# Women’s Rights Trigger Warnings



## Boxer123

It's been a disappointing couple of weeks for women's rights accross the world.

The takeover of the Taliban in Afghanistan women and children will suffer the most.

Texas abortion law

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-58416805.amp

And in our own fine country child killer and rapist being released. I fail to see how he can not be a risk.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-58408210.amp

I don't know what the answer is but it's quite terrifying.


----------



## rona

Boxer123 said:


> It's been a disappointing couple of weeks for women's rights accross the world.
> 
> The takeover of the Taliban in Afghanistan women and children will suffer the most.
> 
> Texas abortion law
> 
> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-58416805.amp


Seems a lot similar here me thinks. Women who are raped or made pregnant through incest, seem to be blamed too if they want an abortion in Texas 

There's a chance that a rapist could prosecute a woman if she aborts a pregnancy from that rape


----------



## Boxer123

rona said:


> Seems a lot similar here me thinks. Women who are raped or made pregnant through incest, seem to be blamed too if they want an abortion in Texas
> 
> There's a chance that a rapist could prosecute a woman if she aborts a pregnancy from that rape


I just can't believe this is happening in 2021


----------



## rona

Boxer123 said:


> I just can't believe this is happening in 2021


I'm sorry to say but there is also another link between this and Afghanistan. They are both being driven by religion.


----------



## Boxer123

rona said:


> I'm sorry to say but there is also another link between this and Afghanistan. They are both being driven by religion.


Very true it is very much used as an excuse to control people.


----------



## Cleo38

It's disgusting! Honestly there are so many stories that are 'anti-women' that is makes for such depressing reading.

I've not read much about the abortion law in Texas but have read several articles about the vile man Colin Pitchfork, I honestly do not understand how he has the 'right' to be released after his horrible crimes? How can it be deemed that he is no longer considered a risk? Of course he hasn't been a risk so far as he's been in prison!

I hope he has a horrible time outside & lives in fear of reprisals for his crimes


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> It's disgusting! Honestly there are so many stories that are 'anti-women' that is makes for such depressing reading.
> 
> I've not read much about the abortion law in Texas but have read several articles about the vile man Colin Pitchfork, I honestly do not understand how he has the 'right' to be released after his horrible crimes? How can it be deemed that he is no longer considered a risk? Of course he hasn't been a risk so far as he's been in prison!
> 
> I hope he has a horrible time outside & lives in fear of reprisals for his crimes


Even on the off chance he is zero risk (don't believe it for a second) surely the girls and their families deserve justice? How must their families feel knowing he's going to be walking around.


----------



## simplysardonic

Cleo38 said:


> It's disgusting! Honestly there are so many stories that are 'anti-women' that is makes for such depressing reading.
> 
> I've not read much about the abortion law in Texas but have read several articles about the vile man Colin Pitchfork, I honestly do not understand how he has the 'right' to be released after his horrible crimes? How can it be deemed that he is no longer considered a risk? Of course he hasn't been a risk so far as he's been in prison!
> 
> I hope he has a horrible time outside & lives in fear of reprisals for his crimes


My husband & daughter both don't think he'll be safe from vigilante justice for long, I hope they're right.


----------



## Cleo38

Boxer123 said:


> Even on the off chance he is zero risk (don't believe it for a second) surely the girls and their families deserve justice? How must their families feel knowing he's going to be walking around.


Yes, exactly how I feel. they must be devastated. Same with those horrible men from the 'grooming' (rape) gangs. So many were supposed to be deported but instead were released from jail & one of their victims bumped in to one of her attackers in a supermarket with no knowledge that he had been freed in to this country.

It really is disgusting how male perpetrator's rights seem to trump those of their (mainly) female victims


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> Yes, exactly how I feel. they must be devastated. Same with those horrible men from the 'grooming' (rape) gangs. So many were supposed to be deported but instead were released from jail & one of their victims bumped in to one of her attackers in a supermarket with no knowledge that he had been freed in to this country.
> 
> It really is disgusting how male perpetrator's rights seem to trump those of their (mainly) female victims


You can guarantee those who chose to release him won't rehome him near their families.


----------



## mrs phas

Saw these the other day and wanted to start a thread 
But 
Was so upset I couldn't put a coherent sentence together, that would stay within the guidelines 
So thank you @Boxer123 for doing so

I also read that Alabama and another state I can't remember have 0 days abortion law , so women can't even get the morning after pill, for any reason
And 
That Texas has already set up a whistle blowing line, in preparation of the law coming into force


----------



## Boxer123

mrs phas said:


> Saw these the other day and wanted to start a thread
> But
> Was so upset I couldn't put a coherent sentence together, that would stay within the guidelines
> So thank you @Boxer123 for doing so
> 
> I also read that Alabama and another state I can't remember have 0 days abortion law , so women can't even get the morning after pill, for any reason
> And
> That Texas has already set up a whistle blowing line, in preparation of the law coming into force


I find it very upsetting. Apparently you can sue a women for having an abortion it's disgusting. I'm also quite confused as Biden has come out against it is he not in charge of America?


----------



## mrs phas

Boxer123 said:


> I find it very upsetting. Apparently you can sue a women for having an abortion it's disgusting. I'm also quite confused as Biden has come out against it is he not in charge of America?


Each state has their own government, if I've read things correctly, and it only goes to Congress if it's going to become a national law 
I think Texas is something Ike 4 or 5 times the size of UK, so it makes sense that they have their own state governing bodies 
Until something Ike this happens 
I was surprised to read Texas isn't the first state to implement this, so I wonder why no outcry over the others doing so


----------



## Cleo38

Boxer123 said:


> I find it very upsetting. Apparently you can sue a women for having an abortion it's disgusting. I'm also quite confused as Biden has come out against it is he not in charge of America?


But in this country rapists can (or could as am not sure if the law has been changed) request parental rights to any child born through rape. It's truly unbelievable, but happened again during the 'grooming' scandals. I think in one case one of the poor young women was almost forced by social workers to marry one of her attackers.

It honestly doesn't make sense how this can be lawful but again another example of women being treated unfairly


----------



## Boxer123

mrs phas said:


> Each state has their own government, if I've read things correctly, and it only goes to Congress if it's going to become a national law
> I think Texas is something Ike 4 or 5 times the size of UK, so it makes sense that they have their own state governing bodies
> Until something Ike this happens
> I was surprised to read Texas isn't the first state to implement this, so I wonder why no outcry over the others doing so


I was surprised to, I guess it depends on the direction the wind blows on whether the media report on it.


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> But in this country rapists can (or could as am not sure if the law has been changed) request parental rights to any child born through rape. It's truly unbelievable, but happened again during the 'grooming' scandals. I think in one case one of the poor young women was almost forced by social workers to marry one of her attackers.
> 
> It honestly doesn't make sense how this can be lawful but again another example of women being treated unfairly


That's awful  when you really think about everything you don't feel safe at all.


----------



## Beth78

The man who raped me has been free for years now, he's not allowed to mix with children though which is good I suppose but I don't like the fact he is free to do what he wants.
He got into therapy before I did which I don't think is right.


----------



## Boxer123

Beth78 said:


> The man who raped me has been free for years now, he's not allowed to mix with children though which is good I suppose but I don't like the fact he is free to do what he wants.
> He got into therapy before I did which I don't think is right.


I'm so sorry to hear that. It's not right not at all. Big hugs.


----------



## Beth78

Boxer123 said:


> I'm so sorry to hear that. It's not right not at all. Big hugs.


The good news is I'm in therapy now and am working on healing.
He can't hurt me any more.


----------



## Boxer123

Beth78 said:


> The good news is I'm in therapy now and am working on healing.
> He can't hurt me any more.


That's good you are getting support, you are a strong lady. Victim support in this country certainly needs some work.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

I'm ******* hopping about the anti-abortion laws in the States. I have friends there and it's terrifying. I was nearly expelled from my Catholic school for campaigning for a woman's right to choose when David Alton tried to get a bill through in the late 80s. I feel so passionately about it. I will defend a woman's right to choose until the end of my days.

@Beth78 I'm so sorry. I'm glad you are working through it, you are strong indeed.


----------



## Boxer123

Mrs Funkin said:


> I'm ******* hopping about the anti-abortion laws in the States. I have friends there and it's terrifying. I was nearly expelled from my Catholic school for campaigning for a woman's right to choose when David Alton tried to get a bill through in the late 80s. I feel so passionately about it. I will defend a woman's right to choose until the end of my days.
> 
> @Beth78 I'm so sorry. I'm glad you are working through it, you are strong indeed.


Good on you my blood is boiling. We like to think it couldn't happen here but who knows. Where's the policy on men who get these women pregnant? As a women it's terrifying.


----------



## MilleD

Anti abortion laws just drive it underground. Always have done. The fact that people know this, and still instigate these laws just goes to show they don't give a sh1t about women getting harmed.


----------



## Lurcherlad

MilleD said:


> Anti abortion laws just drive it underground. Always have done. The fact that people know this, and still instigate these laws just goes to show they don't give a sh1t about women getting harmed.


The sad (and horrifying) reality too is that possibly some of the women in power will have voted with the men on this …. Infathomable!


----------



## Dimwit

The anti-abortion law makes me so angry. There are so many reasons why a woman may decide not to continue with a pregnancy but they have to make an already incredibly difficult time even more so.

I don't know if anyone has seen Jen Psaki (White House press secretary) responding to a male journalist who kept asking about why Biden, a catholic, opposed this law but it is worth finding.
All the people (mainly men) hiding behind religion to try to control women would do well to think about this:


----------



## O2.0

The people writing these anti abortion laws and enacting them will always find a way for their mistresses and daughters to get an abortion. It's not a law that will affect the affluent and powerful. They think it makes them look good and caring and they don't care that it only really affects the poor and less influential. It makes me sick.

All while also making it harder for women to get access to birth control, health care and pre-natal care. 

One woman can realistically only have one baby a year. One man can impregnate countless women in a year. If the problem is really babies being born without proper adult support, we're looking at all of this from the wrong angle. Chemically castrate all men until they're mature and financially stable enough to support a child. Make it mandatory? Oh, sound draconian? Huh... try being a woman!


----------



## Mrs Funkin

I have cared for many women having a termination for an abnormality in the fetus. I’ve cared for several women who have had a late termination not for abnormality (we had one of only two clinics in the country who performed the procedure near to my old hospital, the women often ended up with us). I have cared for women having surgical early terminations whilst I was training to be a midwife. I have provided information for women about how to access a termination when they have come to register their pregnancy but just cannot do it but thought they had no way out. For all of these things I am glad that the women encountered me and not a “pro-life” midwife. I was ignored and slagged off by some very religious colleagues after one horrific situation, where I helped a woman access a termination. I also helped her escape a spectacularly awful situation - which she couldn’t have done if she had gone ahead. 

We actually need people to use contraception more effectively. We need to teach our girls that they don’t have to have sex without a condom and we need to teach our boys that they shouldn’t even entertain unsafe sex. Obviously not just from a pregnancy POV. I can honestly say I can count on one hand the number of women I have met in all these years who have not agonised over their decision to terminate. 

I always say I’m not pro-termination, I’m pro-choice. I would much rather women not have an unwanted pregnancy in the first place. We are so lucky in this country to have access to free contraception. We need to use it more! The American situation is hideous, I’m really pleased that Biden is supportive of the right to choose. 

The situation for Afghani women and girls now is equally terrifying. I have no idea what can be done, it must be so frightening to be there. Don’t forget though, we don’t want “them” arriving on our shores and taking our jobs and houses…oh but isn’t it awful what might happen to them, aren’t the Taliban terrible. Oh but no I don’t want them living two doors up from me, why should they get a bigger house than I’ve got? Pffft. *removes tongue from cheek* 

Jeez. I’ve been for a run and a bike ride and a go on a friend’s rowing machine and I’m still angry about it all!


----------



## Boxer123

O2.0 said:


> The people writing these anti abortion laws and enacting them will always find a way for their mistresses and daughters to get an abortion. It's not a law that will affect the affluent and powerful. They think it makes them look good and caring and they don't care that it only really affects the poor and less influential. It makes me sick.
> 
> All while also making it harder for women to get access to birth control, health care and pre-natal care.
> 
> One woman can realistically only have one baby a year. One man can impregnate countless women in a year. If the problem is really babies being born without proper adult support, we're looking at all of this from the wrong angle. Chemically castrate all men until they're mature and financially stable enough to support a child. Make it mandatory? Oh, sound draconian? Huh... try being a woman!


Exactly this.


----------



## Cleo38

Just saw this on my FB newsfeed ... funny & sad at the same time


----------



## DogLover1981

I find the fierce opposition to abortions from some people here in the states to be rather bizarre. People eat animals far more sentient than a fetus and that's especially true early in pregnancy. People also regularly have dogs PTS which are also far more sentient than a human fetus. People regularly abort pregnancies in dogs and other animals with little thought even though there's very little difference between a dog fetus and a human fetus. To a degree, I think, it's not really about abortion and that it's "merely" the crazy politics and culture of the USA. There's all sorts of extremes here. My state has few abortion restrictions for example.


----------



## Boxer123

What a brave group of women. Women's rights protesters in Afghanistan.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-58450230


----------



## Magyarmum




----------



## Cleo38

I heard on the news yesterday about the horrible case of Sophie Moss who was killed by Sam Pybus in yet another ';rough sex' attack. Why is this now being accepted so readily by judges? Why is the accused statement that his victim consented so readily?

Apparently this piece of sh*t says he passed out (as he'd been drinking) then became conscious & saw her lifeless body yet didn't do anything for 15mins (probably whilst he got his story straight) then phoned an ambulance. He was only charged with manslaughter & according to what i heard on the news yesterday will probably only serve 2 yrs for this crime.

Depressing reading ....
Man pleads guilty to killing lover by choking her to death | Daily Mail Online
Sophie Moss: Sam Pybus jailed for strangling woman to death in Darlington flat | The Northern Echo
We Can't Consent To This (wecantconsenttothis.uk)


----------



## Nonnie

Cleo38 said:


> I heard on the news yesterday about the horrible case of Sophie Moss who was killed by Sam Pybus in yet another ';rough sex' attack. Why is this now being accepted so readily by judges? Why is the accused statement that his victim consented so readily?
> 
> Apparently this piece of sh*t says he passed out (as he'd been drinking) then became conscious & saw her lifeless body yet didn't do anything for 15mins (probably whilst he got his story straight) then phoned an ambulance. He was only charged with manslaughter & according to what i heard on the news yesterday will probably only serve 2 yrs for this crime.
> 
> Depressing reading ....
> Man pleads guilty to killing lover by choking her to death | Daily Mail Online
> Sophie Moss: Sam Pybus jailed for strangling woman to death in Darlington flat | The Northern Echo
> We Can't Consent To This (wecantconsenttothis.uk)


His sentence is being reviewed https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-58492328


----------



## Cleo38

Nonnie said:


> His sentence is being reviewed https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-58492328


Yes, I had seen that & really hope it's successful. Her poor family, having to go through all that & then that disgusting man gets such a slap on the wrist ... what an insult! 
I hope he gets plenty of 'rough sex' in prison seeing as he enjoys it so much


----------



## Nonnie

Cleo38 said:


> Yes, I had seen that & really hope it's successful. Her poor family, having to go through all that & then that disgusting man gets such a slap on the wrist ... what an insult!
> I hope he gets plenty of 'rough sex' in prison seeing as he enjoys it so much


I really think sentencing needs an overhaul.

Fed up of seeing so many people get a suspended sentence for some pretty serious crimes, or being handed down the lowest possible sentence. The amount of people that have thousands of Cat A child pornography images that never go to prison is disgusting.


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> Yes, I had seen that & really hope it's successful. Her poor family, having to go through all that & then that disgusting man gets such a slap on the wrist ... what an insult!
> I hope he gets plenty of 'rough sex' in prison seeing as he enjoys it so much


And of course we are taking his word for it that she consented I doubt he even knows what the word means. Disgusting.


----------



## Cleo38

Nonnie said:


> I really think sentencing needs an overhaul.
> 
> Fed up of seeing so many people get a suspended sentence for some pretty serious crimes, or being handed down the lowest possible sentence. The amount of people that have thousands of Cat A child pornography images that never go to prison is disgusting.


I completely agree. This new 'excuse' that men now have seems to be being used more frequently & yet again their victim's sex life is being dragged in to the public forum & used against her. Same old story, always blame the woman for the actions of a violent man. I honestly hope it is overhauled & it's about bloody time


----------



## Cleo38

FFS ..... this is not right 

Man makes history by beating/choking woman on live television - by Graham Linehan - The Glinner Update (substack.com)


----------



## Siskin

Cleo38 said:


> FFS ..... this is not right
> 
> Man makes history by beating/choking woman on live television - by Graham Linehan - The Glinner Update (substack.com)


It certainly isn't. I just despair all over again. What on earth are we coming to as a species, this is just brutal


----------



## Magyarmum

Siskin said:


> It certainly isn't. I just despair all over again. What on earth are we coming to as a species, this is just brutal


It's sick!


----------



## mrs phas

Cleo38 said:


> FFS ..... this is not right
> 
> Man makes history by beating/choking woman on live television - by Graham Linehan - The Glinner Update (substack.com)


No one forced her to fight him tho?
I'm not defending him for one minute, its sick that the promotors thought such a fight was ok
But
She could've said no and refused the match, walked away with dignity and the backing of most sane women everywhere
One has to wonder what kind of woman would volunteer to get beaten up by a bloke, let alone think they could win against such?
End trans genocide?
How about ending abuse of women and their rights


----------



## O2.0

mrs phas said:


> No one forced her to fight him tho?


Her - Alana McLaughlin is a trans woman and goes by her. We can object to the fight and still be respectful of the fighters and use their preferred pronouns.

Alana's life is tragic and I have a so much compassion for what she has endured. 
I don't agree with her though. Her choice of t-shirt is particularly jarring and disrespectful to the actual genocides that have happened that still aren't even fully acknowledged. The Mayan Genocide of the 1980's for example. That sort of thing has never happened to trans communities. To claim that is what trans people are experiencing is IMO in terrible taste.

And yes, Celine did not have to fight her. This is true. But who knows what the fight promoters put forth and how this all came about. 
Personally I think it sets a bad precedent and it will become a slippery slope towards eliminating women's sports entirely. If we start being completely 'inclusive' in sports, we will no longer see women competing at the elite levels. 
I for one am not okay with that.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Her - Alana McLaughlin is a trans woman and goes by her. We can object to the fight and still be respectful of the fighters and use their preferred pronouns.
> 
> Alana's life is tragic and I have a so much compassion for what she has endured.
> I don't agree with her though. Her choice of t-shirt is particularly jarring and disrespectful to the actual genocides that have happened that still aren't even fully acknowledged. The Mayan Genocide of the 1980's for example. That sort of thing has never happened to trans communities. To claim that is what trans people are experiencing is IMO in terrible taste.
> 
> And yes, Celine did not have to fight her. This is true. But who knows what the fight promoters put forth and how this all came about.
> Personally I think it sets a bad precedent and it will become a slippery slope towards eliminating women's sports entirely. If we start being completely 'inclusive' in sports, we will no longer see women competing at the elite levels.
> I for one am not okay with that.


Personally I couldn't give a sh*t about his story. Am fed up with privileged men thinking their rights trump everyone else's. I am not against trans people (as I feel I need to keep saying) yet this is vile & is promoting male violence against women. If he had any understanding of being a woman (which he obviously doesn't) then he would realise this is not right & how vile this is.

Be a transwoman, live your life as you want to, etc but do not take away places designed for women & do not use your new gender identity to beat up women because you now can.

And there is no genocide against trans people. That t shirt just say it all to me


----------



## kimthecat

This is scary and shocking. , Taken from the link


----------



## Cleo38

@kimthecat

Yes, absolutely horrible. That's why when he did get the sh*t kicked out of him (the video was amazing!) I & many other TERFS cheered ... something I would never usually btw


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> Personally I couldn't give a sh*t about his story. Am fed up with privileged men thinking their rights trump everyone else's. I am not against trans people (as I feel I need to keep saying) yet this is vile & is promoting male violence against women. If he had any understanding of being a woman (which he obviously doesn't) then he would realise this is not right & how vile this is.


As a human I do. It's tragic how her own mother treated her. I'm sensitive to parental rejection and I have a lot of empathy there. I don't know that I would call her privileged either. I'm familiar with the area she (he back then) grew up in, and it's definitely not a life of privilege.

See that's where I say there has to be a way to treat trans people with compassion and understanding while still protecting the rights and safety of biological women. 
This is not it.

Fallon Fox's comments are horrific and exactly the sort of thing that makes this all so scary for biological women.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> As a human I do. It's tragic how her own mother treated her. I'm sensitive to parental rejection and I have a lot of empathy there. I don't know that I would call her privileged either. I'm familiar with the area she (he back then) grew up in, and it's definitely not a life of privilege.
> 
> See that's where I say there has to be a way to treat trans people with compassion and understanding while still protecting the rights and safety of biological women.
> This is not it.
> 
> Fallon Fox's comments are horrific and exactly the sort of thing that makes this all so scary for biological women.


When I use the word privileged I mean in the sense that so many men seem to consider their rights before those of anyone els'es .... & IME it does seem to be mainly men.

Parental rejection is tough, am not denying that but do I feel compassion for someone who feel's it's their 'right' to beat women up? Who fails to consider their physical strength against that of a biological female then no I don't tbh.

I would treat people with compassion usually but am getting fed up of men disregarding others for their own gain.

Trans people like this are part of the reason why there will be less tolerance. I used to consider myself very tolerant of other but am slowly becoming less so for some. I do recognise this & try to balance this (hence me watching an old BBC series documenting the journey of a lovely trans woman & the stigmas she faced. It truly was upsetting (it was based in the late 70'80's so very little tolerance) & demonstrated how she just wanted to get on with her life & be accepted ....why does that seem to be such a problem now?

And sorry, this wasn't meant to be another trans debate but an example of 'acceptable' male violence


----------



## Boxer123

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...killing-women-and-judges-are-falling-for-them

An interesting article.


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> Trans people like this are part of the reason why there will be less tolerance.


I most definitely agree with this, and I think a lot of the trans community does too. They just get shouted down.

That said, I try very hard not to be negatively influenced by the louder trans "activists" because I know they don't speak for the whole community, most of whom are very understanding and reasonable about the fears biological women have of losing their hard earned spaces and tenuous safety.

Sadly I think the trans debate is integral to what is happening to women now. It's all connected. 
A very loud group of trans women (biological men) being very aggressive towards women, using terms like TERF and excuses to attack verbally and sometimes physically. It's *something* and it needs to be part of the conversation.


----------



## mrs phas

kimthecat said:


> This is scary and shocking. , Taken from the link


This is exactly the reason I referred to them as him 
Normally, as many know, I'm the first to defend LGBTQ+ rights and use correct pronouns 
But
Anyone who posts such vile glorification in beating up a woman, doesn't deserve to be recognised in their 'new identity'
It would seem the _*only *_ reason they fight women is to do such harm and are no good when fighting their own gender
Don't get me wrong, if women want to fight other women in sport, any sport, then go for it, I don't support it, as I don't like it, but I _*do*_ support your choice
For a man to choose to identify as a woman, to beat women up, is wrong, whatever way one looks at it and I refuse point blank to recognise his choice of identity, the same as I never have, nor would , support a rapist being put in a woman's prison, because they, conveniently, self identify as a woman _*after*_ sentencing


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> I most definitely agree with this, and I think a lot of the trans community does too. They just get shouted down.
> 
> That said, I try very hard not to be negatively influenced by the louder trans "activists" because I know they don't speak for the whole community, most of whom are very understanding and reasonable about the fears biological women have of losing their hard earned spaces and tenuous safety.
> 
> Sadly I think the trans debate is integral to what is happening to women now. It's all connected.
> A very loud group of trans women (biological men) being very aggressive towards women, using terms like TERF and excuses to attack verbally and sometimes physically. It's *something* and it needs to be part of the conversation.


 Yes, I agree. I think it does all tie in & that's why it's so bloody scary. It is not about trans acceptance at all IMO .,....


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Lurcherlad

mrs phas said:


> This is exactly the reason I referred to them as him
> Normally, as many know, I'm the first to defend LGBTQ+ rights and use correct pronouns
> But
> Anyone who posts such vile glorification in beating up a woman, doesn't deserve to be recognised in their 'new identity'
> It would seem the _*only *_ reason they fight women is to do such harm and are no good when fighting their own gender
> Don't get me wrong, if women want to fight other women in sport, any sport, then go for it, I don't support it, as I don't like it, but I _*do*_ support your choice
> For a man to choose to identify as a woman, to beat women up, is wrong, whatever way one looks at it and I refuse point blank to recognise his choice of identity, the same as I never have, nor would , support a rapist being put in a woman's prison, because they, conveniently, self identify as a woman _*after*_ sentencing


Perhaps the answer is to have Trans Sport?

In the same way girls can play football in "boys" teams up to a certain age …. as physicality then comes into it.

By secondary school the mismatch in size, strength and physicality is pretty big ime.

They can then play in women's teams. Seems fair to me.

Same way we have Olympics and Paralympics …. for fairness.

Trans women should not be able to compete against females …. but only against other Transwomen (Trans men the same).

Obviously, it will be a "minority" sport but could grow accordingly.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Cleo38

bmr10 said:


> This would not work as people transition at different ages. Those transitioning before puberty are likely to have a physical advantage over their counterparts who transitioned later in life. As I said, I am not sure why competitors of any gender matched on their athletic abilities is not the best option? There are many cis women who could win a fight against a cis man- I don't think that gender or transitioning needs to be a part of this discussion at all. Just match people fairly based upon their sporting abilities.


So if gender isn;t part of fair sporting abilities then why would it be uinfair for trans people to compete against each other? Seems to me that male/female sports have worked pretty well for men in the past yet now more investment/interest is being shown in women's sports all of a sudden mediocre male athletes are now 'transitioning' & competing against biological women.

Of course it needs to be part of the discussion ... when you have biological men beating up women because they now
can then is is very much part of a discussion


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## MilleD

bmr10 said:


> Your biological sex contributes to your physical abilities most definitely and that is why I proposed matching fighters based upon their physical abilities *not* strictly their gender. If you match based on gender then what about the cis woman who could take on a cis man? I don't see an issue with that fight happening unless there's an unfair power advantage. For trans individuals, the age they underwent hormone therapy (if they have at all) will have the potential to create those unfair power advantages. A male to female trans woman who transitioned at 40 is likely to have a power advantage over a male to female trans woman who transitioned at 16. The former will have completed a male puberty and will likely have the physical advantages that come with that. That, to me, wouldn't be a fair fight. The same as a heavyweight vs lightweight boxing fight wouldn't really be fair, would it? Would we put Barcelona FC against your local football team made up of non professionals? Probably not as the difference in athletic ability is extreme and it would likely be a wipe out. Why can't the same happen in this situation? Put fighters together who have similar athletic abilities- regardless of their genders. I cannot think of a reason why this would be unfair.


Abilities IS usually used to pit like against like. That's what seedings and leagues etc and in the case of fighters weight (usually) is about.

How do you propose they 'test' ability if it isn't on weight?

I can see it now - "Hit this as hard as you can"

"ok" '_tap_'

During a fight though - '*WHACK*'

See how that wouldn't work?


----------



## Cleo38

MilleD said:


> Abilities IS usually used to pit like against like. That's what seedings and leagues etc and in the case of fighters weight (usually) is about.
> 
> How do you propose they 'test' ability if it isn't on weight?
> 
> I can see it now - "Hit this as hard as you can"
> 
> "ok" '_tap_'
> 
> During a fight though - '*WHACK*'
> 
> See how that wouldn't work?


Completely agree.



bmr10 said:


> Your biological sex contributes to your physical abilities most definitely and that is why I proposed matching fighters based upon their physical abilities *not* strictly their gender. *If you match based on gender then what about the cis woman who could take on a cis man?* I don't see an issue with that fight happening unless there's an unfair power advantage. For trans individuals, the age they underwent hormone therapy (if they have at all) will have the potential to create those unfair power advantages. A male to female trans woman who transitioned at 40 is likely to have a power advantage over a male to female trans woman who transitioned at 16. The former will have completed a male puberty and will likely have the physical advantages that come with that. That, to me, wouldn't be a fair fight. The same as a heavyweight vs lightweight boxing fight wouldn't really be fair, would it? Would we put Barcelona FC against your local football team made up of non professionals? Probably not as the difference in athletic ability is extreme and it would likely be a wipe out. Why can't the same happen in this situation? Put fighters together who have similar athletic abilities- regardless of their genders. I cannot think of a reason why this would be unfair.


Am not sure what this relate to? Can you give an example of where this has happened? I don't follow much sport so may have missed something

The other examples you cite already demonstrate gradings so surely this again will be applicable to the person being male or female For example I doubt a heavyweight male boxer will be the same as a female fighter.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Siskin

bmr10 said:


> I don't follow sport at all so was not referencing a sporting incident, apologies. Was referencing real life incidents where women have fought off a man. Also, it's impossible to say that no woman on earth could take on another man. Although it's not fighting, Caster Semenya has XY chromosomes and has been raised as an woman since birth. She naturally has a high testosterone production and is forced to take medication to lower this as it gives her a sporting advantage. Is that okay? In my opinion no as she identifies as a woman and should be allowed to perform as her natural self. If she was placed with runners of any gender that are more on her performance level would that not be fairer?
> 
> Creating a trans-only version of the sport would mean creating both a pre-puberty transition trans-only version and a post-puberty transition trans-only version. It would also invalidate that trans individuals are the gender they say they are. It would also mean that some trans people who are not out would be outed against their will in order to compete in a sport they love. Very little people would watch it too as trans individuals are heavily judged.


I guess there were similar issues when people were thinking about the para Olympics. After all not all disabled people are the same, some have more sight then others, some have more movement then others and so on and so forth. They have managed to work out a system of grading each competitor so that who they compete against makes them as equal as possible. I dare say it was thought no one would watch it as who would want to watch a load of disabled people trying to compete in sports, yet they do. The para Olympics is popular, I dare say a trans Olympics could be in years to come


----------



## Cleo38

Lets hope these scum bags are finally deported. I still cannot believe that despite their crimes some only served a few years & are still in this country. Their poor victims have been through so much so should not have to worry about constantly bumping in to these horrible men.

'What about my rights?' Rochdale groomer complains at deportation tribunal | Evening Standard


----------



## kimthecat

Cleo38 said:


> Lets hope these scum bags are finally deported. I still cannot believe that despite their crimes some only served a few years & are still in this country. Their poor victims have been through so much so should not have to worry about constantly bumping in to these horrible men.
> 
> 'What about my rights?' Rochdale groomer complains at deportation tribunal | Evening Standard


I hope so!

This made me laugh 
"I cannot take my son to school if it is raining, we cannot afford a taxi."  He could do what we used to do , wear a rain mac and take a brolly .


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> I don't follow sport at all


Yes, and your ignorance shows in your posts - I don't mean that unkindly or condescendingly, simply a statement of fact. You can tell by your posts that you're not at all familiar with athletics in general, particularly not at the elite level. 
An elite female athlete can fairly easily best an average male athlete.
But an elite male athlete will in general always best an elite female athlete.

Elite athletes - those at the top of their sport, are a combination of genetic jackpot, hard work and training, mental toughness, opportunity, and yup, sex. Sex differences are more than just power and size. Men have more fast twitch muscle for example, so their reaction time is better. Men have a higher VO2 max, their blood volume is different, men have denser bones. That's not to say women don't have some advantages, we do. Women tend to be more flexible than men, we have a higher pain tolerance or endurance for pain so we can push ourselves harder. 
But there is a reason why we have men's sports and women's sports. There is a reason why there is anywhere from a 10 to 30 percent difference in the world records for men and women in all sorts of sports.

And not for nothing, women have fought so hard for equal representation and opportunity in sports, it's beyond frustrating and discouraging to see those opportunities being taken by men.



bmr10 said:


> This would not work as people transition at different ages. Those transitioning before puberty are likely to have a physical advantage over their counterparts who transitioned later in life.


This is a whole other conversation. 
There is compelling evidence that transitioning before puberty is physically and mentally more harmful than helpful. I don't mean social transition, which wouldn't affect athletic ability, but hormonal transition which is hugely controversial. I think history will show it to be a terrible experiment we did on our children, and not for their benefit.


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> I hope so!
> 
> This made me laugh
> "I cannot take my son to school if it is raining, we cannot afford a taxi."  He could do what we used to do , wear a rain mac and take a brolly .


I know ... his poor son tho. Imagine finding out that your dad was involved in all that


----------



## MilleD

Siskin said:


> I guess there were similar issues when people were thinking about the para Olympics. After all not all disabled people are the same, some have more sight then others, some have more movement then others and so on and so forth. They have managed to work out a system of grading each competitor so that who they compete against makes them as equal as possible. I dare say it was thought no one would watch it as who would want to watch a load of disabled people trying to compete in sports, yet they do. The para Olympics is popular, I dare say a trans Olympics could be in years to come


Grading someone on how well you can do something is a lot easier than getting a fighter to say how well they can do something.

If you have to do your best everytime it's tested, it's easy to measure (run/swim/lift/shoot etc).

It's always going to be the contact sports that would be difficult to grade on ability.

And my, weren't the paralympics spectacular?


----------



## Cleo38

MilleD said:


> And my, weren't the paralympics spectacular?


I don't watch sport but it is fantastic to see that different events are now getting more TV coverage & (Hopefully) investment. I hope this continues


----------



## Boxer123

And then there is Prince Andrew. I have no words.


----------



## Magyarmum

Boxer123 said:


> And then there is Prince Andrew. I have no words.


If there's any truth in the series I'm watching the Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew are saints compare to this man'

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


----------



## Cleo38

Magyarmum said:


> If there's any truth in the series I'm watching the Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew are saints compare to this man'


Yes, I have read about this horrible man


----------



## Magyarmum

Cleo38 said:


> Yes, I have read about this horrible man


Horrible is too nice a word for him.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Jesthar

bmr10 said:


> But if sporting matchups were based wholly on predicted performance then it would be possible to match some female fighters with some male fighters. As previously discussed, I acknowledge it has limitations and a lot of it would be down to trust but I still don't believe in separating genders in sport. *With more and more people identifying as a different gender to what they were assigned at birth or even no gender at all how will this be fair?* In what category will a non-binary fighter be placed? The idea of having women's, men's, trans women who transitioned before puberty, trans women who transitioned after puberty, trans men who transitioned before puberty, trans men who transitioned after puberty, and gender non-binary classes for sports is excessive to me. There are physiological differences associated with each sex hormone and how long a person has had them flowing through their body but as the discussion of gender moves away from a binary format to a more open way of thought I feel that this way of classifying sports will become logistically impossible. Evidently, we are already seeing issues with it. I don't think these issues will stop and I really do believe there needs to be a different way of deciding who fights/competes against who. Placing a trans woman in the male league is, to me, akin to saying "You can say you're a woman but you're not _really_ a woman".


With respect, you are confusing biological sex and gender. Biological sex is what is defined genetically at conception/birth - usually male or female, but with the occasional intersex or other outlier.

Gender is where things get gnarly, as that has no scientific definition, only a social definition. Basically, gender is defined as the expectations of society placed on biological adult males, adult females, young males and young females - the behavioural norms and roles society expects them to adopt or fall within the bounds of based on their biology. Needless to say, social definitions are a lot more blurry than scientific definitions, and as such these expectations can vary from not only country to country, but culture to culture, area to area, even street to street and family to family - and are also subject to change at any time, sometimes on very short notice, as society changes.

Not so long ago, for example, some common gender definitions were that "a (biological) woman's place is in the home," "biological men should be the breadwinners," "women can't do computing," "real men don't cry" etc. I think we can all agree that those either have been or are being generally eroded - but that some areas and cultures are still holding on to at least some of them.

Or take 'pink for a girl, blue for a boy' - a gender definition as old as the hills, right? Wrong - as recently as the early 20th century, it was common for mothers to be told that boys should be dressed in a masculine color like pink in order to grow into a more manly individual later in life, while girls should be dressed in a more feminine alternative like blue. It was only post WW2 this definition was flipped and pink suddenly started being marketed and sold by fashion brands and retailers as the perfect color for women, while blue was suddenly manly and masculine.



bmr10 said:


> Also, if there are studies you are referring to surrounding the compelling evidence then I'd be interested in reading them. The only issue I am aware of is the fact that gender dysphoria (which not all trans people experience) is sometimes no longer reported after adolescence. This could be due to a multitude of variables. I am not sure about other countries but the NHS guidance for gender-affirming hormones is that the individual must be around the age of 16. Prior to this, puberty blockers can be used. Puberty blockers have long been used in children who experience precocious puberty and there is a well-documented safety profile associated with their usage. The use of gender-affirming hormones is not as well documented but I would not label it as a "terrible experiment". A whole team is involved in these cases, including a paediatric endocrinologist and psychologist. As society understanding of gender identity changes, I feel that this service will only improve. There are health risks associated with any medical intervention but again, these decisions involve an entire team especially when the patient is a child. When guidelines are strict and adhered to, then the prescription of puberty blockers allows time for conversations around gender to happen. Conversations that help identify whether transitioning is the best choice for someone. There are always going to be people who regret transitioning, but statistics show this is incredibly rare and much rarer than adults who wish they had been offered puberty blockers/gender-affirming hormones prior to puberty. I believe the question as to if this treatment is the right course of action for a child should be judged on a case by case basis. Some individuals will be unsuitable for treatment but for some, it will allow them to escape the often traumatising process of experiencing puberty of a gender which you do not identify with.


I would have to wholly disagree with allowing children to take 'gender affirming' hormones - I think that would definitely be a terrible experiment. A young body is a mass of swirling hormones and development, even before puberty hits. Do we really want to go throwing powerful drugs into that mix of such tender ages and immature minds? Wouldn't it be better to figure out someone is why a child is feeling that way and try and work through that first, rather than initiate a premature fight with something as immutable as biology?


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> But if sporting matchups were based wholly on predicted performance then it would be possible to match some female fighters with some male fighters. As previously discussed, I acknowledge it has limitations and a lot of it would be down to trust but I still don't believe in separating genders in sport.


You mean separating sexes?

Not separating sexes in sports will mean the end of women's sports. And if that doesn't bother you, then please research how hard women have fought over the years to be taken seriously in sports, to have equal representation, equal prize money and pay - all the battles women have fought to simply be allowed to compete. 
Look up title nine in the US. 
Look up when women were first allowed to compete in different venues in the olympics.

The history of women in sports is the story of women fighting to be treated fairly - like we have fought in so many other areas. What you're suggesting - to eliminate biological sex categories, is a huge slap in the face to women athletes past and present, and quite insulting really.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Cleo38

bmr10 said:


> I believe everyone has a place in sport but I cannot see how it will logistically be possible to include non-cis people in future with this current set up, especially as the rates of non-cis gender identities increase. .


As I said I don't follow much sport but as far as I can tell there hasn't been the increase in transmen in sport (& the few I have looked at seem to compete in women's sports) - maybe I am completely wrong so would be grateful if anyone has info 

What I do see is an increase of trans women competing against women in sports & having an unfair advantage. Several of the trans men were mediocre athletes then all of a sudden they compete against women & they do much better ... funny that!


----------



## Boxer123

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....-compete-in-pageant-without-makeup-2021-9?amp

Some good news


----------



## Lurcherlad

Good news on that front. 

Natural beauty should be allowed to shine …. instead of the lipgloss! 

If only makeup (and sexy dancing) could be banned from the kids’ pageants in USA … they are obscene with their sexualisation of very young children


----------



## picaresque

O2.0 said:


> You mean separating sexes?
> 
> Not separating sexes in sports will mean the end of women's sports. And if that doesn't bother you, then please research how hard women have fought over the years to be taken seriously in sports, to have equal representation, equal prize money and pay - all the battles women have fought to simply be allowed to compete.
> Look up title nine in the US.
> Look up when women were first allowed to compete in different venues in the olympics.
> 
> The history of women in sports is the story of women fighting to be treated fairly - like we have fought in so many other areas. What you're suggesting - to eliminate biological sex categories, is a huge slap in the face to women athletes past and present, and quite insulting really.


A famous example being Kathrine Switzer, the first woman to run the Boston marathon in 1967 which at that point was an all male event.









Unfortunately scenes like this have returned in the 21st century when women dare to protest to keep hold of their sex based rights, in sport and elsewhere. So much for progress.


----------



## Cleo38

Such a disgusting man yet a suspended sentence?!!! How do they get away with these crimes? 

Male midwife, 39, caught with stash of 400 indecent images of children | Daily Mail Online


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> I believe everyone has a place in sport but I cannot see how it will logistically be possible to include non-cis people in future with this current set up, especially as the rates of non-cis gender identities increase. Obviously, as shown by the news article linked, we are already facing issues with it. If it is a "Women's" or "Men's" sport that refers to gender and then where do you place trans and non-binary people? Placing a trans man in the women's class would be a slap in the face to him. For non-binary people- do you ask what genitals they had as a kid? I feel like this set up would be rife in controversy and offence. If it is "Female" or "Male" sport then that still has the issue of 1) majority of the public see women/female and men/male as interchangeable and some competitors will not be comfortable with people viewing them as a woman/man just because of the genitals they had a birth 2) Where do you place intersex individuals? In the category they identify as? In the category a judge feels they look the most like??
> 
> Unless they can somehow work something out then I believe news stories of trans/NB competitors sparking controversy will continue.


Saying you believe everyone has a place in sports and then going on to suggest we eliminate women's sports doesn't make sense, and isn't very inclusive either. You just eliminated 50% of the population's opportunity to compete at the elite level.

Non binary athletes already compete happily in sport as the sex they are biologically. Quinn is a Canadian football player who was born female but identifies as non binary. They compete on the women's football team. It's a non-issue. Layshia Clarendon is another non binary athlete who was born female and competes in the WNBA - women's league. They identify as non-binary. Another complete non-issue.

I don't know what the solution is for trans women who were born male and want to compete as women but I do know that eliminating opportunities for all biological women in order to accomodate trans women is not the right answer.


----------



## O2.0

picaresque said:


> A famous example being Kathrine Switzer, the first woman to run the Boston marathon in 1967 which at that point was an all male event.


So for those who don't follow/understand sports. The Boston Marathon is a great example. 
In order to be allowed to run the Boston Marathon you have to have run another official marathon at a qualifying time. Qualifying times are based on age and yup - sex. There is a 30 minute difference between the qualifying times for men and women. 
Qualifying to run the Boston Marathon is a goal for a lot of hobby runners. It's a nice little feather in your cap. One of my friends qualified this year and it's a huge deal. 
We need the separate sex categories to keep the playing field fair and have equal representation of men and women.

@bmr10 do you really want to see women disappear from sports after all we have fought to claim our place there?


----------



## Siskin

It wasn’t that long ago that women were not allowed to run marathons as it was considered they were not able to do so and it was unhealthy for them


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## picaresque

@bmr10 there is a reason transmen aren't qualifying against biological males in great numbers...


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Cleo38

bmr10 said:


> A trans man would not compete against women under current regulations so I am not sure what instances you're referring to. *There may well be a larger number of trans women competing in high-level sports than trans men*- from what I can see there are no figures on it. Although, perhaps the number of trans men competing has not seemed to increase as it is less reported on than trans women competing.


Exactly ... wonder why? Could it be because they have an unfair advantage ... IMO yes.

Keelin Godsey is a transman yet competes in the women's division of hammer throwing. If he takes testosterone then maybe this would also be unfair. But .... if he had to compete against men then no way would he be as good as them..

This is madness, some people are simply picking & choosing which divisions they will do best in so this is NOT fair.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## O2.0

picaresque said:


> @bmr10 there is a reason transmen aren't qualifying against biological males in great numbers...


I think the "party line" is that there are no real sex differences between men and women. And as such, we don't acknowledge that trans men aren't blowing it out of the water in men's sports.

It's confusing to me. If there is no difference between sexes - which is the excuse used for allowing trans women to compete against biological women, then why is being trans even a thing? If anyone can be any gender they want, and gender is fluid then surely that would mean that there is no need for gender reassignment surgeries and hormones.



bmr10 said:


> Myself asking why sports cannot be segregated based on a predicted performance level, acknowledging the limitations of this and the fact that it would be largely based on trust, and then clearly stating that I do not see how it is logistically possible to include all gender identities with the current set up does not equate to me wanting "to see women disappear from sports". I am not a committee member deciding the regulations for a sporting event. I proposed a possible solution and while that may not be the most beneficial solution or the one that we eventually are forced to use, I still believe that news articles sparking outrage at trans/NB athletes competing will continue under the current setup. The current regulations discriminate cis women (see Caster Semenya) and the LGBT+ community and I do not personally see how they will hold up in future. If the Olympics exist in 50 years time I would be incredibly surprised if the gender regulations were the same as they are today.


I feel like you're only reading parts of my posts, not the whole thing so it's frustrating to keep answering what feels like the same thing over and over. 
Sports already ARE segregated based on a predicted performance level because one's sex IS a predictor of performance level. IOW, we already have a way of segregating sports based on performance and that is to base participation on biological sex. 
After that, yes there are also levels and divisions.
Some sports have weight and age divisions. This is how sports have been segregated for years, it's based on science and biology, and it's fair.

Hey, would love to compete in the 70 to 79 age bracket the next time I run a race because I would win. But unfortunately for me, I was born in 1972 and I don't have the option of changing the age I identify as when I compete...


----------



## Cleo38

bmr10 said:


> There probably are individuals choosing which division they will do best in but I think this is the minority and is blown out of proportion by media and the public. I feel that the majority of trans athletes wish to compete in the class that makes them feel the most comfortable mentally.


You may feel it is being blown out of proportion but tell that to the girls & women who dedicate their lives to pursing their chosen sport only to have biological males be allowed to also compete & steal their glory.

You can't have people simply choosing what they want to enter because it's their right .... it does seem that the category that many chose to compete in is the one that means they will be more successful in which is very wrong.

Utter madness & I hope it is stopped or women's sport will be so unfair that I can't see how it would be able to continue


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Cleo38

bmr10 said:


> I get your point but the issue is that the language used in the competing classes is gendered. A trans man being forced to compete in the women's class may be based on the sex they were assigned at birth but it gives off the impression that they are not seen as a "real man". Vice versa for trans women. If the regulatory bodies remove gendered language and change to female and male (which have gendered connotations anyway but let's pretend they don't) then there is still the issue of placing intersex individuals who are born with both sets of reproductive organs/genitals (either partially or complete). These individuals are assigned a sex at birth, so this could work, but there would still be outcry over an intersex woman with naturally high levels of testosterone competitions against cis non-intersex women. Basing it upon chromosomes additionally has issues as there are more than XX and XY pairings.
> 
> There is no way to place trans athletes in today's set up without it being controversial. Placing them with their birth sex is essentially invalidating who they are and placing them with the gender they identify with has the potential to create an unfair game.


But are trans men being 'forced' to compete with women or at they choosing to? There does not seem to be many trans men in sport & I can understand why ... because if they had to compete against men they would not do well. Hence the outcry when transwomen are allowed to compete against women, It is unfair.

And in reality how many inter sex people are there & how many are athletes? It seems alot of bother for such a tiny fraction of society when in reality it's not needed.

Whilst I understand how intersex people can be assigned a sex at birth (or later in life) most people aren't .... we are born either male or female, it is not assigned.


----------



## mrs phas

52 shades of gender

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/types-of-gender-identity#types-of-gender-identity

So shall we have sport/the world broken down into all of these?
What a joke!



bmr10 said:


> There is no way to place trans athletes in today's set up without it being controversial. Placing them with their birth sex is essentially invalidating who they are


And referring to real women by using the made up, by the LGBTQ+ community, word cisgender is essentially invalidating our right to be who we are
Real, natural, born, women/females

Edit to add; just to make things crystal clear: 
I totally support trans rights 
I refuse to accept the term cisgender 
That _*Is *_ my right!


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## mrs phas

bmr10 said:


> I'm not sure what you're referring to. Cisgender means you identify as the sex you were given at birth. It was created as a counterpart to transgender as they are opposites. When the sun is in the sky we call this day and we could call when the moon is out as "not day" but it is easier to say "night". We could refer to people identifying as the sex they were assigned at birth as "not transgender" but I see no harm in having a unique term for it such as cisgender. All words are made up after all. I am a cis woman but I do not see myself as more "real" than my trans sisters. I was born a woman and have developed the physical shape associated with women naturally, yes, but I would not say that this makes me more real than those who haven't.


 That's your choice 
Not mine 
I refuse to acknowledge the term cisgender when being spat out by those who somehow think they're superior to those born women, it's the highjacking of the termand being made into a slur I object to, not the word itself
The same as I didn't support LGBTQ+, when they moaned about the rainbow being used for the NHS 
Nor do I support self identification, as used by those who wish to use it for nefarious reasons, (and we know there's been at least two, which were high profile)
Or 
The usage of '*** hag' or 'tranfans' for those who wish to show more than verbal support

The vitriolic venomous side of the trans community, is as bad as the venom spewed at them by the haters 
But 
As shown by the woman beater's t shirt, they seem to believe it's a one way street.
Perhaps he, (I refuse to acknowledge him with any other pronoun) and others, of the LGBTQ+ community, need some history lessons into what the term genocide actually encompasses


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Cleo38

bmr10 said:


> I'm not sure what you're referring to. Cisgender means you identify as* the sex you were given at birth.* It was created as a counterpart to transgender as they are opposites. When the sun is in the sky we call this day and we could call when the moon is out as "not day" but it is easier to say "night". We could refer to people identifying as the sex they were assigned at birth as "not transgender" but I see no harm in having a unique term for it such as cisgender. All words are made up after all. I am a cis woman but I do not see myself as more "real" than my trans sisters. I was born a woman and have developed the physical shape associated with women naturally, yes, but I would not say that this makes me more real than those who haven't.


I really do wonder why you (& others) keep using this phrase. I see it so often & I honestly don't understand it. We are not 'given' a sex we are born with a sex of either male or female. Your statement makes it sound as if a baby was given a box with either a penis or a vagina in when it was born 

I am not a ciswoman I am a biological woman, I do not need some made up name to describe my biology. 

What is wrong with trans women & women? It's pretty clear, easy to understand & correct.


----------



## kimthecat

All these groups insisting they should be called this or that and it seems biological women are not allowed to choose what they want to be called.


----------



## Jesthar

bmr10 said:


> https://www.reuters.com/article/olympics-2020-athletics-intersex-idUSL8N2OW50W According to this article the estimate is that 7.1 out of 1000 athletes are intersex. Additionally, everyone is assigned a sex at birth (and even before then) based upon the genitals of the child. "Assigning" of sex means that's what they write down on the birth certificate and is usually what the child is raised as. Unless you were born at home and have never had to register your gender then you were assigned a sex at birth.


Respectfully, once again you are confusing biological sex and gender.

Most people (intersex notwithstanding) have their biological sex recorded at birth as most babies enter the world with obviously male or female genetalia. And I mean recorded, not assigned, as biological sex comes pre-defined by your chromosomes (which are set at the moment of conception) and is therefore immutable, not decided by the doctors or parents after birth and the appropriate bits bolted on like a biological Meccano kit. Nobody registers a gender at birth, only biological sex.

As for "what the child is raised as" - maybe that is a large part of the problem. Perhaps if society ditched the whole notion of 'masculine' and 'feminine' activities and instead just considered it absolutely fine for a child of either biology to, say, have a dolls tea party or build a go-kart, rather than tell them that wanting to do that isn't what boys/girls should be interested in, we may have less kids (and adults!) worrying that they don't feel like doing the things they think they ought to...


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## kimthecat

.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## kimthecat

bmr10 said:


> I agree that biologically the Y chromosome is typically the "male" chromosome and determines whether a child will be born male or female but I fail to see how you can say that sex is not assigned at birth when intersex individuals exist. In these cases it very much is up to the doctor's discretion whether male or female will be assigned? I don't feel that we can exclude a group of people from the discussion. Furthermore, despite a child being born with female genitals and being raised as a female, it may turn out she has androgen insensitivity syndrome and a Y chromosome. Her chromosomes would indicate she is a male but a doctor looked at her genitals and was confident that she was a female. There are sometimes incompatibilities between our chromosomes and the expected phenotypes associated with them.
> 
> I do agree with what you say about removing gender norms for children. I think it's damaging to the child and society as a whole.


 the doctors have to assign a gender at birth and state whether a child is male or female so the birth can be registered and for legal purposes . That doesn't change the fact that children are born male , female and some intersex, They are born like that and it doesn't change because a doctor says different .


----------



## picaresque

bmr10 said:


> You are born with genitals and chromosomes you are not born with a sex


Sorry but this is just nonsense. We have now reached the point where we're just pretending biological sex isn't an objective reality. The existence of intersex people does not change this. Sometimes babies are born with one or both legs missing or only partially formed, humans are still bipeds.
The fact that woman is a 'made up word' also is not a gotcha... humans have language and name things. Dog is also a made up word, I'm looking at mine right now, he is real, he is a dog, dogs exist. He's male incidentally, he has a sex, that's real too.


----------



## picaresque

Are we going to get the clownfish argument next?


----------



## kimthecat

picaresque said:


> Are we going to get the clownfish argument next?


Whats that? ETA just Binged it. they can change sex. Looking forward to that argument 

BTW in your other post , you said what I wanted to say except you said it better.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> I asked why the criteria cannot be based wholly on predicted performance with no segregation between women and men.


Again, sex is an integral part of predicting performance. An elite female runner is going to be on average 30% slower than an elite male runner. 
You can't have both predicted performance and no segregation between men and women because sex is absolutely part of predicting performance. 
Either you predict performance and include sex in the prediction or you base it on nothing but performance and end up eliminating women from the elite ranks of pretty much every sport minus equestrian sports and maybe fencing and archery.



bmr10 said:


> I asked for the compelling evidence against transitioning prior to puberty but this was not mentioned in any of your replies.


Abigail Sherer wrote a whole book on it, but I didn't want to bring that up because I'm sure she's black listed by the folks you follow and it didn't seem worth the discussion.



Cleo38 said:


> And in reality how many inter sex people are there & how many are athletes? It seems alot of bother for such a tiny fraction of society when in reality it's not needed.


Exactly. 
Women make up roughly 50% of the population. I'm all for being inclusive, but when your idea of inclusivity causes 50% of the population to lose their place in sports, lose their safe spaces, lose their rights, then that's not inclusivity.



kimthecat said:


> All these groups insisting they should be called this or that and it seems biological women are not allowed to choose what they want to be called.


Yup, here's a perfect example of women being 'erased' in the name of inclusivity. Women are no longer women, we are 'cis' women - whether we want to be called that or not. The term "woman" is essentially being stolen from us.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Cleo38

picaresque said:


> Sorry but this is just nonsense. We have now reached the point where we're just pretending biological sex isn't an objective reality. The existence of intersex people does not change this. Sometimes babies are born with one or both legs missing or only partially formed, humans are still bipeds.
> The fact that woman is a 'made up word' also is not a gotcha... humans have language and name things. Dog is also a made up word, I'm looking at mine right now, he is real, he is a dog, dogs exist. He's male incidentally, he has a sex, that's real too.


It's madness, I honestly feel as if this is part of a bigger conspiracy against women. I know we've discussed this before & I would never considered myself a conspiracy theorist but .....

I am a woman. I am not a ciswoman. I am a biological woman. I am female. Why is that now considered offensive?


----------



## MilleD

If all sport is based purely on (perceived) ability, men and then trans women will win everything where a strength weight or speed element is involved.

I can't believe that someone can't understand the impact of that on women.


----------



## Cleo38




----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> View attachment 476273


Oh that last line!!! Absolutely!! 
We're now deciding who gets to have the label of "woman" like it's up for men to decide. No, biology decides if you're a woman or not.



bmr10 said:


> The sentence after the section you quoted mentions I am aware of the limitations and that it may very well not be the system future regulatory bodies decide to utilise, but that I do believe the system will be forced to change as the number of trans athletes rises.


I think the "rise" in trans athletes should make us pause and think. 
Historically, the number of people in the population who identify as trans is tiny. Now, there is a compelling argument to be made that as acceptance grows, the number of people who feel comfortable coming out as trans will grow too. 
However, when there is a massive increase in only a small part of the population, then you have to ask the difficult questions. Why are we seeing a sudden rise in tans female athletes but not an equal increase in trans male athletes? Where are the middle aged, non athletic trans women who now feel comfortable enough to come out? There's not an equal increase there is there. 
You get in to a chicken and egg conversation. Are there more trans female athletes now because the rules have changed to accept them, or has the change in rules allowed more men to figure out ways of gaining athletic accolades?



MilleD said:


> I can't believe that someone can't understand the impact of that on women.


Exactly. In the US sports means athletic scholarships to universities. In a country where higher education is not free, this can seriously impact what education is available to you. That's why there was such a kerfuffle in Connecticut over two male high school runners who ran as women, broke all sorts of track records, and pushed female athletes out of region and state final placements. Those region and state finals are where recruiters watch athletes and think about who they're going to offer scholarships to. Those women never got the opportunity to go to state. Not because they weren't good enough, but because two men took their spots.

Or as Abigail Shrier points out, why is there suddenly a massive (1000 to 4000 percent) rise in young female teens identifying as trans but not an equal rise in other areas of the population? Is this a trans issue that needs to be addressed, or are there social issues going on that are being ignored because we're so focused on trans acceptance and activism? 
And what in god's name are we doing to our daughters? 
https://www.independent.ie/entertai...e-rise-in-teen-gender-dysphoria-39975855.html

When a young teenage girl is so traumatized by the thought of what it means to be a woman in today's world that she would rather cut off her breasts than become a woman, is that a 'her' issue or is that a societal issue?


----------



## O2.0

More on teenage girls.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/when-your-daughter-defies-biology-11546804848

We're not permanently disfiguring our teenage boys. Just girls. And no one is asking why...


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> More on teenage girls.
> https://www.wsj.com/articles/when-your-daughter-defies-biology-11546804848
> 
> We're not permanently disfiguring our teenage boys. Just girls. And no one is asking why...


This is so sad & disturbing


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Boxer123

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58591225.amp

This report out today about violence against women. Most domestic abuse cases get thrown out.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> because on average a body that has gone through male puberty will perform better at most sports than a body that has gone through female puberty.


Yes. Exactly. At least you acknowledge this now... 


bmr10 said:


> I feel that the vast vast majority of trans women athletes genuinely identify as women and are more prominent in sports than their trans men counterparts *due to the physical advantage they can possess over cis women*.


Read that bolded part again. And then try to understand what that feels like for biological women athletes - hell biological women period.



bmr10 said:


> Also, I think the lower rates of middle-aged trans people in comparison to younger trans people is probably due to the same reasons as there is a higher incidence rate of individuals identifying as not-straight in younger populations than older populations. I think there would be more middle-aged trans women comfortable enough to come out but I think there are differences in the average opinion on LGBT+ (especially the T and B) topics between these two age groups. Young people are being raised in a world much more accepting towards these communities than a currently middle-aged person was. Obviously, your upbringing does not define you but it may be that a lot of middle-aged trans people cannot accept their identity or do not feel supported enough by those around them/feel that they would face judgement. This happens in any age group but I know that for a lot of young people, gender and sexuality are big discussions happening all the time with their friends and there can be a higher degree of openness, progression, education, and acceptance.


More openness in younger generations accounts for *some* of the higher rates, but a 4000% increase? And only with girls, not boys? If more openness in younger generations accounts for the increase, why are we not seeing an equal rate of boys wanting to transition? Why is it only with girls? 
Do you really think if a generation of boys started asking to be chemically castrated at 12 years old based on self-diagnosis that we as a society would support it with open arms? I don't. 
Did you even read the articles I posted?


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## mrs phas

bmr10 said:


> I have previously mentioned, the road to commencing surgery or even prescribing gender-affirming hormones is long and in the UK the NHS guidance is that both of these are not suitable until a child is around 16. In the UK someone of 16 is legally an adult and has full control over their medical treatment (no more mandatory parents in a doctor's office).


BBC News - Ruling limiting under-16s puberty blockers overturned
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58598186


----------



## kimthecat

mrs phas said:


> BBC News - Ruling limiting under-16s puberty blockers overturned
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58598186




" Court of Appeal judges said they recognised "the difficulties and complexities" of the issue, but that "it is for the clinicians to exercise their judgement knowing how important it is that consent is properly obtained according to the particular individual circumstances".

Can we trust the clinicians at the Tavistock Trust? Hmmm.


----------



## kimthecat

Boxer123 said:


> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58591225.amp
> 
> This report out today about violence against women. Most domestic abuse cases get thrown out.


Shocking. Awful to think that not much has changed overt the years . Its not over when the relationship is over. You have to deal with the aftermath and the memories of abuse and fear and the affect it has on future relations . There are men who start off charming and then gradually start controlling you and they erode your confidence , clever enough to physically hurt you but not enough so that its noticeable to others and you are afraid of them.


----------



## Boxer123

kimthecat said:


> Shocking. Awful to think that not much has changed overt the years . Its not over when the relationship is over. You have to deal with the aftermath and the memories of abuse and fear and the affect it has on future relations . There are men who start off charming and then gradually start controlling you and they erode your confidence , clever enough to physically hurt you but not enough so that its noticeable to others and you are afraid of them.


You just described my ex husband. I would like to see more education in schools which covers; red flags, healthy relationships, how to be alone, also how to leave because it's not that easy. It's such a wide subject. We often tell women not to walk home at night or to drink to much but the majority are killed in their own home.


----------



## kimthecat

Boxer123 said:


> You just described my ex husband. I would like to see more education in schools which covers; red flags, healthy relationships, how to be alone, also how to leave because it's not that easy. It's such a wide subject. We often tell women not to walk home at night or to drink to much but the majority are killed in their own home.


Im sorry to hear that. That was my ex but fortunately I wasn't married to him.

Same with sexual assaults , its usually someone you know.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## kimthecat

kimthecat said:


> " Court of Appeal judges said they recognised "the difficulties and complexities" of the issue, but that "it is for the clinicians to exercise their judgement knowing how important it is that consent is properly obtained according to the particular individual circumstances".
> 
> Can we trust the clinicians at the Tavistock Trust? Hmmm.


Keira Bells lawyers are seeking permission to appeal at the Supreme Court .


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> Many of these trans people may decide sooner or later that they don't identify as trans and that's okay.


I have absolutely nothing against social transitioning. I think it's a perfectly safe and affirming way for a child to experiment as children and teens do.



bmr10 said:


> Additionally, it is not disfigurement for trans people to change their bodies and that is quite a loaded term to use.


 But here's the rub. If that child who goes from social transitioning to physical transitioning and has surgery then hits his/her 20's and realizes they no longer feel like they did as teens (who doesn't?) that surgery very much was a disfigurement.

Teens are my area of expertise. I've been working with teens for the past 26 years. I have experienced many of the trends Abigail Shrier talks about - eating disorders, cutting, burning, self-harm, and now questioning gender. 
Personally I'm more worried about a child doing themselves permanent damage than I am about using a "loaded" term.

18 years ago when I found out I would have to have a c-section and asked my doctor to tie my tubes while he was in there, he talked me out of it saying that with pregnancy and everything happening I probably wasn't in the best frame of mind to make such a permanent choice (even though tubal ligation is supposedly reversible). Though I never did change my mind, I really appreciate him being up front with me about it. That we don't afford teenage girls this same welfare bothers me.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> In this scenario, the surgery would have been a choice that at the time all parties thought was the best decision going forward. All anyone can do is make the decision they think is best at that moment in time. People will change their mind or have regrets about medical treatment but if the treatment is done in a professional, cautious manner using up to date information then I cannot argue against it. The hypothetical scenario you mention does happen and is extremely unfortunate I do not think it is common enough to remove the option of gender-affirming hormones for adolescents. This study only has a cohort of 767 but I would presume getting trans volunteers is much more difficult than a "healthy young person" most used in studies. It states that only 2.2% of the cohort expressed regret over transitioning. Study: https://www.researchgate.net/public...en_1960-2010_Prevalence_Incidence_and_Regrets
> Articles with further studies:
> https://www.stonewall.org.uk/about-us/news/dispelling-myths-around-detransition
> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1102686
> While your doctor was right to err on the side of caution as decisions like that are best made when plans have been laid down well in advance and discussions have been had, that is exactly the point of puberty blockers. Delaying puberty by a couple of years allows time for these discussions to be had and can avoid the sometimes traumatic experience that is going through the puberty of a sex you do not identify with. If patients were forced to wait until post puberty before discussions over gender-affirming hormones were had, then this will still likely leave them with undesirable leftover characteristics which will affect their mental health and potentially require surgery (if the person opts to). These operation costs add up and increase the health risks associated with transitioning. Transitioning at a younger age can avoid these things happening and allow trans people to grow into a body they feel comfortable in.
> 
> And on the topic of the rise in young trans men being associated with mental health issues then at what point do you wait to have a discussion about physical transitioning? You could wait until the patient is 20 but they'd likely still be experiencing gender dysphoria or other mental health issues. At what point would someone be in the right state of mind? I think this is why a psychologist being involved is key. A psychologist can aim to help a child ascertain whether the feelings they are experiencing are due to their body/gender or due to other stressors in their lives. I think medical professionals require further education in these areas so that this service is safer and more beneficial for patients of all ages and that these cases of individuals detransitioning/experiencing regret, though few, decrease.


You're completely overlooking the data that teen girls are self diagnosing as trans at rates that have risen by 4000%, far, far more than any other demographic, teen boys are not discovering that they're trans, it's just teen girls. At that rate the number of girls who later change their mind is going to be far higher. 
Then we offer these girls hormone that have life-long consequences. That affects mental health as well, that causes multiple surgeries and medical interventions to try and reverse. That side of the argument matters too. 
Doesn't the hippocratic oath call for "first do no harm"? Hormones offered to 16 year olds can cause infertility, osteoporosis, heart disease. 
Puberty blockers are not benign either.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> Every medical treatment carries risks and potential side effects. Taking a multivitamin has potential health risks. The caesarian you mentioned carries potential health risks which you will be aware of. This part of the oath refers to intentional harm. If a doctor is prescribing gender-affirming hormones to someone with the intent of causing side effects then that is malpractice but a doctor prescribing a medication to a child that has potential side effects is not the same thing.


It's pretty euphemistic to call puberty blockers and 'gender affirming' hormones "medication." It's not medication. It's powerful hormones that have long-term and potentially permanent effects. Permanently changed facial features, permanent infertility, endometriosis. That's not the same as giving a child a multivitamin or even a course of antibiotics. It's disingenuous to conflate the two.



bmr10 said:


> I believe the majority of teen referrals being trans men is due to their feminine upbringing and the increased rates of mental health issues that come with this.


I don't know what feminine upbringing means but I find it hard to believe that it accounts for the increase we're seeing. And even if it is does, hormones are not the answer.



bmr10 said:


> Some of those who identify as trans at this age may go on to change their mind but once again this is why the NHS (England) guidance advises puberty blockers must be used for at least 12 months prior to commencing gender-affirming hormone therapy. Those 12 months allow discussions to happen which can hopefully decrease the risk of "actually this label does not fit me anymore, I wish I had never went through with medical treatment" occurring. The guidance of a patient being around the age of 16 before being offered gender-affirming therapy applies here too.


Again with the euphemistic "gender-affirming therapy." Call it what it is. These girls are being given large doses of testosterone. Do you know what the effects of testosterone are? Well for one, it makes you feel awesome. Particularly if you weren't feeling that good about yourself to begin with. So the teenage girl who feels anxious and depressed before, takes testosterone, feels great and this confirms for her that her problem must indeed be that she's really trans.
The other effects of testosterone can be permanent. Including loss of fertility - which comes with it's own very serious MH implications.



bmr10 said:


> If trans men make up the majority of trans people in the future then the ratio between trans men and trans women detransitioning would, hypothetically, favour trans men. The higher rates of people identifying as trans, in general, may push that 2.2% figure higher but there is absolutely no way to know either of these at present as it's impossible to do a decent longitudinal study. Improving the service we provide so that it is safer, based on up to date education, and as attentive as possible will aim to decrease the likelihood of this happening.


But that's the thing. Historically there has always been a greater population of trans women than men. This new trend of teenage girls identifying as trans is just that - a trend.

There is clearly something happening to our teenage girl population and I find it impossible to believe that they are all now suddenly trans. Our girls need our support and our wisdom and they need help absolutely. 
But what is so hard for me watching this all unfold is that there is a very vocal group of people purporting to want to help, but their help feels a lot more like trying to forward an agenda than truly having these girls' best interest in mind.

That all this is happening at the same time as so many other events that hurt women - among them the horrifying trial of Larry Nassar with Olympic gymnasts having to retell and relive their trauma over and over, feels a lot like an attack on women and girls. 
Like others I do not consider myself a conspiracy theorist, but it's all feeling so overwhelmingly misogynistic it's hard not to connect the dots.


----------



## kimthecat

What TERF really stands for -

TERF - Tired of Explaining Reality to Fantasists. :Hilarious


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> What TERF really stands for -
> 
> TERF - Tired of Explaining Reality to Fantasists. :Hilarious


I LOVE this!!!!


----------



## Cleo38

More depressing reading supressing the rights of girls & women 

Taliban ban girls from secondary education in Afghanistan | Afghanistan | The Guardian


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> More depressing reading supressing the rights of girls & women
> 
> Taliban ban girls from secondary education in Afghanistan | Afghanistan | The Guardian


It's just awful.


----------



## Cleo38

Boxer123 said:


> It's just awful.


It really is. I honestly feel the quote from JK Rowling (unfortunately) is so relevant atm. WTF is happening?


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> It really is. I honestly feel the quote from JK Rowling (unfortunately) is so relevant atm. WTF is happening?


I really don't know women's rights are being eroded or maybe I'm just more aware. Either way it's scary.


----------



## Magyarmum

kimthecat said:


> Shocking. Awful to think that not much has changed overt the years . Its not over when the relationship is over. You have to deal with the aftermath and the memories of abuse and fear and the affect it has on future relations . There are men who start off charming and then gradually start controlling you and they erode your confidence , clever enough to physically hurt you but not enough so that its noticeable to others and you are afraid of them.


My ex never abused me physically \but the emotional abuse I suffered at his hands nearly killed me. He was an abused child (long story) who ended doing to me what his mother had done to him. So tragic because we had known each other from childhood and I was one of the few people who knew what he had gone through and yet he chose to make me the target of all his hate towards women.


----------



## kimthecat

Magyarmum said:


> My ex never abused me physically \but the emotional abuse I suffered at his hands nearly killed me. He was an abused child (long story) who ended doing to me what his mother had done to him. So tragic because we had known each other from childhood and I was one of the few people who knew what he had gone through and yet he chose to make me the target of all his hate towards women.


I'm sorry to hear that.


----------



## Boxer123

Magyarmum said:


> My ex never abused me physically \but the emotional abuse I suffered at his hands nearly killed me. He was an abused child (long story) who ended doing to me what his mother had done to him. So tragic because we had known each other from childhood and I was one of the few people who knew what he had gone through and yet he chose to make me the target of all his hate towards women.


Sorry to hear that, apart from a few physical incidents mine was mostly emotional/financial. I ended up a shell of myself if that makes sense I was so tired and run down. I had some dark thoughts in those times. Thank god I had the boxers.


----------



## Magyarmum

kimthecat said:


> I'm sorry to hear that.


Water under the bridge. I don't hate him, even 35 years later I only wish things could have been different.

Has anyone been watching the US gymnasts who've been testifying about the abuse they received from Larry Nasser. Quite shocking how they were all ignored by the FBI for 20 years.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/larry-nassar-usa-gymnastics-simone-biles-aly-raisman/

*U.S. gymnasts testify about abuse by Larry Nassar: "We have been failed"*


----------



## Magyarmum

Boxer123 said:


> Sorry to hear that, apart from a few physical incidents mine was mostly emotional/financial. I ended up a shell of myself if that makes sense I was so tired and run down. I had some dark thoughts in those times. Thank god I had the boxers.


I just had two young sons, three dogs, two cats, six mice, seven snakes and a bull frog. no home, no money and living in a foreign country.


----------



## rona

Boxer123 said:


> Sorry to hear that, apart from a few physical incidents mine was mostly emotional/financial. I ended up a shell of myself if that makes sense I was so tired and run down. I had some dark thoughts in those times. Thank god I had the boxers.





Magyarmum said:


> I just had two young sons, three dogs, two cats, six mice, seven snakes and a bull frog. no home, no money and living in a foreign country.


I'd hate to think what it does to you long term. I was lucky to have family and a great friend, so only put up with it for a couple of years.


----------



## Magyarmum

rona said:


> I'd hate to think what it does to you long term. I was lucky to have family and a great friend, so only put up with it for a couple of years.


It took me about 10 years to sort myself out but in the end as my mother always said "You spit on your hands and start again"


----------



## Boxer123

rona said:


> I'd hate to think what it does to you long term. I was lucky to have family and a great friend, so only put up with it for a couple of years.


I'm over two years separated 10 months divorced. Covid in a way was a blessing. It forced me to confront my feelings, it gave me time to think about what happened. I realised I didn't like myself very much. I could still hear his thoughts in my head, 'your boring, your weird, funny looking, messy and a failure. You make everything worse.

Lockdown gave me the chance to get some counselling and work on myself. The best bit of advice I had was, 'imagine your 4 year old self would you say that to her.'

Now I find myself smiling over nothing I dance when cooking, I laugh again. I'm in a really good place. I'm getting my anxiety under control and I've not self harmed since I left. (I wouldn't have put this on a public forum a year ago I would have been embarrassed but I'm not now)

I hope I can get to a place like @Magyarmum where I don't hate him anymore but I do. I hate him for taking my child bearing years, I hate him for making me scared in my home I'd worked 70 hour weeks to pay for. I hate him for taking that confident, happy 30 year women and turning her into a gibberish mess.

Mostly I hate him for scaring sox and making him cower (I will carry that shame until I die) my beautiful gentle boy who once stood in front of me and barked even though he was scared and stopped me being screamed at.

Sox is much better now he has a new lease of life, he isn't nervous anymore he is silly and playful.

But yes you start again. Starting again is amazing.

For anyone reading this wanting to leave but don't know how;

My saviours;

my deputy head teacher at my workplace Wendy who tried to find me accommodation with my boys. Talk to someone anyone that's the first step.

Woman's Aid who are on the end of the phone If you cannot get out safely they will help.

The Rights of the Women free legal advice team.

There are charity's that will foster pets whilst you get out.

Your local GP.


----------



## Siskin

Oh bless you @Boxer123 for being able to say these things out loud (so to speak). I can imagine that writing it down and clicking on the post button must have felt scary but cathartic at the same time.
My heart goes out to you, I'm so very happy that you are now in a good place and getting your life back


----------



## Boxer123

Siskin said:


> Oh bless you @Boxer123 for being able to say these things out loud (so to speak). I can imagine that writing it down and clicking on the post button must have felt scary but cathartic at the same time.
> My heart goes out to you, I'm so very happy that you are now in a good place and getting your life back


Thank you.


----------



## Lurcherlad

What awful stories some of you tell … my heart goes out to you 

So glad you are all on the other side of it and able to look forward.


----------



## kimthecat

Magyarmum said:


> I just had two young sons, three dogs, two cats, six mice, seven snakes and a bull frog. no home, no money and living in a foreign country.


+

I went home to my parents . I just said it didn't work out , I didn't want to upset them as they had enough on their plates but one time he came round drunk and we had to call the police.


----------



## O2.0

Magyarmum said:


> Has anyone been watching the US gymnasts who've been testifying about the abuse they received from Larry Nasser. Quite shocking how they were all ignored by the FBI for 20 years.


Yes, I brought it up earlier.

Does anyone else see a parallel with the Larry Nassar case - adult gymnasts raising concerns and outright evidence and it being brushed under the carpet, and the Tavistock situation where a psychiatrist raised concerns about how the girls were being treated, and not only was she ignored, she herself was maligned and ostracized. 
It's like our daughters are expendable.


----------



## kimthecat

@02.0 Its sickening reading the tweets from supporters of the clinic , they jubilant about their victory and how they have won.etc


----------



## O2.0

kimthecat said:


> @02.0 Its sickening reading the tweets from supporters of the clinic , they jubilant about their victory and how they have won.etc


I thought the whistleblower finally won some damages?!

I'm not on twitter, and I'm glad I'm not.


----------



## Cleo38

Such sad stories regarding abusive exes. Thank-you for sharing tho everyone. I think it's good reminder to know that abuse can have so many different guises & usually starts with little things to chip away at your confidence before it really escalates 

I hope you are all stronger now & recognise that these men are the ones with the problems, not you.


----------



## kimthecat

O2.0 said:


> I thought the whistleblower finally won some damages?!
> 
> I'm not on twitter, and I'm glad I'm not.


Oh sorry , Yes she did . I forgot to add the comments were about the recent court of appeal case , they over turned a ban on puberty blockers for under 16s.

https://www.theguardian.com/society...ers-ruling-for-under-16s-tavistock-keira-bell

Twitter was fun at first but now its manic. I do it because I don't like Facebook. The animal forums and Yahoo groups I used to do aren't running anymore . Its good to be in touch with people who have the same illnesses as me.  and also I follow dog trainers and anti hunt people so I get a lot of information from them.


----------



## Magyarmum

O2.0 said:


> Yes, I brought it up earlier.
> 
> Does anyone else see a parallel with the Larry Nassar case - adult gymnasts raising concerns and outright evidence and it being brushed under the carpet, and the Tavistock situation where a psychiatrist raised concerns about how the girls were being treated, and not only was she ignored, she herself was maligned and ostracized.
> It's like our daughters are expendable.


Sorry. I haven't been following this thread too closely.


----------



## karenmc

Your post made me get tears in my eyes @Boxer123 . I am so sorry that you went through all that and happy for you that you are coming out the other side and are happy with your lovely boys.x


----------



## Calvine

Boxer123 said:


> It's just awful.


I read that they were allowed to attend university, but had to be segregated from the boys/men (however that would work) and had to wear ''appropriate'' clothing.


----------



## Boxer123

Calvine said:


> I read that they were allowed to attend university, but had to be segregated from the boys/men (however that would work) and had to wear ''appropriate'' clothing.


I guess separate lectures with female teachers. Poor women they must be so scared.


----------



## Calvine

Magyarmum said:


> the emotional abuse I suffered at his hands nearly killed me


True: mental cruelty is more difficult to prove as there are no physical signs. It's a difficult one and one that parents often use.


----------



## Cleo38

Yet more bad news from Afghan women & girls .... 

Taliban rename women's ministry as department 'for promotion of virtue and prevention of vice' | The Independent


----------



## Calvine

Cleo38 said:


> Yet more bad news from Afghan women & girls ....
> 
> Taliban rename women's ministry as department 'for promotion of virtue and prevention of vice' | The Independent


 You could not make this up in your wildest dreams!


----------



## O2.0

Magyarmum said:


> Sorry. I haven't been following this thread too closely.


No, no need to apologize, I only mentioned it in passing on one post, I was just agreeing with you that yes, I've been following the Nassar case too. It's horrifying 

The thing that bothers me so is that while the Larry Nassar case is front and center, this sort of thing - powerful men with lots of connections taking care of "their own" happens so often and it's always the women and girls who suffer. 
How many women came forward about Harvey Weinstein and it was brushed aside "oh well, that's just the way he is." And it took those women becoming powerful themselves for anyone to do anything about it.

How many abused women and girls never get to the point that they are important enough to be listened to?


----------



## Magyarmum

O2.0 said:


> No, no need to apologize, I only mentioned it in passing on one post, I was just agreeing with you that yes, I've been following the Nassar case too. It's horrifying
> 
> The thing that bothers me so is that while the Larry Nassar case is front and center, this sort of thing - powerful men with lots of connections taking care of "their own" happens so often and it's always the women and girls who suffer.
> How many women came forward about Harvey Weinstein and it was brushed aside "oh well, that's just the way he is." And it took those women becoming powerful themselves for anyone to do anything about it.
> 
> How many abused women and girls never get to the point that they are important enough to be listened to?


I don't know whether you've been following the series "Unseamly" "The Investigation into Peter Nygard".

He was so rich that he could afford to pay the police to "bury" any complaints against him. Or in the more persistent cases financially ruin them.

He's now facing extradition from Canada to the US to stand trial..

https://globalnews.ca/news/8187785/...ace-extradition-hearing-sooner-than-expected/
*
Former fashion mogul Peter Nygard to face extradition hearing sooner than expected*


----------



## rona

Calvine said:


> True: mental cruelty is more difficult to prove as there are no physical signs. It's a difficult one and one that parents often use.


Yes. I didn't tell anyone but my two best friends. Still haven't really. Something I'd like to put completely behind me. So hard though, beforehand I was lighthearted, silly and innocent........he took that away in two short years.
He was the life and soul at the pub, no one would believe.........................


----------



## Boxer123

rona said:


> Yes. I didn't tell anyone but my two best friends. Still haven't really. Something I'd like to put completely behind me. So hard though, beforehand I was lighthearted, silly and innocent........he took that away in two short years.
> He was the life and soul at the pub, no one would believe.........................


That's always the way they can put on the charm when they need to.


----------



## O2.0

Here in the US we have a missing woman case that has made national news. Gabby Petito. She and her fiance were traveling out west in a travel van, he returned without her and is invoking his 5th amendment rights. Refuses to speak to anyone. Right now there is no crime, just a missing person report. He has now disappeared. He's definitely not acting like an innocent person...


----------



## Boxer123

O2.0 said:


> Here in the US we have a missing woman case that has made national news. Gabby Petito. She and her fiance were traveling out west in a travel van, he returned without her and is invoking his 5th amendment rights. Refuses to speak to anyone. Right now there is no crime, just a missing person report. He has now disappeared. He's definitely not acting like an innocent person...


I've been reading about this scary.


----------



## Calvine

rona said:


> Yes. I didn't tell anyone but my two best friends. Still haven't really. Something I'd like to put completely behind me. So hard though, beforehand I was lighthearted, silly and innocent........he took that away in two short years.
> He was the life and soul at the pub, no one would believe.........................


Awful: what could you have done? At one time, the police were not interested in anything that they considered ''domestic'', even if the woman was beaten black and blue, so they would take absolutely no notice of you saying that you were being demoralised or bullied. That has supposedly changed and police now maintain that about 70% of their calls are ''domestic''. Usually from women, of course, but apparently occasionally some men live in fear of violence from their wives/partners too.


----------



## rona

Calvine said:


> Awful: what could you have done? At one time, the police were not interested in anything that they considered ''domestic'', even if the woman was beaten black and blue, so they would take absolutely no notice of you saying that you were being demoralised or bullied. That has supposedly changed and police now maintain that about 70% of their calls are ''domestic''. Usually from women, of course, but apparently occasionally some men live in fear of violence from their wives/partners too.


But I couldn't have proven anything. a lot of it was veiled


----------



## Boxer123

Calvine said:


> Awful: what could you have done? At one time, the police were not interested in anything that they considered ''domestic'', even if the woman was beaten black and blue, so they would take absolutely no notice of you saying that you were being demoralised or bullied. That has supposedly changed and police now maintain that about 70% of their calls are ''domestic''. Usually from women, of course, but apparently occasionally some men live in fear of violence from their wives/partners too.


Coercive control is now a crime although I have no idea how many if any have been prosecuted. As @rona said it's hard to prove. Also you end up so worn down it's hard to think straight. Gaslighting is common so your told it's normal.


----------



## Calvine

Getting back to some previous posts:
Labour MP Rosie Duffield skips conference in trans rights row | The Independent

Poor lady - this sort of thing is really despicable and totally unacceptable; it's simply bullying in its worst form..


----------



## Calvine

rona said:


> But I couldn't have proven anything. a lot of it was veiled


No. These people are clever, they know not to say anything in front of witnesses - it's not like you can take a photo of a black eye to use as evidence.


----------



## O2.0

Listening to all these stories of surviving abuse just confirms how strong and resilient survivors are. What an incredible group of people. *hugs*

And yes, one of the things I find most disturbing is how many abusers manage not to fly in to an uncontrollable rage in front of witnesses. For years I thought my dad had a really bad temper and he just couldn't control himself. Until my therapist pointed out that it never happened outside of the privacy of our home. If it really was an uncontrollable temper, how did he manage to control himself in front of neighbors, at work, out in public? That realization that his rages were calculated and deliberate set up a whole new grieving process. There are multiple layers to recovery that's for sure.

Has anyone read The Glass Castle? It's a difficult, but good read.



Calvine said:


> Getting back to some previous posts:
> Labour MP Rosie Duffield skips conference in trans rights row | The Independent


I'm really struggling to process how trans rights has turned in to the clusterfluck it currently is. 
I'm old enough to remember gay rights activism and maybe I was naive but it never felt like this current movement feels. There was never an attempt to silence, shut down, shout down dissenting opinions. Simply a conversation and a perfectly legitimate request to have the same rights as straight people. Which to me, made perfect sense. Why couldn't two men or two women be married? Why couldn't someone be openly gay and not fear losing their livelihood?

I feel the same way about trans people. Of course they should have equal rights and we should be understanding and supportive of a condition like gender dysphoria. 
But when I say that women and trans women are not the same, how is that hateful? How is that transphobic? How is that thinking "these" people should not exist? It's simply stating biological facts. When I call someone who's 6' or taller tall is that short-phobic? Or am I simply making an observation about a person's stature with no agenda.


----------



## Calvine

O2.0 said:


> I'm really struggling to process how trans rights has turned in to the clusterfluck it currently is.


Absolutely. Here's a young woman trying to live her life and carry out a responsible job but now she's afraid to do that. Shades of Afghanistan - because, to be honest, tactics like this are reminiscent of the Taliban. And yes, I wonder if they would bully and hound a man in the same way? I sort of doubt it.


----------



## rona

O2.0 said:


> And yes, one of the things I find most disturbing is how many abusers manage not to fly in to an uncontrollable rage in front of witnesses.


Not all go into rages, for some it is the chilling calm control. Power grab


----------



## mrs phas

Boxer123 said:


> Coercive control is now a crime although I have no idea how many if any have been prosecuted. As @rona said it's hard to prove. Also you end up so worn down it's hard to think straight. Gaslighting is common so your told it's normal.


Not liking this because I like it 
But more because it's so true 
Especially the gaslighting bit


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Going right back to earlier on in the thread and Afghanistan I've just read this. I don't know quite what to say.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-58585323

What the heck is the answer? I am assuming the maternal mortality rate will rapidly increase again but I also assume that it doesn't matter as it's only women. Can you think of anything you'd do as an Afghani woman except try to get out?


----------



## Cleo38

Mrs Funkin said:


> Going right back to earlier on in the thread and Afghanistan I've just read this. I don't know quite what to say.
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-58585323
> 
> What the heck is the answer? I am assuming the maternal mortality rate will rapidly increase again but I also assume that it doesn't matter as it's only women. Can you think of anything you'd do as an Afghani woman except try to get out?


That is horrific. I honestly don't know what the answer is to help these people as previous efforts didn't work ... but then the withdrawal appeared to be so ill thought out & the outcome was inevitable IMO.

I think the only hope that some women have is escape tbh


----------



## Magyarmum

rona said:


> Not all go into rages, for some it is the chilling calm control. Power grab


 As you say it's the chilling calm control that is so scary. In over 18 years of marriage I don't remember my OH ever loosing his temper.

It's the constant calculated undermining and etching away of all your confidence in yourself that does the damage,

And even worse for me having children, using them as pawns in his game.


----------



## Calvine

O2.0 said:


> Here in the US we have a missing woman case that has made national news. Gabby Petito. She and her fiance were traveling out west in a travel van, he returned without her and is invoking his 5th amendment rights. Refuses to speak to anyone. Right now there is no crime, just a missing person report. He has now disappeared. He's definitely not acting like an innocent person...


And another couple - she Brit (Sarm Heslop), he American - she ''disappeared'' from his boat in the Caribbean quite recently. I doubt she will ever be found and parents will never know for sure what happened to her. I seem to recall the guy would not allow the police to board the boat.


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> That is horrific. I honestly don't know what the answer is to help these people as previous efforts didn't work ... but then the withdrawal appeared to be so ill thought out & the outcome was inevitable IMO.
> 
> I think the only hope that some women have is escape tbh


Articles like this send shivers down my spine absolutely terrifying I can't believe we have just left these people.


----------



## Calvine

Boxer123 said:


> Coercive control is now a crime


I remember years ago a friend of mine was a passenger in her boyfriend's car (he was driving) and he crashed it. He had had a drink, not much (she, the passenger, had had more as she was not the driver), but he ''persuaded'' her to say that she was driving and he convinced her that he needed driving licence for work so if either of them were to lose their licence, better it was Linz. She felt she had no choice but to agree; of course she blew positive and got banned. I never knew why she did it - she simply said she didn't feel she had a choice . . .


----------



## Boxer123

Calvine said:


> I remember years ago a friend of mine was a passenger in her boyfriend's car (he was driving) and he crashed it. He had had a drink, not much (she, the passenger, had had more as she was not the driver), but he ''persuaded'' her to say that she was driving and he convinced her that he needed driving licence for work so if either of them were to lose their licence, better it was Linz. She felt she had no choice but to agree; of course she blew positive and got banned. I never knew why she did it - she simply said she didn't feel she had a choice . . .


It's amazing how you lose your free choice and it's so hard to explain if people have t experienced it. It's like someone is in your head with a spoon. You know what will happen if you say no they will go on and on. They are always more important. I look back and think why did I do that ? Why did I agree to that ?


----------



## Cleo38

So the piece of sh*t that is Sam Pybus had a history of sexual violence .. wonder if this was bought up in his trial like his victims sex life was?

Sam Pybus' jail term sparked calls for a judicial review. His wife supports them | Daily Mail Online


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> So the piece of sh*t that is Sam Pybus had a history of sexual violence .. wonder if this was bought up in his trial like his victims sex life was?
> 
> Sam Pybus' jail term sparked calls for a judicial review. His wife supports them | Daily Mail Online


This sentence is disgusting.


----------



## Magyarmum

O2.0 said:


> Here in the US we have a missing woman case that has made national news. Gabby Petito. She and her fiance were traveling out west in a travel van, he returned without her and is invoking his 5th amendment rights. Refuses to speak to anyone. Right now there is no crime, just a missing person report. He has now disappeared. He's definitely not acting like an innocent person...


It's just been announced that her body has been found on a campsite in Wyoming.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

I'm struggling to understand the Gabby Petito case. I don't know how it took (by all accounts) ten days for her to be reported missing after her fiancé returned home? Of course the full story won't be reported, in case of jeopardising the investigation, I do get that, but yet another young woman who has had her life ended. We then get into why are some cases publicised (and worldwide in this case) but others not? There is of course a theory about it generally only being pretty, white, middle class women that make the headlines.

@Boxer123 I am at a loss re: Afghanistan - all those years of work, all those lives lost, all essentially for nothing in the space of a fortnight. There's now no access to contraception but also to be pregnant and have a baby is so dangerous.


----------



## Magyarmum

Mrs Funkin said:


> I'm struggling to understand the Gabby Petito case. I don't know how it took (by all accounts) ten days for her to be reported missing after her fiancé returned home? Of course the full story won't be reported, in case of jeopardising the investigation, I do get that, but yet another young woman who has had her life ended. We then get into why are some cases publicised (and worldwide in this case) but others not? There is of course a theory about it generally only being pretty, white, middle class women that make the headlines.
> *
> @Boxer123 I am at a loss re: Afghanistan - all those years of work, all those lives lost, all essentially for nothing in the space of a fortnight. There's now no access to contraception but also to be pregnant and have a baby is so dangerous*.


The US could never win, much in the same way they never won in Vietnam. Two interesting article that you might like to read.

https://www.futuredirections.org.au/publication/where-did-the-us-go-so-wrong-in-afghanistan/

*Where Did the US Go So Wrong in Afghanistan?*

https://intpolicydigest.org/why-afghanistan-is-another-vietnam-and-why-it-is-different/

*Why Afghanistan is Another Vietnam - and Why it is Different*


----------



## Siskin

Magyarmum said:


> The US could never win, much in the same way they never won in Vietnam. Two interesting article that you might like to read.
> 
> https://www.futuredirections.org.au/publication/where-did-the-us-go-so-wrong-in-afghanistan/
> 
> *Where Did the US Go So Wrong in Afghanistan?*
> 
> https://intpolicydigest.org/why-afghanistan-is-another-vietnam-and-why-it-is-different/
> 
> *Why Afghanistan is Another Vietnam - and Why it is Different*


Has anyone actually won in Afghanistan? The Russians had a go and backed off hurriedly when they realised it was impossible. You would have thought everyone else would leave well alone. However it's awful to see and hear reports of how people are treated under various regimes, there is a basic human need to try and help those that are suffering


----------



## O2.0

Mrs Funkin said:


> I'm struggling to understand the Gabby Petito case. I don't know how it took (by all accounts) ten days for her to be reported missing after her fiancé returned home? Of course the full story won't be reported, in case of jeopardising the investigation, I do get that, but yet another young woman who has had her life ended. We then get into why are some cases publicised (and worldwide in this case) but others not? There is of course a theory about it generally only being pretty, white, middle class women that make the headlines.


Yes, pretty, middle class white girls. Who are every bit deserving of the attention of course, but so are native women who go missing in the Tetons all the time. That's a whole 'nother dynamic going on.

