# Ban on transgender people serving in the military



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/07/26/us/politics/trump-transgender-military.html

Sometimes it feels like things are going backwards. What does everyone think of this?


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

It's Trump. It's no surprise. It's an ill-thought-out kneejerk populist idea that he only cares about because Obama allowed trans soldiers. If Obama hadn't, Trumpy wouldn't have given it a second thought.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

I heard about this briefly on the radio this afternoon.

Is it Donald Trump who has decreed that no transgender people will serve in the military?

If so, I feel it is ridiculous and truly a backward step.


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

Sweety said:


> I heard about this briefly on the radio this afternoon.
> 
> Is it Donald Trump who has decreed that no transgender people will serve in the military?
> 
> If so, I feel it is ridiculous and truly a backward step.


Yes it is Trump.


----------



## cbcdesign (Jul 3, 2014)

Its Trump so its politically motivated (Obama introduced it ergo Trump hates the idea) and not therefore much of a surprise.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

I'm not sure why being transgender would negatively affect someone's ability in a military role.

But this is the guy who thinks it's acceptable to grab women by bits of their anatomy he has no rights to be grabbing so doesn't surprise me unfortunately.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Absolutely disgraceful to read this.

Do the LGBT community in the US have support/action groups like we do in the UK eg Stonewall? Surely they could protest/gather support and take action about this discrimination as it is transgender-phobia after all?

Trump just gets worse.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

TBH, very little of what Trump has announced on Twitter has come to pass. This most likely won't either. It has to get through Congress and what not so it's unlikely to happen.


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

stockwellcat said:


> Absolutely disgraceful to read this.
> 
> Do the LGBT community in the US have support/action groups like we do in the UK eg Stonewall? Surely they could protest/gather support and take action about this discrimination as it is transgender-phobia after all?
> 
> Trump just gets worse.


Oh yes there are support/action groups in the US. I imagine they will kick up a big stink about this. I seriously don't see a good reason for this measure to be passed.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Nothing about Trump surprises, the man is a complete idiot. What ever Obama has done he whats to change it.


----------



## bearcub (Jul 19, 2011)

Trump is a law unto himself however what I find most depressing is that there are regular people in the US who will believe he is speaking for them no matter how ridiculous the cause.


----------



## dorrit (Sep 13, 2011)

Trump / English slang for a fart . I think that sums him up.


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

dorrit said:


> Trump / English slang for a fart . I think that sums him up.


:Hilarious


----------



## Jobeth (May 23, 2010)

His reasons are ridiculous (medical costs and disruption) as they needed to be 'stable' in their chosen gender for 18 months before joining. I can't imagine anything more disruptive than losing the estimated 2500 to 7000 already serving if he follows through. If it was just about cost he could have said that they wouldn't pay any related medical bills for those currently serving. Thankfully it is not the policy of the UK services.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

:Wideyed

Trump

And



Jobeth said:


> if he follows through.


All in the same thread.:Hilarious


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

This is the man who bought his way out of the draft during the Vietnam war. Maybe he just doesn't want to be shown up.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

All very contradictory and strange.


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

The LGBT movement will struggle under Trump ....he's in office because of the religious right and will pander to their pressure to keep popularity. To state that a certain group of people can not serve in the military in any capacity is massively discriminatory. And to release the news on Twitter says it all 

J


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Jamesgoeswalkies said:


> And to release the news on Twitter says it all


It does, rather.


----------



## Lexiedhb (Jun 9, 2011)

He's a huge cockwomble


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

Zaros said:


> :Wideyed
> 
> Trump
> 
> ...


:Hilarious that really made me chuckle!


----------



## Boxerluver30 (Jun 14, 2017)

Absolutely ridiculous

Feels like he's just targeting one group after another, wonder who will be next 

He is an absolute cretin (I could say worse) 

Hopefully Congress will stop this, thank God they are around or else who knows what he'd do


----------



## sesmo (Mar 6, 2016)

To be honest, it's not an issue I'd ever thought of before. I believed (maybe naively) that if you were capable of doing the job, then you could do the job.

It's a very retrograde step in human rights. You have to wonder what the motive is behind picking on a small subset of people and what they hope it will achieve. Is it paving the way for more outrageous pronouncements?

I hope congress stop this and anything else he comes up with. It's all soundbites with him. Anything that will fit into 140 characters or less. It's no way to run a country.

ETA: I'll bet a reasonable amount of money that if there was a draft for a war that transgender people wouldn't be excluded.


----------



## lorilu (Sep 6, 2009)

sesmo said:


> You have to wonder what the motive is behind picking on a small subset of people


It's what bullies do. In the school playground they pick on the little kid, or the weird kid. In the Whitehouse he kicks whatever he perceives as weak or vulnerable or different from him. These 4 years can't end soon enough for me. It's a flipping nightmare. Thankfully he has discovered that he can't just say things and make them true, that the checks and balances are in place for people just like him. but it's a nightmare, all the same. The man is deranged.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

I still can't believe that people in the US were daft enough to believe this man and vote for him, I do wonder about the state for mind of some of them, who still think he can't do wrong.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

It's absolutely disgusting and is a combination of discrimination and his weird fixation on Obama and undoing everything he ever touched.

I hope people speak up, take to the streets, as if he goes after the trans community, he'll come after you next (unless you are an older very white man!).

It is not about money, they spend over $41 million every year on viagra, so maybe he should tackle that first? But of course he won't, that's the drug of his people.


----------



## sesmo (Mar 6, 2016)

emmaviolet said:


> It's absolutely disgusting and is a combination of discrimination and his weird fixation on Obama and undoing everything he ever touched.
> 
> I hope people speak up, take to the streets, as if he goes after the trans community, he'll come after you next (unless you are an older very white man!).
> 
> It is not about money, they spend over $41 million every year on viagra, so maybe he should tackle that first? But of course he won't, that's the drug of his people.


I read this morning that transgender medical costs had cost the US military $45 million- over 10 years. Seems like a drop in the ocean really compared to Viagra.


----------



## Westie Mum (Feb 5, 2015)

Thankful not to be american .... 

Honestly, i thought he would have been mysteriously assassinated long before now !


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

Removing my reply to Sidevalve as SusieRainbow has dealt with the derail. Thank you!


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

@sidevalve I have deleted your post as that sort of attitude is unncessary & shows a lack of understanding about what others go through.

You already have plenty of rights, you should consider yourself very lucky, unlike my transgender friends.

Apologies to all the others who replied with more empathy, but who quoted the post, but I've deleted them all so it's no longer visible.

This forum is for everyone & we won't tolerate bigotry.


----------



## Biffo (Mar 14, 2016)

I believe there were always transgender and gay people in the military, but they had to hide it before. The USA had a "don't ask don't tell" policy regarding being gay. If people sign up to serve, then they all deserve the same protections and rights regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity or genitals.

Saying that though, I feel it is disingenuous of the MOD to use the case of a transgender woman who was a serving Guards soldier before transitioning, and remained in the unit after, as being the first women to serve on the front line in the British Military.

It seems to me they have taken this person and used them, I think her name is Chloe, to suit their own needs, they can say now that Britain has full equality and women are doing all jobs that men are, but they haven't actually done anything to achieve this.


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

I missed the post that got removed and am kind of curious to know what it said, although having heard and read plenty of hateful comments about LGBT people in the past I could probably guess the gist of it.


----------



## Guest (Jul 27, 2017)

simplysardonic said:


> @sidevalve I have deleted your post as that sort of attitude is unncessary & shows a lack of understanding about what others go through.
> 
> You already have plenty of rights, you should consider yourself very lucky, unlike my transgender friends.
> 
> ...


This is exactly the sort of moderation this forum needs and needs more of. Absolutely no reason for that sort of post. I almost wish you would have left it so others could see what sort of person we're dealing with, but I totally understand why you removed it. 
Thanks


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Sairy said:


> I missed the post that got removed and am kind of curious to know what it said, although having heard and read plenty of hateful comments about LGBT people in the past I could probably guess the gist of it.


Although not actually openly saying 'I hate LGBT people' it insinuated that minorities (with emphasis on LGBT) get special treatment & the 'silent majority' don't have any rights, overlooking the fact that the silent majority have always had the rights that minorities are fighting to get.

On a side note, it's Norwich Pride on Saturday!!!!


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

Are you going?


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

simplysardonic said:


> Although not actually openly saying 'I hate LGBT people' it insinuated that minorities (with emphasis on LGBT) get special treatment & the 'silent majority' don't have any rights, overlooking the fact that the silent majority have always had the rights that minorities are fighting to get.
> 
> On a side note, it's Norwich Pride on Saturday!!!!


Sigh. Yes heard it all before. Usually the same sort of people that say things like "it's not fair, they get gay pride but we don't get straight pride!" My answer is usually "every day is straight pride!"


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

I said something similar to someone who said 'There's a Black Police Officers Association, why isn't there a White Police Officers Association'. I pointed out there is. It's called the Police Force.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Mirandashell said:


> Are you going?


Me?

Yes, hubby & myself (& possibly Bob with his Pride flag, if the weather forecast says it's not going to get too hot) during the daytime/parade, oldest daughter is meeting up with her friends for the evening festivities as she has to work the day shift.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

Cool. The Birmingham Pride is usually August Bank Holiday, I think. I used to go but since I got CFS it's difficult to spend a long time on my feet. I've had to give up the St Patrick's Day Parade as well.

ETA: Tell a lie, it's in May! Picked the wrong BH!


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Mirandashell said:


> Cool. The Birmingham Pride is usually August Bank Holiday, I think. I used to go but since I got CFS it's difficult to spend a long time on my feet. I've had to give up the St Patrick's Day Parade as well.


I am off to Manchester Pride August Bank holiday 25th to 28th. I go every year (got my tickets)

Done Lancaster Pride and London Pride as well this year.

Hope you have a good time at Norwich Pride @simplysardonic?


