Amendment to Data Bill to revert all gender markers and out all trans people

[bluegoldflow]

Hoping this passes, it shouldn't be possible to change your sex (a biological impossibility) on legal documents. This would prevent men using this loop hole to erase their past identities and stop male crimes being recorded as female crimes.

people like you believe only in social constructs

You really would think the clue would be in the name, even if it’s just ‘radical feminist’…. 🤷

These people seem to think that it is 'sex' itself that is the construct, rather than the idea or concept of 'Gender' or 'Gender identity'. It is as if they have just imbibed Judith Butler and not questioned anything, or thought it through at all.

And another huge irony is that is is they that see things as a binary. You are either 'cis' ( someone who doesn't question anything about their 'gender') or 'trans' ( someone who does). They seem to think that a man dressing up as a woman is rejecting the binary, and is therefore a radical act, and vice versa with a woman presenting as a man. Failing to see that what they are doing is rejecting one set of social constructs only to embrace another set of constructs.

I always wonder about this. I am an adult human, following a female biological pathway - so woman.

I don’t identify as a man, so not a transman
and I don’t identify as a woman, so not a ciswoman
I don’t identify as having any, or no gender, so not agender

In my language I’m a woman, in your language I have no label - are you trying to eradicate women like me? I could scream genocide, but honestly that would be overblown tripe wouldn’t it?

@TotallyExhaustingRighteousFanatics why are you using the transphobic term cis?

It's rather like a Christian requiring all to identify themselves as Christians, Heathens or Sinners depending on the requirers internal standards. Basically to defer to their right to control and define the other person to their own inner world, and require their participation.

No thanks, I'm an atheist.

Oh dear, not too bright are you? Poor thing!

Cis - Woman (Biological Born)
Trans - Woman (Non Biological Born)

There is no such thing as a non biological born woman and you make yourself sound so silly by saying it. Yes, I am laughing at you.

Your sex isn't private information.

We don't need the word "cis" because there is only one type of woman. The female kind.

Trans women are a subcategory of men.

Is this Data Bill amendment likely to progress soon?

It's a little galling to be accused of a lack of education by someone who is a complete stranger to punctuation of any description.

As MALES, transwomen ARE a threat to women, @TruthInTransition . That is why we have male and female spaces. We know not all males are a threat to females, but we keep all males out - for safety, as well as dignity and privacy. Your entire post is typical selfish Male Pattern male privilege. Advocating for women necessitates excluding all males. That, includes transwomen. You are not a woman. You are not female. You are a male. This is about safety, dignity and truth for the female sex. And no, you don't get to colonise and water down our definition, as the oppressed sex class. You're a male. And you will never, ever, ever, ever qualify as a woman or female. You don't have the shared experience of growing from a girl into a woman. Of having periods. Of being catcalled. Of being sexualised. As a male, you DON'T have the shared LIVED EXPERIENCE of being female.

Lastly, it isn't 'outing' you as you out yourself. None of you pass. No matter how delusional you are. The fact you think this 'outs' you shows the delusion.

Recognizing trans women as women doesn’t erase or override anyone else’s identity.

Yes it does. Just as recognising Rachel Dolezal as an African American over-rides the actual lived experience and oppression that African Americans face.

It expands our understanding of womanhood to include the diverse ways it is lived and experienced. That is not an insult—it is progress.

Only a male could be so arrogant, so entitled, and so utterly offensive to say recognising males as women is 'progress'.

You don't get to colonise the word woman and enter our safe spaces for a fetish. You DON'T get to over-ride our language, our rights and our spaces. We say NO. You're a male. A man. A member of the oppressor sex class. Just as a fox does not get to identify as a hen and enter the hen house, you don't get to identify into our oppressed sex class when you have no actual lived experience as girl growing into a woman. Your posts reek of Male Privilege and Male Entitlement, and you, are the reason we are pushing back. We are telling you no. NO. That's it and that's final.

You clearly didn't see any coverage of it.

What about the challenges females are up against? You don't learn about those from reading these threads? Or you disregard them because you simply don't care about the oppressed sex class?

It's so convenient that there has been soooooo much coverage of the numerous vile, bigoted and hateful signs, as well as men urinating on feminist statues, in papers, in print, on camera and on tv, and you conveniently 'didn't see it'. I call bullshit. You must have walked around with your eyes glued shut.