But yes I too don't understand how Gabby's fiancee is only a person of interest and they couldn't at least hold him. From the start he acted guilty. 
The reason it took 10 days to report her missing makes sense if you assume the fiance is guilty and his parents are aiding him. 
He came home to Florida on sept. 1 without Gabby. Gabby's family is in NY on the other end of the east coast so would not have known he was home and was just waiting for cell phone contact from Gabby. After no contact for 10 days they report her missing. Actually I'm sure they contacted authorities before then but there may be some protocol that says you can't open a missing person case until a certain amount of time with no contact. 
Her last text to her parents was August 30 saying no cell reception in Yosemite, fiancee shows back up in Florida Sept. 1. If Gabby really was in Yosemite with fiancee Aug. 30, that's one hell of a drive to make it back to Florida. It's a 38 hour drive straight through. Of course now we know she was never in Yosemite. She was still in Wyoming which is about a 16 hour drive from each other. To me that alone is super suspicious, it wasn't Gabby who sent that message about cell reception in Yosemite...


----------



## O2.0

Gabby Petito's remains have been found. Fiance is in hiding. I can't believe they couldn't hold him at least


----------



## Magyarmum

O2.0 said:


> Gabby Petito's remains have been found. Fiance is in hiding. I can't believe they couldn't hold him at least


A sad commentary!




__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=402681761465892


----------



## O2.0

Magyarmum said:


> A sad commentary!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=402681761465892


Indeed 

However, it's a difficult narrative, because the solution is not that women like Gabby Petito shouldn't get attention, it's that women like Lauren Cho (also went missing on a road trip) should get just as much attention.

It's also more complicated than race and demographics too. Gabby was very active on social media and social media made her disappearance a 'story' before it hit the national news. How much the parents and love ones push for media coverage and consent to be in the media eye affects coverage also.
The fiance's behavior is also so strange and suspicious that this makes this a more 'interesting' story, worth covering. There's all sorts of factors in what goes in to coverage - including race and demographics.


----------



## Boxer123

Magyarmum said:


> A sad commentary!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=402681761465892
> 
> 
> )
> 
> So sad for everyone involved.


----------



## Cleo38




----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> View attachment 476715


This is so true mantras like, 'boys will be boys' and 'he's only hurting you because he likes you' just constantly excuse behaviour.


----------



## Boxer123

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58639602

Another life lost, barely any news coverage. So sad.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

You are so right @O2.0 - Gabby's death SHOULD receive publicity but so should every other person who dies at the hands of another, as demonstrated by Boxer's link above. I've never heard of Sabina and yet here we are, another young woman who has been murdered - it's so wrong.

I am so tired I can't think straight beyond just thinking it's so hideous. I'll think more about it and be more articulate tomorrow. I'm just so sad about this needless violence against women (and yes, I know it happens to men too).


----------



## Boxer123




----------



## Mrs Funkin

See. That makes my heart hurt even more. It makes my heart hurt more I think because there hasn't been that reaction and outpouring and coming together. 

RIP Sabina.


----------



## Cleo38

Boxer123 said:


> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58639602
> 
> Another life lost, barely any news coverage. So sad.


Awful, such a terrible loss


----------



## Lurcherlad

A vigil is due to be held in her memory on Friday evening according to BBC news app.


----------



## Boxer123

It's taken a movement on social media to get the mainstream media to acknowledge this young women's death. It really puts the video @Magyarmum posted into context.

This is being handed out to women. Again more victim blaming and expecting women to change there behaviour. When will we challenge male violence? Where are the flyers telling men not to walk at night. And let's face it we are not even safe if we stay in.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-58635995.amp


----------



## Cleo38

Boxer123 said:


> View attachment 476755
> 
> 
> It's taken a movement on social media to get the mainstream media to acknowledge this young women's death. It really puts the video @Magyarmum posted into context.
> 
> This is being handed out to women. Again more victim blaming and expecting women to change there behaviour. When will we challenge male violence? Where are the flyers telling men not to walk at night. And let's face it we are not even safe if we stay in.
> 
> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-58635995.amp


Exactly my thoughts when I read this 

Whilst I do agree that advising women how to be more aware when out is beneficial I also think that men also should be told how to make women feel less threatened. So many men are completely unaware of their behaviour & how it is perceived by lone women.


----------



## Magyarmum

Boxer123 said:


> View attachment 476755
> 
> 
> It's taken a movement on social media to get the mainstream media to acknowledge this young women's death. It really puts the video @Magyarmum posted into context.
> 
> This is being handed out to women. Again more victim blaming and expecting women to change there behaviour. When will we challenge male violence? Where are the flyers telling men not to walk at night. And let's face it we are not even safe if we stay in.
> 
> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-58635995.amp


I left South Africa because of the violence particularly towards women. It had got to the point where I was afraid to leave my apartment to go shopping and I never went out after about 4 in the afternoon

In the last few years of living there, I'd been mugged twice and been threatened with a machete. A friend had been murdered, another was carjacked. elderly friends beaten up in their own home and my doctor's wife and her two teenage daughters were gang raped in their own home.

Colour and race don't matter all you have to be is a woman!

By comparison the UK and Hungary are safe countries to live in. So be thankful for it! Having lived "behind bars" for so many years it was a relief to live in a country where I didn't have to risk my life every time I went out of my front door. It took over a year though to get over the PTSD caused by living in a violent society.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-49739977

*South Africa: Violence against women like a war - Ramaphosa*


----------



## Mrs Funkin

See, I'm all for being safe (or what is at least perceived as being safe) - but all of that "advice" mean nothing if someone is setting out to kill. For some of these women who have been killed, it's been at the hands of an unknown person. Those people aren't killing because someone is on their phone/has their hood up on their jacket in the rain. They kill because they set out to kill. For the women who have been murdered by the hands of someone they know, it's clearly not going to mean anything either.

Yes, not having your iPhone13 on show is the street might help you not be robbed - but it won't stop some b****** murdering you because he has the desire to kill.

Yet more cases of the ball being put in the woman's court.


----------



## Calvine

Mrs Funkin said:


> They kill because they set out to kill


That is what is so completely horrifying - they think that this was a ''random stranger'' and that she was in the wrong place at the wrong time. We are assuming it was carried out by a man? They said yesterday that there was no conclusive cause of death but that they are treating it as a murder case which I found rather odd. So many CCTVs in operation everywhere, but presumably none where she was. What a dreadful story.


----------



## MilleD

It's not just a random stranger though is it (if it was)? It's a psychopath. Normal men don't go out intending to kill someone.

So for all the 'we shouldn't have to avoid places/times" etc, we do because there's no-one going to talk sense to a psychopath. Doesn't matter how many vigils are held.


----------



## Boxer123

MilleD said:


> It's not just a random stranger though is it (if it was)? It's a psychopath. Normal men don't go out intending to kill someone.
> 
> So for all the 'we shouldn't have to avoid places/times" etc, we do because there's no-one going to talk sense to a psychopath. Doesn't matter how many vigils are held.


I'm not sure they do always plan it or we can use the psychopath excuse. Some intend to sexually assault and lose control, some see an opportunity to kill without pre planning it. With regards to vigils and protests I think the y are important. The police office who murdered Sarah Everard had the week before incidentally exposed himself this wasn't taken seriously he still had his badge. Had it been followed up she may still be alive.

The following protests were to raise awareness. Those so called normal men aren't always innocent. Do they step in if they see a women being harassed ? Do they cat call ? Do they add to the fear ? It's about education. It's about us saying enough is enough, stop victim blaming telling us we shouldn't have been out in the dark, wearing a short skirt. I think it's so important we talk about make violence and aggression.


----------



## MilleD

You think men who sexually assault and lose control or "see an opportunity to kill" are _not _psychopaths?


----------



## Magyarmum

MilleD said:


> You think men who sexually assault and lose control or "see an opportunity to kill" are _not _psychopaths?


I think the second could/would be considered premeditated whereas the first would not.

In France and also (I believe) in some states in the US the definition to cover the your first example would be a "Crime of Passion".

When I was attacked it was purely to steal money but because I fought back it could no doubt have spiralled out of control and I ran the risk of being murdered as a result, but I'm certain that was never in my attacker's mind

https://www.davidolsonlaw-firm.com/...es-understanding-crimes-of-passion-in-florida


----------



## Boxer123

MilleD said:


> You think men who sexually assault and lose control or "see an opportunity to kill" are _not _psychopaths?


No a psychopath can be measured on a test not all killers are psychopaths not all psychopaths are killers.


----------



## Calvine

I think there was a huge reaction to Sarah Everard's murder as the media had clips of CCTV which showed a young woman making her way home alone on a cold dark night and knowing that she was never going to get there. Terribly sad footage; she could have been anyone's daughter or sister - yours or mine - just grainy footage of a girl snatched off the street. And the later horrified reaction, after her body was found, to read that it was a member of the police force who killed her, and people asking themselves how on earth he got her into his car . . . had he used his status as a serving police officer to trick her?


----------



## Calvine

Well, a man has been arrested in connection with the murder of Sabine Nessa, and I think they are looking for a second 'person of interest'. Let's hope they have got the right man.


----------



## Cleo38

WTAF????!!!! :Rageunch

Link: Medical Journal Sparks Outrage With 'Bodies With Vaginas' Cover - UNILAD


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> WTAF????!!!! :Rageunch
> 
> Link: Medical Journal Sparks Outrage With 'Bodies With Vaginas' Cover - UNILAD
> 
> View attachment 476911


I just don't understand.


----------



## Cleo38

Boxer123 said:


> I just don't understand.


We are being erased 

It's disgusting & insulting. I was just reading previous articles & the word men was used when discussing prostate issues, etc yet they cannot bring themselves to use the word women ..... I feel so angry.

Luckily there are alot of angry, articulate women now bombarding their social media pages


----------



## O2.0

WTF is right. 

I think if women who have had to have double mastectomies in order to survive cancer can manage not to be offended by humans being classified as mammals, then the trans, binary, and gender queer community can handle humans of the female variety being called women. 

And the truth is, the vast majority of people of all gender persuasions and expressions have zero issue with women being called women. It's this teeny tiny portion of wackadoodles and the super woke who get some sort of flagellation pleasure out of catering to them. 

And for anyone who doesn't get how massively insulting this is to women everywhere - you're reducing the experience of being a woman, as a full actual human in all its complexities, to a body part. A vagina. A body - not even a human being, a body with a vagina. Yes, it's completely erasing women.


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> We are being erased
> 
> It's disgusting & insulting. I was just reading previous articles & the word men was used when discussing prostate issues, etc yet they cannot bring themselves to use the word women ..... I feel so angry.
> 
> Luckily there are alot of angry, articulate women now bombarding their social media pages


The thing is there are so many other inclusive terms they could have used that's just disgusting.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> WTF is right.
> 
> I think if women who have had to have double mastectomies in order to survive cancer can manage not to be offended by humans being classified as mammals, then the trans, binary, and gender queer community can handle humans of the female variety being called women.
> 
> And the truth is, the vast majority of people of all gender persuasions and expressions have zero issue with women being called women. It's this teeny tiny portion of wackadoodles and the super woke who get some sort of flagellation pleasure out of catering to them.
> 
> And for anyone who doesn't get how massively insulting this is to women everywhere - you're reducing the experience of being a woman, as a full actual human in all its complexities, to a body part. A vagina. A body - not even a human being, a body with a vagina. Yes, it's completely erasing women.


I am actually quite shocked as well. You don't expect to be reduced to such a basic term by a reputable publication yet that exactly what I & other women have been. We are just 'bodies with vaginas' .... FFS


----------



## Mrs Funkin

I can’t even vocalise my anger at this. Women are being erased. We also can’t vocalise our distress at it for fear of being called phobic in one way or another. There is so much that currently saddens me - it’s not going to get better either, is it?


----------



## Cleo38

@Mrs Funkin

Even in this sector? This is awful. And it seems to be getting so much worse so quickly


----------



## O2.0

Mrs Funkin said:


> I know .


But you're completely correct.
If you are giving birth it's because you were born with functional _female_ reproductive organs. So why try to pretend you're not a woman? Or worse try to pretend like men can gestate and birth humans. Men can't. It's biologically the exclusive realm of women.

Call it what it is. Women having babies and women menstruating. That women choose to present themselves to the world in the rich diversity that is the human experience is great, and we absolutely should be accepting of all those presentations, but that doesn't make women stop being women and men stop being men.


----------



## Cleo38




----------



## Mrs Funkin

See, I'm even saddened that I felt the need to edit my post for fear of someone finding me and hauling me over the coals. 

I will never accept this erasing. Never. I will fight it with every fibre of my being - starting with an email to the Lancet. Hardly fighting really is it? I'm going to go and see what a friend of mine has to say on FB, she's an incredibly eloquent feminist and says things much better than I ever could.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Cleo38 said:


> Even in this sector? This is awful. And it seems to be getting so much worse so quickly


I think *especially* in this sector


----------



## kimthecat

Its ludicrous 

I love the humour and sarcasm in this Twitter thread


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1441704968365428736
I've woken up this morning and I appear to have lost my vagina. If anyone comes across one could you send it back please? It's a bit battered and had a difficult life, but I'm used to it now. Post it to the Lancet for safe keeping, and I'll pick it up from there


----------



## Cleo38

Yes, I saw you'd edited & realised why. Would you like me to remove quoting you from my post?


----------



## Lurcherlad

Boxer123 said:


> The thing is there are so many other inclusive terms they could have used that's just disgusting.


Surely the term "women" covered it though … maybe I'm missing something but in the context of the piece there was no need for inclusive language … it was referring to biological females, wasn't it?


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Cleo38 said:


> Yes, I saw you'd edited & realised why. Would you like me to remove quoting you from my post?


If you are able, then yes please that would be great. Thank you.


----------



## Cleo38

Lurcherlad said:


> Surely the term "women" covered it though … maybe I'm missing something but in the context of the piece there was no need for inclusive language … it was referring to biological females, wasn't it?


Yes, it was. But obviously the word "woman" is so offensive now


----------



## picaresque

Cleo38 said:


> I was just reading previous articles & the word men was used when discussing prostate issues, etc yet they cannot bring themselves to use the word women .....


Always the way. Men aren't being redefined as testicle owners, ejaculators, bodies with penises. That would be dehumanising!

It's always the terfs/the gender critical/people who just aren't buying this who're accused of reducing women to their genitalia though. Classic projection.



Cleo38 said:


> Yes, it was. But obviously the word "woman" is so offensive now


'Progress'


----------



## O2.0

Lurcherlad said:


> Surely the term "women" covered it though … maybe I'm missing something but in the context of the piece there was no need for inclusive language … it was referring to biological females, wasn't it?


Exactly.

Fun fact: not everything needs to be inclusive. 
When you're talking about menstruation, you don't need to be inclusive, you can simply address the people for whom that applies - women. 
Here's a good test. Imagine you have a male child and a female child. If the girl child goes through puberty and does not start menstruating, that's a problem and I'm going to take her to a doctor to investigate. If the boy child goes through puberty and doesn't start menstruating nothing needs to be investigated. And if he does, that most definitely needs to be investigated.

It's almost like, weirdly, somehow, the sex you're born as matters...? What a concept!


----------



## Calvine

Cleo38 said:


> We are just 'bodies with vaginas'


I would describe my cat with a more respectful term. Funny I don't notice it happening so much to men: bodies with penises - bodies with bollocks. Unless I'm missing something?


----------



## MilleD

They are being dragged over the coals for this one now. Seems like they have doublestandarditis.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1441435012511907847
The tweet is this for those who don't have Twitter.


----------



## Jobeth

I thought the title was only because they were writing about the vagina museum that was created in response to their being a penis museum. The actual article uses the word woman several times.


----------



## Cleo38

MilleD said:


> View attachment 476954
> They are being dragged over the coals for this one now. Seems like they have doublestandarditis.


What I find so shocking is that they haven't responded at all, just ignoring all of us angry "bodies with vaginas" as obviously we don't count :Rage


----------



## Cleo38

Jobeth said:


> I thought the title was only because they were writing about the vagina museum that was created in response to their being a penis museum. The actual article uses the word woman several times.


Yes it does but why use the title? We are not "bodies with vaginas" but women. The porn industry has managed to de-humanise women to such an extent that we simply are just that, & the medical industry also has a very dubious past regarding women's health (as highlighted in the article).

So why continue with this 'theme' regarding women?


----------



## Siskin

I think we ought to take a patent out on the word women and it is to be used for those who have bodies with vaginas.


----------



## O2.0

Jobeth said:


> I thought the title was only because they were writing about the vagina museum that was created in response to their being a penis museum. The actual article uses the word woman several times.


I read the actual article. There were so many quotable excerpts, that the Lancet chose the one example of "bodies with vaginas" to use as their headline in the tweet is what I object to. The article itself is titled "Periods on Display" why not simply use that? There is nothing not inclusive about that title.


----------



## O2.0




----------



## Cleo38

Hahahahahaha! OMG, I'd forgotten about that @O2.0 .... hilarious & yet very relevant


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> Hahahahahaha! OMG, I'd forgotten about that @O2.0 .... hilarious & yet very relevant


A couple quotable lines for sure!

While motherhood does not define being a woman, there is something insidiously sinister about men trying to co-opt it.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> A couple quotable lines for sure!
> 
> While motherhood does not define being a woman, there is something insidiously sinister about men trying to co-opt it.


Oh it gets worse ....

Transgender woman is first to be able to breastfeed her baby | New Scientist
Trans Women Can Breastfeed - Here's How | them.

It seems that their desire to breast feed trumps the health & welfare of the baby, Surely the amount of hormones, etc being taken would have implications


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> Oh it gets worse ....
> 
> Transgender woman is first to be able to breastfeed her baby | New Scientist
> Trans Women Can Breastfeed - Here's How | them.
> 
> It seems that their desire to breast feed trumps the health & welfare of the baby, Surely the amount of hormones, etc being taken would have implications


You know what infuriates me about this? Well, one of the many things....
When I was pregnant and we found out it was twins, I was told to prepare to have to supplement with formula. Not ONE medical professional even mentioned, let alone offered drugs to help with lactation. 
When the babies were born via c-section with not so much of a contraction on my part, I was again told I probably wouldn't be able to lactate, don't stress about it, preemie formula is really good these days. I insisted I would pump. And I did produce milk and more than enough for two, but I had to do all the advocating for myself. No medical professional was concerned if I lactated or not, if the preemie babies latched or not, nothing. 
And my experience is not unique. Women all over the world experience this apathy about their ability to lactate. Not one woman I know who has struggled with lactation has ever been offered drugs/hormones to help. Just the usual advice to keep trying but have the formula handy. If it happens it happens but if it doesn't oh well. Don't stress about it. 
Yet women do stress about it, a lot. And it can seriously affect the postnatal experience and the mother's mental health. Why are we not offering all these struggling mothers better research and ways to help them lactate?

But hey, if a man can't lactate, well by god let's figure out how to help him do so! Just ARGH!!!!!!


----------



## Lurcherlad

And being able to (or choosing not to) breastfeed is not a measure of how well one is doing at motherhood either.


----------



## mrs phas

Cleo38 said:


> Oh it gets worse ....
> 
> Transgender woman is first to be able to breastfeed her baby | New Scientist
> Trans Women Can Breastfeed - Here's How | them.
> 
> It seems that their desire to breast feed trumps the health & welfare of the baby, Surely the amount of hormones, etc being taken would have implications


This is surely a joke article
Men don't have the capacity to produce milk, even though they do have mammary tissue, they don't have milk ducts and the necessary understructure, no matter how many hormones they take ( well they do, but at a very rudimentary level, even those that have enlarged, or extra, mammary tissue)
I know theres protocols to allow adoptive mum's to be able to lactate, but they have all the equipment in situ (so to speak) and it just needs kick starting

If it is true we women might just as well become fembots, because that's what we're being reduced too (and were pretty close to being obsolete in that job too)


----------



## O2.0

mrs phas said:


> even though they do have mammary tissue, they don't have milk ducts


Yes, male breasts have milk ducts - and men can get breast cancer in those milk ducts.


----------



## Cleo38

mrs phas said:


> This is surely a joke article
> Men don't have the capacity to produce milk, even though they do have mammary tissue, they don't have milk ducts and the necessary understructure, no matter how many hormones they take ( well they do, but at a very rudimentary level, even those that have enlarged, or extra, mammary tissue)
> I know theres protocols to allow adoptive mum's to be able to lactate, but they have all the equipment in situ (so to speak) and it just needs kick starting
> 
> If it is true we women might just as well become fembots, because that's what we're being reduced too (and were pretty close to being obsolete in that job too)


No joke unfortunately


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Now we have this from Keir Starmer.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-58698406

It just distresses me that Rosie Duffield is being attacked for stating how many of us feel - such as spaces like female prisons being spaces where only biological women are and yet we aren't allowed to say it without being accused of being transphobic.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

@O2.0 I've used domperidone with ladies on several occasions in my career - sadly most GPs in this country were very reluctant to prescribe it. I'm sure it works very differently in the States though - and many midwives in the UK would never have even heard of using it to increase lactation (I was lucky and worked with an excellent breast feeding specialist midwife for a couple of years). You are right about men wanting to lactate so everything will be done to facilitate it. I knew this had happened a few years back but thankfully it's not in the mainstream as yet - give it a couple of years though as the pressure is now on.


----------



## O2.0

Mrs Funkin said:


> @O2.0 I've used domperidone with ladies on several occasions in my career - sadly most GPs in this country were very reluctant to prescribe it. I'm sure it works very differently in the States though - and many midwives in the UK would never have even heard of using it to increase lactation (I was lucky and worked with an excellent breast feeding specialist midwife for a couple of years). You are right about men wanting to lactate so everything will be done to facilitate it. I knew this had happened a few years back but thankfully it's not in the mainstream as yet - give it a couple of years though as the pressure is now on.


Our healthcare system is such a wreck, if it's not prescribed and coded the 'right' way you have to pay for it yourself which is prohibitively expensive for most people. I love how insurance will pay for erectile dysfunction drugs no questions asked, but a woman needs to 'prove' she needs to be in birth control for insurance to cover it. For example, regulating periods is not a coverable reason for b/c. I know many teen girls who's doctors have to say they are sexually active, even though they aren't to get BC for them. It's ridiculous.


----------



## mrs phas

Mrs Funkin said:


> It just distresses me that Rosie Duffield is being attacked for stating how many of us feel


Yet it goes on to say
"she acknowledges that some trans men have a cervix"

Now I'm going to give her the benefit of the doubt and say she was referring to f to m, when using the phrase transmen
However,
if we are going to be forced to believe that biological men, who have self identified, magically now have a cervix
Can I please be first in the queue to watch them having a smear test done


----------



## O2.0

Mrs Funkin said:


> Now we have this from Keir Starmer.
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-58698406
> 
> It just distresses me that Rosie Duffield is being attacked for stating how many of us feel - such as spaces like female prisons being spaces where only biological women are and yet we aren't allowed to say it without being accused of being transphobic.


"Appearing on the BBC's Andrew Marr show, Sir Keir Starmer was asked if it was transphobic to say only women have a cervix.

The Labour leader replied: "Well, it is something that shouldn't be said. It is not right.""

It's "not right" to say that cervixes are found on women?! How? It's biology. Women have ovaries and uteruses too. Women don't have testicles. 
Woman - female human, we have female parts. What is 'not right' about saying something that's factually correct?!


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> "Appearing on the BBC's Andrew Marr show, Sir Keir Starmer was asked if it was transphobic to say only women have a cervix.
> 
> The Labour leader replied: "Well, it is something that shouldn't be said. It is not right.""
> 
> It's "not right" to say that cervixes are found on women?! How? It's biology. Women have ovaries and uteruses too. Women don't have testicles.
> Woman - female human, we have female parts. What is 'not right' about saying something that's factually correct?!


The left in this country are a joke now. I always used to vote Labour but it is unbelievable how woke they are & completely disregarding women's right's in their politics now.


----------



## Cleo38

Mrs Funkin said:


> Now we have this from Keir Starmer.
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-58698406
> 
> It just distresses me that Rosie Duffield is being attacked for stating how many of us feel - such as spaces like female prisons being spaces where only biological women are and yet we aren't allowed to say it without being accused of being transphobic.


Quoted from the article:

"Ms Duffield is not attending this week's party conference in Brighton, having said there were concerns for her safety after threats from activists.

But Sir Keir said he had spoken to Ms Duffield and "she didn't want to come because it would cause a distraction from the ideas that we're putting forward"."

So he is allowing her to be silenced due to threats rather than addressing concerns for her safety & highlighting how wrong this ?!


----------



## Mrs Funkin

I’m pretty sure Keir is more pale blue than red  I’m also pretty sure he’s the reason I’ll be spoiling my ballot paper (again!) should there be an election any time soon. 

As for his cervices comment. Pppffftttt. I’m with O2.0 - I just cannot see what is wrong with stating biological facts. It’s science FFS. 

In the words of my (at the time seven years old) god daughter when she opened the front door to me, “Auntie S, mummy says me and you and her have a vagina and that daddy and Uncle D have a penis, is that right?” Smothering a smile I told her that was indeed the case and her mummy hadn’t been lying to her (I think her friends mothers used other words for genitalia, so she’d been curious). I wonder if I would be “allowed” to say that now?


----------



## kimthecat

Well, Keir Starmer as a person with a penis , isn't really going to understand how a woman feels about being called a person with a cervix etc. 
I was thinking of referring to men as people with penises but it takes too long to type.


----------



## Siskin

kimthecat said:


> Well, Keir Starmer as a person with a penis , isn't really going to understand how a woman feels about being called a person with a cervix etc.
> I was thinking of referring to men as people with penises but it takes too long to type.


The acronym is PWP which isn't terribly catchy


----------



## rona

Mrs Funkin said:


> Now we have this from Keir Starmer.
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-58698406
> 
> It just distresses me that Rosie Duffield is being attacked for stating how many of us feel - such as spaces like female prisons being spaces where only biological women are and yet we aren't allowed to say it without being accused of being transphobic.


Well that's the Tories in again.
He obviously doesn't realize that it's the silent majority that will make a PM



mrs phas said:


> Can I please be first in the queue to watch them having a smear test done


Hahaha, can I come too?


----------



## Cleo38

Mrs Funkin said:


> I'm pretty sure Keir is more pale blue than red  I'm also pretty sure he's the reason I'll be spoiling my ballot paper (again!) should there be an election any time soon.
> 
> As for his cervices comment. Pppffftttt. I'm with O2.0 - I just cannot see what is wrong with stating biological facts. It's science FFS.
> 
> In the words of my (at the time seven years old) god daughter when she opened the front door to me, "Auntie S, mummy says me and you and her have a vagina and that daddy and Uncle D have a penis, is that right?" Smothering a smile I told her that was indeed the case and her mummy hadn't been lying to her (I think her friends mothers used other words for genitalia, so she'd been curious). I wonder if I would be "allowed" to say that now?


You would have thought that after the murder of Jo Cox leaders of all parities would be cracking down on threats to safety for all in their parties, particularly women who seem to get such threats of violence on social media. If these threats were made by far right groups you can bet he would but as this subject seems to be so much "off limits" then he seems to have backed off. I may be wrong but haven't heard much of him addressing this


----------



## O2.0

Mrs Funkin said:


> In the words of my (at the time seven years old) god daughter when she opened the front door to me, "Auntie S, mummy says me and you and her have a vagina and that daddy and Uncle D have a penis, is that right?" Smothering a smile I told her that was indeed the case and her mummy hadn't been lying to her (I think her friends mothers used other words for genitalia, so she'd been curious). I wonder if I would be "allowed" to say that now?


I always used the actual terms for body parts with my two. I remember one afternoon driving home with them in back explaining that babies grow in the mom's uterus, not the stomach. I said that women have a uterus and that's where babies grow. My son (3 or 4 at the time) was annoyed that his sister and I have a uterus, but he didn't. He's over that now


----------



## kimthecat

Siskin said:


> The acronym is PWP which isn't terribly catchy


:Hilarious


----------



## Cleo38

And another 'woman' (with full beard & looking exactly like a man!!) charged with a violent crime ......

Overnight church fire may be linked to suspect who lit woman on fire at Tallahassee Taco Bell


----------



## Magyarmum




----------



## Cleo38

At last! How did he get away with this for so long? 

R Kelly is found GUILTY of all nine counts of racketeering and sex trafficking | Daily Mail Online


----------



## mrs phas

Cleo38 said:


> At last! How did he get away with this for so long?
> 
> R Kelly is found GUILTY of all nine counts of racketeering and sex trafficking | Daily Mail Online


The same way jimmy saville did 
It's easier to not believe the victims, than put together a case against a 'star'


----------



## Magyarmum

mrs phas said:


> The same way jimmy saville did
> It's easier to not believe the victims, than put together a case against a 'star'


They also have sufficient money to ruin anyone that does try to put a case against them as well as, ( the case of Peter Nygard is an example), buy off the police and politicians


----------



## Cleo38

And another reason to make my blood boil. A non-apology form The Lancet for de-humanising us women ......


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> At last! How did he get away with this for so long?
> 
> R Kelly is found GUILTY of all nine counts of racketeering and sex trafficking | Daily Mail Online


Shocking thank goodness they finally prosecuted him.


----------



## MilleD

Cleo38 said:


> And another 'woman' (with full beard & looking exactly like a man!!) charged with a violent crime ......
> 
> Overnight church fire may be linked to suspect who lit woman on fire at Tallahassee Taco Bell


Come on now, that's got to be a p!ss take, surely.


----------



## MilleD

Cleo38 said:


> And another reason to make my blood boil. A non-apology form The Lancet for de-humanising us women ......
> 
> View attachment 477080


So trans feelings are still more important than womens'?


----------



## Cleo38

MilleD said:


> So trans feelings are still more important than womens'?


Yes, seems so. And funny that men's health can be discussed without referring them to them as "bodies with penises" & without mentioning trans men or non-binary people yet women's health doesn't get the same priority. But if we do complain then we are hysterical or bigoted ....


----------



## O2.0

MilleD said:


> So trans feelings are still more important than womens'?


Does anyone really believe that trans, non-binary, and intersex people really want anyone to be referred to as people with vaginas? I don't. I think it's virtue-signaling gone crazy. No one really demanded or asked for it, but we're going to change language because it makes us look like we care without having to actually *do* anything. And hey, if it pisses women off and gives us an opportunity to divide and call names, even better. 
I mean, I don't think it's that overt, but I do think something like that is going on subconsciously.



Cleo38 said:


> Yes, seems so. And funny that men's health can be discussed without referring them to them as "bodies with penises" & without mentioning trans men or non-binary people yet women's health doesn't get the same priority. But if we do complain then we are hysterical or bigoted ....


Yes, would be interesting to see a paper on Viagra written for people with a penis.


----------



## rona

I'm incensed by all this. I did not spend my whole life trying to be my own person, and excepted as such by all. for it to be taken away
Why should that be taken away by others seemingly fighting for the same thing.

I don't believe the reason for this is genuine, from genuine people, otherwise they would realise what they are doing those born women who want to just be...............

There is something very unsavoury about what is happening


----------



## Cleo38

rona said:


> I'm incensed by all this. I did not spend my whole life trying to be my own person, and excepted as such by all. for it to be taken away
> Why should that be taken away by others seemingly fighting for the same thing.
> 
> I don't believe the reason for this is genuine, from genuine people, otherwise they would realise what they are doing those born women who want to just be...............
> 
> There is something very unsavoury about what is happening


I completely agree. I am beyond angry about the so called 'apology' from The Lancet as it is just another insult to us women. I can't believe that in the 21st century it seems that we matter so little in comparison with other groups 

But I like this message to those politicians who can't seem to say the word 'woman' anymore


----------



## MilleD

O2.0 said:


> Does anyone really believe that trans, non-binary, and intersex people really want anyone to be referred to as people with vaginas? I don't. I think it's virtue-signaling gone crazy. No one really demanded or asked for it, but we're going to change language because it makes us look like we care without having to actually *do* anything. And hey, if it pisses women off and gives us an opportunity to divide and call names, even better.
> I mean, I don't think it's that overt, but I do think something like that is going on subconsciously..


I'm not so sure, you should have seen some of the comments on Twitter. I vowed never to read what is trending after seeing them.



O2.0 said:


> Yes, would be interesting to see a paper on Viagra written for people with a penis.


_Bodies _with a penis, surely


----------



## Boxer123

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58733714

This is terrifying he showed a warren card and pretended to arrest her. Poor woman must have been terrified.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

I shan't type what I just sent to husband about this "body with a penis" that murdered Sarah when I read the above news story on the bbc as I'd be banned from the forums.


----------



## Siskin

Mrs Funkin said:


> I shan't type what I just sent to husband about this "body with a penis" that murdered Sarah when I read the above news story on the bbc as I'd be banned from the forums.


Thinking pretty much the same as you I suspect


----------



## Dimwit

Cleo38 said:


> And another reason to make my blood boil. A non-apology form The Lancet for de-humanising us women ......
> 
> View attachment 477080


This makes me so angry - why does including one minority group of people mean that women have to be dehumanised like this.
I am not for a second saying that trans women are not women, but why can't we accept that they are a subgroup of women, in the same way that women who have had babies are a subgroup. I have never had problems with endometriosis or PCOS (thankfully) and yet I don't fly into a rage when I read an article about women's health that focuses on these. I just accept that not every mention of women applies directly to me and move on with my life. That, to me, is inclusivity, accepting that women are actually people (and not just a body part) forming a heterogeneous group and so writing about one subgroup does not mean you are discriminating against all other women...


----------



## Cleo38

Dimwit said:


> This makes me so angry - why does including one minority group of people mean that women have to be dehumanised like this.
> I am not for a second saying that trans women are not women, but why can't we accept that they are a subgroup of women, in the same way that women who have had babies are a subgroup. I have never had problems with endometriosis or PCOS (thankfully) and yet I don't fly into a rage when I read an article about women's health that focuses on these. I just accept that not every mention of women applies directly to me and move on with my life. That, to me, is inclusivity, accepting that women are actually people (and not just a body part) forming a heterogeneous group and so writing about one subgroup does not mean you are discriminating against all other women...


I feel the same to a degree. I haven't had children (never wanted any) but alot of women's health issues might focus on pregnancy .... maybe that excludes me to a degree but I don't throw a hissy fit about it. Sometimes certain topics will not be relevant to me, it doesn't mean I am less than a woman & neither does it mean I have been deliberately excluded.

It has been almost hilarious watching so many politicians this week floundering about when asked about women's issues, desperately trying not to say the word "woman" or acknowledge biological sex. Funny in some ways yet bloody sad 

Ed Davey on the Andrew Marr Show - Woman's Place UK (womansplaceuk.org)
After Keir Stammer claimed it was incorrect to say "only women have a cervix," - YouTube

And David Lammy doesn't even acknowledge that women have raised concerns about their rights being eroded despite one of his colleagues not even feeling safe enough to attend her parties conference. But as a black man who is also a 'feminist' he 'knows' about rights so can tell us silly women who do have concerns how to think
Lammy bites back as he is confronted with trans comments on 5Live 'I won't take lectures!' | Politics | News | Express.co.uk


----------



## Calvine

Boxer123 said:


> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58733714
> 
> This is terrifying he showed a warren card and pretended to arrest her. Poor woman must have been terrified.


And then drove her for 80 minutes handcuffed. She must have been petrified and she must have known exactly what was was going to happen - can you imagine? Apparently, he had been planning it for some time and investigated various routes before he settled on that one. It was not a spur of the moment thing, it was carefully premeditated. Then he burnt her body.
I really think the death sentence would be the only right sentence in his case, but in the absence of that, one thing at least: as a policeman he will always get a hard time in jail - and especially in view of what he did to poor Sarah. He will have no mates in there and no visitors. My guess is that either he will be dealt with or he will commit suicide (tho' sadly, that will never bring his victim back) . How on earth can her parents ever come to terms with what happened to their daughter - crikey, if you lost a child to some illness or an accident, but this is really the worst thing you can imagine.


----------



## Boxer123

Calvine said:


> And then drove her for 80 minutes handcuffed. She must have been petrified and she must have known exactly what was was going to happen - can you imagine? Apparently, he had been planning it for some time and investigated various routes before he settled on that one. It was not a spur of the moment thing, it was carefully premeditated. Then he burnt her body.
> I really think the death sentence would be the only right sentence in his case, but in the absence of that, one thing at least: as a policeman he will always get a hard time in jail - and especially in view of what he did to poor Sarah. He will have no mates in there and no visitors. My guess is that either he will be dealt with or he will commit suicide (tho' sadly, that will never bring his victim back) . How on earth can her parents ever come to terms with what happened to their daughter - crikey, if you lost a child to some illness or an accident, but this is really the worst thing you can imagine.


I hope he has a hard time it just doesn't bare thinking about. That could happen to anyone of us. There were red flags about him before (indecent exposure) if that was taken more seriously he wouldn't still have his badge.


----------



## Cleo38

Calvine said:


> And then drove her for 80 minutes handcuffed. She must have been petrified and she must have known exactly what was was going to happen - can you imagine? Apparently, he had been planning it for some time and investigated various routes before he settled on that one. It was not a spur of the moment thing, it was carefully premeditated. Then he burnt her body.
> I really think the death sentence would be the only right sentence in his case, but in the absence of that, one thing at least: as a policeman he will always get a hard time in jail - and especially in view of what he did to poor Sarah. He will have no mates in there and no visitors. My guess is that either he will be dealt with or he will commit suicide (tho' sadly, that will never bring his victim back) . How on earth can her parents ever come to terms with what happened to their daughter - crikey, if you lost a child to some illness or an accident, but this is really the worst thing you can imagine.


Absolutely horrific. I can't imagine the trauma her poor family must be going through


----------



## Calvine

Boxer123 said:


> That could happen to anyone of us.


The reason I took so much notice of the Sarah case that when they described her route, they mentioned Poynders Rd in Clapham which is where I used to live and going back there late one night was sure a guy was following me and I started to run - it was thick snow - and when I looked round, he was running too. Some guy in a car at the other side of the road saw it, thought it looked odd, pulled up and got out of his car and the guy ran off.


----------



## Siskin

Calvine said:


> The reason I took so much notice of the Sarah case that when they described her route, they mentioned Poynders Rd in Clapham which is where I used to live and going back there late one night was sure a guy was following me and I started to run - it was thick snow - and when I looked round, he was running too. Some guy in a car at the other side of the road saw it, thought it looked odd, pulled up and got out of his car and the guy ran off.


Blimey. There but for fortune, eh


----------



## O2.0

Dimwit said:


> This makes me so angry - why does including one minority group of people mean that women have to be dehumanised like this.
> I am not for a second saying that trans women are not women, but why can't we accept that they are a subgroup of women, in the same way that women who have had babies are a subgroup. I have never had problems with endometriosis or PCOS (thankfully) and yet I don't fly into a rage when I read an article about women's health that focuses on these. I just accept that not every mention of women applies directly to me and move on with my life. That, to me, is inclusivity, accepting that women are actually people (and not just a body part) forming a heterogeneous group and so writing about one subgroup does not mean you are discriminating against all other women...


What a perfect way to explain it. 
Women's health is full of subgroups as you say, nothing wrong with having an all encompassing term that we all understand - women!


----------



## Boxer123

Calvine said:


> The reason I took so much notice of the Sarah case that when they described her route, they mentioned Poynders Rd in Clapham which is where I used to live and going back there late one night was sure a guy was following me and I started to run - it was thick snow - and when I looked round, he was running too. Some guy in a car at the other side of the road saw it, thought it looked odd, pulled up and got out of his car and the guy ran off.


So scary.


----------



## Calvine

Siskin said:


> Blimey. There but for fortune, eh


Indeed - but what it also brought back to me was a police car pulling up and the young guy offering me a lift and I said thank you, but I was OK to get myself home and he was sort of crawling alongside me (I should have been on the other side of the road, but when you're young you think you are invincible). He was alone (I think now they are usually in twos, probably for their protection) and I just didn't like the way he was acting so I remember I crossed the road behind his car and pretended to be going into one of the houses there.
I sort of wonder now what you do when you're driving. I've been stopped more than once late at night, and they come up to the driver's door, and you open the window. I'd be very reluctant to do this now, in fact I would be tempted to lock the door (especially if it was a policeman alone). I remember going to the stables really early one morning, 05.30-ish, and there was a police car parked up against the stable gate blocking the entrance. One lone policeman fast asleep - I tooted the horn to get him to move, thought nothing of it, but now I really would be sure to lock the car doors.


----------



## Boxer123

Calvine said:


> Indeed - but what it also brought back to me was a police car pulling up and the young guy offering me a lift and I said thank you, but I was OK to get myself home and he was sort of crawling alongside me (I should have been on the other side of the road, but when you're young you think you are invincible). He was alone (I think now they are usually in twos, probably for their protection) and I just didn't like the way he was acting so I remember I crossed the road behind his car and pretended to be going into one of the houses there.
> I sort of wonder now what you do when you're driving. I've been stopped more than once late at night, and they come up to the driver's door, and you open the window. I'd be very reluctant to do this now, in fact I would be tempted to lock the door (especially if it was a policeman alone). I remember going to the stables really early one morning, 05.30-ish, and there was a police car parked up against the stable gate blocking the entrance. One lone policeman fast asleep - I tooted the horn to get him to move, thought nothing of it, but now I really would be sure to lock the car doors.


I thought I read somewhere if you are being asked to pull over you can keep going to a public place but I know I wouldn't. So many women have been brought up to be respectful and apologetic not to challenge I know I was.

When I was 17 I was underage drinking in a bar with a friend. A man approached us showed a warrant card and told us to come outside. My friend sozzled as she was said, 'my moms a police officer that's not a real card' and he disappeared. I shiver to think what could have happened. I didn't think to report it. I only remembered during this case and really thought about it.


----------



## Calvine

Boxer123 said:


> I thought I read somewhere if you are being asked to pull over you can keep going to a public place but I know I wouldn't. So many women have been brought up to be respectful and apologetic not to challenge I know I was.
> 
> When I was 17 I was underage drinking in a bar with a friend. A man approached us showed a warrant card and told us to come outside. My friend sozzled as she was said, 'my moms a police officer that's not a real card' and he disappeared. I shiver to think what could have happened. I didn't think to report it. I only remembered during this case and really thought about it.


Crikey - quick thinking by your friend there - maybe it was a good thing your friend was three parts pissed as that may have given her the Dutch courage to question him. Had she been sober she might have been too reserved and polite. You know, sometimes you look back and think ''How on earth have I lived this long without being kidnapped or murdered?'' don't you!


----------



## Boxer123

Calvine said:


> Crikey - quick thinking by your friend there - maybe it was a good thing your friend was three parts pissed as that may have given her the Dutch courage to question him. had she been sober she might have been too reserved and polite. You know, sometimes you look back and think ''How on earth have I lived this long without being kidnapped or murdered?'' don't you!


Yes it probably was good that is true sober she may not have done. Growing up my mums favourite parenting line was, 'do what your told stop asking questions.'

I do when I think back to the amount of sexual harassment, groaping, being followed and jeered at. You just except it. I've got close friends who have been sexually assaulted whilst out in public. It just goes on.


----------



## Calvine

Boxer123 said:


> assaulted whilst out in public.


It seems to happen now - people not noticing that someone is being raped in broad daylight on a beach or somewhere else equally public.


----------



## Siskin

During the late ‘60’s I was invited to go to a party by this lad I really fancied. I was so thrilled he had asked me that I didn’t kick up a fuss when he said whilst we were there that he couldn’t run me home in his car. I managed to talk him into running me to Gloucester, but he was too miserable to take me to the bus station so I had to walk across the town late at night.
I became aware that this bloke was following me so I speeded up and got to the phone box at the bus station to ring my dad and get him out of bed and come a fetch me (he was very miffed). The bloke hung about outside the phone box watching me. I sort of ran out towards some policemen I had spotted and asked them if I could stand with them whilst waiting for dad because of this bloke.
It wasn’t until many years later we all got to hear about Fred West who was killing young girls in Gloucester. Makes you wonder.


----------



## Boxer123

Siskin said:


> During the late '60's I was invited to go to a party by this lad I really fancied. I was so thrilled he had asked me that I didn't kick up a fuss when he said whilst we were there that he couldn't run me home in his car. I managed to talk him into running me to Gloucester, but he was too miserable to take me to the bus station so I had to walk across the town late at night.
> I became aware that this bloke was following me so I speeded up and got to the phone box at the bus station to ring my dad and get him out of bed and come a fetch me (he was very miffed). The bloke hung about outside the phone box watching me. I sort of ran out towards some policemen I had spotted and asked them if I could stand with them whilst waiting for dad because of this bloke.
> It wasn't until many years later we all got to hear about Fred West who was killing young girls in Gloucester. Makes you wonder.


When you think about it it's so scary but you almost get used to being on guard. What a nasty boy your date was.


----------



## Siskin

Boxer123 said:


> When you think about it it's so scary but you almost get used to being on guard. What a nasty boy your date was.


He was, went off him well and truly


----------



## Boxer123

Siskin said:


> He was, went off him well and truly


I walked 9 miles home in the freezing cold once with a friend (same friend as in bar) because she had argued with her bf and he refused to drive us home.


----------



## Boxer123

I'm just horrified.


----------



## Cleo38

Siskin said:


> During the late '60's I was invited to go to a party by this lad I really fancied. I was so thrilled he had asked me that I didn't kick up a fuss when he said whilst we were there that he couldn't run me home in his car. I managed to talk him into running me to Gloucester, but he was too miserable to take me to the bus station so I had to walk across the town late at night.
> I became aware that this bloke was following me so I speeded up and got to the phone box at the bus station to ring my dad and get him out of bed and come a fetch me (he was very miffed). The bloke hung about outside the phone box watching me. I sort of ran out towards some policemen I had spotted and asked them if I could stand with them whilst waiting for dad because of this bloke.
> It wasn't until many years later we all got to hear about Fred West who was killing young girls in Gloucester. Makes you wonder.


OMG how terrifying ... at the time & even years later to think what might have been . I've had numerous things happen over the year & it does keep you on guard all the time when out on your own. I'm fine being out in the countryside on my own (although usually have to dogs with me) but in towns I am always vigilant & alert to my surroundings.


----------



## MilleD

Cleo38 said:


> Absolutely horrific. I can't imagine the trauma her poor family must be going through


Have you read her family's victim impact statement? It's agonising


----------



## Cleo38

MilleD said:


> Have you read her family's victim impact statement? It's agonising


Yes, I did this afternoon. So very upsetting. It's terrible what some people have to go through. their lives will never be the same again because of that vile man


----------



## Dimwit

MilleD said:


> Have you read her family's victim impact statement? It's agonising


Wasn't it heartbreaking? I truly hope there is some serious investigation going on in the police force to find out why nothing was done about this man sooner despite numerous reports of sexual offences. I don't hold out much hope though, so far they are just asking the press to refer to him as an ex-police officer, conveniently forgetting that at the time he was very much a serving officer…


----------



## Boxer123

This morning on the news women are now getting advice to stay safe when stopped by the police you couldn’t make it up.


----------



## Calvine

Boxer123 said:


> View attachment 477194
> I'm just horrified.


 Yes, the incident where he exposed himself which someone (maybe you) mentioned earlier. How on earth could he keep his job after that? Think it was in a McDonalds's or somewhere similar - can you imagine!


----------



## Boxer123

Calvine said:


> Yes, the incident where he exposed himself which someone (maybe you) mentioned earlier. How on earth could he keep his job after that? Think it was in a McDonalds's or somewhere similar - can you imagine!


All the early signs a man will kill or rape are always ignored. Sexist comments, hating women, upskirting, stalking. It's so scary.

Apparently if you get pulled over and are worried you can call 999 I wonder if they would take that seriously?


----------



## Calvine

Boxer123 said:


> All the early signs a man will kill or rape are always ignored. Sexist comments, hating women, upskirting, stalking. It's so scary.
> 
> Apparently if you get pulled over and are worried you can call 999 I wonder if they would take that seriously?


Yes: I wonder if his former colleagues still think his behaviour was amusing?


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Boxer123 said:


> All the early signs a man will kill or rape are always ignored. Sexist comments, hating women, upskirting, stalking. It's so scary.
> 
> Apparently if you get pulled over and are worried you can call 999 I wonder if they would take that seriously?


I am going to ask a couple of pals who are control room supervisors about this. I shall report back when they respond (they do really strange shifts).

I read the family statements yesterday and it made me angry all over again. I hope, actually, that he just kills himself. Vile creature.


----------



## Cleo38

I was just listening to the news & heard he will be sentenced today & will 'probably' get a whole life tariff. I don't understand why there could be anything else. But then that piece of sh*t Colin Pitchfork is now out after raping & murdering two young girls so ....


----------



## Calvine

Cleo38 said:


> I was just listening to the news & heard he will be sentenced today & will 'probably' get a whole life tariff. I don't understand why there could be anything else. But then that piece of sh*t Colin Pitchfork is now out after raping & murdering two young girls so ....


I think there would be a public outcry if he were to receive less (surely?), but the justice system here seems to be crazy.


----------



## Boxer123

Mrs Funkin said:


> I am going to ask a couple of pals who are control room supervisors about this. I shall report back when they respond (they do really strange shifts).
> 
> I read the family statements yesterday and it made me angry all over again. I hope, actually, that he just kills himself. Vile creature.


It would be interesting to see what they say. If he doesn't get a full life sentence I don't know what to say.


----------



## MilleD

Have you seen the interview in his home where they initially ask if he knows her and he says no.

Then goes onto say that a gang have been threatening him so he had to go and pick up girls for them. He's very calm considering he must know they know it's him.


----------



## Cleo38

MilleD said:


> Have you seen the interview in his home where they initially ask if he knows her and he says no.
> 
> Then goes onto say that a gang have been threatening him so he had to go and pick up girls for them. He's very calm considering he must know they know it's him.


 And he took his wife & kids to the woodland where he had hidden her body. How awful. I also feel sorry for his family, how must it be knowing you lived with a monster like that


----------



## Dimwit

It will be interesting to see the backlash to this...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/58732146


----------



## mrs phas

Dimwit said:


> It will be interesting to see the backlash to this...
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/58732146


OMG! 
Common sense being used 
How archaic


----------



## kimthecat

Siskin said:


> During the late '60's I was invited to go to a party by this lad I really fancied. I was so thrilled he had asked me that I didn't kick up a fuss when he said whilst we were there that he couldn't run me home in his car. I managed to talk him into running me to Gloucester, but he was too miserable to take me to the bus station so I had to walk across the town late at night.
> I became aware that this bloke was following me so I speeded up and got to the phone box at the bus station to ring my dad and get him out of bed and come a fetch me (he was very miffed). The bloke hung about outside the phone box watching me. I sort of ran out towards some policemen I had spotted and asked them if I could stand with them whilst waiting for dad because of this bloke.
> It wasn't until many years later we all got to hear about Fred West who was killing young girls in Gloucester. Makes you wonder.


 Frightening.


----------



## Lurcherlad

There are also practical and financial implications, particularly in community sports which already struggle to fund and build their facilities as it is.

Already a club has to offer separate changing rooms and showers for Away and Home teams, the same again for officials.

Currently accommodating male and female teams works at my local club because they play at different times as there is only one pitch.

What happens if trans players are on the team?

Currently, those showers and changing rooms are communal for each team … how could that work if there are trans players … considering everybody who is using them - not just modesty but also safeguarding for all?

Just saying build more separate cubicles is easy …. But where does the money come from?

There is already an issue in women’s football where heterosexual teenage girls leave the game after moving up to the women’s section because of the communal facilities and overt sexual behaviour of some fellow players (especially if they have partners on the team) and pressure to “convert”.

Everyone is so frightened of being labelled phobic.

It really is an extremely complicated issue in all ways …. Not as easy as just saying “be inclusive”.


----------



## O2.0

Dimwit said:


> It will be interesting to see the backlash to this...
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/58732146


It sounds perfectly reasonable to me...


----------



## kimthecat

Comments by David Lammy about trans.

he thinks that transwomen can grow a cervix with hormone treatment etc.


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> Comments by David Lammy about trans.
> 
> he thinks that transwomen can grow a cervix with hormone treatment etc.


I know .... it's hilarious isn't it???!!! What a total @rse!!! I can't believe he honestly thinks that 

It just shows how badly the female anatomy has been neglected in teaching or discussions.


----------



## kimthecat

Cleo38 said:


> I know .... it's hilarious isn't it???!!! What a total @rse!!! I can't believe he honestly thinks that
> 
> It just shows how badly the female anatomy has been neglected in teaching or discussions.
> 
> View attachment 477208


:Hilarious Love it !


----------



## Mrs Funkin

My friends report that yes, you would be taken seriously if you called in. 

As for the Lammy Award. Genius. Regarding his insistence that you can grow a cervix, I have no words. Jeez.


----------



## Boxer123

Full life sentence I hope he rots.


----------



## kimthecat

Boxer123 said:


> Full life sentence I hope he rots.


I dont believe in the death sentence but if something happened to him in prison I wouldn't shed any tears and Levi Bell too who killed Milly Dowler and lived in my neck of the woods.


----------



## Calvine

Cleo38 said:


> It's terrible what some people have to go through. their lives will never be the same again because of that vile man


I also can't help wondering how it is affecting his wife and children. To think you have been married to such a monster for ?? years. The children may well be old enough to read or understand what's happened. They will have to change schools, change their names. I think I read that she was not English, so they will maybe leave the country. Apparently she saw absolutely no warning signs. So that's another family he's destroyed.


----------



## Boxer123

Calvine said:


> I also can't help wondering how it is affecting his wife and children. To think you have been married to such a monster for ?? years. The children may well be old enough to read or understand what's happened. They will have to change schools, change their names. I think I read that she was not English, so they will maybe leave the country. Apparently she saw absolutely no warning signs. So that's another family he's destroyed.


It's a awful for them I should imagine there were signs she's probably to scared to talk about it.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

kimthecat said:


> I dont believe in the death sentence but if something happened to him in prison I wouldn't shed any tears and Levi Bell too who killed Milly Dowler and lived in my neck of the woods.


Kate Sheedy was mowed down very close to where I lived in Isleworth, by a pub called the County Arms. Vile creature.


----------



## Calvine

Boxer123 said:


> It's a awful for them I should imagine there were signs she's probably to scared to talk about it.


 Apparently he exposed himself more than once at McDonalds, but not all the girls involved reported it. If they had, who knows, Sarah might still be alive. Some women he worked with in the past said he made them feel ''uneasy'' but said nothing at the time.


----------



## Boxer123

Calvine said:


> Apparently he exposed himself more than once at McDonalds, but not all the girls involved reported it. If they had, who knows, Sarah might still be alive. Some women he worked with in the past said he made them feel ''uneasy'' but said nothing at the time.


It's also come out he was on a what's app group with other officers full of racist, sexist, homophobic language. His nickname was The Rapist at work. She really could have been saved.


----------



## Calvine

Boxer123 said:


> It's also come out he was on a what's app group with other officers full of racist, sexist, homophobic language. His nickname was The Rapist at work. She really could have been saved.


They are investigating the others too (16 of them?), the ones he exchanged WhatsApp messages with. What a can of worms.


----------



## Boxer123

Calvine said:


> They are investigating the others too (16 of them?), the ones he exchanged WhatsApp messages with. What a can of worms.


Honestly if they have those views so we really want them as officers? Its really scary. They are talking about ensuring officers are always in twos to keep people safe from the police !


----------



## Calvine

Boxer123 said:


> Honestly if they have those views so we really want them as officers? Its really scary. They are talking about ensuring officers are always in twos to keep people safe from the police !


The ones I see here almost always are in pairs; I thought that was for their safety - who knows?


----------



## Calvine

More than 100 police officers were accused of crimes last year | Metro News


----------



## Siskin

Calvine said:


> The ones I see here almost always are in pairs; I thought that was for their safety - who knows?


I thought this too, but as you say, who knows


----------



## Magyarmum

Boxer123 said:


> Honestly if they have those views so we really want them as officers? Its really scary. They are talking about ensuring officers are always in twos to keep people safe from the police !


At one time certainly in Nottingham where I was brought up,the police always patrolled in pairs.


----------



## simplysardonic

Boxer123 said:


> It's also come out he was on a what's app group with other officers full of racist, sexist, homophobic language. His nickname was The Rapist at work. She really could have been saved.


Over 750 sexual misconduct allegations against Met Police officers & staff since 2010, that equates to 75 a year.

I'm only a country mouse & have no idea about urban policing but this seems a horrifying & disturbing number.


----------



## HarlequinCat

Ok. Well. Twitter is quite the cess pit. Tried having a reasoned debate with someone. Apparently I'm not entitled to thoughts on women's rights as I'm not part of the feminist movement. They are quite rude and obnoxious on there!


----------



## Magyarmum

simplysardonic said:


> Over 750 sexual misconduct allegations against Met Police officers & staff since 2010, that equates to 75 a MONTH.
> 
> I'm only a country mouse & have no idea about urban policing but this seems a horrifying & disturbing number.


I stand to be corrected but I think you have your figures wrong. 750 allegations over a period of 10/11 years doesn't amount to 75 a month.


----------



## Boxer123

HarlequinCat said:


> Ok. Well. Twitter is quite the cess pit. Tried having a reasoned debate with someone. Apparently I'm not entitled to thoughts on women's rights as I'm not part of the feminist movement. They are quite rude and obnoxious on there!


I don't use twitter but surely being part of a feminist movement is simply educating and discussing ?


----------



## simplysardonic

Magyarmum said:


> I stand to be corrected but I think you have your figures wrong. 750 allegations over a period of 10/11 years doesn't amount to 75 a month.


Oops, you're right, & this is why I'm not allowed to do the maths in our household:Facepalm

I meant year so I'll change that, still awful though.


----------



## HarlequinCat

Boxer123 said:


> I don't use twitter but surely being part of a feminist movement is simply educating and discussing ?


There was no education or discussion there. A bit disappointing really. I was discussing women's rights and how far we've come, and that trans people had an advantage in sport. They accused me of dead zoning trans and told me to let the adults talk ...


----------



## Cleo38

HarlequinCat said:


> There was no education or discussion there. A bit disappointing really. I was discussing women's rights and how far we've come, and that trans people had an advantage in sport. They accused me of dead zoning trans and told me to let the adults talk ...


I have never been on Twitter as it seems vicious .... even worse than vegan or force free dog groups! 

Unfortunately this is subject that instantly gets shut down now by some. Any deviation from their narrow viewpoint is seen as bigoted. I had this on a FB group a while. It was after JK Rowling tweeted about the word woman. I posted that I thought she was very eloquent & said what a lot of women felt. I was told I was vile, disgusting, bigoted & hateful by a few of the shouty types. I then was pm'ed by a couple of transwomen threatening to choke me with their 'lady dicks' ..... yet I was the hateful one


----------



## O2.0

HarlequinCat said:


> They accused me of dead zoning trans


What does that even mean?

I'm not on twitter, but some of the articles I've read and posts I've seen just aren't reasonable.

Biology is real. Sex is real. We can't pretend that they're not. 
There is nothing hateful about saying that a trans woman is not the same as a biological woman.
The female experience is unique to women. That's a reality. I can almost see that socially it may not be, that effeminate men may experience what it's like to be a woman in social settings, but biologically it's not the same and it's insulting to pretend that it is.

I'm currently going through menopause or perimenopause or whatever, but that is an experience unique to biological women. The experience will vary of course, as will menstruation, as will so many other uniquely female physical experiences. But no man will experience menopause. Men are not women. That's not a hateful thing or even a judgmental thing. It just is.

We have fought for appropriate healthcare based on our uniqueness as biological females, and now we're going backwards trying to pretend that men are women and it's all the same. That "woman" is a cultural invention. It's not.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> What does that even mean?
> 
> I'm not on twitter, but some of the articles I've read and posts I've seen just aren't reasonable.
> 
> Biology is real. Sex is real. We can't pretend that they're not.
> There is nothing hateful about saying that a trans woman is not the same as a biological woman.
> The female experience is unique to women. That's a reality. I can almost see that socially it may not be, that effeminate men may experience what it's like to be a woman in social settings, but biologically it's not the same and it's insulting to pretend that it is.
> 
> I'm currently going through menopause or perimenopause or whatever, but that is an experience unique to biological women. The experience will vary of course, as will menstruation, as will so many other uniquely female physical experiences. But no man will experience menopause. Men are not women. That's not a hateful thing or even a judgmental thing. It just is.
> 
> We have fought for appropriate healthcare based on our uniqueness as biological females, and now we're going backwards trying to pretend that men are women and it's all the same. That "woman" is a cultural invention. It's not.


I completely agree but honestly if you try to state that on certain social media platforms you will be told that is hate speech .... it really is that crazy!


----------



## HarlequinCat

Cleo38 said:


> I have never been on Twitter as it seems vicious .... even worse than vegan or force free dog groups!
> 
> Unfortunately this is subject that instantly gets shut down now by some. Any deviation from their narrow viewpoint is seen as bigoted. I had this on a FB group a while. It was after JK Rowling tweeted about the word woman. I posted that I thought she was very eloquent & said what a lot of women felt. I was told I was vile, disgusting, bigoted & hateful by a few of the shouty types. I then was pm'ed by a couple of transwomen threatening to choke me with their 'lady dicks' ..... yet I was the hateful one


They sound lovely, friendly, reasonable people... :Bag


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> I completely agree but honestly if you try to state that on certain social media platforms you will be told that is hate speech .... it really is that crazy!


I would like for someone to explain that to me - seriously. I genuinely don't understand how it is hateful to point out that men and women are different. Different doesn't mean less, different doesn't mean bad, it simply means we're not made up of the same parts. How is that hateful?

If a trans woman presents as female I'm not going to question it, and quite frankly knowing me I wouldn't even notice she was a trans woman and not a woman. That's not my business how people choose to present themselves to the world. But biology is different.


----------



## picaresque

Julie Bindel on point as usual (Twitter does have its uses)


----------



## Boxer123

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-58762029

I'm so angry I'm spitting.

93% of murders in England are committed by men and yet the focus is on women learning police and arrest legislation. Why can't we ever discuss what the actual problem is ?


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> I would like for someone to explain that to me - seriously. I genuinely don't understand how it is hateful to point out that men and women are different. Different doesn't mean less, different doesn't mean bad, it simply means we're not made up of the same parts. How is that hateful?
> 
> If a trans woman presents as female I'm not going to question it, and quite frankly knowing me I wouldn't even notice she was a trans woman and not a woman. That's not my business how people choose to present themselves to the world. But biology is different.


I honestly would as well. I have tried when discussions have come up on certain FB pages but that's the problem .. they don't discuss or explain their views. They just shout down any discussion & repeat transwomen are women end of.

It is so bizarre & so scary that this has filtered in to the mainstream with certain groups now also deciding that there is no debate.

I posted before about a discussion on Woman's Hour regarding transwomen competing in women's sport & the panelist supporting the rights of trans competitors refused to go in to the studio to discuss with another women who expressed concerns. It was ridiculous & IMO they should have declined her request to have a seperate conversation.

This is Stonewall's response to discussion regarding trans issues (Stonewall is a lesbian, gay, bi & trans charity)

".*Why are people who support trans equality refusing to go on panel shows to discuss gender? Aren't you silencing debate?*
Trans people and trans allies are keen to have robust and honest debates about how to make trans equality a reality in the UK. But what they're not prepared to do is debate whether or not they have the right to be themselves, or have rights as citizens under the law. We're working with people in the media to help them understand this, and move the conversation on to how we can work together to tackle transphobia and fight for acceptance without exception for trans people."

But in reality it isn't just about trans rights but a much wider discussion. Alot of people no longer support Stonewall due to this


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> I honestly would as well. I have tried when discussions have come up on certain FB pages but that's the problem .. they don't discuss or explain their views. They just shout down any discussion & repeat transwomen are women end of.
> 
> It is so bizarre & so scary that this has filtered in to the mainstream with certain groups now also deciding that there is no debate.
> 
> I posted before about a discussion on Woman's Hour regarding transwomen competing in women's sport & the panelist supporting the rights of trans competitors refused to go in to the studio to discuss with another women who expressed concerns. It was ridiculous & IMO they should have declined her request to have a seperate conversation.
> 
> This is Stonewall's response to discussion regarding trans issues (Stonewall is a lesbian, gay, bi & trans charity)
> 
> ".*Why are people who support trans equality refusing to go on panel shows to discuss gender? Aren't you silencing debate?*
> Trans people and trans allies are keen to have robust and honest debates about how to make trans equality a reality in the UK. But what they're not prepared to do is debate whether or not they have the right to be themselves, or have rights as citizens under the law. We're working with people in the media to help them understand this, and move the conversation on to how we can work together to tackle transphobia and fight for acceptance without exception for trans people."
> 
> But in reality it isn't just about trans rights but a much wider discussion. Alot of people no longer support Stonewall due to this


I don't know if you remember when the bathroom thing came up here in the US and people were freaking out about trans women using women's public bathrooms. I was one of the ones who said who the f cares about trans women using the bathroom, everyone has probably shared a public toilet with a trans woman and had no idea. It's not like we pee in urinals, it's stalls with doors. Big whoop.

That sort of argument I totally get. Trans people have the right to exist in society however they choose to present themselves. No one is saying trans people can't "be themselves" have equal rights as citizens. Well maybe some weirdo ultra conservatives are, and if they are, I will fight for the rights of trans people to be out and proud and live their lives.

But there is another piece here that I feel the trans activists are deliberately missing. Women's spaces, women's sports, medical care and research, children on puberty blocking hormones, social contagion in teen girls. This all needs to be discussed openly and honestly and has nothing at all to do with trans people existing or being themselves. It's a false correlation and makes conversation impossible. It's really a shame, because I feel like there would be a lot more trans allies if we could just have honest conversations about realities of being a woman, being trans, and not shout -ist every time someone doesn't agree with you.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

I asked husband to read the victim statements from Sarah's family, to try to understand a little of why I'm still so upset about what happened. When the vigils were happening not ONCE did he say he would come with me. He knew it was a thing that as a woman, I needed to do. Alone. Not with a man. The fact that he wouldn't ever contemplate doing such a thing was not the point and he got that. He never once said "not all men". Today he is angry that once again the onus is being put on women to "know the law" about whether you can be arrested or not. He's angry about that and about women being given safety tips, about keeping themselves safe, why should it all be on the woman he says. I love that he is angry about it but I love more that he understands he shouldn't be the one protesting it and that he understands why I am so f'ing livid about the whole situation. He is equally angry about the removal of women and the acceptance of men who now identify as a woman being allowed to be in female spaces. He's not a bad "body with a penis", this husband of mine. 

I just don't know HOW to channel the rage I still feel about it.


----------



## MilleD

Cleo38 said:


> I have never been on Twitter as it seems vicious .... even worse than vegan or force free dog groups!
> 
> Unfortunately this is subject that instantly gets shut down now by some. Any deviation from their narrow viewpoint is seen as bigoted. I had this on a FB group a while. It was after JK Rowling tweeted about the word woman. I posted that I thought she was very eloquent & said what a lot of women felt. I was told I was vile, disgusting, bigoted & hateful by a few of the shouty types. I then was pm'ed by a couple of transwomen threatening to choke me with their 'lady dicks' ..... yet I was the hateful one


I was on a sewing Facebook page and they posted a new rule that you weren't allowed to post photos of Harry potter material without a "trigger" warning after she made her (reasonable in my eyes) comment.

I mean, what the actual hell?


----------



## O2.0

MilleD said:


> I was on a sewing Facebook page and they posted a new rule that you weren't allowed to post photos of Harry potter material without a "trigger" warning after she made her (reasonable in my eyes) comment.
> 
> I mean, what the actual hell?


Wow.... 
What the actual hell for real! 
I wonder if we'll get to a point and realize how insane this all is. Like McCarthyism in the US and we now look back and realize how crazy and damaging it was.


----------



## picaresque

MilleD said:


> I was on a sewing Facebook page and they posted a new rule that you weren't allowed to post photos of Harry potter material without a "trigger" warning after she made her (reasonable in my eyes) comment.
> 
> I mean, what the actual hell?


This is insane but also hilarious (because sometimes all you can do is laugh)

These are probably the same kind of people who made fun of the conservative Christians who wanted to ban Harry Potter from school libraries because of the evil occult influence. And they weren't wrong, it was silly, they're harmless, fun kids books. And yet here we are...


----------



## Cleo38

MilleD said:


> I was on a sewing Facebook page and they posted a new rule that you weren't allowed to post photos of Harry potter material without a "trigger" warning after she made her (reasonable in my eyes) comment.
> 
> I mean, what the actual hell?


What???!!! That is crazy!!!!


----------



## Calvine

picaresque said:


> because sometimes all you can do is laugh


 True: quite often you say to yourself (or I do), ''If it weren't so awful it would be funny''.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

My tongue is clearly buried firmly in my cheek but still….


----------



## Cleo38

Does anyone know if any male celebrities or men's groups (sports, etc) have ever spoken out regarding male violence against women? has there ever been any campaigns or awareness weeks, (or similar) as there are for racism or homophobia?

I was thinking about this today & I honestly can't think of anything but hope I am wrong

Edited to add .... spot on @Mrs Funkin !!!!


----------



## Boxer123

Mrs Funkin said:


> My tongue is clearly buried firmly in my cheek but still….
> 
> View attachment 477333


I spotted this yesterday it's so apt. Constant victim blaming doesn't help we should be looking at everything; the culture around men harassing women, teaching what constant means, understanding the impact of rape jokes. I could go on. I like you @Mrs Funkin am so angry. I can't even express myself properly.


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> Does anyone know if any male celebrities or men's groups (sports, etc) have ever spoken out regarding male violence against women? has there ever been any campaigns or awareness weeks, (or similar) as there are for racism or homophobia?
> 
> I was thinking about this today & I honestly can't think of anything but hope I am wrong
> 
> Edited to add .... spot on @Mrs Funkin !!!!


Of course not because they are to busy telling us it's not all men. No one really wants to admit it's an issue. Again 93% of murders are committed by men.

Toxic masculinity doesn't just hurt women look at male suicide rates. Its so engrained in our culture. I don't know any women who hasn't been harassed or worse at some point in her life.

We are told that cat calling and being flashed at is a compliment.

In my last house a man on the state started following me and my sister. He was very odd and creepy. He'd follow really close with his dog which was quite aggressive. Anyway called the police at one point to be told they can't do anything unless he attacks us.


----------



## Calvine

Boxer123 said:


> don't know any women who hasn't been harassed or worse


Every single one. Even our school caretaker was a dodgy one. 
When I had dogs, I used to walk them along the towpath, the most direct route to the park and I could not count the number of times I was flashed at - and I reported it to the police only once as they were so obviously not taking it seriously. I actually recognised one guy as he had a Greek restaurant down the road where a friend and I often went. I told the police who he was, _even what his first name was_ and that he was noticeably small, dark-skinned, quite fat and described him perfectly, even down to the fact that he spoke with a heavy Greek accent. I knew the guy FFS.
I thought they were taking it seriously when they dragged me out at a totally inconvenient time to an ''identity parade'' (late evening which I found odd). Not one of them was anything like the guy whom I described. They were all typically English in appearance, fair skinned, too tall, not fat enough - whatever. I never reported any of the others after that. Think they were hoping I would point to one of them and say ''Yep, that's him'' (like maybe I wanted my ten minutes of fame) so that they could tell me not to waste their time. I told them in no uncertain terms that I thought that they had wasted my evening.
So when I took the dogs out late one night after work and encountered a guy standing on a 6' wall with only a pair of socks and an erection, I did not trouble Twickenham police with the details (police with a small ''p'' deliberately). I knew who he was too, as a fellow dog-walker and I had encountered him on our walks and were somewhat taken aback when he joined us (he had no dog) on one occasion and started masturbating behind his newspaper. The most I ever did after these incidents was to warn any other women/girls I encountered to be on their guard.


----------



## Boxer123

Calvine said:


> Every single one. Even our school caretaker was a dodgy one.
> When I had dogs, I used to walk them along the towpath, the most direct route to the park and I could not count the number of times I was flashed at - and I reported it to the police only once as they were so obviously not taking it seriously. I actually recognised one guy as he had a Greek restaurant down the road where a friend and I often went. I told the police who he was, _even what his first name was_ and that he was noticeably small, dark-skinned, quite fat and described him perfectly, even down to the fact that he spoke with a heavy Greek accent. I knew the guy FFS.
> I thought they were taking it seriously when they dragged me out at a totally inconvenient time to an ''identity parade'' (late evening which I found odd). Not one of them was anything like the guy whom I described. They were all typically English in appearance, fair skinned, too tall, not fat enough - whatever. I never reported any of the others after that. Think they were hoping I would point to one of them and say ''Yep, that's him'' (like maybe I wanted my ten minutes of fame) so that they could tell me not to waste their time. I told them in no uncertain terms that I thought that they had wasted my evening.
> So when I took the dogs out late one night after work and encountered a guy standing on a 6' wall with only a pair of socks and an erection, I did not trouble Twickenham police with the details (police with a small ''p'' deliberately). I knew who he was too, as a fellow dog-walker and I had encountered him on our walks and were somewhat taken aback when he joined us (he had no dog) on one occasion and started masturbating behind his newspaper. The most I ever did after these incidents was to warn any other women/girls I encountered to be on their guard.


It's awful and of course we change our behaviour to avoid these incidents. Many of these men escalate in behaviour.


----------



## Calvine

Laurel Hubbard ''Sportswoman of the year'' in New Zealand? (Apologies if this was already posted.)


----------



## Dimwit

MilleD said:


> I was on a sewing Facebook page and they posted a new rule that you weren't allowed to post photos of Harry potter material without a "trigger" warning after she made her (reasonable in my eyes) comment.
> 
> I mean, what the actual hell?


I can well believe it. I am a knitter and the number of indie yarn dyers who have had so much hate directed at them for dying up HP themed yarn is shocking. One pattern designer bought out a book of HP themed patterns and got absolutely hounded on social media for profiting from a transphobic person. Strangely none of these keyboard warriors bothered to target Warner Bros who profit much more…


----------



## Cleo38

Boxer123 said:


> Of course not because they are to busy telling us it's not all men. No one really wants to admit it's an issue. Again 93% of murders are committed by men.
> 
> Toxic masculinity doesn't just hurt women look at male suicide rates. Its so engrained in our culture. I don't know any women who hasn't been harassed or worse at some point in her life.
> 
> We are told that cat calling and being flashed at is a compliment.
> 
> In my last house a man on the state started following me and my sister. He was very odd and creepy. He'd follow really close with his dog which was quite aggressive. Anyway called the police at one point to be told they can't do anything unless he attacks us.


And this is what p*sses me off so much. Every woman I know has been harassed or attacked.

I have a huge list & I don't consider myself particularly unusual. Luckily none of my incidents involved me being hurt but in one it was pure luck that I wasn't seriously assaulted.

Even when I moved here I was out with my dogs one day walking along the river bank & a man suddenly appeared on the other side, saw me, dropped his trousers & started w*nking. WTF!!! I was fuming, I didn't react at all as I didn't want to give him any attention to just walked down the other side so he couldn't see me. Then 3wks after I saw him again so I threw Roxy's ball in the water (he didn't see this), he only saw a big GSD swimming towards him & quickly pulled his trousers up, got in his car & drove off.


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> And this is what p*sses me off so much. Every woman I know has been harassed or attacked.
> 
> I have a huge list & I don't consider myself particularly unusual. Luckily none of my incidents involved me being hurt but in one it was pure luck that I wasn't seriously assaulted.
> 
> Even when I moved here I was out with my dogs one day walking along the river bank & a man suddenly appeared on the other side, saw me, dropped his trousers & started w*nking. WTF!!! I was fuming, I didn't react at all as I didn't want to give him any attention to just walked down the other side so he couldn't see me. Then 3wks after I saw him again so I threw Roxy's ball in the water (he didn't see this), he only saw a big GSD swimming towards him & quickly pulled his trousers up, got in his car & drove off.


That's awful  it's dirty pigs like that who should be in prison.


----------



## HarlequinCat

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sex-attacker-targeted-seven-women-London.html

Sex attacker targets at least 7 that are known of in a month in Tower Hamlets London. Another case where if he's not found and punished you can see it escalating. (and let's face it no one can identify him from that photo). Disgusting


----------



## Jesthar

Watched The Last Leg last night, and Adam Hills nailed it:






What's the betting any actual enquiry lasts for years and never draws anywhere near as good a conclusion?


----------



## Mrs Funkin

https://www.theguardian.com/society...HF3-ACAz_rPNxcrmHZscYJs2aEhOsFwN5Ybqno3aAaj14

I don't know what to say. I still don't know what to do. I can't believe that this many women have been killed since Sarah's murder. How is it acceptable? HOW? Why are we not shouting and screaming about this. Why are we letting this happen to us? Why are we as women let these vile men get away with it? Are we being complicit in these behaviours by not challenging a man every single time they make a comment/behave in a way that we aren't happy with?

My brain won't switch off about it. It just won't.


----------



## rona

I've always felt lucky that the comments, molesting and assaults that I have suffered over the years were not serious. How screwed up is that?


----------



## kimthecat

rona said:


> I've always felt lucky that the comments, molesting and assaults that I have suffered over the years were not serious. How screwed up is that?


Me too. Remember dirty old men with Wandering Hand Trouble:Meh


----------



## rona

kimthecat said:


> Me too. Remember dirty old men with Wandering Hand Trouble:Meh


Just so many


----------



## Cleo38

rona said:


> I've always felt lucky that the comments, molesting and assaults that I have suffered over the years were not serious. How screwed up is that?


Yes, I realised I thought the same ...


----------



## Mrs Funkin

It’s so true. I remember a bloke in a club once (I was under age with a fake ID) smashing his glass on a table and threatening me with it because I wouldn’t dance with him. We did nothing about it at all. Nothing. We just went to another area in the club, to where we thought we were safe away from the situation. I’ve not thought about it for years - obviously still in there though. How we accept that sort of behaviour is exactly what I mean - that is not a normal thing to do - but the onus was back on me to go away from the situation rather than him not threaten a young woman with a broken glass. That was over 30 years ago and nothing has changed


----------



## lullabydream

Mrs Funkin said:


> It's so true. I remember a bloke in a club once (I was under age with a fake ID) smashing his glass on a table and threatening me with it because I wouldn't dance with him. We did nothing about it at all. Nothing. We just went to another area in the club, to where we thought we were safe away from the situation. I've not thought about it for years - obviously still in there though. How we accept that sort of behaviour is exactly what I mean - that is not a normal thing to do - but the onus was back on me to go away from the situation rather than him not threaten a young woman with a broken glass. That was over 30 years ago and nothing has changed


You have just reminded me. Not my best behaviour but a sleaze ball so called friend of OH tried it on with me in a pub once, with wandering hands. When I was out with my sister. I stopped him by just throwing my drink at him. It barely touched him, I drank like a fish and it was a short of taboo(ghastly stuff urgh) . It was instinct.

I was the one everyone then had a problem with, my cries of you should keep your filthy hands off didn't deserve maybe a teaspoon of drink at him. Maybe it didn't but he was brazen and should have kept his hands away. 
The bouncers knew me and I was the one to get asked to move away. Not him as to be fair he made more of a performance over it than me.


----------



## Cleo38

Mrs Funkin said:


> It's so true. I remember a bloke in a club once (I was under age with a fake ID) smashing his glass on a table and threatening me with it because I wouldn't dance with him. We did nothing about it at all. Nothing. We just went to another area in the club, to where we thought we were safe away from the situation. I've not thought about it for years - obviously still in there though. How we accept that sort of behaviour is exactly what I mean - that is not a normal thing to do - but the onus was back on me to go away from the situation rather than him not threaten a young woman with a broken glass. That was over 30 years ago and nothing has changed


That's awful. Years ago when my sister & I were out in a pub this one bloke would not leave us alone & kept hassling us despite us being much younger than him & politely telling him (several times) that we didn't want a drink, we didn't want to talk to him, etc. In the end my sister told him to "**** off & leave us alone" .... which he did then came back to ask if we really meant it?! No violence but the sheer disbelief that two young women did not want to spend their time with him as he was obviously such amazing company 

Other times there has been abuse, threats, etc simply because we turned a man down & bruised his ego.

The Margaret Atwood quote: "Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them" is unfortunately very apt


----------



## Calvine

HarlequinCat said:


> Sex attacker targets at least 7 that are known of


 Probably double that number - there will be other people like me who have reported it in the past and know it's a waste of time reporting anything to the police. They don't take it seriously, and yes, it does escalate (let's not forget Wayne Couzens started by flashing).
What made me angry though, was men's reaction to the guy standing naked on a wall (mid-winter!) with an erection. They smirked and made crass comments; ''Hahaha - did he have a big one?'' and the like. When I said I really didn't hang around long enough to take notice it was ''Oh, come on, you must have had a good look at it''. Why the f*** would I? Give it a mark out of ten or what?


----------



## Cleo38

lullabydream said:


> You have just reminded me. Not my best behaviour but a sleaze ball so called friend of OH tried it on with me in a pub once, with wandering hands. When I was out with my sister. I stopped him by just throwing my drink at him. It barely touched him, I drank like a fish and it was a short of taboo(ghastly stuff urgh) . It was instinct.
> 
> I was the one everyone then had a problem with, my cries of you should keep your filthy hands off didn't deserve maybe a teaspoon of drink at him. Maybe it didn't but he was brazen and should have kept his hands away.
> The bouncers knew me and I was the one to get asked to move away. Not him as to be fair he made more of a performance over it than me.


So sorry to read that @lullabydream but unfortunately that sounds familiar. Again, years ago I lived with my BF at the time & we had friends round. It was quite a late one with booze involved. My BF had gone to bed & I stayed up chatting with one of our (male) friends & then listening to a CD of his band. I must have fallen asleep on the sofa but I suddenly woke up as I couldn't breathe & he was on top of me trying to get my clothes off. I shouted at him & chucked him out, I was furious but decided not to tell my BF.

Anyway after a week or so this person carried on coming round our flat as if nothing had happened, no apology or anything just the odd comment like we had some sort of secret & that I was in on it. So I told my BF who was rightly furious. The problem was alot of our friends (mostly male but one women) were then annoyed with me; why did I have to say anything? I had ruined our 'group' now & made things awkward, why couldn't I have just kept my mouth shut?

I remember at the time being so angry with everyone & even now I think how could I have been blamed?


----------



## lullabydream

Cleo38 said:


> So sorry to read that @lullabydream but unfortunately that sounds familiar. Again, years ago I lived with my BF at the time & we had friends round. It was quite a late one with booze involved. My BF had gone to bed & I stayed up chatting with one of our (male) friends & then listening to a CD of his band. I must have fallen asleep on the sofa but I suddenly woke up as I couldn't breathe & he was on top of me trying to get my clothes off. I shouted at him & chucked him out, I was furious but decided not to tell my BF.
> 
> Anyway after a week or so this person carried on coming round our flat as if nothing had happened, no apology or anything just the odd comment like we had some sort of secret & that I was in on it. So I told my BF who was rightly furious. The problem was alot of our friends (mostly male but one women) were then annoyed with me; why did I have to say anything? I had ruined our 'group' now & made things awkward, why couldn't I have just kept my mouth shut?
> 
> I remember at the time being so angry with everyone & even now I think how could I have been blamed?


It's not the only incident I have had with my OH do called friends. They can be so blatant and yes I actually thought its not worth mentioning to OH and in some way I think it's because of that incident that night. What is the point of causing a scene, upsetting people.

I can also relate to your lecherous old man story. One particular bloke was terrible. Apparently his wife left him for a younger model so he thought he would try it on every young girl. He made my skin crawl but I was underage drinking and it came across like he had the right to make us young girls feel awful because poor him, his wife left him. It was like the unwritten rule in my town.
Ironically he ended up living a few doors down from me when he became riddled with ill health and passed away. Must be 3/4 years ago.. He hadn't changed one bit. Still lecherous then or rather tried to be, bit harder in a wheel chair.


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> Me too. Remember dirty old men with Wandering Hand Trouble:Meh


Travelling by tube in the rush hour, packed like sardines so you couldn't even move away. Then they go home to their wife and children! And they are not tramps, they are men in smart suits with a job in town.


----------



## Cleo38

Calvine said:


> Travelling by tube in the rush hour, packed like sardines so you couldn't even move away. Then they go home to their wife and children! And they are not tramps, they are men in smart suits with a job in town.


I used to work in London & it was awful. My friend had some bloke w&nk over the back of her when we were coming back from work one day. It was packed & she didn't realise what was happening but then it was obvious when we got off. And yes, it was a middle aged, smart man in a nice suit probably finding the whole disgusting incident amusing


----------



## Calvine

Cleo38 said:


> I used to work in London & it was awful. My friend had some bloke w&nk over the back of her when we were coming back from work one day. It was packed & she didn't realise what was happening but then it was obvious when we got off. And yes, it was a middle aged, smart man in a nice suit probably finding the whole disgusting incident amusing


Just unbelievable - and for years they have got away with it; and as often as not you couldn't see them, they would be behind you and you'd think, ''Christ, this guy is too close for comfort'', clearly rubbing themselves against you, then the hands would move round the front, miserable vile turds. At least now most women have a camera so sometimes you could get a picture.
Just remembered another, more recent too and in Waitrose of all places. Middle of summer about two years back and in one of the aisles at Waitrose, just me and some really fat old bloke coming towards me. He was wearing a pair of loose-fitting baggy shorts and looked absolutely revolting in them. As he drew level with me he deliberately lifted the leg of his shorts nearer to me as high as he could to reveal (to my great excitement and delight, of course) that he was wearing nothing underneath them. You don't expect THAT in Waitrose, do you!! :Vomit


----------



## Boxer123

Some scary stories on here I didn't want to like the posts but my heart goes out to everyone. We just become so used to it and are grateful it wasn't worse . @Mrs Funkin i know what you mean about the anger. I've just logged of Facebook after reading another, 'not all men not all police offers post.' It makes me to mad.


----------



## O2.0

This just showed up in my FB feed. Posted completely unironically too. 
I despair, seriously. Victim blaming level expert here....


----------



## kimthecat

Victims do get the blame and also victims often blame themselves.  
I think though that since sexual assaults and murders have gone on since time began , things will not change. No offence to the decent men out there , but while you can teach young boys to respect women more , there will be always be perverts out there waiting for an opportunity . I see the points in the FB as keeping yourself safe ( though some OTT ) , the same as wearing a seat belt or a condom. 

Staying alert at night is a good idea , whatever your sex , some areas you could get mugged for example. When we used to walk the dogs at night round the streets , we would cross over the road if there were lads hanging about on the corners just to avoid trouble. Its not that bad here compared to some area but drug deals do go on and its best to look the other way and pretend you haven't seen anything.


----------



## Lurcherlad

I don’t see it as victim blaming when something is posted to take care when out and about, male or female.

Whilst the majority are decent there will always be bad people out there.


----------



## Boxer123

It’s directly aimed at females. We know all of this we don’t need to be told. It reinforces that women should be changing their behaviour. Whilst we like to think the majority are not going to hurt us when you look at lad culture (out on a Saturday night a bunch of men singing, ‘get your tits out for the lads) it’s extremely intimidating and scary but most of those men go home to mums and girlfriends and would call themselves a good guy because they don’t rape anyone.

Of course if you complain and are wearing a short skirt your asking for it. 

The men on the police what’s app group probably thought they were having a laugh until one of there group raped and murdered someone. 

Women should be able to go anywhere and do what they want but we can’t. We need to change the narrative. ‘She didn’t get raped, a man raped her.’ We need to change our language.

There are more than just a few bad apples every women on this thread has experienced harassment or worse. I don’t know anyone who hasn’t been groped or indecently exposed at. 

So this advice just once again blames victims, why were you out in the dark ? Were you drunk? 

As women we naturally do all of these because we feel fear constantly.


----------



## Boxer123

I much prefer this advice.


----------



## Cleo38

Not sure if anyone would be interested but sort of in keeping with the theme of this thread, I went to the Paula Rego exhibition at Tate Britain the other week. It was bloody amazing & she is such an advocate for feminism & reflects women's stories from all over the world in her work. I loved her work, it was amazing & fantastic to see women depicted in such strong roles.

So inspiring that i think I might go again ....

Paula Rego - Wikipedia
Paula Rego - Exhibition at Tate Britain | Tate


----------



## Calvine

lullabydream said:


> It's not the only incident I have had with my OH do called friends. They can be so blatant and yes I actually thought its not worth mentioning to OH and in some way I think it's because of that incident that night. What is the point of causing a scene, upsetting people.
> 
> I can also relate to your lecherous old man story. One particular bloke was terrible. Apparently his wife left him for a younger model so he thought he would try it on every young girl. He made my skin crawl but I was underage drinking and it came across like he had the right to make us young girls feel awful because poor him, his wife left him. It was like the unwritten rule in my town.
> Ironically he ended up living a few doors down from me when he became riddled with ill health and passed away. Must be 3/4 years ago.. He hadn't changed one bit. Still lecherous then or rather tried to be, bit harder in a wheel chair.


It's especially awful when it's someone you know and you are bound to have to see them again (like the neighbour's husband . . . . yep, him too). And then you have also to listen to the wife/OH talking about them and you think to yourself, ''If only you knew what the rat's arse gets up to''.


----------



## Calvine

Metropolitan Police officer charged with rape - BBC News

Not had time to read this, but saw the headline . . . from the same unit as Couzens. Cressida Dick is ''deeply concerned'' she says (you'd hope so wouldn't you!).


----------



## MilleD

Mrs Funkin said:


> Are we being complicit in these behaviours by not challenging a man every single time they make a comment/behave in a way that we aren't happy with?


Whilst I don't want to put the onus back on women, I think you have hit the nail on the head a little.

When I was at school there was a scheme run by Staffordshire Police called SPACE (Staffordshire Police activity and community enterprise) where activities were held over the summer holidays for kids.

I got my boob felt in a theatre in Alton Towers by a policeman. Didn't say a word to anyone. At the time, probably made me feel a bit more grown up.

How messed up is that? And I guess the more we don't call them out for the small things, they think it's ok to push the envelope until things get out of hand.


----------



## Calvine

Sarah Everard's killer can keep at least one third of his police pension | News | The Times

How gratifying to know that his human rights are being respected.


----------



## O2.0

Lurcherlad said:


> I don't see it as victim blaming when something is posted to take care when out and about, male or female.


When it's directed only at women, going about doing normal every day things, I do think that's an issue. Because like @kimthecat said, victims blame themselves too. 
The graphic I posted - if I've had a busy week and end up getting gas after dark on my way home from work and I get assaulted, plenty of people are going to then look back, hyper analyze everything and yup, blame themselves for not having been more on the ball with getting gas. 
The consequence for not being on the ball about gassing up your car should be running out of gas, not assault as implied by that meme. 
There's also the unspoken thread in those 'warnings' to women that being sexually assaulted somehow taints you.

I do get it to a point. There has to be some personal responsibility for your safety - for everyone. But telling women how to stay safe from men is kind of f-ed up if you stop and think about it.


----------



## mrs phas

Worth watching

https://www.ted.com/talks/jackson_katz_violence_against_women_it_s_a_men_s_issue/up-next?language=en


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> Sarah Everard's killer can keep at least one third of his police pension | News | The Times
> 
> How gratifying to know that his human rights are being respected.


Oh FFS


----------



## Dimwit

The problem with putting the onus on women to call out/report this behaviour is that it doesn't take into account the backlash
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58754182.amp

There are also other terrible stories coming out: one woman noted that of 7 separate call outs for domestic violence against her, on 6 occasions the visiting police officer recognised her husband as a fellow police officer and started laughing and joking with him. Only once was she take seriously.

Wayne Couzens may have been 'one bad apple' but he was allowed to remain in the service unchallenged because of the culture where his behaviour was accepted and even encouraged.

over the past year as a volunteer at my local emergency department I have met several police officers and in general I have a huge amount of respect for them, and I have seen some of the vile abuse they are subjected to every shift. 
Absolutely it is not all men, and not all police officers - but how are we supposed to know which ones are good.


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> Oh FFS


 Infuriating - that PLUS the cost of keeping lowlife like him alive in jail, probably more than an ordinary prisoner (which I believe is almost £1000 a week) as they will be watching him like a hawk as a) he will be on ''suicide watch'' (fingers crossed) and b) there will be plenty of guys inside who would just love to whack him.


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> Victims do get the blame and also victims often blame themselves.
> I think though that since sexual assaults and murders have gone on since time began , things will not change. No offence to the decent men out there , but while you can teach young boys to respect women more , there will be always be perverts out there waiting for an opportunity . I see the points in the FB as keeping yourself safe ( though some OTT ) , the same as wearing a seat belt or a condom.
> 
> Staying alert at night is a good idea , whatever your sex , some areas you could get mugged for example. When we used to walk the dogs at night round the streets , we would cross over the road if there were lads hanging about on the corners just to avoid trouble. Its not that bad here compared to some area but drug deals do go on and its best to look the other way and pretend you haven't seen anything.


I agree, I think we should be looking to keep ourselves safe; men & women, but I do also think we should be teaching men how they can act more responsibly. I honestly think some men are so oblivious to how threatening their behaviour can be perceived at times & just by making them aware might help.

But I do also think why are so many women worried about speaking out? And I am not victim shaming at all but why so I read so many accounts of women saying they didn't want to speak out & draw attention to themselves (for example being assaulted on a busy tube), or by a man making suggestive remarks, etc. Maybe this is something this is conditioned to us as girls & then becomes so ingrained as we reach adulthood. Maybe a skill we should be teaching girls when they are young & to continue doing. How to speak out, how to be more assertive, how to have a voice.

i get that all incidents are different & in some cases pure fear causes paralysis but not all incidents. In some women are simply too embarrassed to speak out & this is an area I really think can be worked on & can make a difference.