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

stockwellcat said:


> I am off to Manchester Pride August Bank holiday 25th to 28th. I go every year (got my tickets)
> 
> Done Lancaster Pride and London Pride as well this year.
> 
> Hope you have a good time at Norwich Pride @simplysardonic?


Thankyou, & enjoy Manchester 

We had a blast last year, my daughter was going to attend the Toronto one (she was staying with the grandparents in Canada) but my dad had already booked them all on a cross continental train journey so they were in BC that day.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Mirandashell said:


> Cool. The Birmingham Pride is usually August Bank Holiday, I think. I used to go but since I got CFS it's difficult to spend a long time on my feet. I've had to give up the St Patrick's Day Parade as well.
> 
> ETA: Tell a lie, it's in May! Picked the wrong BH!


Sorry to hear that, chronic illnesses are horrible & soul destroying


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

Most of the family still go so I get to see the pictures.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Oh Lordie. An easy target if the antis believe the military are paying for 'none essential' medical treatment for trans health. As one of my best friends in the 80s was a transgender woman who darent leave her flat, (she's passed now) I quite well understand why Gay Pride exists.  It's not just Trump wanting to ban transgender from the military, it's the prejudice this kind of attitude encourages.


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

Elles said:


> Oh Lordie. An easy target if the antis believe the military are paying for 'none essential' medical treatment for trans health. As one of my best friends in the 80s was a transgender woman who darent leave her flat, (she's passed now) I quite well understand why Gay Pride exists.  *It's not just Trump wanting to ban transgender from the military, it's the prejudice this kind of attitude encourages. *


Exactly this! And the message that it sends to transgender people is that they are somehow less worthy than other people. It basically gives bigots the green light to go ahead with their hateful comments.


----------



## Royoyo (Feb 21, 2013)

I was reading a facebook post about this earlier and the comments below it were disgusting. Saying that transgender people shouldn't be allowed to serve in the military anyway because they are all mentally ill.......... many people had liked it too!!


----------



## Guest (Jul 27, 2017)

Royoyo said:


> I was reading a facebook post about this earlier and the comments below it were disgusting. Saying that transgender people shouldn't be allowed to serve in the military anyway because they are all mentally ill.......... many people had liked it too!!


Ugh, I saw the same sort of thing on a post too. I can't decide if it breaks my heart or enrages me, or both at the same time.

Sadly homosexuality was considered a mental illness not too long ago as well.

And none of it makes sense anyway, as even if being transgender were a mental illness - which it's not - shouldn't that be a reason for compassion rather than hate and discrimination? 
The US military has an atrocious track record when it comes to the necessary assistance for veterans and currently serving members struggling with mental health. The suicide rate in the military is shocking, PTSD is rampant and goes untreated... It's awful.

But coming from Trump, nothing really surprises me anymore. This is the same man who mocked a disabled reporter in public and his supporters cheered. He claimed John McCain wasn't a war hero because he was captured. He has zero compassion or decency. And people STILL defend and support him. I despair.


----------



## catz4m8z (Aug 27, 2008)

Every time you think Trump has hit the bottom he just proves how low he can truly go. nm all the evidence proving transgender people cause no disruption to troops and barely cost anything in healthcare....he is just a bigoted, ignorant fool.
Poor Americans must still be in shock. Its like everytime he opens his mouth or tweets what comes out is so unbelievable.....:Bored


----------



## lorilu (Sep 6, 2009)

Sairy said:


> Exactly this! And the message that it sends to transgender people is that they are somehow less worthy than other people.* It basically gives bigots the green light to go ahead with their hateful comments.*


And there lies the one of the fundamental problems with having Donald Trump as POTUS.

I don't use twitter and pay very little attention to politics. But it strikes me that all these little tweets(?) he makes about things he says he is going to do (which of course he cannot, legally) is typical troll behavior. He makes a statement that he knows will get everyone all riled up. The frightening thing is, he isn't a troll in a pet forum trying to get people all worked up, he's president of the United States. It's really...sick..behavior. And it's a very terrible thing for my country.


----------



## DogLover1981 (Mar 28, 2009)

From what I've read congress has little appetite for banning transgender people from the military and people in congress were taken off guard by his comments. Trump loves to be the center of attention. Doesn't matter to him whether it's negative or positive attention. You could define that as being a troll, I suppose.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

They were saying on The Last Leg that it was a 'throw a dead cat on the table' move by Trumpy to distract attention from stuff he doesn't want the media looking at.


----------



## DogLover1981 (Mar 28, 2009)

On a side note, I think politics brings out the worst in people. I remember a while back a place in my state for helping refugees was vandalized. Too, I had not seen bumper stickers expressing dislike or hatred of Mexicans prior to this election.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

I think the hate has always been there but Trumpy has validated it and made people more comfortable in being open about it.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Sairy said:


> https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/07/26/us/politics/trump-transgender-military.html
> 
> Sometimes it feels like things are going backwards. What does everyone think of this?


Is it not something to do with them not wanting to use either male or female toilets and that they want their own ? if so then I agree, the line has to be drawn somewhere


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

DT said:


> Is it not something to do with them not wanting to use either male or female toilets and that they want their own ? if so then I agree, the line has to be drawn somewhere


I've not heard anything about them asking for separate toilets.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Sairy said:


> I've not heard anything about them asking for separate toilets.


Tbh sairy. I haven't really been paying attention the only reason I mentioned that is because I was actually speaking to a friend yesterday who said they were opening their salon once a month too transgenders, I mention this and they told me that was a reason to be honest I don't know if it's fake news or not and I don't really care either xxx no disrespect meant to you there I add


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

DT said:


> Tbh sairy. I haven't really been paying attention the only reason I mention that is because I was actually speaking to a friend yesterday who said they were opening a salon once the month two transgenders


Sorry I'm not quite following what you are saying. As far as I'm aware Trump's reasoning is to do with medical costs and nothing to do with toilets. I haven't heard anything about transgender people pushing for their own toilets, but I may have missed that.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Sairy said:


> Sorry I'm not quite following what you are saying. As far as I'm aware Trump's reasoning is to do with medical costs and nothing to do with toilets. I haven't heard anything about transgender people pushing for their own toilets, but I may have missed that.


Tbh sairy haven't really been paying any attention, , honestly doesn't bother me in the slightest and,it certainly wont affect me, I appreciate I was perhaps wrong to write that as it is second hand information just something I was told by a friend whom-due to gender, I thought would be reliable with the facts perhaps they are not.


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

Mirandashell said:


> They were saying on The Last Leg that it was a 'throw a dead cat on the table' move by Trumpy to distract attention from stuff he doesn't want the media looking at.


Happens over there and happens over here too (the distraction). It's a good analogy.


----------



## Guest (Jul 29, 2017)

It's not about the toilets. It was never about the toilets. 

The toilet thing was ignorant, bigoted idiots worrying about transgender women using women's bathrooms. As in they (the bigoted ignorant idiots) didn't want to allow transgender women to use women's bathrooms. Because you know, transgender women are all just pedophiles and rapists in disguise 

Which is ironic because we were supposed to be terrified of these transgender ninja fighters who could jump stalls and attack women, but now we don't want those same ninja warriors in the military. Strange....

No, it was never about the bathrooms, just like it was never about the water fountains.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

ouesi said:


> It's not about the toilets. It was never about the toilets.
> 
> The toilet thing was ignorant, bigoted idiots worrying about transgender women using women's bathrooms. As in they (the bigoted ignorant idiots) didn't want to allow transgender women to use women's bathrooms. Because you know, transgender women are all just pedophiles and rapists in disguise
> 
> ...


Dunno! Hence the. .??? Mark!


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

DT said:


> Tbh sairy. I haven't really been paying attention the only reason I mentioned that is because I was actually speaking to a *friend yesterday who said they were opening their salon once a month too transgenders*, I mention this and they told me that was a reason to be honest I don't know if it's fake news or not and I don't really care either xxx no disrespect meant to you there I add


lol, does your 'friend' ban them the rest of the time?

Cos that would be illegal.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Nonnie said:


> lol, does your 'friend' ban them the rest of the time?
> 
> Cos that would be illegal.


Think its a new venture. Guess its the circle they move it. It could be open to them now, I dont know. Just something they want to emphasize on, or concentrate on whatever


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Nonnie said:


> lol, does your 'friend' ban them the rest of the time?
> 
> Cos that would be illegal.


Oh, forgot to mention their salon is not in the UK


----------



## Guest (Jul 29, 2017)

Trying to figure out how a salon would need to adapt in any way to cater to a transgender clientele. I'm assuming we're talking hair salon. Hair is hair isn't it?


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

ouesi said:


> Trying to figure out how a salon would need to adapt in any way to cater to a transgender clientele. I'm assuming we're talking hair salon. Hair is hair isn't it?


Maybe the salon is in a country that is not tolerant! I perhaps should not of mentioned it as it's not relevant in this instance- and at the moment it's just a pipe dream!


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Hair, nails, waxing, bleaching, plucking? It might make good business sense.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Ouch, I can see how someone who doesn't know me might take that. I meant salons offer many services, some of them quite embarrassing and it could make good business sense to offer a trans day where people might feel more comfortable.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Elles said:


> Ouch, I can see how someone who doesn't know me might take that. I meant salons offer many services, some of them quite embarrassing and it could make good business sense to offer a trans day where people might feel more comfortable.


Well at the gym I used to use they have men only and women only sessions! seems some are suggesting that's illegal


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

DT said:


> Well at the gym I used to use they have men only and women only sessions! seems some are suggesting that's illegal


I think the suggestion of it being illegal was more a response to when you said that your friend was thinking of opening up their salon once a month to transgender people, implying that the rest of the time they would not be welcomed.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Well I'm sorry, but I think that's ridiculous. Not everyone is confident. I don't see anything wrong in having separate and mixed sessions for people and giving them the choice. It's like everyone wants everyone proud of their bodies, walking around naked and any polite or modest behaviour is in some way sexist.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Sairy said:


> I think the suggestion of it being illegal was more a response to when you said that your friend was thinking of opening up their salon once a month to transgender people, implying that the rest of the time they would not be welcomed.


