Posting upton’s old photos and name on twitter

[Biggadyboom]

Look I’ve been in these discussions since before this forum existed. You don’t need to break it down for me. I peaked in 2018.

But the endless sharing of upton’s name accompanied by photos and horrible comments about him and his wife is not nice. It is totally is transphobia. It’s horrible.

I could kind of understand the point of it, if it was just the name being shared.

But equally the court has ruled that Upton has a right to privacy. I thought it was all about respecting court’s rulings?

but the sharing of private photos (presumably grabbed from social media) and especially their wedding photo with insults to both of them and speculation about their marriage is awful and will not help their be a resolution to this debate. It polarises it even more and is transphobia.

fair enough, don’t let Upton change the rules of the country and workplace based on personal beliefs . But that doesn’t involve posting personal information and photos , insults and horrible speculation.

or are we just going low now?

Being 'mean' isn't going to legitimise an argument further if anything it's going to turn people who are on the fence off.
To clarify, my tone was ironic as GC are not being mean or unkind when they ask all men (including the TW kind) to respect women’s (the biological kind) spaces/sports/short list’s etc.
No, but that's not all some of them do. They often accompany their concerns with a side of hateful abuse.
Such as?
Calling trans people 'mentally ill' & are all predatory sex fetishists.
Some quite obviously are. Are we supposed to just ignore that, while they also issue death/rape threats to us?
As are all people including women. The point is not to use inflammatory generalisations that implicate entire groups.
It is not inflammatory to correctly identify a pattern, and to name it...and to understand its application.

The problem is attributing the pattern to the entire group. As in 'all gender criticals are transphobic' when they some are clearly not.

No one has said that they are all predatory sex fetishists.

Please explain how we can keep all the predatory sex fetishists out of women's toilets though.

no one is doing that however

OK but assuming that the whole group present no threat to women is also a problem. You get that, right?

"Do you think that it is a safeguarding issue that the senior doctor in the ED wanted PS arrested for failing to believe/see a male doctor (who would expect staff to bring him to a woman who asked for same sex care) as a female?"

yes!

If you peaked and hold the belief that a medical doctor employed by the NHS lacks a rudimentary understanding of human biology
a) what are you doing about it?
b) what would you suggest others do about it?

a) Writing to MPs, public bodies, talking to friends/family.
b) ditto

So if people had been posting the same stuff about someone who was not trans would you be coming here scolding us for that too? It’s not transphobia, it’s justified outrage at a man bullying women into undressing in front of him. Would you be ok if a non trans male did the same thing? If not, why not?

I don't think it's justified outrage. It's justified outrage to point out he is a man, regardless of how he wants to indentitfy. It's justified outrage to point out that NHS Fife and the Scottish Government have given him permission to act in the way he has and failed SP. But I think namecalling and posting private photos (regardless of assumptions how they got in the public domain) is abuse, and that some of the comments I saw in particular under his wedding photo crossed a line into transphobia. Because calling a trans woman a "pervert" is rooted in long-standing anti-trans stereotypes and bigotry and calling their partner an "enabler" implies that supporting a trans person is wrong or harmful, which further stigmatizes both the individual and those who care about them.

I can see the point of posting his old name, Streisand effect and all, even though personally I'm not doing it.

But sticking to the main example I've mentioned here, I think posting a wedding photo and commenting underneath "perv and enabler" is transphobic.

I again apologise for my assumption that there would be a crossover between mumsnet and twitter, that obviously has offended and I wish I'd phrased it differently. Reflecting I think it's probably because I generally keep up with issues in this debate through a mixture of twitter and this forum and so have them linked in my head. My profile on twitter is my real identity (use it for work) and I work in the arts, so if I tried to have a discussion on there I would never work again. So I suppose I decided to come here instead. Genuinely didn't think that it's offend, you can see that by my second post. Pretty naive and guilty of seeing things thru my own lens, but I do apologise.

To a certain extent this thread did give me what I was looking for which was a discussion on why people think it's ok to post photos and nasty comments because the majority have disagreed with me and say they don't think it's transphobic and they would have done the same because of "justified outrage" at Upton.

I don't agree with that.

