So hurtful £2500 compensation will make her feel better though...:think:

Not saying I know how she feels but truthfully she doesn't look or sound feminine so mistakes will happen, she never even corrected the first person and the second denied doing it so is likely to have seen her or heard her for a split second and never thought much of it, is thst really worth compensation?

Thing is though, the people who say "She's clearly presenting as female" are the same ones who say "Well, why is it a female attribute to be in a dress? People can wear whatever irrespective of gender!" Yet, when one sex/gender is identifying as another they do so with cliche stereotypes.

This lady in the OP seems more like a crossdresser to me. Never in their life felt like they were in the wrong body but suddenly found they enjoyed wearing women's clothes, that doesn't necessarily translate to 'want to be a woman'.

Even at that, when watching drag, we all call the guys she and her when in drag, and he/him when out of drag.
We are all born naked and the rest is drag... as it goes.

Saying that someone fits into the conventional way we view gender and saying that conventional gender norms are harmful are two completely different things tbh

Not really. They're either harmful or they're how we identify gender, you can't have it both ways.

She clearly says she's never gone through life feeling as though she was in the wrong body and it was only dressing up in women's clothes that she said she found it "comfortable". Sounds more like a man feeling more comfortable wearing what is conventionally women's clothes rather than this "I like wearing dresses therefore I am now a woman" story being sold.

Either that or she explained her story terribly in the interview.

The £2500 compensation will probably make southern rail think a bit more about how seriously they take complains like her's, from the sounds of it when she flagged it up she was dismissed.

also no offence to old ladies but a few of them are a tad masculine.

The interview pretty short and wasn't really focused on her transition and her mental process before and throughout. She gave a really brief summary of when how her transition started. You really don't have enough info to make this assumption.

Well, I did say "unless she explained her story terribly".

BUT, she also explicitly says she's never had ANY form of thoughts about being a woman, wanting to be a woman or not feeling right in her body she was born with. So, contrary to your reply, I have exactly the right amount of information to REPEAT what she said. It's not an assumption, it's what she says.

A previous interview of hers backs up Marsh's summary:

So Marsh's summary is that this person felt physically more comfortable in dresses and that's why she chooses to wear them, is backed up by a statement that makes it abundantly clear that she is referring to feeling more comfortable as an individual / as an identity (and not the physical comfort of the softer fabric :facepalm: ) oh and also states that she has actually had her male genitals removed.

But yes all of this clearly would lead to the conclusion that this is just "just a bloke who felt more physically comfortable in female clothes so wears dresses".

Clear as day.

:umm2:


No what is in fact going on here is that people are OK with trans so long as the individual looks and sounds feminine and pretty, but "ugly trans" isn't allowed and those blokes should get their overalls back on. Amirite? Disgusting pervs, how DARE they not have dainty features :fist:.

What's going on here from my point of view is that this person is making this story up, and this should have never made the TV.

Whether or not the train story is true is completely irrelevant to everything I've said in the post you quoted, Alf.

Though I see no reason to think that it's "made up". The demand for compensation is a bit much and an apology should be enough but it being a complete fabrication is a stretch.

if YOU YOURSELF accidentally called this trans woman a "SIR" or "HE" and she went ballistic calling you prejudice and blah blah?? , what if you apologised and she still reported you and went on national TV moaning about it and demanding compensation? .

Sometimes genuine mistakes happen and people get misgendered, it's not the end of the world. If there was name calling & mocking then that's different . But to call a slip of the tongue a "hate crime" is just stupid :facepalm: . , Some people get confused as sometimes its cross dressers and so on .

And this person obviously just wants attention! as she didn't even correct the first person who called her "sir", and the second person again might of genuinely thought she was a man by hearing the voice .yet she insists on forming a complaint and going to court and getting compensation :bored: .

I don't get why money would help with that? Just comes across as greedy really.

She never rectified the first guy and the second claims he said something else entirely. I hope she loses her case.

Oh dear. Bitter are we?

If you'd like to take a stab at what I actually said and not this pathetic attempt at baiting I might respond.

Instead of putting words in people's mouths, offer your own opinion. Or do you remain incapable?