Oh on here, in response to a post. I thought DT meant having a specific day at a salon not a ban the rest of the month. I probably should have read the thread properly. :Shy


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Sairy said:


> I think the suggestion of it being illegal was more a response to when you said that your friend was thinking of opening up their salon once a month to transgender people, implying that the rest of the time they would not be welcomed.


 I dont know the facts but suspect it could possibly be very hush hush. I also suspect he already does a fair few. Not really something we talk about.


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

Elles said:


> Well I'm sorry, but I think that's ridiculous. Not everyone is confident. I don't see anything wrong in having separate and mixed sessions for people and giving them the choice. It's like everyone wants everyone proud of their bodies, walking around naked and any polite or modest behaviour is in some way sexist.


Sorry which post is this a response to? I'm getting a little confused


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Sairy said:


> Sorry which post is this a response to? I'm getting a little confused


The gym one.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

Elles said:


> Well I'm sorry, but I think that's ridiculous. Not everyone is confident. I don't see anything wrong in having separate and mixed sessions for people and giving them the choice. It's like everyone wants everyone proud of their bodies, walking around naked and any polite or modest behaviour is in some way sexist.


But then in a salon,most people aren't comfortable doing that anyway, I never walk around naked in a public place, and I'm not a transgender person. I don't think you're expected to at all, so no need to segregate anybody.

I've had my eyebrows threaded after a man many times, why should a transgender person be any different?


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Elles said:


> Oh on here, in response to a post. I thought DT meant having a specific day at a salon not a ban the rest of the month. I probably should have read the thread properly. :Shy


That correct but typical petforumers like to cross their Ts and dot their I s no wonder this place is going downhill !


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

emmaviolet said:


> But then in a salon,most people aren't comfortable doing that anyway, I never walk around naked in a public place, and I'm not a transgender person. I don't think you're expected to at all, so no need to segregate anybody.
> 
> I've had my eyebrows threaded after a man many times, why should a transgender person be any different?


Transgender people are also at different stages of transition and confidence. We have women's salons and men's barbers, although a salon that caters only for LGBT or just transgender in most places would be undersubscribed, I don't see a problem with discretely offering a trans friendly day personally.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Elles said:


> Transgender people are also at different stages of transition and confidence. We have women's salons and men's barbers, although a salon that caters only for LGBT or just transgender in most places would be undersubscribed, I don't see a problem with discretely offering a trans friendly day personally.


I think it's a brilliant idea. My partner is 69 he will go into a woman's hair dressers now only because I've told him that women are quite capable of cutting his hair but he seldom goes he prefers to go to a barber's it's down to preference


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

ouesi said:


> It's not about the toilets. It was never about the toilets.
> 
> The toilet thing was ignorant, bigoted idiots worrying about transgender women using women's bathrooms. As in they (the bigoted ignorant idiots) didn't want to allow transgender women to use women's bathrooms. Because you know, transgender women are all just pedophiles and rapists in disguise
> 
> ...


So true. It's all just same s##t, different era.

The toilets goes all the way back to race segregation too, black people could not use the same toilet as white people.

I never understand what people fear. In most places now you have one toilet which is unisex, and nobody ever cares or complains about that. All coffee shops and big chain stores are unisex, so what's the problem with someone who is now a woman using women's toilets?


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Transgender are also men. People usually think of trans women when they talk about trans.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

emmaviolet said:


> So true. It's all just same s##t, different era.
> 
> The toilets goes all the way back to race segregation too, black people could not use the same toilet as white people.
> 
> I never understand what people fear. In most places now you have one toilet which is unisex, and nobody ever cares or complains about that. All coffee shops and big chain stores are unisex, so what's the problem with someone who is now a woman using women's toilets?


Maybe a lot of down to age when I was in my late teens I remember the first time I went into unisex toilet I was hesitant.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

Elles said:


> Transgender people are also at different stages of transition and confidence. We have women's salons and men's barbers, although a salon that caters only for LGBT or just transgender in most places would be undersubscribed, I don't see a problem with discretely offering a trans friendly day personally.


From what I know from some transgender friends, they just want to be treated as anyone else is, they don't want to be marked out as an exception, to feel like they are hidden away from other men/women.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Elles said:


> Transgender are also men. People usually think of trans women when they talk about trans.


I don't know any women ones only men


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

emmaviolet said:


> From what I know from some transgender friends, they just want to be treated as anyone else is, they don't want to be marked out as an exception, to feel like they are hidden away from other men/women.


I expect it depends on how confident you are. It might be more relaxing. Otoh, maybe there's no call for it today, where LGBT are generally not thought of as different, just one of us and quite usual.

Unless you're in the us military of course.


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

Elles said:


> I expect it depends on how confident you are. It might be more relaxing. Otoh, maybe there's no call for it today, where LGBT are generally not thought of as different, just one of us and quite usual.
> 
> Unless you're in the us military of course.


I suspect the idea of a 'transgender day' in a salon (providing that this is not the only day they are allowed in said salon) could be quite popular, particularly with people who have fairly recently transitioned and therefore perhaps lacking in a little confidence. Whilst LGBT people are generally accepted in society these days there is still a way to go. It can be scary being open about who you are, particularly around new people. The idea of being in a place where you know you will be accepted without question can be very comforting. I am careful about showing my OH any affection in public because whilst things have come a long way, we still experience people staring, whispering, shouting comments at us and on one occasion a group of girls surrounded us and hurled abuse at us.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Sairy said:


> I suspect the idea of a 'transgender day' in a salon (providing that this is not the only day they are allowed in said salon) could be quite popular, particularly with people who have fairly recently transitioned and therefore perhaps lacking in a little confidence. Whilst LGBT people are generally accepted in society these days there is still a way to go. It can be scary being open about who you are, particularly around new people. The idea of being in a place where you know you will be accepted without question can be very comforting. I am careful about showing my OH any affection in public because whilst things have come a long way, we still experience people staring, whispering, shouting comments at us and on one occasion a group of girls surrounded us and hurled abuse at us.


I Confess at taking umberence at some of the replies, directed at me, on this thread sairy tbh. Mainly because I am perhaps one of the most understanding people towards all sexualities I have many friends gay lesbian and transgender who's friendship I value most highly their sexual preferences are of no concern of mine how they are as people is what's important.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

DT, I think a few people have assumed things from your first post that you didn't say so I'm not surprised you are upset. It's difficult when you only have the written word.

It's not something I've ever had to think about but I'm guessing trans men and women have to find a way to learn how to look like a man or woman without looking like a drag act? Or is that ignorant of me? This is not an area I know much about.


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

Mirandashell said:


> DT, I think a few people have assumed things from your first post that you didn't say so I'm not surprised you are upset. It's difficult when you only have the written word.
> 
> It's not something I've ever had to think about but I'm guessing trans men and women have to find a way to learn how to look like a man or woman without looking like a drag act? Or is that ignorant of me? This is not an area I know much about.


I have a trans friend who I knew as a guy when we were in our early teens. He then "came out" when we were around 18 and I helped him with the early steps to become a woman, including showing her how to put make-up on and experimenting with clothes etc. It was of course hard for her because as she had been a guy with facial hair etc. She then had to find ways around this. I haven't seen her for a while, but I believe she has it lasered these days.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Mirandashell said:


> DT, I think a few people have assumed things from your first post that you didn't say so I'm not surprised you are upset. It's difficult when you only have the written word.
> 
> It's not something I've ever had to think about but I'm guessing trans men and women have to find a way to learn how to look like a man or woman without looking like a drag act? Or is that ignorant of me? This is not an area I know much about.


I did actually ask on my first post if it was anything to do with the toilets I didn't say that it was I merely ask, only I assumed the person who told me would be more knowledgeable on it than me who doesn't really take a lot of notice of this sort of things xxxx


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

DT said:


> I Confess at taking umberence at some of the replies, directed at me, on this thread sairy tbh. Mainly because I am perhaps one of the most understanding people towards all sexualities I have many friends gay lesbian and transgender who's friendship I value most highly their sexual preferences are of no concern of mine how they are as people is what's important.


DT I apologise if I have upset you with anything I have said. I was just generally confused by a few things that you said rather than assuming anything bad of you at all.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Sairy said:


> I have a trans friend who I knew as a guy when we were in our early teens. He then "came out" when we were around 18 and I helped him with the early steps to become a woman, including showing her how to put make-up on and experimenting with clothes etc. It was of course hard for her because as she had been a guy with facial hair etc. She then had to find ways around this. I haven't seen her for a while, but I believe she has it lasered these days.


My friend, a male too- was very blarzy about it actually, but he moved to dubai, and used to dress in a monk like outfit but the moment he came back he dressed as a female and used the name Doris I've known him 40 years but my new partner would never call him by that name and would only ever call him Ian that is why we fell out. We no longer meet up be he and I still keep in touch occasionally


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Sairy said:


> DT I apologise if I have upset you with anything I have said. I was just generally confused by a few things that you said rather than assuming anything bad of you at all.


It wasn't you sairy xxx


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

And really don't want to crash this thread anymore so I'll leave it alone now but when I think to some of the experiences I have had and a colourful life I have lived it would certainly open some eyes I don't think anyone would believe some of stories I could tell xx
And I've loved every single moment of it


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

I could tell a few tales myself, but this is a public forum. :Hilarious


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Elles said:


> I could tell a few tales myself, but this is a public forum. :Hilarious


Well we are the Wild Childs elles born in the 50s. Xx
Weren't we just lucky


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

lorilu said:


> he isn't a troll in a pet forum


Not so sure about that, @lorilu, we get our share of weirdos!