I still don't believe he is a woman and that the state should be allowing him to use single sex spaces. or persecuting, suspending or smearing people who object. I don't think the laws of our country should be changed around his beliefs. But I do think he and his wife shouldn't be subject to abuse that centres around his trans identity, which I think pervert and enabler is. I think that crosses a line. and other comments I posted earlier in the thread.

But most of you disagree. Which is fine, happy to leave it there. I've learnt a fair bit about attitudes and appreciate everyone's time.

Thanks all.

Women consent to be in the workplace and would have the right to walk out of a situation where they felt unsafe if they were by themselves with someone or a group making them concerned for their safety. Workplaces have safeguarding responsibilities too.

We spent an entire thread pointing this out.

Safeguarding policies understand that some women will be sex offenders. As I and others have pointed out on various threads now, safeguarding decisions don’t mean that people of the sams sex are excluded from the publicly and freely accessible single sex spaces intended for use by people of that sex. This is where physical advantage is assessed. Male people, even after hormone treatment, retain those male physical advantages, even height and leverage of a male skeleton is significant enough to be able to cause more harm to a woman than the average woman.

Therefore safeguarding for these spaces work on the premise that it is more risk to allow any male person over the age of 8 into the spaces.

Yes. Some women will be sex offenders that we use the space with. We know. We understand that safeguarding is about minimising risk not providing 100% risk free environments.

The reason to exclude all male people is because including any male over the age of 8, is considered too high a risk of harm to female people.

And harm is not limited to physical attack.

As is the case of Upton in NHS Fife.

Shedmistress · Today 08:46

Howseitgoin · Today 08:36
Howseitgoin · Today 08:27
Being 'mean' isn't going to legitimise an argument further if anything it's going to turn people who are on the fence off.
To clarify, my tone was ironic as GC are not being mean or unkind when they ask all men (including the TW kind) to respect women’s (the biological kind) spaces/sports/short list’s etc.
No, but that's not all some of them do. They often accompany their concerns with a side of hateful abuse.
Such as?
Calling trans people 'mentally ill' & are all predatory sex fetishists.
A - if you genuinely think you are the wrong sex, then that is by definition a mental health issue
B - if you don't genuinely think you are the wrong sex but are pretending to be, especially just to access female sex spaces, then you are more than likely to be either mentally ill [see A] or a predator or a sex fetishist.
Neither are hateful abuse, but statements of understanding and explanation.

You are confusing sex & gender. Gender as in the 'behavioural, psychological & cultural associations to a particular sex' is not a 'mental illness' but a very real phenomena. Trans people don't deny their biological reality rather they acknowledge behavioural, psychological & cultural associations to the sex they were not born.

Let Them Speak is wonderful to watch. The XTwitter stuff was a response to the nonsense about 'deadnaming' attention-seeking look-at-meee Upton (he's quite a spectacle, a classic dog that caught the car) - next I'm looking forward to reading more about the massive own goal of arresting glinner - even RTÉ, a totally trans-captured media organisation, is having to admit it happened.

Some transwomen absolutely do. India Willoughby thinks he has changed sex and has a cervix.

“The point is not to use inflammatory generalisations that implicate entire groups.”

You continue to not understand the principles of safeguarding. Safeguarding for the purposes of publicly accessible single sex spaces does indeed work by generalisations. Hence why they are segregated by sex, which is an act of legitimate discrimination.

Calling him a pervert is calling a spade a spade.

Any man who demands women undress in front of him in a women’s changing room is a sexual predator, a pervert, an abuser.

Many members of this group's lives have been significantly impacted by men and male violence. The group has members that have been left broken, the course of their lives irrevocably changed by men who ignore boundaries.

BU is a man who choses to ignore boundaries.

It is unsurprising that, in the responses to the OP's original statements, there are some posters whose positions are at the extreme of what the OP considers acceptable.

I may be wrong but I can see no posts that encourage violence towards trans people. If there are any then report them - unlike many social media platforms, they will be promptly be taken down. All I see are robust statements by women who have simply had enough of trans ideology

For some balance, remember that BU and Fife instructed their barrister to

-- search through SP's husband's social media posts to look for dirt
-- out SP's daughter as a lesbian
-- spin a mother trying to understand her daughter coming out as homophobia
-- try to drive a homophobic wedge between a mother and her daughter
-- trawl through 7 years worth of a private message group to pick out the single occurrence of racist shock jokes
-- seek out work colleagues that disliked SP and then elevate their here say to 'evidence'
... etc.