----------



## StormyThai

Calvine said:


> Infuriating - that PLUS the cost of keeping lowlife like him alive in jail, probably more than an ordinary prisoner (which I believe is almost £1000 a week) as they will be watching him like a hawk as a) he will be on ''suicide watch'' (fingers crossed) and b) there will be plenty of guys inside who would just love to whack him.


I've never understood the point of suicide watch when t comes to a person like this...I mean it's 100% that he committed an abhorrent crime...so what if they want to end their lives?
I personally had a huge weight lifted off my shoulders when I found out that the person that sexually abused me as a child had died...I didn't care how he had died, but I did feel relief.
If someone wants to end their life then let them I say...at least dead he can't hurt anyone else 

-crawls back under rock-

ETA: @Cleo38 Personally I didn't report due to knowing I wouldn't be believed, and the thought of having to talk about the whole sordid thing over, and over, and over...I do regret not trying though as he then went on to abuse many more children.


----------



## Cleo38

StormyThai said:


> I don't see all these posts explaining how to keep safe after dark
> 
> I've never understood the point of suicide watch when t comes to a person like this...I mean it's 100% that he committed an abhorrent crime...so what if they want to end their lives?
> I personally had a huge weight lifted off my shoulders when I found out that the person that sexually abused me as a child had died...I didn't care how he had died, but I did feel relief.
> If someone wants to end their life then let them I say...at least dead he can't hurt anyone else
> 
> -crawls back under rock-


In some ways I agree but then why should he be allowed to choose his end? He took that choice away from his victim so he should not be allowed this control.

I hope every day in prison is a living hell for him & I hope others make sure it is as well


----------



## kimthecat

@Cleo38 Remember this? 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/may/10/judge-questioned-sex-train-allegation

and

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/oct/14/footballer-ched-evans-cleared-of-in-retrial

the girl was named on public media and was given hell.

They feel they wont be believed, dont want to go to court. children are assaulted by their family members and still love them and dont want to be put in care.


----------



## StormyThai

Cleo38 said:


> In some ways I agree but then why should he be allowed to choose his end? He took that choice away from his victim so he should not be allowed this control.
> 
> I hope every day in prison is a living hell for him & I hope others make sure it is as well


Oh I do get that, I just don't get it personally


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> @Cleo38 Remember this?
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/may/10/judge-questioned-sex-train-allegation
> 
> and
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/oct/14/footballer-ched-evans-cleared-of-in-retrial
> 
> the girl was named on public media and was given hell.
> 
> They feel they wont be believed, dont want to go to court. children are assaulted by their family members and still love them and dont want to be put in care.


Yes I do remember that vile man 

I do completely get it with children but it's more incidents where women state that they felt too embarrassed to do anything ....

I am talking more about at the time, why is it so common for us to feel embarrassed? Like we don't want to draw attention to ourselves? In that moment why do we feel so powerless?

I was on a tube going to work one morning (popular place for disgusting men groping women!) & one woman grabbed the hand of the man next to her, held it up & shouted out loud "If this touches my @rse once more I'll f*cking break it!". OMG, it was amazing, he looked so shocked & the whole carriage cheered her. The bloke got loads of abuse & scuttled off at the next stop.

She did look very young, very small & delicate so he probably thought she wouldn't dare say anything but he was so very wrong!


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Well, I have now started my non-complicit behaviour of calling out a man every time they behave in an inappropriate way by calling out a really good friend on something. Can't say it went down awfully well but there you go. I've obviously put up with too much for too long.


----------



## Boxer123

Mrs Funkin said:


> Well, I have now started my non-complicit behaviour of calling out a man every time they behave in an inappropriate way by calling out a really good friend on something. Can't say it went down awfully well but there you go. I've obviously put up with too much for too long.


 Well done for saying something it's never going to go down well.


----------



## Cleo38

Mrs Funkin said:


> Well, I have now started my non-complicit behaviour of calling out a man every time they behave in an inappropriate way by calling out a really good friend on something. Can't say it went down awfully well but there you go. I've obviously put up with too much for too long.


Good for you @Mrs Funkin , am going to do the same & will see what happens


----------



## mrs phas

Boris Johnson does not support making misogyny a hate crime - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-58800328


----------



## mrs phas

The last leg 
Adam Hills hits the nail on head with his monologue


----------



## Boxer123

mrs phas said:


> Boris Johnson does not support making misogyny a hate crime - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-58800328


Of course he doesn't he can't be bothered to do anything that will make a difference. Honestly you couldn't make it up.


----------



## Boxer123

mrs phas said:


> The last leg
> Adam Hills hits the nail on head with his monologue


Well said.


----------



## Siskin

mrs phas said:


> The last leg
> Adam Hills hits the nail on head with his monologue


I clapped at the end of that along with the audience, well said Adam


----------



## MilleD

So apparently Dominic Raab thinks that misogyny is wrong, whether it's a man against a woman, or a woman against a man....

You couldn't make it up could you :Facepalm:Banghead:Meh


----------



## Lurcherlad




----------



## Boxer123

MilleD said:


> So apparently Dominic Raab thinks that misogyny is wrong, whether it's a man against a woman, or a woman against a man....
> 
> You couldn't make it up could you :Facepalm:Banghead:Meh


What else would you expect from our government.


----------



## Boxer123

Just read an article on this and not only does he not know what he’s talking about but it sounds like they are going to do nothing.


----------



## StormyThai

Boxer123 said:


> Just read an article on this and not only does he not know what he's talking about but it sounds like they are going to do nothing.


Of course they are going to do nothing...I mean we don't want to ruffle the "good old boys clubs" feathers now do we?
Also they are far to busy thinking up ways to reduce social care to worry about us silly women


----------



## MilleD

I don't think it's the law that is the problem, it's implementing it.

Making misogyny a hate crime will make sod all difference if nothing else changes.

And to avoid the equality argument, you would have to make misandry a crime also, and there we are, back at square one.


----------



## StormyThai

Maybe if there was equality with how women and men are dealt with in the courts then we can talk about making all laws equal


----------



## MilleD

StormyThai said:


> Maybe if there was equality with how women and men are dealt with in the courts then we can talk about making all laws equal


But that _is _about the implementation, not the law.


----------



## StormyThai

The legal age to marry someone shows perfectly that it is both the law and the implementation of it that is at fault ☺

I don't care what anyone says...a 16 year old marrying a 40+ year old is all kinds of wrong... but it's legal so...


----------



## MilleD

StormyThai said:


> The legal age to marry someone shows perfectly that it is both the law and the implementation of it that is at fault ☺
> 
> I don't care what anyone says...a 16 year old marrying a 40+ year old is all kinds of wrong... but it's legal so...


I'm not really sure I see the relevance.


----------



## Cleo38

MilleD said:


> I don't think it's the law that is the problem, it's implementing it.
> 
> Making misogyny a hate crime will make sod all difference if nothing else changes.
> 
> And to avoid the equality argument, you would have to make misandry a crime also, and there we are, back at square one.


I don't understand though how hate crimes can be considered when other groups are targeted; because of race, sexuality, etc yet crimes against women aren't considered in the same context when they are IMO.

Women are victims of crime simply because of our biological sex ,... how can that not be a hate crime?


----------



## MilleD

Cleo38 said:


> I don't understand though how hate crimes can be considered when other groups are targeted; because of race, sexuality, etc yet crimes against women aren't considered in the same context when they are IMO.
> 
> Women are victims of crime simply because of our biological sex ,... how can that not be a hate crime?


It's generally because it's against a minority, which being female isn't. I think it's a huge rabbit hole of 'this is a hate crime, but this isn't' which could actually take the focus away from actually trying to get convictions.

And flagging something as a hate crime only has an effect by increasing any sentence a judge can pass.

So again, makes no difference to the investigating of a reported crime, or how a woman is treated during the process.


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> I don't understand though how hate crimes can be considered when other groups are targeted; because of race, sexuality, etc yet crimes against women aren't considered in the same context when they are IMO.
> 
> Women are victims of crime simply because of our biological sex ,... how can that not be a hate crime?


Exactly I follow some quite prominent feminists on instagram they get regular messages from men threatening to rape them because if their views. How is that not a hate crime ?


----------



## Boxer123

MilleD said:


> It's generally because it's against a minority, which being female isn't. I think it's a huge rabbit hole of 'this is a hate crime, but this isn't' which could actually take the focus away from actually trying to get convictions.
> 
> And flagging something as a hate crime only has an effect by increasing any sentence a judge can pass.
> 
> So again, makes no difference to the investigating of a reported crime, or how a woman is treated during the process.


I disagree the Plymouth shooter was part of a wider group of incels. Yet the refusal to call it terrorism and calling him a lone wolf down plays the problem which is that there is a large group of men who hate and target women.


----------



## Boxer123

Of course this is from the sand government who today insisted they would reduce inequality the same day they cut money from thousands of families plunging them into poverty. The conservatives make me so angry my head might explode today.


----------



## StormyThai

MilleD said:


> I'm not really sure I see the relevance.


You said that you didn't think the law was the problem.
I disagree and used the above example of a law that does need changing to protect young girls. You don't even need parental consent in Scotland iirc

I don't think that misandry and misogyny are even in the same ball park...whilst the men that are victims/survivors of abuse deserve support and justice, suggesting that misandry should be included is basically saying that "abuse has no gender" - which is inaccurate IMO


----------



## Boxer123

StormyThai said:


> You said that you didn't think the law was the problem.
> I disagree and used the above example of a law that does need changing to protect young girls. You don't even need parental consent in Scotland iirc
> 
> I don't think that misandry and misogyny are even in the same ball park...whilst the men that are victims/survivors of abuse deserve support and justice, suggesting that misandry should be included is basically saying that "abuse has no gender" - which is inaccurate IMO


Exactly; how many men get followed by women in cars, how many men get groped on the tube, how many get upskirted? How many were murdered by women in the last year? How many are told to change their behaviour, dress differently to avoid being attacked?


----------



## MilleD

StormyThai said:


> You said that you didn't think the law was the problem.
> I disagree and used the above example of a law that does need changing to protect young girls. You don't even need parental consent in Scotland iirc
> 
> I don't think that misandry and misogyny are even in the same ball park...whilst the men that are victims/survivors of abuse deserve support and justice, suggesting that misandry should be included is basically saying that "abuse has no gender" - which is inaccurate IMO


I still don't see the relevance. Unless you are saying young girls are being forced into marriage? And if so, that wouldn't be legal.


----------



## MilleD

Boxer123 said:


> I disagree the Plymouth shooter was part of a wider group of incels. Yet the refusal to call it terrorism and calling him a lone wolf down plays the problem which is that there is a large group of men who hate and target women.


Hang on, surely misogyny and terrorism are two different things? He didn't just kill women.


----------



## StormyThai

Groomed, forced - potato, potato.


----------



## MilleD

StormyThai said:


> I don't think that misandry and misogyny are even in the same ball park...whilst the men that are victims/survivors of abuse deserve support and justice, suggesting that misandry should be included is basically saying that "abuse has no gender" - which is inaccurate IMO


I didn't say they were. But from an equality point of view, they will be seen that way.


----------



## Boxer123

MilleD said:


> Hang on, surely misogyny and terrorism are two different things? He didn't just kill women.


No but he killed them fueled by his hatred of women. My point is that he was painted as a lone crazy wolf when actually there was a lot more going on behind the scenes. It's played down like so many acts of violence against women.


----------



## Boxer123

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/news...alking-home-backed-by-home-secretary-12429676

Now we must be tracked walking home. Rather than asking men to stop attacking women.


----------



## lullabydream

Boxer123 said:


> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/news...alking-home-backed-by-home-secretary-12429676
> 
> Now we must be tracked walking home. Rather than asking men to stop attacking women.


I saw that and thought Wtf!


----------



## Boxer123

lullabydream said:


> I saw that and thought Wtf!


I could be wrong but it looks like it was designed by men so they stand to make a lot of money because we can't walk home safely.

How about instead we track men that way if someone indecently exposes themself or attacks someone we will know who it is and where they went?


----------



## kimthecat

Boxer123 said:


> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/news...alking-home-backed-by-home-secretary-12429676
> 
> Now we must be tracked walking home. Rather than asking men to stop attacking women.


It's not going to stop women getting attack . But asking men not to attack women , I really don't think that's going work.


----------



## mrs phas

Boxer123 said:


> How about instead we track men that way if someone indecently exposes themself or attacks someone we will know who it is and where they went?


Wish there was a round of applause icon

Can you imagine the furore if men had to install it, or sign in/out of venues, had to dress certain ways or curtail what they eat, drink and how they behave?
As someone who brought up 4 boys alone, after their father died, when they were all hormonal, and angst, riddlen teenagers, I can, hand on heart say..........
It's not that hard to teach boys/men respect for women and that no means no
If I could do it, whilst, like them, in the throes of deepest grief, anyone can
Respect starts at home and in the family,
it doesn't have to be your ideal mum, dad and 2.4,
A family is whatever you make it,
but
If that family has no respect being taught within it, Then,
Male or female,
they grow up believing they're entitled and act like they own everyone and everything


----------



## Boxer123

mrs phas said:


> Wish there was a round of applause icon
> 
> Can you imagine the furore if men had to install it, or sign in/out of venues, had to dress certain ways or curtail what they eat, drink and how they behave?
> As someone who brought up 4 boys alone, after their father died, when they were all hormonal, and angst, riddlen teenagers, I can, hand on heart say..........
> It's not that hard to teach boys/men respect for women and that no means no
> If I could do it, whilst, like them, in the throes of deepest grief, anyone can
> Respect starts at home and in the family,
> it doesn't have to be your ideal mum, dad and 2.4,
> A family is whatever you make it,
> but
> If that family has no respect being taught, then,
> male or female,
> they grow up believing they're entitled and act like they own everyone and everything


It sounds like you have done a lovely job with your boys. I think education and up bringing is so important.


----------



## HarlequinCat

kimthecat said:


> It's not going to stop women getting attack . But asking men not to attack women , I really don't think that's going work.


Theres the whole nature versus nature thing. I think people ( men or women) can have the nature to be inherently bad. No matter their upbringing there will always be little boy and girls that get pleasure from harming creatures and animals etc. They grow into adults and still enjoy it. Its disgusting but there it is. Telling men to do better I think wont do anything to change that. The good people will take heed, but the others wont...
I think most good people try to teach their kids right from wrong. Though I know there are a lot of neglected kids that dont have the right role models growing up.

I don't think it is victim blaming telling women to be careful at night, I think its prudent to be aware of your surroundings and having a plan in place if you don't feel safe. Night is the time that criminals are most active, under the cloak of darkness. Burglaries, fights, attacks mainly happen at night. We are told to lock our doors and windows at night. People know burglary is wrong, and telling these people to stop wont make a blind bit of difference.

Like I said, no women should feel scared on their own. But to eradicate any threats in a society is impossible in my mind. I am not being apathetic, but I just do not see it happening.


----------



## Boxer123

HarlequinCat said:


> Theres the whole nature versus nature thing. I think people ( men or women) can have the nature to be inherently bad. No matter their upbringing there will always be little boy and girls that get pleasure from harming creatures and animals etc. They grow into adults and still enjoy it. Its disgusting but there it is. Telling men to do better I think wont do anything to change that. The good people will take heed, but the others wont...
> I think most good people try to teach their kids right from wrong. Though I know there are a lot of neglected kids that dont have the right role models growing up.
> 
> I don't think it is victim blaming telling women to be careful at night, I think its prudent to be aware of your surroundings and having a plan in place if you don't feel safe. Night is the time that criminals are most active, under the cloak of darkness. Burglaries, fights, attacks mainly happen at night. We are told to lock our doors and windows at night. People know burglary is wrong, and telling these people to stop wont make a blind bit of difference.
> 
> Like I said, no women should feel scared on their own. But to eradicate any threats in a society is impossible in my mind. I am not being apathetic, but I just do not see it happening.


No of course we are not. What we are trying to eradicate is victim blaming; she was drunk, it was dark, she was wearing a short skirt. We are trying to change the culture of harassment on streets seen as the norm. Trying to change the narrative. Instead of, 'a women got raped,' Use a man raped her.' So if we are saying we are going to track women, why are we not tracking men ?


----------



## Lurcherlad

It doesn’t have to be either/or ….


----------



## Boxer123

Lurcherlad said:


> It doesn't have to be either/or ….


Of course not but can you imagine the uproar if we suggested tracking men ? Who will be tracking these trackers ? Can they be abused for stalking probably.


----------



## Lurcherlad

If only there were a simple, effective fast solution that pleased everyone …. And the World would change overnight.

Until then, there will be a lot of people making lots of suggestions and maybe some will be viable and useful.


----------



## kimthecat

Boxer123 said:


> Of course not but can you imagine the uproar if we suggested tracking men ? Who will be tracking these trackers ? Can they be abused for stalking probably.


I dont understand , Do you mean all men must wear a tracker? Its up to the woman if she wants to wear a tracker.

Not so long ago people were talking about implanting microchip trackers into children. I dont know what happened about that.


----------



## Boxer123

Lurcherlad said:


> If only there were a simple, effective fast solution that pleased everyone …. And the World would change overnight.
> 
> Until then, there will be a lot of people making lots of suggestions and maybe some will be viable and useful.


So far the suggestions have been;

For women to run away from the police and call the police 
A police commissioner has suggested we should learn more about the law and not submit to police officers
To track women


----------



## Boxer123

kimthecat said:


> I dont understand , Do you mean all men must wear a tracker? Its up to the woman if she wants to wear a tracker.
> 
> Not so long ago people were talking about implanting microchip trackers into children. I dont know what happened about that.


I'm being tongue on cheek sorry but you can see how ridiculous it is when we suggest tracking men but we tell women to change their behaviour on a daily basis. For change to happen we need to address the issue which is male violence not keep putting the emphasis back on women.


----------



## kimthecat

HarlequinCat said:


> Theres the whole nature versus nature thing. I think people ( men or women) can have the nature to be inherently bad. No matter their upbringing there will always be little boy and girls that get pleasure from harming creatures and animals etc. They grow into adults and still enjoy it. Its disgusting but there it is. Telling men to do better I think wont do anything to change that. The good people will take heed, but the others wont...
> I think most good people try to teach their kids right from wrong. Though I know there are a lot of neglected kids that dont have the right role models growing up.
> 
> I don't think it is victim blaming telling women to be careful at night, I think its prudent to be aware of your surroundings and having a plan in place if you don't feel safe. Night is the time that criminals are most active, under the cloak of darkness. Burglaries, fights, attacks mainly happen at night. We are told to lock our doors and windows at night. People know burglary is wrong, and telling these people to stop wont make a blind bit of difference.
> 
> Like I said, no women should feel scared on their own. But to eradicate any threats in a society is impossible in my mind. I am not being apathetic, but I just do not see it happening.


I agree with you. 
Lots of stabbings in London, seems to be increasing , all the work they have put into youth gangs hasn't helped at all.


----------



## kimthecat

Boxer123 said:


> I'm being tongue on cheek sorry but you can see how ridiculous it is when we suggest tracking men but we tell women to change their behaviour on a daily basis. For change to happen we need to address the issue which is male violence not keep putting the emphasis back on women.


Oh sorry . Though it wouldn't be ridiculous to track sex offenders though Im sure civil right people would have something to say about that.



Lurcherlad said:


> If only there were a simple, effective fast solution that pleased everyone …. And the World would change overnight.
> 
> Until then, there will be a lot of people making lots of suggestions and maybe some will be viable and useful.


Yes, indeed. people are trying to do something and coming up with ideas , useful or not. Relying on men to change is not helping. Its horrible cruel world out there and I wouldnt care whether my behaviour changed if it kept me safe.


----------



## Boxer123

kimthecat said:


> Oh sorry . Though it wouldn't be ridiculous to track sex offenders though Im sure civil right people would have something to say about that.


No it certainly wouldn't be a bad thing. My other concern is who has access to tracking data if it gets in the wrong hands all we are doing is advertising a women is walking home on their own. Also tracking devices already exist we are just recycling old ideas.


----------



## StormyThai

HarlequinCat said:


> nature versus nature thing


Which is starting to show in scientific circles that it is both...many are suggesting that genetics is around 40%...the rest is the environmental factors, including how they are bought up.
Most "evil" people have a horrific event happen (either one event of prolonged) and/or live in a horrible family when either one or both the parents are violent.

There are many psychopaths in or society but not all of them go on to hurt or kill.
For me saying that bad people are just bad people is a get out of jail free card - well they can't help it after all!


----------



## HarlequinCat

StormyThai said:


> Which is starting to show in scientific circles that it is both...many are suggesting that genetics is around 40%...the rest is the environmental factors, including how they are bought up.
> Most "evil" people have a horrific event happen (either one event of prolonged) and/or live in a horrible family when either one or both the parents are violent.
> 
> There are many psychopaths in or society but not all of them go on to hurt or kill.
> For me saying that bad people are just bad people is a get out of jail free card - well they can't help it after all!


40% being genetics is still quite high. The same can be said for nurture. Not everyone who has a bad upbringing go on to violent crimes either.

And I'm not saying being inherently predisposed to having violent thoughts etc is a get out of jail free card. When they are caught they deserve to be locked up just as much or even more so. It's like saying oh he had a bad upbringing, it's not his fault etc. All deserve punishment. But the "cure" to tell people not to break the law or violate isn't going to be very effective.

There are boys now that are scared to approach girls incase they are labelled as harassing, just for saying hello or trying to talk to them.


----------



## kimthecat

StormyThai said:


> Which is starting to show in scientific circles that it is both...many are suggesting that genetics is around 40%...the rest is the environmental factors, including how they are bought up.
> Most "evil" people have a horrific event happen (either one event of prolonged) and/or live in a horrible family when either one or both the parents are violent.
> 
> There are many psychopaths in or society but not all of them go on to hurt or kill.
> For me saying that bad people are just bad people is a get out of jail free card - well they can't help it after all!


Thats interesting about the percentage of genetics.

I dont think anyone is saying its a get out of jail card. Its not . It saying that there will always be psychopaths and murderers who will kill. as you said it can depend on the circumstances . In a way , you are making excuses for those who do kill by saying their parents were violent etc .


----------



## kimthecat

Boxer123 said:


> No it certainly wouldn't be a bad thing. My other concern is who has access to tracking data if it gets in the wrong hands all we are doing is advertising a women is walking home on their own. Also tracking devices already exist we are just recycling old ideas.


That's a good point. Frightening.


----------



## O2.0

What's wrong with asking a man who has shown himself to be a danger to wear a tracking device?
Here in the US plenty of convicted people have to wear ankle bracelets. Sex offenders have to be registered and there is a website where you can look them up. 
If a man exposes himself, or does other behavior that we know is potentially dangerous, can you not have that man wear a device for a certain period of time? 
Simply taking seriously pre-curser behaviors and addressing them seems like a good start to me... Didn't that police officer who killed Sara Everard have a history of scary behavior that was never addressed? 
Can we not just start by addressing those sorts of behaviors and actually prosecuting them?


----------



## Boxer123

From my perspective we are not just talking about murder it’s also; harassment, sexual assault, stalking, indecent exposure, cat calling, groping. Many of those who have committed these crimes have perfectly normal home lives. It’s just our culture allows it. 

A lot of boys I went to school with are now grown men with families they wouldn’t dream of harassment anymore however at school more than one of them put there hand up my skirt or grabbed my boob. This is still happening at schools I’m saddened by recent reports of sexual harassment and assaults at schools. Nothing has changed. 

For years we have been told to change our behaviour to stay safe but it doesn’t work. We need to accept and challenge male violence. Toxic masculinity doesn’t help anyone. Look at male suicide figures, gang violence. If we could change our culture it would be a good step forward. 

To do this we have to accept what the problem is and not feel sorry for those poor men worried about being accused of harassment. (If they are being accused for only saying hello I would suggest they are completely misreading a situation)


----------



## Boxer123

O2.0 said:


> What's wrong with asking a man who has shown himself to be a danger to wear a tracking device?
> Here in the US plenty of convicted people have to wear ankle bracelets. Sex offenders have to be registered and there is a website where you can look them up.
> If a man exposes himself, or does other behavior that we know is potentially dangerous, can you not have that man wear a device for a certain period of time?
> Simply taking seriously pre-curser behaviors and addressing them seems like a good start to me... Didn't that police officer who killed Sara Everard have a history of scary behavior that was never addressed?
> Can we not just start by addressing those sorts of behaviors and actually prosecuting them?


He did indeed in fact his nickname at work was, The Rapist.


----------



## Lurcherlad

Boxer123 said:


> So far the suggestions have been;
> 
> For women to run away from the police and call the police
> A police commissioner has suggested we should learn more about the law and not submit to police officers
> To track women


But that doesn't rule out the chance that there might be some useful, viable suggestions going forward.


----------



## Boxer123

Lurcherlad said:


> But that doesn't rule out the chance that there might be some useful, viable suggestions going forward.
> 
> Honestly, I feel there is no chance of discussing this (or other topics) without saying the wrong thing, being misunderstood or being shouted down… so I'm giving up on here.


No one is shouting you down it's a discussion. As women we've been told for years what to do to stay staff, we know this stuff. (Granted running away from the police is a new one for me) I'm simply saying we need to change the focus.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

I don't know the answer. 

On a slight tangent, I've been reading about some awful cases in Richmond Park where cyclists have been having their bikes stolen by pairs of lads on mopeds. One of the cyclists is a Pro, he was dragged behind a moped and then threatened with a machete. However, what is similar is now people are coming out and saying that cyclists shouldn't be riding their posh bikes around. You should ride an old bike so it's not stolen. The Police say you should ride with confidence, you should know where you're going. Errm, this guy is a Pro cyclist, he lives next to the park. I'm pretty sure he rides with confidence and knows where he's going and he's riding an awesome bike. However, just because he has a nice bike, these entitled little shits think it's okay. They want the bike. They will take it. 

The theme emerging is the same. The onus is ALWAYS on the victim to prevent themselves being attacked. You're a woman so don't go out in the dark/let your friend track you/text when you get there/don't look too tempting because God knows some men can't control themselves if you look like you do...best wear a freaking bin bag all day then. If you have a nice bike don't actually ride it but if you do be prepared for it to be nicked and you be threatened as that's just too tempting as well. 

It makes me just rage. On both counts. Sorry for the slight off topic...just had to let the rage out somewhere.


----------



## kimthecat

Smearing the victim in court was common practice.

Jackie was murdered in 1983 and her murderer was finally caught out by DNA testing 20 years later. 
I knew her when she was in her teens , she was dating one of my friends younger brother . She was really nice. 
Her mum lived near me , not in Ruislip , she used to fuss my dogs when we met in the street and she'd talk about her grandchildren but we never spoke about Jackie , she died a few years ago, The family name wasnt Poole , that was her married name. 
The press went to town on the fact she worked in a night club.

Warning contains upsetting , graphic descriptions.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1459056.stm

But Ruark's counsel, Nicholas Price QC, claimed Mrs Poole had left her alive and she had been murdered by someone else, possibly one of her other lovers.

*Salt in the wound*

This was salt in the wound for the Poole family, who had to hear their loved one's reputation besmirched.


----------



## StormyThai

These popped up on my newsfeed this morning...it's sad that I (and many other women) have heard every last one!


























I have even been called a "Prick tease"


----------



## Jesthar

kimthecat said:


> Smearing the victim in court was common practice


Still is. These days a rape victim is expected to surrender all electronic devices and passwords so they can be gone through for 'evidence' - ostentisbly to see if the accused was honey trapped and falsely accused, but in reality it's just a muck raking exercise for the defence. Somehow the 'moral character' of the victim is more important than the immorality of the rapist's actions - or, in plain English, the defence will try and make the jury believe that the victim was actually the perpertrator/instigator and deserved to be raped.


----------



## Cleo38

Jesthar said:


> Still is. These days a rape victim is expected to surrender all electronic devices and passwords so they can be gone through for 'evidence' - ostentisbly to see if the accused was honey trapped and falsely accused, but in reality it's just a muck raking exercise for the defence. Somehow the 'moral character' of the victim is more important than the immorality of the rapist's actions - or, in plain English, the defence will try and make the jury believe that the victim was actually the perpertrator/instigator and deserved to be raped.


In some ways I agree, this happened to a friends daughter when she was raped & it was just another violation as her phone contained private conversations with friends but ... there have been cases where the accused has been found innocent due to messages from the 'victim' admitting she was lying so I really don't know how I feel about this now.


----------



## Jesthar

Cleo38 said:


> In some ways I agree, this happened to a friends daughter when she was raped & it was just another violation as her phone contained private conversations with friends but ... there have been cases where the accused has been found innocent due to messages from the 'victim' admitting she was lying so I really don't know how I feel about this now.


Those cases are very rare, and in those cases the evidence should be admissible.

However, I see no reason as to why anything unrelated to the incident itself should be admissible. At the moment, the defence usually gets away with everything and everything (sexual history, dress habits, drinking habits, social habits etc.) all under the guise of 'establishing the character of the victim' - as if someone who was sexually active or liked going out for a drink with their mates was somehow less deserving of justice than a social nun.


----------



## Cleo38

Jesthar said:


> Those cases are very rare, and in those cases the evidence should be admissible.
> 
> However, I see no reason as to why anything unrelated to the incident itself should be admissible. At the moment, the defence usually gets away with everything and everything (sexual history, dress habits, drinking habits, social habits etc.) all under the guise of 'establishing the character of the victim' - as if someone who was sexually active or liked going out for a drink with their mates was somehow less deserving of justice than a social nun.


No I agree but the messages were relating to the incident so relevant. I don't know what the answer if btw, but I don't automatically think it's wrong ... if that makes sense!


----------



## Jesthar

Cleo38 said:


> No I agree but the messages were relating to the incident so relevant. I don't know what the answer if btw, but I don't automatically think it's wrong ... if that makes sense!


To clarify, I don't think going through the devices is in itself necessarily wrong - as you say, it does on rare occasion reveal a false accusation. It should, of course, apply equaly to the perpetrator.

However, currently it is standard practice for the defence on rape cases to trawl through the life of the victim with a view to discrediting them as a 'valid' victim of rape. Why sexual history, someones skirt length or whether or not they own a sex toy should be admissible as 'proof' they were not raped is beyond me.


----------



## Cleo38

Jesthar said:


> To clarify, I don't think going through the devices is in itself necessarily wrong - as you say, it does on rare occasion reveal a false accusation. It should, of course, apply equaly to the perpetrator.
> 
> However, currently it is standard practice for the defence on rape cases to trawl through the life of the victim with a view to discrediting them as a 'valid' victim of rape. Why sexual history, someones skirt length or whether or not they own a sex toy should be admissible as 'proof' they were not raped is beyond me.


From my limited understanding it does with both parties. The sexual history of the victim, her clothing worn, etc should not even be referred to IMO as all it does it serve to try & discredit her. I honestly can't believe that this is still allowed in court. I remember this case a few years ago which was sickening

'I'm shocked this is still happening' - Mum of teen rape victim who died by suicide after being forced to hold up underwear in court - Independent.ie


----------



## kimthecat

Jesthar said:


> Still is. These days a rape victim is expected to surrender all electronic devices and passwords so they can be gone through for 'evidence' - ostentisbly to see if the accused was honey trapped and falsely accused, but in reality it's just a muck raking exercise for the defence. Somehow the 'moral character' of the victim is more important than the immorality of the rapist's actions - or, in plain English, the defence will try and make the jury believe that the victim was actually the perpertrator/instigator and deserved to be raped.


 There is improvement in that victims are anonymous nowadays though that doenst stop people naming them on social media


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> There is improvement in that victims are anonymous nowadays though that doenst stop people naming them on social media


Yes, it's vile. I remember the Ched Evans case (although he was later found not guilty) where the victim was named on social media & had to leave her house due to death threats, etc. How can that be allowed? How come celebs can get mega injunctions to stop them being named on social media (usually for their own misconduct) yet it's fine to name ordinary women who then suffer abuse?

Having said that i listened to a podcast recently regarding both men & women who had been victims of 'trial by social media' & it was truly terrifying


----------



## lullabydream

Cleo38 said:


> 'trial by social media' & it was truly terrifying


Off topic sort of, but there is a new family across the road. A couple and a child about 12 who seems to have friends over a lot.

It's been said on social media that he might be a paedophile. All I know is he's from London. The might I think gets lost in translation and all people read is he's a paedophile

I know there are terms and conditions for sex offender register, but it's usually no children at said address.


----------



## kimthecat

This article was originally in The Telegraph but you have to subscribe to see it.

https://uk.newschant.com/uk-news/wo...ender-inmates-he-or-him-face-extra-jail-time/

Women prisoners who call transgender inmates by the incorrect pronoun may face extra time in jail below equality guidelines, says a justice minister.

Female inmates who intentionally call a transgender lady "he" or "him" could possibly be punished below guidelines barring "threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour".


----------



## rona

lullabydream said:


> I know there are terms and conditions for sex offender register, *but it's usually no children at said address.*


What do you mean by this?

No people living at the address or no child allowed at that address, and is that before or after going on the register?



kimthecat said:


> This article was originally in The Telegraph but you have to subscribe to see it.
> 
> https://uk.newschant.com/uk-news/wo...ender-inmates-he-or-him-face-extra-jail-time/
> 
> Women prisoners who call transgender inmates by the incorrect pronoun may face extra time in jail below equality guidelines, says a justice minister.
> 
> Female inmates who intentionally call a transgender lady "he" or "him" could possibly be punished below guidelines barring "threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour".


:Rage :Rage :Rage :Rage :Rage

I should really stay off this thread


----------



## Cleo38

lullabydream said:


> Off topic sort of, but there is a new family across the road. A couple and a child about 12 who seems to have friends over a lot.
> 
> It's been said on social media that he might be a paedophile. All I know is he's from London. The might I think gets lost in translation and all people read is he's a paedophile
> 
> I know there are terms and conditions for sex offender register, but it's usually no children at said address.


That sort of thing is very worrying, so may people can be destroyed on social media by witch hunts like that simply through a grudge or misunderstanding 



kimthecat said:


> This article was originally in The Telegraph but you have to subscribe to see it.
> 
> https://uk.newschant.com/uk-news/wo...ender-inmates-he-or-him-face-extra-jail-time/
> 
> Women prisoners who call transgender inmates by the incorrect pronoun may face extra time in jail below equality guidelines, says a justice minister.
> 
> Female inmates who intentionally call a transgender lady "he" or "him" could possibly be punished below guidelines barring "threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour".


I read that, sickening. But vulnerable women can be put at risk by male predators using the 'trans' card to gain access to them tho? Despite being told it won't happen it has & does & if any incident is referred to (Karen White!!) then we are told it was a one off & to stop being TERF's


----------



## lullabydream

rona said:


> No people living at the address or no child allowed at that address, and is that before or after going on the register?


The offenders have to have a named address and under terms and conditions no children live or visit.

I have known men and a woman be investigated for child molestation. The people I am aware of theses were false or rather a mountain made of molehill in one case. This is through work and they remove the accused from home if children present naturally, so that's a similiar thing too.


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> Smearing the victim in court was common practice.
> 
> Jackie was murdered in 1983 and her murderer was finally caught out by DNA testing 20 years later.
> I knew her when she was in her teens , she was dating one of my friends younger brother . She was really nice.
> Her mum lived near me , not in Ruislip , she used to fuss my dogs when we met in the street and she'd talk about her grandchildren but we never spoke about Jackie , she died a few years ago, The family name wasnt Poole , that was her married name.
> The press went to town on the fact she worked in a night club.
> 
> Warning contains upsetting , graphic descriptions.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1459056.stm
> 
> But Ruark's counsel, Nicholas Price QC, claimed Mrs Poole had left her alive and she had been murdered by someone else, possibly one of her other lovers.
> 
> *Salt in the wound*
> 
> This was salt in the wound for the Poole family, who had to hear their loved one's reputation besmirched.


 That's terrible. How awful for her family in so many ways. It was like with the case of Claudia Lawrence who went missing many years ago. because she was single & had had a few BF's the media tried to make out she was somehow to blame for having relationships with a few men. I remember watching an interview with her poor dad saying he felt as if people were judging her poorly because of this ... so sad. It must be such a horrendous time just made worse by such biased reporting


----------



## lullabydream

Cleo38 said:


> That's terrible. How awful for her family in so many ways. It was like with the case of Claudia Lawrence who went missing many years ago. because she was single & had had a few BF's the media tried to make out she was somehow to blame for having relationships with a few men. I remember watching an interview with her poor dad saying he felt as if people were judging her poorly because of this ... so sad. It must be such a horrendous time just made worse by such biased reporting


I thought the same about the Claudia Lawrence case having similarities.

I always feel sorry for her Dad. In fact I always feel sorry for people who go missing and initially police do nothing as not got additional needs.


----------



## StormyThai

lullabydream said:


> Off topic sort of, but there is a new family across the road. A couple and a child about 12 who seems to have friends over a lot.
> 
> It's been said on social media that he might be a paedophile. All I know is he's from London. The might I think gets lost in translation and all people read is he's a paedophile
> 
> I know there are terms and conditions for sex offender register, but it's usually no children at said address.


Are there any reasons that the word paedophile has been mentioned or is it just people throwing words out there without thinking of the potential fallout? I mean lots of 12 year olds have mates over to visit so that shouldn't raise questions at all...but if there is actual worries then someone needs to say something rather than post on social media IMO

I'm always conflicted with things like this because some people throw that word around and lives can be ruined due to false accusations BUT if someone had raised concerns when I was groomed then he might have been stopped :Bag


----------



## picaresque

Cleo38 said:


> (Karen White!!)


The actual Karen we should be concerned about, but society prefers to demonise and belittle middle aged women.


----------



## lullabydream

StormyThai said:


> Are there any reasons that the word paedophile has been mentioned or is it just people throwing words out there without thinking of the potential fallout? I mean lots of 12 year olds have mates over to visit so that shouldn't raise questions at all...but if there is actual worries then someone needs to say something rather than post on social media IMO
> 
> I'm always conflicted with things like this because some people throw that word around and lives can be ruined due to false accusations BUT if someone had raised concerns when I was groomed then he might have been stopped :Bag


I have no idea, all I know is if it was rumoured to be a paedophile but knowing the system it doesn't seem true

If I was bothered I would use Sarah's Law

So wrong on many levels trial by social media


----------



## lullabydream

Bothered is more if I had any worries just to clarify my last post


----------



## mrs phas

Sarah Everard: Commissioner Philip Allott resigns 
- https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-58915325


----------



## Boxer123

mrs phas said:


> Sarah Everard: Commissioner Philip Allott resigns
> - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-58915325


A good result what a bloody Wally.


----------



## Cleo38

FFS, that poor girl! How can a school cover something like this up?! Oh yes that's right ... it's because it NEVER HAPPENS!!! 

Father whose daughter was 'raped' in 'gender fluid' bathroom sues Loudoun County under Title IX | Daily Mail Online


----------



## kimthecat

Cleo38 said:


> FFS, that poor girl! How can a school cover something like this up?! Oh yes that's right ... it's because it NEVER HAPPENS!!!
> 
> Father whose daughter was 'raped' in 'gender fluid' bathroom sues Loudoun County under Title IX | Daily Mail Online


 Sickening


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> Sickening


Isn't it?! I don't understand why children are being put at risk just to suit an ideology ... or that they are then silenced if something happens. So worrying


----------



## O2.0

Dave Chappelle, the comedian, who stays in trouble in general, is now in trouble for his latest comedy special where he among other things, defends JK Rowling and says he's on Team TERF. Makes a joke about Kaitlyn Jenner being named woman of the year, says he gets why women are pissed about it, it would be like BET calling M&M the black entertainer of the year. 

Netflix - that is putting on the special is also in trouble now too. 

Should be interesting to see it all play out.


----------



## mrs phas

__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=4569926083054917


----------



## Boxer123

mrs phas said:


> __ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=4569926083054917


Brilliant.


----------



## StormyThai

That popped up on my newsfeed a couple of days ago, brilliant sketch


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Dave Chappelle, the comedian, who stays in trouble in general, is now in trouble for his latest comedy special where he among other things, defends JK Rowling and says he's on Team TERF. Makes a joke about Kaitlyn Jenner being named woman of the year, says he gets why women are pissed about it, it would be like BET calling M&M the black entertainer of the year.
> 
> Netflix - that is putting on the special is also in trouble now too.
> 
> Should be interesting to see it all play out.


Yes, I've read about this & a couple of Netflix employees now having hissy fits & wanting him cancelled 

I have also read comments from the family of a trans women who support him & said he was a good friend to her during the time they worked together. But as usual the shouty people think they speak for a whole community.

It honestly is getting so bizarre & so worrying how people are being silenced. There is a University professor called Kathleen Stock who has been getting abuse & threat over her comments regarding biological sex & gender. Apparently her union has not supported & effectively ended her career by allowing this. She has been harassed & threatened yet still the University hasn't addressed this. I find it disgraceful that people are allowed to get away with this. No one should be in fear for their life simply for speaking their opinions especially when they are based on scientific fact.

Academics show support for Kathleen Stock over 'harassment' | The Argus


----------



## picaresque

Ugh, I find Nish Kumar unbearably smug I’m afraid, and definitely remember him lashing out at ‘terfs’ before. 
I really really can’t take these woke blokes’ takes on misogyny seriously. I know it’s a different comic he’s just introducing here but it’s his show and it’s all part of the same media approved feminism-lite imo where the men in particular say all the right things but they evidently don’t give a shit. All performative. The women who eagerly go along with it are another topic again.

Regarding Dave Chappelle, apparently he’s exercising his white privilege on this. Yes, really.


----------



## Cleo38

picaresque said:


> Ugh, I find Nish Kumar unbearably smug I'm afraid, and definitely remember him lashing out at 'terfs' before.
> I really really can't take these woke blokes' takes on misogyny seriously. I know it's a different comic he's just introducing here but it's his show and it's all part of the same media approved feminism-lite imo where the men in particular say all the right things but they evidently don't give a shit. The women who eagerly go along with it are another topic again.
> 
> Regarding Dave Chappelle, apparently he's exercising his white privilege on this. Yes, really.


Am with you on Nish Kumar!
Dave Chapelle white privilege??? Eh?!


----------



## Siskin

Cleo38 said:


> Am with you on Nish Kumar!
> Dave Chapelle white privilege??? Eh?!


I agree about Nish too, can't stand him, not funny either


----------



## picaresque

Siskin said:


> I agree about Nish too, can't stand him, not funny either


A comedian being funny comes second to having all the right opinions nowadays. At least for the BBC/Channel 4/Dave etc


----------



## Cleo38

picaresque said:


> A comedian being funny comes second to having all the right opinions nowadays. At least for the BBC/Channel 4/Dave etc


That's exactly what I was talking about with my friend the other day. We were discussing BBC dramas/programmes & I said it always feels like they are preaching, not at all unbiased as they are supposed to be. Probably why I don't watch much on there now as it's all a bit too 'safe' & boring


----------



## picaresque

Cleo38 said:


> That's exactly what I was talking about with my friend the other day. We were discussing BBC dramas/programmes & I said it always feels like they are preaching, not at all unbiased as they are supposed to be. Probably why I don't watch much on there now as it's all a bit too 'safe' & boring


Oh it's even worse when it's inserted into drama/fictional shows.

As for comedy - can't even watch The Last Leg anymore. Used to love it. Don't know if I'm less woke now, them more so or a bit of both. Or maybe it just got too boring and samey.


----------



## mrs phas

An eye roll complaint to some
But
This just shows a teeny bit of the gender bias that women are complaining of

https://www.indy100.com/news/gmb-today-professor-devi-sridhar-b1940888

That is just an example of the tip of the Iceberg, when it comes to women being recognised alongside their male counterparts, which then leads, or should lead,into all the varied discussions just in this thread alone


----------



## Boxer123

mrs phas said:


> An eye roll complaint to some
> But
> This just shows a teeny bit of the gender bias that women are complaining of
> 
> https://www.indy100.com/news/gmb-today-professor-devi-sridhar-b1940888
> 
> That is just an example of the tip of the Iceberg, when it comes to women being recognised alongside their male counterparts, which then leads, or should lead,into all the varied discussions just in this thread alone


And very common. Women are not really good at blowing our own trumpets so often let these things slip.


----------



## Jesthar

Boxer123 said:


> And very common. Women are not really good at blowing our own trumpets so often let these things slip.


We're kind of trained not to be...


----------



## Boxer123

Jesthar said:


> We're kind of trained not to be...


Exactly we are told to be quiet and not draw attention to ourselves. Women who put themselves forward get labelled as aggressive.


----------



## picaresque

Oh definitely. A man taking the lead is assertive. Woman does the exact same thing - bossy. It starts so early as well, from when we’re little girls.


----------



## picaresque

Margaret Atwood’s being Rowlinged for asking why woman is now a dirty word. She believes (or claims to) that TWAW and uses the term terf in earnest to describe others but it’s never enough. You can bend over backwards with this ideology but it’s never enough.


----------



## Boxer123

Some great advice from Durham university. Honestly the victim blaming just goes on.


----------



## mrs phas

Boxer123 said:


> View attachment 478259
> Some great advice from Durham university. Honestly the victim blaming just goes on.


How about turning it around and having a poster saying........

Don't spike anyone's drink 
REMEMBER
It could be YOUR sister, brother, father, mother, granny being targeted 
Would it just be 'a lark' then?
If YOU see it and don't alert the victim and report it and the perpetrator/s
Then your just as guilty as they are

Put the onus on society, the blame on the perpetrators and keep the victim safe


----------



## Siskin

It's not just spiking drinks, piece on the news how women themselves are being spiked with a hypodermic or similar. Several women have suddenly become light headed and ill and later have found a strange new bruise or what appears to be an injection site
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ng-date-rape-nottingham-boycott-b1941668.html


----------



## Boxer123

Siskin said:


> It's not just spiking drinks, piece on the news how women themselves are being spiked with a hypodermic or similar. Several women have suddenly become light headed and ill and later have found a strange new bruise or what appears to be an injection site
> https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ng-date-rape-nottingham-boycott-b1941668.html


So scary.


----------



## mrs phas

Bystanders did nothing as woman raped in front of them 
Just where is this world heading to?
How have we forgotten empathy, sympathy, compassion, kindness, right from wrong
And 
Allowed ourselves to sink to such depths of depravity?

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/19/opin...in-rape-bystander-effect-filipovic/index.html


----------



## Cleo38

Common sense at last!! https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-trans-women-female-crime-stats.html#comments


----------



## picaresque

Cleo38 said:


> Common sense at last!! https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-trans-women-female-crime-stats.html#comments


Relevant to the topic at hand to note that Priti Patel seems to get way more anger and loathing directed towards her than a male politician with a similar record.


----------



## kimthecat

picaresque said:


> Relevant to the topic at hand to note that Priti Patel seems to get way more anger and loathing directed towards her than a male politician with a similar record.


and racist remarks. 



Cleo38 said:


> Common sense at last!! https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-trans-women-female-crime-stats.html#comments


About time !


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> and racist remarks.
> 
> About time !


Yes & many comments from people who claim that they are 'inclusive' .... but always the same with these people, if they decide you are on the 'wrong' side or have the 'wrong' opinion then they think they can say what they want


----------



## picaresque

So called progressives can be the absolute worst when it comes to misogyny and racism.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Exactly. Whether I agree with her politically or not I don't wish awful comments on her such as the ones she is subjected to.


----------



## MilleD

Cleo38 said:


> Common sense at last!! https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-trans-women-female-crime-stats.html#comments


The up and down votes on these comments is quite heartening. Terrible spelling aside.


----------



## Calvine

Mrs Funkin said:


> Errm, this guy is a Pro cyclist


It's ridiculous . . . he's not going to want to ride a ladies' shopper with a basket, is he.
When he was at school, my son did a paper round to pay something towards a good bike - back then it cost about £1000. He worked for it (as did the guy in Richmond Park, no doubt). He got home one day and at our front door, as he was putting the key in the lock, school bags and bike balanced on spare arm, a creep with a balaclava grabbed his bike (''Give us yer f****** bike) and cycled off while his mate ran off in the other direction. A young chap I knew locally, about to give a driving lesson, asked my son to get in the car and followed him for about a mile, pulled in front and slammed on the brakes, whereupon the thief fell off and Dave, the driver, grabbed him and called the police. 
What a joke . . . no retribution for stealing the bike, the guy who helped was told by the police (get this, but seriously) that as he'd got the bike back there was really no case to answer and that the thief, if he so wished, could claim damages from the driver as he ''hurt his hand'' when he fell off. When I heard that, it was one of those jaw-drop moments, as you can imagine. 
Apparently they had seen an expensive bike parked at the station where it was locked while he got the train to school and followed him home to see where he lived, then donned the balaclavas and waited near our front door. And yes, my mother also more or less said it was my son's fault for having an expensive bike and that children with expensive trainers should just keep them in their bedroom and only wear them when they were accompanied by parents etc. in case they were mugged. He was 13 and did a paper round for about a year to pay for it.


----------



## MilleD

Calvine said:


> It's ridiculous . . . he's not going to want to ride a ladies' shopper with a basket, is he.
> When he was at school, my son did a paper round to pay something towards a good bike - back then it cost about £1000. He worked for it (as did the guy in Richmond Park, no doubt). He got home one day and at our front door, as he was putting the key in the lock, school bags and bike balanced on spare arm, a creep with a balaclava grabbed his bike (''Give us yer f****** bike) and cycled off while his mate ran off in the other direction. A young chap I knew locally, about to give a driving lesson, asked my son to get in the car and followed him for about a mile, pulled in front and slammed on the brakes, whereupon the thief fell off and Dave, the driver, grabbed him and called the police.
> What a joke . . . no retribution for stealing the bike, the guy who helped was told by the police (get this, but seriously) that as he'd got the bike back there was really no case to answer and that the thief, if he so wished, could claim damages from the driver as he ''hurt his hand'' when he fell off. When I heard that, it was one of those jaw-drop moments, as you can imagine.
> Apparently they had seen an expensive bike parked at the station where it was locked while he got the train to school and followed him home to see where he lived, then donned the balaclavas and waited near our front door. And yes, my mother also more or less said it was my son's fault for having an expensive bike and that children with expensive trainers should just keep them in their bedroom and only wear them when they were accompanied by parents etc. in case they were mugged. He was 13 and did a paper round for about a year to pay for it.


And they wonder why people take matters into their own hands...


----------



## Calvine

MilleD said:


> And they wonder why people take matters into their own hands...


 And as if that didn't destroy any faith I had in the police, when I rang the same police and gave them the name and detailed description of a flasher and the Greek restaurant he owned, they made a total mockery of an identity parade with men who were nothing like I described. I told them they had wasted my time and that if I ever found a headless corpse outside my door I would not ''bother'' them.


----------



## mrs phas

As if feeling threatened as a heterosexual women isn't bad enough 
There's a whole subsection *within* the LGBTQ+ community that are specifically singled out

*Is a lesbian transphobic if she won't have sex with a trans woman?
*
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-57853385

Already marginalised, they're now suffering lack of support, and increased hatred, from within their 'safe' community, just because they dont want a relationship with someone who has a penis ie still male


----------



## Cleo38

mrs phas said:


> As if feeling threatened as a heterosexual women isn't bad enough
> There's a whole subsection *within* the LGBTQ+ community that are specifically singled out
> 
> *Is a lesbian transphobic if she won't have sex with a trans woman?
> *
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-57853385
> 
> Already marginalised, they're now suffering lack of support, and increased hatred, from within their 'safe' community, just because they dont want a relationship with someone who has a penis ie still male


I have literally just been reading that article ... bloody madness! People should never be coerced into any relationship or sexual encounter. FFS, what is wrong with having sexual preferences?! We all do! I have read previous articles specifically regarding lesbians being singled out as being 'transphobic' as they don't want to have sex with transwomen so am glad this is being reported on (although it's a nice surprise that it's the woke BBC!) to hihglight this bullying tactic.

It is getting ridiculous, no one should have to justify who they choose not to have sex with. The answer "NO" should be enough


----------



## mrs phas

Cleo38 said:


> although it's a nice surprise that it's the woke BBC


Obviously you're not the only one who was surprised by the BBC 
Not just surprised but infuriated, it would seem

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-59074096


----------



## Siskin

mrs phas said:


> Obviously you're not the only one who was surprised by the BBC
> Not just surprised but infuriated, it would seem
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-59074096


Back to the BBC's norm then, kowtow to the woke brigade and blow everyone else


----------



## Jesthar

Siskin said:


> Back to the BBC's norm then, kowtow to the woke brigade and blow everyone else


Actually, looks like they're sticking to their guns on this one...

Did anyone actually try and read the protest letter? Pretty much the opening argument was "This happens, but isn'ta big enough problem to be newsworthy"


----------



## Cleo38

Jesthar said:


> Actually, looks like they're sticking to their guns on this one...
> 
> Did anyone actually try and read the protest letter? Pretty much the opening argument was "This happens, but isn'ta big enough problem to be newsworthy"


Yes, so yet again women & their concerns are being side lined!

The wonderful Magdalen Berns posted about this years ago & used YouTube clips from several trans women (activists) who were basically saying that if lesbians didn't want to have sex with transwomen then they were transphobic.


----------



## mrs phas

Jesthar said:


> Did anyone actually try and read the protest letter


Me Miss, me, I read it and ended up speechless


----------



## Lurcherlad

*A good news story for women:

"The International Handball Federation (IHF) has changed its uniform rules after it was criticised for requiring female beach players to wear bikinis."










*


----------



## Boxer123

Some good news Britney is free


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Oh heck. I was just reading this https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-59214544 and it's terrifying. I'd be interested in the American perspective, has this been in the news much in the States at all @O2.0 ?

I can't vocalise how mad it makes me. Blooming heck, reproductive rights in the States really are not universal, are they?


----------



## Boxer123

Mrs Funkin said:


> Oh heck. I was just reading this https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-59214544 and it's terrifying. I'd be interested in the American perspective, has this been in the news much in the States at all @O2.0 ?
> 
> I can't vocalise how mad it makes me. Blooming heck, reproductive rights in the States really are not universal, are they?


i read this terrifying so many things wrong I don't know where to start.


----------



## kimthecat

It sad that so many take drugs and drink etc while pregnant


----------



## O2.0

Mrs Funkin said:


> Oh heck. I was just reading this https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-59214544 and it's terrifying. I'd be interested in the American perspective, has this been in the news much in the States at all @O2.0 ?
> 
> I can't vocalise how mad it makes me. Blooming heck, reproductive rights in the States really are not universal, are they?


It's the first I've heard of it. 
And no, reproductive rights are in the dark ages here. I just spent hours of my life I won't get back battling insurance over birth control. Apparently unless my OBGYN specifically codes it for regulating menstrual cycle insurance won't pay - yes, if I take birth control to prevent birth, insurance won't pay for it. They will only pay if it's to regulate my cycle 
So the doctor lies on my chart for why I'm taking it. Fun times...


----------



## mrs phas

I read that the other day 
Once again, I find I'm glad there's an ocean and a vast and deep well of enlightenment, between them and us 
And _this_ is, 
allegedly 
the country that likes to call itself the leader of the western world 
As long as youre white, rich, and male


----------



## mrs phas

*Warning contains possibly triggering pictures
*
I think it helps, sometimes, to remember how far we have actually come
Whatever ones feelings or thoughts about her nowadays
Without Erin Pizzey, we would've had longer in the 'dark ages'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-59064064


----------



## Mrs Funkin

I read that yesterday @mrs phas thought it was really interesting (in particular how she no longer calls herself a feminist). I'm still thankful that she started what is now Refuge, without it there would have been no escape for numerous women.


----------



## MilleD

Cleo38 said:


> I was just listening to the news & heard he will be sentenced today & will 'probably' get a whole life tariff. I don't understand why there could be anything else. But then that piece of sh*t Colin Pitchfork is now out after raping & murdering two young girls so ....


Well that didn't last long...

Colin Pitchfork recalled to jail after approaching young women - BBC News


----------



## kimthecat

@MilleD The article said "The hearing will determine whether Pitchfork should stay in a closed prison, be transferred to an open prison or be released. "

How can they even consider an open prison or release. ! he is dangerous.


----------



## rona

I see that there is now courses to help men recognise mysogyny, even in minor form, and to give them the confidence to stand against it.


----------



## HarlequinCat

MilleD said:


> Well that didn't last long...
> 
> Colin Pitchfork recalled to jail after approaching young women - BBC News


Scary how quickly he went back to that. It's like he just doesn't care


----------



## Cleo38

MilleD said:


> Well that didn't last long...
> 
> Colin Pitchfork recalled to jail after approaching young women - BBC News


What a surprise .... not!!!! There is no way that man should be out. After raping & murdering two youn women I do not understand how he was even considered for release. He will always be a danger to women & am glad he is back inside


----------



## MilleD

Cleo38 said:


> What a surprise .... not!!!! There is no way that man should be out. After raping & murdering two youn women I do not understand how he was even considered for release. He will always be a danger to women & am glad he is back inside


That story said he had taught himself to cheat the lie detector which is a tad worrying.

Funny that everyone on the outside knew he shouldn't be out, but the parole board thought it would be ok. I'm no conspiracy theorist but it makes you wonder if there is something else at play.


----------



## Cleo38

MilleD said:


> That story said he had taught himself to cheat the lie detector which is a tad worrying.
> 
> Funny that everyone on the outside knew he shouldn't be out, but the parole board thought it would be ok. I'm no conspiracy theorist but it makes you wonder if there is something else at play.


I know ... who'd have thought that known criminals would lie?! Same with so many people that parole boards consider 'safe' then demonstrate that the public was right.

I honestly don't understand sentences these men get. The latest one is women being murdered through 'rough sex' & yet the men involved are believed despite evidence showing they were violent or controlling towards previous partners, failed to call for any professional help & tried to hide their crime


----------



## MilleD

Cleo38 said:


> I honestly don't understand sentences these men get. The latest one is women being murdered through 'rough sex' & yet the men involved are believed despite evidence showing they were violent or controlling towards previous partners, failed to call for any professional help & tried to hide their crime


Yep, and once again make the woman out to be the bad person because of sexual preference or the like.

It's infuriating.


----------



## lullabydream

Cleo38 said:


> I know ... who'd have thought that known criminals would lie?! Same with so many people that parole boards consider 'safe' then demonstrate that the public was right.
> 
> I honestly don't understand sentences these men get. The latest one is women being murdered through 'rough sex' & yet the men involved are believed despite evidence showing they were violent or controlling towards previous partners, failed to call for any professional help & tried to hide their crime


This is exactly the excuse on idiot (that's putting it politely) on some young girl who was murdered. She was so happy with her boyfriend and it was the boyfriend of a friend who killed her via strangulation. This was apparently some sex game gone wrong, even though no intercourse had taken place..she was made out to be a slut by the defence so he was found not be guilty of next to nothing. Cannot remember the exact reason and served a pittance time in jail. Police do think he will do it again.


----------



## kimthecat

Not sure if this comes under womens rights but the Brit awards are going gender neutral and dropping best female and best male because of complaints from non binary singers such as Sam Smith ,

I wonder who will lose out .


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> I know ... who'd have thought that known criminals would lie?! Same with so many people that parole boards consider 'safe' then demonstrate that the public was right.
> 
> I honestly don't understand sentences these men get. The latest one is women being murdered through 'rough sex' & yet the men involved are believed despite evidence showing they were violent or controlling towards previous partners, failed to call for any professional help & tried to hide their crime


This makes me very cross the system is massively flawed.


----------



## picaresque

Won't somebody please think of the sex offenders









https://4w.pub/colorado-board-scraps-sex-offender-label-due-to-negative-impact-on-sex-offenders/


----------



## O2.0

Jesus... 
You know how sometimes you read things and think that can't possibly be real. Well I did that and looked it up. It's real.

https://denver.cbslocal.com/2021/11...-label/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
DENVER (CBS4)- The way sex offenders are labeled is changing in Colorado. The board that sets state standards voted today to change the term "sex offenders" to reflect so-called "person-first" language.

The Sex Offender Management Board, which is made up of everyone from public defenders to prosecutors, sets standards and guidelines for treatment providers so the new terminology will only be used in that context. It doesn't change the term sex offender in law or the criminal justice system but some worry it's a step in that direction.

"I'm involved today after hearing that it would be improper or offensive in some manner for me to refer to the man who raped me, as a sex offender."

A rape survivor, Kimberly Corbin is among those who spoke out against changing the term sex offender to something less stigmatizing, saying labels based on traits people can't control is one thing, "It's very, very damaging for those who people who are labeled when it has to do with gender, race, sexuality, ability, but those are not their choices, the biggest thing for me is these are choices that sex offenders make."

Derek Logue says he shouldn't have to carry the label for life, "Referring to me by a label for something I did half my life ago is inappropriate and downright offensive."
He argued "client" would be a better term.

Public Defender Kathy Heffron agreed, "It takes into consideration the uniqueness of individuals who are receiving treatment."

"Client" is one of five options the board considered.

Supports of the change in terminology argue it will reduce recidivism. Opponents say it will only reduce accountability, noting victims and survivors live with their label for life.

In the end, the board voted 10-6 to go with "adults who commit sexual offenses."

"I think this strikes a balance that honors the impact to victims and recognizes the current and ongoing impacts of sexual assault but also avoids the labeling term that has negative impacts on those who commit sex offenses."

Jessica Dotter with the Colorado District Attorneys' Council worries the change won't end with the Sex Offender Management Board, "I'm concerned that the use of person-first language generally is an intent to remove accountability from offenders and to diminish the experience of the victims"

Last year, lawmakers considered a bill that would have, among other things, eliminated the term "sexually violent predator" from statutes but they ended up pulling it. Meanwhile, a task force charged with sentencing reform is considering asking the legislature to change terms like "defendant," "convict," and "felon" to "justice-involved people."

Ironically, the Sex Offender Management Board will not drop "sex offender" from its name because only the state Legislature can change the name of the board.


----------



## picaresque

O2.0 said:


> Derek Logue says he shouldn't have to carry the label for life, "Referring to me by a label for something I did half my life ago is inappropriate and downright offensive."


Cry me a river, Derek. Yikes.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Oh poor Derek. Perhaps the women/women/children you abused "half a lifetime ago" might find it downright offensive that you abused them.

Flipping heck.


----------



## O2.0

picaresque said:


> Cry me a river, Derek. Yikes.


Can you imagine the hubris?
He doesn't want to be branded for life as a sex offender, but the women he abused will have to live with what he did to them for the rest of their lives...


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Can you imagine the hubris?
> He doesn't want to be branded for life as a sex offender, but the women he abused will have to live with what he did to them for the rest of their lives...


WTF?!!! How can anyone think this is ok??? Maybe Derek should have though about his actions & the effect it would have on his victims (& their friends, family, the public, etc) before he committed such a horrible crime. Tbh it just shows how lacking in empathy these people are.

Any worryingly there are already thousands of men (in the UK am not sure of the laws anywhere else) who have successfully managed to get themselves removed from the sex offenders register ..... 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7846583/Sex-offenders-allowed-sign-danger-list.html
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/sep/01/sex-offenders-register-appeal-right
https://www.lep.co.uk/news/crime/mo...e-taken-register-have-request-granted-1354333


----------



## MilleD

Mrs Funkin said:


> Oh poor Derek. Perhaps the women/women/children you abused "half a lifetime ago" might find it downright offensive that you abused them.
> 
> Flipping heck.


Wow, think this one takes the biscuit. What a bloody mess this world is in.


----------



## StormyThai

Ummm..what the actual F**k???

https://www.ladbible.com/news/news-...sdQPWHoDDwf7sbYXvkYYhHpMHL11M9lemALllQhrKuPQQ

For anyone wondering...there is zero scientific data to support that cannabis is a drug that causes psychotic episodes (unless you consider all the flawed studies that are used in the "war on drugs"), in fact most people can't be arsed to get up after eating "space cake" let alone use it as an excuse to stab someone 30 times... (yes I know that there are some links to schizophrenia but that link hasn't been solved yet)
So yet another violent man gets to walk away because bless him, he couldn't possible have known what he was doing on a drug that millions use without issue everyday!
I wonder what this poor woman should have done to protect herself then?


----------



## Cleo38

StormyThai said:


> Ummm..what the actual F**k???
> 
> https://www.ladbible.com/news/news-man-stabbed-his-partner-after-eating-cannabis-cake-cleared-of-murder-20211125?c=1637828802593?source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR26OZeL18-992sdQPWHoDDwf7sbYXvkYYhHpMHL11M9lemALllQhrKuPQQ
> 
> For anyone wondering...there is zero scientific data to support that cannabis is a drug that causes psychotic episodes (unless you consider all the flawed studies that are used in the "war on drugs"), in fact most people can't be arsed to get up after eating "space cake" let alone use it as an excuse to stab someone 30 times... (yes I know that there are some links to schizophrenia but that link hasn't been solved yet)
> So yet another violent man gets to walk away because bless him, he couldn't possible have known what he was doing on a drug that millions use without issue everyday!
> I wonder what this poor woman should have done to protect herself then?


Personally I have seen people affected by excessive cannabis use but .... I still do not think this constitutes a good enough reason for killing someone. If he got 8 yrs then it means he will probably be out in 4. Seems like such a lenient sentence for killing someone


----------



## MilleD

StormyThai said:


> Ummm..what the actual F**k???
> 
> https://www.ladbible.com/news/news-man-stabbed-his-partner-after-eating-cannabis-cake-cleared-of-murder-20211125?c=1637828802593?source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR26OZeL18-992sdQPWHoDDwf7sbYXvkYYhHpMHL11M9lemALllQhrKuPQQ
> 
> For anyone wondering...there is zero scientific data to support that cannabis is a drug that causes psychotic episodes (unless you consider all the flawed studies that are used in the "war on drugs"), in fact most people can't be arsed to get up after eating "space cake" let alone use it as an excuse to stab someone 30 times... (yes I know that there are some links to schizophrenia but that link hasn't been solved yet)
> So yet another violent man gets to walk away because bless him, he couldn't possible have known what he was doing on a drug that millions use without issue everyday!
> I wonder what this poor woman should have done to protect herself then?


That court is in my town, I couldn't be more proud 

I guess we will be told to wear suits of armour? That's the only thing that would be any defence against something like this.

He wasn't even smoking it, it was a brownie... Never heard such a poor excuse.


----------



## StormyThai

I'm not suggesting that excessive use can not be a problem for someone, but this is suggesting that he ate some sodding cake and then that made him stab his girlfriend 30 times and that is so wrong on so many levels. 
If this person seriously couldn't tell what was real or not (remembering that cannabis does not cause this type of psychosis) then there was more in that brownie that cannabis.

Drugs do not make people stab someone.


----------



## Cleo38

StormyThai said:


> Drugs do not make people stab someone.


It's whatever excuse they can use. They were drunk, they were on drugs, they were depressed, they can't remember ...... always something & then they portray themselves as victim.


----------



## picaresque

Vulnerable white girls let down yet again
https://news.sky.com/story/amp/i-wa...claim-grooming-gang-at-large-in-hull-12469237

Makes me so angry, can't even articulate it


----------



## kimthecat

picaresque said:


> Vulnerable white girls let down yet again
> https://news.sky.com/story/amp/i-wa...claim-grooming-gang-at-large-in-hull-12469237
> 
> Makes me so angry, can't even articulate it


 Sickening !


----------



## Cleo38

picaresque said:


> Vulnerable white girls let down yet again
> https://news.sky.com/story/amp/i-wa...claim-grooming-gang-at-large-in-hull-12469237
> 
> Makes me so angry, can't even articulate it


I follow Maggie Oliver on FB & despite everything that's happened in the past, despite the police/social services repeating that old chestnut of "lessons will be learned" this is still going on. Perpetrators are still being released (early!) back in to the local community despite promises that they would be deported (where appropriate), or that victims would be informed. Why is this still happening????


----------



## simplysardonic

Cleo38 said:


> WTF?!!! How can anyone think this is ok??? Maybe Derek should have though about his actions & the effect it would have on his victims (& their friends, family, the public, etc) before he committed such a horrible crime. Tbh it just shows how lacking in empathy these people are.
> 
> Any worryingly there are already thousands of men (in the UK am not sure of the laws anywhere else) who have successfully managed to get themselves removed from the sex offenders register .....
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7846583/Sex-offenders-allowed-sign-danger-list.html
> https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/sep/01/sex-offenders-register-appeal-right
> https://www.lep.co.uk/news/crime/mo...e-taken-register-have-request-granted-1354333


What's the bloody point in having a sex offenders register if these predators can 'opt out'?

Disgusting.


----------



## mrs phas

> Good afternoon!
> I was wondering if I could have some support in who to contact please.
> We are running a project called The Very Important Invitation, which is based around the importance and support of cervical screening, with our main aim to increase screening uptake in Suffolk and to promote best practice.
> As an organisation, we are looking for any community events/fates/playgroups/libraries or anything along those lines that we could do a pop up stand/talk at please, done by one of our Health Educators?
> Our pop stands offer vital information and knowledge around a cervical screen, and will also be able to answer any questions, worries or concerns that someone may have with cervical screening.
> 
> We have gone out to a few high schools, colleges, events and recently got to attend the Ipswich Town Football club fanzone and feel it has been really beneficial speaking to our local community in regards to this important topic. It has given them an idea on what to expect, and also to speak about any barriers that may stop someone from attending.
> *We want to support anyone with a cervix, and want to make sure that they have the best experience possible!*
> Thank you for reading.


Sorry, I know this will offend some,
But
I'm so so very angry
Spitting fireballs never mind feathers

My anger at this is more towards the fact that the NHS panel (nice?) Will ignore women over the age of 65e, when it comes to smear tests,
Despite the fact that many over that age are still sexually active
And
That cancer, is no respector of age, in fact those over 65, are in one of the group's that are seeing a significant rise in cervical cancer, purely because of not routinely being called for smears
Yet
They bend over backwards to make sure * self identifying transmen* are not made to feel 'uncomfortable' by using the word woman/ women
Also
It's not just self identifying transwomen, that can trigger biological women, in what has always been seen as a safe arena


----------



## kimthecat

This so sad and shocking. Amber Gibson was murdered by her brother.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-59525916
* 19-year-old man, who is understood to be the brother of teenager Amber Gibson, has appeared in court charged with her murder. *
Amber was reported missing from her home in Hamilton, South Lanarkshire, on Friday.

The 16-year-old's body was discovered at Cadzow Glen on Sunday morning.

Connor Gibson was also charged with offences relating to the Sexual Offences Act 2009 and with attempting to pervert the course of justice.


----------



## rona

Why is this guy not leader?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-59698000

"#IsThisOk: Greater Manchester sexual harassment video targets men and boys"


----------



## picaresque

Not our crimes









https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/8189608/woman-jailed-cocaine-fuelled-sex-alsatian/


----------



## Siskin

OMG. Poor dog


----------



## mrs phas

picaresque said:


> Not our crimes
> View attachment 480856
> 
> 
> https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/8189608/woman-jailed-cocaine-fuelled-sex-alsatian/


:Vomit
Came to post this, as I've only just managed to catch up with the news
I presume, although it's not reported, they will be incarcerated in a woman's prison

Agreed, not our crime at all (I could say more, but :Locktopic)


----------



## Boxer123

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-59824150

Guilty verdict in.


----------



## Calvine

Boxer123 said:


> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-59824150
> 
> Guilty verdict in.


Now they are wondering if, since she has nothing to lose now, she might start naming certain names (nudge nudge, wink wink).


----------



## Boxer123

Calvine said:


> Now they are wondering if, since she has nothing to lose now, she might start naming certain names (nudge nudge, wink wink).


Its certainly possible especially if she is hoping for some sort of a deal on her sentence. Apparently they are now looking at the wider circle involved.


----------



## Calvine

Boxer123 said:


> Its certainly possible especially if she is hoping for some sort of a deal on her sentence. Apparently they are now looking at the wider circle involved.


Watch this space, eh!


----------



## Calvine

I didn't realise she has a husband - he's certainly (unsurprisingly, I suppose) kept a low profile; and stepchildren too, I think I read somewhere.


----------



## Magyarmum

Boxer123 said:


> Its certainly possible especially if she is hoping for some sort of a deal on her sentence. Apparently they are now looking at the wider circle involved.


Interestingly Prince Andrew's accuser didn't appear at the trial and his name was barely given a mention.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/29/prince-andrew-ghislaine-maxwell-trial

*Prince Andrew emerges with barely a mention in Ghislaine Maxwell trial*


----------



## Magyarmum

Calvine said:


> I didn't realise she has a husband - he's certainly (unsurprisingly, I suppose) kept a low profile; and stepchildren too, I think I read somewhere.


According to the Daily Fail........

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...husband-Scott-Borgerson-appears-ready-on.html


----------



## Calvine

I haven't really followed the Epstein saga so maybe I'm mistaken; but what struck me was that she only seemed to become of great interest to 'the authorities' after Epstein died. Maybe they just couldn't find her (she would have enough money to be 'invisible' if she so wanted). But certainly in the beginning it was only Epstein they seemed to be interested in.


----------



## Boxer123

Magyarmum said:


> Interestingly Prince Andrew's accuser didn't appear at the trial and his name was barely given a mention.
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/29/prince-andrew-ghislaine-maxwell-trial
> 
> *Prince Andrew emerges with barely a mention in Ghislaine Maxwell trial*


Apparently dozens of women came forward but the prosecution was only based on 4.


----------



## Magyarmum

Boxer123 said:


> Apparently dozens of women came forward but the prosecution was only based on 4.


Just read this article from Reuter.

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/ep...il&utm_term=0_10959edeb5-b85c13c6ce-190460357


----------



## Boxer123

Magyarmum said:


> Just read this article from Reuter.
> 
> https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/ep...il&utm_term=0_10959edeb5-b85c13c6ce-190460357


I'm not sure the point of this article? Is it the usual rather than prove if the accused is innocent or guilty we will set out to prove the victim a liar. One of the reasons so few rape cases make it to court.


----------



## Magyarmum

Boxer123 said:


> I'm not sure the point of this article? Is it the usual rather than prove if the accused is innocent or guilty we will set out to prove the victim a liar. One of the reasons so few rape cases make it to court.


As I read it I don't think they are implying that in this case Gauffe is lying but rather that due to a technicality, i.e because she has already received a settlement, according to PA's lawyer it absolves him from any liability.


----------



## Boxer123

Magyarmum said:


> As I read it I don't think they are implying that in this case Gauffe is lying but rather that due to a technicality.
> 
> Namely, she has already received a settlement which according to PA's lawyer absolves him from any liability.


I don't think he will ever face justice because of who he is so will probably get off on a technicality which makes me hopping mad but this is the world we live in.


----------



## Magyarmum

Boxer123 said:


> I don't think he will ever face justice because of who he is so will probably get off on a technicality which makes me hopping mad but this is the works we live in.


Have you ever considered that despite his photo of him with Gauffe and his undoubted association with Epstein, he might not be guilty of having underage sex with her?


----------



## Boxer123

Magyarmum said:


> Have you ever considered that despite his photo of him with Gauffe and his undoubted association with Epstein, he might not be guilty of having underage sex with her?


I have however if it was you or me we would still face the justice system. Why is he exempt ? I don't think it's much of a leap to think he may have been involved considering the fact he continued his friendship after Epstein was arrested for sex trafficking. It's not just underage sex which is bad enough it's being involved in a sex trafficking ring where scores of underage girls were traded like cattle.

Edit to add he did say he would work with the FBI but hasn't.


----------



## Pawscrossed

Boxer123 said:


> I have however if it was you or me we would still face the justice system. Why is he exempt ? I don't think it's much of a leap to think he may have been involved considering the fact he continued his friendship after Epstein was arrested for sex trafficking. It's not just underage sex which is bad enough it's being involved in a sex trafficking ring where scores of underage girls were traded like cattle.
> 
> Edit to add he did say he would work with the FBI but hasn't.


Virginia Guiffre still has a lawsuit filed against him for underage sex.

I can't bring myself to share the BBC headline (it leads with 'Who is Maxwell, the downfall of a favourite daughter' as it smacks of media influence by the Maxwell family). This article leads with the response from the brave victims
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/30/ghislaine-maxwell-guilty-verdict-reactions


----------



## kimthecat

What about the rest of them on the Lolita Express. Its more than just Prince Andrew surely. Also wondering why Andrew was allowed to use Sandringham and balmoral to entertain "guests" such as maxwell and epstein.


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> What about the rest of them on the Lolita Express. Its more than just Prince Andrew surely. Also wondering why Andrew was allowed to use Sandringham and balmoral to entertain "guests" such as maxwell and epstein.


Clinton was named, as were The Donald and Kevin Spacey, as being passengers on the plane, photos of all three in the company of Epstein, but not sure that there have been any accusations of any impropriety on the part of any of them.


----------



## picaresque

Calvine said:


> Clinton was named, as were The Donald and Kevin Spacey, as being passengers on the plane, photos of all three in the company of Epstein, but not sure that there have been any accusations of any impropriety on the part of any of them.


There have been for all three...


----------



## Calvine

picaresque said:


> There have been for all three.


As I said, I have not seen them, but of course you have to wonder what they were doing in his company or on his plane. But then, it's a free world and the accusations against him, although historic, were made more recently.


----------



## Magyarmum

Calvine said:


> As I said, I have not seen them, but of course you have to wonder what they were doing in his company or on his plane. But then, it's a free world and the accusations against him, although historic, were made more recently.


https://www.newsweek.com/every-celebrity-named-jeffrey-epstein-files-1521985

*Every Celebrity Named in Jeffrey Epstein Files*


----------



## Calvine

Magyarmum said:


> https://www.newsweek.com/every-celebrity-named-jeffrey-epstein-files-1521985
> 
> *Every Celebrity Named in Jeffrey Epstein Files*


Stephen Hawking? Really?


----------



## Magyarmum

Calvine said:


> Stephen Hawking? Really?


He wasn't the only scientist.

https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/13/20692415/jeffrey-epstein-scientists-sexual-harassment

*JEFFREY EPSTEIN LIKED PALLING AROUND WITH SCIENTISTS - WHAT DO THEY THINK NOW?*


----------



## Calvine

Magyarmum said:


> He wasn't the only scientist.
> 
> https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/13/20692415/jeffrey-epstein-scientists-sexual-harassment
> 
> *JEFFREY EPSTEIN LIKED PALLING AROUND WITH SCIENTISTS - WHAT DO THEY THINK NOW?*


I don't actually recognise most of the names there on the list, to be honest.


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> As I said, I have not seen them, but of course you have to wonder what they were doing in his company or on his plane. But then, it's a free world and the accusations against him, although historic, were made more recently.


I understand Epstein was a financier so I expect it was to do with business. But i guess some of his guests took advantage of what was in offer,


----------



## Magyarmum

kimthecat said:


> I understand Epstein was a financier so I expect it was to do with business. But i guess some of his guests took advantage of what was in offer,


https://books.google.hu/books?id=s8...prize winners were friends of Epstein&f=false


----------



## kimthecat

Magyarmum said:


> https://books.google.hu/books?id=s80AEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA186&lpg=PA186&dq=Which+Nobel+prize+winners+were+friends+of+Epstein&source=bl&ots=ZsKA3IjjoQ&sig=ACfU3U27CBgaso4HA-i8earRt-YFp2Ii2A&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiNlrug2I71AhWEKewKHdN7AFgQ6AF6BAgiEAM#v=onepage&q=Which Nobel prize winners were friends of Epstein&f=false


it says viewing unavailable .


----------



## Magyarmum

kimthecat said:


> it says viewing unavailable .


Oh no! It's so annoying when that happens. I always check after I've posted and the link was working perfectly.

To summarise. The link was extracts from a book called American Kompromat which states that Epstein had a "black book" containing the names of some 1500 people all of whom were friends of his and who had enjoyed his hospitality. To name a few

Rupert Murdoch 
Tony Blair
Richard Branson
Sarah Ferguson.
John Cleese
Mick Jagger
Deepak Chopra
Plus the then Israeli Prime Minister, several Saudi Princes and numerous prominent American politicians.

I can hardly believe any of them were so naive that they had no idea what was going whilst they were being wined and dined by him and being ferried on his private jet to his island.


----------



## kimthecat

Magyarmum said:


> Oh no! It's so annoying when that happens. I always check after I've posted and the link was working perfectly.
> 
> To summarise. The link was extracts from a book called American Kompromat which states that Epstein had a "black book" containing the names of some 1500 people all of whom were friends of his and who had enjoyed his hospitality. To name a few
> 
> Rupert Murdoch
> Tony Blair
> Richard Branson
> Sarah Ferguson.
> John Cleese
> Mick Jagger
> Deepak Chopra
> Plus the then Israeli Prime Minister, several Saudi Princes and numerous prominent American politicians.
> 
> I can hardly believe any of them were so naive that they had no idea what was going whilst they were being wined and dined by him and being ferried on his private jet to his island.


and Tony Blair has just been knighted:Vomit


----------



## Boxer123

kimthecat said:


> and Tony Blair has just been knighted:Vomit


Couldn't make it up could you.


----------



## mrs phas

Looks like he might be the luckiest man alive, although, I suppose it might be argued that she wasn't mature enough (never mind old enough) and so under Epstein/Maxwell control, she didn't really know what she was signing

BBC News - Prince Andrew accuser's 2009 deal with Jeffrey Epstein made public
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59861831


----------



## Magyarmum

mrs phas said:


> Looks like he might be the luckiest man alive, although, I suppose it might be argued that she wasn't mature enough (never mind old enough) and so under Epstein/Maxwell control, she didn't really know what she was signing
> 
> BBC News - Prince Andrew accuser's 2009 deal with Jeffrey Epstein made public
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59861831


In 2009 when she signed the agreement she would have been about 25 years old and one would imagine quite capable of knowing what she was agreeing to.


----------



## mrs phas

Something positive, for a change

BBC News - Taking pictures of breastfeeding mothers in public to be made illegal in England and Wales
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59871075


----------



## mrs phas

Well he failed 
Perhaps now the truth will out

BBC News - Prince Andrew fails to get US civil case dismissed
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59871514


----------



## Boxer123

mrs phas said:


> Well he failed
> Perhaps now the truth will out
> 
> BBC News - Prince Andrew fails to get US civil case dismissed
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59871514


It will be interesting to see what happens. Trying to use an agreement written up by a sex trafficker to ge out of this is shocking.


----------



## Boxer123

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59987935

If they knew he was innocent wouldn't they stand by him ?


----------



## Boxer123

Meanwhile another young women murdered going for a run something I do everyday. Poor women and her family.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59977432


----------



## Siskin

Prince Andrew has lost all his military patrons and can no longer use HRH

https://news.sky.com/story/prince-a...yal-patronages-returned-to-the-queen-12515222


----------



## Jaf

I thought he gave up HRH in order to be able to fight the case, as an "ordinary citizen". 

He should he admitted right from the start that he was there, even he said no assault happened. Would have made him seem more honest...right now he seems guilty as charged.


----------



## mrs phas

Siskin said:


> Prince Andrew has lost all his military patrons and can no longer use HRH
> 
> https://news.sky.com/story/prince-a...yal-patronages-returned-to-the-queen-12515222


Much as I believe he's guilty 
Im going to play devil's advocate for 1 minute
What happened to presumed innocence?
For everyone else, the prosecution have to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt 
BEFORE 
The accused is charged 
NOT 
Found guilty (even if it is trial by media) 
THEN 
Charged

Don't get me wrong, the royal family have always been viewed as above the law (because you are charged in the name of Her Majesty's courts)
But 
I do find all this eagerness to take a bite from his carcass a little distasteful 
Just because she is female doesn't mean she never lies 
Just because he was friends with a vile sex abuser and trafficker doesn't mean he was guilty of doing the same, purely by association

Seems to me they (American justice system, which is manipulating the statute of limitations [if you believe everything reported]) want someone to punish because Epstein took his own life and 'escaped'
And
HRH Prince Andrew is a huge fish to land

Again, I, personally, believe he's an inbred idiot, who thought his 'royalness' gave him ultimate protection


----------



## Boxer123

mrs phas said:


> Much as I believe he's guilty
> Im going to play devil's advocate for 1 minute
> What happened to presumed innocence?
> For everyone else, the prosecution have to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt
> BEFORE
> The accused is charged
> NOT
> Found guilty (even if it is trial by media)
> THEN
> Charged
> 
> Don't get me wrong, the royal family have always been viewed as above the law (because you are charged in the name of Her Majesty's courts)
> But
> I do find all this eagerness to take a bite from his carcass a little distasteful
> Just because she is female doesn't mean she never lies
> Just because he was friends with a vile sex abuser and trafficker doesn't mean he was guilty of doing the same, purely by association
> 
> Seems to me they (American justice system, which is manipulating the statute of limitations [if you believe everything reported]) want someone to punish because Epstein took his own life and 'escaped'
> And
> HRH Prince Andrew is a huge fish to land
> 
> Again, I, personally, believe he's an inbred idiot, who thought his 'royalness' gave him ultimate protection


I think the issue is he won't face a proper trial because of who he is so the only justice he will face is civil court.

I assume the queen has made the decision to take these titles away does she know something we don't ?


----------



## picaresque




----------



## Mrs Funkin

I sit awaiting all the advice to female runners of how not to be beaten to death, in a similar vein to the advice issued when Sarah was murdered walking home. How many more women must die? 

Oh Ashling


----------



## Boxer123

Mrs Funkin said:


> I sit awaiting all the advice to female runners of how not to be beaten to death, in a similar vein to the advice issued when Sarah was murdered walking home. How many more women must die?
> 
> Oh Ashling


I know we always consider what the victim was doing not the red flags from the perpetrator leading up to the attack.


----------



## Magyarmum

mrs phas said:


> Much as I believe he's guilty
> Im going to play devil's advocate for 1 minute
> What happened to presumed innocence?
> For everyone else, the prosecution have to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt
> BEFORE
> The accused is charged
> NOT
> Found guilty (even if it is trial by media)
> THEN
> Charged
> 
> Don't get me wrong, the royal family have always been viewed as above the law (because you are charged in the name of Her Majesty's courts)
> But
> I do find all this eagerness to take a bite from his carcass a little distasteful
> Just because she is female doesn't mean she never lies
> Just because he was friends with a vile sex abuser and trafficker doesn't mean he was guilty of doing the same, purely by association
> 
> Seems to me they (American justice system, which is manipulating the statute of limitations [if you believe everything reported]) want someone to punish because Epstein took his own life and 'escaped'
> And
> HRH Prince Andrew is a huge fish to land
> 
> Again, I, personally, believe he's an inbred idiot, who thought his 'royalness' gave him ultimate protection


My sentiments exactly.


----------



## Calvine

Boxer123 said:


> Trying to use an agreement written up by a sex trafficker to ge out of this is shocking.


 There is a certain irony there, no doubt about that..


----------



## neverforgotten2020

kimthecat said:


> I dont believe in the death sentence but if something happened to him in prison I wouldn't shed any tears and Levi Bell too who killed Milly Dowler and lived in my neck of the woods.


He has confessed to the dreadful hammer murders now.


----------



## kimthecat

neverforgotten2020 said:


> He has confessed to the dreadful hammer murders now.


I hope they can prove who did it , one way or another.


----------



## MollySmith

Virgina Guiffre says that she has insisted all the money goes to her charities in support of victims rights (before the papers misguidedly tell us that Prince Andrew is giving a donation to charity, he is not, he could do that anytime he wanted). Meanwhile BBC's Nicholas Witchell is scraping the barrel and suggesting that the former HRH could do some work on raising awareness of sex trafficking, proving that men have so much still to learn.


----------



## Boxer123

MollySmith said:


> Virgina Guiffre says that she has insisted all the money goes to her charities in support of victims rights (before the papers misguidedly tell us that Prince Andrew is giving a donation to charity, he is not, he could do that anytime he wanted). Meanwhile BBC's Nicholas Witchell is scraping the barrel and suggesting that the former HRH could do some work on raising awareness of sex trafficking, proving that men have so much still to learn.


After insisting he wanted his day in court.


----------



## MollySmith

Boxer123 said:


> After insisting he wanted his day in court.


Exactly. I hope that she has gained the justice she wanted and can begin to live her life with support and kindness. I fear something sinister.


----------



## Boxer123

MollySmith said:


> Exactly. I hope that she has gained the justice she wanted and can begin to live her life with support and kindness. I fear something sinister.


I hope so she has done a lot of work for victims of sex trafficking.


----------



## Cleo38

And another one .... https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scot-flashed-penis-used-sex-26256211

Seriously, how can they refer to this man as woman?! And I hope he doesn't end up in a women's prison as he is clearly a danger


----------



## Siskin

Cleo38 said:


> And another one .... https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scot-flashed-penis-used-sex-26256211
> 
> Seriously, how can they refer to this man as woman?! And I hope he doesn't end up in a women's prison as he is clearly a danger


I agree s/he was clearly acting as a man


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> And another one .... https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scot-flashed-penis-used-sex-26256211
> 
> Seriously, how can they refer to this man as woman?! And I hope he doesn't end up in a women's prison as he is clearly a danger


"Exposing _her_ penis" is a phrase that shouldn't even exist. I would think the trans community would be as outraged by this sort of self-identification as well because it makes a mockery of what it is to be a trans woman.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> "Exposing _her_ penis" is a phrase that shouldn't even exist. I would think the trans community would be as outraged by this sort of self-identification as well because it makes a mockery of what it is to be a trans woman.


Exactly! This is yet another example of how ridiculous things have become. Predatory men are obviously hijacking this 'right' to self identify & nothing appears to be done about it. But unfortunately as we are all well aware anyone who speaks out is shouted down.


----------



## picaresque

‘Her penis’

‘It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words’. 

Autogynephila is very real despite what TRAs say and allowing these fetishists and sex offenders to claim the same rights and identity as actual transsexuals is mindblowingly stupid and dangerous as well as counterproductive to the cause. But sure, put this repeat offender with ‘her’ penis in a female prison with vulnerable women who cannot escape because his feelings are more important than their safety.


----------



## O2.0

Transgender female swimmer breaking records. 
https://billypenn.com/2022/02/19/li...nioghUirl7okU5kr2yLpnLm4wHVqNCdtC7KFOBINXWIM8

"An Ivy League announcement that played over the public address system each day stated a no tolerance policy against transphobia, as well as racism and homophobia."
In a hierarchy of "-isms" transphobia is intolerable, but misogyny isn't.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Transgender female swimmer breaking records.
> https://billypenn.com/2022/02/19/li...nioghUirl7okU5kr2yLpnLm4wHVqNCdtC7KFOBINXWIM8
> 
> "An Ivy League announcement that played over the public address system each day stated a no tolerance policy against transphobia, as well as racism and homophobia."
> In a hierarchy of "-isms" transphobia is intolerable, but misogyny isn't.


In the UK misogyny isn't classed as a hate crime which I find unbelievable. Considering 2 women are killed in England & Wales alone by their partner or ex partner, (not including other crimes against them purely based on their sex) I find deeply disturbing. The numbers of violent crime against women is huge yet it seems that crimes against trans people are far more important which I do not understand.

Whilst any type of hate crime is not to be tolerated I do not understand why crimes against women are. It is almost the norm as they are so common. Someone on a FB group pointed out numbers of crimes against biological women compared to against transwomen & was accused of playing 'victim Olympics' . So despite having info to support our concerns of biological men invading our spaces & our sex based rights being eroded that is still not enough


----------



## picaresque

Saw this delightful graffiti today (a day that's been stressful enough already)










Good to know what TRAs think women like me and the rest of us on this thread deserve for wanting things like no male rapists in women's prisons and the protection of women's sport.
It's genuinely disturbing. Would love to see what the police would say if I attempted to report it as a hate crime, as has happened with GC women and stickering campaigns with evil messages like 'women don't have penises'. I'd be laughed out of the station because somehow these threats of violence are ok but disagreeing with sacred ideology is not


----------



## O2.0

Bill signed to make it so that only biological females can compete in women's sports in Iowa. 
https://www.npr.org/2022/03/03/1084...LPgARjx1u_tSrHVKLM2olvtaIIMdby9GbfmU2cYq3-hJY

I don't know that this should be a permanent solution, but I do see the need right now. Hopefully long term we can find a more inclusive solution that makes space for transgender youth while also respecting and preserving women's sports.

And dear gawd don't read the comments, don't read the comments, don't read the comments!!!


----------



## Cleo38

picaresque said:


> Saw this delightful graffiti today (a day that's been stressful enough already)
> 
> View attachment 484916
> 
> 
> Good to know what TRAs think women like me and the rest of us on this thread deserve for wanting things like no male rapists in women's prisons and the protection of women's sport.
> It's genuinely disturbing. Would love to see what the police would say if I attempted to report it as a hate crime, as has happened with GC women and stickering campaigns with evil messages like 'women don't have penises'. I'd be laughed out of the station because somehow these threats of violence are ok but disagreeing with sacred ideology is not


Did you listen to Jeremy Vine on R2 the other day? They were discussing on-criminal hate crimes & it was truly terrifying how these have snuck in & been used. One man did challenge his & it was over turned but how the f*ck can these be legal?? You can make a comment online as the man in question did)stating you opinion (not offensive or threatening) yet be on police records as a type of criminal which could then affect your chances of employment, etc if a check was run on you .... I honestly didn't understand how it has come to this.

And as for threats from the tan slobby I have never received so much hatred form people simply for stating my opinion on a feminist FB page that single sex spaces should be available to people, women's sports should be for biological women & that I have concerns over self identification. I was not offensive but stated my opinion ... I was called a disgusting TERF, a revolting disease, mentally ill, consumed with virulent hate, obsessed with genitals & a disgusting perversion in pm's from two transwomen.