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

Comparing sex segregated spaces (not just toilets but changing rooms, hospital wards and so on all the way to prisons) with racial segregation is frankly stupid and offensive.
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article78706432.html

There is no reason to keep races separate. This was done to dehumanise and degrade people of colour. There is a reason we have these separate spaces for men and women. For centuries there were no women's facilities, to keep us at home. In parts of rural India women and girls are forced to go out into fields to pee and they get raped. By men. Regardless of how they identify.This is just one example.
So-called progressives are all about rape culture until transpolitics comes up then it's roundly mocked and women are accused of being hysterical. And ignorant bigots.


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

picaresque said:


> Comparing sex segregated ssex"es (not just toilets but changing rooms, hospital wards and so on all the way to prisons) with racial segregation is frankly stupid and offensive.
> http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article78706432.html
> 
> There is no reason to keep races separate. This was done to dehumanise and degrade people of colour. There is a reason we have these separate spaces for men and women. For centuries there were no women's facilities, to keep us at home. In parts of rural India women and girls are forced to go out into fields to pee and they get raped. By men. Regardless of how they identify.This is just one example.
> So-called progressives are all about rape culture until transpolitics comes up then it's roundly mocked and women are accused of being hysterical. And ignorant bigots.


Hmm...So do you not think that a male to female transgender person should be able to use the ladies toilets? The article says that "HB2 simply says that men and women should use the restroom of their biological sex". I don't know if I'm misinterpreting this, but that suggests to me that a male - female transgender person would have to use mens toilets.

Yes there are differences between the civil rights movement and the LGBT movement, but there are also a lot of similarities. LGBT people have been bullied, beaten up, tortured, jailed etc. purely for being themselves.


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

I'm not massively bothered about toilets. What I am bothered about is violent male criminals who claim a female identity being put in women's prisons. Which is happening btw.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

For what its worth I would say if you are using a cubical it shouldn't matter


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Sairy said:


> Sorry which post is this a response to? I'm getting a little confused


Yes, it does get confusing . . . that's the reason I tag or quote people (takes a bit more time but it avoids confusion).


----------



## catz4m8z (Aug 27, 2008)

Sairy said:


> Yes there are differences between the civil rights movement and the LGBT movement, but there are also a lot of similarities. LGBT people have been bullied, beaten up, tortured, jailed etc. purely for being themselves.


Thats actually one of my pet peeves...prejudice snobbery! Someone thinking that their pain is more valid and worthy because it has a social history and context. If someone punches you in the face and calls you names because you are black or because you stutter it all hurts the same surely?
I find the male female double standard irritating too TBH. Women can 'butch up', cut their hair, wear mens clothes and they will be tomboys or slobs! And yet men arent allowed to wear make up or dresses without abuse? seems weird if you think about it.


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

picaresque said:


> I'm not massively bothered about toilets. What I am bothered about is violent male criminals who claim a female identity being put in women's prisons. Which is happening btw.


Surely you have to do more than just "claim" to be female to get put in a women's prison. I'm pretty sure I couldn't claim to be male and get put in a men's prison.

Surely the issue here is violent people who are at risk of causing harm to others being allowed to freely mix with other inmates. Those who are in such a category should be kept separate or under close supervision I would have thought? I know that there are lots of issues in prisons and no doubt that this doesn't happen as it should all of the time. However, I don't really want to get into prison politics as that's a giant can of worms that I really don't know enough about. I will say though that the idea of my trans friend (male-female) going into a men's prison makes me shudder. I'm pretty sure the outcome for her there would be bleak.


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

Sairy said:


> Surely you have to do more than just "claim" to be female to get put in a women's prison. I'm pretty sure I couldn't claim to be male and get put in a men's prison.
> 
> Surely the issue here is violent people who are at risk of causing harm to others being allowed to freely mix with other inmates. Those who are in such a category should be kept separate or under close supervision I would have thought? I know that there are lots of issues in prisons and no doubt that this doesn't happen as it should all of the time. However, I don't really want to get into prison politics as that's a giant can of worms that I really don't know enough about. I will say though that the idea of my trans friend (male-female) going into a men's prison makes me shudder. I'm pretty sure the outcome for her there would be bleak.


Already all it really takes is a declaration of being the opposite sex, and it is likely that self identification will soon be enshrined in law. So a bloke can claim womanhood just like that. No hormones or surgery required, nothing. Feeling female = female.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ender-recognition-self-identify-a7855381.html

People like your friend could well be at risk in the general population of a male prison. I'm not for throwing transwomen to the wolves like that but likewise I believe incarcerated women (who are largely inside for non-violent crimes) should have their rights and safety taken into account too. There has to be a solution that protects everyone. And what about transmen? They identify as male, wish to be seen as male. But if sentenced to prison I can't see them clamouring to be put in with the men because they would end up raped. So it seems using the 'right' facilities for one's gender is only paramount when it suits.
Going back to the original topic, I do not support a blanket ban on trans people serving in the military. However for a group whose activism often focuses on their very high rate of suicide I would question how suitable they might be for combat roles.


----------



## Canine K9 (Feb 22, 2013)

I have to admit it does annoy me when people make comments about the high suicide rate as saying that trans people are mentally ill and therefore can't serve in combat (or use the correct bathrooms or to not feed into their 'delusion'- the mental illness line is a great excuse for everything apparently!) as I've read on Facebook.

Being trans in itself doesn't make one suicidal. What makes someone suicidal is when your family and friends don't accept you, when you can't access the (expensive) treatment needed to transition, when dating and finding a partner becomes very complicated, seeing a body every day that to you is so wrong and wanting to tear off your own skin, when you're being misgendered and dead named, when you see all the hate many people still harbor for trans people etc. That's what makes the suicide rate so high. Of course, many trans people do have mental illnesses which are nothing to do with them being trans, but that's something else entirely that is not dependent on their trans identity. 

Ive not much to say on the original topic, other than it's a ridiculous ban in which Trump is trying to please the religious right. Trans is just the current issue in the spotlight, as it gains more acceptance and of course, non acceptance. It'll pass, just like other issues have before it. 

I'm not sure if the military ban has gone through yet, but if it hasn't, hopefully it'll be denied.


----------



## bearcub (Jul 19, 2011)

ouesi said:


> It's not about the toilets. It was never about the toilets.
> 
> The toilet thing was ignorant, bigoted idiots worrying about transgender women using women's bathrooms. As in they (the bigoted ignorant idiots) didn't want to allow transgender women to use women's bathrooms. Because you know, transgender women are all just pedophiles and rapists in disguise
> 
> ...


I don't really want to get into the toilets debate as it's not something that concerns me. I don't think that it's OK however to call any woman who would have concerns about sharing a space with a man a bigoted ignorant idiot. The needs of one group shouldn't leave the needs of another completely invalid, and a tolerant society is not one that shouts other people down just because we don't agree with their views.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

bearcub said:


> I don't really want to get into the toilets debate as it's not something that concerns me. I don't think that it's OK however to call any woman who would have concerns about sharing a space with a man a bigoted ignorant idiot. The needs of one group shouldn't leave the needs of another completely invalid, and a tolerant society is not one that shouts other people down just because we don't agree with their views.


Unless she plans on sharing a cubicle with another person I'm not sure why anyone would care what gender someone wishes to identify with.
Seriously, I don't get the upset with accepting people for who they wish to be...If someone is so worried about sharing their space with someone that used to be male and now indentifies as a female (or vice-versa) then they are indeed ignorant IMHO


----------



## Guest (Jul 30, 2017)

bearcub said:


> I don't really want to get into the toilets debate as it's not something that concerns me. I don't think that it's OK however to call any woman who would have concerns about sharing a space with a man a bigoted ignorant idiot. The needs of one group shouldn't leave the needs of another completely invalid, and a tolerant society is not one that shouts other people down just because we don't agree with their views.


Women have been toileting in cubicles next to people in all stages of transition forever and just didn't know it. 
If the only reason someone has for not wanting to pee in the same space as another person is that the other person is transgender, then yes, that is bigoted.


----------



## bearcub (Jul 19, 2011)

ouesi said:


> Women have been toileting in cubicles next to people in all stages of transition forever and just didn't know it.
> If the only reason someone has for not wanting to pee in the same space as another person is that the other person is transgender, then yes, that is bigoted.


I'm sure the reasons are more complex than that in some cases. The use of the word idiot just doesn't sit right with me, when we are potentially talking about other groups whose needs or concerns should be taken into account, or at least listened to.


----------



## Guest (Jul 30, 2017)

bearcub said:


> I'm sure the reasons are more complex than that in some cases. The use of the word idiot just doesn't sit right with me, when we are potentially talking about other groups whose needs or concerns should be taken into account, or at least listened to.


But what needs are not being addressed by allowing transgender people to use the bathroom of the sex they identify with?


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

What other reasons can there be though?
I don't use public toilets if I can help it, but if I do the last thing on my mind is what gender anyone else is or was or even will be in 10 years!


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

I'm fairly certain that a transgender man, who has no doubt gone through hell to identify as a woman, is not suddenly going to morph back into a man and begin ravishing women in public toilets.

Personally, if I were in a public toilet, I wouldn't care less who was using the cubicle next to me.


----------



## bearcub (Jul 19, 2011)

I used to go to a swimming class with a group of Muslim women. No men were allowed in the building, so even the pool receptionist was a woman. I chose these classes because they were women only and I wasn't feeling particularly comfortable at the time about being in my costume in front of anyone. Now I personally wouldn't of cared if a transgender person had joined the class, I imagine their hangs up would have been the same as mine. However to the Muslim women, a transgender man joining the class would have taken away their safe space and limited their access to the pool. I think these women were probably bigoted and ignorant, but they weren't idiots. Their reason for not wanting to share a space with a man of any description was valid.

I know this is perhaps not the same issue as toilets, which again, I have no concerns about. But it hopefully is an example of attitudes that exist in our society that while we may not agree with, should be taken into account. The issue of intolerance cannot be addressed by further intolerance.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Dunno. Some of the loos at events I wouldn't use if I was a dog let alone human. Cubicle? Lol. You should be so lucky. It's a row of holes in the floor that everyone squats over, the posh ones might have a tiny barrier like a western door to a bar. Not all men's toilets, even not at events, actually have separate cubicles or doors at all. There are trans male too and people are in varying levels of transition.

