"Biological sex is a multidimensional variable with various components" - Thread 2

[MissScarletInTheBallroom]

The last thread ended with Tandora attempting to sidestep the question about what she would say if her daughter had been raped by a trans woman in a female only space and no longer believed that trans women should be in female only spaces as a consequence.

Her last reply was along the lines of, "The same thing I would say if she had been bullied by a green person at school and said she no longer wanted to go to school with green people."

@Tandora can we have a serious answer?

Well precisely. No one has to believe a man is in fact a woman. Glad you agree. Therefore it's perfectly reasonable for a woman to be uncomfortable with a man in a female-only changing room and ask them to leave.

You don't have to believe in the reality of a trans woman's experience. But you have to respect her dignity as a trans person and accommodate her. This means not confronting her at work about her body and identity and about where she is allowed to be, misgendering her, texting colleagues laughing at her, etc.

So you're suggesting that no one has to believe a man is really a woman, they just have to pretend they do to accommodate transwomen, regardless of how uncomfortable the person pretending is made to feel. We all have to participate in a grand game of make believe?
BTW, there are already laws regarding harassment that would potentially be relevant to 'laughing at' someone (depending on context). They apply to everyone. In the workplace individuals can be suspended - and then cleared if they've done nothing wrong.

If having something in common was irrelevant, parliament wouldn't have gone to the trouble of setting out specific circumstances in which you can discriminate against people by having spaces and services for exclusively reserved for people who have something in common.

Would they?

Their demands to be in spaces for members of the opposite sex are in direct conflict with the legal rights of members of the opposite sex to have spaces which do not include them.

You're predictable at least.

Treat them with dignity and respect, yes. Include them in spaces for members of the opposite sex, no.

So women are allowed to have sex based rights but if trans identifying males decide to trample all over those rights we aren't allowed to do or even say anything to try to enforce those rights?

What's the point of having them then?

Ah thanks!

like muslim women, disabled women, birthing mothers, pregnant women, older women, teenage women, breastfeeding women, menopausal women.

It’s not make believe and it’s not a game.

This is a very important nuance, thank you. Even if we did allow adults to stop puberty in young males (or females), we can't replace that puberty with a female puberty. So trans identifying men can never really know what it is like to be a woman, especially as so much of our experience is so bound up in what we experience due to our uniquely female biology. So TIM will always be a category of male, and should be treated that way, with third spaces if they wish.

why do you quote people as if they have said something when they havent mentioned it in their post?

This level of response is beneath you Tandora.

She said We all have to participate in a grand game of make believe?

I responded. It’s not make believe and it’s not a game.

That poster said you were suggesting "We all have to participate in a grand game of make believe?", hence the question mark.

There appear to be two options. Either we are required to actually believe that some male people are women or we have to pretend we do. Which is it?

The problem remains that words have meanings.

Some people want to change those meanings unilaterally.

For instance, some people think that being forced to say something that isn't true, is equivalent to a game of make believe.

That isn't (necessarily) saying that what a trans person experiences is a game. But forcing everyone else into a non consensual lie sounds pretty much like, well, a game at best .

Similarly, 'respect' seems to mean different things to different people and that's where we get into trouble here. I think it would be hard to find someone who believes truly that trans people aren't worthy of general respect, as humans. But it's when we try to define what that respect looks like, we hit problems.

Most people here do not agree that 'respect' = treating someone for all purposes, at all times, as their desired sex. It's a bit disingenuous to try to argue that if a person won't do [enter demand here] then that means they don't respect trans people.

It's a way to twist words and try to unfairly set up one view point as the baddies.

It's the same with people claiming that someone's actions made them feel unsafe.

That can't be a carte blanche to veto anything a person doesn't like, by crying 'unsafe'.

Edit to explain/sort out typos

Of course a trans woman can be reduced to "a man saying he is a woman". That is literally what a trans woman is

"You have to treat them with dignity and respect". Says who? We have laws in place to determine a basic level of how we treat each other, but outwith those, we don't actually have to treat anyone with respect. (It might be polite, or kind, but that's not what you have argued- you say we "have to").

I guess this brings us back to what you mean specifically by "treat with respect".

If you mean "obey" then no thank you. If you mean treat with the same basic politeness i treat everyone, then sure.

My mum always said "respect has to be earnt, not demanded." I think she had a point.

You are entitled to your own personal beliefs about trans people (however prejudiced they are) but you have to treat the person in a manner that is compatible with their human dignity and respect. That means, not confronting them with your opinions about their body and identity in public , or at work, addressing them as they have asked to be addressed, etc. these are basic principles of respect.

No I don't. The supreme court agrees that there are places they are not supposed to be. I don't know about "misgendering" but my gender critical beliefs (also known as scientific fact based on genotype and phenotype) are protected by law.

Well of course I have no control over how you choose to behave. all I can say to you is that your interpretation of the law and how it entitles you to behave are , imv, not compatible with the principles of a civilised , democratic society .

And that's your opinion, nothing more.

Yes we are sharing our opinions

Which law specifically are you quoting?

You keep saying that we 'have' to treat people with 'respect', but this just seems to be thinly disguised code for 'you have to treat people how i say'.

It is not illegal to 'disrespect' someone.

Similarly, you have no legal right to not be 'offended' or indeed 'triggered'.

This is why is really important to agree what words mean, so we can all understand what argument is being presented.

At the moment, you sound like you're moaning that people aren't kind enough.

Which is entirely your right to do. But nobody has to listen.