[ethanjames]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

A diagnosis of gender dysphoria actually makes you the opposite sex?

a diagnosis of gender dysphoria from a doctor shows that you mentally the opposite sex and not just a "man wearing a dress" if that makes sense?

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by ethanjames

a diagnosis of gender dysphoria from a doctor shows that you mentally the opposite sex and not just a "man wearing a dress" if that makes sense?

I don't believe in brain sex tbh, but I understand where you are coming from.

I totally disagree that this makes them actually the opposite sex though. Sex is a real thing. Its physical, not mental. And we segregate certain areas of life by sex, not by feelings.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by ethanjames

a diagnosis of gender dysphoria from a doctor shows that you mentally the opposite sex and not just a "man wearing a dress" if that makes sense?

But you would still be physically a man and you think that you should be allowed go and work with women who have been abused by men and in a female only refuge? So therefore abused women's right to feel safe in a women only environment comes second to a man who mentally thinks he's a woman's right to work in that environment?

[bots]

The point is the safety and well being of the victims. If the victims are vulnerable then they should not need to be fearful of going to a safe place that could then be populated by people that traumatised them in the first place.

Take sex slaves as an example, a gang could just infiltrate a safe place easily by some of them saying they identify as being a woman. That's just not good enough.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

The point is the safety and well being of the victims. If the victims are vulnerable then they should not need to be fearful of going to a safe place that could then be populated by people that traumatised them in the first place.

Take sex slaves as an example, a gang could just infiltrate a safe place easily by some of them saying they identify as being a woman. That's just not good enough.

No it isn't at all, but we're not allowed point any of this out because we're intolerant and transphobic if we do

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

No it isn't at all, but we're not allowed point any of this out because we're intolerant and transphobic if we do

Because we are women and our rights come in second to a man who wants to be a woman. It's almost comical.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Because we are women and our rights come in second to a man who wants to be a woman. It's almost comical.

It would be hilarious if it weren't so serious

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yeah. I cannot believe this is even being considered. And yes, it feels very odd to be on Piers side..so very strange. Its just nonsensical really. Male and female are no longer actual things but are simply a feeling for one to 'self declare' and then the rest of the world has to buy into the 'brain sex/gender identity/soul' religion else be named bigoted. Its quite insulting tbh.

Since when has the right of some males to feel validated in their 'womanhood' been more important than the actual women who need to use these services as they are escaping (on the whole) abusive males. That its even being considered, seriously, is beyond belief.

I like that he brought up prisons (thats already happened and conitnues to happen) and sport also. Very important areas.

And for gods sake, I am so sick of the 'but lesbians' argument when it comes to male people. Its so ****ing homophobic. Lesbians are not men. Male lesbians do not exist, contrary to what the transcult would have you believe.

And of course transwomen require different services to actual women. 'I am a womaaaan' again from India

'You are impying transgender women are a threat'. Nah. Knowing that male people are a threat (on the whole, not all men and such) to female ones is not wrong. And this is about any man being able to declare himself a woman.

Give them enough rope I say - their demands get more ridiculous by the day and people are seeing that. The tide will turn against them soon enough if they don’t stop all the self-indulgent, controlling behaviour.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by ethanjames

a diagnosis of gender dysphoria from a doctor shows that you mentally the opposite sex and not just a "man wearing a dress" if that makes sense?

A doctor can diagnose you with fibromyalgia by touching specific points on your back and asking you if there is pain. That's so you can seek treatment and be approved by your insurance...

They can't do scans for chronic pain (yet) and they can't scan brains to see the gender mismatch, so they can only go based on how you feel... many doctors would still consider both to be psych disorders, and they may say very differently to make you and themselves feel better, but that's what effectively they are treating you for... I would know, because I was under the fibro category for many years and had to live with those contradictions. They are doing the moral and ethical thing to take the patient seriously and to still help them to seek care and hopefully feel better.


Also who here is surprised that India would be upset that she doesn't have access to women's shelters? Victimhood is like a career achievement for her, so of course she would need to up the ante... it's like she is seeking the fame of being the poster child of as many causes by the end of 2018 as she can possibly obtain.

[Maru]

Moving post

[GiRTh]

Piers Morgan is such a prick. Master of the 'What if/What about' scenarios. Why is he talking about athletes?

I agree more with him than India however if post op then the refuge cant really deny them..

[Vicky.]

Had to post this. Is in relation to the video obviously.