A transgender woman is a woman who was born as a boy. So when I say transgender man I'm talking about a man. He just happened to be born as a girl. It would sound odd calling a woman a transgender man and vice versa.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

bearcub said:


> I used to go to a swimming class with a group of Muslim women. No men were allowed in the building, so even the pool receptionist was a woman. I chose these classes because they were women only and I wasn't feeling particularly comfortable at the time about being in my costume in front of anyone. Now I personally wouldn't of cared if a transgender person had joined the class, I imagine their hangs up would have been the same as mine. However to the Muslim women, a transgender man joining the class would have taken away their safe space and limited their access to the pool. I think these women were probably bigoted and ignorant, but they weren't idiots. Their reason for not wanting to share a space with a man of any description was valid.
> 
> I know this is perhaps not the same issue as toilets, which again, I have no concerns about. But it hopefully is an example of attitudes that exist in our society that while we may not agree with, should be taken into account. The issue of intolerance cannot be addressed by further intolerance.


I don't get this.

If any woman is not comfortable having a man around, not even in the same building as her, then I see that as her problem.

It is not reasonable to banish men from an environment because that makes it a more comfortable place for some women.

What if some women decide, for instance, that they're not comfortable in an elevator with men? Do we ban men from elevators or have women only elevators?


----------



## bearcub (Jul 19, 2011)

Sweety said:


> I don't get this.
> 
> If any woman is not comfortable having a man around, not even in the same building as her, then I see that as her problem.
> 
> ...


Kirklees Council deemed it reasonable, I guess due to high demand from the Muslim community.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

There are some swimming sessions advertised in a religious sense where it's not just women, it's women covered to their knees.  I was just reading about it. It's called Alhamdulliaswimming.

There's been mother/father and child, and women, or men only only swim sessions at our local leisure centres and pools, but not to cater for a race or religion. It was so people could take their young children and/or get lessons, you could wear a bikini if you want and there was more than one pool, or it was cordoned off. Some of the toddler and baby sessions were in the daytime. I took all of my offspring when they were young. 

In my opinion this is not good for integration, for women, or for our society to do this. It's stepping into the realms of apartheid and segregation. I'm quite sad to read it.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

It's discrimination.

Discrimination, whether it's ageism, feminism, apartheid, is wrong IMO.

It is not acceptable for women to expect an exclusive environment, any more than it would be acceptable for men to expect a woman free environment.

We know that there are a very few Golf Clubs who don't allow women, but they are now being treated with the contempt they deserve.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Elles said:


> There are some swimming sessions advertised in a religious sense where it's not just women, it's women covered to their knees.  I was just reading about it. It's called Alhamdulliaswimming.
> 
> There's been mother/father and child, and women, or men only only swim sessions at our local leisure centres and pools, but not to cater for a race or religion. It was so people could take their young children and/or get lessons, you could wear a bikini if you want and there was more than one pool, or it was cordoned off. Some of the toddler and baby sessions were in the daytime. I took all of my offspring when they were young.
> 
> In my opinion this is not good for integration, for women, or for our society to do this. It's stepping into the realms of apartheid and segregation. I'm quite sad to read it.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...wimming-pool-bans-women-from-men-only-sessio/

Yes, This was a story I remembered from last year where women were banned from using the Olympic sized pool (only able to use the smaller 20m one) on certain time slots. Again, I can understand why some people would feel more comfortable having segregated sessions but am not sure they should be encouraged & promoted to the point where others were feeling their access to facilities was being limited.


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

Focussing on toilets and completely ignoring the prison issue again. Changing the goalposts as well - transwomen fear male violence, let's accommodate them. Oh, 'cis' women also have cause to be afraid? Don't be ridiculous. Bigots.
I don't think many people are aware that most trans identified males are still 'entire'. You know I used to be totally on board with this whole thing until I started hearing the words 'female penis'. None of you actually believe in such a thing. None of you. The hetero men of PF and the world know what a woman is and nobody calls them bigots. As a left leaning woman I'm supposed to pretend that we're all the same, just to be nice. That I can just opt out of oppression by IDing as male if I don't like it. Tell that to Malala. Tell that to the Chibok schoolgirls, and the ten year old Indian girl currently in the news, raped and pregnant and denied an abortion. They weren't targeted for their 'gender identity' but for their sex, the basis of our oppression for millennia. No one cares, trans is more fashionable.


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

picaresque said:


> I don't think many people are aware that most trans identified males are still 'entire'


And your point is?

Having a penis doesn't make a person dangerous. And it certainly doesn't make them automatically dangerous in the company of women. However they identify.

And I really don't think that is the reason Trump tried to headline his ban on Trans.

J


----------



## steveshanks (Feb 19, 2015)

You kind of lost me there picaresque?


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

Jamesgoeswalkies said:


> And your point is?
> 
> Having a penis doesn't make a person dangerous. And it certainly doesn't make them automatically dangerous in the company of women. However they identify.
> 
> And I really don't think that is the reason Trump tried to headline his ban on Trans.


You are male, right @Jamesgoeswalkies? I'm just going to assume you're heterosexual, correct me if I'm wrong. You know exactly what a woman is, at least when it comes to choosing sexual partners. Does that make you a bigot?
Being a woman isn't a costume, an essence, an identity. It is a physical reality that you don't get to opt in and out of (like Caitlyn Jenner still frequenting his all male golf club, seeing as golf clubs were mentioned upthread).
Not even going to bother with the 'not all men' business. If there's zero risk from men then transwomen can use male facilities, right? Problem solved.


----------



## LinznMilly (Jun 24, 2011)

picaresque said:


> Focussing on toilets and completely ignoring the prison issue again. Changing the goalposts as well - transwomen fear male violence, let's accommodate them. Oh, 'cis' women also have cause to be afraid? Don't be ridiculous. Bigots.


OK. Let's go there. But first - some clarification. Transgender isn't simply a case of waking up one morning and deciding that today, you're going to identify as being the opposite gender to the one your body says you are. These people are not wolves in sheep's clothing. They firmly believe they are in the wrong body. Trans woman is not another word for "rapist".

Trans woman = an individual born a boy, identifying as a woman.
Trans man = an individual born a girl, identifying as a man,

https://www.google.co.uk/search?sit...11.1854.3..35i39k1j0i131k1j0i20k1.hIf5DP5cbm0

Now:

What offences are trans women committing?
Where are the stats that show that trans women present a threat to cis women prisoners?
*And where is the evidence to back up your concerns?*



> I don't think many people are aware that most trans identified males are still 'entire'. You know I used to be totally on board with this whole thing until I started hearing the words 'female penis'. None of you actually believe in such a thing. None of you. The hetero men of PF and the world know what a woman is and nobody calls them bigots. As a left leaning woman I'm supposed to pretend that we're all the same, just to be nice. That I can just opt out of oppression by IDing as male if I don't like it. Tell that to Malala. Tell that to the Chibok schoolgirls, and the ten year old Indian girl currently in the news, raped and pregnant and denied an abortion. They weren't targeted for their 'gender identity' but for their sex, the basis of our oppression for millennia. No one cares, trans is more fashionable.


But these atrocities are committed by men, who identify as male. Not by a trans woman. If you have evidence to the contrary, please share itl


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

-backs away slowly-


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

No argument then @StormyThai


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

@LinznMilly, transwomen commit violent and sexual crime at the same rate as men, look it up.

ETA

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885


> regarding any crime, male-to-females had a significantly increased risk for crime compared to female controls (aHR 6.6; 95% CI 4.1-10.8) but not compared to males (aHR 0.8; 95% CI 0.5-1.2). This indicates that they retained a male pattern regarding criminality. The same was true regarding violent crime


https://thepoliticsofgender.wordpress.com/2015/11/19/trans-male-violence/


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

No...your post has left me speechless so I will back out now.


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

What horrifies you so much about what I said? No one can articulate the problem, it's all 'bigot' and 'ignorant' and now implying that I'm unhinged.
Think I might also have to retreat from this for my own sake.


----------



## shadowmare (Jul 7, 2013)

Am I understanding correctly - a penis makes someone more dangerous?? So if the same psychopath would have a vagina, then they would be somehow "safer"?  By that logic are gay men just as dangerous to females as transgender women?


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

No one? I've mentioned different stages of transitions in the thread a number of times. Also that folk forget transgender males. If you want to talk about prisons, we should at least acknowledge that some transgender people are men, who were born as girls and are also in various stages of transition. They would be expected to serve their time in a men's prison.

The point really being that everyone should feel safe when they are incarcerated and avoid it in the first place if at all possible. You go to prison for making a mistake with your taxes, you shouldn't expect to be raped or assaulted by anyone. I don't think Rose West would be a comfort.

On saying that the thread hasn't been discussing prisons. If someone conned someone else, like the woman who was recently imprisoned for it, that's a separate issue. A none violent, peace loving trans shouldn't be incarcerated with violent men and no one should be having sex in prison. Violent men and women are violent based on what's in their head, not what's between their legs. It's a different issue altogether.

Don't think a transgender woman is comparable to a violent criminal just because she's transgender. It's not a great way to generalise about men either really. 

I wouldn't want to be in prison with violent people who don't respect my being whatever my gender. I actually don't have a problem with mixed gender prisons for none violent prisoners, so long as they can have separate and unisex facilities to choose for themselves tbh.

If you were to ask me if Huntley should be given reassignment surgery and relocated to a female prison though, I'd say that's not the kind of operation I'd be offering him. He didnt live outside prison as a woman either, so he doesn't get to choose. He can live with what he is, the words I'd use for it isn't for polite company, and be grateful he's fed.


----------



## LinznMilly (Jun 24, 2011)

picaresque said:


> @LinznMilly, transwomen commit violent and sexual crime at the same rate as men, look it up.
> 
> ETA
> 
> ...


