsetting to other women and leaves to talk with a senior colleague about the matter.

The response to the patient’s concern isn’t appropriate [bold mine] and may breach legislative protection afforded to Trans people. Someone’s Trans status should not be disclosed to a third party without the express permission of the Trans person and the assumption that others in the ward will feel uncomfortable is unfounded. In this instance there is no need to either disclose or seek permission to disclose gender identity. The nurse should work to allay the patient’s concerns – it would be appropriate to re-iterate that the ward is indeed female only and that there are no men present. [bold mine]

Duty of care extends to protect all patients from harassment and should the patient continue to make demands about the removal of the other patient and be vocal in the ward it would be appropriate to remind her of this. The nurse should check with the other patient and sensitively ask if everything is ok. If the other patient has heard any of the discussions it is imperative that she is given every assurance that the matter will be resolved. If the patient is upset and there is spare capacity, it would be appropriate to offer her the option to move to a single room, though this must be with the interests of the patient in mind rather than conflict avoidance.

Balancing the rights of patients is challenging. The concern expressed by the complainant should not be dismissed and accordingly if there is spare capacity of single rooms it may be prudent to make this offer to the complainant. The complainant should be given all appropriate support to access NHSGGC’s complaints process if they feel their concerns have not been listened to properly.

So that is from an NHS document for Glasgow and Greater Clyde CCG. It tells nurses to lie and gaslight patients.

Anyone want to tell me that it's "hearsay" now?

That's nice for you. I like to think about people it has had an impact on, like the women I know who have detransitioned after being on hormones as young women or worse who have had life changing surgery and those who are suffering because of that or the women self excluding from rape crisis centers (I know 2 personally but I can think about the ones I don't know too, there will be more) and the women in prisons who are being forced to go along with this to the detriment of their own beliefs, dignity and safety. Or I think about the young women who have lost out in sports or don't see the point in pursuing them now. I think about the teenagers I know who are afraid to voice their opinions on this issue (I know quite a few who feel like this) and how shocking it is that we are allowing an environment where they cannot discuss an issue which is relevant to society and affects them directly. I think about women who can't say they don't think people can change sex because they fear losing their jobs. I think about women in court who have to call their rapist 'she' ...

Still as long as it has no impact on you, that's good.

I'm really not a fan of the 'i'm alright Jack' school of thought. I do hope the day comes when we can look back on this and discuss it thoughtfully and when women have reestablished their rights firmly. It reminds me of how tenuous women's rights are and that is frightening. On a more shallow note I hate being part of a period in history people will look back on and say 'were they all insane?!' and will probably be blamed on feminists.

I didn't even mention the lesbians who can't even have their own spaces or dating apps, same for gay men. So many people ARE affected. I don't know how people can ignore it and say 'it doesn't affect me so I don't care.'

And this is also quite hilarious.

FWR is quite well known to pull together threads of evidence, even down to awesome posters creating transcripts so evidence can be further analysed.

I rarely see ‘vague bullshit’, except from people who either subscribe to n+1 women and children are acceptable collateral- ‘it doesn’t really happen’, ‘I don’t know anyone who this impacts’ or are deeply entrenched in their own political aims that have negative impacts on the protections for women and children, or are simply indulging in their own prejudices about those posting on FWR.

Whatever it is, comments like “full of vague bull shit stories” are pretty standard for posters who actually have no supporter argument to make and they understand they don’t have an argument that would withstand the slightest scrutiny so resort to these tactics.

Thanks for yet another live demonstration. It always helps readers to see the tactics live and free.

I really should read on. Sorry thewayround I had a little rant at your expense. It does affect people I know in real time though so perhaps it seems more urgent.

Yes, and the sheer disbelief, by anyone who didn’t live through it, that it could have happened.

Oh - right the first time I see lol.

I think this is realistic if a little depressing. Hopefully it will culminate in the vision in your last sentence. Mind you this "Woman" may never return to a single sex group." makes me want to weep.

Oh I do give a damn and happy to help in any direction you point me with any issue, so it would be great to have some suggestions from someone who knows what would be helpful aside from this issue and I would appreciate your suggestions. Ivy sincerely.

As a general rule the posters on FWR, far from making unverified claims, are able to back up every point with vast amounts of evidence. That's probably why the majority of posters knew what Abccde was referring to despite her (understandable) typo.

I'm sure that one day, as the OP says, we will look back on this time in amazement, but I wish we could put it on fast forward because I'm tired of waiting. Every time I think we're getting somewhere we experience a reversal.

For me, the most astonishing thing about this is not the outright misogyny and homophobia, horrifying as it is. It's the utter, barefaced insanity of it: actually changing, in law, a key demographic indicator to render it meaningless.

Suppose the Scottish parliament decided that everyone could legally change their birth certificate to reflect the age they identify with. So if you were born in 1970, you could change your birth certificate to say you were born in 1997. From that point onward, any demographic data collected about people born in 1997 would be unreliable: you'd have a spike in 25-year olds who had been through the menopause, married and divorced and owned their own home. That data would be meaningless. It doesn't really matter if the lawmakers thought that only half a dozen people would make the change - there's a principle at stake. And in any case, how can you possibly know in advance how many people will take it up?

I find it absolutely mindboggling that lawmakers are prepared to do this. From now on, in Scotland at any rate, data about the numbers of girls or boys taking A-level physics, or going to university, or participating in sport; or the numbers of women compared to men having heart attacks and surviving them, or the life expectancy of the different sexes; or comparative information about how much men and women earn - in other words all the data that government relies on to make policy - are all rendered meaningless. It's gobsmacking.

Here is a snapshot of some recent highly publicised incidents from the USA. If we cannot learn from them and ensure the policies are in place here to protect female prisoners, why do some posters believe it will not happen here?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11458335/Male-female-Trans-inmates-drive-rising-numbers-rapes-abuse-womens-prisons.html

Once you start reading women’s accounts of their treatment in regards to males in prison, why is anyone so determined to prevent discussion about ensuring this is one thing that they don’t have to deal with.

The attempt to compartmentalise actions when the issues of prioritising gender over sex are broad and far reaching is pretty transparent distraction.

This post has it so well explained ! It's a shit storm of massive proportion to everyone.

If men can identify and be labelled as women who is the comparator for an equal pay audit?

My mother was incarcerated, so take it as read I cared about it before. In fact, males of any gender identity in women's prisons is what made me stop going along with gender ideology to fit in. I think there shouldn't even be male guards in prison because of what she told me.

My mother wouldn't see the GP if a woman wasn't available. She wouldn't use public toilets if a male cleaner was there, and would wait until he was done. Years later, she was still distressed by the practice of "slopping out". And you expect me to say that because prisons are already awful, it's okay to make them worse for women.

No. I won't. Male prisoners should not go in women's prisons, and I do NOT care how small you think the issue is.

Honestly, I am up to HERE with people who want to use the low priority of prison welfare as a justification for violating human rights more.

Kindly find the centre of the nearest sun and fuck off into it.

I'll crowdfund the rocket.

Yes neighbourhood. I also have had close family members in jail, one of those was a young female and I find posts directing women’s attention away from an over riding issue manipulative too.

However, we also shouldn’t have to disclose our family history in justification of it.

Also 'cisgender' is a nonsense

Yes, indeed. If there is one word which does my head in more than any other at the moment it is this.

I am not CIS. I was born a woman and that is what I am.

Even if you believe you’re not personally affected, whenever you repeat the lie that male people are female, you’re contributing to an environment which actively harms women. Lies are told, accurate data remains uncollected, women suffer.

👋