Is it normal to look at a webpage full of women who have been killed by men, and feel sorry for men? I know that would not be my reaction

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Had to post this. Is in relation to the video obviously.

Is it normal to look at a webpage full of women who have been killed by men, and feel sorry for men? I know that would not be my reaction

What a disaster as a spokesperson she is. If I hear her sigh and shout "I'm a REAL WOMAN" again, I will throw something at my telly. She has no interest in women at all.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Had to post this. Is in relation to the video obviously.

Is it normal to look at a webpage full of women who have been killed by men, and feel sorry for men? I know that would not be my reaction

India Willoughby. Wants to be a woman, thinks like a man. Absolutely no clue whatsoever about women's issues and more interested in nail polish than the value of women's lives.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by jaxie

India Willoughby. Wants to be a woman, thinks like a man. Absolutely no clue whatsoever about women's issues and more interested in nail polish than the value of women's lives.

This is why I wonder about having been born with "a womans brain" in cases like India, to me her idea of what a woman is, is very much how a man would describe what a woman is, wears heels and dresses, like's nail polish and shopping etc

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

This is why I wonder about having been born with "a womans brain" in cases like India, to me her idea of what a woman is, is very much how a man would describe what a woman is, wears heels and dresses, like's nail polish and shopping etc

Thats all India has to go on though tbf She can hardly grow up as an actual woman or anything..or ever actually know how a woman 'feels', so all she has is a mans idea of what a woman should be.

[Alf]

For all we know, Harvey Weinstein types could be transitioning into women to get closer to them.

[Jamie89]

I think trans women who are the victims of abuse should be allowed refuge, we should aim to protect all people in genuine need. And I think that's currently what happens. The problems seem to be with the potential new laws of self-identification and the process being made easier? I don't know a lot about them and need to look more into it tbh, but from what I've heard, I think there's a danger here to both women and transwomen. It seems like these laws could blur the lines in terms of public perception between transwomen and predatory men who claim to be trans, and in turn is likely to cause an even bigger divide between women and trans women as well as make certain situations more difficult for both, and so I'm wondering who these laws actually aim to benefit? Surely the current way of being able to asses a persons history of transexualism to determine genuine cases makes the most sense (and that would no longer factor into things with the new proposed way of self-id as far as I understand it but I could be wrong I'm not 100% sure on this), and with genuine cases of transwomen being allowed refuge I don't believe there is a danger to women in that.

Originally Posted by Niamh.

This is why I wonder about having been born with "a womans brain" in cases like India, to me her idea of what a woman is, is very much how a man would describe what a woman is, wears heels and dresses, like's nail polish and shopping etc

To be fair most transpeople undergo SRS and dress a certain way, not because they feel it's necessary do that to be a woman, but because they feel it's necessary to do that in order to be treated as a woman by the rest of society, and often it's something almost subconscious/ingrained, from a young age and being aware of the different social constructs surrounding gender and seeing boys/girls men/women being treated differently and in their minds these facades can become a fixation almost, in that they are things that can be changed and in doing so they will be more likely to be treated as the sex that they feel their biology should be. I mean you're not really wrong about it being what someone else would describe as what a woman looks like, but it's much deeper than just thinking 'a girl wears heels so if I wear heels I'll be a girl', as they already believe they are the opposite gender, they just want to be recognised by others as such, and in their minds they're not going to be unless they do those things, so I think is understandable.

[Marches]

I kinda understand both sides but ehhh saying that I could imagine dealing with gender related issues for all ur life, you finally transition to be a woman and you’re not even allowed in a female refugee camp. I’d say just go to a male one but male abuse is trivialised and so many of them are getting refused funding now how fun

[Vicky.]

The proposed changes in law benefit neither transwomen nor women. They benefit only fetishists (who would not have a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, and as such, cannot get a GRC) and predatory males who would use this to...be predatory, basically. I have no idea why such changes are even being considered.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Marches

I kinda understand both sides but ehhh saying that I could imagine dealing with gender related issues for all ur life, you finally transition to be a woman and you’re not even allowed in a female refugee camp. I’d say just go to a male one but male abuse is trivialised and so many of them are getting refused funding now how fun

Its not this. Transwomen who have transitioned already can use womens refuges. This issue is about letting 'selfID' rule all, basically. So no transition required, just anyone who says they are a woman in their head. No way that could be abused, eh..