Thank you - I will look at those links. However, you are the one with a problem with trans women being in a women's prison. Therefore, the burden of proof lies with you - not me.


----------



## LinznMilly (Jun 24, 2011)

@picaresque : from your own link:



> *Results*
> The overall mortality for sex-reassigned persons was higher during follow-up (aHR 2.8; 95% CI 1.8-4.3) than for controls of the same birth sex, particularly death from suicide (aHR 19.1; 95% CI 5.8-62.9). *Sex-reassigned persons also had an increased risk for suicide attempts (aHR 4.9; 95% CI 2.9-8.5) and psychiatric inpatient care (aHR 2.8; 95% CI 2.0-3.9). C*omparisons with controls matched on reassigned sex yielded similar results. *Female-to-males*, *but not male-to-females, had a higher risk for criminal convictions than their respective birth sex controls*.


So - transgender individuals are proportionally at a higher risk of suicide.

And (bear in mind that this is from *your* link). It is trans men - (female to male trans )- who are stastically a higher risk of criminal convictions, which ties in with the stats of men who identify as male. So, trans women pose no increased risk to cis women prisoners. Trans _men_ in women prisons, might.

It's also worth noting that that study ended 14 years ago.


----------



## Jobeth (May 23, 2010)

Being transgender is certainly not 'fashionable'. My cousin is. My side of the family is fine with it. On the other side her immediate family are, but some won't now acknowledge her. She could never tell my grandparents as they would not have understood. To have to hide who you are from people you love is so sad. People don't just decide on a whim to be identified as male/female. 

I couldn't care less who is in the next cubicle in the toilets. Disabled people manage public unisex toilets on a daily basis without their being any horror stories as it is also in a cubicle. As for jail, whilst she is unlikely to ever go, I would fight for it to be a woman's prison. Maybe if it is such an issue they should think of how to keep the vulnerable (for whatever reason) safe.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

We could look at it from another aspect.

Rose West and Myra Hindley were incarcerated in women's prisons, despite that they were proven to be a danger to young women and girls. Dennis Neilson was incarcerated in a male prison despite being proven to be a danger to young men and boys. Should they swap?

A trans woman who has never been a danger to anyone much less a woman or girl is more of a danger to women in a women's prison? Makes no sense to me.


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

LinznMilly said:


> @picaresque : from your own link:
> 
> So - transgender individuals are proportionally at a higher risk of suicide.
> 
> ...


They present the same risk as other men, that's the point. As much as everyone is gaily trying to pretend otherwise, male violence is a thing. This doesn't mean all men are evil rapists FFS but there is a pattern. One in five women aged 16 - 59 has experienced some form of sexual violence since the age of 16. This probably includes many of you. I was a victim at fourteen. But please keep trying to gaslight me that this isn't part of a wider problem, and women are just as bad.
Rose West (that name always comes up in these discussions but few other examples) is in a women's prison... because...she is...a woman.


----------



## LinznMilly (Jun 24, 2011)

picaresque said:


> They present the same risk as other men, that's the point. As much as everyone is gaily trying to pretend otherwise, male violence is a thing. This doesn't mean all men are evil rapists FFS but there is a pattern. One in five women aged 16 - 59 has experienced some form of sexual violence since the age of 16. This probably includes many of you. I was a victim at fourteen. But please keep trying to gaslight me that this isn't part of a wider problem, and women are just as bad.
> Rose West (that name always comes up in these discussions but few other examples) is in a women's prison... because...she is...a woman.


So you agree then, that females who identify as male should be in male prisons, and males who identify as females, should be in women's prisons?

Because it is trans men - people born female who identify as male - who are statistically more likely to be convicted of a crime.

And, even then, there's nothing in your own links that indicate whether trans people are stastically more likely than cis people, to commit violent crimes.


----------



## Team_Trouble (Apr 11, 2016)

The changing facilities at my local leisure centre are unisex, except for two large rooms generally used for groups of children. The rest is all cubicles. One thing I feel uncomfortable about is coming out of the shower cubicle in just a towel when there might be men on the other side of the door. I just feel embarrassed! And paranoid that perhaps I should be showering with my swimsuit on. I don't worry about the possibility of a transgender person being the other side of the door. I'm not sure why. They're probably more anxious than I am though, at a swimming pool changing room. But I don't really know what the answer is, as unisex changing facilities doesn't work for everyone, though I just about manage. Perhaps it's because I have been brought up with segregated changing facilities, that I feel embarrassed in front of men but not women. Or maybe the behaviour of some of the young men at the swimming pool.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

@KatieandOliver I wouldn't feel at ease with unisex changing rooms or toilets . I think you feel more vulnerable when you're nearly naked or your knickers are around at your ankles . The behaviour of some young lads at swimming pools , horrible when you are getting changed in a cubicle and you realise a male is peering over from the next one


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

LinznMilly said:


> So you agree then, that females who identify as male should be in male prisons, and males who identify as females, should be in women's prisons?
> 
> Because it is trans men - people born female who identify as male - who are statistically more likely to be convicted of a crime.
> 
> And, even then, there's nothing in your own links that indicate whether trans people are stastically more likely than cis people, to commit violent crimes.


You've misunderstood me - while the crime rate of transmen may go up after transition, the ('cis')male crime rate is still a great deal higher, and transwomen commit offences at the same rate. Pay attention to the news and you'll notice an increasing number of reports of 'women' being charged with typically male crimes (see the current story of Wendy Jones and their collection of extreme animal pornography). This isn't happening with transmen. As I said a few pages back, the issue of prisons is complicated and there needs to be a solution that protects everyone.
Anyway I'm just going to leave this here and then h̶a̶v̶e̶ ̶a̶ ̶p̶r̶o̶p̶e̶r̶ ̶f̶l̶o̶u̶n̶c̶e̶ bow out. Don't mind being disagreed with and my opinions on this are obviously very unpopular here but I could do without having my sanity called into question for having a different view and making quite reasoned points.


----------



## Biffo (Mar 14, 2016)

picaresque said:


> I don't think many people are aware that most trans identified males are still 'entire'. You know I used to be totally on board with this whole thing until I started hearing the words 'female penis'. None of you actually believe in such a thing. None of you.


I think the point Picaresque is making is NOT that people with a penis are dangerous, but that people with a penis are male. Lady penis and male vagina. These terms are nonsense.

I don't care what other people have under their clothes. Transitioning for the average person (I.e. not someone who is a millionaire and has all the privelleges that go with it) must be hell on earth.


----------



## steveshanks (Feb 19, 2015)

Biffo said:


> must be hell on earth.


 Very very true, the only 2 i know (or knew..... One had full op one was waiting) both ended up committing suicide and as far as i can tell it was all to do with what other people thought of them


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

KatieandOliver said:


> The changing facilities at my local leisure centre are unisex, except for two large rooms generally used for groups of children. The rest is all cubicles. One thing I feel uncomfortable about is coming out of the shower cubicle in just a towel when there might be men on the other side of the door. I just feel embarrassed! And paranoid that perhaps I should be showering with my swimsuit on. I don't worry about the possibility of a transgender person being the other side of the door. I'm not sure why. They're probably more anxious than I am though, at a swimming pool changing room. But I don't really know what the answer is, as unisex changing facilities doesn't work for everyone, though I just about manage. Perhaps it's because I have been brought up with segregated changing facilities, that I feel embarrassed in front of men but not women. Or maybe the behaviour of some of the young men at the swimming pool.


The same could be said on touring pitches. Some of the smaller sites we use it wouldn't be exaggerating to say that facilities can be rather primitive, it's not unusual to walk into the ladies toilets to find women at the sinks in various stages of undress likewise young children hopping between showers on the largest sites. Doesn't bother me one iota which toilets whoever uses but for people to slate others because their views differ on the subject then it's bang out of order.


----------



## stuaz (Sep 22, 2012)

Well this thread has certainly been an eye opener!


----------



## Jobeth (May 23, 2010)

steveshanks said:


> Very very true, the only 2 i know (or knew..... One had full op one was waiting) both ended up committing suicide and as far as i can tell it was all to do with what other people thought of them


That's really sad. Luckily my cousin's parents have been supportive and her work was as well.


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)




----------



## MilleD (Feb 15, 2016)

I assume this would be very unpopular on this thread, but I have to confess to being very uncomfortable that I would need to be described as a 'cis' woman.


----------



## Team_Trouble (Apr 11, 2016)

DT said:


> The same could be said on touring pitches. Some of the smaller sites we use it wouldn't be exaggerating to say that facilities can be rather primitive, it's not unusual to walk into the ladies toilets to find women at the sinks in various stages of undress likewise young children hopping between showers on the largest sites. Doesn't bother me one iota which toilets whoever uses but for people to slate others because their views differ on the subject then it's bang out of order.


But I didn't slate anybody's view....


----------



## LinznMilly (Jun 24, 2011)

picaresque said:


> Don't mind being disagreed with and my opinions on this are obviously very unpopular here but I could do without having my sanity called into question for having a different view and making quite reasoned points.


Who's calling your sanity into question? 

I've gone back and re-read the thread from page 7. Nobody has said anything along the lines of questioning your sanity. I've actually tried to look at things from your viewpoint. I've read your links. The one worth mentioning is the first one, which I have commented on, and, IMHO, doesn't really support your argument. That's not calling your sanity into question - it's simply pointing out that perhaps your own links don't corroborate your viewpoint.

The other is a WordPress site which claims not to be anti-trans, but then lists each and every news article they could find that portrays trans people as violent thugs, yet not a single article highlighting the good trans people do. I was hoping for governmental statistics, and/or verifiable sources - not a list of news articles compiled on one site by someone who hides behind a vague name. Google "The Politics of Gender", and you get links to a Twitter hash tag, college/university courses, and, half way down the page, that 1 site. Remove the word "The", and that website doesn't seem to feature at all on the front page. I have no idea who designed that site, no idea who compiled that list - so why should I trust it as a credible source?