The only abusive messages I have ever received on social media have been from biological men


----------



## picaresque

Cleo38 said:


> Did you listen to Jeremy Vine on R2 the other day? They were discussing on-criminal hate crimes & it was truly terrifying how these have snuck in & been used. One man did challenge his & it was over turned but how the f*ck can these be legal?? You can make a comment online as the man in question did)stating you opinion (not offensive or threatening) yet be on police records as a type of criminal which could then affect your chances of employment, etc if a check was run on you .... I honestly didn't understand how it has come to this.
> 
> And as for threats from the tan slobby I have never received so much hatred form people simply for stating my opinion on a feminist FB page that single sex spaces should be available to people, women's sports should be for biological women & that I have concerns over self identification. I was not offensive but stated my opinion ... I was called a disgusting TERF, a revolting disease, mentally ill, consumed with virulent hate, obsessed with genitals & a disgusting perversion in pm's from two transwomen.
> 
> The only abusive messages I have ever received on social media have been from biological men


Didn't hear it but 'non criminal [hate] crime' is hard to get one's head around. I think it was a 'non criminal hate incident' one man was accused of, the case where a police officer said he was calling to 'check your thinking'! Chilling really. That was a few years ago I think and it does look like the tide is turning, very gradually. I avoid a lot of it now though tbh after being immersed in it a while, it was stressing me out. But then you get slapped in the face with hateful graffiti and obnoxious stickers (there are a few on lampposts around here saying something about trans catgirls but it's not a fetish, right? I might have a pic on my phone somewhere, will see if I can find it).
And yeah the male rage that is let loose when women dare to have boundaries is quite something and it's hugely prevalent with the trans issue rn. It's the reason I am increasingly mistrustful of 'liberal' or leftie blokes tbh.


----------



## Boxer123

It’s International Women’s day.


----------



## Cleo38

Boxer123 said:


> It's International Women's day.


 Happy International Women's Day 2022


----------



## MollySmith

I suggest anyone on Twitter looks up the Pay Gap App for a brutal summing up of the state of pay. Every UK account that posted celebrating women and pays them less, has been shared by the account with a summary of the median pay difference between men and women. It’s extraordinary how many tried to avoid it. They tried to post then delete and repost ‘owning to a typo’ and a few gave up. We are talking councils, charities, fire and rescue services… all celebrating female staff and paying them a lot lot less.


----------



## £54etgfb6

MollySmith said:


> I suggest anyone on Twitter looks up the Pay Gap App for a brutal summing up of the state of pay. Every UK account that posted celebrating women and pays them less, has been shared by the account with a summary of the median pay difference between men and women. It's extraordinary how many tried to avoid it. They tried to post then delete and repost 'owning to a typo' and a few gave up. We are talking councils, charities, fire and rescue services… all celebrating female staff and paying them a lot lot less.


I'm not well versed in law but why is there no laws allowing the prosecution of this? Why are companies not forced to declare pay by gender (for equal positions) and prosecuted if not equal? Very, very odd... Pay should be based on ability and for jobs that require academic qualifications, well, women have been outperforming men in that field for decades?


----------



## Siskin

In the late sixties early seventies I worked for a bank and the pay difference and the extra perks the men got were awful and made me cross even then as a new person in her first job. After two years I left and joined a department of the civil service where it was equal pay and everyone was called by their first name whatever their grade and seniority. 
If it could be done then, why isn’t it now


----------



## O2.0

Siskin said:


> If it could be done then, why isn't it now


It is done in some areas. 
In the education field, you're paid based on your education and years of experience. Done. There's no haggling for a raise, there's no negotiation (which men generally do better with than women). It's based solely on objective measures. 
It's doable.

Though to be fair, it also depends on the career. Women supermodels make far more than male supermodels - is there such a thing?


----------



## Cleo38

I bloody love this woman!!!
So grateful that there is a woman who has a backbone & will speak out against the madness

https://www.indiewire.com/2022/03/jk-rowling-transphobia-international-womens-day-rant-1234705640/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...nister-refuses-Labours-definition-female.html


----------



## Jobeth

Sturgeon’s response is the one that I think is amazing.


----------



## Cleo38

Jobeth said:


> Sturgeon's response is the one that I think is amazing.


Really? Why? If you are in favor of this bill how do you suggest we protect women from predatory men who will be able to gain access to women's spaces if this bill goes ahead making the whole process so much easier? And I would genuinely be interested in your answer  

IMO women will not be protected, especially those who are most vulnerable if men are able to claim they are 'women' simply by saying they are. Despite us women being told "it never happen's" there has been numerous example of violent/sexual crimes committed by men claiming to be women


----------



## O2.0

Jobeth said:


> Sturgeon's response is the one that I think is amazing.


There has to be a way to include trans women in society without endangering biological women, and the way they're proposing is not it.

You can't just put someone who is essentially a man in spaces that for reasons of safety are meant to be for only biological women, and here's the thing, most trans women understand this well because they understand not feeling safe. It's a small group of very vocal activists who are making this more complicated than it needs to be.


----------



## Jobeth

She said, "This is about a process, an existing process, by which people can legally change their gender, and This is about a process, an existing process, by which people can legally change their gender, and *it's about making that process less traumatic and inhumane for trans people, one of the most stigmatized minorities in our society. *It doesn't give trans people any more rights, doesn't give trans people one single additional right that they don't have right now. Nor does it take away from women any of the current existing rights that women have under the Equalities Act.". It doesn't give trans people any more rights, doesn't give trans people one single additional right that they don't have right now. Nor does it take away from women any of the current existing rights that women have under the Equalities Act."

I can't see anything wrong with that statement and I agree it's a small minority of vocal people making life difficult for them. All you need to do is put systems in place in prison that ensure everyone is safe. That sadly isn't happening for a lot of people.

I did enjoy how GB pottery throw down had both transgender/non-binary people on but everyone focused on the actual show.


----------



## Jesthar

O2.0 said:


> You can't just put someone who is essentially a man in spaces that for reasons of safety are meant to be for only biological women, and here's the thing, most trans women understand this well because they understand not feeling safe. It's a small group of very vocal activists who are making this more complicated than it needs to be.


This. The partner of our union LGBT officer identifies as trans, and also firnly believes that there should be spaces that are exclusive to biological women for their safety. The vilification they get online for that stance from the extremists is absolutely disgusting, even the mildest wouldn't be repeatable on a family forum - it would be an instant perma-ban...


----------



## Cleo38

Jobeth said:


> She said, "This is about a process, an existing process, by which people can legally change their gender, and This is about a process, an existing process, by which people can legally change their gender, and *it's about making that process less traumatic and inhumane for trans people, one of the most stigmatized minorities in our society. *It doesn't give trans people any more rights, doesn't give trans people one single additional right that they don't have right now. Nor does it take away from women any of the current existing rights that women have under the Equalities Act.". It doesn't give trans people any more rights, doesn't give trans people one single additional right that they don't have right now. Nor does it take away from women any of the current existing rights that women have under the Equalities Act."
> 
> I can't see anything wrong with that statement and I agree it's a small minority of vocal people making life difficult for them.* All you need to do is put systems in place in prison that ensure everyone is safe*. That sadly isn't happening for a lot of people.
> 
> I did enjoy how GB pottery throw down had both transgender/non-binary people on but everyone focused on the actual show.


Whilst I agree with the sentiment why does a medical condition not require confirmation from a doctor? Why are people so keen to rush this through? Why has the age been lowered to 16 therefor making medication probably more easily accessible for children?

And what systems? Because whenever this is raised (as per any women's issues) we are shouted down & called TERF's? How do you weed out the predatory men who take advantage?


----------



## O2.0

Jobeth said:


> I can't see anything wrong with that statement and I agree it's a small minority of vocal people making life difficult for them. All you need to do is put systems in place in prison that ensure everyone is safe. That sadly isn't happening for a lot of people.


There isn't anything wrong with the statement, but it's a disingenuous argument. 
It's not "just" about how people identify. It's about what happens next. 
Once anyone can say they're a woman, how do you keep women's only spaces safe? What stops the abusive husband from claiming he's a woman and entering the women's shelter? What stops the male rapist from being housed in female prisons? 
The legal definition of gender matters greatly when you're trying to get in to women only spaces. Women only spaces exist so that women can be safe. 
So how can those supporting this change in law assure women that they too matter and they too will be protected? Because that conversation that needs to happen too, and we should be able to bring it up without being attacked and labeled transphobic or a TERF and worse.

So yes, kudos to JK Rowling and refusing to be intimidated and continue to ask these questions.


----------



## O2.0

Actually I change my mind. I think we all should be able to self identify. 
I'm going to self identify as 65 years old so I can stop working and start collecting my retirement.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Actually I change my mind. I think we all should be able to self identify.
> I'm going to self identify as 65 years old so I can stop working and start collecting my retirement.


Exactly!!! But that sort of comment could be considered a non - criminal hate crime as that's the cost of crazy world we are now living.

in https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-59727118


----------



## Jesthar

Cleo38 said:


> Exactly!!! But that sort of comment could be considered a non - criminal hate crime as that's the cost of crazy world we are now living.
> 
> in https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-59727118


Actually, you might get away with it on the grounds that age is also a protected characteristic, i.e. you aren't allowed to discriminate against people based on their age...


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> Exactly!!! But that sort of comment could be considered a non - criminal hate crime as that's the cost of crazy world we are now living.
> 
> in https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-59727118


I don't understand. 
I'm glad he won, but I don't even understand how what he said was 'hate' in any way. He was making a point with an analogy. Whether or not the analogy worked or his point is valid is all up for discussion, but having an opinion is not hate.

And in all seriousness, what is the difference between self-identifying age vs. gender?
I actually think it's a good comparison.
If I want to present to the world as a 65 year old (I'm 50) and and go about life as a 65 year old - who cares? It doesn't matter in the least and it's frankly no one's business but mine and my doctor's how old I am.

But if I want to run a marathon, claim retirement benefits, or even get a senior citizen discount at the local diner, it's perfectly reasonable to be more careful about making sure I really am the age I claim to be. Age may only be a number for most things, but for some things, in order to be fair to all of us, the year you were born really does matter.


----------



## O2.0

Jesthar said:


> Actually, you might get away with it on the grounds that age is also a protected characteristic, i.e. you aren't allowed to discriminate against people based on their age...


Are we talking birth age or age you identify as?


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> I don't understand.
> I'm glad he won, but I don't even understand how what he said was 'hate' in any way. He was making a point with an analogy. Whether or not the analogy worked or his point is valid is all up for discussion, but having an opinion is not hate.
> 
> And in all seriousness, what is the difference between self-identifying age vs. gender?
> I actually think it's a good comparison.
> If I want to present to the world as a 65 year old (I'm 50) and and go about life as a 65 year old - who cares? It doesn't matter in the least and it's frankly no one's business but mine and my doctor's how old I am.
> 
> But if I want to run a marathon, claim retirement benefits, or even get a senior citizen discount at the local diner, it's perfectly reasonable to be more careful about making sure I really am the age I claim to be. Age may only be a number for most things, but for some things, in order to be fair to all of us, the year you were born really does matter.


Me neither & the worrying thing is that that information would have been held on his record so potentially any checks by potential employers, etc would have shown this therefore impacting on his career/employment opportunities .... CRAZY!!!!!!


----------



## Jesthar

O2.0 said:


> Are we talking birth age or age you identify as?


Given that the gender someone identifies as seems to be trumping the biology someone was born with at the moment, I'd say a strong case could be made for the age you identify as


----------



## O2.0

Huh... I was doing some googling about legally changing your age and apparently it's been tried, and the trans community spoke up. 
I'm actually confused by the argument:

"But then there is the more serious side of age fluidity. The trans community, in particular, doesn't appreciate having age fluidity be conflated with gender. Brynn Tannehill, activist and author of _Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Trans (But Were Afraid to Ask)_, told AARP that where the comparison goes wrong is with the concept of immutable characteristics. "It almost goes without saying that you cannot change your age. Neither can transgender people change their gender identity (trust me, we have all tried mightily to not be transgender before we transition). When transgender people transition, they're not changing sex, they're making their bodies match their gender identity." Ratelband's comparison to the trans struggle is "offensive," Tannehill says, and belittles her community."
https://www.aarp.org/disrupt-aging/stories/info-2019/legally-change-age.html

It almost feels like the argument switches to suit. 
When it's women's sports, sex can and does change, so a person who was a man can change to a woman and compete fairly against women. 
But here the argument is that sex doesn't change....


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Huh... I was doing some googling about legally changing your age and apparently it's been tried, and the trans community spoke up.
> I'm actually confused by the argument:
> 
> "But then there is the more serious side of age fluidity. The trans community, in particular, doesn't appreciate having age fluidity be conflated with gender. Brynn Tannehill, activist and author of _Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Trans (But Were Afraid to Ask)_, told AARP that where the comparison goes wrong is with the concept of immutable characteristics. "It almost goes without saying that you cannot change your age. Neither can transgender people change their gender identity (trust me, we have all tried mightily to not be transgender before we transition). When transgender people transition, they're not changing sex, they're making their bodies match their gender identity." Ratelband's comparison to the trans struggle is "offensive," Tannehill says, and belittles her community."
> https://www.aarp.org/disrupt-aging/stories/info-2019/legally-change-age.html
> 
> It almost feels like the argument switches to suit.
> When it's women's sports, sex can and does change, so a person who was a man can change to a woman and compete fairly against women.
> But here the argument is that sex doesn't change....


It really is crazy! I still can't believe we have gotten to this stage. I was reading about Lia Thomas earlier & was raging of how titles from women have been stolen by a biological male who was mediocre when competing against other biological men yet is now smashing records. How this person can feel any sense of achievement I really don't understand.

The female teammates have been basically ignored & their concerns belittled just to accommodate one person who feel that their rights are far more important ....


----------



## Jesthar

O2.0 said:


> It almost feels like the argument switches to suit.
> When it's women's sports, sex can and does change, so a person who was a man can change to a woman and compete fairly against women.
> But here the argument is that sex doesn't change....


Oh, if you are looking for coherent logic, the gender debate is the not the place to be looking... I've just finished reading an article in which a scientific researcher actually said that there is no such thing as a male or female brain (which I agree with), then goes on to argue that is one of the things that means being trans is real (um, how?).

My brand of autism means I am hyper-logical. It's what makes me so very good with computers. But I also love to know how and why things work - including people, so I find psychology fascinating too. And the weird thing is, psychology is also (usually) pretty logical. Irrational, maybe, but in a logical way (if that makes sense!).

So between the two, I've found myself putting a lot of thought into the whole topic, especially as I was part girly part tomboy as a kid. I suppose nowadays they'd try and figure out which of the 72 (yes, 72 - last time I looked anyway) genders I fitted, but thankfully I (and my parents) had a more straightforwards approach - if I enjoyed doing something that wasn't considered 'usual' for a biological girl to do, who cares? All of those 'this is for girls, this is for boys' rules are artificial, and what I was interested in didn't define me, I defined my interests. 

Despite all the effort, though, I keep hitting the same blocker - all the definitions focus on HOW someone feels, but no-one ever seems to explain or even explore WHY people feel that way. And with psychology, WHY is key. But despite all my googling prowess, I've struggled to find any accounts that say "I don't feel <insert biology here>, and these are the specific reasons why I don't feel <insert biology here>"


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> It really is crazy! I still can't believe we have gotten to this stage. I was reading about Lia Thomas earlier & was raging of how titles from women have been stolen by a biological male who was mediocre when competing against other biological men yet is now smashing records. How this person can feel any sense of achievement I really don't understand.
> 
> The female teammates have been basically ignored & their concerns belittled just to accommodate one person who feel that their rights are far more important ....


I really struggle to understand how people can't see that allowing trans women in to women's sports discriminates against women. It's incredibly depressing and feels like so much of what women have fought for in sports is being ripped out from under them. I mean, weren't we just a few years ago discussing the inequality in pay for women's football vs. men's football? Now we're just back to hoping there actually will be a women's football.

It should go without saying but I'll say it anyway. I respect and will support any person's right to present themselves to the world however they choose to do so and however it makes them feel the most comfortable. But there are some areas where your biological sex does and should matter - like sports. Otherwise we will lose women's sports.



Jesthar said:


> Oh, if you are looking for coherent logic, the gender debate is the not the place to be looking... I've just finished reading an article in which a scientific researcher actually said that there is no such thing as a male or female brain (which I agree with), then goes on to argue that is one of the things that means being trans is real (um, how?).
> 
> My brand of autism means I am hyper-logical. It's what makes me so very good with computers. But I also love to know how and why things work - including people, so I find psychology fascinating too. And the weird thing is, psychology is also (usually) pretty logical. Irrational, maybe, but in a logical way (if that makes sense!).
> 
> So between the two, I've found myself putting a lot of thought into the whole topic, especially as I was part girly part tomboy as a kid. I suppose nowadays they'd try and figure out which of the 72 (yes, 72 - last time I looked anyway) genders I fitted, but thankfully I (and my parents) had a more straightforwards approach - if I enjoyed doing something that wasn't considered 'usual' for a biological girl to do, who cares? All of those 'this is for girls, this is for boys' rules are artificial, and what I was interested in didn't define me, I defined my interests.
> 
> Despite all the effort, though, I keep hitting the same blocker - all the definitions focus on HOW someone feels, but no-one ever seems to explain or even explore WHY people feel that way. And with psychology, WHY is key. But despite all my googling prowess, I've struggled to find any accounts that say "I don't feel <insert biology here>, and these are the specific reasons why I don't feel <insert biology here>"


I wonder how history will remember this period. I feel like we're not only failing women, but the trans community as well. I feel like there are conversations to be had that could help trans people, and we're not having them. I feel like there are avenues to explore to better help trans and gender dysphoric youth that we're not exploring - to the detriment of a lot of people who deserve better support than we're giving them.


----------



## mrs phas

Jesthar said:


> I suppose nowadays they'd try and figure out which of the 72 (yes, 72 - last time I looked anyway) genders I fitted


72
This is getting totally out of hand now
I don't care if anyone want to identify as anything, from an aardvaark to a zedonk, and everything inbetween
But
Their are only 2 identifiable, physical genders at birth, male and female
Plus
Identifiable anomalies of those two, such as intersex (I'm sure there are others my Brian's at status level mush ATM)

Any other, so called, genders are anomalies with how someone's brain works, and again, I totally accept that, no one can foresee how another's brain will develop 
And 
If I accept that my sons pre development and developing brain, made him autistic (and he was at birth, not because of some Wakefield quakery)
I have to accept that pre development and further development of A.N. Others brain, can make them gender dysphoric
But
To say there are 72 genders (at least) is just risible
No wonder these self identifiers attract such loathing and ridicule

I'm fast begining to give up with the whole trans community tbh, the whole attitude of
If your not with us
Then you're against us
Makes me so angry
Whatever happened to being supportive without having to be militant about it
Whatever happened to
Above all be kind to each other?
I'm all for
"Be out, be loud, be proud"
But
I'm damned sure that I will not be an apologist for being a heterosexual, biological, female and damned proud of it
And
I will not allow any :Chicken in a frock, make me feel otherwise


----------



## Deguslave

I do wonder, if I'd have been born a few years later, if I'd have been pushed towards the trans pigeon hole because I didn't as a child, and still don't, fit the stereotypical idea of a woman. And it's quite possible that if I was 30 or 40 years younger, and an impressionable youth, I may have had people trying to tell me that I'm trans.

I don't like human children, and never wanted any, if it ain't got four legs, fur or feathers, I ain't interested. I never wear makeup, I hate the way it feels on my skin and I hate the way it makes me feel wearing it. I haven't seen a hairdresser since I was a kid (I'm in my late 50s now) and don't even own a hairdryer, straighteners or even conditioner and I wouldn't know the latest fashion if I fell over it. Nor do I want or need a man around.

But I'm still a woman, I was born a woman, I'm happy being a woman, I just don't understand other women. And none of that makes me trans.


----------



## kimthecat

There's an advert for Always saying 61% of young people felt ashamed for having a period. theres a young girl in the photo . People?


----------



## Cleo38

Deguslave said:


> I do wonder, if I'd have been born a few years later, if I'd have been pushed towards the trans pigeon hole because I didn't as a child, and still don't, fit the stereotypical idea of a woman. And it's quite possible that if I was 30 or 40 years younger, and an impressionable youth, I may have had people trying to tell me that I'm trans.
> 
> I don't like human children, and never wanted any, if it ain't got four legs, fur or feathers, I ain't interested. I never wear makeup, I hate the way it feels on my skin and I hate the way it makes me feel wearing it. I haven't seen a hairdresser since I was a kid (I'm in my late 50s now) and don't even own a hairdryer, straighteners or even conditioner and I wouldn't know the latest fashion if I fell over it. Nor do I want or need a man around.
> 
> But I'm still a woman, I was born a woman, I'm happy being a woman, I just don't understand other women. And none of that makes me trans.


And this is what makes being a woman (or a man) so complex, we don't fit stereotypes & that's normal. I have never wanted children, never felt any maternal instinct towards a human baby but like you, am very different when it comes to animals.

I find it sad that younger people may be pushed in to labelling themselves so early when they are going through such a confusing tiome when it comes to their body & their emotions. Medications & surgical procedures should not be an option for someone so young & I don't understand why so many groups seem keen to want to rush these through. It's not patronising or 'transphobic' to want people to wait & to discuss because such drastic measures may not be warranted.

I


----------



## Jobeth

In over 30 years of working in schools I have only had one child that has transitioned and they knew from when they were in foundation stage. My cousin is also transgender and knew early on. I have never seen schools/teachers forcing labels on children and that child was dealt with incredibly sensitively. A lot of the issue is down to how the media presents what they think is happening.


----------



## Cleo38

Jobeth said:


> In over 30 years of working in schools I have only had one child that has transitioned and they knew from when they were in foundation stage. My cousin is also transgender and knew early on. I have never seen schools/teachers forcing labels on children and that child was dealt with incredibly sensitively.* A lot of the issue is down to how the media presents what they think is happening*.


I agree, but then I also think that there are some very vocal groups who seem to think children know exactly how they feel when they don't always. growing up is so complicated, for some very much more than others. I am saying we should ignore their feelings at all but we should be mindful of giving medication (where there is no real studies regarding long terms effects) or recommending life changing surgery. Am sure that osyt groups don;t do this but some do which is very scary

There was discussion on a group recently from some insisting that George in the Famous Five books was 'definitely' trans when there was no mention of this except that she was more of a tom boy ....how does that signify she was trans? I loved those books growing up & she was my favourite character as I was more like her than prissy Ann 

For me that is wrong on so many levels, as it enforces so many stereotypes that I thought we had moved away from & sort of belittles how complex it must be for genuine trans people.


----------



## Dimwit

Cleo38 said:


> There was discussion on a group recently from some insisting that George in the Famous Five books was 'definitely' trans when there was no mention of this except that she was more of a tom boy ....how does that signify she was trans? I loved those books growing up & she was my favourite character as I was more like her than prissy Ann
> 
> For me that is wrong on so many levels, as it enforces so many stereotypes that I thought we had moved away from & sort of belittles how complex it must be for genuine trans people.


Absolutely. George got to go off and have adventures while Ann got to stay behind and wash the dishes. I know which I'd rather do!
While I know that there are some people who absolutely know from a young age that they are trans (and I would 100% support them) I feel that there are too many young people (especially girls) who either don't conform to gender stereotype, or may be confused about their gender identity or sexuality who are being persuaded by the powerful trans lobby that they are trans and are being railroaded into taking hormone therapy or opting for major surgery. That is wrong and damaging. Of course these people need support and it is obviously a huge help to them to know that they are not alone, but that support should come from people who don't have an agenda.


----------



## O2.0

Deguslave said:


> I do wonder, if I'd have been born a few years later, if I'd have been pushed towards the trans pigeon hole because I didn't as a child, and still don't, fit the stereotypical idea of a woman. And it's quite possible that if I was 30 or 40 years younger, and an impressionable youth, I may have had people trying to tell me that I'm trans.
> 
> I don't like human children, and never wanted any, if it ain't got four legs, fur or feathers, I ain't interested. I never wear makeup, I hate the way it feels on my skin and I hate the way it makes me feel wearing it. I haven't seen a hairdresser since I was a kid (I'm in my late 50s now) and don't even own a hairdryer, straighteners or even conditioner and I wouldn't know the latest fashion if I fell over it. Nor do I want or need a man around.
> 
> But I'm still a woman, I was born a woman, I'm happy being a woman, I just don't understand other women. And none of that makes me trans.


This is one of those conversations that I think would be helpful. 
Why aren't we talking about being more accepting of all the different incarnations of what it is to be a woman and making space for women to be whatever expression of themselves they want to be? Same with men. If effeminate men weren't bullied and shamed, if little boys weren't told to "man up" and not cry when they're sad...
When it becomes so hard to be different that you feel like you have to change your entire gender, isn't that a societal problem that should be addressed?

There has been a 4000% increase in gender dysphoria in young girls. Clearly there is something terrible ailing our young women, but the diagnosis of gender dysphoria can't be right. Why are we not figuring out what is causing this level of discomfort and address that instead of rushing to pump hormones in to them as if the problem is within them and has to be changed rather than seeing what the real problem is and addressing it.

As I've said before on this thread, if a generation of young men were fleeing manhood to this level we would be falling over ourselves to find out what's wrong, but when it's women, we happily let them take hormones that might sterilize them and let them have surgeries. Because a woman thinking the problem lies within themselves and not society is pretty much ingrained in to our entire cultural system....


----------



## Siskin

O2.0 said:


> This is one of those conversations that I think would be helpful.
> Why aren't we talking about being more accepting of all the different incarnations of what it is to be a woman and making space for women to be whatever expression of themselves they want to be? Same with men. If effeminate men weren't bullied and shamed, if little boys weren't told to "man up" and not cry when they're sad...
> When it becomes so hard to be different that you feel like you have to change your entire gender, isn't that a societal problem that should be addressed?
> 
> There has been a 4000% increase in gender dysphoria in young girls. Clearly there is something terrible ailing our young women, but the diagnosis of gender dysphoria can't be right. Why are we not figuring out what is causing this level of discomfort and address that instead of rushing to pump hormones in to them as if the problem is within them and has to be changed rather than seeing what the real problem is and addressing it.
> 
> As I've said before on this thread, if a generation of young men were fleeing manhood to this level we would be falling over ourselves to find out what's wrong, but when it's women, we happily let them take hormones that might sterilize them and let them have surgeries. Because a woman thinking the problem lies within themselves and not society is pretty much ingrained in to our entire cultural system....


I'm beginning to wonder if these young girls are trying to avoid oversexed boys who seem to be watching porn and thinking this is how girls are supposed to want sex. Saying your trans seems to me a good way of avoiding them

I suspect I would have labelled trans these days, very much a tomboy always wearing trousers and identified strongly with George in the Famous Five. Don't think I have changed that much really, but I'm definitely a women and don't want to be anything else


----------



## Deguslave

I think there's a little more to it than trying to avoid over sexed boys and men. But I need to share a true story with you that I've never told anyone before, and it may prove a point.

When I was in junior school, I was lucky enough to have access to a swimming pool on a pretty regular basis. The pool belonged to the education authority and was shared with the infants school. Those were the days when kids were taught to swim.

One afternoon they had scheduled extra time in the pool as it was a hot day, but I didn't want to go. I didn't fancy going swimming that day, I was bored with swimming to be honest, so I said I didn't want to go and I was quite happy reading instead. It was the first time I missed swimming and it was only the once.

But it was reported back to my parents that I was showing signs of being scared of the water! Luckily my parents had a very short attention span when it came to me so it was quickly forgotten, but what if my parents had picked that ball up and run with it......

Maybe, just maybe, there are too many parents picking the ball (no pun intended) up before the ball is even in the court, let alone in play.


----------



## Cleo38

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...en-Parliament-theyre-scared-say-woman-is.html

Well said Jenni Murray!!!!


----------



## mrs phas

Cleo38 said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...en-Parliament-theyre-scared-say-woman-is.html
> 
> Well said Jenni Murray!!!!





> AMANDA PLATELL
> 
> Mail columnist
> 
> A woman is a grown-up girl born from a female's womb. She enters this world with two X chromosomes. She has a womb and ovaries and develops breasts, designed to succour her own children. She has periods for most of her life, then she has the menopause. She is not born with a penis.


----------



## Cleo38

This is a really interesting & sad (& disturbing) account of how & why a young woman became a trans-boy but then de-transitioned.

By Any Other Name - by Helena - prude posting (substack.com)


----------



## Dimwit

Meanwhile in Missouri legislation has been proposed that will actually kill pregnant women
https://www.today.com/today/amp/rcna19683


----------



## Boxer123

Dimwit said:


> Meanwhile in Missouri legislation has been proposed that will actually kill pregnant women
> https://www.today.com/today/amp/rcna19683


I read about this it's shocking.


----------



## Lurcherlad

Dimwit said:


> Meanwhile in Missouri legislation has been proposed that will actually kill pregnant women
> https://www.today.com/today/amp/rcna19683


OMG!

I almost died when an ectopic pregnancy ruptured one of my Fallopian tubes at around 8 weeks … I was saved by emergency surgery.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

How can that even be allowed to be proposed? An ectopic, a life threatening emergency cannot be treated because of the rights of a fetus? Women will die as a result of this. 

Oh no, sorry, pregnant people. Not women.


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> This is a really interesting & sad (& disturbing) account of how & why a young woman became a trans-boy but then de-transitioned.
> 
> By Any Other Name - by Helena - prude posting (substack.com)


This is exactly what I was talking about when I said there are conversations we're not having and should be. Our youth is suffering that is very clear, but if we make everything about gender we may be missing some key information that could be so much more helpful for these young people than gender affirming care. Or simply don't put gender at the top of the mental health priority. Examine other areas as well. With teenagers there are so many!



Dimwit said:


> Meanwhile in Missouri legislation has been proposed that will actually kill pregnant women
> https://www.today.com/today/amp/rcna19683


I've been following this. I've said it before I'll say it again. If what you really want to do is prevent unwanted pregnancies, start legislating men's bodies. Men can impregnate innumerable women in one year. Realistically a woman can have one child a year, every once in a while two if she pops out twins. Men are the problem here, not women. 
But it's never about legislating men's bodies.

There was a beautiful article written about late term abortions that I read many years ago, and of course can't find it anymore. But essentially the woman was pregnant with a much wanted child. Not that it should matter but she was married, financially stable, and well prepared to have this baby. A routine ultrasound revealed the fetus was developing normally, without a brain. The child would basically be born, and then die. 
So she went home an prepared herself to carry the baby to term and grieve the loss when the child came. 
But then, she had to go about her life, as a pregnant woman, now very much showing, very clearly pregnant. At the grocery checkout line well meaning people would comment on her pregnancy, coworkers were saying how great she looked and asking how the nursery was coming along. And every single day she had to juggle dealing with the loss and how and if to share it. It got to be too much. 
So she chose to abort. And yes, it would be a late term abortion. A choice she made carefully with her doctor and her partner.

My whole point of that sad story was to say that abortion is a personal decision between a woman (yes, a WOMAN) and her doctor. That's it. It's none of the state's damn business and the worst thing we ever did was involving the law in a medical procedure.


----------



## MollySmith

One of my best friends is trans, born a woman to a Jewish family and went through gruelling surgery to become a man, lost all his family connections and his nephew took his own life due to gender confusion at a time when one had to be either male or female but born into a vacuum of silence with no role models or support. My gorgeous godchild is binary and bisexual. It's how they are comfortable at 21. A client is binary and in a relationship with a woman and a man. My brother is childfree (a choice). It is not my place to understand, but I respect and listen.

I have learned so much from both presenting a podcast for three years on the 100 ways not to be a parent (not by choice), and also as neurodiverse. The big one is that there isn't a typical person. We may have the reproductive bits but they don't always work (only in 72% of people) or we may not want to use them! But there are a lot of people willing to pontificate or pass judgement on stuff in which they have no experience for whatever reason. It can really impact in mental welfare and recovery.

When we podcast presenters as male/female white heterosexual married folk want to talk about ethnicity and infertility, we hand our _entire_ platform to life experienced, respected speaker/s. Ditto LGBTQI+, single people, religion and childloss. We learn with our listeners and together we find threads and connections that we may share and connect but we listen to voices in the first person not edited third person accounts maybe edited by those who have bias (I have appeared in mainstream media articles and in two cases my words completely misappropriated with no proof check before publication). It's okay to ask - it's how we learn - but getting answers doesn't make one an expert (JK Rowling could hand her Twitter account to someone with lived experience maybe) *** because empathy only goes so far before we add in our feelings and opinions as complex beings.

Feels like folk push these rules and bills through with no lived experienced based on what rules and history dictate are society norms. And that's so dangerous, a man pushing through a bill that places pregnant women at risk is truly 'effed' up but not surprising. IWD eh? 

*** edit - on Twitter this afternoon she is trending after claiming to speak for LGBTQ and there is pushback from some who identify as LGBTQ+ on her qualification to do so. Merely an example to give context as a well known tweeter and debater many will know and perhaps follow.


----------



## O2.0

MollySmith said:


> (JK Rowling could hand her Twitter account to someone with lived experience maybe)


JK Rowling has lived experience being a woman. I think that more than qualifies her to comment on what it is to be a woman and what it feels like to have that lived existence erased.


----------



## MollySmith

O2.0 said:


> JK Rowling has lived experience being a woman. I think that more than qualifies her to comment on what it is to be a woman and what it feels like to have that lived existence erased.


I didn't qualify the context, a poor edit on my part in my OP. Okay so this afternoon there is push back from a tweet that she speaks for LGBTQ people and many people are questioning how and why. It is lengthy.


----------



## O2.0

MollySmith said:


> I didn't qualify the context, a poor edit on my part in my OP. Okay so this afternoon there is push back from a tweet that she speaks for LGBTQ people and many people are questioning how and why. It is lengthy.


Do you have a link?


----------



## Pawscrossed

MollySmith said:


> One of my best friends is trans, born a woman to a Jewish family and went through gruelling surgery to become a man, lost all his family connections and his nephew took his own life due to gender confusion at a time when one had to be either male or female but born into a vacuum of silence with no role models or support. My gorgeous godchild is binary and bisexual. It's how they are comfortable at 21. A client is binary and in a relationship with a woman and a man. My brother is childfree (a choice). It is not my place to understand, but I respect and listen.
> 
> I have learned so much from both presenting a podcast for three years on the 100 ways not to be a parent (not by choice), and also as neurodiverse. The big one is that there isn't a typical person. We may have the reproductive bits but they don't always work (only in 72% of people) or we may not want to use them! But there are a lot of people willing to pontificate or pass judgement on stuff in which they have no experience for whatever reason. It can really impact in mental welfare and recovery.
> 
> When we podcast presenters as male/female white heterosexual married folk want to talk about ethnicity and infertility, we hand our _entire_ platform to life experienced, respected speaker/s. Ditto LGBTQI+, single people, religion and childloss. We learn with our listeners and together we find threads and connections that we may share and connect but we listen to voices in the first person not edited third person accounts maybe edited by those who have bias (I have appeared in mainstream media articles and in two cases my words completely misappropriated with no proof check before publication). *It's okay to ask - it's how we learn - but getting answers doesn't make one an expert* (JK Rowling could hand her Twitter account to someone with lived experience maybe) *** because empathy only goes so far before we add in our feelings and opinions as complex beings.
> 
> Feels like folk push these rules and bills through with no lived experienced based on what rules and history dictate are society norms. And that's so dangerous, a man pushing through a bill that places pregnant women at risk is truly 'effed' up but not surprising. IWD eh?
> 
> *** edit - on Twitter this afternoon she is trending after claiming to speak for LGBTQ and there is pushback from some who identify as LGBTQ+ on her qualification to do so. Merely an example to give context as a well known tweeter and debater many will know and perhaps follow.


Here here to listening. My stepchild is binary. Opinions are fraught with dangers because they are read in an opinion column newspaper or some Z list celeb with - as you say 'no lived experience' - says such. Which is not okay if becomes a stronger voice than the person at the heart. Which often the case because those what shout the loudest or have the biggest following get heard. Doesn't make them right!

It happened a lot with Covid. Neil Oliver comes to mind unfortunately. And Giles Coren.


----------



## Deguslave

I had two friends, we unfortunately lost contact when I did a distance move, who were a trans couple - male to female and female to male. Both lost their families as a result, and as soon as anyone outside of their supportive friends found out they were both in transition the question was always they same, 'if they still want to be a couple, why can't they just stay as they are?' If only it were that simple.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> JK Rowling has lived experience being a woman. I think that more than qualifies her to comment on what it is to be a woman and what it feels like to have that lived existence erased.


To hear our Labour MPs this week yet again stumble & hesitate over trying to define the word woman I honestly feel feminism has taken such a huge hit & us women are being disregarded yet again in favour of biological males.

IMO JK Rowling has a platform where she defends my rights as a woman. A platform that many women now do not have as they are terrified of cancel culture, or abuse/threats from the most vocal hard line pro trans lobbyists.

I am sick of it tbh


----------



## Lurcherlad

#biologicalwomenmattertoo


----------



## MollySmith

O2.0 said:


> Do you have a link?


If you search her on Twitter her feed comes up.


----------



## picaresque

Cleo38 said:


> IMO JK Rowling has a platform where she defends my rights as a woman. A platform that many women now do not have as they are terrified of cancel culture, or abuse/threats from the most vocal hard line pro trans lobbyists.


J K Rowling is thankfully uncancellable (don't think that's a word but ykwim) despite best efforts. She has 'f*** you' money and none of her $$$ franchises can exist without her say-so.


----------



## MollySmith

Deguslave said:


> I had two friends, we unfortunately lost contact when I did a distance move, who were a trans couple - male to female and female to male. Both lost their families as a result, and as soon as anyone outside of their supportive friends found out they were both in transition the question was always they same, 'if they still want to be a couple, why can't they just stay as they are?' If only it were that simple.


Good grief.


----------



## Cleo38

picaresque said:


> J K Rowling is thankfully uncancellable (don't think that's a word but ykwim) despite best efforts. She has 'f*** you' money and none of her $$$ franchises can exist without her say-so.


Exactly! Shes been on fire this week with her retorts to idiots trying to shut her up


----------



## O2.0

MollySmith said:


> If you search her on Twitter her feed comes up.


I'm not on twitter and all I've been able to come up with through google is her mentioning lesbians, who are, you know, women. So again, I don't see the issue with a woman speaking as a woman and sharing the experience of what it is to be a biological woman.


----------



## MollySmith

O2.0 said:


> I'm not on twitter and all I've been able to come up with through google is her mentioning lesbians, who are, you know, women. So again, I don't see the issue with a woman speaking as a woman and sharing the experience of what it is to be a biological woman.


She is indeed giving a voice to women (including lesbians who yes, are women - I was aware of this, but thank you for the reminder, always helpful). So again, I don't see the issue with a woman speaking as a woman and sharing the experience of what it is to biological woman.

It was the broad qualification and listening that was the point in my post not JK Rowling, I've never had any trans friend undermine my view or experiences as a biological woman, it's anything but unless I have completely missed it.


----------



## MollySmith

O2.0 said:


> I'm not on twitter and all I've been able to come up with through google is her mentioning lesbians, who are, you know, women. So again, I don't see the issue with a woman speaking as a woman and sharing the experience of what it is to be a biological woman.


I don't know if this works for those not on Twitter but here is one hashtag 
https://mobile.twitter.com/search?q=#JKDoesntSpeakForMe&src=trend_click&vertical=trends

For balance the second 
https://mobile.twitter.com/search?q=#IStandWithJKRowling&src=trend_click&vertical=trends

Both should provide a link to the source tweets too.


----------



## O2.0

MollySmith said:


> I don't know if this works for those not on Twitter but here is one hashtag
> https://mobile.twitter.com/search?q=#JKDoesntSpeakForMe&src=trend_click&vertical=trends
> 
> For balance the second
> https://mobile.twitter.com/search?q=#IStandWithJKRowling&src=trend_click&vertical=trends
> 
> Both should provide a link to the source tweets too.


Okay, so she said that gays and lesbians - especially lesbians, are under attack. Which they are. When a lesbian isn't interested in a trans woman she's called trans-phobic and a vagina fetishist. Essentially erasing the whole homosexuality experience.
Kind of like how the whole experience of being a woman becomes erased in the current climate.

I'm sorry I don't really understand what you mean by "broad qualification and listening."
Who are we not listening to?
I personally think there is a whole contingent of the trans community that is not being listened to, who don't want self ID, who take 'passing' very seriously and are offended by things like 72 genders.
There are abused women who are not being listened to.
There are lesbians who don't want to date trans women who are not being listened to.
And there is an ever increasing community of detransitioners who aren't being listened to


----------



## MollySmith

O2.0 said:


> Okay, so she said that gays and lesbians - especially lesbians, are under attack. Which they are. When a lesbian isn't interested in a trans woman she's called trans-phobic and a vagina fetishist. Essentially erasing the whole homosexuality experience.
> Kind of like how the whole experience of being a woman becomes erased in the current climate.
> 
> I'm sorry I don't really understand what you mean by "broad qualification and listening."
> Who are we not listening to?
> I personally think there is a whole contingent of the trans community that is not being listened to, who don't want self ID, who take 'passing' very seriously and are offended by things like 72 genders.
> There are abused women who are not being listened to.
> There are lesbians who don't want to date trans women who are not being listened to.


My point was about men - and people - who become experts based on knowledge acquired by third person/osmosis and not direct conversation.

Re Rowling. I skimmed over links ive posted (having not read Rowling's books or followed her and seeing also that a good friend who is a well known queer author is baffled by the latest tweet) I can see there is push back over the vague 'authority' - perhaps it's the wording. Unless I've missed something, her experiences as a heterosexual woman will be entirely different to LGBTQI+ community. There is a danger maybe of her voice being so loud it drowns those who have lived experiences perhaps.

Not agreeing or disagreeing. And literally spent five mins looking and clearly a lot more to it.


----------



## £54etgfb6

MollySmith said:


> My point was about men - and people - who become experts based on knowledge acquired by third person/osmosis and not direct conversation.
> 
> Re Rowling. I skimmed over links ive posted (having not read Rowling's books or followed her and seeing also that a good friend who is a well known queer author is baffled by the latest tweet) I can see there is push back over the vague 'authority' - perhaps it's the wording. Unless I've missed something, her experiences as a heterosexual woman will be entirely different to LGBTQI+ community. There is a danger maybe of her voice being so loud it drowns those who have lived experiences perhaps.
> 
> Not agreeing or disagreeing. And literally spent five mins looking and clearly a lot more to it.


A lot of the LGBT community saying "JK Rowling does not represent our community" is in part because 1) As far as she has stated, she is not a member of the LGBT community and therefore cannot represent us (I don't represent the black community as a white person or the Polish community as a Scottish person) and 2) She shoehorned a gay character into her work after the work was already published for no reason because it was a hot topic and she wanted to appeal to a young audience. She has done nothing for gay rights aside from using us for clout and so a lot of the community dislike her and disagree with the thought of her representing our -rightly protected- community. Regardless of whether or not anyone identifying as a lesbian has contacted her to say they agree with her opinions, a large portion of the community dislike her anyway for a wide variety of reasons that are *not* limited to trans-rights. So while some people may disagree with her and believe she's transphobic, others will not want her associated with the LGBT community because they dislike her for other reasons.


----------



## Cleo38

MollySmith said:


> When we podcast presenters as male/female white heterosexual married folk want to talk about ethnicity and infertility, we hand our _entire_ platform to life experienced, respected speaker/s. Ditto LGBTQI+, single people, religion and childloss .


Have you not considered that the LGBT people she might be speaking about are too scared to speak out? This is a subject where death threats are issued, women are hounded from their jobs, they are physically assaulted, their addresses published online, they are threatened both in RL & online & it's ok as they 'deserve' it because of their opinions?!

I have never, ever experienced such disgusting hatred & threats of violence online until I commented on a couple of posts supporting JK Rowling on a literary FB page. The irony of these people claiming to be inclusive is not lost on me but obviously is on them. IMO it is typical male violence
_


----------



## Mrs Funkin

My head spins with the fear of saying the wrong thing now. There has been a case where a pregnant person has changed hospitals because the midwife referred to them with a female pronoun. I don’t for one minute suspect she did it as a malicious act. 

All of our policy documents are changing their language to “pregnant people” - though I am informed that there is a bit of a backlash from women demanding that they not be removed. There have also been cases where colleagues have put in an incident form complaining that the wrong language is being used. I just think it’s madness - if you hear a colleague using what is deemed to be the incorrect language, why don’t you just talk to them about it? I’m fairly sure you’d get a more favourable response than someone submitting an incident about you and then you get hauled over the coals as a result?


----------



## Deguslave

Mrs Funkin said:


> My head spins with the fear of saying the wrong thing now. There has been a case where a pregnant person has changed hospitals because the midwife referred to them with a female pronoun. I don't for one minute suspect she did it as a malicious act.
> 
> All of our policy documents are changing their language to "pregnant people" - though I am informed that there is a bit of a backlash from women demanding that they not be removed. There have also been cases where colleagues have put in an incident form complaining that the wrong language is being used. I just think it's madness - if you hear a colleague using what is deemed to be the incorrect language, why don't you just talk to them about it? I'm fairly sure you'd get a more favourable response than someone submitting an incident about you and then you get hauled over the coals as a result?


I think it depends where you work.

There are certain industry sectors where ALL complaints about colleagues have to be raised as a grievance with HR. I know, I've worked in a couple. Its a stupid and childish way to run any business, but it is the way it is, and if I were to speak to the colleague I had the issue with, a grievance would be raised against me for being aggressive. One colleague had a grievance raised because she hadn't noticed when someone walked in her office so she didn't immediately say 'hello.'


----------



## Pawscrossed

MollySmith said:


> My point was about men - and people - who become experts based on knowledge acquired by third person/osmosis and not direct conversation.
> 
> Re Rowling. I skimmed over links ive posted (having not read Rowling's books or followed her and seeing also that a good friend who is a well known queer author is baffled by the latest tweet) I can see there is push back over the vague 'authority' - perhaps it's the wording. Unless I've missed something, her experiences as a heterosexual woman will be entirely different to LGBTQI+ community. There is a danger maybe of her voice being so loud it drowns those who have lived experiences perhaps.
> 
> Not agreeing or disagreeing. And literally spent five mins looking and clearly a lot more to it.


I understand your point. Not all battles are JK Rowlings fight, leave space for others. I speak as partner to a man who is relentlessly targeted by racism. I'd love to yell, defend and kick butt but I can be supportive. Share a bit, but I do not and never will represent him.

JK Rowling can't be all things to everyone in her audience, but she's giving it a good go but as a bisexual woman, it's not actually my voice or anything close it. A misrepresentation. There are better spokespersons, charities. Me thinks it may have begun with good intentions and still is, but Twitter isn't the platform and people, however well meaning, could be perceived as jumping on a bandwagon. Intentions become twisted which also happens on PF


----------



## Mrs Funkin

I work for the NHS @Deguslave and our incident reporting system just goes to one of several clinical people, who then delegate it out to be dealt with/investigated. It doesn't go near HR as a matter of course if it's done via the clinical incident reporting.


----------



## Cleo38

Mrs Funkin said:


> My head spins with the fear of saying the wrong thing now. There has been a case where a pregnant person has changed hospitals because the midwife referred to them with a female pronoun. I don't for one minute suspect she did it as a malicious act.
> 
> All of our policy documents are changing their language to "pregnant people" - though I am informed that there is a bit of a backlash from women demanding that they not be removed. There have also been cases where colleagues have put in an incident form complaining that the wrong language is being used. I just think it's madness - if you hear a colleague using what is deemed to be the incorrect language, why don't you just talk to them about it? I'm fairly sure you'd get a more favourable response than someone submitting an incident about you and then you get hauled over the coals as a result?


It is definitely a fear culture in some places. I'll bet some people would be horrified if they worked in construction (as I do) as the sort of language that is used would be far too 'triggering' for some! That's not to say people aren't respectful, they are (mainly) but there is a very harsh mentality & you just have to get on with it, Tbh I would take that every single time than worrying constantly about getting bloody pro nouns (or whatever) wrong & people crying about it.

I am so glad there is a backlash regarding this 'pregnant people' or 'chest feeding' nonsense


----------



## MollySmith

Cleo38 said:


> Have you not considered that the LGBT people she might be speaking about are too scared to speak out? This is a subject where death threats are issued, women are hounded from their jobs, they are physically assaulted, their addresses published online, they are threatened both in RL & online & it's ok as they 'deserve' it because of their opinions?!
> 
> I have never, ever experienced such disgusting hatred & threats of violence online until I commented on a couple of posts supporting JK Rowling on a literary FB page. The irony of these people claiming to be inclusive is not lost on me but obviously is on them. IMO it is typical male violence
> _


Absolutely. Thank you, that's very true and I'm sorry you have such experiences of abuse, people are thugs online. It's unnerving.

As I mentioned, my trans friend, nephew.... numerous people subject to awful judgments, threats. It's hideous and it's good she gives a voice and raising awareness. As an aside I have received and reported one death threat and three rape threats in the past two years for sharing my story so I'm very aware of the cause and effect. I was demoted in one job too. It's not perhaps as significant as some of the accounts I've heard but still scary.

There is some awful stuff online about equality in numerous areas of publishing and literacy atm too.

Again, not disagreeing or agreeing but observing. You've reminded me it isn't so clear cut.


----------



## MollySmith

Pawscrossed said:


> I understand your point. Not all battles are JK Rowlings fight, leave space for others. I speak as partner to a man who is relentlessly targeted by racism. I'd love to yell, defend and kick butt but I can be supportive. Share a bit, but I do not and never will represent him.
> 
> JK Rowling can't be all things to everyone in her audience, but she's giving it a good go but as a bisexual woman, it's not actually my voice or anything close it. A misrepresentation. There are better spokespersons, charities. Me thinks it may have begun with good intentions and still is, but Twitter isn't the platform and people, however well meaning, could be perceived as jumping on a bandwagon. Intentions become twisted which also happens on PF


I remember you talking about your experiences with your partner on here and the contextualisation is helpful. Yes, Twitter is lawless. I am constantly surprised - horrified - by what is allowed there.

I hope you're not thinking of Neil Oliver or Giles Coren today!


----------



## O2.0

Mrs Funkin said:


> My head spins with the fear of saying the wrong thing now. There has been a case where a pregnant person has changed hospitals because the midwife referred to them with a female pronoun. I don't for one minute suspect she did it as a malicious act.


Okay, time out.
This person is pregnant. So clearly a biological woman. And someone said "she." And this is considered a major incident?
I completely agree, how on earth is someone supposed to know that a pregnant person doesn't go by "she" and even if they did, can you not be a little understanding of a slip-up?

Blair White is one of the few vocal trans women who speaks out against this sort of craziness. Her take on pronouns is that she made a choice to transition and pass as a woman so that there wouldn't be any question about what pronouns to use. If you were to ask her what pronouns she prefers she would be highly insulted. "I didn't spend all that time transitioning for there to be any question about what pronouns to use with me!"



Cleo38 said:


> Tbh I would take that every single time than worrying constantly about getting bloody pro nouns (or whatever) wrong & people crying about it.


I think I've told this before, when I was in my 20's living in Colorado I was a lot skinnier, and as a tall woman with broad shoulders and short hair, and so many occasions I was called "sir" accidentally in the winter when we're all bundled up and body shape isn't as evident. As soon as I turn around or the person gets a better look at me, they apologize, and that's it. Why is this such a big deal? It's not.


----------



## Cleo38

MollySmith said:


> Absolutely. Thank you, that's very true and I'm sorry you have such experiences of abuse, people are thugs online. It's unnerving.
> 
> As I mentioned, my trans friend, nephew.... numerous people subject to awful judgments, threats. It's hideous and it's good she gives a voice and raising awareness. As an aside I have received and reported one death threat and three rape threats in the past two years for sharing my story so I'm very aware of the cause and effect. I was demoted in one job too. It's not perhaps as significant as some of the accounts I've heard but still scary.
> 
> There is some awful stuff online about equality in numerous areas of publishing and literacy atm too.
> 
> Again, not disagreeing or agreeing but observing. You've reminded me it isn't so clear cut.


Personally I honestly don't care about the threats. I usually screen shot them & then send to the family/friends of the sender. Luckily some of them have also tagged their employer on their profile details so I will send to them as well to demonstrate how effectively they are promoting their company.

But ... this is not ok. Threats of rape (being choked by a 'lady dick' is the most common one I have had) is a male response & these people are behaving in a stereotypical way yet they are allowed to get away with this but women who speak out are removed from social media or positions at work, etc How is this acceptable? What happened to Kathleen Stock was disgusting & reeked of good old fashioned misogyny but dressed up as 21st century inclusivity


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> reeked of good old fashioned misogyny but dressed up as 21st century inclusivity


You've said it perfectly right here. 
The trans women in sports debate. 
The hormones for prepubescent children debate.
The self-ID debate.
Pronouns
TERF

It's all misogyny in some incarnation or another. But because it has a progressive, liberal, inclusive label we fail to see it for what it is.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> You've said it perfectly right here.
> The trans women in sports debate.
> The hormones for prepubescent children debate.
> The self-ID debate.
> Pronouns
> TERF
> 
> It's all misogyny in some incarnation or another. But because it has a progressive, liberal, inclusive label we fail to see it for what it is.


Agreed. I was just watching the Blaire White YT conversation regarding paedophiles 're-branding' as MAP's. Unfortunately I am not shocked, this was bound to happen & did happen here in the 1970's when a group called PIE (Paedophile Information Exchange) group tactually got government grants as they tried to align themselves with LGBT groups of the time.

I honestly can see this happening again


----------



## O2.0

Wow @Cleo38 I remember being so annoyed with the anti homosexual argument that if we allowed gay marriage then bestiality and pedophilia would be next, I remember thinking how stupid can you be to not understand something so basic as consent. I'm thinking the same thing now.



bmr10 said:


> A lot of the LGBT community saying "JK Rowling does not represent our community" is in part because 1) As far as she has stated, she is not a member of the LGBT community and therefore cannot represent us (I don't represent the black community as a white person or the Polish community as a Scottish person)


Sorry if I'm being dense but where is JK Rowling speaking for the LGBT community? Where is she saying she represents the LGBT community?
She simply said that people had contacted her and feel like they're under attack, as she too is under attack.
When a Latino says to a black person that they know what it's like to be a minority because they too are a minority is that speaking for black people or simply empathizing with a shared experience of being a minority?
I don't know, but I do know that I don't see anything malicious in anything JK Rowling has said, but a lot malicious in how some people have responded to her.


----------



## kimthecat

Saw this on Twitter.

I'm not a cervix holder 
I'm not a menstrator
I'm not a cis -woman 

I am a woman. You will not rename me.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Blair White is one of the few vocal trans women who speaks out against this sort of craziness. Her take on pronouns is that she made a choice to transition and pass as a woman so that there wouldn't be any question about what pronouns to use. If you were to ask her what pronouns she prefers she would be highly insulted. "I didn't spend all that time transitioning for there to be any question about what pronouns to use with me!"


Hahahaha, that is such a fantastic response!


----------



## £54etgfb6

O2.0 said:


> Sorry if I'm being dense but where is JK Rowling speaking for the LGBT community? Where is she saying she represents the LGBT community?
> She simply said that people had contacted her and feel like they're under attack, as she too is under attack.
> When a Latino says to a black person that they know what it's like to be a minority because they too are a minority is that speaking for black people or simply empathizing with a shared experience of being a minority?
> I don't know, but I do know that I don't see anything malicious in anything JK Rowling has said, but a lot malicious in how some people have responded to her.


I didn't say JK spoke for or represented the LGBT community, I said that others _feel_ she is and I stated that as a straight, cis woman she cannot realistically represent us. I don't personally think her tweet spoke for any community, certainly not one I am part of. Her tweet spoke on behalf of people who share the same opinion as her. Just because that group includes some lesbians does not imply she is taking a role as a spokesperson for the queer community, in my view.


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> Hahahaha, that is such a fantastic response!


Isn't it?
But it also (to me) highlights how a lot of this craziness around pronouns and self ID is hurtful to the transgender community.
If biological sex isn't a *thing* then is the effort that all these trans people who have successfully transitioned and have completely integrated in to society as specifically women or men completely wasted? Why bother transitioning if sex isn't real?
It's not just women being erased but trans women who have worked so hard to pass as women, their efforts and experience is being erased too.


----------



## O2.0

Hopefully this counts as 'lived experience' a transwoman speaking on trans issues. 
She makes an interesting comparison between the gay rights movement and the trans right movement.






"Flat earthers of gender" is one of my favorite quips. And pretty accurate!


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Hopefully this counts as 'lived experience' a transwoman speaking on trans issues.
> She makes an interesting comparison between the gay rights movement and the trans right movement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Flat earthers of gender" is one of my favorite quips. And pretty accurate!


I love her!!! She speaks so much sense. I also agree that I think there are more divisions now as people are far more worried about saying the wrong thing they actively avoid conversations.

From a personal POV I also have had to remind myself that most trans people are not these hard line militant's who seem to dominate social media. Thanks for posting about her, I started following her now on YT & IG


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> From a personal POV I also have had to remind myself that most trans people are not these hard line militant's who seem to dominate social media. Thanks for posting about her, I started following her now on YT & IG


I think what jumps out for me in this vein is that there is a large contingent of the trans and LGBT community who is being silenced as well. It's dangerous to speak out like Blaire if you have a 'regular' job or certainly a government job. 
Thank goodness for people like her and JK Rowling and John McWorter who point out fallacies and "flat earth" science denying madness when they see it.


----------



## O2.0

Short 'n sweet opinion piece on JK Rowling:
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jk-rowling-trans-rights-harry-potter-b2036177.html

"I neither wish to worship or condemn her; rather, I simply think we should all get over the fact that a 56-year-old woman has dared to air a legitimate opinion over a deeply divisive issue.
First of all, it really needn't be this way - the whole situation is an absurd mess. Gender-critical women and those who would like to discuss their rights are too often shunned by the left, who are unduly distrustful of their position. On the other hand, those who identify as trans or who are gender-dysphoric are understandably fearful of a bigoted backlash, when they simply wish to live an authentic, peaceful and happy life.
This issue is complex and requires careful consideration, as _both _parties are an oppressed category. Women do not hold some sort of privileged stake in this debate. And yet it often feels as if we are a nuisance for suggesting that is the case.
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand that allowing a male-bodied person - no questions asked - into a vulnerable female space could potentially lead to unscrupulous men taking advantage of a loophole. It is my belief that those who blind themselves to this risk are doing it either because they're naive, or they are simply willing to relegate women's safety in the name of faux-progressivism.
(...)
I was struck by a tweet sent to Rowling a couple of days ago. It read: "You really want your legacy to die on this hill?" Rowling sent a fitting riposte but surely, the fact a woman can metaphorically die on a hill for an opinion proves why her presence is so valid in the first place. I am in no doubt that her legacy will remain intact, perhaps even furthered by her bravery."


----------



## kimthecat

Is this for real ? I can't believe it !

This was posted on twitter by author of baby books etc Millie Hill . 
https://twitter.com/millihill
I bring you today's #erasureoftheday, over on Instagram, from period product company
@its_yoppie










.


----------



## O2.0

kimthecat said:


> Is this for real ? I can't believe it !
> 
> This was posted on twitter by author of baby books etc Millie Hill .
> I bring you today's #erasureoftheday, over on Instagram, from period product company
> @its_yoppie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


I don't think I understand. Is she trying to sell me menstrual products? Why didn't she use the word "menstruation"? 
I don't know what a bleeder is? If I cut my finger it bleeds. If it bleeds badly I will apply pressure and possibly get stitches and maybe get some antibiotics and possibly a tetanus shot. That's bleeding.

Menstruation is not something I describe as "bleeding." It's not an open wound that needs to be staunched, it is a perfectly normal biological function for most women of reproductive age that doesn't require any medical attention or intervention. Why are we turning normal biological functions in to something that it's not?

It's still menstruation if you're a trans man who has a period. It's still menstruation if you're non binary and you have a period. 
Biological women menstruate. 
Geez! It really is like the flat earthers of gender!


----------



## kimthecat

I don't do Instagram so I can't check if that is genuine .

If you live in London , calling someone a bleeder is a bit rude and a mild insult.


----------



## Lurcherlad

kimthecat said:


> I don't do Instagram so I can't check if that is genuine .
> 
> If you live in London , calling someone a bleeder is a bit rude and a mild insult.


I can't see they will be that popular with biological women with that way of referring to menstruation.

I would actually boycott any company that goes along those lines tbh.


----------



## O2.0

kimthecat said:


> I don't do Instagram so I can't check if that is genuine .
> 
> If you live in London , calling someone a bleeder is a bit rude and a mild insult.


I don't know it if was posted as a joke or what but it definitely was posted on instagram and happily every comment I've seen (I didn't scroll through all of them, there were a lot) was critical of their choice of language. Yes, also saying it's a derogatory term in England. Most commented on how dehumanizing it is to reduce women to "bleeders" - which it is


----------



## kimthecat

O2.0 said:


> I don't know it if was posted as a joke or what but it definitely was posted on instagram and happily every comment I've seen (I didn't scroll through all of them, there were a lot) was critical of their choice of language. Yes, also saying it's a derogatory term in England. Most commented on how dehumanizing it is to reduce women to "bleeders" - which it is


Thanks for checking it out. Im speechless really . It makes me think what is the world coming to.


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> Thanks for checking it out. Im speechless really . It makes me think what is the world coming to.


It's been posted on their own FB group with lots of angry women commenting on it but no response from the company as yet.

What a f*ck up! Talk about p*ssing off so much of your client base with such an ill thought out statement


----------



## kimthecat

Im looking forward to see what the company say and how they explain it.


----------



## Siskin

My feelings are that it’s a rude and unpleasant way of referring to menstruating women and frankly my reactions were how dare they. 
There doesn’t seem to be similar wording referring to men, they are just men.


----------



## O2.0

Siskin said:


> My feelings are that it's a rude and unpleasant way of referring to menstruating women and frankly my reactions were how dare they.
> There doesn't seem to be similar wording referring to men, they are just men.


To me, this is where the not-so-subtle misogyny of it all gets exposed. 
We're not seeing advertisements for prostate health referring to "prostate holders" or ads for viagra directed at "people with penises" 
Men are not being dehumanized to a body part or completely erased. Only women.


----------



## mrs phas

Cleo38 said:


> It's been posted on their own FB group with lots of angry women commenting on it but no response from the company as yet.
> 
> What a f*ck up! Talk about p*ssing off so much of your client base with such an ill thought out statement


But it's got people, especially women, talking about their products and their company 
Every click or message on their page brings them revenue, whether it's good or bad (which is why I won't)

What's that old saying, attributed to Barnam.....

"There no such thing as bad publicity 
Just 
Publicity"


----------



## O2.0

mrs phas said:


> Every click or message on their page brings them revenue, whether it's good or bad (which is why I won't)


Most of the clicks are to shares which doesn't affect the company at all. 
It's not like a youtube channel where actual views can generate revenue. I don't think instagram works that way.

And that's not the point anyway. 
It isn't about just one business or just one advertisement. It's this whole social experiment of extreme progressivism that claims to be about protecting marginalized groups but actually end up hurting them.


----------



## MollySmith

Instagram clicks are very helpful for metrics - Activity, Content, and Audience - it's a valuable way of capturing audience data to use for marketing from gender (!) to time, location, device, job. It's not the post, it's the responses good and bad that enable revenue used 'well'. Their marketing team know what they're doing.


----------



## Jobeth

kimthecat said:


> Im looking forward to see what the company say and how they explain it.


Sorry for the source but this article contains her response: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...pany-comes-fire-referring-women-bleeders.html


----------



## O2.0

MollySmith said:


> Instagram clicks are very helpful for metrics - Activity, Content, and Audience - it's a valuable way of capturing audience data to use for marketing from gender (!) to time, location, device, job. It's not the post, it's the responses good and bad that enable revenue used 'well'. Their marketing team know what they're doing.


Sharing a screenshot of a Twitter re-tweet (which is also a screenshot) is not adding any clicks to their instagram account. 
And the question was about directly adding to their revenue, not if it gives them more data.

And seriously, what is the salient issue here, women being reduced to body parts, dehumanized, and erased, or whether sharing these examples helps or hurts a business? 
How would you suggest one share examples of women being erased? 
Or should we just pretend it's not happening. You know, shut up and be quiet like so many men seem to want us to?



Jobeth said:


> Sorry for the source but this article contains her response: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...pany-comes-fire-referring-women-bleeders.html


Speaking of clicks, for those who don't want to click:
Founder and CEO of Yoppie Peri said of the criticism: 'I recently referred to women as 'bleeders', but also in the same post used 'women'. I used the word 'bleeders' for our new campaign 'Ride your cycle' as I feel it best describes the point we are trying to make; that 'menstrual health' is so much more than the days you bleed.

'Yoppie is focussed on being a brand welcoming all those who have a menstrual cycle - it's what we do. But, being at the forefront of menstrual health, how we describe it and talk to our customers is fraught with challenges, mistakes and learnings. After all that's part of being a genuine brand.
We recognise the menstrual cycle is a biological function. We should be proud of this cycle, of bleeding from our uterus, it's what makes us different. So we want to have this conversation, to bust the social stigma of talking about it publicly.

'We strongly believe all women, girls and people with a menstrual cycle should feel welcome at Yoppie. We also understand there are many women who don't have periods, and some people who menstruate who are not women. We're proud to host a safe space for anyone wishing to take charge of their menstrual health.

'If this conversation increases discussion within families and friendship groups to the level that people now talk about mental health - surely this is a great thing? We must remove any stigma of the menstrual cycle and periods and open up the conversation.

'The big question is how can brands like Yoppie talk directly to their customers, simply and eloquently, without causing offense to many. Can we, is that even possible?

'I myself am a woman. But I understand many of our customers are not. I also understand it is neither my place nor that of Yoppie to tell anyone how they should identify.

'We're an open, straight talking and transparent brand that is trying to navigate the right language. We will continue to promote that discrimination prevents all people from having equal opportunities - and we make no apology for that stance. This is the hard conversation everyone needs to have and we're here to have it. Join the conversation'.


----------



## StormyThai

Ok, genuine question here...I honestly want to understand so that I have the full picture.

When people refer to "people who menstruate who are not women"
Are they talking about someone that was born with female organs but has now transitioned? Including those that don't identify as a woman but still have female reproductive organs?

Or?


I must admit that I find the term "bleeders" is horrible....what is so wrong with just calling it a menstrual cycle?


----------



## O2.0

StormyThai said:


> Ok, genuine question here...I honestly want to understand so that I have the full picture.
> 
> When people refer to "people who menstruate who are not women"
> Are they talking about someone that was born with female organs but has now transitioned? Including those that don't identify as a woman but still have female reproductive organs?
> 
> Or?
> 
> I must admit that I find the term "bleeders" is horrible....what is so wrong with just calling it a menstrual cycle?


It's a fair question. I don't know the answers...
No, not all women menstruate, but menstruation is the sole realm of biological females. I don't understand how biological realities have come to be offensive.

I mean... if tampon companies really want to expand their market, just embrace the other uses tampons and pads have had for years in the sports community. Every boxing ring has a supply of tampons to staunch nose bleeds, pads are great for bad scabs if you don't want the scab to stick to the dressing...


----------



## Cleo38

Almost as bad as the "bodies with vagina's" quote from The Lancet


----------



## Jesthar

StormyThai said:


> Ok, genuine question here...I honestly want to understand so that I have the full picture.
> 
> When people refer to "people who menstruate who are not women"
> Are they talking about someone that was born with female organs but has now transitioned? Including those that don't identify as a woman but still have female reproductive organs?


It probably means they are on the "trans men are fully men" bandwagon, yes...


----------



## MollySmith

O2.0 said:


> Sharing a screenshot of a Twitter re-tweet (which is also a screenshot) is not adding any clicks to their instagram account.
> And the question was about directly adding to their revenue, not if it gives them more data.
> 
> And seriously, what is the salient issue here, women being reduced to body parts, dehumanized, and erased, or whether sharing these examples helps or hurts a business?
> How would you suggest one share examples of women being erased?
> Or should we just pretend it's not happening. You know, shut up and be quiet like so many men seem to want us to?


I assume that's a general set of questions to all the thread.

I was helpfully explaining to those who may not know how _Insta_ (not Twitter) generates data in case anyone was going to go the post. By saying the marketing team know what they are doing is a observation on data collection *not* advocating their actions.


----------



## O2.0

Jesthar said:


> It probably means they are on the "trans men are fully men" bandwagon, yes...


You mean trans women?

I was going to give them the benefit of the doubt and say they were referring to trans men who might still menstruate or women who identify as non-binary and don't refer to themselves as women and also still menstruate.
Still a terrible choice. Woman is not an offensive word.



MollySmith said:


> I assume that's a general set of questions to all the thread.
> 
> I was helpfully explaining to those who may not know how _Insta_ (not Twitter) generates data in case anyone was going to go the post. By saying the marketing team know what they are doing is a observation on data collection *not* advocating their actions.


Yeah, I got that


----------



## Jesthar

O2.0 said:


> You mean trans women?
> 
> I was going to give them the benefit of the doubt and say they were referring to trans men who might still menstruate or women who identify as non-binary and don't refer to themselves as women and also still menstruate.
> 
> Still a terrible choice. Woman is not an offensive word.


Nope, trans men - they are the ones who can still have periods. Unless there is some really advanced surgery now available that lets trans women have proper periods? I confess it's not an area of news I keep abreast = sorry, a_chest_ - of... 

And yes, really terrible choice of words. You have to wonder where they get the idea from. I wouldn't normally wish the contents of the Daily Heil comment section on anyone, but in this case I'll make an exception


----------



## Lurcherlad

Whatever the motive, the use of the word “bleeders” would turn me off using their website or products …. end of.

So their “wokeness” has backfired on this occasion.

I’m sure there are other ethical, vegan sanitary product providers out there who don’t risk insulting 50% of the population, potentially.

Though, thankfully at 61 and menopausal, I’m not a bloody bleeder anymore! Yay!


----------



## OrientalSlave

O2.0 said:


> Short 'n sweet opinion piece on JK Rowling:
> https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jk-rowling-trans-rights-harry-potter-b2036177.html
> 
> "<snip>
> You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand that allowing a male-bodied person - no questions asked - into a vulnerable female space could
> <snip>"


e.g. someone with a penis.


----------



## O2.0

Jesthar said:


> Nope, trans men - they are the ones who can still have periods. Unless there is some really advanced surgery now available that lets trans women have proper periods? I confess it's not an area of news I keep abreast = sorry, a_chest_ - of...


Oh I see now. Yeah, IDK either but I would guess the heavy doses of testosterone would cause amenorrhea. Not that it matters, it's still women who menstruate, not men.
Though there is also a contingent of trans women who claim they *can* menstruate. Or maybe it's just one trans woman, but I have seen that claim.

This push for inclusivity isn't really about being inclusive at all is it? 
It's not about making space for marginalized groups or normalizing differences among biological women and accepting that we can present to the world in all sorts of different ways that are all valid and equal. 
Nope... instead this virtue signaling has become about shaming and silencing women who speak out in protest. 
I'm not falling for it.


----------



## O2.0

Changing gears a little but still very much on topic. 
I don't follow the Kardashians at all if I can possibly avoid it, but it has all veered in to the creepy domain. 
Trevor Noah's take on it all:





"Women are questioned for what is happening to them as opposed to people questioning what is happening to them."


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Changing gears a little but still very much on topic.
> I don't follow the Kardashians at all if I can possibly avoid it, but it has all veered in to the creepy domain.
> Trevor Noah's take on it all:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Women are questioned for what is happening to them as opposed to people questioning what is happening to them."


The video won't play here. What's it about?


----------



## kimthecat

It says its not available in this country


----------



## Cleo38

A story about a group of men in Australia cat calling & giving female runners marks out of 10 was on a FB page. The story itself was depressing enough but the comments ...... 

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fwww.JOE.co.uk%2Fposts%2F2391938164303569&show_text=true&width=500]https://www.facebook.com/plugins/po...sts/2391938164303569&show_text=true&width=500


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> The video won't play here. What's it about?





kimthecat said:


> It says its not available in this country


Sorry!!
The short version is that Kim Kardashian and Kanye West got married and then shockingly, divorced. And ever since, Kanye has been trying to win Kim back. At first it was kind of cute, but then it has gotten kind of creepy and stalkerish and not it's just plain OTT. 
Trevor Noah's own mom was shot by her husband (not his father) and he talks about her going to the police and how much she was questioned for what was going on and how little they did to help. Leading to this fabulous quote "Women are questioned for what is happening to them as opposed to people questioning what is happening to them."
Then he says that if someone as rich and powerful and privileged as Kim can't get her ex to leave her alone, what hope is there for every day women? That there is a societal issue going on that needs to be addressed.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Sorry!!
> The short version is that Kim Kardashian and Kanye West got married and then shockingly, divorced. And ever since, Kanye has been trying to win Kim back. At first it was kind of cute, but then it has gotten kind of creepy and stalkerish and not it's just plain OTT.
> Trevor Noah's own mom was shot by her husband (not his father) and he talks about her going to the police and how much she was questioned for what was going on and how little they did to help. Leading to this fabulous quote "Women are questioned for what is happening to them as opposed to people questioning what is happening to them."
> Then he says that if someone as rich and powerful and privileged as Kim can't get her ex to leave her alone, what hope is there for every day women? That there is a societal issue going on that needs to be addressed.


Totally. I don't really pay much attention to them but had read a couple of stories about him harassing her. And yes, it seems that it will probably be directed at her; she shouldn't be flaunting' her new relationship, she loves attention anyway, she is a mother so should be concentrating on her children, etc.


----------



## O2.0

This is the FB version, I wonder if it will play

https://fb.watch/bOJLITB06f/


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> This is the FB version, I wonder if it will play
> 
> https://fb.watch/bOJLITB06f/


 Thanks, am watching it now ...


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> This is the FB version, I wonder if it will play
> 
> https://fb.watch/bOJLITB06f/


He makes some very good points. It is scary that this can happen in such public view & be seen as ok, some sort of 'entertainment' but I think that's something that is not just about violence (or potential) towards women but this weird mentality we have around celebrities & something being a 'good story'.

I remember when Britney Spear had her breakdown & it was so tragic. I didn't really know much about her but seeing how she was hounded was disgusting, her life collapsing seemed to be right there for public entertainment, that is so sad.

With this, I understand that KW does also have mental health problems, I remember some stores a while ago ridiculing him for some statements he had made when he was obviously not well.

This is worrying tho as many women experience this sort of harassment & it's usually up to them to placate their harasser, to try to keep things calm, to make sure the children are protected, etc while the preparator is excused. I hope this is sorted out soon for everyone involved ... but I don't think much of her new BF's comments tho

,


----------



## Cleo38

And another one ...... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...not-possible-revealing-one-patient-trans.html

The poor victim in this being gas lighted by the hospital & the whole ordeal dragged out when the hospital knew exactly who the rapist was. Why is there such a lack of honestly from agencies?

And yet it 'never happen's'


----------



## mrs phas

Cleo38 said:


> And another one ...... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...not-possible-revealing-one-patient-trans.html
> 
> The poor victim in this being gas lighted by the hospital & the whole ordeal dragged out when the hospital knew exactly who the rapist was. Why is there such a lack of honestly from agencies?
> 
> And yet it 'never happen's'


This.....

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...wed-NHS-review-single-sex-hospital-wards.html

Follows the above and explains just how and why women, at, possibly, their most vulnerable, are seen as second class to self identifying men


----------



## Cleo38

mrs phas said:


> This.....
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...wed-NHS-review-single-sex-hospital-wards.html
> 
> Follows the above and explains just how and why women, at, possibly, their most vulnerable, are seen as second class to self identifying men


And this is what I am struggling to understand. Women are vulnerable in certain environments especially if incapacitated through illness or injury so why is their safety being ignored so blatantly?

I was also reading about a home for the elderly in Maine (I think) now being sued by a trans woman as they would not accommodate them as it would mean sharing a room with an elderly woman. To think you can get to an old age & then be told you have to share a room with a biological male who you don't know simply because it is their 'right' is astounding.


----------



## Dimwit

Cleo38 said:


> And this is what I am struggling to understand. Women are vulnerable in certain environments especially if incapacitated through illness or injury so why is their safety being ignored so blatantly?


This is the issue, I am all for trans rights, but not when it comes at the expense of safeguarding other vulnerable groups. It is difficult in hospitals as geniune trans patients would be more at risk on a male ward BUT there has to be a solution that doesn't put other women at risk.


----------



## mrs phas

Dimwit said:


> This is the issue, I am all for trans rights, but not when it comes at the expense of safeguarding other vulnerable groups. It is difficult in hospitals as geniune trans patients would be more at risk on a male ward BUT there has to be a solution that doesn't put other women at risk.


If they have a penis they are, biologically, still male, so they go on a male ward ( and obvs vice versa)
If they've had the full op, then, fine, put them on a female ward
It's the whole self identifying clap trap that causes all of the problems
Will they set up an aquarium if I self identify as a goldfish?
Not on your life


----------



## O2.0

mrs phas said:


> If they have a penis they are, biologically, still male, so they go on a male ward ( and obvs vice versa)
> If they've had the full op, then, fine, put them on a female ward
> It's the whole self identifying clap trap that causes all of the problems
> Will they set up an aquarium if I self identify as a goldfish?
> Not on your life


You may not know this, but a large portion of genuine trans women choose not to have the full lower op nor should they have to to appease anyone. 





However, like @Dimwit I agree that there needs to be a better solution than just putting a vulnerable trans woman on a male ward. 
Though I'm a little confused. OH was in the hospital recently for an extended period and none of the facilities he was at were unisex. At both facilities there were men and women on the same floor, same hallway.

I don't see why you can't just house men and women together - not in the same room obviously, but on the same floor. Then if the person in the room next door is a man or a woman won't matter.


----------



## Siskin

When I was in hospital just before Christmas I was temporarily on a day orthopaedic ward which I ended up staying in for a few days before the op and transfer to a ward. I seemed to be surrounded by men and in order to get to the loo I had to walk past a row of beds of men dressed in little else then the gowns they provide. Apparently the 4 bed day ward was for anyone who could be operated on and sent home the same day, so I was on my own at night. The nurse told me it was mainly men that came in for minor ops as they were the ones falling off bikes and ladders all the time.
It was a relief to get to the main ward although I did end up have some interesting chats with the fellas that had been falling off bikes etc


----------



## O2.0

I guess hospitals here are just more private.
Even in the emergency room I've had a private area. I mean there's the triage area that's not completely private, but even in a tiny rural hospital they do have more private areas for people who are going to be there longer than just a few stitches.
And you're not left alone for any length of time either. There's always someone ready to take blood, take temp and blood pressure... it's constant!
I used to try and sneak out of bed when I was on total bed rest, and the nurses would catch me every time


----------



## Lurcherlad

O2.0 said:


> You may not know this, but a large portion of genuine trans women choose not to have the full lower op nor should they have to to appease anyone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, like @Dimwit I agree that there needs to be a better solution than just putting a vulnerable trans woman on a male ward.
> Though I'm a little confused. OH was in the hospital recently for an extended period and none of the facilities he was at were unisex. At both facilities there were men and women on the same floor, same hallway.
> 
> I don't see why you can't just house men and women together - not in the same room obviously, but on the same floor. Then if the person in the room next door is a man or a woman won't matter.


As a woman, I really hate the idea of mixed sex wards, particularly at night when there aren't many staff or other people around.


----------



## O2.0

Lurcherlad said:


> As a woman, I really hate the idea of mixed sex wards, particularly at night when there aren't many staff or other people around.


Yeah, I think I'm visualizing hospitals very differently than what we have here. We don't really have wards. It's all either private or at most 2 people to a room. You're all on the same floor, same area, but everyone has their own room.


----------



## Nonnie

O2.0 said:


> Yeah, I think I'm visualizing hospitals very differently than what we have here. We don't really have wards. It's all either private or at most 2 people to a room. You're all on the same floor, same area, but everyone has their own room.


Yeah, but you are paying a stupid amount of money for that room. Shared wards keeps the costs down for the NHS.


----------



## O2.0

Here's a possible solution. 
Do you keep records of sex offenders in the UK? 
So anyone with a history of sexual assault doesn't get to be in women's only places. That seems simple enough to me. Leave the whole gender debate out of it.


----------



## Cleo38

Dimwit said:


> This is the issue, I am all for trans rights, but not when it comes at the expense of safeguarding other vulnerable groups. It is difficult in hospitals as geniune trans patients would be more at risk on a male ward BUT there has to be a solution that doesn't put other women at risk.


Yes, of course. That's sort of why I feel the self ID bill will put more women at risk in places such a prisons, hospitals, etc as predatory men will abuse this.

I was going to add to the Maine story that if the trans woman had lived as such most of her life then I would be more understanding, but I still feel that other female residents should be asked & safe guarding measures put in place rather than just hope for the best!

Also we need to have open & honest conversations when these incidents happen surely? Covering things up is not only unfair to the victims (& future victims) but will cause hostility to communities when the truth does come out & it will eventually.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Here's a possible solution.
> Do you keep records of sex offenders in the UK?
> So anyone with a history of sexual assault doesn't get to be in women's only places. That seems simple enough to me. Leave the whole gender debate out of it.


Hahahaha, this is whole other story as these poor men are being stigmatised by their crimes (yes really!) so are applying to be removed .... & ALOT are successful!


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> Hahahaha, this is whole other story as these poor men are being stigmatised by their crimes (yes really!) so are applying to be removed .... & ALOT are successful!


I saw the story on that in Colorado how the language was dehumanizing or something


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> I saw the story on that in Colorado how the language was dehumanizing or something


Yes, those poor men having the 'shame' of being a sex offender constantly used to define them. Must be so awful


----------



## O2.0

Nonnie said:


> Yeah, but you are paying a stupid amount of money for that room. Shared wards keeps the costs down for the NHS.


US healthcare is ridiculous, agreed, but other than with infrastructure, I'm not sure sharing a room or not affects costs that much. You still have to have enough nurses and doctors, you still need equipment and medication for every patient...

And if stuff posted about on here is anything to go by, the NHS can be plenty frivolous in other areas of spending. So it's not like more privacy in general isn't a complete no-go.


----------



## rona

O2.0 said:


> Here's a possible solution.
> Do you keep records of sex offenders in the UK?
> So anyone with a history of sexual assault doesn't get to be in women's only places. That seems simple enough to me. Leave the whole gender debate out of it.


Unfortunately many sex offenders are never even reported, let alone prosecuted!

You find me any woman who hasn't been "touched up" without consent!!

I don't think there will be many.

We should do an anonymous poll on here


----------



## O2.0

rona said:


> Unfortunately many sex offenders are never even reported, let alone prosecuted!
> 
> You find me any woman who hasn't been "touched up" without consent!!
> 
> I don't think there will be many.
> 
> We should do an anonymous poll on here


Yeah, good point.
Honestly, just keep wards segregated by sex. I mean, if there is anywhere where the sex you were assigned at birth should matter it's in the medical care you receive!
Even something as simple as a bed pan, you're going to bring a different container depending on what plumbing you have! It's going to look pretty odd on a women's ward to have a urinary jug hanging from the patient's bed!


----------



## stuaz

This kinda feel relevant here so looking for opinions.

A colleague of mine in a meeting in conversation used the term “pregnant woman”. I wasn’t in the meeting but have watched recordings and the words were in context to the discussion and we’re not derogatory in anyway.

Someone in the meeting made a complaint to HR that the term used was wrong and discriminatory and that they should have said “pregnant people”. As the employees manager I have been asked to “take action” however I have refused and said that’s the employee hasn’t done anything wrong that warrants anything apart from at most a conversation. 

Full disclaimer, I am a man so perhaps I am just oblivious to these things?


----------



## O2.0

stuaz said:


> This kinda feel relevant here so looking for opinions.
> 
> A colleague of mine in a meeting in conversation used the term "pregnant woman". I wasn't in the meeting but have watched recordings and the words were in context to the discussion and we're not derogatory in anyway.
> 
> Someone in the meeting made a complaint to HR that the term used was wrong and discriminatory and that they should have said "pregnant people". As the employees manager I have been asked to "take action" however I have refused and said that's the employee hasn't done anything wrong that warrants anything apart from at most a conversation.
> 
> Full disclaimer, I am a man so perhaps I am just oblivious to these things?


Whoever complained to HR needs to check themselves. 
Who are they complaining on behalf of? Was anyone in the meeting actually offended, put on the spot, excluded, or in any other way affected? Because my guess is that no one but the superwoke complainer even noticed the terminology.

You're absolutely right to refuse to take action. There is no wrong that has happened here. Thank goodness for reasonable people like you!


----------



## MollySmith

stuaz said:


> This kinda feel relevant here so looking for opinions.
> 
> A colleague of mine in a meeting in conversation used the term "pregnant woman". I wasn't in the meeting but have watched recordings and the words were in context to the discussion and we're not derogatory in anyway.
> 
> Someone in the meeting made a complaint to HR that the term used was wrong and discriminatory and that they should have said "pregnant people". As the employees manager I have been asked to "take action" however I have refused and said that's the employee hasn't done anything wrong that warrants anything apart from at most a conversation.
> 
> Full disclaimer, I am a man so perhaps I am just oblivious to these things?


Is there a policy within HR on terminology that can be referred to? Or a gender balance network (I sit on one of these and it's one of our roles to advice independently drawing on our research and diversity in our membership). Does the pregnant woman (person) involved uphold the complaint? That's where I would start, just like any complaint. If there isn't a policy or network on gender then maybe it's a suggestion to make to HR.


----------



## Boxer123

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....-q-scandal-black-britons-letter-to-met-police

This story is just heart breaking. Poor girl.


----------



## stuaz

O2.0 said:


> Whoever complained to HR needs to check themselves.
> Who are they complaining on behalf of? Was anyone in the meeting actually offended, put on the spot, excluded, or in any other way affected? Because my guess is that no one but the superwoke complainer even noticed the terminology.
> 
> You're absolutely right to refuse to take action. There is no wrong that has happened here. Thank goodness for reasonable people like you!


In watching the meeting back, when the words were used, no one said anything at the time. People had there cameras on so I could there reactions and no one reacted visually apart from one person who I believe is the complainer.

No one was excluded and without going into details about the meeting, the conversation was on topic and in the agenda of that meeting.

HR are being very insistent that they agree with the complainant, so I know I am going to have a battle here.



MollySmith said:


> Is there a policy within HR on terminology that can be referred to? Or a gender balance network (I sit on one of these and it's one of our roles to advice independently drawing on our research and diversity in our membership). Does the pregnant woman (person) involved uphold the complaint? That's where I would start, just like any complaint. If there isn't a policy or network on gender then maybe it's a suggestion to make to HR.


We have a similar thing with a different name and is part of HR. And they have ruled that the term should be "pregnant people" so that it is as inclusive as possible but they haven't directly said that "pregnant woman" can't be/shouldn't be used.

There isn't actually a specific pregnant woman, as the conversation (without revealing too much) was about vulnerable groups of people so it was a "general conversation" rather than being aimed at a specific real person.


----------



## O2.0

stuaz said:


> We have a similar thing with a different name and is part of HR. And they have ruled that the term should be "pregnant people" so that it is as inclusive as possible but they haven't directly said that "pregnant woman" can't be/shouldn't be used.


As a woman who was at one point pregnant, I find it beyond reason why we have to police terminology to refer to us. 
No one asked me when I was pregnant what I wanted to be called. No one is asking women anywhere what they want to be called when pregnant. We're just making shit up to look like we're trying to be progressive, yet does it really make any actual difference in areas that matter? Is policing language going to lead to better pre and post natal care?


----------



## Jesthar

stuaz said:


> This kinda feel relevant here so looking for opinions.
> 
> A colleague of mine in a meeting in conversation used the term "pregnant woman". I wasn't in the meeting but have watched recordings and the words were in context to the discussion and we're not derogatory in anyway.
> 
> Someone in the meeting made a complaint to HR that the term used was wrong and discriminatory and that they should have said "pregnant people". As the employees manager I have been asked to "take action" however I have refused and said that's the employee hasn't done anything wrong that warrants anything apart from at most a conversation.
> 
> Full disclaimer, I am a man so perhaps I am just oblivious to these things?


Popping my Union rep hat on for a moment, what kind of 'action' are you expected to take? If just having a conversation will count, all you have to do is say you have spoken to them about it, and that should be the end of it. No-one needs to know the exact nature of the conversation, (although I'd advise against referring to the complainant as an 'oversensitive dingbat' if you might be overheard...  )

Whilst it is rather ridiculous that something that trivial has been instantly escalated to HR rather than the complainant just saying "we're supposed to use a different phrase", you don't want to be in the position where the complaint is escalated and bypasses you, or even extended to you. There is a reason that 'discrimination' accusations are usually the cue for getting our senior reps involved.

Oh, and bonus points for using the phrase "members of the human race currently in the process of gestating a foetus" in the next meeting  (joking! Probably best not to poke that particular hornet's nest...  )

Full disclaimer, I'm a woman, and answer to pretty much anything. Life's too short!


----------



## MollySmith

stuaz said:


> In watching the meeting back, when the words were used, no one said anything at the time. People had there cameras on so I could there reactions and no one reacted visually apart from one person who I believe is the complainer.
> 
> No one was excluded and without going into details about the meeting, the conversation was on topic and in the agenda of that meeting.
> 
> HR are being very insistent that they agree with the complainant, so I know I am going to have a battle here.
> 
> We have a similar thing with a different name and is part of HR. And they have ruled that the term should be "pregnant people" so that it is as inclusive as possible but they haven't directly said that "pregnant woman" can't be/shouldn't be used.
> 
> There isn't actually a specific pregnant woman, as the conversation (without revealing too much) was about vulnerable groups of people so it was a "general conversation" rather than being aimed at a specific real person.


Ah okay. A constructive conversation about the context is so much better and more productive but your HR department seem a bit woolly and if they are, then they need to explain and provide training. They can't penalise people of any gender when they haven't determined the language already by saying what can't be used (and why).

I hope that is useful.


----------



## O2.0

Jesthar said:


> Oh, and bonus points for using the phrase "members of the human race currently in the process of gestating a foetus" in the next meeting  (joking! Probably best not to poke that particular hornet's nest...  )


Bodies with a uterus? 
Would adding functional be too much?

Honestly I wouldn't have cared if someone called me a pregnant person, gestating recepticle, or fat cow when I was pregnant. I was totally overwhelmed with the whole thing and my body didn't feel like my own anyway.

It's forcing people to use certain terminology that I object to. On the individual level, if you want me to call you a pregnant person instead of a pregnant woman, I'll be happy to, but forcing everyone to change perfectly fit for purpose language seems... Well, stoopid.


----------



## Oof

@stuaz maybe that person had read the story on the man that recently gave birth.


----------



## stuaz

Jesthar said:


> Popping my Union rep hat on for a moment, what kind of 'action' are you expected to take? If just having a conversation will count, all you have to do is say you have spoken to them about it, and that should be the end of it. No-one needs to know the exact nature of the conversation, (although I'd advise against referring to the complainant as an 'oversensitive dingbat' if you might be overheard...  )
> 
> Whilst it is rather ridiculous that something that trivial has been instantly escalated to HR rather than the complainant just saying "we're supposed to use a different phrase", you don't want to be in the position where the complaint is escalated and bypasses you, or even extended to you. There is a reason that 'discrimination' accusations are usually the cue for getting our senior reps involved.
> 
> Oh, and bonus points for using the phrase "members of the human race currently in the process of gestating a foetus" in the next meeting  (joking! Probably best not to poke that particular hornet's nest...  )
> 
> Full disclaimer, I'm a woman, and answer to pretty much anything. Life's too short!


I have been advised that it should be a written warning. I personally don't feel comfortable doing that and feel it's all very "knee jerky".

Im happy to reprimand people but it has to be fair.


----------



## Cleo38

Bloody hell, this is so very sad that the term 'pregnant woman' is some how offensive :Arghh


----------



## O2.0

stuaz said:


> I have been advised that it should be a written warning. I personally don't feel comfortable doing that and feel it's all very "knee jerky".


For calling someone who is pregnant a woman instead of a person? 
And this goes in their permanent personnel file? 
Oh hell no.


----------



## stuaz

Oof said:


> @stuaz maybe that person had read the story on the man that recently gave birth.


Is that the one which stars Arnold Schwarzenegger? (I'm joking btw)

maybe they did but I don't think it's reasonable to expect someone to know every news story etc.


----------



## stuaz

O2.0 said:


> For calling someone who is pregnant a woman instead of a person?
> And this goes in their permanent personnel file?
> Oh hell no.


yeah it would go on there record which in my business can seriously effect further job opportunities


----------



## Oof

stuaz said:


> Is that the one which stars Arnold Schwarzenegger? (I'm joking btw)
> 
> maybe they did but I don't think it's reasonable to expect someone to know every news story etc.


Yeah I agree. I don't envy you in that position.

I honestly get worried speaking to new people in case I get something wrong


----------



## O2.0

stuaz said:


> yeah it would go on there record which in my business can seriously effect further job opportunities


No, no, no, no... 
I'm so sorry you're having to deal with this. With all the actual wrongs that happen in the world that this shit has become what we're reduced to.


----------



## Cleo38

stuaz said:


> yeah it would go on there record which in my business can seriously effect further job opportunities


That is so very wrong. I really don't envy you having to try & deal with this in a sensible way despite the pressure you are getting.
This is so very depressing. Also shows how spineless the complainant is, why didn't they challenge the comment in the meeting? I can't bear that sort of weasely person


----------



## Jesthar

stuaz said:


> I have been advised that it should be a written warning. I personally don't feel comfortable doing that and feel it's all very "knee jerky".
> 
> Im happy to reprimand people but it has to be fair.