Any MALE, poses a threat to women, @WaffleParty , no matter how brainwashed you are to think a fully intact male in a dress, like a wolf in sheeps clothing, suddenly becomes no threat to women, because he has re-labelled himself. How foolish of you. Especially considering there are actual transwomen in jail for RAPING women. Numerous transwomen in jail. So you're clearly ignorant of the facts.

It's a shame you can't support females and our needs to safety, privacy and dignity. But of course it's all about the Mens Rights movement.

Oh yes, those poor men getting a hard time from women defending their human rights! How very dare we speak up and defend our rights! How dare we! Poooooor men.

“Cis - Woman (Biological Born)”
“Trans - Woman (Non Biological Born)”
“Intersex Woman”

I am rather surprised that you pulled this offensive whopper out while claiming datun to be the one who is uneducated.

Your logic is flawed here. And it is offensively so.

The category you have termed ‘intersex woman’ relates to whom? Because all people with differences of sex development (they are not ‘intersex’) are either male or female people. They can be reliably categorised into male or female with testing using modern techniques. Which means they are in the ‘biological’ category.

Yet, you have offensively claimed with your grouping that they are not biologically ‘women’ or ‘men’.

But either way, your attempt to force the word woman to be a descriptor for any male person is incorrect and always was. Woman is a noun that was a clear category description for human female people. It never referred to male people. Attempts to forcibly change the meaning has not succeeded.

The noun for a male who holds the philosophical belief that they are in any way ‘female’ is the category label ‘transwoman’. This language fuckwittery in adding the space is only a political campaign and it hasn’t changed the meaning of the word in reality. Obviously, the space was meant to make people believe that a male person could be a woman. With ‘trans’ being falsely treated as an adjective with the same grouping as tall or bald. But the logic doesn’t work.

Any attempt to include the opposite sex in the word makes the word completely meaningless.

Your post was a lesson in how to make words meaningless.

How about you treat females with kindness and compassion? And defend OUR rights?

CIS

It's all sciencey and scientificalised and everything. That's us proved wrong and no mistake! I'm so glad, I always thought it meant Co-Op Insurance Services.

The other significant issue with ‘cis’ is that its very usage forcibly categorises someone into having a philosophical belief that they may or may not have. It is very problematic for those who do not have a ‘gender identity’.

In fact, to extrapolate it out : if ‘cis’ excludes those who do not ‘identify as having a gender aligned with the sex they were born’ then the trans gender community would be fucking huge.

Because it would include everyone who doesn’t believe in gender identities at all. Not through deliberately self-categorisation as ‘agender’ but simply through rejection of anything to do with that philosophical belief that is the foundation for gender identity and the theories that shape those identities.

Because, the only commonality with all those claiming a transgender identity is philosophical belief. Not a medical 'problem' according to transgender people and academics and medical professionals who are transgender and shaping public awareness. No scientific and robustly established material facts.

So only philosophical belief.

And I would be pleased to know just what other philosophical belief should be given the power to shape a whole populations language to the extent that we are seeing these language changes being demanded?

If someone who was religious called me a non-believer, I cannot dispute that. Because it reflects my reality. I don’t believe in their religion so in their religion centred language that is what I am. It could be considered neutral in that respect. It doesn’t change my belief.

As an example, labelling me ‘cis’ is not neutral. It falsely categorises my beliefs and is not a neutral act at all. Calling me ‘cis’ coercively forces me to believe in gender identity and the theories that are foundational to them.

That is not forgetting that in recent years it has also become clear that the term ‘cis woman’ has been used to incorporate male people with differences of sex development. Those who have masculinised using the testosterone their bodies produces from testes.

I believe that happened because of that other problematic phrase ‘assigned female at birth’ . It is problematic because it too was unsuccessfully repurposed in another false attempt to support a philosophical belief as being something more than just belief.

The term cis woman was said to mean ‘a person assigned female at birth who identified as the gender they were born’ or ‘identified as a woman’. It is quite interesting really as you see the not subtle political manoeuvring in these artificial word changes.

Either way, it was a scientific term that has been wrongly repurposed. It was never meant to describe human belief systems and it fails dismally in that role.

But do keep cracking on with attempting to bully others into agreeing with you. How is that working for you?

People are either male or female at birth that’s biology. The courts have backed biology so you remain male or female throughout your life. I do not acknowledge the term cis, I am female , I don’t need another label as female describes me.

I think these words by Helleofabore bear repeating:

As an example, labelling me ‘cis’ is not neutral. It falsely categorises my beliefs and is not a neutral act at all. Calling me ‘cis’ coercively forces me to believe in gender identity and the theories that are foundational to them.