Who knows what other lines of enquiry BU's team pursued that were not used in court? Other family members social media? The daughter's girlfriend's social media? Maybe have a trawl through the social media posts from her friends at work?

BU and Fife instructed their team to fight dirty. This was not a passive action. They did not ask their team to 'fight the best case' only to discover in court that it had gone-off-the-rails-a-bit.

They instructed their legal team to fight dirty

SP, her family, her friends and her work colleagues have been dragged through the court of public opinion repeatedly. Take a quick look on reddit if you want to see the sort of vitriol directed at SP

It is an important part of this case to understand that BU is a man - the images clearly show this. Images of BU are not stolen they are in the public domain.

If a poster decides to add puerile or offensive comments to the images then that is between them and their conscience.

You: Not all male bodied people are deluded predatory violent sex pests

He said that he would ignore his training around consent when a woman who clearly said she only wanted same sex care provision.

Very good reminder.

No one has said that they are all predatory sex fetishists.

Oh yes they have.

Please explain how we can keep all the predatory sex fetishists out of women's toilets though.

You can never do that because the problem was never about 'permission' it's about being alone & vulnerable. Laws will only go so far regarding deterrence as we know for all sexual violent crimes.

For some balance, remember that BU and Fife instructed their barrister to

-- search through SP's husband's social media posts to look for dirt
-- out SP's daughter as a lesbian
-- spin a mother trying to understand her daughter coming out as homophobia
-- try to drive a homophobic wedge between a mother and her daughter
-- trawl through 7 years worth of a private message group to pick out the single occurrence of racist shock jokes
-- seek out work colleagues that disliked SP and then elevate their here say to 'evidence'
.. etc.

Good point. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

@Howseitgoin they acknowledge behavioural, psychological & cultural associations

aka they are committed to enforcing arbitrary culturally-specific sex-role stereotypes. Seems mentally unwell to me.

But if all men are banned from female only spaces we can assume that a man in a female only space is not there for a good reason and have him removed. We aren't obliged to "be kind" and give him the benefit of the doubt.

Please explain how we can do this if we have to include people like Katie Dolatowski in female only spaces.

It is you who is making the negative generalisation here. Nobody has said " all". I, for one, have correctly identified a particular sub-set......and quite a large one at that.

Where do you think all the transvestites have gone? Men like Eddie Izzard... who now refers to himself as a woman called Suzie, and flagrantly barges into women's facilities.

Some transwomen absolutely do. India Willoughby thinks he has changed sex and has a cervix.

Depending on the context she is correct. There's 'sex' as in born with reproductive characteristics that distinguish males from females & there's 'sex' as in a person possessing characteristics that distinguish males from females.

You've got to remember the word sex specifically denotes distinguishing features between the sexes. See 1(b)

www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sex

Possessing a fake vagina made of penile tissue certainly distinguishes you from female people.

This is all pure academia now...if we can grace it with that label.

The Supreme Court has established that female single sex spaces and services are for female people only. By this time next year that should have sunk in and heel draggers will have 'got with the game'......and most organisations will have moved to providing facilities that can be used by those with trans identities, without encroaching on protected female only spaces,

DeanElderberry · Today 09:11

** "they acknowledge behavioural, psychological & cultural associations
aka they are committed to enforcing arbitrary culturally-specific sex-role stereotypes. Seems mentally unwell to me."

As in suggesting all men are violent ergo they shouldn't have access to women's spaces?

Works both ways.

Stereotypes do point to on average facts in both cases as they do elsewhere.

Possessing a fake vagina made of penile tissue certainly distinguishes you from female people.

You could say the same about 'fake' breasts.

That's just total nonsense though.

A man with a surgically constructed 'vagina' is just a man with a surgically constructed hole in his body.

Calling trans people 'mentally ill' & are all predatory sex fetishists.

its more of an either-or, frankly.