Then your HR department need their heads examined. Or possible shooting, whichever is cheaper - sub-atomic MRI scans are expensive  A written warning should be for incidents with malicious intent (or serial repeat offenders), not a slip of the tongue.

Also, was your colleague offered the chance to correct their error in the meeting, and if so did they refuse to do so? If not, then there is even less reason for this to go beyond a conversation, and possibly a 'sensitivity training course' if HR offer such things.


----------



## MollySmith

stuaz said:


> I have been advised that it should be a written warning. I personally don't feel comfortable doing that and feel it's all very "knee jerky".
> 
> Im happy to reprimand people but it has to be fair.


It feels like they are trying to set an example when the error doesn't fit the punishment. I guess the issue would be if the complainant escalated to the media or higher up. So it seems more like HR trying to tick boxes than considering the long term effect.

I don't have a issue with political/socially correct terms, language is a powerful tool, but it's dangerous when companies take advantage or become fearful. Gender policies are meant to be inclusive to encourage a diverse workforce that supports all genders and address transphobia but not a policy to threaten.

I still stand by earlier comment - the HR team need to provide clarity and this is an opportunity to train, review comms - for them. Though that often means more manager training too (soz, hurrah for self employment!)


----------



## O2.0

Where is the "error" in saying pregnant women? 

I don't understand the point on inclusivity at all costs. Not everything is inclusive and that's okay.
Pregnancy won't ever apply to 50% of the population, it's not an inclusive term because pregnancy itself is not inclusive. So why the need to include everyone in the discussion of it. 

I'm really over trying to make people out to be bigots because they accept reality.


----------



## £54etgfb6

O2.0 said:


> US healthcare is ridiculous, agreed, but other than with infrastructure, I'm not sure sharing a room or not affects costs that much. You still have to have enough nurses and doctors, you still need equipment and medication for every patient...
> 
> And if stuff posted about on here is anything to go by, the NHS can be plenty frivolous in other areas of spending. So it's not like more privacy in general isn't a complete no-go.


If you're interested, without commenting on trans-issues, the original idea behind the NHS using multiple patient bays instead of private rooms is 1) Cost and 2) Private rooms impede observation ability. Single rooms _do_ indeed cost more, for a multitude of reasons. Having 20 single rooms in comparison to 3 bay wards takes up a lot more room. Why is this? Bathrooms. A bay ward with 6 patients will have 1 communal bathroom, usually, or 1 communal bathroom shared between 2 bays (12 patients). Single rooms have their own bathroom. These are large for accessibility and due to the fact that they contain a shower. Less room for patients means building a bigger hospital which means more money required, more additional facilities that _could_ be shared means more money required.

In terms of observation ability, this is of greater importance with patients at risk of falls (which is.... the majority of patients in the UK!). A nurse brisking past a bay has a greater chance of being able to glance over patients than walking through a corridor of single rooms. The majority of patients in single rooms tend to close their room door. This requires a nurse to step into the room and interrupt the patient as opposed to a simple "look" in a bay ward. In some settings, single rooms are not realistic. In day-case wards and recovery wards, the nurses are typically stationed within the bay itself. In these circumstances, this constant ability to view patients is essential (for obvious reasons).

Bays are also thought to improve mood via socialisation. The NHS has forgotten that many patients are sick and a) sick people tend to not want to speak to others and b) patients can be annoying to those around them. This does not improve mood. As a result, a large portion of patients detest bay wards (myself included). Some people _do_ enjoy them though and find the communication with other patients very valuable and encouraging.

The NHS _has_ taken notice of this issue, to an extent. NHS Scotland aims for all of its future hospitals to be built with 100% single rooms, aside from circumstances where this would endanger patient safety. NHS England has not shown that much interest. Most of the UK's hospitals use very old buildings that cannot be converted so, unfortunately, single rooms tend to be a rarity in many places.

Not sure anyone will be interested in a waffle about the NHS but there you have it


----------



## Siskin

bmr10 said:


> If you're interested, without commenting on trans-issues, the original idea behind the NHS using multiple patient bays instead of private rooms is 1) Cost and 2) Private rooms impede observation ability. Single rooms _do_ indeed cost more, for a multitude of reasons. Having 20 single rooms in comparison to 3 bay wards takes up a lot more room. Why is this? Bathrooms. A bay ward with 6 patients will have 1 communal bathroom, usually, or 1 communal bathroom shared between 2 bays (12 patients). Single rooms have their own bathroom. These are large for accessibility and due to the fact that they contain a shower. Less room for patients means building a bigger hospital which means more money required, more additional facilities that _could_ be shared means more money required.
> 
> In terms of observation ability, this is of greater importance with patients at risk of falls (which is.... the majority of patients in the UK!). A nurse brisking past a bay has a greater chance of being able to glance over patients than walking through a corridor of single rooms. The majority of patients in single rooms tend to close their room door. This requires a nurse to step into the room and interrupt the patient as opposed to a simple "look" in a bay ward. In some settings, single rooms are not realistic. In day-case wards and recovery wards, the nurses are typically stationed within the bay itself. In these circumstances, this constant ability to view patients is essential (for obvious reasons).
> 
> Bays are also thought to improve mood via socialisation. The NHS has forgotten that many patients are sick and a) sick people tend to not want to speak to others and b) patients can be annoying to those around them. This does not improve mood. As a result, a large portion of patients detest bay wards (myself included). Some people _do_ enjoy them though and find the communication with other patients very valuable and encouraging.
> 
> The NHS _has_ taken notice of this issue, to an extent. NHS Scotland aims for all of its future hospitals to be built with 100% single rooms, aside from circumstances where this would endanger patient safety. NHS England has not shown that much interest. Most of the UK's hospitals use very old buildings that cannot be converted so, unfortunately, single rooms tend to be a rarity in many places.
> 
> Not sure anyone will be interested in a waffle about the NHS but there you have it


I can relate to the other patients being annoying especially if you are in a bay full of patients on various stages of dementia, having no one to talk to makes for a very long day. The ward I was in just before Christmas was much more cheery as there was a lady who was just such good fun and seemed to be upbeat whatever the circumstances. I was really sorry when she left.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Siskin said:


> I can relate to the other patients being annoying especially if you are in a bay full of patients on various stages of dementia, having no one to talk to makes for a very long day. The ward I was in just before Christmas was much more cheery as there was a lady who was just such good fun and seemed to be upbeat whatever the circumstances. I was really sorry when she left.


I'm not a sociable person, especially when in hospital (ironically despite applying to study medicine I am terrified of being in hospital myself!) so bay wards stress me out. Having said that, getting to know people around you can distract you from your suffering and fill in the gaps between your own visitors. It's a hit or a miss in my opinion (the snoring is always a miss though).


----------



## kimthecat

(sorry for the big size of photo).


----------



## stuaz

Jesthar said:


> Also, was your colleague offered the chance to correct their error in the meeting, and if so did they refuse to do so? If not, then there is even less reason for this to go beyond a conversation, and possibly a 'sensitivity training course' if HR offer such things.


No one commented on the phrase in the meeting, no audible gasps or awkward silences etc. the conversation just flowed normally.



O2.0 said:


> No, no, no, no...
> I'm so sorry you're having to deal with this. With all the actual wrongs that happen in the world that this shit has become what we're reduced to.


Thank you. I'm quite happy to "fight the fight" but I will be honest I was kinda feeling like I was the "odd" one for not immediately seeing what was wrong but at least from some of the comments on here, I am not alone.

I will try and update here what the outcome ends up being, hopefully I can get the relevant people to see some sense!


----------



## Cleo38

The stories today of this biological man "winning' in a women's race was sickening.

This picture sumned up how the female athletes felt .... I feel some cropping is needed to show the true winners!


----------



## Lurcherlad

bmr10 said:


> I'm not a sociable person, especially when in hospital (ironically despite applying to study medicine I am terrified of being in hospital myself!) so bay wards stress me out. Having said that, getting to know people around you can distract you from your suffering and fill in the gaps between your own visitors. It's a hit or a miss in my opinion (the snoring is always a miss though).


You wouldn't want to be in a bay with my MIL … she would never stop talking 

I tend to pull my curtains round and pretend I'm sleeping 

Wearing headphones can help too to appear occupied 

Silicone earplugs are a must for sleeping … hospitals are so noisy.


----------



## Lurcherlad

stuaz said:


> No one commented on the phrase in the meeting, no audible gasps or awkward silences etc. the conversation just flowed normally.
> 
> Thank you. I'm quite happy to "fight the fight" but I will be honest I was kinda feeling like I was the "odd" one for not immediately seeing what was wrong but at least from some of the comments on here, I am not alone.
> 
> I will try and update here what the outcome ends up being, hopefully I can get the relevant people to see some sense!


As it was a general conversation and no individual was actually called the so called "wrong thing", I can't see how it can be a disciplinary matter anyway.


----------



## Rafa

Seriously, what is this World coming to?

If she's a woman, she's a woman. If she's pregnant, she's pregnant.

What do we have? A pregnant woman.

I swear some people get up in a morning seeking opportunities to become offended or become a 'crusader' on a totally inappropriate 'womens' rights' issue.


----------



## O2.0

Rafa said:


> I swear some people get up in a morning seeking opportunities to become offended or become a 'crusader' on a totally inappropriate 'womens' rights' issue.


And the thing is, those crusaders aren't actually helping anything or anyone, in some cases, even impede progress.

Does policing conversations to the point that an employee can have their career affected because they said pregnant people instead of pregnant women actually improve anything for maternal and fetal outcomes? Does it make employers more likely to treat pregnant employees (see what I did there?) fairly? What actual good does reprimanding someone for using the wrong language (which arguably isn't even wrong) do?


----------



## Siskin

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...ice-NHS-insist-male-bodied-rapists-women.html

I know there are some of you who won't read this because it is in the Mail, but this article by Dominic Lawson raises some pertinent points much of which has been discussed here


----------



## O2.0

Siskin said:


> I know there are some of you who won't read this because it is in the Mail


:Hilarious:Hilarious
I suppose that's one way to pretend that predators aren't taking advantage of self-ID policies...

I'm still stuck on the whole Lia Thomas thing. And honestly, I hate how it has turned in to hate against her when it's really about the governing bodies not protecting women's sports in their policies. 
Martina Navratilova did a great interview on the topic. One of the few willing to stand up for women's sports these days. And I had forgotten that her longtime coach and still dear friend is a trans woman.


----------



## Cleo38

Siskin said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...ice-NHS-insist-male-bodied-rapists-women.html
> 
> I know there are some of you who won't read this because it is in the Mail, but this article by Dominic Lawson raises some pertinent points much of which has been discussed here


I think certain media groups choose to ignore certain stories tho which again is worrying. I have lost a lot of faith in the BBC of late.

This was a very worrying article & it seems utter madness that this has been allowed to happen. "Rapes by women with penises" is completey crazy .... how has it come to this?! 



O2.0 said:


> :Hilarious:Hilarious
> I suppose that's one way to pretend that predators aren't taking advantage of self-ID policies...
> 
> I'm still stuck on the whole Lia Thomas thing. And honestly, I hate how it has turned in to hate against her when it's really about the governing bodies not protecting women's sports in their policies.
> Martina Navratilova did a great interview on the topic. One of the few willing to stand up for women's sports these days. And I had forgotten that her longtime coach and still dear friend is a trans woman.


In some ways I don't see how the hate couldn't end up being directed against Lia tho. Lia has taken advantage of a current climate of accommodating trans women in sports regardless of the impact on biological women. Lia is hardly innocent IMO & is knowingly pushing women who deserve places out of the sport. How any win can be regarded as a victory is beyond me


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> I think certain media groups choose to ignore certain stories tho which again is worrying. I have lost a lot of faith in the BBC of late.
> 
> This was a very worrying article & it seems utter madness that this has been allowed to happen. "Rapes by women with penises" is completey crazy .... how has it come to this?!
> 
> In some ways I don't see how the hate couldn't end up being directed against Lia tho. Lia has taken advantage of a current climate of accommodating trans women in sports regardless of the impact on biological women. Lia is hardly innocent IMO & is knowingly pushing women who deserve places out of the sport. How any win can be regarded as a victory is beyond me


Lia Thomas is not blameless at all, agreed, but she's already done. She's a senior and not eligible to swim at the collegiate level anymore. 
There will be (and have been) more Lia Thomas' and will continue to be more until the governing bodies step up and take a stand. The efforts for protecting women's sports need to be directed at those in charge of the policies more than the individuals taking advantage of the policies.

Shame on Lia Thomas, yes. But more shame on the IOC and NCAA for not putting their collective foot down and protecting women's sports. 
In the US, this should really turn in to a lawsuit that re-visits Title IX because to me, this is a clear violation of equal opportunity for women in sports.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

stuaz said:


> yeah it would go on there record which in my business can seriously effect further job opportunities


I think it's atrocious that you are essentially having your hand forced to formally reprimand someone when they have merely stated a biological fact. You cannot be pregnant unless you are a biological woman (Arnie not withstanding!). I hope there is a better option found for the poor person who has been complained about.

You may see me comment on this language occasionally as I am a midwife and I feel very strongly about the use of "pregnant people". There is a backlash now at our trust from women who are objecting to being removed from the language - so I think we are now going to be using "pregnant women and people" to please everyone.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

My tongue is buried firmly in my cheek here but I can't think why Lia is now identifying as a female...

https://www.swimmingworldmagazine.c...imes-no-denying-the-advantages-of-lia-thomas/

I feel so saddened by this. Sharron Davies is voicing what I am feeling about it really. I appreciate that it's an impossible situation for Lia but I fail to see how it can be fair to swim against biological women. I mean even just her reach to touch the end of the pool first when you have arms that match a 6'4" height, rather than 5'6" makes a huge difference.

Can you imagine the outrage if the testing that happened with Caster Semanya happened now instead of several years ago?


----------



## O2.0

Mrs Funkin said:


> You may see me comment on this language occasionally as I am a midwife and I feel very strongly about the use of "pregnant people". There is a backlash now at our trust from women who are objecting to being removed from the language - so I think we are now going to be using "pregnant women and people" to please everyone.


It's hard for me to articulate what I find so insidious and downright dangerous about this language of erasure.

If you are pregnant you are a woman. It's really that simple. 
Women's reproductive heath and *rights* are so incredibly important and we have fought so hard to have them taken seriously. If we start saying that anyone can be pregnant, what does that mean? Where does that leave us? 
If anyone can have a vulva then is FGM no longer a thing? 
If anyone can have a baby, then are women's reproductive rights no longer an issue?

I know I sound like a crazy person taking things too far, but I really do see this all headed in a dangerous direction for women.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Me too @O2.0 but obviously I'm not allowed to protest how I feel as our hands are tied. The RCM are no better with their use of language either, so they wouldn't defend those of us who feel the way we do.

I feel so so strongly about women's reproductive rights and health, I will defend those rights until the end of my days - or maybe the end of my job at the rate this world is going.


----------



## MollySmith

Mrs Funkin said:


> I think it's atrocious that you are essentially having your hand forced to formally reprimand someone when they have merely stated a biological fact. You cannot be pregnant unless you are a biological woman (Arnie not withstanding!). I hope there is a better option found for the poor person who has been complained about.
> 
> You may see me comment on this language occasionally as I am a midwife and I feel very strongly about the use of "pregnant people". There is a backlash now at our trust from women who are objecting to being removed from the language - so I think we are now going to be using "pregnant women and people" to please everyone.


I find it personally very complex because it's hard enough trying to get recognition for the 48m women (estimated) who cannot have children and then _this_, which implies so much. There are numerous people, me included have queried the teaching of 'how not to get pregnant' and the absence of 'it may not happen' and 'you can choose not to'. It's okay not to (well not as far as your job goes Mrs F ) but this... ack, I...... don't know. I have all sorts of complicated stuff in my head and I'm not going to poke it too much as my brain is in a place of acceptance after 10 years of not. But there will be stuff I'm sure for those who choose to be or the opportunity to be a pregnant _woman_ is not part of their life story and I feel this side tracks, over takes other holistic welfare that takes, still taking, years to be heard and even then mostly gets lost (sits on hands ). Pregnant person is more likely to be found in gender and HR paperwork and childlessness is not... It's so frustrating.

I have refrained from saying too much as I'm aware it's a personal feeling. I try to be more factual, and it is at odds with how I feel about a certain author which is sort of yes and yes, but not at the expense of another and let's look at our systems. I'm doing the same but with the added whammy of adding in those who can't or respectfully choose not to.

(and please note the sentence above folks, I'm poking bits of my brain that aren't exposed much, I may not reply, my mental health comes before PF.) The above is a bit ranty as I'm still figuring out how I feel.


----------



## Pawscrossed

MollySmith said:


> I find it personally very complex because it's hard enough trying to get recognition for the 48m women (estimated) who cannot have children and then _this_, which implies so much. There are numerous people, me included have queried the teaching of 'how not to get pregnant' and the absence of 'it may not happen' and 'you can choose not to'. It's okay not to (well not as far as your job goes Mrs F ) but this... ack, I...... don't know. I have all sorts of complicated stuff in my head and I'm not going to poke it too much as my brain is in a place of acceptance after 10 years of not. But there will be stuff I'm sure for those who choose to be or the opportunity to be a pregnant _woman_ is not part of their life story and I feel this side tracks, over takes other holistic welfare that takes, still taking, years to be heard and even then mostly gets lost (sits on hands ). Pregnant person is more likely to be found in gender and HR paperwork and childlessness is not... It's so frustrating.
> 
> I have refrained from saying too much as I'm aware it's a personal feeling. I try to be more factual, and it is at odds with how I feel about a certain author which is sort of yes and yes, but not at the expense of another and let's look at our systems. I'm doing the same but with the added whammy of adding in those who can't or respectfully choose not to.
> 
> (and please note the sentence above folks, I'm poking bits of my brain that aren't exposed much, I may not reply, my mental health comes before PF.) The above is a bit ranty as I'm still figuring out how I feel.


I'm not so vocal as yourself, complex is right, and it does seem very odd. Goodness knows when I was briefly pregnant and miscarried there was no help all those years ago, and it is only recently that I read anything vaguely useful in employment.

I can see this debate overtaking recognition too.

I have been asked if I was pregnant once, recently (thank you IBS!) and there wasn't anything legally where I could demand an apology, thus being able to claim person over woman seems extraordinary when there are other houses to get in order first (not a Harry Potter pun, I agree with you!). But likewise it is the system, and recognition.

My stepchild identifies as binary, if they were to be pregnant, they might decide to be a pregnant person I suppose, I'm conscious of this as I write and edit, and edit somemore!!!!! I respect them for choices though I do not understand so it's as much as wish to say, but I do not blame them for 'stealing' woman's rights, yet I feel aggrieved by a process that precludes us from using women and/or person, and issuing disciplinary action to those who do not follow these rules. One argument cannot exclude the hard earned rights of another in my mind too.

Forgive my ignorance, you are not alone in your figuring out.


----------



## stuaz

Mrs Funkin said:


> I think it's atrocious that you are essentially having your hand forced to formally reprimand someone when they have merely stated a biological fact.


It would appear I have ruffled a few feathers further today with this whole situation and refusing to reprimand. Some subtle threats on there part which I didn't react well too…

I have now requested a formal meeting with HR, my manager and myself to discuss this whole situation like adults and to look at things with level heads and not do knee jerk reactions.

They asked if I wanted the person who made the "phrase" to attend and my response was "why when as far as I see the issue is not them or what they have said, but the issue is the over top response that you are requiring".

I love my job and the people management side of it is just a small aspect of it thankfully, but this silly thing seems to be consuming a lot of my time and effort which is better spent elsewhere at the moment!


----------



## O2.0

Mrs Funkin said:


> Me too @O2.0 but obviously I'm not allowed to protest how I feel as our hands are tied. The RCM are no better with their use of language either, so they wouldn't defend those of us who feel the way we do.
> 
> I feel so so strongly about women's reproductive rights and health, I will defend those rights until the end of my days - or maybe the end of my job at the rate this world is going.


And that in itself should point to the craziness of all this. 
That a midwife - someone who's whole training is about taking care of women, surely your voice should matter and should be heard above others?

We have to have a definition for woman. We do. Female human. 
Because if we can't define women, we can't protect them, we can't care for them, we can't give them equal rights.

Biology is real, there is no flat earth.

Just as importantly, people with gender dysphoria deserve compassion and respect just like any other person. And here's the thing. What does calling pregnant women people instead of women actually *do* to make anything better for anyone with dysphoria? How is is helpful in any real sense?


----------



## Rafa

.


----------



## Rafa

O2.0 said:


> How is is helpful in any real sense?


It isn't in any way.

I well remember how it was fifty, forty, even thirty years ago. Women were seen as inferior to men in many ways.

Now, we have equal relationships with our Partners, our Sons do not see us as inferior and we have equal rights in the workplace.

As a woman, go out and do what you want, nobody is stopping you.

Those who dream up more and more ridiculous ideas as to how to ensure women are seen as 'equal', are behaving in a counterproductive way, IMO.

Most women I know are successful and happy, whether as a career woman or as a Mother, and do not spend their time campaigning about how they may or may not be identified on a Maternity Unit.


----------



## Jesthar

stuaz said:


> It would appear I have ruffled a few feathers further today with this whole situation and refusing to reprimand. Some subtle threats on there part which I didn't react well too…
> 
> I have now requested a formal meeting with HR, my manager and myself to discuss this whole situation like adults and to look at things with level heads and not do knee jerk reactions.
> 
> They asked if I wanted the person who made the "phrase" to attend and my response was "why when as far as I see the issue is not them or what they have said, but the issue is the over top response that you are requiring".
> 
> I love my job and the people management side of it is just a small aspect of it thankfully, but this silly thing seems to be consuming a lot of my time and effort which is better spent elsewhere at the moment!


Thank goodness they have you to stand up for them!

That HR would expect a manager to throw an employee under the bus for a slip of the tounge that clearly wasn't malicious is just mad. Surely education would be the better option (and I use that term 'education' loosely in this scenario). If they're going to hand out career ending disciplinaries every time someone forgets the latest round of political correctness, or mixes up biology and gender, they're going to run out of staff pretty quickly...


----------



## Cleo38

MollySmith said:


> I find it personally very complex because it's hard enough trying to get recognition for the 48m women (estimated) who cannot have children and then _this_, which implies so much. There are numerous people, me included have queried the teaching of 'how not to get pregnant' and the absence of 'it may not happen' and 'you can choose not to'. It's okay not to (well not as far as your job goes Mrs F ) but this... ack, I...... don't know. I have all sorts of complicated stuff in my head and I'm not going to poke it too much as my brain is in a place of acceptance after 10 years of not. But there will be stuff I'm sure for those who choose to be or the opportunity to be a pregnant _woman_ is not part of their life story and I feel this side tracks, over takes other holistic welfare that takes, still taking, years to be heard and even then mostly gets lost (sits on hands ). Pregnant person is more likely to be found in gender and HR paperwork and childlessness is not... It's so frustrating.
> 
> I have refrained from saying too much as I'm aware it's a personal feeling. I try to be more factual, and it is at odds with how I feel about a certain author which is sort of yes and yes, but not at the expense of another and let's look at our systems. I'm doing the same but with the added whammy of adding in those who can't or respectfully choose not to.
> 
> (and please note the sentence above folks, I'm poking bits of my brain that aren't exposed much, I may not reply, my mental health comes before PF.) The above is a bit ranty as I'm still figuring out how I feel.


Am not sure what your point is .... whether women have children or not it still doesn't take away the fact that it is women who are pregnant. I haven't had children & had no desire to but still object to chest feeding, pregnant people & all that nonsense. Language being twisted to meet a minority of people & denying others is simply not fair as well as being incorrect

There are many aspects of people's lives that are over looked at times; carers especially & the need for them to be heard is often ignored. Surely it's about having conversations with work colleagues as well as HR rather than simply changing language to suit


----------



## MollySmith

Cleo38 said:


> Am not sure what your point is .... whether women have children or not it still doesn't take away the fact that it is women who are pregnant. I haven't had children & had no desire to but still object to chest feeding, pregnant people & all that nonsense. Language being twisted to meet a minority of people & denying others is simply not fair as well as being incorrect
> 
> There are many aspects of people's lives that are over looked at times; carers especially & the need for them to be heard is often ignored. Surely it's about having conversations with work colleagues as well as HR rather than simply changing language to suit


I was brain dumping to a degree but it feels like there is a lot more equality and recognition work to do in workplaces on being fair to childfree and childless first. And parents.

Yes, language is being twisted and excluding others.

(I'm being a bit more careful on words this morning having riffed yesterday. I am on a equality board and a podcast and not necessarily their views!)


----------



## Jobeth

I don’t get it either as if you are transgender then surely you’d want to be known as the pronoun that you’d transitioned to. Those choices would be appropriate if you were non-binary and then you would only use those words/terminology if asked to.


----------



## O2.0

If we add in the childlessness piece of the equation, it's *women* who suffer miscarriages. Not men. 
So let's imagine now we're writing some sort of policy for women in the workplace who suffer miscarriage or who are at work when they start their period when they were hoping they wouldn't. Would you want that policy written for "people who miscarry" or "women who miscarry?" Because while of course male partners suffer loss as well, having a miscarriage is a uniquely female experience.


----------



## MollySmith

O2.0 said:


> If we add in the childlessness piece of the equation, it's *women* who suffer miscarriages. Not men.
> So let's imagine now we're writing some sort of policy for women in the workplace who suffer miscarriage or who are at work when they start their period when they were hoping they wouldn't. Would you want that policy written for "people who miscarry" or "women who miscarry?" Because while of course male partners suffer loss as well, having a miscarriage is a uniquely female experience.


_Women_ miscarry assuming there's a policy or that someone in a company thought there was a need for one.

The policy should also allow the _partners of_ (inc. same sex relationships) time off to mourn the loss (and more awareness around disenfranchised grief). But that policy rarely exists hence my bug bear that language of _person_ is adding on stuff on top of other stuff that's not even on any agenda; as rare as unicorns. Reading University have a policy, a few on the way according to Miscarriage and Infertility Support and Training, everything else is a fight and give the stats that MIST quote are so high, it really ought not to be.

Policies aren't as far, as I can tell, anywhere near inclusive enough for women and that needs to take shape first before adding in other language (my focus is on freelance and business networks not in the workplace so I'm a bit rusty). Businesses are in danger of losing good staff and @stuaz could loose this member of his team when I'll bet it's HR at fault. It's why I work for myself these days (and my boss is telling me to get back to work!)


----------



## O2.0

MollySmith said:


> _Women_ miscarry assuming there's a policy or that someone in a company thought there was a need for one.
> 
> The policy should also allow the _partners of_ (inc. same sex relationships) time off to mourn the loss (and more awareness around disenfranchised grief). But that policy rarely exists hence my bug bear that language of _person_ is adding on stuff on top of other stuff that's not even on any agenda; as rare as unicorns. Reading University have a policy, a few on the way according to Miscarriage and Infertility Support and Training, everything else is a fight and give the stats that MIST quote are so high, it really ought not to be.
> 
> Policies aren't as far, as I can tell, anywhere near inclusive enough for women and that needs to take shape first before adding in other language (my focus is on freelance and business networks not in the workplace so I'm a bit rusty). Businesses are in danger of losing good staff and @stuaz could loose this member of his team when I'll bet it's HR at fault. It's why I work for myself these days (and my boss is telling me to get back to work!)


LOL I think I need more coffee or I'm just not smart enough to understand your posts.

Miscarriage is specific to women, yes, but bereavement policies don't have to be specific to miscarriage do they? Or am I not understanding what you're saying?

In the US we have FMLA (Family Medical Leave Act). This applies to pretty much anything dealing with immediate family or adoption. OH was hospitalized back in November, and FMLA protected my job. I had to use accrued sick days, but I was legally allowed the time off even though there wasn't anything wrong with me because of FMLA.

I've not ever known employers not to be understanding of pregnancy loss. But my circle is small.
When my friend's wife miscarried, again, he took 2 weeks off through FMLA. She too had plenty of time off and both places of employment were incredibly supportive. 
When my friend went through IVF years ago and on failed attempts, if she felt she needed to go home, we covered for her, no questions asked by us or our bosses. FMLA would have covered it, but our boss was just understanding and she didn't have to do any paperwork.
She in turn covered for me when I needed to pump at work. That part was not covered by any policy, and I was just lucky to have a boss who gave me a place and time to do it. 
A lovely issue here in the US because we get a whopping 6 weeks to recover from childbirth - that's a whole 'nother can of worms, that does deal with *women's* rights, because it is *women* who die disproportionately in this country from post natal complications because of our ridiculous policies about women returning to work after childbirth.



Pawscrossed said:


> My stepchild identifies as binary, if they were to be pregnant, they might decide to be a pregnant person I suppose, I'm conscious of this as I write and edit, and edit somemore!!!!! I respect them for choices though I do not understand so it's as much as wish to say, but I do not blame them for 'stealing' woman's rights, yet I feel aggrieved by a process that precludes us from using women and/or person, and issuing disciplinary action to those who do not follow these rules. One argument cannot exclude the hard earned rights of another in my mind too.


I agree with you about respecting and accepting others' choices.

Some stuff seems so simple to me though, like for including trans people in sports, simply have two categories. "Women" - that is for biological women only, and "Open" for everyone else. That would include men, any woman who wanted to test her mettle against men, and any trans woman who also wanted to compete.
Many sports already have Juniors and Open, and a junior can compete in open if they choose, but an adult can't compete in juniors.
Granted when I was discussing this with OH, he mentioned some men would call discrimination because that means there are two categories women can compete in, but only one men can compete in. So maybe not so simple after all.

But back to pregnancy. I won't for a minute pretend to know I understand what it is to be non binary, but how you present to the world does matter. As Blair White (trans woman) says, she worked very hard, had a lot of surgeries, and paid a lot of money for the world to recognize her as female. If you were to ask her what pronouns to use or if she's a woman, it would offend her, she didn't go through all those surgeries for there to be any question about what to call her.
In the same way, if we're discussing pregnancy, I don't think there is anything wrong with assuming we're talking about women. 
If I go to a maternal fetal medicine specialist for a pregnancy scan and in the intake paperwork they ask me what pronouns I prefer, sorry but that's going to piss me right off. Can you not look at me, as a woman, sitting in an obstetrician's office and figure that one out? 
If individuals prefer to be called something different, absolutely, accommodate that. But it doesn't make sense to me to make everyone jump through all these pronoun and nomenclature hoops when a simple, "please call me ____" would suffice.


----------



## MollySmith

O2.0 said:


> LOL I think I need more coffee or I'm just not smart enough to understand your posts.
> 
> Miscarriage is specific to women, yes, but bereavement policies don't have to be specific to miscarriage do they? Or am I not understanding what you're saying?
> 
> In the US we have FMLA (Family Medical Leave Act). This applies to pretty much anything dealing with immediate family or adoption. OH was hospitalized back in November, and FMLA protected my job. I had to use accrued sick days, but I was legally allowed the time off even though there wasn't anything wrong with me because of FMLA.
> 
> I've not ever known employers not to be understanding of pregnancy loss. But my circle is small.
> When my friend's wife miscarried, again, he took 2 weeks off through FMLA. She too had plenty of time off and both places of employment were incredibly supportive.
> When my friend went through IVF years ago and on failed attempts, if she felt she needed to go home, we covered for her, no questions asked by us or our bosses. FMLA would have covered it, but our boss was just understanding and she didn't have to do any paperwork.
> She in turn covered for me when I needed to pump at work. That part was not covered by any policy, and I was just lucky to have a boss who gave me a place and time to do it.
> A lovely issue here in the US because we get a whopping 6 weeks to recover from childbirth - that's a whole 'nother can of worms, that does deal with *women's* rights, because it is *women* who die disproportionately in this country from post natal complications because of our ridiculous policies about women returning to work after childbirth.
> .


I'm riffing and I don't think I had enough coffee when I wrote it!

I'm not sure if they cover miscarriage or not. It should do, but not where I have worked but it was 6 years ago since I went solo.

My experiences was that it was down to the company but then I got stuck in a cycle of thinking nobody would want to employ a woman who was going through IVF so best stay put as at least my employer, however crap, knew and better the devil I knew, That happens a lot. I got two days after each IVF failure and one day after a miscarriage as I was required to go in for a... get this.... Investors in People interview (a scheme in the UK to 'put people first and care about their work-life balance. Building a stronger, healthier, happier society') somehow I did. Statuory sick pay here is £96.35 per week for 28 weeks.

It's very dependant on companies here I _think_. I'm sure someone who is in a workplace will correct me - please do. The Miscarriage Association say this 'But many employees don't know their rights and employers rarely have policies in place to help. Managers are not always clear on their responsibilities and colleagues may not know what to say.' And that last part is important, many may not want to explain to their boss anyway.

And unfortunately and very sadly, I've heard too many stories in my voluntary work around raising awareness of childlessness not by choice, which may include miscarriage, of employers being terrible including experiences of my own that are too awful to relate to. It's very common.

It pains me to read that employers are scrabbling around with language when they need to write a dammed policy in the first place and make it clear.


----------



## O2.0

MollySmith said:


> The Miscarriage Association say this 'But many employees don't know their rights and employers rarely have policies in place to help. Managers are not always clear on their responsibilities and colleagues may not know what to say.' And that last part is important, many may not want to explain to their boss anyway.


If you're sick, you're sick. If the company offers sick leave, all it should require is the employee to call in, say they're too ill to work, done. Miscarriage has a physical as well as emotional toll, so saying you can't come in because you're physically unable to is a) perfectly accurate, and b) what the physical ailment is is no one's business - whether it's chemo treatments hitting you hard, migraines, miscarriage or anything else.



MollySmith said:


> I got two days after each IVF failure and one day after a miscarriage


I'm surprised there is a set number of days. Honestly, other than the 6 weeks for childbirth, I've never seen a set number of days for anything. I think FMLA is 12 weeks, but negotiable with the employer. I've certainly never been out and been told, oh, you have the flu, you get 3 days but no more! It's always been the doctor who decides how many days you should be out - and that's usually to prevent people going back to work too soon after surgeries etc.


----------



## Siskin

O2.0 said:


> If you're sick, you're sick. If the company offers sick leave, all it should require is the employee to call in, say they're too ill to work, done. Miscarriage has a physical as well as emotional toll, so saying you can't come in because you're physically unable to is a) perfectly accurate, and b) what the physical ailment is is no one's business - whether it's chemo treatments hitting you hard, migraines, miscarriage or anything else.
> 
> I'm surprised there is a set number of days. Honestly, other than the 6 weeks for childbirth, I've never seen a set number of days for anything. I think FMLA is 12 weeks, but negotiable with the employer. I've certainly never been out and been told, oh, you have the flu, you get 3 days but no more! It's always been the doctor who decides how many days you should be out - and that's usually to prevent people going back to work too soon after surgeries etc.


Usually I doctor signs you off on sick leave so it would mean visiting a doctor if you needed time off for whatever your illness is. If you have been in hospital they will issue sick notes, it it needs to be extended then it will often mean a visit to your GP.

There is designated time off after childbirth and you can take up to year off if you want and your job will be preserved. My daughter filled in for her boss for the last year for maternity leave, boss is coming back for two days a week this month and my daughter will fill in the other three days.

I'm not up to date with the various rules over time off for illness and maternity leave. When I had my first child I could have had three months paid maternity leave so long as I planned to return, if I wasn't planning to to return then it was two months. This was in 1979


----------



## stuaz

MollySmith said:


> It's very dependant on companies here I _think_. I'm sure someone who is in a workplace will correct me - please do. The Miscarriage Association say this 'But many employees don't know their rights and employers rarely have policies in place to help. Managers are not always clear on their responsibilities and colleagues may not know what to say.' And that last part is important, many may not want to explain to their boss anyway.


I think you are right that it does depend on the workplace but I think things are getting better in that respect.

Someone in my team a few years back had a miscarriage and turned up to work the next day. I took them to one side and basically told them to take as much time as possible. People deal with things like that differently so it was hard for me to put a number of days or whatever but left them to make the call on that.
I wasn't sure what the "official policy" at the time was but I made my own judgement call for there well-being. However there is now a policy in place for both the woman and partner in the event of miscarriage and I know of other workplaces that also have similar polices in place.


----------



## MollySmith

stuaz said:


> I think you are right that it does depend on the workplace but I think things are getting better in that respect.
> 
> Someone in my team a few years back had a miscarriage and turned up to work the next day. I took them to one side and basically told them to take as much time as possible. People deal with things like that differently so it was hard for me to put a number of days or whatever but left them to make the call on that.
> I wasn't sure what the "official policy" at the time was but I made my own judgement call for there well-being. However there is now a policy in place for both the woman and partner in the event of miscarriage and I know of other workplaces that also have similar polices in place.


You're the sort of manager everyone needs. The fact that they could tell you, perfectly handled.

Rare but an example and I am pleased to hear it's getting better.


----------



## Rafa

O2.0 said:


> If you're sick, you're sick.


Exactly, to me, miscarriage comes under the same mantle as food poisoning, 'flu, etc.

You let your employer know you're unwell and not fit for work. No need for specifics. Any GP worth his/her salt would happily sign a sick note for someone having recently suffered a miscarriage.


----------



## Cleo38

In a world of madness when it comes to women, some common sense at last ...

Humiliation for Nicola Sturgeon as women's rights campaigners win gender court case and get awarded costs - Scottish Daily Express

Home - For Women Scotland


----------



## mrs phas

BBC News - Lia Thomas: Florida governor Ron DeSantis refuses to recognise Thomas win
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/swimming/60842863


----------



## mrs phas

Double post


----------



## Cleo38

mrs phas said:


> BBC News - Lia Thomas: Florida governor Ron DeSantis refuses to recognise Thomas win
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/swimming/60842863


And here we have yet another Labour MP saying how marvellous this is & anyone who criticises is 'transphobic' ... of course they are for expressing concerns. No actual debate again or consideration for women in sport.

I don't think Labour support women at all now, the whole lot of them seem so spineless & unwilling to acknowledge any concerns women have


----------



## Jonescat

Women's Aid has just published a statement on single sex services- it would be great if everyone put this much thought into it ! Sorry it is a big post but it is all relevant and people may at sometime need to know what women's aid's position is. 
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/womens-aid-single-sex-services-statement/

*Position regarding member services and direct services to survivors*
*Following a consultation with members and stakeholders, we are now able to publish our organisational position on single-sex services. We are proud to have a range of services, including single-sex services and services that meet the needs of trans and non binary people, in our federation.*
*Full statement here:*
*About Women's Aid*
Women's Aid is a national charity. Our charitable objects are: "To promote the protection of women and children who have suffered from, or are exposed to, domestic abuse, including the preservation and protection of their mental and physical health, the relief of need and the promotion of research and education concerning gender-based violence."

Women's Aid is a membership organisation with over 160 members that provide support and accommodation to survivors of domestic abuse and their children across England. Each individual member organisation is autonomous providing a wide range of support services including women's refuges, 1-2-1 support, dispersed accommodation, counselling, helpline, and groups. The membership includes many specialist services led by and for marginalised communities. Women's Aid also runs national online support services, as well as providing expert training and consultancy to a range of external agencies and professionals.

Our roots are in the international women's rights movement, and our federation developed in the 1970s and 1980s in response to patriarchy, sexism, and male violence against women. Domestic abuse organisations and refuges were originally created by and for women - many of whom were survivors themselves - as spaces free from men for safety, healing, mutual support, and solidarity.

We have been at the forefront of shaping and coordinating responses to domestic abuse for nearly 50 years. We have done so by placing the needs of survivors at the heart of our work and by responding to their needs and many of our staff, board members and supporters are survivors of domestic abuse. Together with our members, we support women and children experiencing domestic abuse, challenge the root causes of violence, and address women's experience of intersecting and overlapping systems of oppression.

*Development of our position on single sex services*
Today, it is still widely acknowledged by expert service providers that single sex, trauma informed spaces are crucial in providing safe spaces for recovery from abuse and violence for women and their children. However, there is a trend towards gender neutral commissioning of services and its abandonment of commissioning the specialist domestic abuse services which are needed for all parts of the population. A consequence of this is that woman-led, single sex services are losing funding, which results in local communities losing the deep expertise and decades of experience these services provided. This is part of a worrying move by commissioners to disregard the sex-specific nature of domestic abuse.

Additionally, there is an ongoing exchange of different views on the inclusion of trans women in single sex spaces including with commissioners, within feminist movements and organisations, and across society at large.

Given this context, the Women's Aid Federation of England committed to clarifying our own position on single sex services. To inform this, we consulted our national federation, staff, survivors, and key external stakeholders. This helped with our understanding of our members' current practices, and their views, challenges and needs. The information obtained through the consultation is helping us to develop guidance for our member organisations.

*Current practice within our membership*
Our members are a diverse group of organisations providing a range of high-quality support and services. Some members offer support to women and children only, while others support all victims of domestic abuse. Most member organisations deliver at least some women only (single sex) services, most commonly through refuge accommodation and groups.

Members routinely use exceptions within the Equality Act 2010 to provide single sex services. They do this because survivors have told them that they and their children experience trauma responses when in contact with males, particularly at the point of leaving an abusive relationship but also for some time afterwards.

Many members provide responsive and effective community support and emergency accommodation to trans and non-binary survivors. A relatively small number of trans women need to access emergency accommodation. Where they do, some member organisations provide this within their accommodation on a case-by-case basis while others provide alternative dispersed accommodation or signpost to other organisations.

*Where Women's Aid stands*
The Women's Aid approach is born of our desire to support, care and take a trauma-informed perspective for all survivors with a particular focus on women and their children in accordance with our charitable objects. Our position has three pillars:

*1. The provision of single-sex domestic abuse services is a founding principle of Women's Aid, and we will defend it *

Women's Aid's charitable objects centre the protection of women and children who have suffered from domestic violence.

Our priority is to meet the needs of all survivors to have spaces where they can heal and be provided with trauma informed support.

We know from our members that many women and children who have been subject to male violence and abuse need access to support and accommodation which is provided in single sex spaces as this reduces their distress and trauma. We therefore support the principle of providing single sex domestic abuse services which is lawful under the Equality Act.

Some members conclude that it is not appropriate to include trans women (including those with a Gender Recognition Certificate) in women-only shared spaces. We support their right to make this assessment, as long as they do so lawfully.

We will continue to support trans women to approach Women's Aid for help directly. When they do, we will support where we can as ever, and signpost to specialist services that best respond to their specific needs and circumstances as appropriate.

*2. We recognise that members have different approaches and offer a variety of services within their organisations. We support this diversity in our federation. *

Domestic abuse services are most effective when they are led by local and specialist organisations who tailor their offer to the needs of their community. Therefore, our members are best placed to determine whether to deliver some or all as single-sex services within the parameters of the law.

The role of Women's Aid as a federation is to enable and empower our members to meet the need and requirements they have identified in their service, and we recognise that they will choose to do this in different ways. Within the scope of our membership terms, we trust our members to unfailingly put survivors at the centre of their provision, and we will defend our members when they speak out about survivors' needs.

*3. We are committed to increasing the provision of services for all survivors of domestic violence and abuse, including trans people. *

Overall, there is not enough community support or safe accommodation to meet the demand from survivors of domestic and sexual abuse. We will continue to advocate for additional funding and resources to ensure all survivors have the support they need and deserve including services delivered through 'by and for' organisations.

We will engage with respectful discussions about sex and gender and access to services. We recognise that balancing the rights of different groups of people can be challenging and call for respectful discourse about how to develop and deliver the most effective services to meet the needs of all vulnerable victims.

As part of this we are committed to further developing our understanding of the needs of trans people and emerging best practice in service provision for this group.

Within our federation we will champion the rights of women to speak and a respectful culture inclusive of the different viewpoints of, and approaches taken by, our members.

*Women's Aid Board of Trustees, March 2022*

*For review once every 18 months.*

The publication of this statement sees *no change to the way that services are run*, and many of our member organisations run services that are accessible to trans and non-binary survivors, and welcome trans and non-binary survivors as service users. We will be working with our membership moving forward to better meet the needs of trans and non-binary survivors, under the third pillar of our position, and no doors currently open to trans and non-binary survivors will be closed because of this position.

Our position has been developed as we respond to the trend towards the gender neutral commissioning of services. This is leading to women-led, single sex services losing funding, which results in local communities being deprived of the significant expertise and decades of experience these services have provided. It is important for us to challenge commissioning decisions that negatively affect the quality of domestic abuse services that survivors receive. You can read more about this here: https://www.womensaid.org.uk/intern...y-chief-executive-of-womens-aid-farah-nazeer/


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Full link here:

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...nin-zaghari-ratcliffe-iran-hostage-speaks-out


----------



## £54etgfb6

Mrs Funkin said:


> View attachment 485936
> 
> 
> Full link here:
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/comment...nin-zaghari-ratcliffe-iran-hostage-speaks-out


No idea who the journalist behind this article is but it was both comedic and brutally honest. The entitlement of some people who feel they have the authority to tell a hostage victim how to act as if they write the law is bizarre. Why is she not entitled to express frustration about her situation? Send her back "home" (as if she isn't really British) because she has made -valid- complaints about the British government? Is it the British public who freed her? Does she owe us something??? These people have such limited perspectives on life, contained to their own experiences alone and incapable of even imagining what someone else's life may be like.

And why is she not allowed to disagree with her husband? What an odd mindset to have, that a woman exists to improve her husband's image. Are we merely vehicles for male success?? I hate the old stereotype that the man is the leader and the rest of the family are followers. Despite Nazanin being the one who lived through this experience, her husband's opinion is deemed more important due to his gender? God, I forgot we were living in the dark ages :Vomit


----------



## Pawscrossed

O2.0 said:


> If you're sick, you're sick. If the company offers sick leave, all it should require is the employee to call in, say they're too ill to work, done. Miscarriage has a physical as well as emotional toll, so saying you can't come in because you're physically unable to is a) perfectly accurate, and b) what the physical ailment is is no one's business - whether it's chemo treatments hitting you hard, migraines, miscarriage or anything else.
> 
> I'm surprised there is a set number of days. Honestly, other than the 6 weeks for childbirth, I've never seen a set number of days for anything. I think FMLA is 12 weeks, but negotiable with the employer. I've certainly never been out and been told, oh, you have the flu, you get 3 days but no more! It's always been the doctor who decides how many days you should be out - and that's usually to prevent people going back to work too soon after surgeries etc.





Rafa said:


> Exactly, to me, miscarriage comes under the same mantle as food poisoning, 'flu, etc.
> 
> You let your employer know you're unwell and not fit for work. No need for specifics. Any GP worth his/her salt would happily sign a sick note for someone having recently suffered a miscarriage.


Of course. I do not believe that this is the issue, it's what next. Then equality and lack of policy starts to fail. As I have found personally - and as Molly Smith (and countless others in well-researched publications) that's often sick, back to work and that's that. Miscarriage is only one of 80 ways not be a parent.


----------



## O2.0

Pawscrossed said:


> Of course. I do not believe that this is the issue, it's what next. Then equality and lack of policy starts to fail. As I have found personally - and as Molly Smith (and countless others in well-researched publications) that's often sick, back to work and that's that. Miscarriage is only one of 80 ways not be a parent.


I'm not exactly sure what you're alluding to with the what's next part?

This is going to sound horribly callous and I don't mean it that way, but apologies in advance for how this is going to sound. 
How much support really is it appropriate to ask of a workplace? 
People go through shit in life all the time. Does the employee going through a divorce need a policy for days they need off for court dates and dealing with all the complications related to divorce? Or do they just take their personal day on that court day and call it good?
Does the employee who's making arrangements for their parent with dementia to move from their home to assisted living need policies for the days they need off to tour facilities and help that parent move? 
Does the employee who's trying to get their addicted adult child in to rehab, again, need special consideration for taking time off to get said child the help they need, or do they just take the days they need with as little conversation about it with their manager as they can?

Not everything needs a special policy. Rather we can just assume people who take their sick and personal days without much explanation have their reasons and we can be good humans who give them the time and space they need.


----------



## picaresque

Christ


----------



## Jesthar

picaresque said:


> Christ
> View attachment 485947


What a poor choice of wording! I'd select 'Other' just because...

Especially as the club is mislabelling - 'sex' refers to biology, not gender...


----------



## kimthecat

picaresque said:


> Christ
> View attachment 485947


That sums up all the craziness..


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> I'm not exactly sure what you're alluding to with the what's next part?
> 
> This is going to sound horribly callous and I don't mean it that way, but apologies in advance for how this is going to sound.
> How much support really is it appropriate to ask of a workplace?
> People go through shit in life all the time. Does the employee going through a divorce need a policy for days they need off for court dates and dealing with all the complications related to divorce? Or do they just take their personal day on that court day and call it good?
> Does the employee who's making arrangements for their parent with dementia to move from their home to assisted living need policies for the days they need off to tour facilities and help that parent move?
> Does the employee who's trying to get their addicted adult child in to rehab, again, need special consideration for taking time off to get said child the help they need, or do they just take the days they need with as little conversation about it with their manager as they can?
> 
> Not everything needs a special policy. Rather we can just assume people who take their sick and personal days without much explanation have their reasons and we can be good humans who give them the time and space they need.


I agree. There is alot of stuff in the media atm regarding menopause & how much it afects women It is great that this is being discussed & awareness raised but there was talk of having Menopause Ambassadors in workplaces which is juts not needed IMO. I don't want to discuss my personal issues with people at work & neither do I think women need a special ambassador.

After my mum died there wasn't any specific time I was allowed off, in fact I worked the initial few days afterwards, probably because I was on autopilot. When it all came crashing down work were fantastic. They were very accommodating & supported me through a difficult time. I didn't have to go in to details but just inform them what was happening & what meds I was prescribed (as I work in construction so can be random drug tested).

I was signed off sick for a while & then had a back to work plan put in place. Throughout the period nobody advised of any policies or anything like that, it was just taken that I wasn't fit for work

(To add: I am lucky in that i get sick pay & realise not everyone does)


----------



## Pawscrossed

picaresque said:


> Christ
> View attachment 485947




How extraordinary. I think I'd chose other and then tell them 'yes I have enough thanks'.


----------



## Pawscrossed

O2.0 said:


> I'm not exactly sure what you're alluding to with the what's next part?
> 
> This is going to sound horribly callous and I don't mean it that way, but apologies in advance for how this is going to sound.
> How much support really is it appropriate to ask of a workplace?
> People go through shit in life all the time. Does the employee going through a divorce need a policy for days they need off for court dates and dealing with all the complications related to divorce? Or do they just take their personal day on that court day and call it good?
> Does the employee who's making arrangements for their parent with dementia to move from their home to assisted living need policies for the days they need off to tour facilities and help that parent move?
> Does the employee who's trying to get their addicted adult child in to rehab, again, need special consideration for taking time off to get said child the help they need, or do they just take the days they need with as little conversation about it with their manager as they can?
> 
> Not everything needs a special policy. Rather we can just assume people who take their sick and personal days without much explanation have their reasons and we can be good humans who give them the time and space they need.


Your comment above isn't callous, but it demonstrates - not unusually so - that you're not tuned in to the issue then you won't see the signs. Childless is not discussed..HR miss it a lot when they roll out gender equality initiatives, such as parental leave policies and flexible work. There is heaps of research out there to support but it is not often carried through as an awareness piece.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

All of these links that various folk have posted today just make me sad  There's so much insidious sexism in the world and it's just hideous. I can't even think abut how to respond to all of the issues. Thank you everyone for highlighting things that I wouldn't otherwise see.


----------



## Boxer123

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-60847198

Even if his sentence has been increased it's still not enough. This poor women no justice at all


----------



## MollySmith

Pawscrossed said:


> Your comment above isn't callous, but it demonstrates - not unusually so - that you're not tuned in to the issue then you won't see the signs. Childless is not discussed..HR miss it a lot when they roll out gender equality initiatives, such as parental leave policies and flexible work. There is heaps of research out there to support but it is not often carried through as an awareness piece.


Thank you @Pawscrossed, that's spot on and I agree. You're a star. In fact you've pretty much quoted what my dear friend Michael says in in the work he's done for the DCA in Australia.

We've had death today, sort of expected but awful nevertheless... I know if I was at work, I'd get time off. So forgive the mangled thoughts, my mind is elsewhere but this is important.

Chances are, one will have a colleague who has sadly lost a parent, and the woman over the desk there has been having hot flushes and between people, one may find the numbers to stay to HR we need a thing to support women who are menopausal. A workplace will have some system in place to help those who are experiencing a death. People don't find those conversation easy but there's support there. If you say I didn't meant the right person to have a child with, or I met the right man and I was 45, and the baby in the office is why I'm the loos and not at my desk getting the work done on a deadline... who the hell listens to that? If they do, is it fair advice? Or, try my ex was abusive and shoved me down the stairs and I had a stilborn baby and my wonderful new husband and I can't keep a pregnancy I keep miscarrying (that's me btw) nobody listens to it and I've had to leave the office because a colleague brought in cake to celebrate her pregnancy news as it simply floored me. I had a formal warning even though I explained, I have been told I had no kids so can you do the overtime line. I was grieving. So that's why one can't compare it and why it is specific.Any why it's an inequality issue. I hope that helps in a not very eloquent way.

It isn't about time off as you rightly say. It's actions, language, equality, EIDB and....so much more. Life long, disenfranchised grief that nobody talks about because it's the club nobody wants to be in and many will never accept they are part of.

The work place along with life, is fraught with hijacks which we _know_ about and it's not about them parents and us over here (that's pointless and unfair), but systems. With better communication and equality the mental health load can be reduced to create a better and more supportive place in which to succeed, so that the next generation - your kids, if you have them - get a better deal of it, and aren't excluded from flexible working and other areas of contentions that I am so pleased I no longer have to tackle daily.

To quote your signature, Pawscrossed, just because you don't see it don't mean it ain't there. it really is and whilst I'm sure the tempatation is to deny it, it needs a space at the table and drive the change. I have no idea what it's like to homeschool in Covid but I have respect to those who did under awful working demands, and I have huge respect to pregnant then screwed who talks about inequality for parents.It is outragous that it's needed but glad it is there. Like the work of Gateway Women's changemakers exists for inequality for childlessness and that of about 50 other campaigner. Luckily most of it is easy stuff but needs to be noted so that's a protocol. Some if it is around a buddy system (which I set up in one workplace so that people can grab a coffee when there is a baby shower, with someone who understands they don't want to sit in the loos or feel like they must go) and others is around choice but it's is about conversation and care and it's not difficult but very specific.

I appreciate and welcome the attempts to understand, truthfully. you just have to trust me, it's very real and that's not an angry post. I'm at peace with it, but a tired post because it's been twelve years of trying to get this onto an agenda and boy, it's exhausting for something actually very simple! And my eyes are very red and scratchy

Here's some links to underline the validity and better written! More from Bristol Uni. I think I said Reading the other day and I meant _Bristol_. Gateway Women and Mika Mard.

If you got here, have a medal! That's all I have to say on it, there's other stuff with links that is also equally important and I would hate for this to get soapboxing on one topic though I realise I dropped into the conversation !! Move along!


----------



## Mrs Funkin

@MollySmith I'm so sorry that you've had a bereavement today. I send you love and strength xx


----------



## Pawscrossed

MollySmith said:


> Thank you @Pawscrossed, that's spot on and I agree. You're a star. In fact you've pretty much quoted what my dear friend Michael says in in the work he's done for the DCA in Australia.
> 
> We've had death today, sort of expected but awful nevertheless... I know if I was at work, I'd get time off. So forgive the mangled thoughts, my mind is elsewhere but this is important.
> 
> Chances are, one will have a colleague who has sadly lost a parent, and the woman over the desk there has been having hot flushes and between people, one may find the numbers to stay to HR we need a thing to support women who are menopausal. A workplace will have some system in place to help those who are experiencing a death. People don't find those conversions easy but there's support there. If you say I didn't meant the right person to have a child with, or I met the right man and I was 45, and the baby in the office is why I'm the loos and not at my desk getting the work done on a deadline... who the hell listeners to that? Or try my ex was abusive and shoved me down the stairs and I had a stilborn baby and my wonderful new husband and I can't keep a pregnancy I keep miscarrying (that's me btw) nobody listens to it and I've had to leave the office once because a colleague brought in cake to celebrate her pregnancy news as it simply floored me for no reason. I had a formal warning even though I explained because by then I'd been given the line that I had no kids so can you do the overtime line. So that's why one can't compared and why it specific.Any why it's an inequality issue.
> 
> It isn't about time off as you rightly say. It's actions, language, equality, EIDB and....so much more. Life long, disenfranchised grief that no body talks about because it's the club nobody wants to be in and many will never accept they are part of.
> 
> The work place along with life, is fraught with hijacks which we _know_ about and it's not about them parents and us over here (that's pointless and unfair), but systems. With better communication and equality the mental health load can be reduced to create a better and more supportive place in which to succeed, so that the next generation - your kids, if you have them - get a better deal of it, and aren't excluded from flexible working and other areas of contentions that I am so pleased I no longer have to tackle daily.
> 
> To quote your signature, Pawscrossed, just because you don't see it don't mean it ain't there. it really is and whilst I'm sure the tempatation is to deny it, it needs a space at the table and drive the change. I have no idea what it's like to homeschool in Covid but I have respect to those who did under awful working demands, and I have huge respect to pregnant then screwed who talks about inequality for parents.It is outragous that it's needed but glad it is there. Like the work of Gateway Women's changemakers exists for inequality for childlessness and that of about 50 other campaigner. Luckily most of it is easy stuff but needs to be noted so that's a protocol. Some if it is around a buddy system (which I set up in one workplace so that people can grab a coffee when there is a baby shower, with someone who understands they don't want to sit in the loos or feel like they must go) and others is around choice but it's is about conversation and care and it's not difficult but very specific.
> 
> I appreciate and welcome the attempts to understand, truthfully. you just have to trust me, it's very real and that's not an angry post. I'm at peace with it, but a tired post because it's been twelve years of trying to get this onto an agenda and boy, it's exhausting for something actually very simple! And my eyes are very red and scratchy
> 
> More from Bristol Uni. I think I said Reading the other day and I meant _Bristol_. Gateway Women and Mika Mard.
> 
> If you got here, have a medal! That's all I have to say on it, there's other stuff with links that is also equally important and I would hate for this to get soapboxing on one topic though I realise I dropped into the conversation !!


I am so very sorry for your loss x

And thank you for this reply which, even if you feel mangled, is much better than I could ever have attempted! It shows your experience and knowledge. It is a club nobody wants to join and just because we are in it, it's not easy to talk about. I admire your courage and the heaps of info you've given to me to support me.

I hope the replies honour your experiences and validity. I don't think any further justification is required.


----------



## Cleo38

Sorry you've experienced a death @MollySmith but I don't think grief is comparable. It doesn't matter to some of us that there is someone there who will listen as some of us don't talk about. When my mum died I had a few well meaning people tell me they knw how I felt ... they didn't.

No one could experience my grief, my sense of loss, my regrets, etc other than me.


----------



## MollySmith

Mrs Funkin said:


> @MollySmith I'm so sorry that you've had a bereavement today. I send you love and strength xx


Thank you. I hope you're okay too xxx



Pawscrossed said:


> I am so very sorry for your loss x
> 
> And thank you for this reply which, even if you feel mangled, is much better than I could ever have attempted! It shows your experience and knowledge. It is a club nobody wants to join and just because we are in it, it's not easy to talk about. I admire your courage and the heaps of info you've given to me to support me.
> 
> I hope the replies honour your experiences and validity. I don't think any further justification is required.


Thank you. I'm simply happy to help anyone who needs it. Agree with all the rest too, there's links to read if anyone wants to know more.


----------



## MollySmith

Cleo38 said:


> Sorry you've experienced a death @MollySmith but I don't think grief is comparable. It doesn't matter to some of us that there is someone there who will listen as some of us don't talk about. When my mum died I had a few well meaning people tell me they knw how I felt ... they didn't.
> 
> No one could experience my grief, my sense of loss, my regrets, etc other than me.


I agree, death is not comparable. I didn't intend to give that impression. When my grandmother died - she brought me up - it was completely different to my son. They are incomparable. The grief I feel is different.

The death today is different again.

The post is about awareness and policy of a specific need not measuring to another.


----------



## Cleo38

MollySmith said:


> I agree, death is not comparable. I didn't mean to give that impression at all. When my grandmother died - she brought me up - it was completely different to my son. They are incomparable


No situations that cause are grief are comparable regardless of what HR policies may or may not be in place


----------



## Pawscrossed

I've lost my parents - my stepfather recently - and it doesn't relate at all to the loss of motherhood and recognising the need for equality. I had empathy for the former. Nothing for the former because my step kids are apparently enough. When I claimed childfree it made life easier. Grief is a awful businesses. So sorry @Cleo38


----------



## Pawscrossed

MollySmith said:


> Thank you. I hope you're okay too xxx
> 
> Thank you. I'm simply happy to help anyone who needs it. Agree with all the rest too, there's links to read if anyone wants to know more.


Take a night off  I hope no tin hats are needed tomorrow. Take care x


----------



## O2.0

My question was simply about workplace policies for compassionate time off. 
I was questioning if childlessness needs its own umbrella or if it would fit under any of the other equally difficult reasons someone would need a day, a week, or even a moment and not necessarily want to put it under such a specific umbrella.

Years ago, a coworker got beat up by her ex's sister. It was an awful situation and she really didn't want to talk about it and certainly didn't want anyone to know other than people who absolutely had to. She took a week off, it was explained to HR as sick time. That's all they needed to know and that made things much easier for her. If everything ends up needing an explanation or having a category, what do we do for those who don't want to share but still need the compassionate leave? 
We can't find a category for every type of pain and hardship, someone will always end up being left out. But allowing for humans to need compassionate leave regardless of what they may be going through and if they want to share about it or not is IMHO the ultimate way to be inclusive.

But that's all I'll say, and we should probably move on. With stories as tragic as @MollySmith has shared, what else is there to say?

I'm sorry for your losses, and to anyone else reading who hasn't shared their own stories know that I see you too and hold space for you as well


----------



## Rafa

Pawscrossed said:


> it's what next.


This is what I genuinely don't understand.

What is it you would expect from an Employer if you have suffered a miscarriage?​


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Oh @MollySmith I don't have words to say how sorry I am at what you've gone through. Thank you for doing us the honour of sharing what has happened, I'm thankful that you know this is a safe space to share xx


----------



## £54etgfb6

Rafa said:


> This is what I genuinely don't understand.
> 
> What is it you would expect from an Employer if you have suffered a miscarriage?​


I can't assume to know what OP was referring to but in my mind creating a policy would hold businesses accountable? There is no law requiring businesses to have compassionate leave in place. If you suffer a miscarriage and tell your manager this, then they're not legally obligated to do anything (as far as I'm aware- correct me if I'm wrong as I do hope I'm wrong!). Many people view death of a relative and miscarriage as different, and they are in many ways, but both involve loss and some people may view one as greater than the other. This creates the opportunity for abuse by employers as in their eyes you aren't suffering _that_ much. A line for policies like these does need to be drawn, but I don't think miscarriage is where that line is. Hopefully I've interpreted the discussion correctly.


----------



## MollySmith

To be clear. I'm not measuring loss or grief. I'm talking about a disenfranchised grief around invisible loss. Not specifically a miscarriage. I hope that was clear, my sincere apologies if not.

This may help to explain. 
https://jarm.journals.yorku.ca/index.php/jarm/article/download/31220/28657

There are links to evidence to support this inequality in my longer post which is not measured against any other policy or inequality issue which you are invited to read if you wish. I'm not debating the details or justifying when there's enough out there to support the reasoning. It's a complex one!

I would not begin to expect all to understand, but I do expect respect. The same given in the places in which have been invited to speak, and a gentle curiosity. The only time I get a real bite back is online so I have trusted this space too and I hope I don't regret it. I am sure I won't but it's still a bit nerve wracking after all these years!

If anyone does need support for anything related to childlessness or grief then please do drop a DM to me and I'll do my best to help or point too to spaces and in complete confidence.

Take good care of yourselves, especially over the weekend. @Cleo38 sending you a bloody big hug.

catch-up sometime folks x


----------



## MollySmith

O2.0 said:


> My question was simply about workplace policies for compassionate time off.
> I was questioning if childlessness needs its own umbrella or if it would fit under any of the other equally difficult reasons someone would need a day, a week, or even a moment and not necessarily want to put it under such a specific umbrella.
> 
> Years ago, a coworker got beat up by her ex's sister. It was an awful situation and she really didn't want to talk about it and certainly didn't want anyone to know other than people who absolutely had to. She took a week off, it was explained to HR as sick time. That's all they needed to know and that made things much easier for her. If everything ends up needing an explanation or having a category, what do we do for those who don't want to share but still need the compassionate leave?
> We can't find a category for every type of pain and hardship, someone will always end up being left out. But allowing for humans to need compassionate leave regardless of what they may be going through and if they want to share about it or not is IMHO the ultimate way to be inclusive.
> 
> But that's all I'll say, and we should probably move on. With stories as tragic as @MollySmith has shared, what else is there to say?
> 
> I'm sorry for your losses, and to anyone else reading who hasn't shared their own stories know that I see you too and hold space for you as well


thank you for your thoughtful reply, I hope my replies helped.

I am in a space, _almost_, of fragile gratitude as it's made me view life differently, taught me to learn from others and listen with care. And I have made some incredible, deep rooted connections and friendships. Some days are pants but life is for all of us, what matters is we have safe spaces and support in place.


----------



## Cleo38

Heartbreaking new for girls in Afghanistan although not surprising .... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-60848649


----------



## Lurcherlad




----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> Heartbreaking new for girls in Afghanistan although not surprising .... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-60848649


I can't believe we live in a world where women still have to fight for their right to be educated. It's utterly heartbreaking!

My mom doesn't talk about much of her childhood but one big rift with her family happened when she insisted on going to school past the 6th grade, she would have been 12, this would have been in the late 1940's
Back then a 6th grade education was considered good enough for most farm kids and certainly for women. She ended up going to live with an aunt so she could continue school, and she was reminded of how selfish she was for putting her education above the rest of the family's needs. 
Her story is not unique either.

Now we have laws that children have to stay in school until they are 17.

But here we are, 70 years later, still fighting the same fight. It's so disheartening


----------



## StormyThai

I have never been given time off to recover from any of the many miscarriages I had over the years...in fact I have never worked anywhere that didn't require a full run down of exactly what is wrong with you when calling in sick, I remember many occasions when I was told that I wasn't sick enough or my reason wasn't valid.

I shouldn't have to tell a manager why I'm not able to go to work...


----------



## O2.0

StormyThai said:


> I shouldn't have to tell a manager why I'm not able to go to work...


This is what I was getting at. 
Instead of specific miscarriage policies, there should be a blanket policy that if you need to be out you need to be out and it's no one's damned business why. If you want to share why great, not everyone does nor should they feel obligated to.

I'm sorry you didn't get any support


----------



## Siskin

O2.0 said:


> This is what I was getting at.
> Instead of specific miscarriage policies, there should be a blanket policy that if you need to be out you need to be out and it's no one's damned business why. If you want to share why great, not everyone does nor should they feel obligated to.
> 
> I'm sorry you didn't get any support


I remember you used to be able to have three days off sick at a time (from your sick leave allocation for the year), any more and you needed a sick note from the doctor, it's changed now. So something like the above scenario of a miscarriage it could have been used. This was the civil service though rather then private companies.


----------



## O2.0

Siskin said:


> I remember you used to be able to have three days off sick at a time (from your sick leave allocation for the year), any more and you needed a sick note from the doctor, it's changed now. So something like the above scenario of a miscarriage it could have been used. This was the civil service though rather then private companies.


Our policy is sick days and personal days. You accrue both based on how long you've been working. Even after taking nearly a month off to tend to OH, I still have 80+ sick days and 5 personal days I can use however I need to. I simply fill out the paperwork, check the box for "sick" or "personal" and use it to go to a doctor's appointment or take a kid back to university after spring break. It doesn't matter why I need the time. I usually tell my boss because we're friendly like that, but I don't have to. 
If it's unplanned time, we text a number and again, they don't care why you're out, just where your information is so that someone can cover.

This is one of those things where more understanding of a woman's issue (miscarriage) can improve things for everyone. Men need time off for personal reasons they may or may not want to share about, and again, they shouldn't have to. Nor should there be more compassion for those who choose to share over those who choose not to.


----------



## Siskin

O2.0 said:


> Our policy is sick days and personal days. You accrue both based on how long you've been working. Even after taking nearly a month off to tend to OH, I still have 80+ sick days and 5 personal days I can use however I need to. I simply fill out the paperwork, check the box for "sick" or "personal" and use it to go to a doctor's appointment or take a kid back to university after spring break. It doesn't matter why I need the time. I usually tell my boss because we're friendly like that, but I don't have to.
> If it's unplanned time, we text a number and again, they don't care why you're out, just where your information is so that someone can cover.
> 
> This is one of those things where more understanding of a woman's issue (miscarriage) can improve things for everyone. Men need time off for personal reasons they may or may not want to share about, and again, they shouldn't have to. Nor should there be more compassion for those who choose to share over those who choose not to.


When you say personal, is that you annual leave for holidays or whatever?
We used to work flexi hours and accrue enough for days off here and there. Apart from handing in a card marked with your work times and accrued hours you didn't need to do anything more apart from saying you would be off the following day. This is going back a bit, probably all automated on the computer now.
We were entitled as a new employee, to three weeks annual leave which increased with years or promotion to six weeks. Which was quite a decent amount when I worked there in the 70's. If you needed doctor/dentist/hospital visits then it was just a matter of telling your boss, didn't need to take it out of your annual leave entitlement or paid sick leave.


----------



## Jobeth

I get 13 weeks off a year but those times are set. I’m entitled to a year off sick with 6 months on full pay and 6 months half pay but they monitor your absence if you take lots of short absences. I’ve only had 4 days off in 14 years but it makes no difference. When you return to work you have to have an interview with your line manager and fill in a form. Where I work I wouldn’t have a problem with saying anything personal but I don’t think you should have to. Years ago someone had a GP note that said NOYB for none of your business.


----------



## O2.0

Jobeth said:


> Years ago someone had a GP note that said NOYB for none of your business.


Ha ha! I love it! Well done to that GP  


Siskin said:


> When you say personal, is that you annual leave for holidays or whatever?


No, we don't get annual leave. Personal just means a day to take care of personal business. But HR has told us it doesn't matter how we use the days if we have them. I tend to mark the form "personal" for things like taking a kid back to university or staying home for a workman to do something at the house, and "sick" for things like doctor appointments - for me or the kids.


----------



## O2.0

Back to women's sports.









"Biological men in women's athletics is unfair to women who train hard to compete.

Female athletes fought hard to get Title IX. The right to compete for n a level playing field is once again under attack. Here is a letter by Chelsea Mitchell. Here are her thoughts and experiences.

"They used to call me 'the fastest girl in Connecticut.' But I couldn't outrun an injustice.

For four years, I competed as a high school runner and made it to the state championships every one of those years. But in my junior year, I lost four of the state titles I earned to males who identified as females.

They give awards based on who wins-typically the person with the strongest muscles, the greatest lung power, the fastest speed-not based on how a person identifies. At the end of the race, it's about biology, not gender identity. And no amount of testosterone suppression can change a male's innate physical advantages, like bone structure and muscle mass.

And fast as I am, I can't outrun those advantages. Or the injustice that protects them.

For saying that out loud, I've been branded by some as a sore loser and a hater. But what I object to has nothing to do with hate.

Female athletes like me make a ton of sacrifices to compete-working tirelessly to shave fractions of seconds off our personal times and giving up what many would consider the "normal" teenage life by watching what we eat, skipping parties for practice, going to bed early to get up early and practice yet again. It becomes almost like a career. And we do all this while working hard to earn scholarship opportunities with preferred colleges and universities.

It's all worth it to us because we know we stand a chance at victory against our fellow female athletes-but not against those who aren't biologically female. It's demoralizing to see all that effort and sacrifice as futile, where we are punished for a biological reality we can't do anything about.

And that's what's been happening on high school and college campuses across America for the last several years. With the permission of coaches and administrators, as well as those in leadership at the National Collegiate Athletic Association, some male athletes have been pushing their way onto women's sports teams and playing fields. With their physical advantages, they've been taking the positions, the wins, and the opportunities so many women and girls have worked so hard-often their entire life-to obtain.

When women protest this-objecting to seeing the rewards for all our hard work go to competitors with a biological edge we can't hope to overcome-we're accused of hatred and bigotry. But the issue is fairness. And the people who should be protecting us and defending our rights are letting us down, time after time.

Last fall, it was the International Olympic Committee, making way for male-bodied athletes to more freely compete in women's sports. This month, it's the NCAA, offering a complex and confusing list of directives that basically pass the baton to the governing bodies of individual sports. But then USA Track & Field, for example, points to the IOC policy, which points to other national and international bodies. The baton just keeps getting passed round and round and round.

Everyone in leadership seems to want someone else to take responsibility. Many of them are understandably scared that a minority of loud activists are going to take aim at their sport, their school, or them personally. So, they're throwing female athletes under the bus, hoping we will eventually be quiet and all the commotion will eventually go away.

If it does, women's sports will become a thing of the past.

There's no way athletic administrators in every sport can't see this. If biological males move into women's competition, they will dominate whatever contests they enter. Eventually, nearly all the titles, all the scholarships, and all the opportunities to compete, earn scholarships and endorsements, and one day maybe even coach will go to the ones with the anatomical edge.

That's just biological reality, and the leaders of sport are deliberately turning a blind eye to it.

Under Title IX, they have a legal obligation to protect female athletes from this unfairness, but-just like the Connecticut Association of Schools, which I and other girls sued through our attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom-they're not doing it. And that must mean that the dreams of women, the opportunities for women, the rights of women just don't matter. On the playing field, or under the law.

Which means there's a lot more at stake here than a footrace. Or a swimming event. Or an Olympic title. This is about what we think of women in America. This is about what's safe and fair.

And that's a responsibility our athletic administrators can't outrun."

#NCAA #women #men #biology #fairness #fairsports #slipperyslope


----------



## picaresque

Pimps and people traffickers taking advantage of the war in Ukraine to coerce women into 'sex work'. The org in this article, having been called out on it is now defending themselves on Twitter by trying to make it a race thing ('you only care because they're white blah blah blah') 
https://www.reduxx.org/post/german-trans-sex-work-org-targets-ukrainian-refugee-women


----------



## mrs phas

I saw this and thought it was just perfect today


----------



## Pawscrossed

Detest Mother’s Day. Everyday and every woman please. 

Social media littered with people mourning mums, mums whose family forgot and women who are excluded for choices or not choices. A day of expectations and falls short often.

It’s Mothering Sunday in the UK about roots in mothering church for those in service. Mother’s Day is a different event from a USA celebration held in May, created in 1912 by Anna Jarvis (herself childless and unmarried) in homage to her mother who tried to get it stopped because of commercialism. 

The only possible good thing is that the gift buying keeps a lot of little businesses afloat but it still has a power to hurt and exclude.


----------



## Pawscrossed

O2.0 said:


> This is what I was getting at.
> Instead of specific miscarriage policies, there should be a blanket policy that if you need to be out you need to be out and it's no one's damned business why. If you want to share why great, not everyone does nor should they feel obligated to.
> 
> I'm sorry you didn't get any support


I worked at a call centre briefly. I had four days sick allowance and on my fifth day no pay and a formal warning. This was perfectly legal at the time. We had to explain. My spotty manager aged about twenty had no idea how to spell endometriosis never mind know what it meant. I told him in very graphic terms and handed in my notice. That's beside the point. There are/were (I hope) hundreds of other women in this UK wide company enduring this too, who really needed that work. It's thanks to @MollySmith and other campaigners, Fertility Network, Miscarriage Association that it's slowly getting better and more importantly the shame of infertility is being reduced a tiny bit. For men and women, men's mental health is affected by grief too.


----------



## Cleo38

Pawscrossed said:


> Detest Mother's Day. Everyday and every woman please.
> 
> Social media littered with people mourning mums, mums whose family forgot and women who are excluded for choices or not choices. A day of expectations and falls short often.
> 
> It's Mothering Sunday in the UK about roots in mothering church for those in service. Mother's Day is a different event from a USA celebration held in May, created in 1912 by Anna Jarvis (herself childless and unmarried) in homage to her mother who tried to get it stopped because of commercialism.
> 
> The only possible good thing is that the gift buying keeps a lot of little businesses afloat but it still has a power to hurt and exclude.


I disagree. For plenty of people Mother's Day (although maybe not in keeping with it's true origins here ) is a day where many people show appreciation for their mum's & get together as a family for quality time. It's not just about gifts despite what the adverts may suggest.

I found yesterday incredibly difficult (my mum died in May 2020), the only day so far where I really thought I would cave & have a drink (I gave up booze this year), but that does not mean the day itself should be cancelled. Many things in life are 'triggering' (I hate that word!) & sorry but we just need to accept that life just is difficult at times


----------



## Happy Paws2

Cleo38 said:


> I disagree. For plenty of people Mother's Day (although maybe not in keeping with it's true origins here ) is a day where many people show appreciation for their mum's & get together as a family for quality time. It's not just about gifts despite what the adverts may suggest.
> 
> I found yesterday incredibly difficult (my mum died in May 2020), the only day so far where I really thought I would cave & have a drink (I gave up booze this year), but that does not mean the day itself should be cancelled. Many things in life are 'triggering' (I hate that word!) & sorry but we just need to accept that life just is difficult at times


Every Mothers day is hard, I lost my Mom in 2008 and I still dread this time of the year all the Mothers Day cards in all the shops and the beautiful flowers, I know the the shops and companies are making a fortune out of this time of year but I just wish I was still buying something. Still miss you Mom X


----------



## Dimwit

Cleo38 said:


> I found yesterday incredibly difficult (my mum died in May 2020), the only day so far where I really thought I would cave & have a drink (I gave up booze this year), but that does not mean the day itself should be cancelled. Many things in life are 'triggering' (I hate that word!) & sorry but we just need to accept that life just is difficult at times


I thought of you yesterday - hope you are ok. I agree, I find Fathers Day very difficult, but that doesn't mean I think it should be cancelled. Yes Mothers/Fathers day are difficult for some people, but for many it is a time to appreciate your parents. I think, on the whole, people are more understanding now that these days are hard for some people, with may companies offering the choice to opt out of promotional emails etc.


----------



## Cleo38

Dimwit said:


> I thought of you yesterday - hope you are ok. I agree, I find Fathers Day very difficult, but that doesn't mean I think it should be cancelled. Yes Mothers/Fathers day are difficult for some people, but for many it is a time to appreciate your parents. I think, on the whole, people are more understanding now that these days are hard for some people, with may companies offering the choice to opt out of promotional emails etc.


Thank-you. Yes, certain days are so difficult but then there are so many things that are painful reminders. For me seeing the first snowdrops every year gets me crying (poor Kato was trying his best to make me laugh when I broke down on our walk earlier this year) but I suppose rather than cancel things we need to find better coping strategies.

Yesterday mine was just being outside with the dogs, watching them swim & play, just enjoying themselves. I purposefully avoided being with anyone as I didn't want to have to put on an act all day. I had a cry then then concentrated on the dogs. We ended up having a lovely day & tbh I enjoyed seeing people's posts on FB with their mum's.

I hope you have a plan in place for Father's Day


----------



## Dimwit

Cleo38 said:


> I hope you have a plan in place for Father's Day


My sister and I go to Costa and have a lemon muffin and a drink and raise a mug to him. He loved doing this and it just feels like a nice way to remember him.
I actually find there is a lot less understanding around fathers day and how it is difficult for some people - I know this is a thread about Women's rights, but I find it very sad that Dad's are of secondary importance as parents.


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> Many things in life are 'triggering' (I hate that word!) & sorry but we just need to accept that life just is difficult at times


This so much this.


----------



## O2.0

Pawscrossed said:


> I worked at a call centre briefly. I had four days sick allowance and on my fifth day no pay and a formal warning. This was perfectly legal at the time. We had to explain. My spotty manager aged about twenty had no idea how to spell endometriosis never mind know what it meant. I told him in very graphic terms and handed in my notice. That's beside the point. There are/were (I hope) hundreds of other women in this UK wide company enduring this too, who really needed that work. It's thanks to @MollySmith and other campaigners, Fertility Network, Miscarriage Association that it's slowly getting better and more importantly the shame of infertility is being reduced a tiny bit. For men and women, men's mental health is affected by grief too.


Again, this doesn't need to be a specific policy for endometriosis, fertility treatments, or miscarriage. 
The policy should cover _all_ the reasons someone might need to be out that they may not want to talk about. 
And there are many. 
My coworker friend who needed a week to let her face heal after being beaten didn't want nor need to explain why she couldn't come to work. Her reasons are every bit as valid as my other coworkers who have suffered miscarriages and haven't even announced to their own loved ones that they're trying for a child let alone their coworkers. Grief is grief, pain is pain, illness is illness.


----------



## simplysardonic

O2.0 said:


> Again, this doesn't need to be a specific policy for endometriosis, fertility treatments, or miscarriage.
> The policy should cover _all_ the reasons someone might need to be out that they may not want to talk about.
> And there are many.
> My coworker friend who needed a week to let her face heal after being beaten didn't want nor need to explain why she couldn't come to work. Her reasons are every bit as valid as my other coworkers who have suffered miscarriages and haven't even announced to their own loved ones that they're trying for a child let alone their coworkers. Grief is grief, pain is pain, illness is illness.


Agreed, I had to try to explain, in minute detail, to a room of male managers, the effects of my fibroids- the unpredictability of the bleeding, the bleeding through pads & tampons within minutes of them being put on/in, what fibroids were & why they do what they do, the pain & the utter exhaustion of the constant anaemia & why I had to come off medication for it because prolonged use was dangerous for me.

I shouldn't have had to do that & they were clearly uncomfortable, but not nearly as uncomfortable or humiliated as I was having to justify my chronic health issues.


----------



## Happy Paws2

Dimwit said:


> I thought of you yesterday - hope you are ok. I agree, I find Fathers Day very difficult, but that doesn't mean I think it should be cancelled. Yes Mothers/Fathers day are difficult for some people, but for many it is a time to appreciate your parents. I think, on the whole, people are more understanding now that these days are hard for some people, with may companies offering the choice to opt out of promotional emails etc.


Yes Fathers Day is hard as well, although I lost Dad in 1983 Father's Day is still vary hard even after so many years.


----------



## kimthecat

Happy Paws2 said:


> Every Mothers day is hard, I lost my Mom in 2008 and I still dread this time of the year all the Mothers Day cards in all the shops and the beautiful flowers, I know the the shops and companies are making a fortune out of this time of year but I just wish I was still buying something. Still miss you Mom X


Yeah.  my mum died in 1986. My dad 7yeas later. I think of her every day. When I met my OH back in the noughties , one thing I liked about him was that he had parents. It was lovely to be part of a family again . Sadly his parents died in 2012 , they died within 6 weeks of each other.


----------



## Cleo38

That's a great quote @O2.0 . I do feel that whilst we should be aware of people & their circumstances we shouldn't be walking on egg shells all the time. Unfortunately it isn't possible to be inclusive all the time & that's life.

My niece is nearly 4mths pregnant & it is such a happy time for her & her husband. She is very respectful of her friends who haven't been able to conceive yet & has had a chat with them about this but at the same time she is not hiding her pregnancy & is talking about it ... why shouldn't she? This is a such a huge moment for her

I know what times will be difficult for me so I try to plan for them. It doesn't always mean I will cope well but it means I am prepared. The next few months will be hard ( my mums birthday & the anniversary of her death) & will be testing time for me staying off the booze so I need to have coping strategies in place.


----------



## Happy Paws2

kimthecat said:


> Yeah.  my mum died in 1986. My dad 7yeas later. I think of her every day. When I met my OH back in the noughties , one thing I liked about him was that he had parents. It was lovely to be part of a family again . Sadly his parents died in 2012 , they died within 6 weeks of each other.


That's so sad 







[/QUOTE]

You may move though the pain but it never totally goes away, some days it's as raw as the day they left you, it doesn't matter how many years have past.


----------



## kimthecat

https://www.theguardian.com/culture...-sexual-harassment-claims-against-noel-clarke

Claims by 20 women of sexual harassment and bullying against the actor Noel Clarke will not lead to a criminal police investigation, according to the Metropolitan police.

Clarke was the subject of complaints of groping and sexual misconduct in incidents between 2004 and 2019. He is best known for his work on the "hood" series of films, beginning with Kidulthood in 2006, and the BBC's Doctor Who.

The allegations, made by women who knew him in a professional capacity, were revealed by the Guardian in April 2021.


----------



## O2.0

Happy Paws2 said:


> You may move though the pain but it never totally goes away, some days it's as raw as the day they left you, it doesn't matter how many years have past.


I didn't suggest it goes away I simply said we all have pain and grief and we can't live our lives constantly shielding ourselves or expecting others to shield us from triggers.

Much as we would like it to, the rest of the world doesn't stop when ours does. I'm sure most on here can relate to the experience of tremendous loss and looking about in wonder that the world is still going on around you. People going about their lives as if nothing has changed. 
The world isn't going to stop to acknowledge individual's grief. It's just how it is. Brutal as it is, it's not cruelty, it's not personal, it's simply the world going on despite our individual tragedies.

____________________________________________________

I don't know if this is the right place to post it, but I've been thinking a lot about the Will Smith, Chris Rock Oscars thing today. 
I'm disgusted on many levels, but one of the things niggling at me that no one seems to be mentioning is that Will took it upon himself to decide for his wife what she should find offensive. There is no shame in being bald, man or woman. Jada looks beautiful. As did Demi Moore FWIW. 
Did anyone ask Jada how she felt about all this? Does anyone care?


----------



## Happy Paws2

[QUOTE="O2.0, post: 1065872717, member: 1472079"*]I didn't suggest it goes away* I simply said we all have pain and grief and we can't live our lives constantly shielding ourselves or expecting others to shield us from triggers.

[/QUOTE]

I never thought you did, sorry if I gave the wrong idea.


----------



## Boxer123

O2.0 said:


> I didn't suggest it goes away I simply said we all have pain and grief and we can't live our lives constantly shielding ourselves or expecting others to shield us from triggers.
> 
> Much as we would like it to, the rest of the world doesn't stop when ours does. I'm sure most on here can relate to the experience of tremendous loss and looking about in wonder that the world is still going on around you. People going about their lives as if nothing has changed.
> The world isn't going to stop to acknowledge individual's grief. It's just how it is. Brutal as it is, it's not cruelty, it's not personal, it's simply the world going on despite our individual tragedies.
> 
> ____________________________________________________
> 
> I don't know if this is the right place to post it, but I've been thinking a lot about the Will Smith, Chris Rock Oscars thing today.
> I'm disgusted on many levels, but one of the things niggling at me that no one seems to be mentioning is that Will took it upon himself to decide for his wife what she should find offensive. There is no shame in being bald, man or woman. Jada looks beautiful. As did Demi Moore FWIW.
> Did anyone ask Jada how she felt about all this? Does anyone care?


I think you can see by her face she's upset. The 'joke' was disgraceful we need to stop commenting on women's looks. However I doubt it made her feel better when her husband did that. So no your right there was no consideration for her thoughts, feelings. To add to that it was a great night for women but it has been completely over shadowed by this.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Oh so wrong on so many levels, IMO. Wrong that it's acceptable to comment like that on someone's appearance (there does seem to be a history of Jada Pinkett Smith being slagged off though and Chris Rock has done it before I believe). Wrong that Will Smith lost his temper so quickly and stormed up there, culminating very rapidly in violence (I'm most perturbed by this I must confess). Wrong that the smack to the face happened. Wrong that it's okay for a man to "defend" in such a way. All kinds of wrong...


----------



## Dimwit

https://4w.pub/british-cycling-trans-policy/


----------



## Lurcherlad

There were some other interesting articles on that website @Dimwit, including:

31 Mar 2020
*Autism, Puberty, and Gender Dysphoria*

The view from an autistic desisted woman


----------



## stuaz

stuaz said:


> This kinda feel relevant here so looking for opinions.
> 
> A colleague of mine in a meeting in conversation used the term "pregnant woman". I wasn't in the meeting but have watched recordings and the words were in context to the discussion and we're not derogatory in anyway.
> 
> Someone in the meeting made a complaint to HR that the term used was wrong and discriminatory and that they should have said "pregnant people". As the employees manager I have been asked to "take action" however I have refused and said that's the employee hasn't done anything wrong that warrants anything apart from at most a conversation.
> 
> Full disclaimer, I am a man so perhaps I am just oblivious to these things?


I figure people might be interested to know the outcome to this.

After a very tense meeting with me, my manager and two reps from HR where at one point I was accused by one of the reps of "not being inclusive" to which triggered me tbh so I sarcastically replied with "why are you calling it pregnant people, surely it should be pregnant beings, otherwise your excluding the rest of the animal kingdom who can get pregnant, that's not very inclusive is it, think of the donkey's that could be being offended right now", yeah I know it was a petty response!

The HR rep then said point blank that the person needs to be given a formal written warning and was I going to do it, to which I replied simply "no I will not be doing that".

it was at this point that my manager spoke after being quite quiet and said "is this really the bridge you want to die on" (talking to the HR rep not me) and then further back and forth and after around 30 minutes the HR manager then said "clearly we are not going to agree on this so I think the way forward will be to draw a line under this whole situation and no official action should be taken and that there are other more important things going on in the world that pales in comparison to this".

The look on the other HR rep was priceless….

After the meeting I lodged a formal complaint about the HR rep and her mishandling of the complaint and subsequent demeanour towards me. I have been told that the rep involved will be spoken to and given the option for "complaint management training".

So overall a win for common sense?


----------



## Mrs Funkin

If I was a member of British Cycling, I would be resigning my membership based on that. Pppffftttt. Thanks for the link.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

@stuaz I think that is a decent outcome - and I thank you for your sensible stance and for not cow-towing to what "they" wanted you to do, many would have just written the warning for an easy life. I bet the employee you have essentially been defending is thankful too. Blooming heck. What a waste of time, energy and resources and I bet you are pleased it's all dealt with now.


----------



## kimthecat

Mrs Funkin said:


> Oh so wrong on so many levels, IMO. Wrong that it's acceptable to comment like that on someone's appearance (there does seem to be a history of Jada Pinkett Smith being slagged off though and Chris Rock has done it before I believe). Wrong that Will Smith lost his temper so quickly and stormed up there, culminating very rapidly in violence (I'm most perturbed by this I must confess). Wrong that the smack to the face happened. Wrong that it's okay for a man to "defend" in such a way. All kinds of wrong...


Apparently she has Alopecia , if Rock knew that then that's nasty thing to say. he really loves his wife and he was very upset and I expect she was too. I would be mortified if someone made a "joke " like that about me. 
he said in his acceptance speech something like these presenters slag people off and they have to grin and bear it . Imagine all the cameras panning in on them and millions of people watching.. Its been a fashion to do this for some years and its about time it stopped. maybe this will draw attention to it and it will cease. I hope he doesnt lose his Oscar. he deserved it.


----------



## O2.0

Dimwit said:


> https://4w.pub/british-cycling-trans-policy/


Wow. Orwellian is right! So here are our rules and if you have anything to say about it you will be disciplined? What the heck?!

@stuaz thank you for standing up for common sense, and thank goodness your manager has common sense too. What an absolute waste of time and resources, and more importantly, did that do anything beneficial at all for any actual disenfranchised person?
Can you imagine if instead we spent time and resources on making an real, tangible difference instead of debating language?


----------



## O2.0

kimthecat said:


> Apparently she has Alopecia , if Rock knew that then that's nasty thing to say. he really loves his wife and he was very upset and I expect she was too. I would be mortified if someone made a "joke " like that about me.


While I agree that the "joke" was in extremely poor taste and I also agree that I'm totally over this Oscar trend that you have to make mean spirited and personal jokes about people (sorry Ricky Gervais, big fan, but the personal stuff is not necessary), I, personally am not offended by comments like that. To me it says more about the person making the comment than me. 
Will Smith is a grown man and he acted like an impulsive butthurt teenager. And hitting someone is never the way to address things. He solved nothing, made the whole thing far worse. Had he sat there and been an adult about it, the whole thing would have blown over and the reference to GI Jane would have gone over most people's heads and be long forgotten by now.


----------



## stuaz

Mrs Funkin said:


> @stuaz I think that is a decent outcome - and I thank you for your sensible stance and for not cow-towing to what "they" wanted you to do, many would have just written the warning for an easy life. I bet the employee you have essentially been defending is thankful too. Blooming heck. What a waste of time, energy and resources and I bet you are pleased it's all dealt with now.


Luckily my team (while large) is mostly self sufficient, treat adults like adults, hire the right personality fits, have the right team leaders etc so most of the time we deal with stuff, together as a team, in a sensible way, and then something like this comes along and wastes and consumes my time, not to mention the moral issues it causes so yeah glad it's all sorted now and we can get back to "proper work".



O2.0 said:


> @stuaz thank you for standing up for common sense, and thank goodness your manager has common sense too. What an absolute waste of time and resources, and more importantly, did that do anything beneficial at all for any actual disenfranchised person?
> Can you imagine if instead we spent time and resources on making an real, tangible difference instead of debating language?


Yep, Pretty much, in my closing remarks to the whole situation, I actually added up all the time in meetings, emails, phones calls spent on the whole thing and said in the meeting that we could have spent X on another project and which actually impacts people…

I think the HR rep got in over her head and didn't like that I didn't back down and felt they had to run with the whole thing as they had gone so and didn't want to turn around.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Can you imagine if instead we spent time and resources on making an real, tangible difference instead of debating language?