You talk about being abused at 14. I'm genuinely, heartfelt, sorry to hear that, but you're not alone. I was, too. And I was even younger than you were. I sort of figured you were a victim by the language of your posts. We don't choose to be victims, but if we don't move on after the abuse has stopped - if we don't see past the bitterness, the hate and the fear, we're letting our abusers win, and I, for one, refuse to do that.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

MilleD said:


> I assume this would be very unpopular on this thread, but I have to confess to being very uncomfortable that I would need to be described as a 'cis' woman.


What does it mean ? :Shamefullyembarrased


----------



## MilleD (Feb 15, 2016)

kimthecat said:


> What does it mean ? :Shamefullyembarrased


Apparently it means 'not trans' essentially.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

KatieandOliver said:


> But I didn't slate anybody's view....


Never said you did katie, but some have, I quoted you and,made reference to the cAmping facilities as it was a long the same line


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

MilleD said:


> Apparently it means 'not trans' essentially.


Oh right , thanks . I didn't know that .
I don't know much about army life or prison life ( yet !) but I wouldn't have a problem with sharing a toilet or whatever with transgender people as long as they put the toilet seat down but i wouldn't condemn any woman if she did feel uncomfortable as being a bigot . 
There are many people out there who will be cruel to others for any reason at all though and are bigots but I wouldn't lump everyone together .
I hope that Transgenders wont be stopped from joining the Forces and will be allowed to choose what prison they want to go to .


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

kimthecat said:


> Oh right , thanks . I didn't know that .
> I don't know much about army life or prison life ( yet !) but I wouldn't have a problem with sharing a toilet or whatever with transgender people as long as they put the toilet seat down but i wouldn't condemn any woman if she did feel uncomfortable for what ever reason as being a bigot . There are many people out there who will be cruel to others for any reason at all though and I wouldn't lump everyone together .
> I hope that Transgenders wont be stopped from joining the Forces and will be allowed to choose what prison they want to go to .


I hadn't heard of the term either, but according to Wikipedia "*Cisgender* (often abbreviated to simply *cis*) is a term for people whose gender identitymatches the sex that they were assigned at birth."


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

'Cis' is used to avoid all the baggage that goes with the word 'normal'. It's not a value judgement in the way the latter is.


----------



## MilleD (Feb 15, 2016)

Mirandashell said:


> 'Cis' is used to avoid all the baggage that goes with the word 'normal'. It's not a value judgement in the way the latter is.


Just 'woman' would do.

When using the word 'trans', there is no need for the opposite label.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

That depends on the sentence you use it in, doesn't it? And transwomen are women. But using 'woman' to mean 'not trans' reads as transwomen not being women. There's nothing wrong with the word 'cis'. It has a definitive meaning that doesn't carry a value judgement.

Why does it make you feel uncomfortable? Is it just that you aren't used to being labelled?


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

MilleD said:


> Just 'woman' would do.
> 
> When using the word 'trans', there is no need for the opposite label.


That's what I was just typing.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

Same question to you, Elles.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

We can both call ourselves women and mention trans when it's necessary. Women who aren't trans shouldn't need to call themselves cis as well. Women who are trans too, may need or want to mention it sometimes. They are women and trans. I'm just woman.


----------



## MilleD (Feb 15, 2016)

Mirandashell said:


> That depends on the sentence you use it in, doesn't it? And transwomen are women. But using 'woman' to mean 'not trans' reads as transwomen not being women. There's nothing wrong with the word 'cis'. It has a definitive meaning that doesn't carry a value judgement.
> 
> Why does it make you feel uncomfortable? Is it just that you aren't used to being labelled?


It's unnecessary. Despite what some people would wish to have us believe, the vast majority of women were born as women.

And no, I don't have anything against anyone who 'identifies' as anything. I just don't feel we need to come up with another word to describe the majority of people.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Elles said:


> We can both call ourselves women and mention trans when it's necessary. Women who aren't trans shouldn't need to call themselves cis as well. Women who are trans too, may need or want to mention it sometimes. They are women and trans. I'm just woman.


As hilda said to Stan when asked what that taste was!
Woman!


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

MilleD said:


> It's unnecessary. Despite what some people would wish to have us believe, the vast majority of women were born as women.
> 
> And no, I don't have anything against anyone who 'identifies' as anything. I just don't feel we need to come up with another word to describe the majority of people.


Me too, and me neither!


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

MilleD said:


> It's unnecessary. Despite what some people would wish to have us believe, the vast majority of women were born as women.
> 
> And no, I don't have anything against anyone who 'identifies' as anything. I just don't feel we need to come up with another word to describe the majority of people.


You may not but other people do. To them it is necessary. And it's not about how many transwomen there are around. When gender is being discussed, there needs to be a word for each different gender. It's not an insult or value judgement in anyway. I'm not sure why there is a problem. It doesn't bother me at all.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

And neither of you have answered the question as to why the label makes you uncomfortable. You don't have to but it would be interesting to know.


----------



## MilleD (Feb 15, 2016)

Mirandashell said:


> You may not but other people do. To them it is necessary. And it's not about how many transwomen there are around. When gender is being discussed, there needs to be a word for each different gender. It's not an insult or value judgement in anyway. I'm not sure why there is a problem. It doesn't bother me at all.


There already is a word.

And what you're essentially saying here is that your opinion is more valid than mine?

I'm glad it doesn't bother you. Well done.

Like I said, I find it unnecessary.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Mirandashell said:


> And neither of you have answered the question as to why the label makes you uncomfortable. You don't have to but it would be interesting to know.


Ok, so why should the majority of women have to adapt for the minority? Have I got the right end of the Stick ? Some want us woman who were born woman, have always been women will remain women and die women to be renamed cis women is that right? sorry to show my ignorance but have never even heard of the word before.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

DT said:


> but have never even heard of the word before.


No, join the club...what is it?


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

MilleD said:


> I assume this would be very unpopular on this thread, but I have to confess to being very uncomfortable that I would need to be described as a 'cis' woman.


I don't care a bit if I'm unpopular, but I don't even know what a 'cis' woman is, so can someone please explain? Thanks!


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

DT said:


> Ok, so why should the majority of women have to adapt for the minority?


They shouldn't and, as far as I am aware, they don't. I don't, anyway.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Calvine said:


> I don't care a bit if I'm unpopular, but I don't even know what a 'cis' woman is, so can someone please explain? Thanks!


 Me too-, I may have got the wrong end of the Stick


----------



## Jonescat (Feb 5, 2012)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisgender

A woman whose assigned gender is female, and whose assigned female gender is more or less consistent with her personal sense of self.

Pronounced with a soft C ("siss") not a hard one ("kiss")


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

[QUOTE="Jonescat, post: 1064932563, member: 1315401"]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisgender

A woman whose assigned gender is female, and whose assigned female gender is more or less consistent with her personal sense of self.

Pronounced with a soft C ("siss") not a hard one ("kiss")[/QUOTE]
So when was that word invented then? Or has it always been there


----------



## Jonescat (Feb 5, 2012)

From wiki - "_Cisgender_ has its origin in the Latin-derived prefix _cis-_, meaning "on this side of", which means the opposite of _trans-_, meaning "across from" or "on the other side of". This usage can be seen in the cis-trans distinction in chemistry, the cis-trans or complementation test in genetics, in Ciscaucasia (from the Russian perspective), in the ancient Roman term Cisalpine Gaul (i.e., "Gaul on this side of the Alps"), and more recently, Cisjordan, as distinguished from Transjordan"

But this usage is recent


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

MilleD said:


> There already is a word.
> 
> And what you're essentially saying here is that your opinion is more valid than mine?


No, I'm saying neither of our opinions matter as it's not a matter of opinion. It's matter of fact. You may not like a blue table. Doesn't mean it serves no purpose. And this isn't personal but I apologise if you feel attacked because I disagree with you. Like I said, this isn't about opinion.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

DT said:


> Ok, so why should the majority of women have to adapt for the minority? Have I got the right end of the Stick ? Some want us woman who were born woman, have always been women will remain women and die women to be renamed cis women is that right? sorry to show my ignorance but have never even heard of the word before.


In what way are you being asked to adapt? The word 'cis' is used in discussions and situations where gender is being discussed or is important. It doesn't change who you are or what you are. You are still a woman whether there is a label on you or not. Same as transwomen are women despite the label. You don't have to do anything.


----------



## MilleD (Feb 15, 2016)

Mirandashell said:


> No, I'm saying neither of our opinions matter as it's not a matter of opinion. It's matter of fact. You may not like a blue table. Doesn't mean it serves no purpose. And this isn't personal but I apologise if you feel attacked because I disagree with you. Like I said, this isn't about opinion.


Of course it's about opinion. You said it doesn't bother you. That's your opinion. I said I think it's unnecessary. That's my opinion.

I don't feel attacked, I don't feel that strongly about it if I'm honest. I'm just quite surprised that you don't feel someone else can have a different view on something as you.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

I do feel you can have a different opinion to me. I've justbeen trying to find out why you feel the 'cis' label isn't needed. But you haven't actually answered that question other than to repeat that you don't like it. That's what I've been getting at. But I guess it's going nowhere so what the hey.


----------



## MilleD (Feb 15, 2016)

Mirandashell said:


> I do feel you can have a different opinion to me. I've justbeen trying to find out why you feel the 'cis' label isn't needed. But you haven't actually answered that question other than to repeat that you don't like it. That's what I've been getting at. But I guess it's going nowhere so what the hey.


How many times? Because I think it's unnecessary.

I'm out.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

I honestly don't understand this 'ban' at all.

Since when has an American President been overly particular about the type of person he gets killed during conflicts of armed aggression?

I do not support the concept of the military. It makes us all someone's enemy.


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

MilleD said:


> It's unnecessary. Despite what some people would wish to have us believe, the vast majority of women were born as women.
> 
> And no, I don't have anything against anyone who 'identifies' as anything. I just don't feel we need to come up with another word to describe the majority of people.


