the law as it stands on sex - part 3

I'm off out soon, but just came across this. Interesting, and useful that the Canadian census asked for sex at birth.

unherd.com/thepost/canada-census-reveals-how-many-people-are-trans/

SueDonim

Nicola Sturgeon today refused to define what a woman is because to do so could harm transgender people. So there we have it - women no longer exist in their own right. We are what men tell us we are.

Isn't Nicola Sturgeon unintentionally revealing that she knows transwomen aren't actually women? So willing to sell women down the river just for personal power. She claims there are 'no conflict of rights', which she knows is a barefaced lie or else discussion would be permitted. When you need to keep any subject shielded from public examination it demonstrates ill intent.

I’ve tried asking about women and men on here, with limited success. I was once told that it was a trick question and the poster ‘wasn’t falling for that one’.

How can it be difficult, and why can’t transpeople just be transpeople? Women are asked how transwomen being women diminishes us, but I want to know how being called a transwoman diminishes a transwoman.

I think it's time politicians were asked 'What is a man?'
Perhaps that would concentrate their minds more than the airy-fairy concept of 'woman'.

In this interview, Maya Forstater says that politicians are beginning to realise that they can't keep dodging this question and have to come up with an answer.

I hope NS comes to her senses before her government pushes through legislation about identifying as a something or other woman or man.

youtu.be/qVmT2yjT6DI

Maybe NS is also afraid of the sort of reaction JKR experienced. It takes a brave female to speak the truth.

Nicola Sturgeon today refused to define what a woman is because to do so could harm transgender people. So there we have it - women no longer exist in their own right. We are what men tell us we are.

FarNorth

And indeed it seems very likely, from the stats, that some 'trans' prisoners are not trans at all.
Either that or it is actually the case that trans identified males are more likely to commit sex crimes than other males are.

My view entirely, based on what I’ve read in the press , the figures available from prisons/cps and, anecdotally - my 40 years work experience

Yes, that's the trouble when something is based on a 'feeling'. It can't be proved one way or the other, and is massively open to abuse - which is, of course, where we came in.

And indeed it seems very likely, from the stats, that some 'trans' prisoners are not trans at all.
Either that or it is actually the case that trans identified males are more likely to commit sex crimes than other males are.

I'm not sure about transgender units. If they are conversions (ie existing cell blocks that have been repurposed) then fine; but any purpose-built, modern prison spaces should go on merit - eg to those at the end of sentences, or to prisoners who have shown good behaviour - not automatically to transpeople just for saying they are trans. The cells they vacate could then be allocated as trans wings.

I don't say this to suggest that trans prisoners should have harsher treatment, but because prisons have been starved of investment for a long time, and money going into building transgender units should not be depriving other prisoners of anything simply because they don't say they are trans - it should be a level playing field.

Trans or not, we are talking about people who have committed crimes, and their treatment should be based on the seriousness of those crimes and their behaviour in jail, not on their so-called 'gender id'.

If IW and those of his ilk were put in jail, he’d expect/demand to be put in a womens unit. Can you imagine the bullying that would go on . . . from him. The BB scenario amongst trapped females. Can you imagine the claims of bullying he would make against the female inmates. Bring on the transgender units ASAP.

What do people make of this?
Shock horror. Men and women ARE different.Who would have thought it?

It makes all this preffered pronoun business seem like a joke.
You can't argue with science.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-61258731

I think IW is nasty.

Calling male people 'women' and 'she' increases confusion so I don't do it.

FWIW, I will use people's preferred pronouns when politeness dictates, or for those who 'live as' the opposite sex (eg IW), or students who 'identify' as the opposite sex. I wouldn't stoop to making a point myself, IYKWIM?

However, I refuse to be bullied into declaring my own 'preferred pronoun', as I think they should be assumed to follow sex (which is immutable) unless someone specifically asks otherwise. I don't use them if I know that someone is flipping back and forth, as I don't think it is my responsibility to remember someone else's preferences. I would be unhappy to be asked to call a bearded transwoman who has made no attempt to look female 'she', as people like that do seem to be 'making a point', and expecting others to pander to them - I've never been asked to do that, though.