Also its not even about letting people use the refuges. Its about letting them work in them. Letting 'self identified' women (ie any male) work in a refuge for abused women is asking for disaster, IMO. I really really hope this consultation favours womens (and transwomens) right to be safe.Of course it should, given the nature of womens aid. But I am not sure given how crazy places have gone with this rubbish.

[Marches]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Its not this. Transwomen who have transitioned already can use womens refuges. This issue is about letting 'selfID' rule all, basically. So no transition required, just anyone who says they are a woman in their head. No way that could be abused, eh..

Also its not even about letting people use the refuges. Its about letting them work in them. Letting 'self identified' women (ie any male) work in a refuge for abused women is asking for disaster, IMO. I really really hope this consultation favours womens (and transwomens) right to be safe.Of course it should, given the nature of womens aid. But I am not sure given how crazy places have gone with this rubbish.

O I thought she said she wanted it to be trans women who could prove their transition. Well that was at the start then she rambled lmao. I agree it can be exploited for bad things but so can like everything really, tho self Id is the wrong way to go about society in some aspects

[Brillopad]

Sick of hearing about this stupid woman and her perceived rights. Her rights have no rights to trample over the rights of others. Attention-seeking bore.

[Jamie89]

Originally Posted by Marches

I kinda understand both sides but ehhh saying that I could imagine dealing with gender related issues for all ur life, you finally transition to be a woman and you’re not even allowed in a female refugee camp. I’d say just go to a male one but male abuse is trivialised and so many of them are getting refused funding now how fun

There's also the reason that transwomen are likely to have been abused by men and so wouldn't want to be around men for the same reason women wouldn't want to be. This is why I worry so much about the potential divisiveness of these new laws between women and transwomen as the way it currently is seems to protect both.

(As a side note I didn't know they were being refused funding, don't know the details of that but it's quite shocking to hear)

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Jamie89

There's also the reason that transwomen are likely to have been abused by men and so wouldn't want to be around men for the same reason women wouldn't want to be. This is why I worry so much about the potential divisiveness of these new laws between women and transwomen as the way it currently is seems to protect both.

(As a side note I didn't know they were being refused funding, don't know the details of that but it's quite shocking to hear)

The transsexual people I know IRL are all against selfID (all 3 of them ) and on mumsnet there are many transexual posters (I know people can pretend to be anything, but they seem genuine, have discussed their surgeries and such too which would be pretty hard to fake) who are against it, as they feel 'self ID' makes a huge joke of a serious condition that they personally have. Which I agree with too.

Theres a thread on there thats just been picked up by the daily mail, about this kind of thing too

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...s-slammed.html

Its a VERY balanced article for the mail, I am surprised. Its actually accurate.

Basically allowing 'self-ID' and telling businesses to 'educate' anyone who thinks male people are male. Also very interesting double standards in the guidance, as they accept men with penises are women, however the same guidance says to tell transmen that they have to cover up their tits. Surely if men who say they are women can get their dicks out in the womens changing room, then women who say they are men should be treat like men too? And as such, should be allowed to swim in trunks? And the swimmers must be 'educated' that some men have tits, get over it! (actually, some real men have tits bigger than mine )

This is a post from a trans poster on the thread on there..I hope she doesn't mind me nicking it

Then you must have lived a lovely life. There are many, many reasons why that would be unacceptable to some women. I simply don't believe you can't imagine what any of those would be.

I would not enter any women's changing rooms before my op. I still wouldn't enter some of the ones described above (small, no cubicles) because I'm a considerate human being. I choose multisex changing rooms with many private cubicles.

Having been the victim of sexual assault myself I am also well aware of the panic and terror involved with being in proximity to a strange man, it matters not what his intentions are (because sadly for many it has been demonstrated that a fair many have very bad intentions)

No woman should be forced to share a changing room with a man (i.e. anyone with a penis is a man = it's ****ing insane that that needs clarification these days)

These aren't transsexuals that are being 'allowed' in (I think many are thinking of it like that in their head)

It is the AGP's, the sexual predators, the cross dressers who will be aroused by being in the women's changing rooms.

They will be the ones getting access to vulnerable women through this policy. And they are the ONLY ones this policy (and all the other ****ing madness) will benefit)

From
https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_be...msgid=75417453
Should jump direct to post. If anyone wants to check. Their other posts in there are interesting too. I have not fnished the thread yet but there are other trans posters who I imagine will say the same thing, as in other trans threads they are hugely against self ID.


None of this benefits transsexual people, its not about transsexual people. Its framed as being about transsexual people..and this is why it gets support, but its not. At all.