And you could say the same about the word' hetrosexual'. In fact 'hetrosexual' and 'homosexual' only made it into the dictionary 100 years ago....I'm sure people were horrified that they were being 'labelled' because of a 'minority'.

"Cis' is a term that covers both sexes. Male and female. And yes, it will be a relatively modern construct as the wide variation of gender diversity is a modern subject ......well, no, it's as old as the hills but it's just never been spoken about before as it has over the past 40 years......

J


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

When gender is being discussed I'm the same as I always have been and that has been understood by anyone who speaks English my entire life. Woman. Now old woman. 

I am human and I am woman. I don't need some fancy new discriminatory label that's never been needed before. If the kids and trans like it and want to use it, that's fine, just don't call me a cis. I don't like unnecessary labels and cis used to be a derogatory term in the school playground, short for cissy. Maybe that's why it looks vaguely insulting to me. I'd rather be called a none trans in discussions if anything.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Mirandashell said:


> And neither of you have answered the question as to why the label makes you uncomfortable. You don't have to but it would be interesting to know.


 Did people say they felt uncomfortable with labels,* (ETA below) I though they were saying that it was just unnecessary .
Perhaps they're rebels and Born to be wild 

*ETA I meant with personally being labeled not uncomfortable with labels in general .


----------



## Dr Pepper (Jan 17, 2017)

Ok, my tuppence worth.

You are born male or female, very very occasionally hermaphrodite. Just because science has very recently made it possible to "change" sex doesn't make it right or normal. If people feel this way it's a perversion of nature, nothing more.

That's all. Toodle pip.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

kimthecat said:


> Did people say they felt uncomfortable with labels, I though they were saying that it was just unnecessary .
> 
> Perhaps they're rebels and Born to be wild


I did. I don't like unnecessary labels and it looks like an unnecessary label to me.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Elles said:


> I did. I don't like unnecessary labels and it looks like an unnecessary label to me.


But being labeled doesn't make you personally feel uncomfortable which Mirandashell was saying .
I feel it unnecessary , i think its more due to the desire for PCness than necessity .


----------



## Team_Trouble (Apr 11, 2016)

Dr Pepper said:


> Ok, my tuppence worth.
> 
> You are born male or female, very very occasionally hermaphrodite. Just because science has very recently made it possible to "change" sex doesn't make it right or normal. If people feel this way it's a perversion of nature, nothing more.
> 
> That's all. Toodle pip.


What would you do or want to do if you had been born female instead of male? How would you feel if you were forced to conform to female stereotypes?


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Jonescat said:


> A woman whose assigned gender is female, and whose assigned female gender is more or less consistent with her personal sense of self.


So, a normal female who doesn't think she is anything other than what is on her birth certificate? Thank [email protected] never heard of it before, and nor have any of my male or female friends! But what is meant by ''more or less consistent''?


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Dr Pepper said:


> Ok, my tuppence worth.
> 
> You are born male or female, very very occasionally hermaphrodite. Just because science has very recently made it possible to "change" sex doesn't make it right or normal. If people feel this way it's a perversion of nature, nothing more.
> 
> That's all. Toodle pip.


Disgusting.

Lost for words.


----------



## Jonescat (Feb 5, 2012)

Well we all have moments....

I don't think it means any more than that.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Dr Pepper said:


> Ok, my tuppence worth.
> 
> You are born male or female, very very occasionally hermaphrodite. Just because science has very recently made it possible to "change" sex doesn't make it right or normal. If people feel this way it's a perversion of nature, nothing more.
> 
> That's all. Toodle pip.


 I think you're trolling !


----------



## bearcub (Jul 19, 2011)

My reservation with the term 'cis' is that it categorises people into either a) trans or b) people whose gender and sex match at birth. Now I don't particularly like gender stereotypes so where does that leave me? Why can't people just be people?


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

MilleD said:


> Of course it's about opinion. You said it doesn't bother you. That's your opinion. I said I think it's unnecessary. That's my opinion.
> 
> I don't feel attacked, I don't feel that strongly about it if I'm honest. I'm just quite surprised that you don't feel someone else can have a different view on something as you.


Pretty much my views too. Hence my previous post regarding those having differing opinions have no right to query nor preach to those who's views differ!


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

MilleD said:


> How many times? Because I think it's unnecessary.
> 
> I'm out.


And I was just trying to find out why. But what started out as interesting discussion is now going down the usual road so.... fair enough.


----------



## SusieRainbow (Jan 21, 2013)

Dr Pepper said:


> Ok, my tuppence worth.
> 
> You are born male or female, very very occasionally hermaphrodite. Just because science has very recently made it possible to "change" sex doesn't make it right or normal. If people feel this way it's a perversion of nature, nothing more.
> 
> That's all. Toodle pip.


If this is your opinion so be it. But that doesn't make it fact or a welcome contribution to the thread. 
The whole thread is becoming heated and quarrelsome , any more unpleasantness and trolling remarks, it will be closed.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Mirandashell said:


> I do feel you can have a different opinion to me. I've justbeen trying to find out why you feel the 'cis' label isn't needed. But you haven't actually answered that question other than to repeat that you don't like it. That's what I've been getting at. But I guess it's going nowhere so what the hey.


Its not a matter of not liking it I've never even heard it until today, the word plain woman has been used since eve were a virgin, its not broken so why fix it?


----------



## Jonescat (Feb 5, 2012)

bearcub said:


> My reservation with the term 'cis' is that it categorises people into either a) trans or b) people whose gender and sex match at birth. Now I don't particularly like gender stereotypes so where does that leave me? Why can't people just be people?


They can. But I think there are some conversations where you need to talk about trans and non-trans, and people just don't want to use a word that implies non-normality or negativity, because it wouldn't help that conversation. It isn't necessary to use it all the time and it lets you have a non-confrontational non-judgemental conversation.


----------



## Dr Pepper (Jan 17, 2017)

kimthecat said:


> I think you're trolling !


No. If it wasn't a perversion of nature and the normal none of us would be here. I didn't mean it derogatory, each to their own and all that, but don't pretend it's nature's way.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

SusieRainbow said:


> If this is your opinion so be it. But that doesn't make it fact or a welcome contribution to the thread.
> The whole thread is becoming heated and quarrelsome , any more unpleasantness and trolling remarks, it will be closed.


Well, if you want my tuppence ha'penny worth; the post should be removed because it's deliberately incendiary.


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

Dr Pepper said:


> You are born male or female, very very occasionally hermaphrodite. Just because science has very recently made it possible to "change" sex doesn't make it right or normal. If people feel this way it's a perversion of nature, nothing more..


That would hilarious if it wasn't so offensive. You really are ignorant of the subject aren't you.

J


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

kimthecat said:


> Did people say they felt uncomfortable with labels,* (ETA below) I though they were saying that it was just unnecessary .
> Perhaps they're rebels and Born to be wild
> *ETA I meant with personally being labeled not uncomfortable with labels in general .


That's what I was trying to find out! 

Sorry Susie, I wasn't trying to be quarrelsome. I was just trying to find out why it's ok to label trans people but not ok to label non-trans people as cis.

There seems to a bit of a misunderstanding about the use of the label in general. It's not a value judgement. And it's not discriminatory. It's just a name for a group of people. It's mostly used in discussions of gender and gender politics. That's why it's necessary to have it. It makes the discussion easier.


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

Dr Pepper said:


> No. If it wasn't a perversion of nature and the normal none of us would be here. I didn't mean it derogatory, each to their own and all that, but don't pretend it's nature's way.


Now you are talking about homosexuality .....totally off subject. Please follow the debate.

J


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Zaros said:


> Well, if you want my tuppence ha'penny worth; the post should be removed because it's deliberately incendiary.


And if you want mine if those are dr peppers views who are we to query them. In no way shape or form to I agree with them but id bet my little cotton socks,my father would have said much the same had he have been alive


----------



## SusieRainbow (Jan 21, 2013)

The thread is supposedly about 'ban on transgender in the military ' so we have wandered off course. Lets get back on topic .


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Dr Pepper said:


> Ok, my tuppence worth.
> 
> You are born male or female, very very occasionally hermaphrodite. Just because science has very recently made it possible to "change" sex doesn't make it right or normal. If people feel this way it's a perversion of nature, nothing more.
> 
> That's all. Toodle pip.


You little devil 



Calvine said:


> But what is meant by ''more or less consistent''?


I assume it means things like tomboys. I've always been a bit tomboyish but I'm still female 



bearcub said:


> Why can't people just be people?


There's always different descriptive terms for nearly all things, so why not gender?
People are still people even if one is called farmer or a soldier or a banker. Same thing as far as I can see


----------



## Dr Pepper (Jan 17, 2017)

Jamesgoeswalkies said:


> Now you are talking about homosexuality .....totally off subject. Please follow the debate.
> 
> J


No I'm not.


----------



## SusieRainbow (Jan 21, 2013)

DT said:


> And if you want mine if those are dr peppers views who are we to query them. In no way shape or form to I agree with them but id bet my little cotton socks,my father would have said much the same had he have been alive


That is true, it's an old fashioned view point held by many elderly people. 
Thank goodness for education and enlightenment.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

DT said:


> And if you want mine if those are dr peppers views who are we to query them. In no way shape or form to I agree with them but id bet my little cotton socks,my father would have said much the same had he have been alive


And I have a few choice comedic views on the subject too. But I would never consider posting them here because I know how they would provoke strong reactions.

Sometimes, you instinctively know right from wrong.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

@DT Offensive views should always be questioned. If his view was offensive to you, would you just let it slide? No. As you've shown on this board again and again. Quite rightly you are quick to jump on things that offend you. But you have to allow other people the same reaction.


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

Dr Pepper said:


> No I'm not.


Oh yes you are.....trans persons can have children in their original sex and many do ....so your comment about the 'perversion of nature' meaning that none of us would be here means you are talking about homosexuality not gender fluidity or gender transitioning.

J


----------