Debbie Hayton states that he is a man, and a transwoman.
Calling male people 'women' and 'she' increases confusion so I don't do it.

IW, of course, is being nasty.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trans-woman-debbie-hayton-faces-ban-for-transphobia-96tfkl5gc

On Twitter, India is deliberately misgendering Debbie Hayton. He hates Debbie because Debbie says she (I'll use preferred pronouns for Debbie) remains male, accepts she's a transwoman, knows sex is immutable. India says Debbie is a man, despite Debbie having had full reassignment surgery, and refers to he and him. Such a raving hypocrite! India can believe whatever he wants but he can't make me believe it.

Sorry - I should learn to type faster. The above was in reply to FN's post about IW believing she is a woman.

Yes, I think that's what's happened. When India went into the BB house there is no doubt she felt that she was a woman, and was going to have no-one say otherwise. For context, Amanda Barrie, a gay woman who was then in her 80s, had accidentally 'misgendered' India in a conversation earlier. It was clearly something that must happen a lot to someone like India, but it was definitely and blatantly used as a way of gaining attention, an attempt at getting the sympathy of the public, and to 'make a point'. It didn't work, as IW was the first to be voted out. That this wasn't as a result of public transphobia is obvious, as the winner was Courtney Act, a 'gender-fluid' Australian drag queen, who was intelligent, aware, and sensitive to others throughout, unlike India, who was an unmitigated pain in the arse.

I think that was the most interesting BB ever - there was a real mix of characters, and issues of 'gender', feminism and sexual politics were seen and discussed from all sides. It's hard to believe that it was only 2018 - the days when these issues weren't loaded with threats and accusations of phobia and so on seem like they happened in another era.

Wow, Farnorth that video sums it up in a nut(!)shell!

At gym this am, there’s a class which has a timetable for male and mixed classes. I asked why and was told that the male class was more rigorous, but some men couldn’t cope with that, so rather than have a lower ability male class, they’ve called it mixed. So far, it’s only men who use it. I wonder where TW would want to go?

India probably has been passing as a woman, for several years, and had convinced himself that the fiction was true.
And now he's become quite unreasonable in insisting that the rest of us should believe it too.

Mollygo

^I wonder if it's also ok for biological women to dial 999, if we feel unsafe sharing female only places?^

I have this image of people frantically dialling 999 to complain about each other.
We’re back to the place where, if a TW makes it obvious that they’re a male then they shouldn’t be in female spaces. I recall being told by the absent few that TW had been among us, unnoticed for years.
Maybe that’s because those TW wished to remain unnoticed, not to foist themselves on females just to prove they can.

I definitely think this is happening, and I know that some of the older, less militant, TW are very uncomfortable about it.

The 'making a point' thing was discussed earlier in the thread wrt India Willoughby, who said that even though there was a gender-neutral loo available she would deliberately use the women's one 'just to make a point'.

Here is Matt Walsh making a lot of sense on this subject.

video.fgla2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t42.1790-2/279696415_581701882958980_2902697247057581625_n.mp4?_nc_cat=102&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=985c63&efg=eyJybHIiOjM3MiwicmxhIjo1MTIsInZlbmNvZGVfdGFnIjoic3ZlX3NkIn0%3D&_nc_ohc=XW9Hsa9QhgoAX_ZisR0&_nc_ht=video.fgla2-1.fna&oh=00_AT8j97zsxOSBZyUn6ShmvpqjpPb108txAb6shiLW2xrjBw&oe=626FCDD4

There is an offence of 'wasting police time'. I'm pretty sure it would be invoked if women were calling 999 about this, so TW should be treated likewise.

Of course. We can basically write the script now.

An obvious male will go into an inappropriate space, that should be exempt from this free for all, wind up any biological women/girls, who don't wish to share the space with him, and then be on to the police, bleating that he's "worried".

It'll then be an article and "victim face", complete with piteous sobbing, all over a sympathetic tabloid....?