But then those people with fancy sounding titles who tell us how we should speak would be out of a job!


----------



## mrs phas

Boxer123 said:


> I think you can see by her face she's upset. The 'joke' was disgraceful we need to stop commenting on women's looks. However I doubt it made her feel better when her husband did that.


Bet it made it worse that, initially, her husband laughed, as only Will Smith CAN laugh
I get the feeling the slap, and the following conflab, was more to do with redeeming himself in HER eyes, than anything else 
As for not knowing before he made the joke, anyone who watches the red table, on youtube
knows about her alopecia, she also mentions it in most interviews, as she has to wear wigs, not through choice, for films 
And 
She is a strong advocate for those, like me, who suffer from alopecia , I'm guessing she has aurists
So yeah, Chris rock knew 
Also 
The academy have come right out and said that "joke" was not part of the official run through on Friday night, as they would NOT have approved it


----------



## Dimwit

Mrs Funkin said:


> If I was a member of British Cycling, I would be resigning my membership based on that. Pppffftttt. Thanks for the link.





O2.0 said:


> Wow. Orwellian is right! So here are our rules and if you have anything to say about it you will be disciplined? What the heck?!


Another interesting development today - a cyclist who LAST MONTH won a men's event is now eligible to compete in women's events. 
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/team-gb-olympics-trans-cyclist-compete-female-events/
I suspect this will very definitely raise awareness of this issue in the UK. This weekend, she will be competing against Laura Kenny who is pretty much a national treasure and I am fairly sure that the majority of the population will not take kindly to the fact that she could lose her place on the olympic squad to a trans female.

What I don't understand is why trans females are allowed to have testosterone levels twice that of biological females. From a biological point of view, testosterone promotes erythropoiesis so having twice the level of your competitors will give trans athletes a huge advantage in terms of the oxygen-carrying capacity of their blood - it seem to me to essentially amount to legalised doping...


----------



## kimthecat

mrs phas said:


> Bet it made it worse that, initially, her husband laughed, as only Will Smith CAN laugh
> I get the feeling the slap, and the following conflab, was more to do with redeeming himself in HER eyes, than anything else
> As for not knowing before he made the joke, anyone who watches the red table, on youtube
> knows about her alopecia, she also mentions it in most interviews, as she has to wear wigs, not through choice, for films
> And
> She is a strong advocate for those, like me, who suffer from alopecia , I'm guessing she has aurists
> So yeah, Chris rock knew
> Also
> The academy have come right out and said that "joke" was not part of the official run through on Friday night, as they would NOT have approved it


Did Chris Rock apologise? For what its worth , Will Smith apologised , I hope he doesn't lose his Oscar.


----------



## mrs phas

kimthecat said:


> Did Chris Rock apologise? For what its worth , Will Smith apologised , I hope he doesn't lose his Oscar.


Not as far as the public know 
At least Will Smith has made a *public *apology to Chris Rock
Therefor, as it as he who started the conflab due to his attempt at humour 
He _*should, if*_ he has any manners, do the same, and, at the very least, send flowers, to Jada personally, to apologise for using her auto immune disorder, to get a laugh


----------



## Lurcherlad

Apparently, Harvey Weinstein hasn’t been stripped of his Oscars …..

So I don’t see why Will Smith should.


----------



## Cleo38

Dimwit said:


> Another interesting development today - a cyclist who LAST MONTH won a men's event is now eligible to compete in women's events.
> https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/team-gb-olympics-trans-cyclist-compete-female-events/
> I suspect this will very definitely raise awareness of this issue in the UK. This weekend, she will be competing against Laura Kenny who is pretty much a national treasure and I am fairly sure that the majority of the population will not take kindly to the fact that she could lose her place on the olympic squad to a trans female.
> 
> What I don't understand is why trans females are allowed to have testosterone levels twice that of biological females. From a biological point of view, testosterone promotes erythropoiesis so having twice the level of your competitors will give trans athletes a huge advantage in terms of the oxygen-carrying capacity of their blood - it seem to me to essentially amount to legalised doping...


It really is a very sad time for women's sports. I don't know what the female competitors can do as there seems to be no room for acknowledging their concerns


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> It really is a very sad time for women's sports. I don't know what the female competitors can do as there seems to be no room for acknowledging their concerns


It does feel a lot like shut up and deal doesn't it? Be good little meek women who should just be grateful we get to participate in sports at all 

You know, it's also kind of condescending to the trans community as well though. Almost as if being trans makes you incapable of handling any disagreement or discussion. It has all really gotten out of hand. We're losing the ability to think logically, everything is a knee-jerk emotional response


----------



## DFP

I've been lurking on this forum for a while, and this discussion is one that I also want to join in on, as I can't discuss it anywhere else. 
That last post really resonated with me. Especially about the feeling of "shut up and put up". It's like we as women are being forced into acceptance, especially in sport, where feelings and opinions trump factual biology. 
There's no doubt for me that trans people should be accepted and respected for who they are, but at the same time, we can't deny the biological facts that male puberty grants huge physical advantages that means that men on the whole will outstrip women in most sports - Serena Williams, a superb athlete and one of the top female tennis players of all time, threw down a challenge to the male players and was beaten by the 306th (I think?) men's seeded player.

I've just started training in weightlifting. I hope to get a lot fitter and stronger, but I'm under no illusions that I'll beat the male lifters, no matter how hard I train. Men's bodies are just biologically geared towards better performance. My gym has three adult classes for competition, men, women and mx, which is for trans and nonbinary competitors. 

There was a good South Park episode that parodied the whole self identifying gender issue, with a strongwoman competition allowing a very masculine and beefy person, self identifying as a woman, to compete. This person beat the living daylights out of the other competitors. 
Art imitated life here, as there's a trans woman MMA fighter who I think got banned from the USA circuit due to the horrific injuries she inflicted on her opponents. She was deemed too dangerous, and that's in cage fighting, a brutal sport to start with!

I also worry about contact sports allowing trans women to be pitted directly against biological women - rugby, boxing, wrestling, and many others, are rife for life changing, and life ending, injuries. And my understanding, after trying to research, is that trans women are still allowed higher testosterone levels in their blood than bio women usually have. 
Plus, it's not just testosterone - after puberty, men are usually bigger, heavier, have heavier bone density and greater lean muscle mass, and greater reach, than most women. These things don't just magically go away after a year or two of hormone therapy. Some of the advantages are mitigated somewhat, but not all and not to a big enough degree. 

And the reason I can't post this anywhere else? I have a very dear friend with a trans woman family member who has completely dived into the idea that trans women are physically no different to biological women, and I don't want to lose that friend. We've known each other a long time, and although our views mostly align, on this point I would be dead to her if I disagreed. So I'm very sad and upset that I can't air my views anywhere she might see them.


----------



## Cleo38

Public bodies can limit services to a single-sex, says EHRC | Daily Mail Online

Yes!!!


----------



## Dimwit

So if there is no advantage/disadvantage of biological sex, who do trans men deliberately not have hormone therapy so they can continue to compete as women?


----------



## mrs phas

https://fb.watch/cbdIQJoD9r/


----------



## Dimwit

Another blow for women's rights - how on earth are we regressing so quickly 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61005390


----------



## O2.0

Dimwit said:


> Another blow for women's rights - how on earth are we regressing so quickly
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61005390


I think we're approaching the abortion debate from the wrong angle. 
There will never be an agreement on if it should be done or not. There are equally compelling arguments for and against it. 
But I think what we *can* agree on is who should be making those decisions. I don't understand when it became a good idea to let legislators decide about medical procedures. Really it should always be a private decision between a woman and her doctor. (Yes a WOMAN and HER doctor. I'm *really* not doing the pregnant person thing here :Rage)
Medical bodies can come up with best practices and guidance around the medical procedure, but legislators have no place giving anyone medical advice or legislating who should have medical procedures done and when and how.


----------



## kimthecat

Boris speaks out about transgender. It was shown on Sky news.

https://localnews8.com/sports/cnn-s...er-women-should-not-compete-in-female-sports/


----------



## Oof

Dimwit said:


> So if there is no advantage/disadvantage of biological sex, who do trans men deliberately not have hormone therapy so they can continue to compete as women?
> View attachment 486909
> 
> 
> View attachment 486911


I wonder if that's what JP Sears had in mind when he made his latest video


----------



## O2.0

kimthecat said:


> Boris speaks out about transgender. It was shown on Sky news.
> 
> https://localnews8.com/sports/cnn-s...er-women-should-not-compete-in-female-sports/


""I am an athlete, and I just want to race competitively again," Bridges' statement continued. "No one should have to choose between being who they are, and participating in the sport that they love."
This false dichotomy drives me crazy. 
No one is asking transgender athletes to choose between living in a way that feels authentic to them and participating in sports. We're asking that they participate in sports fairly. That's all. 
If you want to race competitively do so. In the men's division or in an open division if that exists.

When I rode horses competitively we had junior (18 and under) and open divisions. Adults could not compete in the junior division, but no one cared if a youth wanted to compete in open if they were good enough, and plenty were. Most of us who competed as youths in open knew we wouldn't win but we enjoyed the learning experience and seeing where we stood against other competitors.

If you want to compete, compete - fairly. It's really that simple.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Flipping heck I've never agreed with BoJo in my life. 

First time for everything I guess...


----------



## Jesthar

Mrs Funkin said:


> Flipping heck I've never agreed with BoJo in my life.
> 
> First time for everything I guess...


I know! I keep expecting to see pigs circling the neighbours chimney...


----------



## Cleo38

Mrs Funkin said:


> Flipping heck I've never agreed with BoJo in my life.
> 
> First time for everything I guess...


Hahahaha! I know, same here. I actually did respect him for that rather than bloody Starmer fumbling around trying desperately to appease everyone regarding the trans women issue & then completely offending most women


----------



## Boxer123

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-61021379

This man had a history of violence it seems the red flags are there but no one ever pays attention until it's to late.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Vile, vile man. May he rot in jail until the end of his days.


----------



## kimthecat

Woman fights back .

Warning Contains shooting


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1512493055705812994


----------



## picaresque

Why are TRAs body shaming J.K. Rowling?|Jean Hatchet
https://thecritic.co.uk/why-are-tras-body-shaming-j-k-rowling/


----------



## kimthecat

picaresque said:


> Why are TRAs body shaming J.K. Rowling?|Jean Hatchet
> https://thecritic.co.uk/why-are-tras-body-shaming-j-k-rowling/


They're just nasty . They get a way with it .


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Thanks for sharing that @picaresque - it's scary how much these "activists" get away with. If JK Rowling spoke of them in such a way, there'd be hell to pay.


----------



## O2.0

picaresque said:


> Why are TRAs body shaming J.K. Rowling?|Jean Hatchet
> https://thecritic.co.uk/why-are-tras-body-shaming-j-k-rowling/


Wow that's a real reach there trying to find something wrong with her body isn't it? 
No you dipshit, that's what gravity does to normal female breasts when you lean over to the side. 
What an incredibly weird, hateful, and eye opening read.


----------



## Cleo38

picaresque said:


> Why are TRAs body shaming J.K. Rowling?|Jean Hatchet
> https://thecritic.co.uk/why-are-tras-body-shaming-j-k-rowling/


I was reading about that on one of the FB feminist groups, just shows how these TRA's are so deluded tbh & spouting typical misogyny . Loved the pics of all these amazing women together 

Also this story .... JAN MOIR: Sorry, but women don't want changing rooms open to all...they should be sacrosanct | Daily Mail Online

So whilst women & children complained about the presence of male in their changing rooms (despite how he 'identifies') their concerns will now be ignored in favour of this whining, self entitled man. I couldn't care less if he wants to wear a dress but he does not have a right to invade a space where women & girls are changing.


----------



## kimthecat

Jemima Goldsmith getting it in the neck because of her ex husband, 

Sorry for the size , It was really large so did a thumbnail . If you click on it , you can see it a bit better.

It is advertising a protest against Khan outside Jemima's house . It gives her address.


----------



## Pawscrossed

Cleo38 said:


> I was reading about that on one of the FB feminist groups, just shows how these TRA's are so deluded tbh & spouting typical misogyny . Loved the pics of all these amazing women together
> 
> Also this story .... JAN MOIR: Sorry, but women don't want changing rooms open to all...they should be sacrosanct | Daily Mail Online
> 
> So whilst women & children complained about the presence of male in their changing rooms (despite how he 'identifies') their concerns will now be ignored in favour of this whining, self entitled man. I couldn't care less if he wants to wear a dress but he does not have a right to invade a space where women & girls are changing.


And the same paper tells how 'ripped' a DJ is, papped by their photographer on holiday. It's okay to pap and objectify him in a gaudy tabloid peep show while minding his own business. I find the Daily Mail a very contrary publication.

No time for her, her past reports claimed gay people take drugs, and she was appallingly homophobic over the death of Stephen Gateley. Here she's confusing 'supporting Charlie' by battering Monsoon and a marginalised child. Either do support or don't.


----------



## Cleo38

Pawscrossed said:


> And the same paper tells how 'ripped' a DJ is, papped by their photographer on holiday. It's okay to pap and objectify him in a gaudy tabloid peep show while minding his own business. I find the Daily Mail a very contrary publication.
> 
> No time for her, her past reports claimed gay people take drugs, and she was appallingly homophobic over the death of Stephen Gateley. Here she's confusing 'supporting Charlie' by battering Monsoon and a marginalised child. Either do support or don't.


I don't know the reporter but I agree with her opinion on this story. Am not sure what relevance the DJ story is tbh 

A man's desire to use women's changing rooms should not trump the rights of the women & girls who complained about him. Monsoon are wrong to pander to this man


----------



## O2.0

I wonder how we're going to look back on this time - this craziness with gender identity, pronouns, and attacking women for asking that they not be erased. I wonder if we'll look back on it like we look back on the McCarthy era here in the US. With a kind of embarrassment and wonder that a small number of people could have such a negative impact. 
Craziness...


----------



## mrs phas

Man, to woman, to baby and being indulged by the prison system, that's, surely, there to punish and rehabilitate, not indulge twisted fantasies

https://metro.co.uk/2022/04/10/scot...jail-16439336/?ico=tag-post-strip_item_3_news


----------



## Cleo38

mrs phas said:


> Man, to woman, to baby and being indulged by the prison system, that's, surely, there to punish and rehabilitate, not indulge twisted fantasies
> 
> https://metro.co.uk/2022/04/10/scot...jail-16439336/?ico=tag-post-strip_item_3_news


Absolutely ridiculous, I honestly hope this isn't being treated seriously. This man is in prison for murder


----------



## Lurcherlad

It’s just a way to manipulate the system.

It’s a fetish … nothing to do with gender.

They should not be accommodated and it sounds like they should be in isolation as they are a danger to other inmates, given they strangled a cell mate.


----------



## Jobeth

Pawscrossed said:


> .
> 
> No time for her, her past reports claimed gay people take drugs, and she was appallingly homophobic over the death of Stephen Gateley. Here she's confusing 'supporting Charlie' by battering Monsoon and a marginalised child. Either do support or don't.


 I wouldn't read anything written by someone so homophobic but I am fed up with the focus on finding anything negative to do with transgender people.

I read the story elsewhere and think it's bizarre that anyone would assume a man would try on a dress just to get in the changing room. The salesperson could easily have checked the room was empty or asked people to wait if anyone was that bothered.


----------



## Cleo38

Jobeth said:


> I wouldn't read anything written by someone so homophobic but I am fed up with the focus on finding anything negative to do with transgender people.
> 
> I read the story elsewhere and think it's bizarre that anyone would assume a man would try on a dress just to get in the changing room. The salesperson could easily have checked the room was empty or asked people to wait if anyone was that bothered.


So should we ignore these incidents then? They happen so should be reported, especially when women are being affected so much & silenced. And predatory men do this? There has been multiple incidents reported. Do I want to use changing rooms where men are? No I don't & many other women feel the same

And why should women & children have to wait to use their own changing areas simply to accommodate a man? There were women who were bothered hence he was asked to leave. Why did he not use the men's changing area? Oh yes, because HE felt uncomfortable & that's all that matters really to people like this


----------



## mrs phas

Jobeth said:


> I read the story elsewhere and think it's bizarre that anyone would assume a man would try on a dress just to get in the changing room. The salesperson could easily have checked the room was empty or asked people to wait if anyone was that bothered.


I wont even use a female only communal changing room, as we are worse than men for pulling each other into dark places
A changing room where there may be radical trans, comparing my body with the perfect airbrushed one, noting just how droopy my boobs are and which way they swing, counting my stretch marks and lax muscles from carry 4 babies, including a twin birth
Sorry that's just wrong, and as much as I believe in each to their own, that's directly impacting on me, and my pleasure in life, I too would take my money elsewhere

As for being in front of children
Well if I can't indoctrinate your child, with my religious beliefs
Why should you be allowed to indoctrinate my child, with your gender beliefs
Age appropriate behaviour and speech seems to have been thrown out the window these days in favour of radicalisation in all forms of life


----------



## Pawscrossed

Jobeth said:


> I wouldn't read anything written by someone so homophobic but I am fed up with the focus on finding anything negative to do with transgender people.
> 
> I read the story elsewhere and think it's bizarre that anyone would assume a man would try on a dress just to get in the changing room. The salesperson could easily have checked the room was empty or asked people to wait if anyone was that bothered.


I read it elsewhere also. Cubicles was my first thought, and of course the employee will defend their actions. I'm curious as to how they knew Charlie (she is the pronoun of choice not they, misreporting by Moir) is hoping to trans.

I find the assumption that all trans people are sex pests or predatory any gender utterly abhorrent. The people I know who are trans have so many body dysmorphia worries that they wouldn't want to use a changing room never mind stay long enough to perve like an extra from the cast of a Carry On film.

Once again trans rights are getting muddled up with women's rights, it's distasteful and no pile on here will change my mind, particularly if influenced by the likes of Moir.


----------



## Pawscrossed

Another ignorance shown by Moir and elsewhere is the assumption that trans people will be in changing rooms stripping off with glee - utter bull cr*p. 

Body dysmorphia doesn’t end with physical surgery and airbrushing isn’t part of the package.


----------



## O2.0

Pawscrossed said:


> I find the assumption that all trans people are sex pests or predatory any gender utterly abhorrent.


No one is making that assumption. 
The issue is not with genuine trans people. The issue is with these crazy self-ID requirements and falling over backwards to accommodate whatever gender someone decides to be that day. That is what perverted people (who likely aren't trans at all) are taking advantage of. I don't believe for a minute that person in prison is a trans woman. I believe he is a man who's taking advantage of these stupid laws. And has now killed a woman because we are falling over backwards to accommodate someone who self-IDs as a woman.


----------



## Jobeth

Pawscrossed said:


> I read it elsewhere also. Cubicles was my first thought, and of course the employee will defend their actions. I'm curious as to how they knew Charlie (she is the pronoun of choice not they, misreporting by Moir) is hoping to trans.
> 
> I find the assumption that all trans people are sex pests or predatory any gender utterly abhorrent. The people I know who are trans have so many body dysmorphia worries that they wouldn't want to use a changing room never mind stay long enough to perve like an extra from the cast of a Carry On film.
> 
> Once again trans rights are getting muddled up with women's rights, it's distasteful and no pile on here will change my mind, particularly if influenced by the likes of Moir.


I totally agree with you and the lack of compassion shown says a lot about a person.


----------



## O2.0

Definitely. 
The lack of compassion shown to JK Rowling. 
The lack of compassion shown to women prisoners who are killed by male inmates self-IDing as female. 
The lack of compassion shown to battered women who now have to worry about their abusers self-IDing as male and gaining access to safe homes. 
The lack of compassion shown to female athletes who are being told to shut up and not complain as men come in and push them out of placements in their sport. 
Yup, serious lack of compassion, I agree.


----------



## MollySmith

Pawscrossed said:


> I read it elsewhere also. Cubicles was my first thought, and of course the employee will defend their actions. I'm curious as to how they knew Charlie (she is the pronoun of choice not they, misreporting by Moir) is hoping to trans.
> 
> I find the assumption that all trans people are sex pests or predatory any gender utterly abhorrent. The people I know who are trans have so many body dysmorphia worries that they wouldn't want to use a changing room never mind stay long enough to perve like an extra from the cast of a Carry On film.
> 
> Once again trans rights are getting muddled up with women's rights, it's distasteful and no pile on here will change my mind, particularly if influenced by the likes of Moir.


I totally agree too.


----------



## Pawscrossed

O2.0 said:


> Definitely.
> The lack of compassion shown to JK Rowling.
> The lack of compassion shown to women prisoners who are killed by male inmates self-IDing as female.
> The lack of compassion shown to battered women who now have to worry about their abusers self-IDing as male and gaining access to safe homes.
> The lack of compassion shown to female athletes who are being told to shut up and not complain as men come in and push them out of placements in their sport.
> Yup, serious lack of compassion, I agree.


Numerous parts of this thread show a vital lack of knowledge and hysteria. Some I get, a lot I don't. Some is the system and a scant minority but there's a danger.

Take point 3 Self-IDing as *male* and gaining access to a safe house....? This fear lead scaremongering has begun to *stop* women seeking safe houses.
https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/09/...c-abuse-myth-debunked-womens-aid-diana-james/

And the trouble with Rowling and Rights
https://thecorrespondent.com/702/im...hobia-is-not-the-answer/788222918340-a4270c13

I expect the thread will now turn into a tag team with the potential to waste an entire 24 hours wrangling on a forum going around in circles. I'm off out to tea with my stepchild (identifies as they for all of.... a year) with my trans friend Lawrence, a truly compassionate man.


----------



## Jobeth

Pawscrossed said:


> Numerous parts of this thread show a vital lack of knowledge and hysteria. Some I get, a lot I don't. Some is the system and a scant minority but there's a danger.
> 
> Take point 3 Self-IDing as *male* and gaining access to a safe house....? This fear lead scaremongering has begun to *stop* women seeking safe houses.
> https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/09/...c-abuse-myth-debunked-womens-aid-diana-james/
> 
> And the trouble with Rowling and Rights
> https://thecorrespondent.com/702/im...hobia-is-not-the-answer/788222918340-a4270c13
> 
> I expect the thread will now turn into a tag team with the potential to waste an entire 24 hours wrangling on a forum going around in circles. I'm off out to tea with my stepchild (identifies as they for all of.... a year) with my trans friend Lawrence, a truly compassionate man.


I really wouldn't waste your time! Enjoy your tea.


----------



## Pawscrossed

Jobeth said:


> I really wouldn't waste your time! Enjoy your tea.


I really won't and I will. Enjoy wearing your tin hat 

I'll take this thread with a little more respect if anyone can evidence that they have actually been in contact in any meaningful way with sports organisations, politicians to query _systems_ or is this thread simply an exercise in navel gazing.


----------



## StormyThai

Pawscrossed said:


> And the trouble with Rowling and Rights
> https://thecorrespondent.com/702/im...hobia-is-not-the-answer/788222918340-a4270c13


Thank you for posting that link, it's a thought provoking and very well written article.


----------



## picaresque

O2.0 said:


> Definitely.
> The lack of compassion shown to JK Rowling.
> The lack of compassion shown to women prisoners who are killed by male inmates self-IDing as female.
> The lack of compassion shown to battered women who now have to worry about their abusers self-IDing as male and gaining access to safe homes.
> The lack of compassion shown to female athletes who are being told to shut up and not complain as men come in and push them out of placements in their sport.
> Yup, serious lack of compassion, I agree.


*standing ovation*


----------



## O2.0

https://thepostmillennial.com/jk-rowling-transphobic-youre-just-sensitive
"Ironically, it's largely a brigade of non-trans people who are offended on the behalf of trans people rather than trans people being outraged. As a trans woman who knows exactly what transphobia feels and looks like, I closely analyzed every word of Rowling's Twitter rant and could not find a shred of hatred. Biological sex _is_ a scientific reality, and erasing it actually invalidates the existence of trans people. If I was not born biologically male, why would I have transitioned in the first place?"


----------



## picaresque

Pawscrossed said:


> Numerous parts of this thread show a vital lack of knowledge and hysteria. Some I get, a lot I don't. Some is the system and a scant minority but there's a danger.


Ah, hysteria, still being used against us in the 21st century. Women, know your place.
The 'hysteria' I've been seeing for the best part of a decade is that trans people in the west are the most oppressed minority that's ever existed and are being murdered or driven to suicide in huge numbers when that's simply not the case. Two women a week murdered by men in the UK but hey we're just being hysterical to want some spaces to be segregated by sex. These spaces past generations have fought hard for as previously women were mostly just kept out of public life. And now some people want to give those rights away. No one wants trans people thrown to the wolves but ffs there is clearly a huge huge issue with self ID that endangers women, children and actual (old fashioned term alert) transsexuals. The news stories are so numerous, no one's going digging to find them.
With the sheer amount of violent/sex offenders now identifying as women and requesting to be moved to the female prison estate, and often they get it granted... either this shows that trans* people are disproportionately more likely to be killers and rapists or it's proof of the glaring problem with self ID. Which is it?

*no I do not think these men are representative of actual normal trans people, they are dangerous fetishists taking advantage of a crazy system


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Definitely.
> The lack of compassion shown to JK Rowling.
> The lack of compassion shown to women prisoners who are killed by male inmates self-IDing as female.
> The lack of compassion shown to battered women who now have to worry about their abusers self-IDing as male and gaining access to safe homes.
> The lack of compassion shown to female athletes who are being told to shut up and not complain as men come in and push them out of placements in their sport.
> Yup, serious lack of compassion, I agree.


Where is that clapping emoji when you need it?!

And hysteria ... isn't that the rolled out term for when us silly women start making a fuss?! enguin

And not all trans people are sheep, not all agree with the more militant voices & they also are shouted down


----------



## O2.0

Since this thread is about *women's* rights, a very on-topic article, inspiring story of the first woman to run the Boston Marathon before women were allowed to run the Boston Marathon. 
https://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/20...bj3qvarzRxFDkhdr4APIrYw43JTNDbUJ_aNsxr8p8xf6k

And for those of you who can't be bothered to read it, women weren't allowed to compete in the Olympics in the Marathon until 1984. That's a mere blink of time ago. 
We still have a lot to fight for!


----------



## mrs phas

Pawscrossed said:


> I find the assumption that all trans people are sex pests or predatory any gender utterly abhorrent. The people I know who are trans have so many body dysmorphia worries that they wouldn't want to use a changing room never mind stay long enough to perve like an extra from the cast of a Carry On film




I don't think anyone on this thread has labelled, presumed, or, assumed that all those whom are trans are also sex/gender predatory
This thread is about those who are and the danger imposed upon women by the ridiculousness of accepting, reporting and the criminalisation (being registered as female) of those who are self identifying as females, to further their own kinks and fetishes, intruding upon and taking away safe spaces , demonising female only actions ( menstruating, giving birth, breast feeding, have wombs/cervixes etc) refusing to see us(women) as the only real and true female identities and so on
No one, I'm sure ( naively hope), could or would feel anything but support and sympathy to those with true gender dysphoria, it's a long, dark and hard road along which many friends and family are often lost, and they are open to radical activists, in the same way that young people running away to big cities are often open to being preyed upon by pimps and drug dealers 
We can all lives in harmony, safely and alongside each other, but not whilst women are continuing to be put in danger by the predators in disguise


----------



## Jesthar

Pawscrossed said:


> I find the assumption that all trans people are sex pests or predatory any gender utterly abhorrent. The people I know who are trans have so many body dysmorphia worries that they wouldn't want to use a changing room never mind stay long enough to perve like an extra from the cast of a Carry On film


I think you misunderstand - no-one is making any assumptions or inferences of that kind.

Quite the opposite, in fact, as one thing is certain - when (not if) non-trans males abuse self ID rules to hang out in female only spaces for whatever reason (I think we can guess the primary one, though), it will be the genuine trans community that get the backlash.


----------



## Jobeth

Jesthar said:


> I think you misunderstand - no-one is making any assumptions or inferences of that kind.
> 
> Quite the opposite, in fact, as one thing is certain - when (not if) non-trans males abuse self ID rules to hang out in female only spaces for whatever reason (I think we can guess the primary one, though), it will be the genuine trans community that get the backlash.


I feel the same way as Pawscrossed and actually feel quite sickened by the tone of some posts especially when the snide comments about self identifying with a bike etc start.

I do agree with you that the genuine trans community is the group that suffers the most by the constant negativity that some 'newspapers' choose to promote.


----------



## Cleo38

Jobeth said:


> I feel the same way as Pawscrossed and actually feel quite sickened by the tone of some posts especially when the snide comments about self identifying with a bike etc start.
> 
> I do agree with you that the genuine trans community is the group that suffers the most by the constant negativity that some 'newspapers' choose to promote.


But it's not the news paper choosing to promote stories these are incident that are happening. Why shouldn't they be reported? Stories that are discriminating against women in favour of biological males I feel is very important. Initially women were told these incident would never happen, now incidents are happening & we are told that it's not that many .... predatory men are abusing self identification.

And (as in the incident at Monsoon) a biological male feels at that point he would be more comfortable in the women's changing room why should his needs be placed above those of women & children who were using the facilities at that time? Why should he be able to access that area despite female customers expressing their discomfort? I don't think that trans phobic or bigoted at all.

Do you think all males who feel they would be more comfortable in the women's changing area be allowed?


----------



## MollySmith

Pawscrossed said:


> Numerous parts of this thread show a vital lack of knowledge and hysteria. Some I get, a lot I don't. Some is the system and a scant minority but there's a danger.
> 
> Take point 3 Self-IDing as *male* and gaining access to a safe house....? This fear lead scaremongering has begun to *stop* women seeking safe houses.
> https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/09/...c-abuse-myth-debunked-womens-aid-diana-james/
> 
> And the trouble with Rowling and Rights
> https://thecorrespondent.com/702/im...hobia-is-not-the-answer/788222918340-a4270c13
> 
> I expect the thread will now turn into a tag team with the potential to waste an entire 24 hours wrangling on a forum going around in circles. I'm off out to tea with my stepchild (identifies as they for all of.... a year) with my trans friend Lawrence, a truly compassionate man.


Thank you for the links to the Pink News and the Correspondent, I enjoyed reading them.

A digression!

A very wise friend who is luckily my business mentor gave me a kick up the backside last week.

It came after I was, in a roundabout(ish) way brought into a charged thread on Twitter about book cover design, full of authors saying designers should work for free and showing off their efforts and asking people to spot the professional cover in an attempt to undermine a skill… see I'm off again). Any old hoo... she asked _why was I torturing myself with people who had different objectives and ethics?_

The above is gently said to all and that it's _okay_ to differ as long as it's not indoctrination, bullying or false news. That's respectful of all rights.

I hope tea was super cool and you wore funky hats. I know you won't be torturing yourself and this is how PF rolls. The owners may have changed but some things never do. The cliques, the tags, the inability to agree to disagree. General Chat would be very dull without it!


----------



## Cleo38

MollySmith said:


> Thank you for the links to the Pink News and the Correspondent, I enjoyed reading them.
> 
> A digression!
> 
> A very wise friend who is luckily my business mentor gave me a kick up the backside last week.
> 
> It came after I was, in a roundabout(ish) way brought into a charged thread on Twitter about book cover design, full of authors saying designers should work for free and showing off their efforts and asking people to spot the professional cover in an attempt to undermine a skill… see I'm off again). Any old hoo... she asked _why was I torturing myself with people who had different objectives and ethics?_
> 
> The above is gently said to all and that it's _okay_ to differ as long as it's not indoctrination, bullying or false news. That's respectful of all rights.
> 
> I hope tea was super cool and you wore funky hats. I know you won't be torturing yourself and this is how PF rolls. The owners may have changed but some things never do. The cliques, the tags, the inability to agree to disagree. General Chat would be very dull without it!


A wise friend once said to me: "if it walks like a duck, swims like a duck & talks like a duck, then .... "


----------



## O2.0

I don't think women's rights and book covers are on the same level - no offense meant to the wonderful artists out there who design book covers. 

Okay. Women's rights. 
I want the girls I coach to have a fair chance to compete. I want them to feel empowered by their bodies and the experience of being a woman, I want their mental health to be taken seriously, I want them to be able to feel safe. 
I want these girls to feel respected. 

When I can't even post about women's rights without being called transphobic, hysterical, and disrespected, that simply tells me I have a lot more work to do for these girls. 
Luckily, I'm quite happy to do it


----------



## kimthecat

We've come so far with womens' rights. I'd hate to see it go backwards.

How bad it was in the sixties and seventies. Does anyone remember Mungo Jerry's song In the Summer time ?
This says it all. 

When the weather's fine
You got women, you got women on your mind
Have a drink, have a drive
Go out and see what you can find

If her daddy's rich, take her out for a meal
If her daddy's poor, just do what you feel


----------



## Jobeth

Cleo38 said:


> l
> 
> Do you think all males who feel they would be more comfortable in the women's changing area be allowed?


It wouldn't bother me at all as changing rooms have individual cubicles and the same goes for toilets.


----------



## O2.0

Jobeth said:


> It wouldn't bother me at all as changing rooms have individual cubicles and the same goes for toilets.


Before I walk in to the girls locker room where they are changing from school clothes to running clothes, I announce myself, say I'm coming in, wait for them to tell me they're decent, then walk in.

Serious question. Do you think it would be okay for a man to do the same? 
These are girls ranging in age from 12 to 18.


----------



## Jobeth

O2.0 said:


> Before I walk in to the girls locker room where they are changing from school clothes to running clothes, I announce myself, say I'm coming in, wait for them to tell me they're decent, then walk in.
> 
> Serious question. Do you think it would be okay for a man to do the same?
> These are girls ranging in age from 12 to 18.


If as a woman you're checking that they are decent before going in then why would it be different for a man to check before going in that they are dressed?


----------



## O2.0

Jobeth said:


> If as a woman you're checking that they are decent before going in then why would it be different for a man to check before going in that they are dressed?


That wasn't my question  
Do you think it would be okay for a man to walk in to a girls' locker room even if they're all dressed?


----------



## Jobeth

O2.0 said:


> That wasn't my question
> Do you think it would be okay for a man to walk in to a girls' locker room even if they're all dressed?


If they were all dressed why not? I assume that you have the same rules for working with children we have where you have to have an enhanced DBS check. As a woman would you not go into the boys changing room if it was necessary and they were dressed?


----------



## O2.0

Jobeth said:


> If they were all dressed why not?


Because the majority of the parents, the coach himself, and most importantly the *girls* in question are not comfortable with a male in what is a girls' space.

Unless of course we don't think that girls' comfort is important...


----------



## Jobeth

O2.0 said:


> Because the majority of the parents, the coach himself, and most importantly the *girls* in question are not comfortable with a male in what is a girls' space.
> 
> Unless of course we don't think that girls' comfort is important...


You didn't answer my question whether you'd go into the boys' dressing room if they were all dressed.

As I said - if they are all dressed then I'm not sure why it being a dressing room rather than a classroom would make such a difference. We have enhanced police checks to work with children.


----------



## O2.0

Jobeth said:


> You didn't answer my question whether you'd go into the boys' dressing room if they were all dressed.


Sorry I missed that. No I would not. Out of respect for them and their private space.

Teachers have to be fingerprinted and police checked here too.

Classroom vs. Dressing room - one is a public, co-ed space. One is a private, girls only or boys only space. 
It's strange, because to me it's a no brainer. Girls spaces for girls, boys spaces for boys. That even something as simple and straighforward as this has become muddied to me speaks to the craziness of all of this.


----------



## Jobeth

I think an adult in a room where children are dressed is a non issue but I accept that you feel differently.


----------



## Jaf

I think a fully grown man in a girls locker room is a completely different thing to a woman in a boys locker room. Girls are so much more vulnerable especially in a state of undress and also just taking off your top is different for girls and boys.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Jaf said:


> I think a fully grown man in a girls locker room is a completely different thing to a woman in a boys locker room. Girls are so much more vulnerable especially in a state of undress and also just taking off your top is different for girls and boys.


But if everyone is dressed before the teacher enters then what's the issue? If the teacher is entering before the kids are dressed then I'd question why? I certainly never had teachers hanging around in changing rooms when I was a kid. We actually left on our own and if someone didn't leave the teacher would knock on the door to check what was going on.

I also grew up getting changed in male bathrooms as my grandfather took me everywhere (like swimming or my gymnastics, dancing, etc). I never felt uncomfortable and I'm not sure why being seen undressing by a man in a changing room or being in a male space _would _make me uncomfortable. The only thing that would make me uncomfortable is a weird person doing a weird thing like staring or approaching me.

Anyway, the whole communal changing room thing is weird just like communal bathrooms. Just get individual cubicles and the problems solved and then people with disabilities benefit too lol.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Because the majority of the parents, the coach himself, and most importantly the *girls* in question are not comfortable with a male in what is a girls' space.
> 
> Unless of course we don't think that girls' comfort is important...


We had a male PE teacher who would knock & ask that question. Eventually it got to the stage he would knock then enter the changing rooms, then he wouldn't even knock. Several years later he was arrested for the rape of a couple of girls at that school


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> We had a male PE teacher who would knock & ask that question. Eventually it got to the stage he would knock then enter the changing rooms, then he wouldn't even knock. Several years later he was arrested for the rape of a couple of girls at that school


And there ya go....


----------



## MollySmith

O2.0 said:


> I don't think women's rights and book covers are on the same level - no offense meant to the wonderful artists out there who design book covers.


That _wasn't the point _but the person to whom the post was directed got as did @Jobeth - thank you! And no, I'm not coming back here to explain the point.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> And there ya go....


And we all knew it would happen. Many girls at the time reported him(I was never assaulted by him but was in the changing rooms when he used to walk in. Despite our complaints or objections it was always "Don't be silly". He used to have a gym club where he would 'help' girls get in to positions or vault over the box thing whilst groping them. This went on for years despite various reports. It was only when I had left school & that I heard he'd been charged & sentenced for 2 rape charges & various other assaults.


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> And we all knew it would happen. Many girls at the time reported him(I was never assaulted by him but was in the changing rooms when he used to walk in. Despite our complaints or objections it was always "Don't be silly". He used to have a gym club where he would 'help' girls get in to positions or vault over the box thing whilst groping them. This went on for years despite various reports. It was only when I had left school & that I heard he'd been charged & sentenced for 2 rape charges & various other assaults.


Ugh that's horrible, and even more so because that sort of story is so common. I bet women everywhere have a similar story of an inappropriate adult allowed access they shouldn't have been. I know I do! Several!

All complete with the "don't be silly" right up there with "hysterical" and what were *you* doing/wearing whatever enguin

So no. I don't want men to have access to women's only spaces. History tells me it's a really bad idea.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Ugh that's horrible, and even more so because that sort of story is so common. I bet women everywhere have a similar story of an inappropriate adult allowed access they shouldn't have been. I know I do! Several!
> 
> All complete with the "don't be silly" right up there with "hysterical" and what were *you* doing/wearing whatever enguin
> 
> So no. I don't want men to have access to women's only spaces. History tells me it's a really bad idea.


One of my friends who complained about being groped at gym club was told "Well don't go then" .... that was the level of concern & am sure this sort of thing still goes on. So I feel the same, men being given free access to women' spaces is a worry & why should I have to have that worry?


----------



## kimthecat

there was a doctor at our surgery back in the day that used to cop a feel . It was done in a way that you were never really sure if it was accidental No one ever said anything , until years later I mentioned it to my sister and she said the same happened to her. When its someone in authority , you dont feel you can complain or th at you would be belived.


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> One of my friends who complained about being groped at gym club was told "Well don't go then" .... that was the level of concern & am sure this sort of thing still goes on. So I feel the same, men being given free access to women' spaces is a worry & why should I have to have that worry?


It's a weird attitude towards women - that we should have to just suck it up and deal. Groped on the subway? Move away and deal. Groped at the gym? Don't go. Share a changing room with a man, suck it up and deal.

And the thing is, we're good at it. We're good at sucking it up and dealing. It's how we're made. So it's just expected of us. Hell, we expect it of each other. The more I think about it, the more I think this attitude about women just dealing with shit is part of what drives these TRAs to dump on women in this way.

I remember listening to Rachel McKinnon now Veronica Ivy - TRA and trans woman who competes in track cycling and she said that biological women who can't beat her should just train harder. 
Same idea. Suck it up and deal.


----------



## rona

My doctor makes inappropriate comments about women's bodies. He's made them to me, and my sister even changed doctors because of it.
I'm sure there's nothing behind it because when I was stripped off in front of him, he didn't seem comfortable at all. I've been with him for over 30 years and never had any other worries.
He is of the generation that believes women like these compliments and doesn't seem to realise just how sleazy it makes him seem


----------



## Lurcherlad

I'd change doctors.

Someone needs to tell him it's not ok.

Just because you can brush it off @rona doesn't mean all women can … or should tbh.


----------



## Deguslave

I don't think 'suck it up and deal' is the way we're made, its more like how we've been conditioned. 

There are generations of women who put up with being abused by their husbands because it was expected, not because it was right. Women have been conditioned for years to 'know' our place. Fight back and we're either hormonal or hysterical. Get angry about it and we're accused of being 'upset' because they don't like us having emotions that are anything other than happy or upset.


----------



## O2.0

Deguslave said:


> I don't think 'suck it up and deal' is the way we're made, its more like how we've been conditioned.


Yes, absolutely. 
I'm currently listening to a podcast series from Wondery - The Fight For Woman's Suffrage and it's amazing what women have managed to accomplish in a relatively short period of time. It's very inspiring. 
And makes me all the more angry to see people trying to undo all that work.


----------



## Pawscrossed

MollySmith said:


> That _wasn't the point _but the person to whom the post was directed got as did @Jobeth - thank you! And no, I'm not coming back here to explain the point.


I did get your point in your post addressed to me.

It is disappointing to see your words manipulated, again. You're not having a lot of joy - being undermined about emojis (tantamount to being told you have no idea how do your job). Twisted like fusilli. Anyone might think there is some cliquey gaslighted going on. Oh, but of course! I am misunderstanding completely. It wasn't the point.

You are, of course, completely correct.

We had a lovely afternoon thank you. I hope you had a productive Easter weekend, your podcast on LGBTQIA+ show arrived. What a guest! Highly emotional and that's just the first few minutes. I will be listening to the rest today.


----------



## Cleo38

Pawscrossed said:


> I did get your point in your post addressed to me.
> 
> It is disappointing to see your words manipulated, again. You're not having a lot of joy - being undermined about emojis (tantamount to being told you have no idea how do your job). Twisted like fusilli. Anyone might think there is some cliquey gaslighted going on. Oh, but of course! I am misunderstanding completely. It wasn't the point.
> 
> .


Eh? I have no idea why you are bringing other threads up on this one. This is about women's rights so please don't derail it in to some petty point scoring one about cliques, etc


----------



## Jobeth

I think it’s more that people have strong feelings about certain topics so they will always agree with each other. Personally I don’t care if people disagree with my views as they are entitled to their opinion. It does annoy me that after a while different voices on ‘debate’ threads get drowned out and give up. It’s depressing though when it’s a thread about women’s rights and some feel disempowered to express their views.


----------



## MollySmith

Pawscrossed said:


> I did get your point in your post addressed to me.
> 
> It is disappointing to see your words manipulated, again. You're not having a lot of joy - being undermined about emojis (tantamount to being told you have no idea how do your job). Twisted like fusilli. Anyone might think there is some cliquey gaslighted going on. Oh, but of course! I am misunderstanding completely. It wasn't the point.
> 
> You are, of course, completely correct.
> 
> We had a lovely afternoon thank you. I hope you had a productive Easter weekend, your podcast on LGBTQIA+ show arrived. What a guest! Highly emotional and that's just the first few minutes. I will be listening to the rest today.


No worries. Apparently it's something about ducks. Ta for podcast kindness! I shall pass on and yes, what a guest! A _proper_ author!


----------



## Cleo38

Jobeth said:


> I think it's more that people have strong feelings about certain topics so they will always agree with each other. Personally I don't care if people disagree with my views as they are entitled to their opinion. It does annoy me that after a while different voices on 'debate' threads get drowned out and give up.


Whether you believe me or not I hope that's not the case. I actually am pleased we can discuss this without it getting personal or abusive as it seems to on other platforms.

I do feel passionately about this & so angry that any debate is being stifled as it's deemed 'transphobic' that's why I actually do appreciate your comments regardless of whether or not I agree with them. I hope you continue to post


----------



## Jobeth

Cleo38 said:


> Whether you believe me or not I hope that's not the case. I actually am pleased we can discuss this without it getting personal or abusive as it seems to on other platforms.
> 
> I do feel passionately about this & so angry that any debate is being stifled as it's deemed 'transphobic' that's why I actually do appreciate your comments regardless of whether or not I agree with them. I hope you continue to post


Thank you


----------



## MollySmith

Jobeth said:


> I think it's more that people have strong feelings about certain topics so they will always agree with each other. Personally I don't care if people disagree with my views as they are entitled to their opinion. It does annoy me that after a while different voices on 'debate' threads get drowned out and give up. It's even more depressing when it's a thread about women's rights and some feel disempowered to express their views.


Yes to all this. I think I already said way back that the thread is doing the very opposite of what it maybe intended by shutting down conversation. I imagine I was told I was wrong much as you were taken to task yesterday. It feels like one can't express a concern or share a link without being disempowered. It is a clique and that quickly leads to bullying, particularly when questions posed back are complete ignored and the responses enter into one upman(woman/other)ship ! and mutual appreciation to the detriment of learning. Whether that's enough to ban or close down threads is up to the long suffering mods and site owners. It's distressing and unkind, I can't imagine anyone benefits from it least of all learns.

i hope you and others are okay.


----------



## Cleo38

MollySmith said:


> Yes to all this. I think I already said way back that the thread is doing the very opposite of what it maybe intended by shutting down conversation. I imagine I was told I was wrong much as you were taken to task yesterday. It feels like one can't express a concern or share a link without being disempowered. It is a clique and that quickly leads to bullying, particularly when questions posed back are complete ignored and the responses enter into one upman(woman/other)ship ! and mutual appreciation to the detriment of learning. Whether that's enough to ban or close down threads is up to the long suffering mods and site owners. It's distressing and unkind, I can't imagine anyone benefits from it least of all learns.
> 
> i hope you and others are okay.


Please stop this, no one is shutting down debate. No one is bullying, if you think they are then maybe speak to the mods about this.

If you find this thread not for you then ignore it. I have learnt alot from links posted here & have listened to the POV of others whether I agree with them or not. It is sad that threads get closed because a few people don't like them, many of us are enjoying discussions & reading about how woman are being affected in the current climate around the world .

I honestly feel that if some people get so upset because others do not agree with them then maybe they should take a break for while & reassess. Whilst people do get passionate about certain subjects there has been no name calling here or nastiness. This is a discussion & I hope those who want to join in do so.


----------



## Jobeth

MollySmith said:


> Yes to all this. I think I already said way back that the thread is doing the very opposite of what it maybe intended by shutting down conversation. I imagine I was told I was wrong much as you were taken to task yesterday. It feels like one can't express a concern or share a link without being disempowered. It is a clique and that quickly leads to bullying, particularly when questions posed back are complete ignored and the responses enter into one upman(woman/other)ship ! and mutual appreciation to the detriment of learning. Whether that's enough to ban or close down threads is up to the long suffering mods and site owners. It's distressing and unkind, I can't imagine anyone benefits from it least of all learns.
> 
> i hope you and others are okay.


That's kind of you to ask but I'm fine. I hope you are ok. Just remember that whilst some disagreed with you there were others that agreed. I'm sure lots of people read threads but don't get involved so it's important that a range of views are always on offer.


----------



## £54etgfb6

I'm not really concerned whether people disagree with me on Petforums or in general but to call this, or any discussion on Petforums, a debate is a stretch in my opinion. During debates at university I have never had passive aggressive comments made towards me. I don't report it because I don't really view it as bullying, just cringe-worthy. Letting your emotions into a debate is called an argument which is what I'd say the general chat threads are more akin to. In an argument, information is not shared as freely and openly as in a debate or discussion.

There are people who will avoid this thread due to the jibes thrown and the weird, back-patting-your-mates-instead-of-adding-anything-to-the-argument. A lot of those people will be those with views which do not align with the majority of posters on this thread. Thus, the thread becomes similar to an echo chamber, which is definitely _not_ a debate.

There are a few (like myself) who continue to post regardless but I can guarantee you the passive-aggressive clique nature of these threads steers _many_ people away. If you want a debate this shouldn't be your aim and the people perpetrating these behaviours should really have their posts ignored by others, but then there is a real issue on Petforums with calling out your friends.

This is a site-wide issue but because it was mentioned here, I thought I'd add my two cents.


----------



## O2.0

Jobeth said:


> It does annoy me that after a while different voices on 'debate' threads get drowned out and give up. It's depressing though when it's a thread about women's rights and some feel disempowered to express their views.


I may be wrong, but I never saw this as a debate thread. 
I see this as a place for those of us who are worried about women's rights to share and post and vent and support each other. 
I don't agree with everyone and everything on this thread but I share the concern over the overarching theme of concern for women's rights. I think that's where most of us are coming from.

I have enjoyed your contribution even when I don't agree (like about changing rooms), and appreciate that you like many on here, don't get overly invested in being "right" just put forward your views, and I hope you continue to feel empowered to do so


----------



## Linda Weasel

I haven’t contributed to this thread, because I know almost nothing about the issues raised.

I don’t really care if it’s a debate, an argument or just an airing of views, I’ve learned a lot from it and am now thinking hard about things that, being a 50s child, had never been on my compass before.

So that’s a win….


----------



## O2.0

On page 3 of this thread, post #43 and #44 @Cleo38 and I disagreed on some points about a trans MMA fighter. We continued to discuss and found our points of agreement - again based on women's rights. To me this sums up the spirit of the thread.

Most (all?) of the main posters on this thread have disagreed at some point or another. And agreed at other points. Agreeing with one another is not a clique. Disagreeing with one another is not exclusion or rejection.

I really hope this thread doesn't deteriorate in to petty personal annoyances. We have a thread for that. 
And I really, really hope this thread doesn't get closed, because for many posters it's the only place they can talk about these worries.


----------



## HarlequinCat

I read people's views on this thread, I agree and disagree with certain points. 
I haven't seen anyone shut down what another has said, but instead put their view across that disagrees with another poster. 
If a majority agree with one but not another it doesn't mean its cliquey. I think that is an assumption that is easy to jump to. If I was taking part in a thread that most didn't agree with me, I'd put my point across and just accept not everyone would like the post, but at least I showed an opposing view.


----------



## Rafa

Cleo38 said:


> Please stop this, no one is shutting down debate. No one is bullying, if you think they are then maybe speak to the mods about this.
> 
> If you find this thread not for you then ignore it. I have learnt alot from links posted here & have listened to the POV of others whether I agree with them or not. It is sad that threads get closed because a few people don't like them, many of us are enjoying discussions & reading about how woman are being affected in the current climate around the world .
> 
> I honestly feel that if some people get so upset because others do not agree with them then maybe they should take a break for while & reassess. Whilst people do get passionate about certain subjects there has been no name calling here or nastiness. This is a discussion & I hope those who want to join in do so.


Very well said indeed.

I did contribute to this thread briefly, but haven't again. The accusations of bullying by certain posters when others offer a different viewpoint to theirs is pathetic and it's own form of bullying, IMO.


----------



## kimthecat

O2.0 said:


> I may be wrong, but I never saw this as a debate thread.
> I see this as a place for those of us who are worried about women's rights to share and post and vent and support each other.
> I don't agree with everyone and everything on this thread but I share the concern over the overarching theme of concern for women's rights. I think that's


Yes , I think the same .

About unisex toilets, many sexual assaults and violence against women are done by men they know but that can still leave those women with a fear of strange men. Toilets don't usually have attendants and I know that I couldn't use one if I was on my own, If a man was in there or one came in , I would be anxious .I would either walk out or wait in the cubicle until they left. It's not fair to assume that all men will hurt you but the fear can be over whelming .


----------



## O2.0

I remember when the bathroom wars first started and there are likely posts in this forum about it, I was on the "what's the big deal" side. Because to me, a trans person presented well enough to use a bathroom and not have anyone notice. I even said, most of us women have probably used a cubicle next to a trans woman and never known. 

And I still don't have an issue with a genuine trans woman using a woman's restroom. Mainly because I doubt I'd notice anyway. Most of us aren't paying a whole lot of attention to other women in the restroom, we're too busy making sure there's toilet paper in the stall, and trying to hover over the commode with our purses around our necks doing our best not to touch anything. 

But I do have an issue with men being allowed free access to women's spaces. For all the reasons already highlighted by others and then some. 
I think women and girls should have spaces that are exclusively theirs. Out of respect for these women and their feelings of comfort, safety, and dignity.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Rafa said:


> Very well said indeed.
> 
> I did contribute to this thread briefly, but haven't again. The accusations of bullying by certain posters when others offer a different viewpoint to theirs is pathetic and it's own form of bullying, IMO.


I don't know who "certain posters" are but I was the most recent person to post in this thread re: bullying so I'm going to _presume_ I'm one of them? I do not think I or anyone else who has mentioned bullying across the 51 pages this thread encompasses, refer to people having a different viewpoint. I think it is more so the weird use of certain emojis such as winking faces (in a potential "debate"? Really?), the occasional vague aura of people trying to one-up others, the dismissal of genuine statistics in favour of anecdotal data, etc.

For example, I myself have been told that I am being put on someone's ignore list, on this thread. It's not bullying IMO but it's wholly unnecessary and adds zero substance to any potential, productive discussion that could occur. _These_ are the behaviours I think people are referring to when they mention bullying. I can't speak on behalf of others, but these are my assumptions based on my own experiences. When a topic as serious as women's rights is brought up, the discussion should be professional, respectful, evidence-based, and mature, in my opinion.


----------



## O2.0

Seriously can we stop with the posts about people getting butthurt about stuff? Pretty please? 

This is not and never was a debate thread. 
It's a thread where those of us who are concerned about women's rights can share news, vent, unload our concerns, bitch about being called bleeders (seriously, if you want to get irate about something surely that's a better target?), hell this thread may make us question our sanity! 

This has been a helpful place for a lot of us to feel like we can talk with like-minded people who at times may make us question and pause but we at least feel like we're united in our belief that women's rights are important and worth defending. 

I *really* don't want to see this thread deteriorate in to pettiness and I really really don't want to see it closed. How ultimately ironic would that be? A thread about women's voices being silenced ends up closed. Let's not.


----------



## Jobeth

kimthecat said:


> Yes , I think the same .
> 
> About unisex toilets, many sexual assaults and violence against women are done by men they know but that can still leave those women with a fear of strange men. Toilets don't usually have attendants and I know that I couldn't use one if I was on my own, If a man was in there or one came in , I would be anxious .I would either walk out or wait in the cubicle until they left. It's not fair to assume that all men will hurt you but the fear can be over whelming .


I'm sorry that it would make you feel afraid. Considering that then unless the cubicles are in isolation (e.g. on a train and some restaurants) then the Barbican's solution of male, female and gender neutral toilets is the best compromise.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Jobeth said:


> I'm sorry that it would make you feel afraid. Considering that then unless the cubicles are in isolation (e.g. on a train and some restaurants) then the Barbican's solution of male, female and gender neutral toilets is the best compromise.


I think the cubicles in isolation are definitely possible for future buildings. One of the libraries at my uni has single cubicles with a sink and hand dryer inside each one. It's bliss. I don't see them in older buildings due to retrofitting costs I presume.


----------



## O2.0

Jobeth said:


> I'm sorry that it would make you feel afraid. Considering that then unless the cubicles are in isolation (e.g. on a train and some restaurants) then the Barbican's solution of male, female and gender neutral toilets is the best compromise.


We're now seeing more and more "family" toilets that are gender neutral, have a changing station, and are large enough to accommodate a parent with 2 or more children in tow.

I get they're not always practical at big venues where you really need multiple stalls or urinals, but there are another nice, inclusive compromise.


----------



## Jobeth

I think it’s important as often the baby change facilities are in the women’s toilets which really isn’t practical for men that are caring for a baby. Where I take my dogs for a walk one of the disabled toilets is in a small building with another toilet that can be used by anyone. Interestingly in Vietnam the women’s toilets in a museum had urinals which felt a bit strange.


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> Yes , I think the same .
> 
> About unisex toilets, many sexual assaults and violence against women are done by men they know but that can still leave those women with a fear of strange men. Toilets don't usually have attendants and I know that I couldn't use one if I was on my own, If a man was in there or one came in , I would be anxious .I would either walk out or wait in the cubicle until they left. It's not fair to assume that all men will hurt you but the fear can be over whelming .


Years ago when I worked in London I worked with a trans woman (I can't remember if I mentioned in this thread or not ... old age!! ). She was lovely, very funny & as we worked on the same project we spent alot of time together. She was very obviously male tho & did look like a big man in a dress (am sorry if that's offensive but it's true). Regardless I would never have had a problem with her using the women's loo's as I knew her & felt comfortable with her. At the time I think some women weren't comfortable (it was a very big busy office so not everyone knew each other) so she used the disabled loos so there were no dramas.

In our local town we have unisex loos but they are all single cubicles spaced around the market square so very visible yet a private space, again I wouldn't have a problem with that either. I do have a problem with the stall type of places & biological men being able to use the & like you I probably wouldn't.

As for baby changing spaces in men's loos are men actually complaining about this? As I don't have kids I have no idea but surely in this time there would be


----------



## Cleo38

Duplicate post


----------



## Jobeth

Cleo38 said:


> As for baby changing spaces in men's loos are men actually complaining about this? As I don't have kids I have no idea but surely in this time there would be


Apparently it's still not the norm for men to have access to changing spaces in their toilets. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/singe-parent-awareness-baby-changing-facilities-phil-mathias


----------



## Cleo38

Jobeth said:


> Apparently it's still not the norm for men to have access to changing spaces in their toilets. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/singe-parent-awareness-baby-changing-facilities-phil-mathias


I did think as much but sort of hoped that things had moved on. Even if men aren't single parents lots of dads take their children out so I don't understand why these specific areas seem to only feature in women's toilets. Surely it should be the norm but I suppose it all boils down to money & again women will be asked to accommodate men in their areas.

Another subject entirely ... what does everyone think about this? Arresting men for staring at women on the train won't make us any safer, writes JULIE BURCHILL | Daily Mail Online

I agree with her, I honestly think we are on dangerous ground with this. Having worked in London & had to suffer the tubes every day then it's great that TFL are working to stamp out sexual harassment & assault but I also do not think this is the answer.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Cleo38 said:


> I did think as much but sort of hoped that things had moved on. Even if men aren't single parents lots of dads take their children out so I don't understand why these specific areas seem to only feature in women's toilets. Surely it should be the norm but I suppose it all boils down to money & again women will be asked to accommodate men in their areas.
> 
> Another subject entirely ... what does everyone think about this? Arresting men for staring at women on the train won't make us any safer, writes JULIE BURCHILL | Daily Mail Online
> 
> I agree with her, I honestly think we are on dangerous ground with this. Having worked in London & had to suffer the tubes every day then it's great that TFL are working to stamp out sexual harassment & assault but I also do not think this is the answer. by


I don't agree with the author mainly due to: "His case does sound pretty unpleasant, but why not just try catching actual rapists rather than wasting time on crimes not yet committed?". Staring at someone, not stopping when asked, and then preventing them leaving the train is harassment which _is_ a crime.

There is the issue of how you prove it but tubes and trains have CCTV. In terms of how to differentiate *staring* and someone just… gazing into space, I'd personally say it's very obvious. I can tell in my own cat when she's simply gazing at me and when her stare seems to harden prior to biting me. Body nature is quite telling.

"These should not be matters for the police! Just like 'misgendering' and other internet thought crimes, it's far too easy to criminalise events which don't actually harm anybody.". The author says as a child she left the house 30 minutes early to avoid being catcalled on the way to school, but believes these "microaggressions" don't harm anyone? Is people feeling uncomfortable in a public space and fearing their safety not harmful? Does this not contribute to the culture that many women experience where they feel they cannot leave the house alone? Is this not harmful??????

I also don't agree with her argument that prosecuting harassment such as staring somehow prevents rape and sexual assault being prosecuted. The fact that rape and sexual assault are not prosecuted is a problem with the police, the government, and society as a whole and is *not* due to people reporting lesser offences, imo.

Seems like a very out of touch article and I'm not sure if the author expects women to sit on a 30 minute journey being stared at in silence or if she expects these women to stand up and call the person out, only to be assaulted on the train or followed off of it. These are real consequences of calling out these behaviours and it's why, in my opinion, the police _need_ to be involved.


----------



## Cleo38

bmr10 said:


> I don't agree with the author mainly due to: "His case does sound pretty unpleasant, but why not just try catching actual rapists rather than wasting time on crimes not yet committed?". Staring at someone, not stopping when asked, and then preventing them leaving the train is harassment which _is_ a crime.
> 
> There is the issue of how you prove it but tubes and trains have CCTV. In terms of how to differentiate *staring* and someone just… gazing into space, I'd personally say it's very obvious. I can tell in my own cat when she's simply gazing at me and when her stare seems to harden prior to biting me. Body nature is quite telling.
> 
> "These should not be matters for the police! Just like 'misgendering' and other internet thought crimes, it's far too easy to criminalise events which don't actually harm anybody.". The author says as a child she left the house 30 minutes early to avoid being catcalled on the way to school, but believes these "microaggressions" don't harm anyone? Is people feeling uncomfortable in a public space and fearing their safety not harmful? Does this not contribute to the culture that many women experience where they feel they cannot leave the house alone? Is this not harmful??????
> 
> I also don't agree with her argument that prosecuting harassment such as staring somehow prevents rape and sexual assault being prosecuted. The fact that rape and sexual assault are not prosecuted is a problem with the police, the government, and society as a whole and is *not* due to people reporting lesser offences, imo.
> 
> Seems like a very out of touch article and I'm not sure if the author expects women to sit on a 30 minute journey being stared at in silence or if she expects these women to stand up and call the person out, only to be assaulted on the train or followed off of it. These are real consequences of calling out these behaviours and it's why, in my opinion, the police _need_ to be involved.


In some ways I agree with you aswell (can I do both? ) I do think that whilst rape/sexual assault prosecutions are down agencies feel they need to be 'seen' to do something but I don't think this is the answer. yes, staring is uncomfortable & yes I think mainly this can be seen as different to day dreaming but I still feel it's almost going to an area where we are almost policing thoughts, who knows what the intention was. Preventing someone leaving or passing by is completely different & the man is question was rightly prosecuted.

I work in construction & this used to be an incredibly sexist industry (still is very male dominated but times/cultures within have changed massively). Now no company would tolerate their work force jeering at women passing by & rightly so. I don't think it 'harmed' me as such when I was younger but more like contributed to the bigger picture of how I was perceived by men & how I felt uncomfortable by this.

I also think that the police fail to get involved when more serious crimes are reported https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/victims-furious-police-forces-870-26727737 (& other media sites) so am not sure how this will work.

I worked in London for years & had to put up with loads of incidents that I shouldn't have, I honestly never even considered reporting them. I think the key is to not have so many people crammed in to tiny carriages so there is less opportunity for alot of assaults to occur but that's never going happen!


----------



## £54etgfb6

Cleo38 said:


> In some ways I agree with you aswell (can I do both? ) I do think that whilst rape/sexual assault prosecutions are down agencies feel they need to be 'seen' to do something but I don't think this is the answer. yes, staring is uncomfortable & yes I think mainly this can be seen as different to day dreaming but I still feel it's almost going to an area where we are almost policing thoughts, who knows what the intention was. Preventing someone leaving or passing by is completely different & the man is question was rightly prosecuted.
> 
> I work in construction & this used to be an incredibly sexist industry (still is very male dominated but times/cultures within have changed massively). Now no company would tolerate their work force jeering at women passing by & rightly so. I don't think it 'harmed' me as such when I was younger but more like contributed to the bigger picture of how I was perceived by men & how I felt uncomfortable by this.
> 
> I also think that the police fail to get involved when more serious crimes are reported https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/victims-furious-police-forces-870-26727737 (& other media sites) so am not sure how this will work.
> 
> I worked in London for years & had to put up with loads of incidents that I shouldn't have, I honestly never even considered reporting them. I think the key is to not have so many people crammed in to tiny carriages so there is less opportunity for alot of assaults to occur but that's never going happen!


I don't want thoughts to be policed but there's something very different from acknowledging that someone is attractive and _staring_. It's a common theme amongst women who find other women attractive that we do our utmost to avoid the male gaze and avoid making women uncomfortable with things such as staring. Why do we do this? Because we've all had an experience of a man staring at us and making us feel trapped and threatened. I *never* want a woman to feel that I am staring at her, ogling her, or making her feel uncomfortable.

There was zero reason for a man on a bus to stare at me for an entire hour, and then the next time I see him on a different bus proceed to stare at me for the entire journey once again. There was also zero reason for a group of teenagers to sit across from my friend and I on an empty bus in Hungary and stare at us for the entire journey. _These_ are the kind of situations I'm referring to. This makes for an unpleasant journey and you _know _that's the intention, to make women feel uncomfortable and to remind them of the power you hold.

I think this is harmful in the same vein that many other microaggressions are. They fly under the radar because they aren't seen as serious enough, but what they end up doing is furling the culture that women are objects to be ogled by men, that women must put up with men's behaviours, and that women cannot sit on a tube for 10 minutes without experiencing the patriarchy. I don't think women should live with this and I think carrying this burden is harmful.

I wholly agree the police fail to get involved with more serious cases. The numbers are shocking.


----------



## Cleo38

bmr10 said:


> I don't want thoughts to be policed but there's something very different from acknowledging that someone is attractive and _staring_. It's a common theme amongst women who find other women attractive that we do our utmost to avoid the male gaze and avoid making women uncomfortable with things such as staring. Why do we do this? Because we've all had an experience of a man staring at us and making us feel trapped and threatened. I *never* want a woman to feel that I am staring at her, ogling her, or making her feel uncomfortable.
> 
> There was zero reason for a man on a bus to stare at me for an entire hour, and then the next time I see him on a different bus proceed to stare at me for the entire journey once again. There was also zero reason for a group of teenagers to sit across from my friend and I on an empty bus in Hungary and stare at us for the entire journey. _These_ are the kind of situations I'm referring to. This makes for an unpleasant journey and you _know _that's the intention, to make women feel uncomfortable and to remind them of the power you hold.
> 
> I think this is harmful in the same vein that many other microaggressions are. They fly under the radar because they aren't seen as serious enough, but what they end up doing is furling the culture that women are objects to be ogled by men, that women must put up with men's behaviours, and that women cannot sit on a tube for 10 minutes without experiencing the patriarchy. I don't think women should live with this and I think carrying this burden is harmful.
> 
> I wholly agree the police fail to get involved with more serious cases. The numbers are shocking.


Again i agree to an extent, that staring is a form of aggression if it is designed to make women feel uncomfortable, I'm just not sure how this can be policed & if this is more of a marketing ploy rather than anything meaningful.

Years ago when i was in India I was stared at on the train from Dehli to Agra for hours. I was with a BF at the time & the man who was doing it was with his wife. In fact the whole 3 wks I as in India I was started at for 3 weeks by Indian men, followed, asked if I would have my photo taken with them, etc (BTW I was not a stunning 18yrs I was a 30 something average white woman but I stood out as there were very few people who looked like me where we were staying). For someone who hates having any sort of attention it was unnerving initially, then amusing but I didn;t feel threatened by this behaviour. Maybe I was naive or maybe they were just (which I think is the case) very nosey!

Am not sure if covered by TFL but I have heard many women say about men sitting next to them watching porn on their phones with the volume up & the images being very visible. I had no idea this went on but then I rarely use public transport


----------



## O2.0

Well the example she gave isn't exactly staring though is it?
He didn't stop when asked and then he barred the door and tried to prevent her leaving - that's definitely not "just" staring, but I bet when he tells the story of how he was arrested and sentenced, it will be "I was put away for staring at a woman" and people will believe him.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Cleo38 said:


> Again i agree to an extent, that sport of staring is a form of aggression is is designed to make women feel uncomfortable, I'm just not sure how this can be policed & if this is more of a marketing ploy rather than anything meaningful.
> 
> Years ago when i was in India I was stared at on the train from Dehli to Agra for hours. I was with a BF at the time & the man who was doing it was with his wife. In fact the whole 3 wks I as in India I was started at for 3 weeks by Indian men, followed, asked if I would have my photo taken with them, etc (BTW I was not a stunning 18yrs I was a 30 something average white woman but I stood out as there were very few people who looked like me where we were staying). For someone who hates having any sort of attention it was unnerving initially, then amusing but I didn;t feel threatened by this behaviour. Maybe I was naive or maybe they were just (which I think is the case) very nosey!
> 
> Am not sure if covered by TFL but I have heard many women say about men sitting next to them watching porn on their phones with the volume up & the images being very visible. I had no idea this went on but then I rarely use public transport


There is the issue with prosecuting someone as I acknowledged previously, yes. It's hard to prove what someone's intentions are/were. Perhaps the warning will deter a certain percentage of perpetrators? I think, knowing our gov (without getting political), it leans more towards a marketing ploy. However, I was just speaking from _my_ perspective in that I think it is a valid, important topic that does harm women. I think microaggressions do need to be reduced but whether this message by TFL will have any effect or not, I'm not sure.

I once had some tourists ask to take a photo with me in St Andrews. The reasoning behind this might be similar to your situation, it _is_ hard to know someone's intentions.

Yeah, people do that, I've seen men masturbating in public. I've had one do it while staring at me. I'm not going to say what emotions it produces within me because it wouldn't be very polite at all!!!


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> I think this is harmful in the same vein that many other microaggressions are.


Have you read any of John McWhorter's stuff on microaggressions? He calls them a detour. I tend to agree with him.

They're hard to pinpoint, what one person sees as a microaggression might not affect someone else, and addressing them doesn't really do much to improve things in any real way. 
Want women treated better? Enforce the laws already in place and prosecute actual assaults properly. That makes a difference. 
Pointing out microaggressions (which may not even be a microaggression) does nothing really.


----------



## £54etgfb6

O2.0 said:


> Have you read any of John McWhorter's stuff on microaggressions? He calls them a detour. I tend to agree with him.
> 
> They're hard to pinpoint, what one person sees as a microaggression might not affect someone else, and addressing them doesn't really do much to improve things in any real way.
> Want women treated better? Enforce the laws already in place and prosecute actual assaults properly. That makes a difference.
> Pointing out microaggressions (which may not even be a microaggression) does nothing really.


I think what someone classes as "wrong" is very subjective, and this will include microaggressions. I don't think there is a hard and fast rule about what's right and what's wrong, aside from the law if you're interested in following it- which most of us are. Some people may not find microaggressions harmful but then some people do not find other things such as cheating harmful. What's right and what's wrong is a subjective question and I think business owners such as TFL reserve the right to decide what's right and what's wrong on their own trains providing no laws are broken.

On a whole, I do personally believe addressing microaggressions is important as many people are not aware of the prejudices they hold and have never stopped to think about it, these things can be subconscious. Some people may genuinely believe that what they say or do is not harmful and making them aware that it can be harmful is much more productive than grudges being harboured. On the other hand, the acceptance of microaggressions can make people believe that more serious offences are acceptable too.

I haven't read his stuff no, my bookshelf is pretty much exclusively medicine/biology books. Not a lot of room for anything else but if any of his stuff is free online I may take a gander.


----------



## O2.0

My view on microaggressions has evolved. About 5 years ago, before covid (anyone remember that anymore?) I jumped at the chance to do cultural sensitivity training. And from there my views started evolving. There is important work to be done that's being sidetracked and derailed by focusing on less important things like microaggressions. 

I agree with McWhorter that like so many ultra progressive movements, it's misguided at best.
First, intent does matter. Context matters. They have to, and to pretend they don't is insulting to everyone's intelligence. 
I have a male coworker who wears themed t-shirts for different occasions. On St. Patrick's day he work a funny green one. I said "Nice! I'm liking the shirt today!" He responded with "I thought you might like this one." We laughed, and went along our merry way. 
In a different context with different intent, "Nice! I'm liking the shirt today!" could be completely inappropriate, or responding "I thought you might like this shirt" could also be inappropriate. 

Another example. How many times on this forum alone have I been misgendered? Posters tend to think I'm a man. They use the wrong pronouns for me. Should I be offended every time and report those posts to moderation, or should I just laugh it off and move on with my life. Would it accomplish anything to give posters a hard time for making assumptions about my gender? Or can I just say I'm a "she" and keep going. Or even nothing if it's not relevant to the conversation? 
I don't see it as a microaggression. 

Now you are a trans woman and people still say "he" in reference to you as a way of making a point - that's different. But that person is likely also doing a lot of other things that need addressing. Getting that person to use the correct pronoun doesn't really solve any of those other issues either. 

So yeah, I think microaggressions have become more a means of people being able to virtue signal that they noticed them than an actual useful tool in fighting discrimination.


----------



## O2.0

Really good article on how conflating sex and gender is so damaging to women. 
https://www.newsweek.com/gender-dogma-threatens-pulverize-womens-rights-opinion-1689424


----------



## picaresque




----------



## £54etgfb6

picaresque said:


> View attachment 488477


Why do they keep being fined meagre amounts like $500 for charges of assault?? It is so bizarre, especially when this is a string of offences within a short space of time (a couple of months)- indicating a severe decline in mental state. Repeat offenders *need* to be taken more seriously! I cannot understand why the US law service issues a fine for an assault crime when it is a repeat offence...


----------



## Cleo38

bmr10 said:


> Why do they keep being fined meagre amounts like $500 for charges of assault?? It is so bizarre, especially when this is a string of offences within a short space of time (a couple of months)- indicating a severe decline in mental state. Repeat offenders *need* to be taken more seriously! I cannot understand why the US law service issues a fine for an assault crime when it is a repeat offence...


I remembered this one .... https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/ne...jordana-rutherford-william-weir-attack-freed/

That poor young woman who was only 17 was beaten to a pulp & yet a £1000 fine & some community service was the sentence. Appalling


----------



## £54etgfb6

Cleo38 said:


> I remembered this one .... https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/ne...jordana-rutherford-william-weir-attack-freed/
> 
> That poor young woman who was only 17 was beaten to a pulp & yet a £1000 fine & some community service was the sentence. Appalling


"Drug dealers getting years for an ounce of weed yet woman beating scum get little to nothing?"

Yeah why is drug possession and supply taken more seriously than beating someone round the head which can cause potentially fatal injuries due to the fragility of the brain and skull?

Why is £1000 considered "compensation"? What does this compensate for? If it's for any plastic surgeries, £1000 doesn't begin to cover anything. If it's for emotional trauma, money will not erase the lifelong fear you will carry after being beaten by your partner (and especially after watching them get an incredibly light sentence).


----------



## Cleo38

WTAF, have Stonewall completely lost the plot now?!

Do lesbians not exist anymore? And if they do then why is a biological man promoting Lesbian Visability week under the guise of being a 'lesbian' .... how f*cking insulting to women .... again!

JK Rowling tweets image of 'white, bearded, Stonewall-approved lesbian' after facing fury | Daily Mail Online


----------



## £54etgfb6

Cleo38 said:


> WTAF, have Stonewall completely lost the plot now?!
> 
> Do lesbians not exist anymore? And if they do then why is a biological man promoting Lesbian Visability week under the guise of being a 'lesbian' .... how f*cking insulting to women .... again!
> 
> JK Rowling tweets image of 'white, bearded, Stonewall-approved lesbian' after facing fury | Daily Mail Online


Lesbians are just women who feel attraction to women. These women can include trans or cis women in the same vein as a straight man being attracted to a trans woman and still being straight as she is a woman.

If a lesbian preferred to appear as masculine and have a beard then that really does not erase her sexual identity as femininity is not exclusive to women and masculinity is not exclusive to men.

Not really sure what the issue with a bearded lesbian is as facial hair is just a personal preference?


----------



## Cleo38

bmr10 said:


> Lesbians are just women who feel attraction to women. These women can include trans or cis women in the same vein as a straight man being attracted to a trans woman and still being straight as she is a woman.
> 
> If a lesbian preferred to appear as masculine and have a beard then that really does not erase her sexual identity as femininity is not exclusive to women and masculinity is not exclusive to men.
> 
> Not really sure what the issue with a bearded lesbian is as facial hair is just a personal preference?


Except the 'lesbian' is a biological male ... so not a lesbian


----------



## £54etgfb6

Cleo38 said:


> Except the 'lesbian' is a biological male ... so not a lesbian


I might have read the article wrong but who is the biological male in the article? I thought the photo was a photoshopped JK??? Her friend referenced throughout the article is also a cis woman?

If a trans woman, who was biologically born male, feels attraction towards women alone are they not a lesbian? If not, what sexuality is appropriate for them to identify as? A woman attracted to only women is the definition of lesbianism.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> Lesbians are just women who feel attraction to women. These women can include trans or cis women in the same vein as a straight man being attracted to a trans woman and still being straight as she is a woman.


In order for this to make any sort of sense, we have to agree on what a woman is. And by saying anyone can be a lesbian, again, we're erasing women, erasing what it is to be homosexual, erasing what it is to be a lesbian.

If sex isn't real then homosexuality doesn't exist. The **** comes from the greek meaning "same" as in same sex. Same sex attraction. 
If a man decides to present as a woman and then says they're attracted to women that's not homosexuality, and that man is not a lesbian.


----------



## Jesthar

bmr10 said:


> I might have read the article wrong but who is the biological male in the article? I thought the photo was a photoshopped JK??? Her friend referenced throughout the article is also a cis woman?
> 
> If a trans woman, who was biologically born male, feels attraction towards women alone are they not a lesbian? If not, what sexuality is appropriate for them to identify as? A woman attracted to only women is the definition of lesbianism.


The biological male is Alex Drummond, who identifies as trans but has kept a masculine look aside from long hair and makeup (as far as I can tell from a quick google). Currently employed by stonewall to go into schools and talk to kids.

The definition of lesbianism has always been same biological SEX attraction (so men attracted to the male body, females attracted to the female body). If you start trying to shoehorn gender into the mix, then - and @O2.0 beat me to it in a far more eloquent fashion


----------



## £54etgfb6

O2.0 said:


> In order for this to make any sort of sense, we have to agree on what a woman is. And by saying anyone can be a lesbian, again, we're erasing women, erasing what it is to be homosexual, erasing what it is to be a lesbian.
> 
> If sex isn't real then homosexuality doesn't exist. The **** comes from the greek meaning "same" as in same sex. Same sex attraction.
> If a man decides to present as a woman and then says they're attracted to women that's not homosexuality, and that man is not a lesbian.


You are saying if someone who is biologically male identifies as a trans woman and feels sexual/romantic attraction towards other women they are not gay? What are they then? Calling them straight completely erases the fact that they identify as a woman?

Boiling lesbianism down to feeling same-sex attraction is risky in this day to day era where someone could look masculine, have a penis, but be a trans man who was born female. If a lesbian was attracted to this hypothetical person would they be experiencing attraction based on the person's sex (which they do not show any primary or secondary sexual characteristics of)? People's genitals and general appearance do not always match their chromosomes and so I don't personally believe sexuality should be so associated with chromosomes so rigidly.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Jesthar said:


> The biological male is Alex Drummond, who identifies as trans but has kept a masculine look aside from long hair and makeup (as far as I can tell from a quick google). Currently employed by stonewall to go into schools and talk to kids.
> 
> The definition of lesbianism has always been same biological SEX attraction (so men attracted to the male body, females attracted to the female body). If you start trying to shoehorn gender into the mix, then - and @O2.0 beat me to it in a far more eloquent fashion


Oh wow, I thought it was a photoshopped picture of JK lmao. I did google the name but it came up with pictures of some random couple together.

Lesbianism is the sexual attraction between women and women come in all appearances? I am bi and experience attraction towards men and women, which includes trans people as they are men and women.

There are many straight men in relationships with trans women, and straight women in relationships with trans men. People from sexual attraction based on personality and aesthetic appearance. Appearances can be altered and can have little to do with your biological sex nowadays (if you wish) and so I don't believe it's as black and white as you say. You cannot always know what someone's biological sex is and therefore I don't think it's accurate to say that that's what sexual attraction is based upon.

If I were to transition to a man, had my breasts removed, took testosterone for a few years, had facial reconstruction surgery and bottom surgery and then dated a cis man would he be straight based on the fact that I have XX chromosomes? Despite looking masculine and having typically male genitalia?


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> You are saying if someone who is biologically male identifies as a trans woman and feels sexual/romantic attraction towards other women they are not gay? What are they then? Calling them straight completely erases the fact that they identify as a woman?


No, they are not gay. And calling them gay completely erases the experience of same-sex attraction, AKA homosexuality.
There are nuances among sexual preferences, I get that. But homosexuality is same sex attraction and pretending it's not is essentially saying that the experiences and feelings of most of the gay community aren't valid.

As a straight woman if I'm not interested in a trans man does that mean I'm no longer straight?



bmr10 said:


> Boiling lesbianism down to feeling same-sex attraction is risky in this day to day era where someone could look masculine, have a penis, but be a trans man who was born female.


Looking masculine =/= being a man. Most of us understand this.
Boiling lesbianism down to same-sex attraction isn't "risky" it's validating to the experience of being a lesbian. If being a lesbian isn't same-sex attraction, then it's nothing and lesbians don't exist. Because being a lesbian doesn't mean you're also attracted to effeminate men, it means you're attracted to biological women. That's like, THE definition of what it is to be a lesbian.
Along with lesbians also being *women*


----------



## Cleo38

bmr10 said:


> You are saying if someone who is biologically male identifies as a trans woman and feels sexual/romantic attraction towards other women they are not gay? What are they then? Calling them straight completely erases the fact that they identify as a woman?
> 
> Boiling lesbianism down to feeling same-sex attraction is risky in this day to day era where someone could look masculine, have a penis, but be a trans man who was born female. If a lesbian was attracted to this hypothetical person would they be experiencing attraction based on the person's sex (which they do not show any primary or secondary sexual characteristics of)? People's genitals and general appearance do not always match their chromosomes and so I don't personally believe sexuality should be so associated with chromosomes so rigidly.


So are you dismissing homosexuality then? Do you not think lesbians exist?

Same-sex attraction isn't risky, it's just as valid as any other form of sexuality. I am hetero sexual which means my sexual partners are (or were!) men. All sorts of men but they were men. A trans man would not have been an option for me


----------



## £54etgfb6

O2.0 said:


> No, they are not gay. And calling them gay completely erases the experience of same-sex attraction, AKA homosexuality.
> There are nuances among sexual preferences, I get that. But homosexuality is same sex attraction and pretending it's not is essentially saying that the experiences and feelings of most of the gay community aren't valid.
> 
> As a straight woman if I'm not interested in a trans man does that mean I'm no longer straight?


If they are not gay, then what would you refer to the hypothetical person I gave you as? What label would better suit them? Also, I am unsure how you have come to the conclusion that "most of the gay community" feel the same as yourself? Do you have a statistic to back this up?

A straight woman not romantically or sexually interested in a trans man does not mean she isn't straight in the same way that if I am not attracted to a random girl on the street it doesn't remove my bisexuality. Nobody is expecting anyone to be attracted to everyone they meet of course.



O2.0 said:


> Looking masculine =/= being a man. Most of us understand this.
> Boiling lesbianism down to same-sex attraction isn't "risky" it's validating to the experience of being a lesbian. If being a lesbian isn't same-sex attraction, then it's nothing and lesbians don't exist. Because being a lesbian doesn't mean you're also attracted to effeminate men, it means you're attracted to biological women. That's like, THE definition of what it is to be a lesbian.
> Along with lesbians also being *women*


Boiling same-sex attraction down to the chromosomes one possesses _is_ risky because, without asking, you cannot ascertain what chromosomes someone has. How are you meant to form sexual attraction based on something that can occasionally leave no visible phenotype (such as in the example I provided)? How does a lesbian know that the person across the room in a bar has XX chromosomes? How do straight women know if their work colleague has XY chromosomes? Unless you ask them you cannot know and yet, people develop do develop a sexual attraction for said stranger across the room in a bar. They might end up learning that said person has a set of genitals they aren't attracted to but initially, that attraction is based upon appearance and appearance is not dictated by chromosomes.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Cleo38 said:


> So are you dismissing homosexuality then? Do you not think lesbians exist?
> 
> Same-sex attraction isn't risky, it's just as valid as any other form of sexuality. I am hetero sexual which means my sexual partners are (or were!) men. All sorts of men but they were men. A trans man would not have been an option for me


I believe lesbians exist but I do not agree with the definition of lesbianism put forward by JK. A lot of the LGBT+ community does not either. A lot of lesbians do not either. This does not imply that I (or we) do not think lesbians exist. I am gay myself and the majority of the people I keep in contact with are part of the LGBT+ community who all have different identities, exposing me to a variety of viewpoints. I listen to people who experience same-sex attraction and their thoughts and I form my own opinions based on this. I agree with the school of thought that trans women are women and can be lesbian, similar to trans men being men and being gay men. There is a rising acceptance and inclusion of trans people into various sexual identities, particularly in younger generations, and I am all for it. In my own life, I do not view trans men and women as separate from cis men and women in my own sexual preferences.

In regard to the latter part of your post, the statement "All sorts of men but they were men. A trans man would not have been an option for me." implies you do not view trans men as men. I'm presuming (based on the conversation's context) you meant you are attracted to biological males, and trans men do not fit that category but that is not what your words translate to.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> If they are not gay, then what would you refer to the hypothetical person I gave you as?


A trans woman who's attracted to women.
In the same way as a trans woman is not a woman, she's a trans woman. 
In most interactions it doesn't matter. If she is presenting to the world as a woman and passing as a woman no one cares nor should they. However, in certain instances, like at a doctor's appointment, or in an intimate relationship, it matters that this woman is not a woman but a trans woman.

Here's the thing. Humans come in two sexes, male and female. That there are anomalies in those two categories doesn't change the fact that we are a male/female species. 
I think it was @picaresque who so eloquently put it that just because some people are born without legs or have them amputated doesn't mean that humans as a species aren't bipedal. 
In the same way we are a species that has two sexes.

Homosexuality, the hint is in the "sex" part of the term. Same-sex attraction. So yes, biological sex matters. Chromosomal abnormalities aside, genital abnormalities aside, if you are a lesbian you are a) a biological woman, and b) sexually you are attracted to other biological women.


----------



## picaresque

Attempting to redefine what lesbian or gay means is just woke homophobia. What about the newer term pansexuality which is supposed to mean attraction to both sexes and all gender identities, why appropriate other sexual orientations which have their own meaning? Considering same sex marriage is a very recent right that’s been won (in most of the west) after hard campaigning all this wishy washy-ness is a bit of a kick in the teeth.


----------



## O2.0

picaresque said:


> Attempting to redefine what lesbian or gay means is just woke homophobia.


Indeed. 
Just like coopting the label woman is woke misogyny.

And let's be clear, the person claiming to be a lesbian which started this whole discussion, is a biological male who has not done any HRT, surgery or anything other than claim to be "female"
https://www.buzzfeed.com/patrickstr...r-woman-has-a-full-beard-and-she-couldnt-be-h


----------



## picaresque

O2.0 said:


> Indeed.
> Just like coopting the label woman is woke misogyny.
> 
> And let's be clear, the person claiming to be a lesbian which started this whole discussion, is a biological male who has not done any HRT, surgery or anything other than claim to be "female"
> https://www.buzzfeed.com/patrickstr...r-woman-has-a-full-beard-and-she-couldnt-be-h


This person lives in my town. Is it hateful to say I wouldn't want to share same sex spaces with them? I was homeless briefly in 2020 and was very lucky I didn't spend any time sleeping rough or in a shelter but tbh I get so angry at over privileged kids telling women in vulnerable situations that they're bigots for seeing a bearded man wearing a skirt and a smirk of duper's delight as just that!


----------



## Jesthar

bmr10 said:


> Lesbianism is the sexual attraction between women and women come in all appearances? I am bi and experience attraction towards men and women, which includes trans people as they are men and women.


Lesbianism is the sexual attraction between biological women. Gender is separate from biology, and is a sociological definition.

If you identify as bi, then this particular debate probably does come across as something of a non-issue, as you don't have a specific biological preference. However, for those who DO have a biological preference, the drive to seemingly erase/diminish biological sexual preference in favour of whatever gender someone currently views themselve as has far greater implications.



bmr10 said:


> There are many straight men in relationships with trans women, and straight women in relationships with trans men. People from sexual attraction based on personality and aesthetic appearance. Appearances can be altered and can have little to do with your biological sex nowadays (if you wish) and so I don't believe it's as black and white as you say. You cannot always know what someone's biological sex is and therefore I don't think it's accurate to say that that's what sexual attraction is based upon.


Who is in a relationship with whom is not relevant to the core of this debate, though, or to the definition of same sex attraction. You are right in that sexual attraction has many facets, but good old basic male/female biology is still by far the biggest facet for most people, and in most cases unless that hurdle is cleared you're already heading down the platonic relationship route even before you get to know them.



bmr10 said:


> If I were to transition to a man, had my breasts removed, took testosterone for a few years, had facial reconstruction surgery and bottom surgery and then dated a cis man would he be straight based on the fact that I have XX chromosomes? Despite looking masculine and having typically male genitalia?


That's a big level level of hypothetical, and I have no idea what you would call it. Perhaps it would be a sensible idea for the genuine trans community to come up with something unique of their own. But if I, as a woman, were to encounter you, I would not be attracted to you because, in the words of a bi friend of mine, I'm "the most 100% straight person" my friend has met.  That would be no slur on you, that would just be my innate preference for biological males kicking in.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Oooft this conversation is very shocking and riddled with opinions that I find very backwards such as trans women not being women, sexual attraction being based on chromosomes, and the expectation that trans people should transition in order to prove their dedication of some sort?? It’s also a bit weird for my opinions to be referred to as homophobic when critiquing an article about a, in my opinion, genuinely homophobic person who uses gay people and their history as a cash cow and a virtue-signalling target (JK).

I don’t believe that trans people (or people in relationships with them) should invent their own sexual/romantic orientations and I fully welcome them into the queer community, if they wish to be here. I don’t want to go round in circles arguing with anyone but in my posts, I aim to highlight a different opinion for diversity’s sake. However, I have made my support for the trans community on this topic clear (I hope) and I’m happy with how the UK is improving regarding trans rights. I am going to withdraw from this particular topic as I've said my piece, made my points clear, and the conversation feels akin to a Piers Morgan column (not my kind of journalism!).


----------



## HarlequinCat

bmr10 said:


> Oooft this conversation is very shocking and riddled with opinions that I find very backwards such as trans women not being women, sexual attraction being based on chromosomes, and the expectation that trans people should transition in order to prove their dedication of some sort?? It's also a bit weird for my opinions to be referred to as homophobic when critiquing an article about a, in my opinion, genuinely homophobic person who uses gay people and their history as a cash cow and a virtue-signalling target (JK).
> 
> I don't believe that trans people (or people in relationships with them) should invent their own sexual/romantic orientations and I fully welcome them into the queer community, if they wish to be here. I don't want to go round in circles arguing with anyone but in my posts, I aim to highlight a different opinion for diversity's sake. However, I have made my support for the trans community on this topic clear (I hope) and I'm happy with how the UK is improving regarding trans rights. I am going to withdraw from this particular topic as I've said my piece, made my points clear, and the conversation feels akin to a Piers Morgan column (not my kind of journalism!).


Thing is I think its about being open - if you are trans and become involved with someone who is the opposite sex (so a woman who is with a trans man etc) I think its important to be upfront, full transitioned or partially transitioned.
Because the trans would have been originally a woman, the woman that becomes involved with the trans man should be aware and be able to decide if it matters to them or not. For some women that wouldn't, but for some it would. 
Better to be open and honest about your life. 
Same for trans woman with a man or trans woman and woman etc. 
That way everyone is aware and going into a relationship knowing all the facts. It's up to an individual, and individual choice as to whether they want to be with someone born to a different gender. And I think in that area they should be transparent about an important stage in their life with a potential romantic partner


----------



## Jesthar

bmr10 said:


> Oooft this conversation is very shocking and riddled with opinions that I find very backwards such as trans women not being women


Biologically speaking, they aren't. That's not backwards, that's just science, and it will remain so until someone finds a way to rewrite someone's genetics from the sub-cellular level up and across every cell of their body. I'm not even sure how saying 'biology is biology' is controversial. 

Gender - well, that's a social definition, and a completely different ball game. As with all social definitions, it is subject to change at any time, and also varies widely by country, creed, background, personal belief etc. What was regarded as 'true' a short while ago might now be regarded as outmoded a position as believing the Earth is flat.



bmr10 said:


> sexual attraction being based on chromosomes


Statistically speaking, most sexual attraction IS down to biology, though, especially at the start. Someone of a physical type that makes you go "oooh!" - and for the majority of people, that involves a specific biological sex as the base qualifier. Other biological preferences (from body shape to hair colour) are also likely to be involved after that, of course.



bmr10 said:


> and the expectation that trans people should transition in order to prove their dedication of some sort?? It's also a bit weird for my opinions to be referred to as homophobic when critiquing an article about a, in my opinion, genuinely homophobic person who uses gay people and their history as a cash cow and a virtue-signalling target (JK).


You are fully entitled to your opinion, but there does seem to be a lot of the LGBT etc, community who agree with JK. And I would gently point out that advocating for the rights of one particular group doesn't mean you are 'phobic' of all groups whose opinions might differ from your own. It is perfectly possible to highlight that there are problems with someone else's views or proposals without hating them or wanting to see them shut down.



bmr10 said:


> I don't believe that trans people (or people in relationships with them) should invent their own sexual/romantic orientations and I fully welcome them into the queer community, if they wish to be here. I don't want to go round in circles arguing with anyone but in my posts, I aim to highlight a different opinion for diversity's sake. However, I have made my support for the trans community on this topic clear (I hope) and I'm happy with how the UK is improving regarding trans rights. I am going to withdraw from this particular topic as I've said my piece, made my points clear, and the conversation feels akin to a Piers Morgan column (not my kind of journalism!).


Well, you'll always be welcome back


----------



## O2.0

Very nicely said @Jesthar and I echo the sentiment that @bmr10 is welcome of course at any time!

I did want to touch on this:


bmr10 said:


> and the expectation that trans people should transition in order to prove their dedication of some sort??


That's not what I meant at all, and if it came across that way my apologies. 
I don't think trans people have to transition and I'm actually a huge advocate for social transitioning for young people especially.

What I take issue with is a man who has no experience living in a woman's body or any approximation of a woman's body claiming to be a lesbian. 
The definition of lesbian is a) woman, and b) same sex attracted. 
That essentially erases what it is to be a lesbian. Just as "pregnant people" erases women. 
That's not a backwards opinion and many in the LGBT community agree but are too afraid to speak up. Arielle Scarcella is one who is not afraid of being vocal though.

________________

Just an aside about "communities" and speaking for certain groups. I don't think any of us can speak for any group. Having family, friends or connections who are ___ insert disenfranchised group of choice doesn't give you any more insight than anyone else.

I am a woman, I speak for myself as a woman that's all.

My own life is full of people who represent all the beautiful diversity that it is to be human but their stories are not mine to tell, so I try not to. I know I have in the scope of this thread but it's feeling more and more distasteful to me to use a personal human connection as a means of proving a point that proves itself without it anyway.


----------



## Pawscrossed

bmr10 said:


> Oooft this conversation is very shocking and riddled with opinions that I find very backwards such as trans women not being women, sexual attraction being based on chromosomes, and the expectation that trans people should transition in order to prove their dedication of some sort?? It's also a bit weird for my opinions to be referred to as homophobic when critiquing an article about a, in my opinion, genuinely homophobic person who uses gay people and their history as a cash cow and a virtue-signalling target (JK).
> 
> I don't believe that trans people (or people in relationships with them) should invent their own sexual/romantic orientations and I fully welcome them into the queer community, if they wish to be here. I don't want to go round in circles arguing with anyone but in my posts, I aim to highlight a different opinion for diversity's sake. However, I have made my support for the trans community on this topic clear (I hope) and I'm happy with how the UK is improving regarding trans rights. I am going to withdraw from this particular topic as I've said my piece, made my points clear, and the conversation feels akin to a Piers Morgan column (not my kind of journalism!).


The part that concerns me is that the source of this part of the discussion seems to comes from the Daily Mail. The same paper who wrote an 'article' at the weekend claiming that Angela Rayner crossing and uncrossing her legs was distracting Boris Johnson who took to Twitter to discredit the article too. Hardly a paper of credibility, particularly when it comes to women's rights. It puts traffic first. It will publish any kind of crap click bait. I don't believe many on PF follow Rowling on Twitter or are even on the platform. Well clearly not, otherwise there might be a more measured, diverse and cautious response before apparently endorsing her. She's blatantly homophobic and transphobic; it's not even a hidden agenda anymore particularly after the buttock clenching exchanges with Stephen King.


----------



## Jesthar

Pawscrossed said:


> The part that concerns me is that the source of this part of the discussion seems to comes from the Daily Mail. The same paper who wrote an 'article' at the weekend claiming that Angela Rayner crossing and uncrossing her legs was distracting Boris Johnson who took to Twitter to discredit the article too. Hardly a paper of credibility, particularly when it comes to women's rights. It puts traffic first. It will publish any kind of crap click bait. I don't believe many on PF follow Rowling on Twitter or are even on the platform. Well clearly not, otherwise there might be a more measured, diverse and cautious response before apparently endorsing her. She's blatantly homophobic and transphobic; it's not even a hidden agenda anymore particularly after the buttock clenching exchanges with Stephen King.


Not a fan of DM either, but ten seconds with google and there are plenty of other sources out there. Hardly a chore to read several of them putting both sides of the debate. Quite a lot of content from the trans and same sex attraction community in support of her too.


----------



## picaresque

Pawscrossed said:


> I don't believe many on PF follow Rowling on Twitter or are even on the platform. Well clearly not, otherwise there might be a more measured, diverse and cautious response before apparently endorsing her. She's blatantly homophobic and transphobic; it's not even a hidden agenda anymore particularly after the buttock clenching exchanges with Stephen King.


I am not very active on Twitter these days but I do check in (still get regular notifications on my phone) and I follow both Rowling and Stephen King. Might have missed recent exchanges between them. I do remember a couple of years ago being quite disappointed in King's rather gutless response to the treatment of a woman I thought was a friend of his but disappointment in celebrities is nothing new.
Could you give some specific examples of JK Rowling's transphobia and homophobia?
And oh boy if people give her shit about parts of Harry Potter she wrote in the nineties that wouldn't pass sensitivity readings today, check out some of King's back catalogue.



bmr10 said:


> Oooft this conversation is very shocking and riddled with opinions that I find very backwards such as trans women not being women


'Transwomen are women/transmen are men' is a belief based on faith just like a belief in God. It's something people say and sometimes believe very sincerely but it's not real. It is not 'invalidating the existence' of trans people, which is something that gets spouted a lot, to not go along with this. I don't believe in god either, I am not religious or 'spiritual' or whatever but I can still respect the beliefs of Christians and Muslims etc etc as long as they're not impacting on the rights and freedoms of others. It's the same. I suppose the issue is that people who see the risk of self ID for example are accused by some of infringing on trans rights, whereas many others are concerned (to put it mildly) about male sex offenders being imprisoned with women based on their alleged gender identity. Which any man can make a claim to now. Just say that they're a woman and authorities will bend over backwards to make this a legal truth. Dissenters are publicly shamed and can lose their jobs. Earnest university students proselytise and harass. I honestly think the decline of religion in the west has a lot to do with the rabid devotion some people have for trans dogma. It seems human beings just have this need.
Transwomen are transwomen. They, alongside transmen and NB people (as much as I think this last is a exercise in navel gazing and thinking they invented gender non conformity) deserve the same rights and protections as everybody else. As far as I'm aware this is not something they lack in the UK, as much as Twitter loves to call us terf island.


----------



## DogLover1981

I do occasionally browse through this thread and I feel so lost and confused with all the terminology and everything. I think people are getting obsessed with labels. I don't really know, think about or even really care about what I am sexually or whatnot, life is short. lol


----------



## O2.0

That's an interesting point about trans women are women equaling religious faith. I know John McWhorter uses 'religion' similarly in talking about racism. 

My thoughts are that if we're going to say trans women are women or that trans women are not women, we have to first define what it is to be a woman. 

On the one hand it's simple, yes. Women are humans of the female variety. 
But of course humans are a complex, wacky and weird species and the lived reality for individuals - who deserve compassion, respect, and equal rights, is not so simple. 

I wish I could remember where I got this from, it's not from me, but the basic premise is that being a woman is a lived experience based on your physical biology, your personal feelings, and the society you live in. A trans woman may experience what it is to be a woman in her society, and may personally feel like a woman, but she does not have the biological experience of being a woman. 
So then we have to decide if we're going to define women socially, biologically, mentally, all three, at least 2 out of 3, none of them... what? 

Until we can have a rational conversation about what/who a woman is, we can't really solve this. And my own worry is that we have jumped to legally allowing anyone to be a woman without these important conversations. 

And while we're at it... 
Talk about privilege. Here we are wondering if Alex Drummond can speak for lesbians while women in Afghanistan can't access education, women in Ethiopia are having their clitoris cut off, and women in Texas are being denied abortions. 

And this is where I start getting pissed off - as a woman. 

Because if you happen to live in Ethiopia and are facing FGM, you don't get to choose if you want to be a woman or not. You don't worry about debating what is the definition of a woman. Can you imagine how prickish (yes, that's the word I want to use) it would seem to that woman to have a bearded man say they're a woman because that's just how they feel?


----------



## Cleo38

Pawscrossed said:


> The part that concerns me is that the source of this part of the discussion seems to comes from the Daily Mail. The same paper who wrote an 'article' at the weekend claiming that Angela Rayner crossing and uncrossing her legs was distracting Boris Johnson who took to Twitter to discredit the article too. Hardly a paper of credibility, particularly when it comes to women's rights. It puts traffic first. It will publish any kind of crap click bait. I don't believe many on PF follow Rowling on Twitter or are even on the platform. Well clearly not, otherwise there might be a more measured, diverse and cautious response before apparently endorsing her. She's blatantly homophobic and transphobic; it's not even a hidden agenda anymore particularly after the buttock clenching exchanges with Stephen King.


Most aspects of the media are sh*tty at times. I posted the link to the DM as it was an easier one to post rather than to FB feeds. I am not on Twitter but follow JKR on IG & FB as well as many other feminist groups. I don't have to be on Twitter to see her tweets 

I find it patronising to suggest that people are endorsing her without actually knowing what she stands for. Those who have contributed to this thread clearly do so am not sure how you have come to this conclusion. I was never a fan of hers previously as I had no interest in the HP books/films. It was only when she started speaking out for women that I realised how amazing she was.

And can you give an example of how she is homophobic & transphobic?


----------



## DogLover1981

DogLover1981 said:


> I do occasionally browse through this thread and I feel so lost and confused with all the terminology and everything. I think people are getting obsessed with labels. I don't really know, think about or even really care about what I am sexually or whatnot, life is short. lol


I'm biologically a male as I think some people would call it. I do find both some women and some man to be attractive and such but I'm skeptical that I'd ever date or be in that kind of a relationship with another man. Beyond that, I don't really think about it. lol

I do think some of the problem here regarding women's rights (the original thread topic and title) is the gender/sex roles in society which seem to exist even today. I have noticed for example in my life that about 90% or 95% of people doing IT work, computer related jobs and coding are men. I could probably find other examples.


----------



## 1507601

DogLover1981 said:


> I have noticed for example in my life that about 90% or 95% of people doing IT work, computer related jobs and coding are men. I could probably find other examples.


Oh yes! I used to be on a web design forum and was constantly referred to as a 'he'.

I'll never forget one particular anecdote. I went to an important appointment with my husband about his sleeping condition when we were around 20. The sleep specialist was talking about what was wrong with him and how his future might look, in particular in regards to working (he is unable). We had already said that we were trying to do freelance photography. Despite this, at one point he turned round to me and suggested I get a job in childcare or hair and beauty. No reason at all to think I would want to drop the photography and do either of those things... Except they're obviously the 'woman' things. I was so shocked that a highly qualified, supposedly intelligent man, delivering sensitive news, would actually come out with such a thing. Not that that's the first shocking thing a medical professional has said to me...


----------



## Cleo38

DogLover1981 said:


> I'm biologically a male as I think some people would call it. I do find both some women and some man to be attractive and such but I'm skeptical that I'd ever date or be in that kind of a relationship with another man. Beyond that, I don't really think about it. lol
> 
> I do think some of the problem here regarding women's rights (the original thread topic and title) is the gender/sex roles in society which seem to exist even today. I have noticed for example in my life that about 90% or 95% of people doing IT work, computer related jobs and coding are men. I could probably find other examples.


I work in construction which is obviously very male dominated but things are changing. I have only been in the industry 15 yrs & even in that time I have seen so many more women joining in a variety of roles. I was chatting to a project manager a while ago & she said when she used to go to site there weren't any women's toilets, you just had to get one of the blokes to make sure no one was in there & then stand guard outside whilst she used it!

I love being in the industry, I love being on site & found most site managers love showing off their work & their team. There is casual sexism but it's honestly meant well. Like when I first joined & used to go out on site most construction managers would have warned everyone that a 'woman was coming' so no swearing!! It was just old fashioned politeness which was actually quite sweet ... till they heard my foul mouth then they all relaxed


----------



## Siskin

Well there's a thing, I hadn't realised @DogLover1981 was male:Hilarious.
I have a tendency to think that most people who are on this forum are mainly female even though most user names are sexless. 
The comments that trans is like a new religion got me thinking and you're right there is a religious zeal to transdom and has the same need to make everyone believe whatever they say is the only way of belief. Free thinking is not allowed, and I dare say I will have upset various people now.
I'm not religious, never have been, not from a religious family and have never wanted to join a religion. However I don't look down or sneer at those that are religious and quite often admire them for their certainty, but have no wish to join them. I resent those people from some religions who knock on your door and want to harangue you often very politely to come and join them. I'm afraid the door gets very quickly closed or not even answered if I know they are about. I'm currently seeing how destructive a religious belief has affected my late half sisters family, the upset this is currently causing and the despair my niece is going through after being told by her religious sister that her mother hated her, something that is patently untrue
I'm not at all bothered about how people choose to live their lives, but when it starts to affect me then I have to have an opinion. The thought that a man can say that today he feels he's a women and then demand access to private female places fills me with fear. But unfortunately my rights to have an opinion are gradually being denied.


----------



## O2.0

I don't see anyone confused about who is a woman when we were denied the right to vote, and still are in many countries.
Or when women are honor killed for having been raped, who the woman is in the equation is never in question. 
No one finds it confusing to define a woman when they're denying her an abortion. 
No one gets befuddled about who is a woman when the Taliban is deciding who deserves to be educated. 
No one seems confused about what a woman is when they're chopping off her clitoris with a dirty piece of broken glass.

When someone like Alex Drummond says they're expanding the definition of what it is to be a woman does it feel like mansplaining to anyone else? 
Like, seriously, this guy is mansplaining womanhood! How insane is that. 

Why can't he be expanding what it is to be a man? That a man can wear makeup and long hair and dresses and skirts and still be a man?
Why are men like this co-opting womanhood? 

Note, this only happens in places where it's relatively safe to be a woman. People in countries where woman are routinely abused for simply being women aren't falling over themselves to become women.


----------



## Dimwit

O2.0 said:


> When someone like Alex Drummond says they're expanding the definition of what it is to be a woman does it feel like mansplaining to anyone else?
> Like, seriously, this guy is mansplaining womanhood! How insane is that.
> 
> Why can't he be expanding what it is to be a man? That a man can wear makeup and long hair and dresses and skirts and still be a man?
> Why are men like this co-opting womanhood?


And why aren't the trans lobby equally vocal about trans men - why is there no drive to relabel men as 'people with a p****'? Or campaigns to allow trans men to use men's bathrooms/changing rooms. The obvious reason is that it is not safe for a person with an obviously female appearance (however they identify) to use these spaces - but how can they argue that on one hand men are inherently more dangerous than women, but on the other hand if you express concern about biological male using women's spaces you are being transphobic...


----------



## picaresque

@O2.0 it's definitely a luxury belief.



Dimwit said:


> And why aren't the trans lobby equally vocal about trans men - why is there no drive to relabel men as 'people with a p****'? Or campaigns to allow trans men to use men's bathrooms/changing rooms. The obvious reason is that it is not safe for a person with an obviously female appearance (however they identify) to use these spaces - but how can they argue that on one hand men are inherently more dangerous than women, but on the other hand if you express concern about biological male using women's spaces you are being transphobic...


Yep, transmen and prisons is another one. Never hear any campaigns to have a transman who's been given a prison sentence to be put in the male estate as corresponds with his gender identity. I mean we know why. Apart from the fact that transmen commit crimes at a far lower rate than biological men (again we know why) it is blindingly obvious that they'd be in huge danger in a male prison. But no, this is all just people being silly about chromosomes, sex doesn't matter, trans women are women, war is peace, repeat the mantra and don't think.


----------



## O2.0

Dimwit said:


> The obvious reason is that it is not safe for a person with an obviously female appearance (however they identify) to use these spaces - but how can they argue that on one hand men are inherently more dangerous than women, but on the other hand if you express concern about biological male using women's spaces you are being transphobic...


I think that's part of it, but not the whole picture.

My personal thoughts are that for the more vocal factions of the trans community it really isn't about trans rights.
What rights do trans people not have?
They can love and marry whoever they want thanks to the gay rights movement.
They are legally protected from discrimination based on sex and/or gender thanks to the women's movement.

What rights do they not have?
Societal acceptance? That's not a right. 
It's absolutely worthwhile to work towards society being more accepting of diversity in general, but this doesn't feel like that either. 
Because if it's about accepting diversity then there would be acceptance of diverse viewpoints - but only some views are accepted. Like that trans women are women. Women's feeling, fears, concerns are not allowed.

And yes, why is there not equal push that trans men are men? Why is that not a debate?


----------



## kimthecat

I dont think its fair that men have to wear suits and ties and woman generally have more choice of what to wear eg on the news programmes and in parliament.


----------



## £54etgfb6

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/top-tory-caught-watching-porn-26810579

Unfortunately, the story is a red slop exclusive but I feel it is important to discuss the many ways in which sexism affects our lives, including driving women away from political careers. I am sure I do not need to state the effects lack of representation in politics has for women.

Additionally, why is the press secretary unaware of whether pornography at work is sackable?? Are MPs paid to masturbate in the House of Commons? I'd say next is sex on the speaker's table but that's probably been done before!


----------



## kimthecat

bmr10 said:


> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/top-tory-caught-watching-porn-26810579
> 
> Unfortunately, the story is a red slop exclusive but I feel it is important to discuss the many ways in which sexism affects our lives, including driving women away from political careers. I am sure I do not need to state the effects lack of representation in politics has for women.
> 
> Additionally, why is the press secretary unaware of whether pornography at work is sackable?? Are MPs paid to masturbate in the House of Commons? I'd say next is sex on the speaker's table but that's probably been done before!


Ugh ! :Vomit
Its certainly important to discuss it because this can happen in any work place , not just in work spaces but anywhere including unisex public toilets and unisex public changing rooms . Women are not safe from this unless there are womans only toilets and changing rooms. .


----------



## Boxer123

bmr10 said:


> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/top-tory-caught-watching-porn-26810579
> 
> Unfortunately, the story is a red slop exclusive but I feel it is important to discuss the many ways in which sexism affects our lives, including driving women away from political careers. I am sure I do not need to state the effects lack of representation in politics has for women.
> 
> Additionally, why is the press secretary unaware of whether pornography at work is sackable?? Are MPs paid to masturbate in the House of Commons? I'd say next is sex on the speaker's table but that's probably been done before!


----------



## £54etgfb6

Boxer123 said:


> View attachment 488939


It's atrocious that so many of the people making important legal decisions have been accused of crimes such as this. People belittling it to "banter" don't seem to understand the effect it has on victims and the fact that all it does is fuel the patriarchal society we live in. Even if you believe it is lighthearted jokes, aren't politicians meant to be professional? /: 9% is a disgusting proportion.


----------



## kimthecat

@Boxer123 Im assuming the 56 MPs are male so it could be a higher per centage . There are 430 male MPs , I cant work out the percentage  13% ?


----------



## Boxer123

kimthecat said:


> @Boxer123 Im assuming the 56 MPs are male  so it could be a higher per centage . There are 430 male MPs , I cant work out the percentage  13% ?


We don't have a gender breakdown but if all of these are men it's 1 in 10 MPs (taken from Laura abates instagram my math isn't this good.


----------



## £54etgfb6

kimthecat said:


> @Boxer123 Im assuming the 56 MPs are male so it could be a higher per centage . There are 430 male MPs , I cant work out the percentage  13% ?


The number of LGBT+ MPs who are women isn't very high at all so your assumption is probably correct based on that and the fact that sexual harassment and sexist remarks towards women are disproportionately perpetrated by straight men.


----------



## O2.0

Using google because my knowledge of UK politics is pretty basic, so take with a grain of salt...

There are 650 MPs total.
225 (35%) are women = 425 male MPs
56/425 = 13% 

13% is statistically significant. 
But here in the US the number of high ranking government officials we have who have less than stellar legal records is really shocking so it doesn't surprise me at all. 
I think politics attracts a certain kind of personality - men and women, and for most of us 'normal' folk, it's not a nice type of person.


----------



## picaresque

Just been reading about Tim Westwood as well. Was only vaguely aware of his existence tbh but apparently he was the main inspiration for Ali G and having just read a Guardian interview of his from 2000 I can see why. If only that was the worst thing about him
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-61247316


----------



## MollySmith

Very surprised not too this on here,it's also been in the media and impacts on all protest rights. 
https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-re...eply-authoritarian-policing-bill-passed-lords


----------



## Cleo38

picaresque said:


> Just been reading about Tim Westwood as well. Was only vaguely aware of his existence tbh but apparently he was the main inspiration for Ali G and having just read a Guardian interview of his from 2000 I can see why. If only that was the worst thing about him
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-61247316


I remember him from years ago. First time I heard him I thought it was a spoof 

Awful, & again other women are now coming forward


----------



## picaresque

Sad account of a young person who regrets transitioning. The damage done here is permanent. I think it is important to read this, especially considering the push to label anything other than total affirmation by doctors and therapists as conversion therapy, and therefore criminalise it. The writer is male and I know this thread is titled women's rights but it's obviously relevant to the discussions we've been having here
https://cutdowntree.substack.com/p/purification-rites?s=r


----------



## £54etgfb6

If anyone did not see in the news and has been following the story, Katie Kenyon is no longer being treated as missing and is instead suspected to be dead. Her ex-partner is being held on suspicion of murder.

It is a very depressing reality when this turn of events is hardly surprising, particularly the part about a male ex being the prime suspect.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Oh her poor family and children  Honestly it's horrendous. Yet another woman, life ended - and I've seen nothing about it until you posted @bmr10

Horrific.


----------



## O2.0

picaresque said:


> Sad account of a young person who regrets transitioning. The damage done here is permanent. I think it is important to read this, especially considering the push to label anything other than total affirmation by doctors and therapists as conversion therapy, and therefore criminalise it. The writer is male and I know this thread is titled women's rights but it's obviously relevant to the discussions we've been having here
> https://cutdowntree.substack.com/p/purification-rites?s=r


Absolutely heartbreaking. 
We are not taking mental health seriously enough. The answer is not hormones and surgery, the answer is long-term compassionate, supportive and effective psychiatric treatment.

Puberty is hard on every teen. We forget that puberty is not just sexual development, it's a huge time in brain development as well. We know the teenage brain is having massive growth similar to the toddler years when everything seems big and overwhelming. Teens have all these big feelings and no life experience to contextualize them. So they're confused and frustrated and looking for anything to grab on to that makes their inner turmoil make sense.

It absolutely breaks my heart that we are allowing vulnerable teenagers to make life altering decisions. No 14 year old is in any way capable of understanding the long-term consequences of hormone "therapy" let alone permanent surgeries. We have laws about sexual consent for teens, yet we allow them to consent to surgery? It's insane.

I know there are people with actual, real gender dysphoria. And for some of them, ultimately what will make them feel better is to transition, yes. And I want society to be open and accepting of these people and protect them from discrimination and harm. 
But I also want to protect our young people from falling down the rabbit hole like this brave young person did and having life-long consequences for it.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Mrs Funkin said:


> Oh her poor family and children  Honestly it's horrendous. Yet another woman, life ended - and I've seen nothing about it until you posted @bmr10
> 
> Horrific.


I try to avoid news of this type as I find it distressing but somehow I always find myself googling it. The list of women killed in the UK by men only this year is depressingly long. I feel this issue needs to be tackled in schools but that's a different conversation.

But yeah, a horrid tragedy for everyone involved. I had hoped she would be found. ):


----------



## Boxer123

bmr10 said:


> If anyone did not see in the news and has been following the story, Katie Kenyon is no longer being treated as missing and is instead suspected to be dead. Her ex-partner is being held on suspicion of murder.
> 
> It is a very depressing reality when this turn of events is hardly surprising, particularly the part about a male ex being the prime suspect.


So very sad her poor children. Unfortunately the most dangerous time for women is after they have left an abusive ex and get threats are rarely taken seriously by police until something happens. What a waste.


----------



## mrs phas

picaresque said:


> Just been reading about Tim Westwood as well. Was only vaguely aware of his existence tbh but apparently he was the main inspiration for Ali G and having just read a Guardian interview of his from 2000 I can see why. If only that was the worst thing about him
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-61247316


Just what has _this_ statement, from the article, have to do with the fact he's a sexual predator

"The women who spoke to the BBC are all black"

Whether the women were red, white, black, blue or purple with pink polka dots, sexual harrassment and abuse has taken part
Yes it may show a 'preferance' on his part, but let's not make women think they're safe with him, just because of their skin colour
An abuser is an abuser, whatever colour the abused are


----------



## £54etgfb6

mrs phas said:


> Just what has _this_ statement, from the article, have to do with the fact he's a sexual predator
> 
> "The women who spoke to the BBC are all black"
> 
> Whether the women were red, white, black, blue or purple with pink polka dots, sexual harrassment and abuse has taken part
> Yes it may show a 'preferance' on his part, but let's not make women think they're safe with him, just because of their skin colour
> An abuser is an abuser, whatever colour the abused are


I would assume that similarities between victims show that attacks were planned, rather than "spur of the moment" (not sure how you could justify these things in the moment but ok). It's seen frequently in court hearings where sexual crimes are described as planned, calculated, pre-meditated, etc.


----------



## Cleo38

mrs phas said:


> Just what has _this_ statement, from the article, have to do with the fact he's a sexual predator
> 
> "The women who spoke to the BBC are all black"
> 
> Whether the women were red, white, black, blue or purple with pink polka dots, sexual harrassment and abuse has taken part
> Yes it may show a 'preferance' on his part, but let's not make women think they're safe with him, just because of their skin colour
> An abuser is an abuser, whatever colour the abused are


I watched part of the BBC programme about this yesterday & find it odd that when the Asian grooming gang stories were in the media the BBC (amongst other media sites) seemed very keen to play down the fact that majority of victims were from white, working class backgrounds & the abusers Muslims. Whilst I agree that it doesn't really matter what ethnicity/class the victims were in some ways it does give a picture of how they were maybe more vulnerable.

I think in this instance it shows that a middle class white male had such power & stature in a predominantly black area of the music industry & maybe that gave him even more opportunities to abuse women in this community.


----------



## Lurcherlad

mrs phas said:


> Just what has _this_ statement, from the article, have to do with the fact he's a sexual predator
> 
> "The women who spoke to the BBC are all black"
> 
> Whether the women were red, white, black, blue or purple with pink polka dots, sexual harrassment and abuse has taken part
> Yes it may show a 'preferance' on his part, but let's not make women think they're safe with him, just because of their skin colour
> An abuser is an abuser, whatever colour the abused are


It's pointing out that he preyed on black women … it's not saying that white women (or any other) is safe from him.

He will also have been aware that black women trying to make it in the music industry were disadvantaged and probably felt extremely vulnerable… making them a weaker target for the slimeball … one said she didn't think anyone would support her if she complained, let alone believe her.

I always thought he was a bit creepy … the way he acted and spoke … as if he were black.


----------



## mrs phas

Lurcherlad said:


> It's pointing out that he preyed on black women …


Nope it's saying only black women, so far, have spoken out about him being an alleged predator (just in case, let's keep it as alleged til a court case or admission)
But you miss my point 
Colour should not be singled out as part of a report 
Would they have, so blatantly, pointed out that only white women had spoken out 
Or 
Asian 
Or 
Hispanic

No they wouldn't
It's disparaging to all abused women to single them out by race and/or colour 
Male on female abuse, whether physical or mental, real life or social media doesn't need woke reporting 
It just needs reporting, full stop!

It should be encouraging ALL those he abused to come forward


----------



## GingerNinja

I have had the "pleasure" of meeting Mr Westwood on a couple of occasions back in the 80s when I was a teenager and he was a resident at a club in Soho. Whilst nothing has been proven, I can say that this revelation came as no shock whatsoever to me.

Whilst I was not in his obvious preference of young ladies, he made me feel very uncomfortable.


----------



## Lurcherlad

mrs phas said:


> Nope it's saying only black women, so far, have spoken out about him being an alleged predator (just in case, let's keep it as alleged til a court case or admission)
> But you miss my point
> Colour should not be singled out as part of a report
> Would they have, so blatantly, pointed out that only white women had spoken out
> Or
> Asian
> Or
> Hispanic
> 
> No they wouldn't
> It's disparaging to all abused women to single them out by race and/or colour
> Male on female abuse, whether physical or mental, real life or social media doesn't need woke reporting
> It just needs reporting, full stop!
> 
> It should be encouraging ALL those he abused to come forward


I took it to mean HE had specifically singled out black women as his victims, hence the reference.

Obviously, anyone who has been abused by him should speak out.


----------



## picaresque

Sorry to hear that @GingerNinja

Hope this Westwood gets what's coming to him.


----------



## Deguslave

https://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/...rrified-domestic-violence-victim-flees-abuser

And all he got was a suspended sentence....


----------



## £54etgfb6

Deguslave said:


> https://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/...rrified-domestic-violence-victim-flees-abuser
> 
> And all he got was a suspended sentence....


Do they think he's going to automatically turn around and become an entirely different person? People change through rehabilitation, the ideal place for this should be prison where harmful influences should be limited.

I say should because our prison system can be very flawed.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

We watched the Westwood programme yesterday. Those women, their accounts, just horrendous. Norman Jay (one of our favourite DJs) tweeted that he was entirely unsurprised when the story emerged. 

What frightens me for the women is that when(if?) they go to court, they will be torn to shreds on the stand. I am so interested in the behaviours exhibited - what on earth drives a young woman who reports that she has been abused once by Westwood to go back to him/with him "several times"? To me it's a no-brainer of never go near that man again. His lawyers will absolutely go for them. I think it's going to be awful, not sure how they will cope with it. Not sure I could cope with that.


----------



## mrs phas

GingerNinja said:


> I have had the "pleasure" of meeting Mr Westwood on a couple of occasions back in the 80s when I was a teenager and he was a resident at a club in Soho. Whilst nothing has been proven, I can say that this revelation came as no shock whatsoever to me.
> 
> Whilst I was not in his obvious preference of young ladies, he made me feel very uncomfortable.


I met Jimmy Saville when I was 19, having helped raise £1000, for Stoke Mandeville
I have never forgot him sitting on a throne, then defending and shaking hands with the boys 
Then
kissing/licking the girls hands, whilst turning his finger on our palms, all shrugged off, when reported, as Jimmy being Jimmy
So, very little, that came out, about him, surprised me
41 years later it still makes me gag to think about that meeting


----------



## GingerNinja

mrs phas said:


> I met Jimmy Saville when I was 19, having helped raise £1000, for Stoke Mandeville
> I have never forgot him sitting on a throne, then defending and shaking hands with the boys
> Then
> kissing/licking the girls hands, whilst turning his finger on our palms, all shrugged off, when reported, as Jimmy being Jimmy
> So, very little, that came out, about him, surprised me
> 41 years later it still makes me gag to think about that meeting


That's disgusting! Makes me feel sick thinking what it would be like 

@Mrs Funkin we used to go to clubs that Norman jay was dj-ing at nearly every week. Very excited that he has an event at Woolwich works soon which is where my son is going to be living


----------



## O2.0

Mrs Funkin said:


> what on earth drives a young woman who reports that she has been abused once by Westwood to go back to him/with him "several times"?


Oh gosh this is such a complex and complicated dynamic...
It would be easy if abusers just abused and nothing else, but that's not how it ever works. I don't know who Westwood is or anything about the women he preyed upon, but the abuser MO is pretty standard across the board.

First, they're good studies of humans, and they know exactly who to target (just like bullies do). And they know what to offer vulnerable women to get them close and keep them coming back. And they never start with blatant abuse, it's just something "off" and the victim often second guesses themselves or talks themselves in to thinking they're making too much of this. So they go back. And the abuser knows just how hard to push one time and when to back off. All the while offering the victim other things they want or need (like shelter and food for homeless girls, drugs, jobs, whatever).

It's a very complicated, complex dynamic. And as comforting as it is to think "I'd never get myself in to that kind of situation" it's far more insidious than people realize. Victims will spend a lifetime replaying everything trying to figure out where they went wrong and what they could have done differently.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Mrs Funkin said:


> We watched the Westwood programme yesterday. Those women, their accounts, just horrendous. Norman Jay (one of our favourite DJs) tweeted that he was entirely unsurprised when the story emerged.
> 
> What frightens me for the women is that when(if?) they go to court, they will be torn to shreds on the stand. I am so interested in the behaviours exhibited - what on earth drives a young woman who reports that she has been abused once by Westwood to go back to him/with him "several times"? To me it's a no-brainer of never go near that man again. His lawyers will absolutely go for them. I think it's going to be awful, not sure how they will cope with it. Not sure I could cope with that.


*TW: mentions of sexual assault.*

Aside from the manipulation aspect that many predators utilise in order to keep people within their grasp, there is a societal pressure on victims of abuse that makes them doubt whether what they experienced was _actually_ abuse. It's very hard to explain it because it's not rational behaviour. You just convince yourself you're wrong and that it was your fault, or it was a one-time thing, or they've changed, or it wasn't really _that_ bad in hindsight and you were probably just emotional. A lot of people say these things in response to claims of rape/abuse; "he is an aspiring athlete, it was a mistake don't ruin his life over it" or "she initiated the kiss, what did she expect to happen?". Even if you aren't someone who says these things, you internalise the words of others and if it happens to you, you believe what you've heard all your life.

I know someone very close to me who stayed with an abusive partner for over a decade. He had convinced himself that it wasn't _that_ bad and that she was a good person. I won't go into detail but it was that bad. From an outsider's perspective, it doesn't make sense to stay. To him, she could do no wrong.
The first time I was raped I didn't believe it because I was so shocked. Once I finally came to terms with it, I told nobody and continued being friends with the guy because I had convinced myself it was probably my fault. I eventually realised it wasn't and I never saw him again. The second time it happened, with a different person, I went through the exact same cycle despite having been through it before. The only upside was that I came to the realisation much quicker the second time, meaning I could mentally heal sooner.

It is a very, very weird experience but it happens all the time. It is very difficult for victims of domestic abuse to leave for these reasons, I remember on one police show they said on average it takes 7 police visits/calls made by the victim for the victim to actually leave. Doubt, insecurity, societal pressure, and manipulation can do a number on your perspective and rationality.


----------



## Lurcherlad

So sorry you went through that @bmr10


----------



## Mrs Funkin

@bmr10 I'm so sorry, horrific for you to go though.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

I’m thinking about the “returning to an abuser” thing. I can see how people stay with an abusive partner for years - and often there are added extras like children/property to think about - I like to think I wouldn’t stay but who knows? I can also see how people become wrapped in an abusive cycle in return for “goods” when they haven’t got the means to pay themselves. The Westwood report though. It seems like a couple of the girls knew the situation wasn’t right, they met him in a club where he put his hand under their clothes. They knew the behaviour was wrong yet got in a car and went with him anyway to his flat. Their self-preservation instinct was warning them but they ignored it. That’s what I don’t get. Yes, on the report two (IIRC) girls gave him demo tapes, so they were hoping to get into the music industry so that was his “in”. There will be tens of women who come forward now I am sure. I’m not stringing my thoughts together well, so I’ll think some more about it and revisit later.


----------



## Boxer123

Mrs Funkin said:


> I'm thinking about the "returning to an abuser" thing. I can see how people stay with an abusive partner for years - and often there are added extras like children/property to think about - I like to think I wouldn't stay but who knows? I can also see how people become wrapped in an abusive cycle in return for "goods" when they haven't got the means to pay themselves. The Westwood report though. It seems like a couple of the girls knew the situation wasn't right, they met him in a club where he put his hand under their clothes. They knew the behaviour was wrong yet got in a car and went with him anyway to his flat. Their self-preservation instinct was warning them but they ignored it. That's what I don't get. Yes, on the report two (IIRC) girls gave him demo tapes, so they were hoping to get into the music industry so that was his "in". There will be tens of women who come forward now I am sure. I'm not stringing my thoughts together well, so I'll think some more about it and revisit later.


I think a lot of victims convince themselves it's not abuse or they are being over dramatic. He is probably a very manipulative man. We as young women are conditioned to see male attention as a compliment and to put up with it and be polite. I was told that builders whistling at me at the age of 12 was a compliment. It is sometimes only as we get older we think about it.

Look at how long Harvey Weinstein got away with it because he was abusing power. He threatened women that he would ruin them if they didn't do what he wanted.

The patriarchy is so ingrained in our society. We will often try and pacify abusers rather than call them out. We are gaslit to see abuse as a husband beating you daily or a stranger raping you. Anything in between is met with suspicion from others. Are you over reacting? An attention seeker? What were you wearing ? We're you drunk ? Look at the phrase boys will be boys and how rape victims are treated in court. We are told polite girls smile and don't make a fuss. It's often only years later abusive victims start dealing with their trauma.

I look back at my marriage and think my god women why didn't you leave earlier. However I had almost normalised what was happening.

I am passionate about education and although there is more work being done in the area we need to do more to teach about red flags and removing women from potentially harmful situations before they happen.


----------



## Boxer123

Just to add adults can be groomed as well. Abusers are often charming and nice 99% of the time so you genuinely question your own reality when those strange uncomfortable situations happen.


----------



## Jobeth

I always wondered why my neighbours stayed together. The first night they moved in he pushed her down the stairs and said he was going to kill her. I dialled 999 and listened to them both deny it happened. She threw a neighbour’s plant pot at his head and I had to call 999 a couple of times. It was scary enough listening to them. They’d play loud music to 4am in the morning and everyone else kept quiet about it even though they could all hear it.


----------



## Boxer123

Jobeth said:


> I always wondered why my neighbours stayed together. The first night they moved in he pushed her down the stairs and said he was going to kill her. I dialled 999 and listened to them both deny it happened. She threw a neighbour's plant pot at his head and I had to call 999 a couple of times. It was scary enough listening to them. They'd play loud music to 4am in the morning and everyone else kept quiet about it even though they could all hear it.


Again it's conditioning. Abusers are very clever often cutting off financial and family support. Statistically the most dangerous time in an abusive relationship is leaving that is when the violence escalates. More work needs to be done to support people leaving abusive relationships.


----------



## Cleo38

Mrs Funkin said:


> I'm thinking about the "returning to an abuser" thing. I can see how people stay with an abusive partner for years - and often there are added extras like children/property to think about - I like to think I wouldn't stay but who knows? I can also see how people become wrapped in an abusive cycle in return for "goods" when they haven't got the means to pay themselves. The Westwood report though. It seems like a couple of the girls knew the situation wasn't right, they met him in a club where he put his hand under their clothes. They knew the behaviour was wrong yet got in a car and went with him anyway to his flat. Their self-preservation instinct was warning them but they ignored it. That's what I don't get. Yes, on the report two (IIRC) girls gave him demo tapes, so they were hoping to get into the music industry so that was his "in". There will be tens of women who come forward now I am sure. I'm not stringing my thoughts together well, so I'll think some more about it and revisit later.


This is exactly how I felt. I think we are sort of told to ignore out gut instincts now tho, too not make a fuss, don't be silly, etc I was also shocked when one victim described how he came out of his bedroom naked then started to have sex with her.

Have we pacified young women to such an extent that they cannot speak up or are young women so terrified that they can't? One of the victims more or less said this when speaking about her ordeal. She was so scared she thought she would be killed. The way she said it was very upsetting to think that was the situations she thought she might be in.


----------



## Jobeth

Boxer123 said:


> Again it's conditioning. Abusers are very clever often cutting off financial and family support. Statistically the most dangerous time in an abusive relationship is leaving that is when the violence escalates. More work needs to be done to support people leaving abusive relationships.


I agree with you but she was just as violent as I could hear it all. They both needed help.


----------



## Boxer123

Jobeth said:


> I agree with you but she was just as violent as I could hear it all. They both needed help.


That's a slightly different dynamic often it's all they have ever known violence as a child then violence as an adult.


----------



## Jobeth

Boxer123 said:


> That's a slightly different dynamic often it's all they have ever known violence as a child then violence as an adult.


I know. A mum complained to another mum that her child had been scratched on the face. The mum responded by punching her in the face. The dad stormed out of the meeting saying his child didn't have any issues with anger. 25 years later I still remember his name and he'd have his own family now.


----------



## Boxer123

Jobeth said:


> I know. Years ago a mum complained to another mum that her child had been scratched on the face. The mum responded by punching her in the face. The dad stormed out of the meeting saying his child didn't have any issues with anger.


----------



## Cleo38

Just heard that Neil Parish (MP caught looking at porn on his phone in the Commons) is going to resign. But apparently he was looking at it by 'accident'. Funny how the amount of men caught looking at porn are doing so by accident


----------



## O2.0

The only time I remember porn showing up on a device by accident was easily 20 years ago and a student typed in WhiteHouse.com
Apparently the correct URL is WhiteHouse.org 
I don't know who was more mortified, me or her. 

These days, porn just doesn't pop up on your browser "by accident."


----------



## Mrs Funkin

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-are-midwives-being-told-that-biological-men-can-give-birth-

I've definitely not got the brain power this evening to process this.


----------



## £54etgfb6

@Lurcherlad and @Mrs Funkin Thank you. I still haven't moved past it in a lot of ways. For example, I don't have any male friends, I don't drink alcohol, I don't go to clubs or bars, I don't speak to men unless it's in a professional environment, and I have my partner accompany me when I walk home from uni at nights. It's completely irrational behaviour but I think my past experiences, combined with my preexisting anxiety, have kind of made me scared of men finding me attractive and potentially doing something again. I've made progress but I want to make more since it does cause me a lot of stress. I spoke to an amazing counsellor while at university after it happened the second time. I do not know where I would be without her. She didn't press for details, didn't judge, didn't react emotionally, and just listened to me during a time when I felt I couldn't tell anyone. A lot of people do not have the option of this kind of support, which saddens me.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Mrs Funkin said:


> https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-are-midwives-being-told-that-biological-men-can-give-birth-
> 
> I've definitely not got the brain power this evening to process this.


Considering their reputation, I'm not surprised that they don't understand what sex reassignment surgery actually is and what it actually changes within the body. A neopenis in trans men is created from the clitoris (which is the female biological equivalent of the male penis and is an erectile tissue) not the vagina???? Have they taken the time to actually speak to trans men???? Bizarre!


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Really interesting

https://millihill.substack.com/p/pe...ITtmEQhsf9ITNY1r2FWiec4OEEK_JhvWy1hqawZHSo3W8


----------



## O2.0

@Mrs Funkin I've read both articles and frankly I'm seething. 
I think, no, I know we've become confused.
Pregnancy is by it's very nature not inclusive. 
Women and only women become pregnant. 
Babies grow in a uterus and come out of a vagina. And yes, that excludes many humans. Because, you know, biology. It's not personal.

Parenting? Absolutely, let's be inclusive. There are so many ways to become a parent and so many different 'labels' of people who become parents. Traditional two parent (of any sex/gender) parents, adoptive parents, single parents, grandparents raising grandchildren, siblings raising siblings... Yes, let's be inclusive in how we present and represent that demographic.

But pregnancy is not parenting, it's one of many ways to become a parent, but not all who are pregnant will become parents. And there is no need to make pregnancy inclusive.

Why have we lost the plot here?!


----------



## £54etgfb6

I think it’s fairly reasonable for these students to be expected to drop the label “women” when writing essays about midwifery because the truth is that not every person who is pregnant identifies as a woman. Woman is a term used to describe gender, not biological sex. This is just an example is students presuming the gender of their patients based on stereotypes. It’s easy to say pregnant person, pregnant individual, someone who is pregnant, or more simply- patient. There is no benefit to anyone to exclude those identifying as men and non-binary individuals. Not everyone giving birth is a woman and the language used in education should reflect that. 

However, it is very misleading and damaging to advise future midwife’s that patients may not have external female genitalia but not discuss examples of these. Instructing midwives how to insert a male catheter is all well and good but it ignores the fact that not all neopenises will contain a urethra. It should not be up to new students to go through a system of trial and error poking a catheter into random body parts hoping to find a urethra. There is no surgery allowing birth through a penis, humans aren’t hyenas. Female reproductive organs can remain intact (so you could have a vagina and a penis) but many patients have their vaginas removed in order to create a scrotum. 

There can be a lot of variation in the appearance of genitalia, including in cis women, and it’s important to be aware of these but telling students that patients can give birth through a penis is damaging and shows a lack of understanding/research about trans issues.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> Woman is a term used to describe gender,


Sorry but no.
Woman is a term used to describe adult female humans.

And compelling students with threats of lowered grades for describing pregnant women as women instead of "people" is forced speech which is ridiculously draconian.

If an individual patient prefers to be referred to as a pregnant person of course you honor that. But you don't get to change an entire language and erase 50% of the population and call it inclusivity.


----------



## Cleo38




----------



## picaresque

Cleo38 said:


> View attachment 489439


Can you believe this is considered borderline hate speech now? Billboards have been taken down. I know this is an observation that has been made a lot on this thread but isn't it strange that no one is arguing over the definition of what a man is. People will go 'oh yeah and transmen are men' when they say the main mantra but we see you


----------



## O2.0

picaresque said:


> Can you believe this is considered borderline hate speech now? Billboards have been taken down. I know this is an observation that has been made a lot on this thread but isn't it strange that no one is arguing over the definition of what a man is. People will go 'oh yeah and transmen are men' when they say the main mantra but we see you


Exactly. 
Are urologists being encouraged to refer to "people with prostates" when educating about prostate health? Are medical students being asked to remove the word "men" from their papers about prostate cancer? 
No. It's just women. Pregnancy. Menstruation. Things that are solely the domain of women. Hrm....


----------



## Cleo38

picaresque said:


> Can you believe this is considered borderline hate speech now? Billboards have been taken down. I know this is an observation that has been made a lot on this thread but isn't it strange that no one is arguing over the definition of what a man is. People will go 'oh yeah and transmen are men' when they say the main mantra but we see you


I know, it's madness. Defining a woman is easy as in the image; an adult human female. It is not difficult to understand

Anyone who is not a biological female may identify as a woman but it doesn't mean they are one.

I


----------



## picaresque

https://www.medicinenet.com/male/definition.htm









https://www.medicinenet.com/female/definition.htm


----------



## £54etgfb6

O2.0 said:


> Sorry but no.


Your reply is entirely your own opinion, as was my post that you replied to. The only difference is that my opinion follows the current medical guidance (GMC guidelines) and legal guidance (Scottish Gov). You are entitled to your opinion but please do not quote my opinion and say that it is incorrect when this entire thread is one big opinion piece. I was not making any statements, merely saying that in my opinion the guidance to refer to pregnant individuals by a gender neutral term is good and I agree with it. If you don't agree with it that does not make me incorrect.

However, it is very interesting that at the start of this thread I was lambasted by several users for not understanding the difference between gender and biological sex. Yet, when I say that woman is a label of gender and female refers to biological sex this is suddenly incorrect. I'm not going to go and quote said lambasting because I'm on mobile and the site is difficult to use on mobile at the best of times but regardless, keep it consistent lads.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> Your reply is entirely your own opinion, as was my post that you replied to. The only difference is that my opinion follows the current medical guidance (GMC guidelines) and legal guidance (Scottish Gov). You are entitled to your opinion but please do not quote my opinion and say that it is incorrect when this entire thread is one big opinion piece. I was not making any statements, merely saying that in my opinion the guidance to refer to pregnant individuals by a gender neutral term is good and I agree with it. If you don't agree with it that does not make me incorrect.


I didn't say your opinion was incorrect. I simply rejected it. 
I don't accept that woman refers to gender. It's an accepted term for an adult human female.

See, now we're getting in to language, and language happens to be my jam. No matter where you are in the world, there is a term for adult human females. Woman, mujer, femme, frau, donna, mulher, kadin... And they all mean the same thing - adult human female.

We don't get to decide for ourselves what a word means. You know how I know this? Because if I were in Saudi Arabia I can't say "oh woman is just my gender" and be allowed to drive. If I were in some West African countries, it doesn't matter if I view my womanhood as just my gender, I'm still subject to a forced marriage. When I fight for woman's rights (as the title of this thread) woman means something, and it's not just the gender one feels like.

Yes, let's talk about GMC guidelines. What are their guidelines for discussing prostate health? I'm seriously asking this, it's not a rhetorical question.
Do they have specific guidelines about making sure urologists and oncologists are inclusive in their discussions about prostate cancer screening? Because if they don't, they can take their guidelines and well, do a prostate screening with them...


----------



## £54etgfb6

O2.0 said:


> I didn't say your opinion was incorrect. I simply rejected it.
> I don't accept that woman refers to gender. It's an accepted term for an adult human female.


I read your post as you simply stating that my opinion is incorrect. If you don't agree with my opinion that's fine. I see female/male as biological sex and woman/man as gender identity.



O2.0 said:


> We don't get to decide for ourselves what a word means.


That makes sense, yes, but language evolves with time. There are many words we say that have changed from their original meaning. You may disagree with the definition evolution of the word "woman" and that's fine but the word's meaning _can _change.



O2.0 said:


> Yes, let's talk about GMC guidelines. What are their guidelines for discussing prostate health? I'm seriously asking this, it's not a rhetorical question.
> Do they have specific guidelines about making sure urologists and oncologists are inclusive in their discussions about prostate cancer screening? Because if they don't, they can take their guidelines and well, do a prostate screening with them...


The GMC does not have specific guidelines for inclusivity in urology but rather has broader guidance referring to gender identity and how it should be respected. Ethics are a large part of being a doctor and the Good Medical Practice guide (essentially the handbook of how to act as a doctor) advises on avoiding your personal beliefs from discriminating a patient based on their gender reassignment: https://www.gmc-uk.org/-/media/documents/good-medical-practice---english-20200128_pdf-51527435.pdf. Do note that the most recent GMP is old (2013) and is due to undergo an update (they are currently taking feedback regarding the proposed changes they have suggested so far). Whether the next GMP will delve further into gender inclusivity is not known.

Since the GMP is a bit bare on detail, here are a couple of other links:

The following is guidance for staff: https://www.gmc-uk.org/-/media/documents/dignity-at-work-policy---dc6612_pdf-58561807.pdf which includes misgendering as a form of harassment if intentional.

The following is an application of their ethical guidance in relation to trans patients: https://www.gmc-uk.org/ethical-guidance/ethical-hub/trans-healthcare#Confidentiality and equality

GMC guidelines, in _general_, refer to patients as "patients" and uses language like "UTI pathology in males and females" rather than "UTI pathology in men and women".


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> That makes sense, yes, but language evolves with time. There are many words we say that have changed from their original meaning. You may disagree with the definition evolution of the word "woman" and that's fine but the word's meaning _can _change.


Absolutely language evolves. It's actually one of my areas of study, I'm well aware of the evolution of languages.

But it doesn't work the way you're describing. Languages evolve naturally, over time, with normal human use and societal change (and many other factors as well). But they don't evolve just because of someone's say-so (French and English royalty not withstanding).

You can't just declare "woman now means something different than what we have all known for the entire history of the word's usage" and claim the meaning has evolved. It doesn't work that way any more than I can say my dog is not a dog but a uniquely evolved swamprat that's not quite a dog but something different than a dog.

Also bears noting that words denoting things that are universal to the human experience like "mother" "father" "son" "daughter" "man" and "woman" don't tend to change meaning. They will evolve into other forms, ex: vader --> vater --> father (I skipped a few steps) but the meaning itself hasn't changed. Interestingly Father, Vater, and Padre are all nearly identical words phonetically - f, v, and p are all right in the front of the mouth with the lips and teeth or lips and lips and no sound just air puffs, while th, t, and d, are also equally similar in the mechanics of pronunciation - which points to the evolution of language, but note all words mean exactly the same thing. The word evolved, the meaning didn't.



bmr10 said:


> Ethics are a large part of being a doctor and the Good Medical Practice guide (essentially the handbook of how to act as a doctor) advises on avoiding your personal beliefs from discriminating a patient based on their gender reassignment


Well that was rather patronizing of you. 
Did you read where I said "If an individual patient prefers to be referred to as a pregnant person of course you honor that." ? Because you quoted the post where I said that.

My issue is not with individual patients what their preferred pronouns are, how they prefer to be referred to. Zero issue on the individual level. My issue is that we have pregnancy education literature that is quite literally erasing the word "woman" from their pages, which is bad enough, but we're not doing the same to pages of a urology textbook when discussing prostate cancer and erasing the word men.

What was that you were saying about staying consistent?


----------



## £54etgfb6

O2.0 said:


> You can't just declare "woman now means something different than what we have all known for the entire history of the word's usage" and claim the meaning has evolved. It doesn't work that way any more than I can say my dog is not a dog but a uniquely evolved swamprat that's not quite a dog but something different than a dog.


I don't think anyone has declared a change in meaning suddenly though? This has been going on in the background for a long time, it has just come to a head recently as people have become more aware of inclusivity. The GMP I linked was from 2013, that's almost a decade ago but it's only within the past couple of years that pronouns, trans rights, etc etc have become a hot topic. There has been an undercurrent in society pushing for these changes for a long time.



O2.0 said:


> Also bears noting that words denoting things that are universal to the human experience


I'm not really sure what qualifies as universal to the human experience but I think emotions most likely do? If so, gay used to mean happy (and still does, archaically) but I don't think I've read anything published within the last century that used the word "gay" in that sense. The word has been adopted to refer to mlm and wlw. The definition was added mid 20th century but was being used unofficially by gay people decades prior. As before, the change in "woman" and "man" to refer to gender is not a new ideology and people have used these words as such for centuries. In my opinion, this is not a sudden change.



O2.0 said:


> Well that was rather patronizing of you.


I was directly quoting the GMP as an example of the GMC's guidelines regarding inclusivity because you asked what they were. The GMP is a publication every UK doctor and medical student is aware of and uses when making decisions as it is the GMC that regulates doctors. My choice to quote the GMP was not in reference to your opinions and was not intended to patronise, it was quoted purely because it is the GMC's most well known publication and you specifically asked about GMC guidelines. I said they do not have any specifically related to inclusivity in urology but have several broader publications mentioning it, which is the reason why I initially stated my view of gender theory aligns with the GMC's. I don't view this as patronising when the context of the quote is taken into account, honestly. I try to make the meaning behind my posts as clear as possible to avoid miscommunication but I am not sure how to explain the use of the quote any more than I already have.

These are the words of the GMP verbatim, in case you thought I had reworded it to patronise:
"You must not unfairly discriminate against patients or colleagues by allowing your personal views24 to affect your professional relationships or the treatment you provide or arrange. You should challenge colleagues if their behaviour does not comply with this guidance, and follow the guidance in paragraph 25c (see section Domain 2: Safety and quality) if the behaviour amounts to abuse or denial of a patient's or colleague's rights. This includes your views about a patient's or colleague's lifestyle, culture or their social or economic status, as well as the characteristics protected by legislation: age, disability, gender reassignment, race, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.".



O2.0 said:


> My issue is that we have pregnancy education literature that is quite literally erasing the word "woman" from their pages, which is bad enough, but we're not doing the same to pages of a urology textbook when discussing prostate cancer and erasing the word men.


I'd advocate for both to be changed, unsurprisingly. I cannot comment on whether urology textbooks refer to patients as "men" or use gender-neutral terminology. I would hope that newer publications would but it is less of a hot topic and therefore given less attention.


----------



## Cleo38

Blimey, about time!

New 3D female anatomy model used to better treat women - BBC News

And showing how us women have anatomical differences (apart from the obvious!) that maybe are often overlooked. Being a woman is more than just a feeling


----------



## Cleo38

What is happening to our rights?! :Muted:Rage

Supreme court voted to overturn Roe v Wade abortion law, leaked draft opinion reportedly shows | Roe v Wade | The Guardian


----------



## mrs phas

Cleo38 said:


> What is happening to our rights?! :Muted:Rage
> 
> Supreme court voted to overturn Roe v Wade abortion law, leaked draft opinion reportedly shows | Roe v Wade | The Guardian


Was just coming to post this 
I don't want to believe that a country as, supposedly, educated as America, are going to take away the rights of women in regard to their own body 
But then 
They did vote for Trump and the senate is full of puritanical Christians 
With Texas already implementing a 'from first heartbeat' ban and encouraging neighbours to 'turn in' any women they think might be contemplating an abortion, and, wanting to criminalise any woman travelling to another state/country for one
I forsee a real time rise in suicides if this goes ahead


----------



## £54etgfb6

Cleo38 said:


> What is happening to our rights?! :Muted:Rage
> 
> Supreme court voted to overturn Roe v Wade abortion law, leaked draft opinion reportedly shows | Roe v Wade | The Guardian


America is such a dystopian hellscape functioning with medieval, illogical laws. The fact that, currently, you may have to travel to another state to get an abortion is wrong in the first place.

They seem to think people should practice total abstinence unless you're a rapist, pedophile, or adulterer (the caveat is you must be rich though). Such a weird, weird place.


----------



## Jesthar

bmr10 said:


> They seem to think people should practice total abstinence unless you're a rapist, pedophile, or adulterer (the caveat is you must be rich though). Such a weird, weird place.


If they carry on like this, then they'll probably end up with many women deciding abstinence is indeed the better option, and I'm not sure the men who are so in favour of these laws will like that


----------



## O2.0

At some point I'll discuss this, but not right now. 

What I will say, is that this is why representation matters, this is why language matters, this is why using the word woman correctly matters, this is why textbooks need to talk about pregnant *women* not people. 

Caitlyn Jenner will never have to worry about needing an abortion, she has run for office and likely will again. Putting her in office and saying she represents women is part of the problem.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Jesthar said:


> If they carry on like this, then they'll probably end up with many women deciding abstinence is indeed the better option, and I'm not sure the men who are so in favour of these laws will like that


I don't think the men who are in favour of these laws will mind that much. By being in favour of the law being overturned they have shown they don't think women should have autonomy. These are probably the same men who think women are prudes (or gay) if they don't agree to have sex but simultaneously if the woman _does_ have sex she is a slut, for the streets, and it's her fault if she falls pregnant.

And in any case, the men making these decisions have money and connections and will thus always have access to abortion services if one of the women they sleep with requires it. Either that or they'll pay off the woman to keep her mouth shut about who the kid's father is.


----------



## Sairy

Mrs Funkin said:


> https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-are-midwives-being-told-that-biological-men-can-give-birth-
> 
> I've definitely not got the brain power this evening to process this.


Does this mean that midwives are being told to refer to their patients as "pregnant people" or "individuals" rather than "women" or "ladies"?


----------



## Siskin

Sairy said:


> Does this mean that midwives are being told to refer to their patients as "pregnant people" or "individuals" rather than "women" or "ladies"?


I've been watching a program about a group of home birth midwives working in Yorkshire on BBC2 and there's none of that, it's women all the way.


----------



## Sairy

Siskin said:


> I've been watching a program about a group of home birth midwives working in Yorkshire on BBC2 and there's none of that, it's women all the way.


Good, I really don't think I'd like being described as a "pregnant individual" or "pregnant person". I am a woman.


----------



## O2.0

Sairy said:


> Good, I really don't think I'd like being described as a "pregnant individual" or "pregnant person". I am a woman.


This is my thing too.

Absolutely honor individual preferences when it comes to pronouns and if that individual wants to be referred to as a woman or not, but that doesn't mean those adjustments have to apply across the board. The huge, vast majority of pregnant women consider themselves women and want to be called women. Their preferences should be honored too.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Sairy said:


> Does this mean that midwives are being told to refer to their patients as "pregnant people" or "individuals" rather than "women" or "ladies"?


Well, it seems to be how it's going, yes. Certainly our protocols and guidelines are now appearing with "pregnant person" in there. I am so saddened by it - and it appears so are many women using maternity services. There is starting to be a backlash against the removal of the words women/woman in documentation.

My ladies/women are still my ladies/women - if they ask me to refer to them differently, then I do.


----------



## Cully

Isn't this all getting a bit ridiculous now? It all sounds like we're all in some sort of SciFi world.
Well I shall still continue to call us people (humanoids!!!) what I always have and they can stuff this particular bit of PC where the sun don't shine. The day a biological male gives vaginal birth to a naturally conceived baby I may reconsider.
Have a lovely evening to all those girls, women, boys, men, ladies and gents out there.


----------



## Dimwit

Cully said:


> The day a biological male gives vaginal birth to a naturally conceived baby I may reconsider.


I saw a bit of a twitter storm the other week because some guidance for midwives suggested the use of 'front hole' instead of 'vagina' to avoid offending trans patients...


----------



## kimthecat

Dimwit said:


> I saw a bit of a twitter storm the other week because some guidance for midwives suggested the use of 'front hole' instead of 'vagina' to avoid offending trans patients...


 Sounds like something a 10 yea old would say.


----------



## Cully

Dimwit said:


> I saw a bit of a twitter storm the other week because some guidance for midwives suggested the use of 'front hole' instead of 'vagina' to avoid offending trans patients...


What will happen in med school? Latin is the universal language for all medical terms, and doctors all over the world use the same words and phrases knowing they will be understood globally by other medics.
What is the Latin for front hole I wonder:Bag.


----------



## Jesthar

Dimwit said:


> I saw a bit of a twitter storm the other week because some guidance for midwives suggested the use of 'front hole' instead of 'vagina' to avoid offending trans patients...


Really?!? :Wideyed 

Last I checked:

a) 'Vagina' is a medical term

b) If you don't have one, you aren't going to be giving birth...


----------



## Lurcherlad

kimthecat said:


> Sounds like something a 10 yea old would say.


I knew a woman man in her 30's who called it her Front Bottom 

Another popular alternative was Lady Garden … guess that's out now?


----------



## Dimwit

Jesthar said:


> Really?!? :Wideyed
> 
> Last I checked:
> 
> a) 'Vagina' is a medical term
> 
> b) If you don't have one, you aren't going to be giving birth...


more importantly,
c) it's anatomically incorrect as the front hole is the urethra...


----------



## Jesthar

Lurcherlad said:


> Another popular alternative was Lady Garden … guess that's out now?


Sounds like a third rate punk rock band anyway...


----------



## Cully

Lurcherlad said:


> I knew a woman man in her 30's who called it her Front Bottom
> 
> Another popular alternative was Lady Garden … guess that's out now?


Didn't lady garden go out when the Brazilian came in?


----------



## Sairy

Am I right I thinking that it is also considered un-PC to address an audience as "ladies and gentlemen"? I remember something about it a good while ago, but tbh I don't keep up to speed with this sort of thing as it annoys me too much. 

As someone who is in a minority group and has felt the sting of discrimination, I feel very strongly that everyone should be treated with equal respect and allowed to live their life as they see fit (providing their choices are not negatively impacting others). However, you could spend forever picking holes in language and finding something to be offended by. I quite often have to correct people when I mention my partner and then they ask questions about "him" (sometimes I can't be bothered to correct them and just let them carry on) and although it can be a little annoying that people assume that my partner is male it really is no great hardship on my part to politely correct them. This usually follows with an apology from them to which I reply "it's fine, don't worry". The fact is that the majority of partners of women are men so it is natural for people to make assumptions. It doesn't mean that they think any less of me for having a female partner.


----------



## Cleo38

I had to fill in a form this week for a medical referral. After name, DOB, etc there were options for gender one of which was cis woman (amongst many others) so I opted for 'other' & entered 'woman' in the please state box. F*cking cis woman .... no way!


----------



## Sairy

Cully said:


> Didn't lady garden go out when the Brazilian came in?


It becomes more of a lady garden when you can no longer see it to maintain it :Hilarious


----------



## Siskin

Cleo38 said:


> I had to fill in a form this week for a medical referral. After name, DOB, etc there were options for gender one of which was cis woman (amongst many others) so I opted for 'other' & entered 'woman' in the please state box. F*cking cis woman .... no way!


I did the same for a hospital form I had to fill in a few months ago. I thoroughly agree with you, I've been a women/girl for 70 years, I'm not about to change that to anything else.


----------



## Siskin

Sairy said:


> It becomes more of a lady garden when you can no longer see it to maintain it :Hilarious


Ha ha. I remember the midwife saying to me that my ankles looked puffy did I think the same. I replied I have no idea as I can't actually see them any more, I was having twins so anything could have been going on below the huge bump


----------



## Sairy

Cleo38 said:


> I had to fill in a form this week for a medical referral. After name, DOB, etc there were options for gender one of which was cis woman (amongst many others) so I opted for 'other' & entered 'woman' in the please state box. F*cking cis woman .... no way!


I thought those sorts of forms normally gave the options of "male" or "female" as well as an option for "other".


----------



## £54etgfb6

Cully said:


> What will happen in med school? Latin is the universal language for all medical terms, and doctors all over the world use the same words and phrases knowing they will be understood globally by other medics.
> What is the Latin for front hole I wonder:Bag.


Can't comment on other courses, but all medicine and medical science courses use anatomical language so there is no "front hole" it is always vaginal vestibule/vaginal opening, which is part of the vulva. "Vagina" is the name for the potential space within you, not the opening, _technically_. 
Using the language of "front hole" is misleading because… urethras exist but is also unnecessary as anatomical terms do not correlate with gender.


----------



## Cleo38

Sairy said:


> I thought those sorts of forms normally gave the options of "male" or "female" as well as an option for "other".


Nope, there was trans woman, trans man, non binary & some other made up BS options but none for woman or man ... it was cis woman or cis man


----------



## O2.0

Regarding Roe v. Wade.

I don't know if it's worth posting here, preaching to the choir, but I think in all the "my body my choice" rhetoric we forget that these are by and large decisions women agonize over and should really be only between her and her doctor.

20 years ago I was pregnant with twins, very much wanted and planned for (well, the twin part wasn't planned but YKWIM).
At 26 weeks I had a level 2 ultrasound which was routine for high risk pregnancies which twin pregnancies are considered. No one was worried, I was healthy babies appeared to be healthy. 
Turns out baby B had absent end diastolic flow which @Mrs Funkin will know what it is. It's a very rare complication that is usually 'treated' by inducing labor or performing a c-section, because absent end diastolic flow invariably turns in to reversed end diastolic flow which is fatal to the fetus. 
However, there was another baby in there. Babies born at 26 weeks don't tend to do well if they do survive, and 20 years ago even less so.

You can't birth one baby and leave the other one in there - I asked.

So my choices were, c-section within 24 hours to give steroids some chance of working and have 2 babies born far too early, or keep both babies in there and possibly lose baby B. OH and I agonized over what to do, and after much discussion with our doctors, we chose to keep the babies in there. That discussion and agonizing continued for the next 5 weeks until a second placental abruption made the decision for us. 5 weeks of waking up every morning to an ultrasound wondering if baby B was still alive.

We were extremely lucky and despite prematurity, NICU and such a rough start, we ended up with 2 healthy normal-ish children who are now university students and make me proud every day.

But my point in telling this story is that these kinds of medical decisions should be solely the realm of woman and her doctor. Legislators who have no clue about reproduction, pregnancy and potential complications of pregnancy have zero business making any kinds of laws about medical decisions a pregnant woman should be making including when to end that pregnancy - which may serve to safe the baby's life. I can't for the life of me imagine how much harder that time would have been had there been laws I had to contend with to work around those decisions.

To me it goes beyond abortion rights but really it's about a woman being able to make medical decisions with her doctor, without outside interference.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Regarding the "front hole" midwife thing @Dimwit there is talk (which generally means it will happen) that trans and non-binary people we are looking after will be given a document where they will write their preferred term of use for many every day language words for us - like vagina and breasts. Apparently (I don't know how true this is) "front hole" is the preferred term for many trans and non-binary people. I am not sure whether it will go into as much detail as "vaginal introitus" which is more used for us than "vaginal opening".

@Sairy your response is exactly all that needs to be said in my opinion. I've been guilty of saying, "when will he be here" (or something similar) when talking to a pregnant woman that I didn't know was gay, who said her partner would be arriving shortly. I obviously apologised, there was no big fuss made. It just is.

You feel like you can't say the right thing sometimes. To be honest I've spent time today with someone through work that makes my heart break, so worrying about the right or wrong word seems minor to me today.


----------



## mrs phas

@Mrs Funkin
Surely it should be midperson now

I have my American niece arriving in June, for an extended stay
I've known she was lesbian for a long time (before her overly Christian parents in fact)
But
She now has a new, English, girlfriend, who is coming with her (never even seen her let alone spoke to her, _awkward!)_
And
Announced to me last week she is now
Lesbian non-binary
Has shortened her name to make it a more non binary name
And
Now uses they/them, zie/zem pronouns, as does the girlfriend (whose non binary name I have a real aversion to saying, despite not knowing her, and, I don't know why)

I have warned her that, as I've known her as her full name, with female pronouns, for 20yrs, I am 100% going to bugger it all up and they're not to take offence if I do


----------



## kimthecat

Lurcherlad said:


> I knew a woman man in her 30's who called it her Front Bottom
> 
> Another popular alternative was Lady Garden … guess that's out now?


:Hilarious Lady garden stlll pops up on PC programmes. We say fanny


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Thank you for sharing your story @O2.0 - the decisions that women need to make around pregnancy are sometimes so stressful. If the right to make the toughest decision is removed, women will feel desperate and will take desperate measures. Imagine going to a scan and being told that your baby is incompatible with life (I know that isn't the same as your case) but that you have to continue? Or as in your case, you go to a scan and there is reverse EDF and the MCA dopplers and ductus venosus dopplers are abnormal and so we know that the fetus is likely severely compromised. Or you have a fetus with ascites and hydrops. or any other number of issues. We have all this technology at our disposal - but actually if we cannot use it to be able to aid us in making decisions around pregnancy, it makes me wonder why we are even using it. This is before we even talk about "just" a pregnancy that is not wanted, or is wanted but a woman cannot see a way through a difficult situation, or literally cannot afford. Or any number of reasons why a TOP is needed.

Oh gosh. I think so many times about how lucky we are that we have that access - I am so sad for you guys in the States who are going to have your reproductive rights further eroded. If I could pop over and protest, I'd be there with you. It's about the only thing I feel really really strongly enough about to want to protest.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

mrs phas said:


> @Mrs Funkin
> Surely it should be midperson now
> 
> I have my American niece arriving in June, for an extended stay
> I've known she was lesbian for a long time (before her overly Christian parents in fact)
> But
> She now has a new, English, girlfriend, who is coming with her (never even seen her let alone spoke to her, _awkward!)_
> And
> Announced to me last week she is now
> Lesbian non-binary
> Has shortened her name to make it a more non binary name
> And
> Now uses they/them, zie/zem pronouns, as does the girlfriend (whose non binary name I have a real aversion to saying, despite not knowing her, and, I don't know why)
> 
> I have warned her that, as I've known her as her full name, with female pronouns, for 20yrs, I am 100% going to bugger it all up and they're not to take offence if I do


You're right, as midwife means "with woman"...jeez. I'd not thought about that


----------



## mrs phas

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ender?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=news_tab


----------



## £54etgfb6

mrs phas said:


> https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ender?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=news_tab


Really like the article but the thought of healthcare providers referring to you solely as a variation of "mama" is so uncomfortable to me for some reason :Vomit please don't call me mum unless you're my child, just call me by my name. I always find posts referring to each other as "mama" very odd and… vaguely immature (why is it never mother???).

I would not want my entire identity to be overtaken by the fact that I have a child. I'm me, I may have a child but I am still me. Please do not reduce me to whether I have a child or not. Maybe this makes others happy, to each their own. However, I agree with the author's perspective on that topic.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Sometimes @bmr10 you are looking after so many women in such a short amount of time, not getting to know any of them (most commonly on the postnatal ward), that you actually can't remember their name and so "Mum" or "Mama" is a bit of a default really. I know it's a cop out but it's what happens.

@mrs phas that article has it right really. All I ask is that someone tells me what they want to be called/how they wish to be referred to and I will try mu absolute best to do what is asked for. I cannot promise that I will not slip up - but it's not done out of malice/prejudice/not being inclusive, it's done because I'm mentally busy and occasionally we just don't use the right pronoun (or whatever).

Anyway, Happy International Day of the Midwife


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> I would not want my entire identity to be overtaken by the fact that I have a child.


Well it pretty much happens whether you want it to or not. As it should IMHO. Motherhood is all encompassing and takes over everything about you. Especially in the early days when you and the baby are still pretty much attached 24/7.

At least it did for me. I am first and foremost a mother. I am many other things, but the main thing I am is a mother. That IS my identity.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Mrs Funkin said:


> Sometimes @bmr10 you are looking after so many women in such a short amount of time, not getting to know any of them (most commonly on the postnatal ward), that you actually can't remember their name and so "Mum" or "Mama" is a bit of a default really. I know it's a cop out but it's what happens.


Oh I don't doubt that it's often due to the sheer number of patients you're dealing with and it probably seems less clinical than referring to someone as "the patient". Just for myself, and the author of that article I guess, it feels uncomfortable. I notice it a lot on social media posts, advertising, etc out with the hospital that "mum" seems to be the way to refer to your friend who has given birth. It probably brings a lot of joy to people, I can imagine, but definitely not for me at all!! I'd just rather people referred to me by my name or just asked me my name


----------



## £54etgfb6

O2.0 said:


> Well it pretty much happens whether you want it to or not. As it should IMHO. Motherhood is all encompassing and takes over everything about you. Especially in the early days when you and the baby are still pretty much attached 24/7.
> 
> At least it did for me. I am first and foremost a mother. I am many other things, but the main thing I am is a mother. That IS my identity.


I respect your opinion but I don't personally have specific traits that are my identity, it is a culmination of everything about myself that's my identity. My identity is me as a person- my psyche, thoughts, emotions, morals, interests, etc. That's the way I view it and I wouldn't want anyone to reduce me to a single aspect of my life such as being a mother, being disabled, being gay, etc etc.

I'm sure it makes some folks happy, just not my kind of vibe!


----------



## Mrs Funkin

bmr10 said:


> Oh I don't doubt that it's often due to the sheer number of patients you're dealing with and it probably seems less clinical than referring to someone as "the patient". Just for myself, and the author of that article I guess, it feels uncomfortable. I notice it a lot on social media posts, advertising, etc out with the hospital that "mum" seems to be the way to refer to your friend who has given birth. It probably brings a lot of joy to people, I can imagine, but definitely not for me at all!! I'd just rather people referred to me by my name or just asked me my name


Heh, we don't have "patients" as midwives either, unless they are actually poorly  Which fortunately is reasonably rare.

When you do your Obs & Gynae you'll see what I mean (depending upon what the MWs are like that you work with  )

ETA - sorry @bmr10 that came across sounding rather patronising I didn't mean it like that at all.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> I respect your opinion but I don't personally have specific traits that are my identity, it is a culmination of everything about myself that's my identity. My identity is me as a person- my psyche, thoughts, emotions, morals, interests, etc. That's the way I view it and I wouldn't want anyone to reduce me to a single aspect of my life such as being a mother, being disabled, being gay, etc etc.
> 
> I'm sure it makes some folks happy, just not my kind of vibe!


I didn't say it makes me happy. It's not about my feelings at all. It just is. 
When you mother a child it takes over everything, it's evolutionary. Infant humans are completely helpless and they need a caretaker's constant attention. 
It's actually a little offensive how you've worded it - I'm sure it makes some people happy. As if people become parents in order to be happy? What? 
And no, it's not a "single" aspect of your life. It IS your life, particularly in the early years.

Now that said, I will say it's not for me when couples start referring to the other one as Mom or Dad in regular conversation instead of using their name. Like when the husband now calls his wife mama instead of whatever her name is. I wouldn't be comfortable with that.


----------



## £54etgfb6

O2.0 said:


> I didn't say it makes me happy. It's not about my feelings at all. It just is.


I meant happy as in some people will be okay with their identity being the fact that they have a child, such as being referred to as "mama" by other people rather than their name. I personally would not.



O2.0 said:


> It's actually a little offensive how you've worded it - I'm sure it makes some people happy. As if people become parents in order to be happy? What?


I don't think what I wrote was offensive or that it implied that some people have children in order to be happy. It's not really a deep topic, I was just agreeing with the journalist who wrote the article on how she felt the change in how people viewed her was uncomfortable. I can imagine I would feel the same, that's it really. Some people may think that motherhood is their life while others don't, such as the author. I was saying I feel I'd fall into the latter category.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Mrs Funkin said:


> Heh, we don't have "patients" as midwives either, unless they are actually poorly  Which fortunately is reasonably rare.
> 
> When you do your Obs & Gynae you'll see what I mean (depending upon what the MWs are like that you work with  )
> 
> ETA - sorry @bmr10 that came across sounding rather patronising I didn't mean it like that at all.


It doesn't sound patronising don't worry. I can see that pregnancy is not viewed the same as other reasons people visit a hospital so it may not be viewed as appropriate to refer to people as patients. I can imagine that for some people it would imply that their pregnancy is an illness. I have seen the word "patients" used in the literature regarding obs and gynae but I appreciate that people have different views of what that word means.

I did have a microbiology lecturer who liked to go on about how foetuses live as parasites. I remember a lot of the class were very upset with her  I didn't think it was offensive, more so interesting but I guess that's another example of how differently people interpret words!


----------



## Deguslave

My vet often calls me mum when handing them back to me, its always 'there you go, back to mum.' It never bothers me.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> It's not really a deep topic, I was just agreeing with the journalist who wrote the article on how she felt the change in how people viewed her was uncomfortable.


Well to me it very much is a deep topic and one that I feel passionately about. I am a mother and I work with children/teens who don't have great mother figures in their lives, so it's a topic near and dear to me.

When you decide to have a child through pregnancy or other means, you *become* a mother, you are viewed as a mother, and you are a mother. Being uncomfortable with people seeing you as a mother after deliberately choosing to become one is confused thinking.

Yes, the transition can be jarring. You go from being an autonomous adult to having someone completely dependent on you and many women balk at that level of neediness. This is where support and a village to help is so important and experienced other women to help guide and nurture that new mom make such a difference. This is not an issue of inclusive language, but rather supportive social structures and relationships.

And this is one of my many peeves about all this effort with language. Calling a new mom mom isn't the issue and changing language isn't going to make anything better for overwhelmed new moms. What they need is support, actual, human relationship-based support. Not fancy new language.


----------



## Jaf

Within my circle no one calls their parent mum or dad. It sounds so strange to me when people do.


----------



## £54etgfb6

O2.0 said:


> Well to me it very much is a deep topic and one that I feel passionately about. I am a mother and I work with children/teens who don't have great mother figures in their lives, so it's a topic near and dear to me.
> 
> When you decide to have a child through pregnancy or other means, you *become* a mother, you are viewed as a mother, and you are a mother. Being uncomfortable with people seeing you as a mother after deliberately choosing to become one is confused thinking.
> 
> Yes, the transition can be jarring. You go from being an autonomous adult to having someone completely dependent on you and many women balk at that level of neediness. This is where support and a village to help is so important and experienced other women to help guide and nurture that new mom make such a difference. This is not an issue of inclusive language, but rather supportive social structures and relationships.
> 
> And this is one of my many peeves about all this effort with language. Calling a new mom mom isn't the issue and changing language isn't going to make anything better for overwhelmed new moms. What they need is support, actual, human relationship-based support. Not fancy new language.


I don't really think you saw the meaning behind my posts. If you haven't read it, the author of the article says that all of the health care staff referring to her as "mama" rather than her name was odd. I added that I think I'd feel uncomfortable if I were in her position and I find adverts/social media posts targetted towards mothers using the words "mama" as odd. This is literally just my view on how I prefer to be called my name, not by a familial role I have. I don't think my personal preference for how people refer to _me_ has anything to do with new mums struggling to acclimate to suddenly having a child in their arms or changes in language. It's simply that if I were a mum, I'd prefer to be referred to by my name by health care professionals, friends, and family rather than a variation of the word "mum". I found the start of the article interesting and commented that I would feel the same, whether that's due to the same reasons as the author or not isn't really the point I was making. I'm not really sure what the issue with me preferring to be called my name is. I'm not speaking for anyone else other than myself.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Jaf said:


> Within my circle no one calls their parent mum or dad. It sounds so strange to me when people do.


I don't really call my dad "dad" either unless I'm referring to him in conversation when he's not there; "my dad likes star wars". His name on my phone is "Father __" with __ being his first name. Slightly unrelated but I've seen siblings that refer to each other as "bro" or "sis" and always felt it was odd, I'd cringe if my sister referred to me like that!


----------



## Boxer123

The current situation in America is very scary what is even worse is some of the comments I’ve seen from men on social media.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

It actually is terrifying for women in the States. The new pre-six weeks rule for procuring a TOP is especially concerning. Makes me think pregnancy test manufacturers have a vested interest as if it was me living there, I’d be doing a pregnancy test every month to check my contraception hasn’t failed. 

Just horrendous. What we civilised nations put women through. Termination will still be there, maybe the sanctity of the woman’s life isn’t quite as important as that of the fetus? For surely there will be many women who die as a result of needing to procure an illegal termination.

Makes my blood boil.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> I don't really think you saw the meaning behind my posts. If you haven't read it, the author of the article says that all of the health care staff referring to her as "mama" rather than her name was odd. I added that I think I'd feel uncomfortable if I were in her position and I find adverts/social media posts targetted towards mothers using the words "mama" as odd. This is literally just my view on how I prefer to be called my name, not by a familial role I have. I don't think my personal preference for how people refer to _me_ has anything to do with new mums struggling to acclimate to suddenly having a child in their arms or changes in language. It's simply that if I were a mum, I'd prefer to be referred to by my name by health care professionals, friends, and family rather than a variation of the word "mum". I found the start of the article interesting and commented that I would feel the same, whether that's due to the same reasons as the author or not isn't really the point I was making. I'm not really sure what the issue with me preferring to be called my name is. I'm not speaking for anyone else other than myself.


I wasn't going to respond because I don't want you to feel like I'm picking on you, that's really not my intention at all. It would be easier to have this conversation in person because I think I could convey that better. So understand that the following is not meant in an argumentative way at all.

You're speaking hypothetically about you as an individual. I'm not. 
I'm talking about women (plural) in real terms. Opinions are irrelevant. Reality is.
The reality is, your identity will change when you become a mother. Telling women this and being honest about it matters.

One, it allows women who don't want to be called "mum" by those attending the birth to have a plan. When someone says "congratulations mum" they have a plan for how to approach that, or can even write it in to their birth plan and head it off at the pass altogether.

However, what people call you is an infinitesimal, nearly irrelevant aspect of motherhood. It's a distraction from reality. The all-encompassing neediness of an infant is a reality. Again, we need to be real with women. And if the thought of being needed to that level is uncomfortable, then that woman is far better equipped to make the decision about being a mother or not. 
That your identity will change is a reality. If you are a woman and you have a child, you are a mother. Can you imagine what it does to a child to hear their parent say in so many words that they resent being called a mother? That they resent their identity being taken over by motherhood?

Which now circles back to reproductive rights. Being real about what motherhood entails - including the identity change, is an essential piece of arguing for reproductive rights. Forcing women to enter motherhood without painting a realistic picture of what motherhood entails is a disaster. Women suffer, their children suffer, society suffers.


----------



## Deguslave

Its not just about the above, whether a woman wants to be a mother or not, it should never be forced on her by any law.


----------



## £54etgfb6

O2.0 said:


> You're speaking hypothetically about you as an individual. I'm not.


If we're talking about different things then the discussion isn't relevant to the original point I made. My original post was not intended to discuss other women, purely myself. It was not meant to be taken seriously either, just an off-handed comment about how I wouldn't be keen for people to suddenly start referring to me as a variation of "mum" rather than my name because I'd rather only my child called me that. At the end of the day, it's just a word and it wouldn't drive me up the wall. I'd just find it weird for a 40-year-old doctor who did not come out of my vagina to be referring to me as "mum".

I'm not going to debate the intricacies of psychology and the theory of self-identity but I do not personally believe one aspect of someone defines their self-identity. Others may oppose that view and that's really okay, I speak for myself and I don't think other women are relevant to that. I agree that anyone planning to have children should be fully educated on the realities of parenthood and the changes that occur but, really, that has very little to do with me not being keen on strangers calling me mum.


----------



## picaresque

Here's the story of Sage, a fourteen year old girl who experienced early childhood trauma who succumbs to social contagion and begins to identify as male. She is groomed online and sex trafficked to another state, then when rescued by authorities gets put into a boys' home despite being a teenage girl with all the specific vulnerabilities this entails, and that's not even taking into account the fact she had very recently been abused by predatory men. The adoptive parents are investigated for abuse because they still used their daughter's birth name and female pronouns (they didn't know Sage had socially transitioned because the school kept this information from them). They're cleared but the child is still unable to go home. She is then trafficked again and sexually abused when she was supposed to be in a safe place. Now she's in a residential therapeutic facility where she is to stay for the next year or two. I'd call it a cluster**** but that is way too flippant for what's happened here. This poor child and her family have been failed big time. Where is the mainstream media? Doesn't fit the happy rainbow affirmation narrative I suppose. 
https://pitt.substack.com/p/saga-of-sage?r=n5nv9&s=w&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
https://pitt.substack.com/p/saga-of-sage?r=n5nv9&s=w&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web


----------



## mrs phas

:Arghh:Arghh 
No words


----------



## Deguslave

https://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/...ho-assaulted-woman-suspended-by-conservatives


----------



## Jonescat

Gosh and blimey. I don't believe becoming a mother changes your identity, indeed I have worked pretty hard for it not to. I accept that in some relationships I am X's Mum, because that's the role I have for that person, and they are not interested in me, only in my role. I have many roles, and sometimes they combine, but they aren't my identity.


----------



## O2.0

picaresque said:


> Here's the story of Sage, a fourteen year old girl who experienced early childhood trauma who succumbs to social contagion and begins to identify as male. She is groomed online and sex trafficked to another state, then when rescued by authorities gets put into a boys' home despite being a teenage girl with all the specific vulnerabilities this entails, and that's not even taking into account the fact she had very recently been abused by predatory men. The adoptive parents are investigated for abuse because they still used their daughter's birth name and female pronouns (they didn't know Sage had socially transitioned because the school kept this information from them). They're cleared but the child is still unable to go home. She is then trafficked again and sexually abused when she was supposed to be in a safe place. Now she's in a residential therapeutic facility where she is to stay for the next year or two. I'd call it a cluster**** but that is way too flippant for what's happened here. This poor child and her family have been failed big time. Where is the mainstream media? Doesn't fit the happy rainbow affirmation narrative I suppose.
> https://pitt.substack.com/p/saga-of-sage?r=n5nv9&s=w&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web


This is so unbelievable that I had to google it and from what I can tell from published news reports here in the US, the essential elements of the story is true. So many failures on so many levels. I shouldn't be surprised as I've seen the same sorts of failures of social services over and over, children being taken from good homes, children being left in terrible homes with horrible outcomes.

This child needed/needs help and didn't get it because of selfish people too concerned with their own agendas instead of what's right for the child.


----------



## picaresque

Sounds crazy doesn't it @O2.0

Here's another awful one. Definitely something wrong with this headline

*NJ woman who forced daughter she fathered into child porn sentenced to 25 years in prison *
https://eu.mycentraljersey.com/stor...ter-fathered-child-porn-sentenced/9674762002/

This is a collective madness


----------



## 1507601

picaresque said:


> Here's the story of Sage, a fourteen year old girl who experienced early childhood trauma who succumbs to social contagion and begins to identify as male. She is groomed online and sex trafficked to another state, then when rescued by authorities gets put into a boys' home despite being a teenage girl with all the specific vulnerabilities this entails, and that's not even taking into account the fact she had very recently been abused by predatory men. The adoptive parents are investigated for abuse because they still used their daughter's birth name and female pronouns (they didn't know Sage had socially transitioned because the school kept this information from them). They're cleared but the child is still unable to go home. She is then trafficked again and sexually abused when she was supposed to be in a safe place. Now she's in a residential therapeutic facility where she is to stay for the next year or two. I'd call it a cluster**** but that is way too flippant for what's happened here. This poor child and her family have been failed big time. Where is the mainstream media? Doesn't fit the happy rainbow affirmation narrative I suppose.
> https://pitt.substack.com/p/saga-of-sage?r=n5nv9&s=w&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web


I actually find it disgusting that 'Sage'/Draco's story is being turned into anti-trans propaganda. By the way, at which point did this child reveal they actually didn't identity as male anymore? Because I haven't spotted it.

The whole 'they took her away because we called her sage still' sounds like a lie.

As someone who suffered emotional abuse as a child/teenager... If a child calls emotional abuse, please listen to them! Nobody cares unless it's physical or sexual. The grandmother isn't allowed to go see the child - did she not consider that maybe the child does not want to see her?

At the end of the day, a child was left in the care of multiple people who utterly, horrifically failed them, and THAT is the important thing, not what gender they identify as


----------



## Oof

Lucy2020 said:


> If a child calls emotional abuse, please listen to them! Nobody cares unless it's physical or sexual.


^^^ This a million %, and emotional abuse stays with you when the bruises fade.
I'm sorry you went through this @Lucy2020. unfortunately I can also relate.

I'm grateful for this thread. It's interesting, and I'm learning a lot about how people think.


----------



## O2.0

Lucy2020 said:


> I actually find it disgusting that 'Sage'/Draco's story is being turned into anti-trans propaganda.


I don't see it as anti-trans propaganda but a sensible warning to not make everything about transgenderism, particularly not at the expense of the child's mental health.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Lucy2020 said:


> I actually find it disgusting that 'Sage'/Draco's story is being turned into anti-trans propaganda. By the way, at which point did this child reveal they actually didn't identity as male anymore? Because I haven't spotted it.
> 
> The whole 'they took her away because we called her sage still' sounds like a lie.
> 
> As someone who suffered emotional abuse as a child/teenager... If a child calls emotional abuse, please listen to them! Nobody cares unless it's physical or sexual. The grandmother isn't allowed to go see the child - did she not consider that maybe the child does not want to see her?
> 
> At the end of the day, a child was left in the care of multiple people who utterly, horrifically failed them, and THAT is the important thing, not what gender they identify as


I agree. I also got very very odd christian traditionalist vibes (I am christian but I'm referring to transphobic, homophobic christianity). What's happened to Draco is no doubt horrendous and a failing of the system but the views expressed by his mum were odd. I'm confused why his grandmother still refuses to acknowledge his gender identity? And why his grandparents didn't notice he was being bullied? Perhaps they didn't have a close relationship, it's not out of the ordinary but the article just gave me odd vibes.

No parental figure is going to be accused of child abuse either for being UNAWARE of their child's pronoun change?????

I really wish Draco the best in their residential facility. I also hope his relationship with his grandparents are not as bad as I feel they are.

Also- "These kids' brains aren't even fully developed until the age of 25!" is such a cop-out argument. Why allow people to marry at 16? Have sex at 16? Drink at 18? Buy a house at 16? That quote implies humans have some smooth, undeveloped brain until the age of 25 where you suddenly develop a full frontal lobe. Neurological development is much more complex than the article makes it out to be. A key part of growing up is finding who you identify as and identifying as a boy is not the reason these atrocities happened to Draco, a shoddy care system is.


----------



## £54etgfb6

Deguslave said:


> https://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/...ho-assaulted-woman-suspended-by-conservatives


Still eligible to be a councillor when he's committed assault?  What a great representative of the people!!


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> No parent is going to be accused of child abuse either for being UNAWARE of their child's pronoun change?????


Although rare, stuff like this does happen, where perfectly sound, healthy, loving parents have children taken away over errors, or outright lies by the authorities involved.

I'm on the sidelines of a situation right now that's not mine to tell but I can say that yes, this sort of thing could happen. 
This child would already have been on DSS's radar because of the need for emergency custody from the grandmother in the first place. These things get very complicated and often parents do as they're told by attorneys or social workers, going against their instinct as parents, and then that ends up working against them.

I think the takeaway here is that this kid needs massive MH counseling and healing, and is in absolutely zero position to make decisions about their gender identity, nor should that be anywhere near the list of top priorities right now.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## picaresque

@Lucy2020 I'd genuinely be interested to read other perspectives of Sage/Draco's story as the substack piece is all I've seen.
I experienced psychological and emotional abuse growing up so I'm not one to be dismissive at all, this is obviously a traumatised child.

There is quite a well known trans child whose family are now activists for trans issues and get glowing articles written about them, and the mother has openly confessed to physically and mentally abusing her child because she was worried and ashamed that her boy might grow up gay. I think I've brought it up before on this thread or another similar one, will see if I can find it. Wonder if anybody sees anything problematic with that too?


----------



## picaresque

Here we are

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/en...ld-bathroom-rights_n_58b5b5b6e4b060480e0c4393



> Kai was just a toddler when she started to present as a girl. By 2, Kai was gravitating toward the toys that she saw other girls playing with. Her two best friends were girls ― she didn't like to play with boys, whom she found "gross." Family members began to make comments.
> "I was very concerned, because at the time I was leading a small ministry at my church and teaching Bible study, and here I have this kid who people in my family were flat asking me if this kid was gay."
> The family tried to redirect Kai to more "masculine" pursuits ― hunting, fishing, sports ― and Shappley punished her when she did anything "feminine." By 3, Kai was pulling T-shirts down around her waist to make skirts and tying long-sleeve shirts around her head to make long hair.
> 
> By 3-and-a-half, Kai was verbalizing that she was a girl six times a day or more, which would lead to time-outs, spankings and yelling matches.


Gee I wonder why this poor kid thought that liking 'girl things' meant he couldn't be a boy any more


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## O2.0

picaresque said:


> Here we are
> 
> https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/en...ld-bathroom-rights_n_58b5b5b6e4b060480e0c4393
> 
> Gee I wonder why this poor kid thought that liking 'girl things' meant he couldn't be a boy any more


I didn't read the article but the snipped you posted irritated me hugely.

My children are boy/girl twins. Their play had no typical gendered stereotypes. My son was as likely to play with dolls and dress up with his sister, as my daughter was to turn sticks in to weapons and have pretend battles with her brother. We didn't have "boy" things and "girl" things, we just had toys. And a dress-up trunk, and a play kitchen, and a 'weapons' bin. And they both played with all of it.

I can give so many examples from my own children and others where people don't fit in to a stereotype and it means nothing other than the stereotype is just that and nothing more.

People need to stop obsessing over gender and what it is to be a man or a woman. 
You know, it used to be that if as a woman you didn't want to be feminine you were a tomboy and that was good enough. And if you were a man who didn't want to be masculine, you were European  (I jest, but it is a funny - to me, stereotype too). But basically we accepted that women and men presented in all sorts of different ways without having to pathologize it into something it's not.

Gender dysphoria is real but it is exceptionally rare. I don't believe for a minute we're having a huge rise in gender dysphoria. I think we have a generation of young people who are depressed, anxious, confused, and conflicted and gender dysphoria feels like a lifeline to explain their discomfort. And we're lying to these kids telling them that their issues are all just because they were assigned the wrong gender at birth - that alone is ridiculous. 
But the sad thing about it, is that when you turn a child's real problems into gender dysphoria, treat them as gender dysphoria, you're never getting to the real issues and that young person isn't getting the actual help they need.


----------



## picaresque

@O2.0 one thing I can credit my mother for is that she raised us similarly to how you did with your kids with regards to toys and gendered stuff. I only have sisters but she let us do whatever. I was a bit of a tomboy, my sister preferred more traditionally girly things and she let us get on with it.


----------



## £54etgfb6

,


----------



## Oof

bmr10 said:


> But we didn't accept it. We still don't. Women and men are still regularly pressured or forced into fitting into rigid, nonsensical gender stereotypes. It's nice to hear this didn't happen in your home but happened in mine and it happens in many other people's. Even after childhood, society pressures people to fit into what's "normal". When Harry Styles wears a skirt in Vogue it must be because he's gay, "real men" don't do that. If a woman doesn't have a partner or children at 35 then she must be gay, right? If a woman shaves her head she must want to be a boy, that's a boy's haircut! I don't think these attitudes are new at all, unfortunately. A lot of people don't fit into the stereotypes, you're right, but there have always been a _lot_ of people who want them to.


The tomboy thing reminds me of an excellent TedTalk - 



One part that sticks in my mind is his brief talk on the term 'tomboy'.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> But we didn't accept it. We still don't. Women and men are still regularly pressured or forced into fitting into rigid, nonsensical gender stereotypes. It's nice to hear this didn't happen in your home but happened in mine and it happens in many other people's. Even after childhood, society pressures people to fit into what's "normal". When Harry Styles wears a skirt in Vogue it must be because he's gay, "real men" don't do that. If a woman doesn't have a partner or children at 35 then she must be gay, right? If a woman shaves her head she must want to be a boy, that's a boy's haircut! I don't think these attitudes are new at all, unfortunately. A lot of people don't fit into the stereotypes, you're right, but there have always been a _lot_ of people who want them to.


You find what you're looking for. 
I grew up in the 80's and men were wearing makeup and women were being androgynous and it was all good. Of course there were also people who weren't cool with it as there always will be. If you're looking for examples of people not accepting differences you will find them, likewise if you're looking for examples of people being totally fine with differences you'll find those too.

But regardless of whether people accept girly boys and boyish girls, the solution is not to change gender. The solution is to work towards society becoming more accepting. I have no desire to be a girly girl who does her hair and make-up every day. I also have no desire to be a man. But I'm a 50 year old woman with a lot more clarity and life experience that provides context for my feelings than a 15 year old teenager has.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Oof

bmr10 said:


> I hate the term "tomboy" too. I was called it growing up and didn't really like being told it. It made me feel like I wasn't a real girl, a proper girl, and that my interests and tastes were what boys like.


100%.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Oof

bmr10 said:


> I also didn't like how it implied my interests were due to something... different about me and not due to me as a person. When my family dismissed my interests as "oh she's a tomboy" it was incredibly invalidating. I'm not a tomboy, I'm me?????? I have interests the same as everyone else does.


Just read about how it's seen as harmful to use the term tomboy on a psychological level.
I got called tomboy a lot. Accompanied with eye rolls and disgusted expressions. My kids now *sometimes* get called tomboys by others and they're quick to say "no, I'm *name*".


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> I'm not looking for anything, I look at all of the experiences throughout my life, some positive and some negative. I was simply saying that no, in the past "we" as a society didn't accept people going out with the gender norms or that people have only been so hyperfocused on gender recently. Your post I replied to made it sound like the general consensus used to be that this sort of thing was okay. so I was just saying that society as a group has pushed gender stereotypes for hundreds of years and these things have never been okay. On an individual level, yeah, there are variations in opinion. On a societal level? Not really.


Out of curiosity how many societies/cultures have you experienced?


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Sairy

My son is far from a typical "boyish" boy. He is quite gentle when I compare him with some of his peers. Granted, he is only 2 and a half, but still developed enough for me to see what sort of person he is. I don't know how much of that is just who he is and how much has to do with him being raised by two women. We've not consciously tried to make him a certain way though, just let himself express who he is.

He goes to ballet and loves to dance. He loves having cuddles with his mummies and will often ask for a "cuggle". One of his favourite cups is one that he chose from the shop, which has rainbows and unicorns on it. He has a doll in a pushchair that he loves to push around. But then, on the other hand, he also enjoys roughousing from time to time. He loves cars and diggers etc (stereotypically boy things) and he finds poo funny. He is just a boy with his own interests. We have not tried to steer him in any particular direction or towards any particular types of toys, just allowed him to enjoy what he likes.

My friend who bought him the rainbow and unicorn cup received criticism from a friend of hers (someone in her early 20s so in the young generation that you might expect to be more open minded) that she bought the cup because "it's a girls cup. Why did you buy that for him?"

I was also surprised that George is the only boy in his ballet class, out of around 15 children of a similar age. All the other children are girls in pink frilly tutus, then there's George in his tracksuit bottoms and digger t shirt.


----------



## Oof

Sairy said:


> My son is far from a typical "boyish" boy. He is quite gentle when I compare him with some of his peers. Granted, he is only 2 and a half, but still developed enough for me to see what sort of person he is. I don't know how much of that is just who he is and how much has to do with him being raised by two women. We've not consciously tried to make him a certain way though, just let himself express who be is.
> 
> He goes to ballet and loves to dance. He loves having cuddles with his mummies and will often ask for a "cuggle". One of his favourite cups is one that he chose from the shop, which has rainbows and unicorns on it. He has a doll in a pushchair that he loves to push around. But then, on the other hand, he also enjoys roughousing from time to time. He loves cars and diggers etc (stereotypically boy things) and he finds poo funny. He is just a boy with his own interests. We have not tried to steer him in any particular direction or towards any particular types of toys, just allowed him to enjoy what he likes.
> 
> My friend who bought him the rainbow and unicorn cup received criticism from a friend of hers (someone in her early 20s so in the young generation that you might expect to be more open minded) that she bought the cup because "it's a girls cup. Why did you buy that for him?"
> 
> I was also surprised that George is the only boy in his ballet class, out of around 15 children of a similar age. All the other children are girls in pink frilly tutus, then there's George in his tracksuit bottoms and digger t shirt.


I remember reading your dance class thread.

George sounds great tbh. He has a lot of different interests!

I was a kindergarten teacher years ago (hated it, never again!) And the amount of parents that would say bizarre things was unreal.

"Don't let X play with the toy kitchen, it'll make him gay"

"Does X have friends who are girls? I've onky seen her with boys and I'd like her to be around her own type".

"Urrrrgh why you playin with that? That's a girl car"

and of course asking their kids to be moved class because the male nursery nurse "might be a pedophile".
Etc
Etc.

The kids were THREE.


----------



## O2.0

Sairy said:


> He loves having cuddles with his mummies and will often ask for a "cuggle".


My nearly 20 year old very 'manly' boy (with long hair) is very huggy, not just with me but with his dad and his male friends. He and his guy friends often tell each other "I love you" as well. 
We are a very touchy, cuddly family anyway and both my children still enjoy physical contact. Daughter will lay on the sofa and put her head in my lap for "head pets." Penny sometimes inserts herself in there too


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> Any man that cooks is gay. Every single chef is gay.


Really?
Cooking is an area that to me seems to be much more inclusive. 
Around here most men are in charge of the meat portion of the dinner. I mean yeah, it's still stereotyped, the men grill while the woman makes the sides, but it doesn't have to be. I feel like I keep using my son as an example but one of the things he and his guy friends like doing is getting together in someone's kitchen and making a meal for everyone to share. Tiktok, FB and youtube are full of examples of men cooking and taking it very seriously, it's not portrayed as effeminate or gay at all.


----------



## Siskin

bmr10 said:


> Any man that cooks is gay. Every single chef is gay.
> 
> Aside from the impacts on boys, as this is a Women's Rights thread these attitudes that boys cannot do certain things or they are/will be gay harms women too as it further enforces the stereotypes that women are gentle, fragile creatures who should stay within the home, raise children, cook, and clean. Attitudes like this are often enforced at such a young age, it's so damaging. Even if _your_ parents are great, a child notices when they're the only one of their gender playing with a certain toy or watching a certain TV show.


I'm finding this very bizarre, I don't know where you are seeing or hearing about these attitudes as they seem back towards the beginning of the last Century not this one
I'm 71 and my formative years were the 1960/70/80's and it's where most of attitudes to life come from. Men wore make up and women's clothing, women wore trousers and had short hair (me included, and I still wear trousers don't have dresses and skirts in the wardrobe at all). My children (one of each if it's permitted to say that these days) grew up playing with each other's toys, daughter didn't like dolls much but loved my little pony, son most definitely wanted boy type toys, none of my family including my old fashioned parents thought it worrying if he played with daughters ponies or did some cooking with me. Nobody treated my daughter as gentle and fragile, they would have got laughed at by OH and me who know that is the funniest thing ever.
Both children have grown up to independent free thinking adults who accept all


----------



## Siskin

O2.0 said:


> Really?
> Cooking is an area that to me seems to be much more inclusive.
> Around here most men are in charge of the meat portion of the dinner. I mean yeah, it's still stereotyped, the men grill while the woman makes the sides, but it doesn't have to be. I feel like I keep using my son as an example but one of the things he and his guy friends like doing is getting together in someone's kitchen and making a meal for everyone to share. Tiktok, FB and youtube are full of examples of men cooking and taking it very seriously, it's not portrayed as effeminate or gay at all.


My son does most of the cooking at home as his partner doesn't enjoy it. OH and I share cooking duties, he's into trying someone new whereas I tend to opt out and do easy stuff. Daughter and her fiancé share or take turns.
Many chefs are male these days in eateries, that is some thing that has gone on for centuries, more often or not a female cook was considered inferior to the male chef professionally. The only places where women were professional cooks were in the big houses as part of the staff.


----------



## Sairy

I would say that cooking is considered one of the more "gender neutral" activities. I have come from a very old-fashioned family (my Dad used to believe that women should wear skirts, he did all the DIY, car maintenance and other typically "male" things whilst my mum took care of the washing, ironing and cleaning etc.), but even in my family both my mum and Dad did cooking.


----------



## Oof

I took that as sarcasm (the gay chef thing)


----------



## Sairy

Oof said:


> I took that as sarcasm (the gay chef thing)


Yes me too, just I think that cooking is not generally viewed as a particularly gender-specific activity. There are others, such as knitting, ironing and mechanical type stuff that I've seen more gender stereotyped. I don't think I've ever met a female mechanic, but I know that some women do well as mechanics because some women would prefer to deal with a female mechanic.


----------



## Sairy

But of course if you are a female mechanic then you are automatically a lesbian


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Jaf

I enjoy and am reasonably good at a variety of things but have never become really good at anything. "Jack of all trades, master of none" is me all over. I can weld, plaster, bake or sew. People skills not so good, but I manage. My parents never pushed girly things on me so I had cars, trains and dolls. Apparently even when tiny I liked taking things apart to see how they worked, of course circuit boards had identifiable parts back then. 

The Queen was a mechanic! I was a mechanic briefly, only lasted a couple of years, but apart from really big trucks I don't see why women can't be mechanics. I obviously wasn't as strong as the men, but mostly it's technique anyway and anything really heavy is lifted with tools. Sometimes my smallness was an advantage, squeezing into spaces. Mostly male customers were fine but sometimes the women were just weird, I had a minibus of women yelling/ cheering at me once.


----------



## lullabydream

Sairy said:


> My son is far from a typical "boyish" boy. He is quite gentle when I compare him with some of his peers. Granted, he is only 2 and a half, but still developed enough for me to see what sort of person he is. I don't know how much of that is just who he is and how much has to do with him being raised by two women. We've not consciously tried to make him a certain way though, just let himself express who he is.
> 
> He goes to ballet and loves to dance. He loves having cuddles with his mummies and will often ask for a "cuggle". One of his favourite cups is one that he chose from the shop, which has rainbows and unicorns on it. He has a doll in a pushchair that he loves to push around. But then, on the other hand, he also enjoys roughousing from time to time. He loves cars and diggers etc (stereotypically boy things) and he finds poo funny. He is just a boy with his own interests. We have not tried to steer him in any particular direction or towards any particular types of toys, just allowed him to enjoy what he likes.
> 
> My friend who bought him the rainbow and unicorn cup received criticism from a friend of hers (someone in her early 20s so in the young generation that you might expect to be more open minded) that she bought the cup because "it's a girls cup. Why did you buy that for him?"
> 
> I was also surprised that George is the only boy in his ballet class, out of around 15 children of a similar age. All the other children are girls in pink frilly tutus, then there's George in his tracksuit bottoms and digger t shirt.


I don't get people questioning the cup. My boys had more 'girls' toys as Argos would describe them than 'boys' it was just play.

Even my OH didn't question what the boys wanted coming from a very traditional household.

I would say both boys did fine.

My sister on the other hand point blank refused to let her son at about George's age have a Barbie. I have no idea why as that's all her wanted.

I often think when I hear about your son @O2.0 he reminds me of my eldest. He and his friends are really tactile with each other it's just so.


----------



## Deguslave

I do see a lot of gender role stereotyping where I live in the north of England. A typical one was during lockdown when I was having meds delivered from the vet. The male driver who dropped them off arrived late morning when I was just doing my breakfast. I sleep late, so eat late, but it works for me.

Anyway, when I told him I was just in the middle of cooking breakfast so couldn't stop to chat his only comment was really telling. Without even blinking he replied 'I feel sorry for your husband if you're only just getting around to cooking breakfast.' 

I'm not sure what I was more annoyed about; the assumption that I had to be married, the implication that if was my place to cook breakfast or the inference that my husband would be too stupid to feed himself without my help.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

See. It's odd isn't it. I was raised in a very traditional household in terms of following the usual jobs being done by who you'd expect in the 70s and 80s despite my father being a Marxist former miner! 

I then carried on in exactly the same way - and still do now. I do the cooking/cleaning/washing/ironing/prettify the garden...husband cleans the windows/mows the lawn/digs me a hole to enable the garden prettifying. I've no idea why beyond that's 1) how I was raised and 2) I like having everything "just so" - so it's easier to do it myself. 

It is still a fair division of labour to me, which is the second most important thing. If I preferred mowing the lawn to cooking a roast, I'd do that  The most important thing is that it doesn't cause animosity. Now then, I'm off to turn the roast potatoes


----------



## MollySmith

My grandmother ran the family business - it was in her name; she drove cars and lorries - had a 4 x 4 in her 80s. My grandad worked for her. My great grandmother was the family matriarch in that East End way, a bit of a Lou Beale with romany roots. I think that may have come from the war when they took on traditional men's work and knowing my family refused to get back in the box. I inherited that gene!

My grandparents taught me car mechanics when I passed my driving test too. I do not think it ever came up as a gender thing, it just was. We'd be thrown the keys to a car or a truck on the forecourt and asked to move it, long before I could legally drive.

My parents conversely are _very_ traditional. My dad does 'man' things but he can cook thank goodness and all his siblings are the same in some sort of rebellion maybe - all very stereotypical. My mum hates that I can reverse lorries and thinks it very wrong.

My husband and I just divide on who does what best. Play to ones strengths. We can both fix a car, but my OH would prefer to fix a motorbike and has no interest whatsoever in vehicles with more than two wheels so that's always interesting when we've changed a car, and I tend to drive it. We're both able to do the garden but he's better at clearance! I cook, purely because he has no interest - we'd live off tinned meat and potatoes if it was down to him :Vomit. I paint the house as I am _very_ particular.


----------



## Sairy

Well we are two women so there are absolutely no pre-conceived ideas of gender roles in terms of who does what, we just tend to play to our own strengths and what we both enjoy doing. She does the vast majority of the cooking and I do most of the cleaning. We both do gardening, although I tend to do the planting and nurturing of plants whereas she mows the lawn and de-weeds more. We both look after household bills but have our own areas that we look after. We parent equally. I do more of the dog care, but then I'm around more to walk her. It's all pretty equal really.

We do get asked by people sometimes "who is the man in the relationship?" My reply is always "neither, we are a same-sex couple so there is no man." Then we get a tut and "you know what I mean, who is the more dominant, manly one?" And then I explain that it isn't like that, we are an equal partnership and neither of us is "manly". I guess we both have traits that might be more typically associated with a stereotypical male, but then doesn't everyone? I find it a very odd thing to be asked, especially in this day and age.


----------



## Siskin

The lady who is the manager of the site where have our static used to be a lorry driver. To look at her you would think it the last job she would have done as she is small and slim and doesn’t look strong enough to handle a huge truck, but she did and was able to to stand up to the more macho truck drivers. Her in depth knowledge and use of bad language is quite astonishing apparently.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Heh I am also "bossy and demanding" @bmr10 - probably why I'm a midwife


----------



## O2.0

https://www.iflscience.com/health-a...LC5WWLXz53JyzgbwFp0VwjLRn28fAx3fFsnlLah8eT1qQ

Uterine transplants for trans women. 
I can't help but think this is a slap in the face for women who want desperately to conceive and carry a baby to term and who for medical reasons that haven't been taken seriously, can't.

And a slap in the face to women who have carried babies to term. Pregnancy is more than just a functioning uterus. Seriously, do people not understand that? It involves your entire body.

Kind of like how the experience of being a woman is about more than how you dress and present to the world. 
I love JK Rowling's quote. "Woman is not an idea in a man's head."


----------



## Sairy

O2.0 said:


> https://www.iflscience.com/health-a...LC5WWLXz53JyzgbwFp0VwjLRn28fAx3fFsnlLah8eT1qQ
> 
> Uterine transplants for trans women.
> I can't help but think this is a slap in the face for women who want desperately to conceive and carry a baby to term and who for medical reasons that haven't been taken seriously, can't.
> 
> And a slap in the face to women who have carried babies to term. Pregnancy is more than just a functioning uterus. Seriously, do people not understand that? It involves your entire body.
> 
> Kind of like how the experience of being a woman is about more than how you dress and present to the world.
> I love JK Rowling's quote. "Woman is not an idea in a man's head."


Hmm this all sounds very complicated and risky. I would hope that if it is a success then biological women with issues with their uterus would have access to the treatment. However, a transplant in general is such a risky thing isn't it? Am I right in thinking that the recipient would need to take anti-rejection drugs for the rest of their life?


----------



## Cleo38

And another one .... Paedophile jailed after trying to groom children on social media | UK news | The Guardian

How can it be reported that this predatory man is called Rachel Fenton & was 'living as a man when arrested' .... He is a bloody man!!!

Surely this sort of pandering to predatory men is insulting to the victims, to women & to the trans community. Such a surprise (not!)that many vile women try to play this in the hope they will get special treatment or moved to a women's prison.


----------



## MollySmith

There are at least 50 ways not be a mother, about 80 I think I've counted. And being born in the wrong body is one.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Sairy

Cleo38 said:


> And another one .... Paedophile jailed after trying to groom children on social media | UK news | The Guardian
> 
> How can it be reported that this predatory man is called Rachel Fenton & was 'living as a man when arrested' .... He is a bloody man!!!
> 
> Surely this sort of pandering to predatory men is insulting to the victims, to women & to the trans community. Such a surprise (not!)that many vile women try to play this in the hope they will get special treatment or moved to a women's prison.


Let's hope he stays where he is and doesn't get moved to a womens prison.


----------



## picaresque

O2.0 said:


> https://www.iflscience.com/health-a...LC5WWLXz53JyzgbwFp0VwjLRn28fAx3fFsnlLah8eT1qQ
> 
> Uterine transplants for trans women.
> I can't help but think this is a slap in the face for women who want desperately to conceive and carry a baby to term and who for medical reasons that haven't been taken seriously, can't.
> 
> And a slap in the face to women who have carried babies to term. Pregnancy is more than just a functioning uterus. Seriously, do people not understand that? It involves your entire body.
> 
> Kind of like how the experience of being a woman is about more than how you dress and present to the world.
> I love JK Rowling's quote. "Woman is not an idea in a man's head."


Where's a uterus even supposed to fit in a male body? Pretty sure you can't just shove one in there. But what do I know, I'm not a biologist enguin This now being the minimum qualification required to understand something humanity has been able to recognise for tens of thousands of years. Would have been quite tricky to be as successful a species otherwise.


----------



## picaresque

Cleo38 said:


> And another one .... Paedophile jailed after trying to groom children on social media | UK news | The Guardian
> 
> How can it be reported that this predatory man is called Rachel Fenton & was 'living as a man when arrested' .... He is a bloody man!!!


Properly Orwellian.



MollySmith said:


> There are at least 50 ways not be a mother, about 80 I think I've counted. And being born in the wrong body is one.


Genuine question, do you really believe it's possible to be 'born in the wrong body'?


----------



## O2.0

Sairy said:


> Hmm this all sounds very complicated and risky. I would hope that if it is a success then biological women with issues with their uterus would have access to the treatment. However, a transplant in general is such a risky thing isn't it? Am I right in thinking that the recipient would need to take anti-rejection drugs for the rest of their life?


I read the whole article, and yes, that is my understanding as well. 
It would also require IVF and extensive hormone treatment. And cesarean if the pregnancy is successful because, well, hips and vagina... 
And that still doesn't address the vascular issues required to support pregnancy. The uterus needs a blood supply which men simply don't have the vascular structures to support. Never mind the massive increase in blood volume throughout your body in pregnancy. Which male hearts are not designed for.... I find the whole thing arrogant in the extreme.

Uterine transplants in *women* who already have the structures internally to support a pregnant uterus makes sense to me. But it's the same old same old in medicine - this idea that women are just a hormonal version of men. We're not. And we have fought so hard for equal representation in medicine, for our bodies to be included in health studies.



MollySmith said:


> There are at least 50 ways not be a mother, about 80 I think I've counted. And being born in the wrong body is one.


That's presuming that being a mother requires physically carrying a baby, which it doesn't.


----------



## Sairy

O2.0 said:


> I read the whole article, and yes, that is my understanding as well.
> It would also require IVF and extensive hormone treatment. And cesarean if the pregnancy is successful because, well, hips and vagina...
> And that still doesn't address the vascular issues required to support pregnancy. The uterus needs a blood supply which men simply don't have the vascular structures to support. Never mind the massive increase in blood volume throughout your body in pregnancy. Which male hearts are not designed for.... I find the whole thing arrogant in the extreme.
> 
> Uterine transplants in *women* who already have the structures internally to support a pregnant uterus makes sense to me. But it's the same old same old in medicine - this idea that women are just a hormonal version of men. We're not. And we have fought so hard for equal representation in medicine, for our bodies to be included in health studies.
> 
> That's presuming that being a mother requires physically carrying a baby, which it doesn't.


I'm not sure how I feel about it as I just don't know enough about biology to be able to form a strong opinion either way. In essence I don't have an issue with a trans woman being able to carry a baby, it just seems incredibly risky. Pregnancy at any time is risky, but it seems like there would be so much more to consider in this situation. I had never even heard of a uterus transplant so would be interested to hear about the success rate in biological females. A close friend of mine had to have a hysterectomy due to issues with her uterus and was never able to have children, which is so sad as she would have made a wonderful mother (sadly adoption was not an option available to her due to her mental health history). My wife is also not able to carry a baby due to the state of her uterus (she also needs a hysterectomy) which is why I have carried both children. However, she is very much a mother to George so I agree you do not need to have carried a baby to be a mother.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## StormyThai

Ok no judgement here BUT I feel this falls heavily into the:- Just because you can, it doesn't mean that you should!
And that honestly goes for both biological sexes - gender aside.

I have a "broken" uterus so can't carry a child full term - nature is harsh but there is probably a valid reason why my body won't allow a viable pregnancy to reach term so I have to live with that.


----------



## picaresque

bmr10 said:


> If it were to be possible, lack of space would be the last of my worries.


Well yeah it's certainly not the sole issue physically, as @O2.0 has covered


----------



## O2.0

StormyThai said:


> Ok no judgement here BUT I feel this falls heavily into the:- Just because you can, it doesn't mean that you should!
> And that honestly goes for both biological sexes - gender aside.
> 
> I have a "broken" uterus so can't carry a child full term - nature is harsh but there is probably a valid reason why my body won't allow a viable pregnancy to reach term so I have to live with that.


Trying to say this in a way that won't be taken the wrong way or cause offense...
Carrying a baby in your own uterus doesn't make you a mother. It can, sure, but it's _so_ not a requirement. And plenty of people who can carry a child in their uterus are piss poor representations of mothers.

And goes without saying (I hope) but becoming a mother is not a requirement for being a fulfilled woman either.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> I'm talking purely ethics here


The article I linked discusses the ethics of uterine transplants in male bodies.

"Currently, the Montreal Criteria for the Ethical Feasibility of Uterine Transplantation - a set of guidelines for clinicians and medical professionals when considering carrying out a uterine transplant - do not allow for transplantation of a womb into trans women, primarily due to safety concerns.

"Medical issues concerning uterine transplant with a non-cisgender female recipient include the creation of adequate uterine vascularization de novo, the necessity for appropriate hormone replacement to sustain implantation and pregnancy, and the placement of the uterus in a non-gynecoid pelvis," Dr Amel Alghrani, Professor of Law at the School of Law and Social Justice at the University of Liverpool and former worker at the General Medical Council in the UK, wrote in a paper on the topic in 2018.

"These unique considerations mean that uterine transplant in cisgender men and transgender women fails to meet the first stipulation of Moore's Criteria for Surgical Innovation, which requires that novel surgical procedures have an adequate research background. It is on this basis that the Montreal Criteria exclude non-cisgender female recipients."

And the reasoning for it "Every transgender woman wants to be as female as possible," said Dr Kaushik 
Again with this idea in a man's head of what it is to be a woman. Women who haven't carried babies inside them are just as female as women who have. 
Pregnancy does not define womanhood!!


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Jesthar

bmr10 said:


> I'm not really sure I see the logic in your argument? Where do you draw the line with "just because you can, doesn't mean you should" in terms of medical procedures? I'm talking purely ethics here as I'm presuming that's the angle you're coming from?
> 
> There are lots of situations where nature is harsh but we provide medical interventions to circumvent this. Babies with heart septal defects, children with genetic disorders, adults with chronic health conditions, transplant recipients, coma patients, etc are all examples of nature being harsh but we still intervene. I am not sure why trans people are any different?


Advance warning: autistic, unemotional hyper-logic ahead.

Well, for me the obvious difference is that the situations you mention are all about saving lives or improving quality of life with existing physical medical conditions.

Unless you are going to argue that 'my current gender headspace doesn't match my biology' is a physical medical condition, there is your difference. Given that gender is a purely social construct, then logically that is not the case, and therefore the ethics of carrying out such invasive elective procedures, especially those which carry a great risk to the recipent for no specific potential *physical *benefit, is extremely dodgy - if not downright unethical full stop. There is a great difference between having breast augmentation, and stuffing around with major internal plumbing - especially if you are trying to plumb in bits a particular body was never designed to have fitted in the first place.

Mental health is a lot more ambigous, of course. But saying 'I think I'll feel better about myself' is not going to carry much weight when requesting a very risky, physically unncecessary procedure that might have severe negative long term health implications even if all goes relatively well. Nor should it.

Besides, I've never had kids. Does that make me less of a woman? Nope! To be absolutely honest, I have no idea what the phrase 'I feel like a woman' means in reality - and I was born one. If I, a a biological woman, can't define myself as a feeling, the conclusion is that being a woman is not a feeling, and that the social expectations (gender stereotypes) that come with my biology don't matter. I do love psychology at an amateur level, and one thing I continually note is that you very often see assertions that people *feel* like they belong to the opposite biology, but rarely follow that up with "and these are the reasons." I do wonder how many of them would be rooted in social expectations (global and local) that do not align with their personal interests. For the record, I have plenty of those (and both a tomboy and a girly streak!) - but i define my interests, they do NOT define me 

Just to soften this a little, as I know the above is very direct, I freely accept that people are at where they are at headspace wise, and that is where you must start when it comes to understanding them. I just think that if we have so many people working themselves into a headspace where they believe picking a fight with something as immutable on a cellular level as the biology they were born with is the only way to be happy, then something is _really _wrong with society somewhere...


----------



## Beth78

This packaging reminded me of this thread. A bit sensitive don't you think ? 
I'm sure it would piss off some people.


----------



## StormyThai

bmr10 said:


> I am not sure why trans people are any different?


@Jesthar sums up my feelings much better than I can but I just wanted to be clear that I didn't suggest that Trans people are any different.
If someone said to me that I could have a uterine transplant so that I could carry a child full term I would not have the operation...it is a very risky medical procedure https://www.uabmedicine.org/patient-care/treatments/uterus-transplant


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> I agree with that wholeheartedly. I presume he's working off the basis of "women give birth, men don't" but as you say lots of women don't go through pregnancy for a wide variety of reasons and this does not make them lesser. However, I was interested in the rationale behind "just because we can, doesn't mean we should" and where StormyThai would draw the line, as medicine on the whole is quite literally the definition of going against the harshness of nature.


Jesthar says it well.

For me it has to do with saving a life and/or improving quality of life.
It's perfectly possible to live without a uterus as many women do.
Having a uterus won't improve quality of life as many women can testify.

As for carrying a child, set aside the whole issue of a male body not being designed to carry a child - it's dangerous enough for healthy women who are technically designed for pregnancy. Even setting that aside, what is the point? We already have a perfectly viable way to carry babies, you can even use your own DNA through surrogacy. Pregnancy doesn't make you a mother, doesn't make you 'more' of a woman... 
Honestly it just feels like more mansplaining womanhood.


----------



## Sairy

I wonder if the anti-rejection medication that the recipient would have to take would have any effect on the baby. It does all seem incredibly risky, and pregnancy itself in a "normal" pregnancy is full of risks.


----------



## Sairy

Also, the psychological trauma of going through the very invasive process of an organ transplant only for it not to work, or (worse still) for the baby to not survive 

It's absolutely heartbreaking for couples going through IVF to never have any success with it. IVF itself is very invasive, but this is just a whole other level.


----------



## Oof

Jesthar said:


> Advance warning: autistic, unemotional hyper-logic ahead.
> 
> Well, for me the obvious difference is that the situations you mention are all about saving lives or improving quality of life with existing physical medical conditions.
> 
> Unless you are going to argue that 'my current gender headspace doesn't match my biology' is a physical medical condition, there is your difference. Given that gender is a purely social construct, then logically that is not the case, and therefore the ethics of carrying out such invasive elective procedures, especially those which carry a great risk to the recipent for no specific potential *physical *benefit, is extremely dodgy - if not downright unethical full stop. There is a great difference between having breast augmentation, and stuffing around with major internal plumbing - especially if you are trying to plumb in bits a particular body was never designed to have fitted in the first place.
> 
> Mental health is a lot more ambigous, of course. But saying 'I think I'll feel better about myself' is not going to carry much weight when requesting a very risky, physically unncecessary procedure that might have severe negative long term health implications even if all goes relatively well. Nor should it.
> 
> Besides, I've never had kids. Does that make me less of a woman? Nope! To be absolutely honest, I have no idea what the phrase 'I feel like a woman' means in reality - and I was born one. If I, a a biological woman, can't define myself as a feeling, the conclusion is that being a woman is not a feeling, and that the social expectations (gender stereotypes) that come with my biology don't matter. I do love psychology at an amateur level, and one thing I continually note is that you very often see assertions that people *feel* like they belong to the opposite biology, but rarely follow that up with "and these are the reasons." I do wonder how many of them would be rooted in social expectations (global and local) that do not align with their personal interests. For the record, I have plenty of those (and both a tomboy and a girly streak!) - but i define my interests, they do NOT define me
> 
> Just to soften this a little, as I know the above is very direct, I freely accept that people are at where they are at headspace wise, and that is where you must start when it comes to understanding them. I just think that if we have so many people working themselves into a headspace where they believe picking a fight with something as immutable on a cellular level as the biology they were born with is the only way to be happy, then something is _really _wrong with society somewhere...


I can't quote on mobile -

"I have no idea what the phrase 'I feel like a woman' means in reality"

Same! What is that even supposed to _mean_?

It's like the 'empowered female' catchphrases. Don't understand it.


----------



## MollySmith

picaresque said:


> Properly Orwellian.
> 
> Genuine question, do you really believe it's possible to be 'born in the wrong body'?


I know enough trans and binary people to listen to their words. Whether I believe is irrelevant as I do not have that experience.


----------



## MollySmith

As you so rightly said @Sairy IVF is invasive and there's an element of 'sell' about this. As I'm sure you already know, IVF clinics sell so many things that have been cited as unethical. I've done a few of them as its easy too be sold to at the lowest ebb and that I feel the need to wave that flag for those who cannot. And I agree with you completely @StormyThai that we accept what we are and sometime in that space there comes a bit of peace. When IVF fails as you said Sairy it's .... I have utterly no words for that at all. You know, you _know _Thankfully many do not but those for whom it does are ignored or spoken over.

I fear for ethics and when science promises all these things and the lack of mental health support and the what happens when it fails and who cleans up. As someone for whom it failed and going through 'stuff' since with my health that's _completely_ ignored by the clinics after they took my money, there's another ethical debate here that's less about rights and more about protection from money spinners and people who take advantage or other (of any gender). That's wrong.

That's as much as I want to say on this right now.


----------



## Dimwit

bmr10 said:


> I'm not really sure I see the logic in your argument? Where do you draw the line with "just because you can, doesn't mean you should" in terms of medical procedures? I'm talking purely ethics here as I'm presuming that's the angle you're coming from?
> 
> There are lots of situations where nature is harsh but we provide medical interventions to circumvent this. Babies with heart septal defects, children with genetic disorders, adults with chronic health conditions, transplant recipients, coma patients, etc are all examples of nature being harsh but we still intervene. I am not sure why trans people are any different?


I agree with @StormyThai here with the 'just because you can doesn't mean you should' view. Maybe I am discriminating against trans women (although I would also have concerns about this with biological women.
For me the line comes because nobody knows the impact that this will have both on the developing foetus, and the psychological impact on the child. Ethically this is what makes me uncomfortable - the disregard for another life to satisfy the desire of a trans woman to 'experience motherhood'. This is very different to the other interventions you mentioned which are all designed to improve the life of the individual.

We know that the foetal environment has a huge influence on development and there is so much that is unknown in the case of trans women - in terms of nutrition, influence of a very different hormone profile and so on. Essentially you would be experimenting with an unborn child which makes me very uncomfortable.


----------



## MollySmith

bmr10 said:


> I'm not really sure I see the logic in your argument? Where do you draw the line with "just because you can, doesn't mean you should" in terms of medical procedures? I'm talking purely ethics here as I'm presuming that's the angle you're coming from?
> 
> There are lots of situations where nature is harsh but we provide medical interventions to circumvent this. Babies with heart septal defects, children with genetic disorders, adults with chronic health conditions, transplant recipients, coma patients, etc are all examples of nature being harsh but we still intervene. I am not sure why trans people are any different?


 It's often a total lack of mental and physical aftercare that would make me very hesitant, (not gender, I do not subscribe to Rowlings rhetoric)

There is just one support group for men who can't be fathers, I can't imagine society has any provision for anyone remotely non conformist. And that puts lives at risk given 50% of women for whom IVF fail suffer PTSD. There is simply a huge gap in acceptance because it's not sexy or something anyone can sell. Medical treatment and babies makes money.

(IMO it's wrong to use childless to obfuscate trans rights which is the vibe I'm feeling in the thread again maybe just me - us childless not by choice have a well honed radar for people speaking on behalf of us and others! Maybe my radar is off… I will have no part in that.)


----------



## O2.0

Dimwit said:


> (although I would also have concerns about this with biological women.


I was just going to say, I have similar reservations for this procedure for biological women too.

Years ago (decades, the children in question are now in their 20's) a dear friend was going through fertility issues, the doctors appointments, treatments, IVF, shots... It was incredibly hard on her and her husband. 
Then she had an epiphany. Actually her husband did. He saw her going through medical hell and said "no, enough is enough, stop." She though he was going to say that's it, we're not going to have children but instead he asked her what their ultimate goal was. Do we want to have a baby, or do we want to be parents?

That hit me hard when she recounted that moment. Because it's such an important distinction. I think we as a society tend to get hung up on the having a baby part and forget about the being a parent part. On so many levels.

There is nothing about being a transperson that would preclude you being a parent. There's no need to complicate things further.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## O2.0

So it turns out uterine transplants are already being done in women, and in the US, two babies have been born this way. 
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/wome...s-uterus-transplanted-deceased-donor-n1112811

Apparently the transplanted uterus is removed after the woman has one or two babies - if the pregnancy is successful.

Reading about the surgery to transplant a uterus in a woman, I really don't see how it could be possible in a man.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## StormyThai

I'm sorry but a transplant operation can not be put in the same argument as CBT, puberty blockers or hormone therapy.

And as I have already said that my opinion did not have a gender or biological distinction...I do not agree with this surgery full stop due to the risk of the op, and all of the unknowns.

And on that note I am out.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## MollySmith

bmr10 said:


> Oh no I understand what you mean. If people are undergoing this procedure with the aspiration to become pregnant, and then they don't, that's obviously going to cause psychological distress which under the NHS is not usually well treated (I cannot speak about physical aftercare as I have only experienced the NHS' shocking mental health system).
> 
> I hope you do not feel that I have spoken on behalf of any community. If you do, I apologise. If I have used cis women's experiences as an example it's only ever because I feel that both trans women and cis women deserve the same attention and care, both of which should be more than the NHS currently offers in my opinion.


I only know the stuff I've been through and if I'm honest - though it goes against my feelings about inclusivity - having only 6 years ago thought about taking my life and had to spent more money fixing my brain - there's a whole heap of stuff to do around welfare and alternative routes to parenthood, pronatalism, equality and the impact of in vitro on women's bodies. And the huge issue of the perception of childfree and childless in society. And trans...and so it goes on. It's the mental health and vulnerability - having spent five figures and more - I guess that is why I feel some empathy to genders and not being the person I wanted to be. I fear that big knowledge gap that makes anyone who lives a life unexpected query their worth and the scant mental health support in place to tackle that that can be driven by societal attitude (my mental health was often driven by that).

There are enough charlatans in the world taking money for stuff like womb scratching and unregulated practice overseas that invariably has to picked up by the NHS. If we live in a world where a kids author who is cis white hetro is cited when her agenda sometimes appears to pitch rights against another, then I'm worried, it's like putting the author of 50 Shades in charge of the Relate (or an Etonian in charge of a country in a cost of living crisis...). There is so much to do in terms of increasing knowledge, kindness and learning on all sides including for me. I'm learning all the time, I need to do more and taking some training on this now. I just don't feel society is ready for this and neither is the system of medical welfare. Gender aside.

You have not offended me! It takes a fair bit to do that!

I am getting better at spending my time wisely/productively when I encounter anyone trying to speak for (but not listening to) childless not by choice with no actual experience of it yet claiming to know more than those who are - it is not at all unusual as history tells me!

And I'm also out, I'm repeating myself!


----------



## Magyarmum

O2.0 said:


> So it turns out uterine transplants are already being done in women, and in the US, two babies have been born this way.
> https://www.nbcnews.com/health/wome...s-uterus-transplanted-deceased-donor-n1112811
> 
> Apparently the transplanted uterus is removed after the woman has one or two babies - if the pregnancy is successful.
> 
> Reading about the surgery to transplant a uterus in a woman, I really don't see how it could be possible in a man.


.

Slightly off topic. Have you read, or seen the film "The Danish Girl" about Lilli Elbe who was one of the first recipients of sex reassignment surgery?

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

https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyl...die-redmayne-s-transgender-role-a2942546.html


----------



## Boxer123

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-61411978.amp

Poor girl assumed now to have been abducted and the police have stated could be anywhere.


----------



## Dimwit

bmr10 said:


> If you could elaborate on what you mean by "psychological impact" and where this would arise from I'd be grateful as I don't want to jump to conclusions.


I am referring to the potential for this to become a huge media circus and the ongoing scrutiny that this child would be subjected to throughout their life. Add in transphobia and the huge potential for damaging cruelty from social media and this has clear psychological implications for the child.



> You genuinely can't hold trans women to such a high standard in terms of nutrition when t*he majority of the adult British public eat a terrible diet and are consequently overweight or obese* (which then increases the percentage of babies born with unnaturally high birth weight, subsequently increasing the risks associated with labour and birth). The nutrition between trans women and cis women has no objective difference providing both eat healthy, balanced diets and maintain a healthy weight.


I am well aware of that, thank you - my PhD was on type 2 diabetes and obesity and I then spent 10 years as a research scientist working on diabetes, obesity and other metabolic disease.
My comments about foetal nutrition relate more to whether or not a transgender woman will undergo the same metabolic and endocrine changes that a biological female does during gestation to ensure optimal foetal nutrition. Implanting a uterus may well be feasible in trans women, but I don't know if the 'normal' adaptive mechanisms in response to pregnancy will kick in, and if not, what impact that will have on the developing foetus.

Which leads onto...


> In terms of hormone profile, it varies between individuals regardless of gender so there will always be differences. However, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6492192/ provides a nice overview of the hormonal factors involved (and the procedure itself). Of course, these procedures are not available in clinic and so the hormonal effects will be further researched.


Yes, hormone profiles vary regardless of gender, but biological males do not have the same pituitary-gonadal axis that biological females do. Biological women may have differences in their hormone profile and of course things go wrong, but that doesn't really compare to a transgender woman who developed as a male, and I don't know to what extent this will change as they transition. As I am sure you know, the endocrine system and other homeostatic mechanisms that kick in during pregnancy are very nuanced and finely tuned. Yes, you can pump in exogenous hormones, but these are a blunt tool and I don't know what the impact will be of losing that fine regulation.


----------



## O2.0

These are high risk pregnancy doctors giving their reasons why they don't recommend this procedure in women:
https://utswmed.org/medblog/uterine-transplant-motherhood/
I like that they address the emotional risks as well as the physical ones.
"While the idea of carrying one's own baby has been romanticized by society as the only "real" route to motherhood, that logic is harmful to women. Every week in our clinic we see patients who became mothers in a variety of ways,"



Magyarmum said:


> .
> 
> Slightly off topic. Have you read, or seen the film "The Danish Girl" about Lilli Elbe who was one of the first recipients of sex reassignment surgery?
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lili_Elbe
> 
> https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyl...die-redmayne-s-transgender-role-a2942546.html


I had heard of the real person and that she died because of one of the surgeries, but I haven't read the book or watched the movie, no.


----------



## Sairy

I do think there seems to be a huge emphasis on women carrying a baby in order to be mothers. My wife desperately wanted to carry her own baby - it's something she always wanted to do. She wasn't so much bothered about being the biological mother, just having the experience of carrying a baby. However, for medical reasons it wasn't to be. After 2 years of trying via artificial insemination she went through the grueling process of IVF but miscarried at around 6 weeks. It was devastating for her. She still had 3 frozen embryos stored, but couldn't bring herself to go through the trauma again so didn't try again after that.

Then I had George, who is biologically mine and I carried. Nik is very much his mum as well and he has absolutely filled the hole of motherhood for her. My baby that I am currently pregnant with (and due to birth any time now) is the last of Nik's frozen embryos (the first two that were implanted into me didn't take). Despite the fact that this is Nik's biological child, she loves George so much that she has worried on several occasions that she won't love this child as much. Parenthood runs so much deeper than biological connections. There is so much more to being a mum than carrying a baby.

As I've already mentioned, pregnancy itself is massively risky. I think unless you've experienced a risky pregnancy, or trauma during pregnancy, or maybe seen someone go through it, it is hard to appreciate just how much can go wrong and level of trauma it can cause. My first baby (before George) I lost at 17 weeks due to going into preterm labor. It was a life-changing experience and incredibly traumatic. I am fortunate in that I had lots of support and came through it able to reflect and still enjoy my life, but it had massive psychological effects on me that I didn't even realise until after I had George. During my first pregnancy I was considered low risk - there was no reason to be concerned that I wouldn't sail through it, but life throws things up like that.

When pregnant with George I was closely monitored, and have been even more closely monitored this time due to the added complexity of this being an IVF pregnancy. It is incredibly stressful, especially when you have already experienced loss in pregnancy and know just how awful it is.

I honestly would not recommend making becoming a parent more complicated. The only reason we had one of Nik's embryos implanted in me rather than me having another biological child was because it felt wrong to just throw away the embryos that already existed. We wanted them to have a chance.

I deeply sympathise with anyone who wants to carry a child and is unable to, but I really don't think this incredibly risky procedure is the answer. Yes there may be some successes and people who have a good experience, but for all the successes there will be many people who don't get their happy ending and suffer the immense trauma of losing a child.


----------



## Cleo38

Boxer123 said:


> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-61411978.amp
> 
> Poor girl assumed now to have been abducted and the police have stated could be anywhere.


I heard about this on the radio yesterday, I really hope there is some good news soon


----------



## Magyarmum

O2.0 said:


> These are high risk pregnancy doctors giving their reasons why they don't recommend this procedure in women:
> https://utswmed.org/medblog/uterine-transplant-motherhood/
> I like that they address the emotional risks as well as the physical ones.
> "While the idea of carrying one's own baby has been romanticized by society as the only "real" route to motherhood, that logic is harmful to women. Every week in our clinic we see patients who became mothers in a variety of ways,"
> 
> I had heard of the real person and that she died because of one of the surgeries, but I haven't read the book or watched the movie, no.


I mentioned it because she was one of the first women to receive a uterine transplant in 1931. Her immune system rejected the transplant and she died 3 months later.


----------



## Calvine

bmr10 said:


> I would not want my entire identity to be overtaken by the fact that I have a child.


And yet you read it so often: ''Thirty-four-year-year old mother of two'' . . . the fact that she may be a brain surgeon is unimportant.


----------



## Jesthar

Calvine said:


> And yet you read it so often: ''Thirty-four-year-year old mother of two'' . . . the fact that she may be a brain surgeon is unimportant.


Or the way journalists feel the need to detail what outfit/shoes/makeup/hairstyle/accessories a lady is wearing (complete with compliments or criticism) before moving on to anything important that said lady was actually doing and is supposedly the real reason for the article.


----------



## Calvine

Jesthar said:


> Or the way journalists feel the need to detail what outfit/shoes/makeup/hairstyle/accessories a lady is wearing (complete with compliments or criticism) before moving on to anything important that said lady was actually doing and is supposedly the real reason for the article.


 If someone is in court for murder, we are told what they are wearing; and even if someone is found murdered, it's obviously very useful to be told the value of their house.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

bmr10 said:


> You genuinely can't hold trans women to such a high standard in terms of nutrition when the majority of the adult British public eat a terrible diet and are consequently overweight or obese (which then increases the percentage of babies born with unnaturally high birth weight, subsequently increasing the risks associated with labour and birth).


@bmr10 interestingly, it is actually women in the overweight, obese and very obese categories who have an increased with of giving birth to infants in the "very low birth weight" and "extremely low birthweight" categories. The heavier the woman, the greater the risk of giving birth to an extremely low birthweight baby. There's not been as large a meta analysis done again that I can see since the one of over one million women in 2010. Of course, some of the studies show a link to heavier women giving birth to preterm infants, which of course then is linked to a lower BW. We now offer additional USSs to women with a booking BMI of 35 or more - and this is as much about identifying the fetus that is not growing well as the fetus that is >95th centile. The fetus that is under the 10th centile (and more worryingly under the 3rd centile) is common in women with an increased BMI.

I am also wondering about the transition to cope with a pregnancy physically for a trans woman who had a transplanted uterus and then a pregnancy. Actually, I'm wondering about lots of things and need to take my time over the issues. This is a whole new world for me on a professional level.


----------



## O2.0

Sairy said:


> I think unless you've experienced a risky pregnancy, or trauma during pregnancy, or maybe seen someone go through it, it is hard to appreciate just how much can go wrong and level of trauma it can cause.


Definitely... 
I've shared on here the complications we went through, and I still have leftover issues from that. And as a parent I've had to work extremely hard to not put my trauma issues on my kids (though I'm sure I haven't succeeded completely).


----------



## MollySmith

Sairy said:


> I do think there seems to be a huge emphasis on women carrying a baby in order to be mothers. My wife desperately wanted to carry her own baby - it's something she always wanted to do. She wasn't so much bothered about being the biological mother, just having the experience of carrying a baby. However, for medical reasons it wasn't to be. After 2 years of trying via artificial insemination she went through the grueling process of IVF but miscarried at around 6 weeks. It was devastating for her. She still had 3 frozen embryos stored, but couldn't bring herself to go through the trauma again so didn't try again after that.
> 
> Then I had George, who is biologically mine and I carried. Nik is very much his mum as well and he has absolutely filled the hole of motherhood for her. My baby that I am currently pregnant with (and due to birth any time now) is the last of Nik's frozen embryos (the first two that were implanted into me didn't take). Despite the fact that this is Nik's biological child, she loves George so much that she has worried on several occasions that she won't love this child as much. Parenthood runs so much deeper than biological connections. There is so much more to being a mum than carrying a baby.
> 
> As I've already mentioned, pregnancy itself is massively risky. I think unless you've experienced a risky pregnancy, or trauma during pregnancy, or maybe seen someone go through it, it is hard to appreciate just how much can go wrong and level of trauma it can cause. My first baby (before George) I lost at 17 weeks due to going into preterm labor. It was a life-changing experience and incredibly traumatic. I am fortunate in that I had lots of support and came through it able to reflect and still enjoy my life, but it had massive psychological effects on me that I didn't even realise until after I had George. During my first pregnancy I was considered low risk - there was no reason to be concerned that I wouldn't sail through it, but life throws things up like that.
> 
> When pregnant with George I was closely monitored, and have been even more closely monitored this time due to the added complexity of this being an IVF pregnancy. It is incredibly stressful, especially when you have already experienced loss in pregnancy and know just how awful it is.
> 
> I honestly would not recommend making becoming a parent more complicated. The only reason we had one of Nik's embryos implanted in me rather than me having another biological child was because it felt wrong to just throw away the embryos that already existed. We wanted them to have a chance.
> 
> I deeply sympathise with anyone who wants to carry a child and is unable to, but I really don't think this incredibly risky procedure is the answer. Yes there may be some successes and people who have a good experience, but for all the successes there will be many people who don't get their happy ending and suffer the immense trauma of losing a child.


((hugs to you and Nik))


----------



## Siskin

Calvine said:


> If someone is in court for murder, we are told what they are wearing; and even if someone is found murdered, it's obviously very useful to be told the value of their house.


Someone in my village was in the newspapers for a while, quite sometime ago now. He was referred to as having a mansion in the Cotswolds. He actually had a cottage up the road from me


----------



## Jesthar

Sairy said:


> As I've already mentioned, pregnancy itself is massively risky. I think unless you've experienced a risky pregnancy, or trauma during pregnancy, or maybe seen someone go through it, it is hard to appreciate just how much can go wrong and level of trauma it can cause


Indeed, medical care has improved so much in recent decades that maternal mortality in childbirth is rare, and we forget that not so long ago childbirth was a major killer of women - exact figures can be hard to pin down due to the variety and reliability of source data, but an average of somewhere around 1 mother death in every 100 births isn't an uncommon estimate.

I have two paediatricians in my immediate family (one by marriage to the other), and their first pregnacy was going fine until it got to the birth. Everything seemed to be progressing normally, if slowly, and then all of a sudden the medical staff were throwing aound Very Scary Technical Words (all of which, of course, mum and dad to be understood!) and initiating the headlong controlled panic that is an emergency c-section. Thankfully, mum and baby were both fine, but not too long in the past it would have been a very different outcome.


----------



## Magyarmum

Deleted


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Sairy said:


> I do think there seems to be a huge emphasis on women carrying a baby in order to be mothers. My wife desperately wanted to carry her own baby - it's something she always wanted to do. She wasn't so much bothered about being the biological mother, just having the experience of carrying a baby. However, for medical reasons it wasn't to be. After 2 years of trying via artificial insemination she went through the grueling process of IVF but miscarried at around 6 weeks. It was devastating for her. She still had 3 frozen embryos stored, but couldn't bring herself to go through the trauma again so didn't try again after that.
> 
> Then I had George, who is biologically mine and I carried. Nik is very much his mum as well and he has absolutely filled the hole of motherhood for her. My baby that I am currently pregnant with (and due to birth any time now) is the last of Nik's frozen embryos (the first two that were implanted into me didn't take). Despite the fact that this is Nik's biological child, she loves George so much that she has worried on several occasions that she won't love this child as much. Parenthood runs so much deeper than biological connections. There is so much more to being a mum than carrying a baby.
> 
> As I've already mentioned, pregnancy itself is massively risky. I think unless you've experienced a risky pregnancy, or trauma during pregnancy, or maybe seen someone go through it, it is hard to appreciate just how much can go wrong and level of trauma it can cause. My first baby (before George) I lost at 17 weeks due to going into preterm labor. It was a life-changing experience and incredibly traumatic. I am fortunate in that I had lots of support and came through it able to reflect and still enjoy my life, but it had massive psychological effects on me that I didn't even realise until after I had George. During my first pregnancy I was considered low risk - there was no reason to be concerned that I wouldn't sail through it, but life throws things up like that.
> 
> When pregnant with George I was closely monitored, and have been even more closely monitored this time due to the added complexity of this being an IVF pregnancy. It is incredibly stressful, especially when you have already experienced loss in pregnancy and know just how awful it is.
> 
> I honestly would not recommend making becoming a parent more complicated. The only reason we had one of Nik's embryos implanted in me rather than me having another biological child was because it felt wrong to just throw away the embryos that already existed. We wanted them to have a chance.
> 
> I deeply sympathise with anyone who wants to carry a child and is unable to, but I really don't think this incredibly risky procedure is the answer. Yes there may be some successes and people who have a good experience, but for all the successes there will be many people who don't get their happy ending and suffer the immense trauma of losing a child.


Thank you for being so open about what you've been through. It is very brave to write all that you have xx


----------



## O2.0

Jesthar said:


> Indeed, medical care has improved so much in recent decades that maternal mortality in childbirth is rare, and we forget that not so long ago childbirth was a major killer of women - exact figures can be hard to pin down due to the variety and reliability of source data, but an average of somewhere around 1 mother death in every 100 births isn't an uncommon estimate.


The US has the proud distinction of ranking #5 in maternal mortality rates 
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1240400/maternal-mortality-rates-worldwide-by-country/
And our rates are rising instead of falling. 
"In 2020, 861 women were identified as having died of maternal causes in the United States, compared with 754 in 2019 (3). The maternal mortality rate for 2020 was 23.8 deaths per 100,000 live births compared with a rate of 20.1 in 2019 (Table)."
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hesta...=In 2020, 861 women were,20.1 in 2019 (Table).
And when you break down for women of color the rates are even higher.


----------



## Sairy

Magyarmum said:


> .
> My first pregnancy was 60 years ago. At 4 months pregnant I began to hemorrhage and was taken to hospital for observation. One evening whilst in the hospital I suddenly lost the use of both arms and legs. I was rushed into the theatre where the pregnancy was terminated. I don't remember ever being given an explanation why all I can remember is waking up in the operating theatre covered in blood. All I know is that I spent the next two weeks hardly able to stand and in agony.
> 
> I hemorrhaged at 3 months pregnant for both my 2nd and 3 pregnancies and had to spend 6 weeks each time in bed. Rather difficult when your husband is out at work all day and you have an 11 month old baby to care for. The nurses at the maternity home where I had both children were mainly ex Queen Alexandra Nursing Corp and more used to dealing with soldiers than pregnant women. I remember being told very brusquely to relax because the baby's not going to drop into your knickers which is charming when you're feeling rather fragile!
> 
> For my 4th pregnancy I hemorrhaged on the way home from France. My doctor was totally unsympathetic and told me to go and see him when "it" was over! My OH decided it was more important to go on a course for a week, so I was left on my own to do the best I could. Fortunately the children were at boarding school. I miscarried two days later and couple of hours later I was doing housework as normal. I never bothered to go and see the doctor.


Good grief, that all sounds so scary 

I was fortunate to receive very good care when needed (they couldn't do anything to save my first little boy, but they took me straight into theatre when I had a retained placenta). I'm pretty sure that in days gone by George and I would both have died during his birth as he got stuck. Very scary.


----------



## Jesthar

O2.0 said:


> The US has the proud distinction of ranking #5 in maternal mortality rates
> https://www.statista.com/statistics/1240400/maternal-mortality-rates-worldwide-by-country/
> And our rates are rising instead of falling.
> "In 2020, 861 women were identified as having died of maternal causes in the United States, compared with 754 in 2019 (3). The maternal mortality rate for 2020 was 23.8 deaths per 100,000 live births compared with a rate of 20.1 in 2019 (Table)."
> https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/maternal-mortality/2020/maternal-mortality-rates-2020.htm#:~:text=In 2020, 861 women were,20.1 in 2019 (Table).
> And when you break down for women of color the rates are even higher.


Ah, yes - I should have clarified that I was quoting UK statistics. Universal healthcare is such a blessing.


----------



## O2.0

Magyarmum said:


> .
> My first pregnancy was 60 years ago. At 4 months pregnant I began to hemorrhage and was taken to hospital for observation. One evening whilst in the hospital I suddenly lost the use of both arms and legs. I was rushed into the theatre where the pregnancy was terminated. I don't remember ever being given an explanation why all I can remember is waking up in the operating theatre covered in blood. All I know is that I spent the next two weeks hardly able to stand and in agony.
> 
> I hemorrhaged at 3 months pregnant for both my 2nd and 3 pregnancies and had to spend 6 weeks each time in bed. Rather difficult when your husband is out at work all day and you have an 11 month old baby to care for. The nurses at the maternity home where I had both children were mainly ex Queen Alexandra Nursing Corp and more used to dealing with soldiers than pregnant women. I remember being told very brusquely to relax because the baby's not going to drop into your knickers which is charming when you're feeling rather fragile!
> 
> For my 4th pregnancy I hemorrhaged on the way home from France. My doctor was totally unsympathetic and told me to go and see him when "it" was over! My OH decided it was more important to go on a course for a week, so I was left on my own to do the best I could. Fortunately the children were at boarding school. I miscarried two days later and couple of hours later I was doing housework as normal. I never bothered to go and see the doctor.


It's crazy to look back just 50 years ago to how things were. 
Women were told it was okay to smoke and drink, I can't imagine how many women died of blood clots which is still a big killer today. 
My own mom had an ectopic pregnancy that burst, she was found unresponsive at home, they took her to the hospital and removed her appendix 

I hope no one reading this is put off by pregnancy though! Sometimes it just happens that women get together and recount horror stories. There are plenty of happy ending too!


----------



## O2.0

Jesthar said:


> Ah, yes - I should have clarified that I was quoting UK statistics. Universal healthcare is such a blessing.


Definitely! 
We spent years paying off our hospital bills even with insurance. 
Now we're paying for University, even with ample scholarships. It's insane how much money we have spent that people in civilized countries never consider an expense. 
I think by UK standards we'd be wealthy if we didn't have medical and education expenses.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

It's a tough stat to think about, maternal death rate. The UK is about a third the rate of the US and we have the same increase when you look at women from a BAME background. It's more difficult to find stats on maternal deaths by economic group but certainly according to the WHO 2000-2017 showed that only just over 5% of maternal deaths worldwide were in upper middle income and high income - though of course that would be skewed by maternal deaths in the developing world (for example there are 200,000 maternal deaths each year in sub saharan Africa). Even with that, it's not a huge stretch to conclude that if you are poorer, you are more likely to die. Certainly in the UK there are strong links to poverty and maternal deaths and stillbirths. Once again there is an education and disempowerment issue I feel - which brings us back a little to women's rights. I've frequently worked areas of classic deprivation, with high levels of unemployment, lower educational attainment and an absolute lack of willingness to engage with healthcare professionals and settings (both through fear of reprisals regarding behaviours and also a lack of appreciation about what can be done to help). I've always tried to make it as easy as possible for people to access care, heck I've even driven people to appointments at the hospital (and been caught and told off! Ha! Didn't stop me doing it again though, I was just more sneaky about it). However, working how I did caused me to be pretty poorly myself, so I had to change role (I know, this isn't about me).

Sadly, maternal death is still a reality. Every three years we have stats published about the causes for maternal deaths and it makes for very sobering reading. This is the summary for the UK 2017-2019 (we await the next triennial report):


Pregnancy remains very safe in the UK, with the overall maternal death rate showing a slight decrease. Among 2,173,810 women who gave birth in 2017-2019, 191 died during or up to six weeks after pregnancy, and 495 during or up to one year after their pregnancy.
Nevertheless, the findings show a continued inequality in the mortality rates for women of different ethnic backgrounds, ages, and socio-economic circumstances.
Heart disease remains the largest single cause of all maternal deaths during or up to six weeks after pregnancy. Neurological causes (epilepsy and stroke) are the second most common cause of maternal death, followed by sepsis and blood clots.
The maternal death rate from pre-eclampsia and eclampsia continues to be low but remains higher than the lowest rate, in 2012-14.
Cancer is the most frequent indirect cause of death for pregnant women between six weeks and a year after the end of pregnancy.
Maternal suicide remains the leading direct (pregnancy-related) cause of death over the first year after pregnancy. Of concern, the number of teenage suicide deaths has increased: 11 per 100,000 teenagers giving birth, up from 2.5 in 2014-2016.
Women from Black ethnic groups are four times more likely to die in pregnancy than women from White groups, and women from Asian ethnic backgrounds almost twice as likely.
Pregnant women living in the most deprived areas are twice as likely to die than those living in the most affluent areas.
The maternal mortality rate is almost four-fold higher for women aged 40 or over, compared with women aged 20-24 years.
The average age at first childbirth continues to increase, yet fewer than a third of mothers who gave birth over the age of 45 receive the recommended care for older mothers. In particular, few women have discussions when planning their pregnancy about potential risks.

I'll stop now. I apologise if it is all too sad to discuss. I suspect that the rates in some categories will be much much higher in the next report as it encompasses the Covid years - and there is definitely a link to clotting and Covid, as well as a reluctance to attend hospital in the earlier weeks of Covid.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

(Sorry, I know this is all UK data)


----------



## MollySmith

My last post as I'm finding some of this too triggering for reasons explained several pages ago around my loss.


72% of IVF cycles fail. 
Louise Brown, the first IVF baby was born 43 years ago. 
ThIs month will see the foundation of the only network of counsellors and coaches who specifically practice in the area of infertility.
I could quote a load of shambolic stats including this from The Times (it happened to me)

If clinics want to offer more ways to have children, they need to provide better support for those whom it fails first. Otherwise it's adding on layers and layers of crisis onto a foundation that is far from stable. And society needs to listen, the onus is on everyone.


----------



## Siskin

Sairy said:


> Good grief, that all sounds so scary
> 
> I was fortunate to receive very good care when needed (they couldn't do anything to save my first little boy, but they took me straight into theatre when I had a retained placenta). I'm pretty sure that in days gone by George and I would both have died during his birth as he got stuck. Very scary.


You're right there, it's what took my maternal grandmother, called childbed fever in those days. My grandfather was killed in action in 1918, so three orphaned children all under 5


----------



## Sairy

Siskin said:


> You're right there, it's what took my maternal grandmother, called childbed fever in those days. My grandfather was killed in action in 1918, so three orphaned children all under 5


So sad


----------



## Cleo38

Siskin said:


> You're right there, it's what took my maternal grandmother, called childbed fever in those days. My grandfather was killed in action in 1918, so three orphaned children all under 5


Gosh, that must have been so hard. I know we can criticise care for children now but back then there really wasn't anything.

My maternal grandmother had my mum out of wedlock in 1940. She lived in Ireland at the time & was Catholic so you can imagine the shame that was put on her. She came to England by herself whilst pregnant not knowing anyone yet & managed to find a place to live & a job. I have no idea how she really managed as she never really spoke of it. Even in her old age she was still ashamed about her past, was so sad


----------



## Mrs Funkin

I agree @MollySmith and the unscrupulous behaviours of clinics here and overseas should be examined closely.

I'm so sorry if anything I have talked about has caused you upset. I am thankful for your personal perspectives on these issues and I thank you and others for sharing painful experiences. I appreciate you all taking the time to write about your experiences.


----------



## mrs phas

Mrs Funkin said:


> interestingly it is actually women in the overweight, obese and very obese categories who have an increased with of giving birth to infants in the "very low birth weight" and "extremely low birthweight" categories.


Waves to you
I bucked the trend then
Not that I'm advocating pregnancy and obesity, but
I was around 16st with all my pregnancies, at 5ft 6 that puts me squarely in the obese category
Son 1 - 9lb 11, full term to the day, I did develop eclampsia, during labour, and had to have an emergency c section though
Son's 2 and 3 - 6lb 13 and 7lb 1, elective section after speaking with head of gynea, 5 weeks early, due to twin birth, would have had to have a section though as it turns out they had settled into an inverted T position
Son 4 - 8lb 10, 2 weeks early, again elective section after advice

I was told I would never have any, naturally
and
Didn't conceive until I was put on the IVF programme,
They told me I was already pregnant, when I arrived for first consultation

Sailed through all pregnancies, except first, they were worried re pre eclampsia, so I was in and out of ante natal ward for last 6 weeks, I would just tell them to keep my bed free
but
I bypassed that and went into the real thing

No gestational diabetes,
had, on midwife orders, liver twice a week with first,
no puffed ankles
and
didn't gain weight throughout any of them,
not even the twins,
And
with them I worked right up to the week before I was scheduled

My point being that, generalisation, in anything, isn't blanket proof things will happen

Anyhow, going back to the whole could 'she' should he debate
I guess I'll be writing an addendum to my organ donor card, again
No male, by birth, to have my uterus, or shrivelled ovaries, if uterine transplants are a thing by then
I already have no alcoholics can have my kidneys/liver, attached to it
Not that I know if they take any notice of those things
Or
Having had cancer and living with lupus I can even donate


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Oh yes, I know that re: generalisation. I was merely responding to an earlier comment that overweight and obese women will have bigger babies, when often that isn't the case at all.

You not gaining weight during your pregnancies is all the rage now, being "weight neutral" in pregnancy if you have a raised BMI. You were ahead of your time @mrs phas


----------



## Cleo38

Mrs Funkin said:


> It's a tough stat to think about, maternal death rate. The UK is about a third the rate of the US and we have the same increase when you look at women from a BAME background. It's more difficult to find stats on maternal deaths by economic group but certainly according to the WHO 2000-2017 showed that only just over 5% of maternal deaths worldwide were in upper middle income and high income - though of course that would be skewed by maternal deaths in the developing world (for example there are 200,000 maternal deaths each year in sub saharan Africa). Even with that, it's not a huge stretch to conclude that if you are poorer, you are more likely to die. Certainly in the UK there are strong links to poverty and maternal deaths and stillbirths. Once again there is an education and disempowerment issue I feel - which brings us back a little to women's rights. I've frequently worked areas of classic deprivation, with high levels of unemployment, lower educational attainment and an absolute lack of willingness to engage with healthcare professionals and settings (both through fear of reprisals regarding behaviours and also a lack of appreciation about what can be done to help). I've always tried to make it as easy as possible for people to access care, heck I've even driven people to appointments at the hospital (and been caught and told off! Ha! Didn't stop me doing it again though, I was just more sneaky about it). However, working how I did caused me to be pretty poorly myself, so I had to change role (I know, this isn't about me).
> 
> Sadly, maternal death is still a reality. Every three years we have stats published about the causes for maternal deaths and it makes for very sobering reading. This is the summary for the UK 2017-2019 (we await the next triennial report):
> 
> 
> Pregnancy remains very safe in the UK, with the overall maternal death rate showing a slight decrease. Among 2,173,810 women who gave birth in 2017-2019, 191 died during or up to six weeks after pregnancy, and 495 during or up to one year after their pregnancy.
> Nevertheless, the findings show a continued inequality in the mortality rates for women of different ethnic backgrounds, ages, and socio-economic circumstances.
> Heart disease remains the largest single cause of all maternal deaths during or up to six weeks after pregnancy. Neurological causes (epilepsy and stroke) are the second most common cause of maternal death, followed by sepsis and blood clots.
> The maternal death rate from pre-eclampsia and eclampsia continues to be low but remains higher than the lowest rate, in 2012-14.
> Cancer is the most frequent indirect cause of death for pregnant women between six weeks and a year after the end of pregnancy.
> Maternal suicide remains the leading direct (pregnancy-related) cause of death over the first year after pregnancy. Of concern, the number of teenage suicide deaths has increased: 11 per 100,000 teenagers giving birth, up from 2.5 in 2014-2016.
> Women from Black ethnic groups are four times more likely to die in pregnancy than women from White groups, and women from Asian ethnic backgrounds almost twice as likely.
> Pregnant women living in the most deprived areas are twice as likely to die than those living in the most affluent areas.
> The maternal mortality rate is almost four-fold higher for women aged 40 or over, compared with women aged 20-24 years.
> The average age at first childbirth continues to increase, yet fewer than a third of mothers who gave birth over the age of 45 receive the recommended care for older mothers. In particular, few women have discussions when planning their pregnancy about potential risks.
> 
> I'll stop now. I apologise if it is all too sad to discuss. I suspect that the rates in some categories will be much much higher in the next report as it encompasses the Covid years - and there is definitely a link to clotting and Covid, as well as a reluctance to attend hospital in the earlier weeks of Covid.


Thanks for your posts on this subject. As a woman who has never wanted children, never been pregnant, spent most of my adult life making sure I didn't, I really have no knowledge of this subject at all but maybe I should be more aware


----------



## Deguslave

No pressure then.... https://news.sky.com/story/indian-p...ent-for-not-giving-them-a-grandchild-12611878


----------



## mrs phas

Deguslave said:


> No pressure then.... https://news.sky.com/story/indian-p...ent-for-not-giving-them-a-grandchild-12611878


Wonders if I can do this
4 boys all brought up to be kind, thoughtful, respectable etc three out of 4 working with own homes
Me 61 at end of month
Yet I'm still waiting 
4x£525,000, yeah I could happily live on that:Smuggrin

Guessing it's down to women wanting 'projects'
Rather than 'perfects'.
And 
Living in a small market town, where literally everyone knows everyone else, or their parents do

(Not that, as their mum, I'd call any of them perfect)


----------



## MollySmith

Mrs Funkin said:


> I agree @MollySmith and the unscrupulous behaviours of clinics here and overseas should be examined closely.
> 
> I'm so sorry if anything I have talked about has caused you upset. I am thankful for your personal perspectives on these issues and I thank you and others for sharing painful experiences. I appreciate you all taking the time to write about your experiences.


Nothing you said it's just a tricky area for me and so sorry for all those who have experienced pain. ((hugs and thank you, Mrs F xx)

Thank you for the space, I just need to keep an eye on me but I hope what I share is constructive in the state of things from childlessness side as it's rare to be able to communicate to others especially parents and I hope that it may help someone people here know to have empathy and kindness and learn a little more.


----------



## MollySmith

Deguslave said:


> No pressure then.... https://news.sky.com/story/indian-p...ent-for-not-giving-them-a-grandchild-12611878


This happens a lot in childlessness - not to this level but certainly pressure from parents to be grand parents.. I'm lucky that my parents are actually reasonably okay about me though my mum has said kids are all they're cracked up to be to me which is a bit strange, but she has a habit of sticking her feet in her mouth. I can't actually speak about my dad not being a grandfather, it hurts my heart more than my husband not being a dad but they've both had 'round Robin' letters at Xmas wishing the grandchildren well. My brother is childfree (chose not to have kids) so there are none.

A close friend has nobody in her family speaking to her because her parents offered to pay for one last round of IVF (she'd had 3) and she refused as she was so ill through it all and wanted to move on. Like me she had Ovarian Hyper Stimulation Syndrome which can be fatal and, like me, ending up in hospital.

I'm seen as an object of pity by an uncle (whose youngest son, father of 2, stole £5k from our grandmother _really_!!) Occasionally those stories appear in the media but they're much more common than people think but nobody says as it's shameful, taboo... It's pronatalism at it's worse.


----------



## Cleo38

So sickening to read so many articles regarding women & children fleeing Ukraine being preyed upon by traffickers. It's vile to think of so many men are taking advantage of these vulnerable people. How can they be so evil ?! 

https://www.politico.eu/article/human-trafficking-risk-grow-women-children-flee-ukraine-report/


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> So sickening to read so many articles regarding women & children fleeing Ukraine being preyed upon by traffickers. It's vile to think of so many men are taking advantage of these vulnerable people. How can they be so evil ?!
> 
> https://www.politico.eu/article/human-trafficking-risk-grow-women-children-flee-ukraine-report/


It's disgusting the world is so messed up.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

@MollySmith you are so right about OHSS. There is a reason it massively increases the risk of developing an embolism, it can be so serious but people just don't realise because it's barely spoken of. Yet another of the IVF issues that are glossed over in the pursuit of the money.

I am so grateful for your sharing of your experiences. It's important for us to be able to share our experiences I think, if we feel able. For example, as a result of your education, I have changed how I refer to myself. I am now childfree by choice, not childless by choice. I'd never even thought about the distinction - but because of you, I did.

I also like that here, in this space, we can talk about things and disagree but fundamentally there is respect for one another and whilst I have a different perspective on women and childbearing than some people here, it doesn't mean I don't respect how they feel. Obviously I wouldn't let how I feel personally affect the care I give to someone.

(I've had a bit of a tough day at work and feel very emotional - so forgive me for sounding slushy)


----------



## Cleo38

Boxer123 said:


> It's disgusting the world is so messed up.


I know that sexual slavery & abuse of women has always been a weapon in war but I suppose hearing the stories of the women that escaped or from aid workers just makes it so much horrific.
The suffering of some just seems to be an opportunity for others ... sickening


----------



## Sairy

Women to be offered 3 days menstrual leave per month in Spain.

https://vt.co/lifestyle/women-to-be...&utm_medium=junglecreations&utm_campaign=post


----------



## MollySmith

Mrs Funkin said:


> @MollySmith you are so right about OHSS. There is a reason it massively increases the risk of developing an embolism, it can be so serious but people just don't realise because it's barely spoken of. Yet another of the IVF issues that are glossed over in the pursuit of the money.
> 
> I am so grateful for your sharing of your experiences. It's important for us to be able to share our experiences I think, if we feel able. For example, as a result of your education, I have changed how I refer to myself. I am now childfree by choice, not childless by choice. I'd never even thought about the distinction - but because of you, I did.
> 
> I also like that here, in this space, we can talk about things and disagree but fundamentally there is respect for one another and whilst I have a different perspective on women and childbearing than some people here, it doesn't mean I don't respect how they feel. Obviously I wouldn't let how I feel personally affect the care I give to someone.
> 
> (I've had a bit of a tough day at work and feel very emotional - so forgive me for sounding slushy)


Thank you and likewise, I learn from you too. You've always been open about how you've coped with Covid, going out.. it's been informative always.

Slush is lovely, beats a lot of the responses and challenges I have had here!

I hope today was a better one for you x


----------



## Cleo38

Sairy said:


> Women to be offered 3 days menstrual leave per month in Spain.
> 
> https://vt.co/lifestyle/women-to-be...&utm_medium=junglecreations&utm_campaign=post


I used to have dreadful period pain when I was younger & would have to take a couple of days off school every month. Mine were much better when I started on the contraceptive pill but not everyone can have that so this is a good idea for those women who do suffer so much each month. Surprising to read that Zambia, Japan & South Korea already have this in place.


----------



## Sairy

Cleo38 said:


> I used to have dreadful period pain when I was younger & would have to take a couple of days off school every month. Mine were much better when I started on the contraceptive pill but not everyone can have that so this is a good idea for those women who do suffer so much each month. Surprising to read that Zambia, Japan & South Korea already have this in place.


Yeah Nik (my OH) used to get really horrific pain and frequently had to be sent home from school/work. Doctors at the time dismissed how much pain she was in and one male doctor told her that she just couldn't handle pain very well. Years later it was discovered that she had lots of scarred tissue on her uterus which caused it to get stuck to her pelvis. No wonder periods were so painful for her! She's on the pill now as management, but she will have a hysterectomy at some point.

A previous employer scoffed at her for calling in sick once "just because she had a bit of tummy ache" when she was lying curled up on the bed and shaking uncontrollably from the pain.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Spain introduced period holidays for women with heavy period. Up to 3 days.
Good thing or not so good?https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/menstrual-leave-spain-first-european-country-women/


----------



## Cleo38

Sairy said:


> Yeah Nik (my OH) used to get really horrific pain and frequently had to be sent home from school/work. Doctors at the time dismissed how much pain she was in and one male doctor told her that she just couldn't handle pain very well. Years later it was discovered that she had lots of scarred tissue on her uterus which caused it to get stuck to her pelvis. No wonder periods were so painful for her! She's on the pill now as management, but she will have a hysterectomy at some point.
> 
> A previous employer scoffed at her for calling in sick once "just because she had a bit of tummy ache" when she was lying curled up on the bed and shaking uncontrollably from the pain.


Yes, mine were awful. I would get severe pain, be sweating, have diarrhoea, vomiting & shaking. If I was lucky it would just be one day but most it was two. I was also told that I was 'being silly' or just trying to get out of school (by male doctors  ) /& none of the medical practioners I saw were interested. It seemed to be more a case of just getting on with it.

Luckily my issues were easily resolved but so many women still have to suffer each month & their issues ignored which is so unfair


----------



## O2.0

I wish women's health in general were more researched, more studied, and taken more seriously. 
It feels like it was just recently that (male) doctors realized we don't get heart disease the same way men do, let alone pay attention to our periods, perimenopause, reproduction, etc.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> I wish women's health in general were more researched, more studied, and taken more seriously.
> It feels like it was just recently that (male) doctors realized we don't get heart disease the same way men do, let alone pay attention to our periods, perimenopause, reproduction, etc.


Definitely. I read Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias In a World Designed for Men by Caroline Criado-Perez where she details how drugs are trialled, how the trials are designed, etc with little thought for women, It was a really interesting read


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> Definitely. I read Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias In a World Designed for Men by Caroline Criado-Perez where she details how drugs are trialled, how the trials are designed, etc with little thought for women, It was a really interesting read


Apparently the 'argument' against using women in drug trials is that their hormone fluctuations will mess results up. 
I guess testosterone must not be a hormone enguin


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Apparently the 'argument' against using women in drug trials is that their hormone fluctuations will mess results up.
> I guess testosterone must not be a hormone enguin


So just discount 50% of the population coz it might make things more difficult to assess ... :Jawdrop


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> So just discount 50% of the population coz it might make things more difficult to assess ... :Jawdrop


Closer to 51%
Even with less information about our health and deaths in childbirth, we still live longer than men. 
Maybe that's the real conspiracy theory - if the medical world took women's health seriously we might live forever and take over the world!


----------



## Mrs Funkin

So I just read this on the BBC. Can you imagine how terrifying it must be as a woman to be living under the rule of the Taliban again?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-61402309


----------



## Cleo38

Mrs Funkin said:


> So I just read this on the BBC. Can you imagine how terrifying it must be as a woman to be living under the rule of the Taliban again?
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-61402309


My heart breaks for the women & girls living there. The woman interviewed is right, it does seem as if being a woman is a crime. I honestly can't imagine the fear they must have just trying to go about their lives & have so much admiration for those who are trying to make a stand as they really are putting their lives at risk


----------



## MollySmith

Conversely as my good friend Dr Robin Hadley says this

_Research on men who are involuntarily childless is important not only because of actual and projected demographic change but also because the evidence base on the effects of male involuntary childlessness on men as they age is virtually non existent. However, in many countries there are more childless men than equivalent women. It is estimated that in the UK by 2030 there will have at least two million people aged 65 and over without an adult child to support them if needed._​
So whilst there is an issue over women's health, there is another very concerning absence of care and stats on childless men. We - leaders in this community - are gently encouraging men and LGBTQIA+ to take about their experiences so that we can figure a space to support them. It's taken about twelve years for women to get a handful of dedicated groups on childless not by choice and infertility failure, men are just starting to get something but it's still one or two spaces and some are shared with men who went onto be fathers which isn't appropriate for those who are coming to terms with grief and still nothing that I'm aware of for those who identify as any part of LGBTQIA+. I realise that this may digress this thread - it being women's rights - so it's a gentle FYI. For the majority of this hidden demographic there's the hidden sub-demographic of the person who has lost their child, miscarried or coming to terms with childlessness for _any_ reason (50 ways link) also supporting their partner who also went through this journey too.


----------



## MollySmith

cheekyscrip said:


> Spain introduced period holidays for women with heavy period. Up to 3 days.
> Good thing or not so good?https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/menstrual-leave-spain-first-european-country-women/


I wonder if it'll be taken. So much seems to depend on the boss, the company and perception. When you think that we're only just getting menopause and fertility policies into _some_ spaces (at least in the UK) and the gender pay gap became a ludicrous PR stunt for most companies who shared that they're were supporting women but were then called out on unequal pay (and usually then scant support for all women - mothers, childfree or childless); this feels like a exercise. However I hope every woman does use it even if the average cycle is meant to last I think 4 days but those of us who suffer pain know it's a rollercoaster every month for 30 days. I hope it works and that it helps, it's long overdue.


----------



## Cleo38

And this terrible story I read yesterday ... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...rests-blasphemy-killing-female-student-sokoto


----------



## O2.0

MollySmith said:


> Conversely as my good friend Dr Robin Hadley says this
> 
> _Research on men who are involuntarily childless is important not only because of actual and projected demographic change but also because the evidence base on the effects of male involuntary childlessness on men as they age is virtually non existent. However, in many countries there are more childless men than equivalent women. It is estimated that in the UK by 2030 there will have at least two million people aged 65 and over without an adult child to support them if needed._​
> So whilst there is an issue over women's health, there is another very concerning absence of care and stats on childless men. We - leaders in this community - are gently encouraging men and LGBTQIA+ to take about their experiences so that we can figure a space to support them. It's taken about twelve years for women to get a handful of dedicated groups on childless not by choice and infertility failure, men are just starting to get something but it's still one or two spaces and some are shared with men who went onto be fathers which isn't appropriate for those who are coming to terms with grief and still nothing that I'm aware of for those who identify as any part of LGBTQIA+. I realise that this may digress this thread - it being women's rights - so it's a gentle FYI. For the majority of this hidden demographic there's the hidden sub-demographic of the person who has lost their child, miscarried or coming to terms with childlessness for _any_ reason (50 ways link) also supporting their partner who also went through this journey too.


That's an interesting point about adults without an adult child to support them. I would hope that the reason for having children isn't to have someone to support them in the future. 
And I would hope that having children isn't the only way people consider supporting or being supported.

My sister and aunt have both chosen not to have children. I have always simply taken it for granted that I am the one who will take care of my aunt should she ever need it. She's so fiercely independent though she'd probably do a Thelma and Louise if she ever felt like she couldn't take care of herself.

My friend had a childless uncle who she took care of. He was in a very large family and he had managed to alienate just about everyone but my friend. His house was like a nightmare off of hoarders, there were clearly MH issues and dementia. He regularly made my friend cry, he knew just how to hit the most sensitive buttons, but she doggedly kept going out there and taking care of him. Made sure to take him meals, take him to doctor's appointments, washed his clothes... I would go out there with her sometimes to help. He was just as evil to me as he was to her, but at least my presence deflected attention a little. It was a really sad situation.

There's also the issue of people who have children who they will always be responsible for because for different reasons the child will never be independent. These parents live in fear of what will happen to their adult children when they pass. Also really sad.

I guess the takeaway here is that we should be paying more attention to others and if you're in a position to help someone, do it.


----------



## Boxer123

O2.0 said:


> That's an interesting point about adults without an adult child to support them. I would hope that the reason for having children isn't to have someone to support them in the future.
> And I would hope that having children isn't the only way people consider supporting or being supported.
> 
> My sister and aunt have both chosen not to have children. I have always simply taken it for granted that I am the one who will take care of my aunt should she ever need it. She's so fiercely independent though she'd probably do a Thelma and Louise if she ever felt like she couldn't take care of herself.
> 
> My friend had a childless uncle who she took care of. He was in a very large family and he had managed to alienate just about everyone but my friend. His house was like a nightmare off of hoarders, there were clearly MH issues and dementia. He regularly made my friend cry, he knew just how to hit the most sensitive buttons, but she doggedly kept going out there and taking care of him. Made sure to take him meals, take him to doctor's appointments, washed his clothes... I would go out there with her sometimes to help. He was just as evil to me as he was to her, but at least my presence deflected attention a little. It was a really sad situation.
> 
> There's also the issue of people who have children who they will always be responsible for because for different reasons the child will never be independent. These parents live in fear of what will happen to their adult children when they pass. Also really sad.
> 
> I guess the takeaway here is that we should be paying more attention to others and if you're in a position to help someone, do it.


As someone who worked in a residential home for the elderly for some years it is clear that having children there is no guarantee you will be supported in your older years. We had lots of residents who never got a visit despite having children.

As someone who is child free by choice (and also possibly circumstances) I do worry a bit about old age. My next door neighbour is 82 she doesn't see her family a lot but the entire village shops, cooks and looks after her.


----------



## O2.0

Boxer123 said:


> My next door neighbour is 82 she doesn't see her family a lot but the entire village shops, cooks and looks after her.


That's how it should be


----------



## Sairy

My great uncle never had any children. It's a long story, basically he desperately wanted children but he was very much under the influence of his father who disapproved of his partner so they didn't get married until after his father had passed away. By that time my great uncle was in his 60s so that boat had long since set sail.

He is in his 90s now and bed bound. My parents bought the house next door to them so he moved in there. My dad goes round and looks after him every day, along with some carers.


----------



## MollySmith

Boxer123 said:


> As someone who worked in a residential home for the elderly for some years it is clear that having children there is no guarantee you will be supported in your older years. We had lots of residents who never got a visit despite having children.
> 
> As someone who is child free by choice (and also possibly circumstances) I do worry a bit about old age. My next door neighbour is 82 she doesn't see her family a lot but the entire village shops, cooks and looks after her.


It's the assumption by the U.K. government that children will pick up the care (as opposed to anyone having kids to care for them or that childless wish they had kids for this reason, though I imagine both may be true for some). Less about people being broken but the systems and there is no guarantee one would have kids who care.

Ageing Well Without Children is a U.K. charity that existed for childless, childfree and anyone estranged from their children. It also offers support for childless and childfree who are more likely to be left to care for their parents.
https://www.awwoc.org/


----------



## kimthecat

Just seen these photos on Twitter. Does anyone know whats this is all about . Emily Pankhurst statue in manchester.


----------



## MollySmith

I have a friend - single and childless through life circumstance- who, at the height of Covid went out onto her balcony to clap or sit each night so people knew she was alive. It caused a huge mental health issue as she realised she was the only one alone. 

This was far from the only story. During 2020 I held a weekly coffee chat over 45 weeks so that those who were childless had a person to talk to. I heard some very awful and very sad stories caused often by society ostracising over many years and worldwide welfare systems that fail to recognise lots of people don’t have a family infrastructure. I don’t, so I’ve got plans and completed my end of life workbook. 

Interesting how the stats on men didn’t clear the thread. Usually it’s a pin drop in a room moment. I suspect I’ve mentioned it before and unfortunately not much has changed.


----------



## mrs phas

MollySmith said:


> It is estimated that in the UK by 2030 there will have at least two million people aged 65 and over without an adult child to support them if needed.


That is one of the worst reasons I've ever read to have a child
Do I expect my other three sons, to look after my eldest when I'm gone?
No, they are entitled to live their own lives, as best they can
Is it my job to make sure as much help and care as he needs/wants, is in place before I go?
Absolutely
As a child who got trapped looking after an aged father, who never acknowledged me, because I was born first and healthy, whilst his son, to carry his name into the future, wasn't and died young, and was also very abusive to all us girls
And
Looking after my mil, after my husband died, until her death, because her daughter had 'escaped' to the USA and her other son CBA
I'm absolutely beyond livid to read that,
Ive already told mine to put me in a home
Or
If there's no longer any 'me' left, to flip the switch
I did not give birth, just so they were indentured to me


----------



## MollySmith

kimthecat said:


> Just seen these photos on Twitter. Does anyone know whats this is all about . Emily Pankhurst statue in manchester.


If you search Emily Pankhurst (the search function is at the top right). Then click on latest or Top, you can read posts that relate to this.


----------



## MollySmith

mrs phas said:


> That is one of the worst reasons I've ever read to have a child
> Do I expect my other three sons, to look after my eldest when I'm gone?
> No, they are entitled to live their own lives, as best they can
> Is it my job to make sure as much help and care as he needs/wants, is in place before I go?
> Absolutely
> As a child who got trapped looking after an aged father, who never acknowledged me, because I was born first and healthy, whilst his son, to carry his name into the future, wasn't and died young, and was also very abusive to all us girls
> And
> Looking after my mil, after my husband died, until her death, because her daughter had 'escaoed' to the USA and her other son CBA
> I'm absolutely beyond livid to read that,
> Ive already told mine to put me in a home
> Or
> If there's no longer any 'me' left, to flip the switch
> I did not give birth, just so they were indentured to me


Please see below. It's a stat about the infrastructure of the country and lack of care. Clearly my words are once again being cherry picked without anyone reading the link. Robin is a researcher who campaigns for better provision for those who age childless/free/estranged based on his experiences. I am not saying it's a reason to have kids and neither is he. It's a fact based on extensive research and IOS data.



MollySmith said:


> It's the assumption by the U.K. government that children will pick up the care (as opposed to anyone having kids to care for them or that childless wish they had kids for this reason, though I imagine both may be true for some). Less about people being broken but the systems and there is no guarantee one would have kids who care.
> 
> Ageing Well Without Children is a U.K. charity that existed for childless, childfree and anyone estranged from their children. It also offers support for childless and childfree who are more likely to be left to care for their parents.
> https://www.awwoc.org/


----------



## kimthecat

Thanks but it only shows my and your post.


----------



## Boxer123

MollySmith said:


> Please see below. It's a stat about the infrastructure of the country and lack of care. Clearly my words are once again being cherry picked without anyone reading the link. Robin is a researcher who campaigns for better provision for those who age childless/free/estranged based on his experiences. I am not saying it's a reason to have kids and neither is he.
> 
> Context please.


I haven't cherry picked anything my response was to @O2.2 regarding my experiences in elderly care.

I know about loneliness in the pandemic I live alone and was going through a nasty divorce living away from family and friends.


----------



## MollySmith

Boxer123 said:


> I haven't cherry picked anything my response was to @O2.2 regarding my experiences in elderly care.
> 
> I know about loneliness in the pandemic I live alone and was going through a nasty divorce living away from family and friends.


Sorry @Boxer123 I didn't mean you. X

I genuinely have no idea what's happened or why @mrs phas is livid. It's not at all intended, they were intended as helpful links for those affected. IF anyone who isn't a parent would like any info on support I'm on DM.

Take care.


----------



## Dimwit

kimthecat said:


> Thanks but it only shows my and your post.


According to the internet, a Women's Rights gathering at the Emily Pankhurst statue to protest the need for female-only spaces etc. was gatecrashed by a counter protest by a group of trans activists 'mostly reported to be men' dressed in black with balaclavas who started intimidating the women…


----------



## MollySmith

kimthecat said:


> Thanks but it only shows my and your post.


I wasn't going to post why, I just posted how to find and use Twitter.


----------



## kimthecat

Dimwit said:


> According to the internet, a Women's Rights gathering at the Emily Pankhurst statue to protest the need for female-only spaces etc. was gatecrashed by a counter protest by a group of trans activists 'mostly reported to be men' dressed in black with balaclavas who started intimidating the women…


Thanks . Apparently the Police threaten to arrest the woman on the bench but not the Men in Black ! I cant find any reference or reports to this elsewhere. Cant believe it.


----------



## kimthecat

MollySmith said:


> I wasn't going to post why, I just posted how to find and use Twitter.


Sorry , I thought you meant a search here in this thread, I know how to use. Twitter ,


----------



## O2.0

I don't think it matters why someone is lonely or alone or whether they're a man or a woman - or neither. 
I see it all as a reminder of the need for community and to help each other out however we can. 
I don't care what "label" we put on elderly people, what their family status is. Just take care of people. Who cares why they don't have support. If you see someone who needs support and you are able to, you help. Seems pretty darned simple to me. 
Communities always do a better job of caring for people than any government can.


----------



## Oof

I think what @mrs phas was referring to was the notion that someone would bring a child into the world for the purpose of being the primary carer for the aging adult (or at least that's what I interpreted from it).

And I agree with it, although I don't think it was the main point of the topic.

I have no idea if my 'parent' is still alive or not, and I don't care either way. It'll be a cold day in hell before I dedicate my life to making hers comfortable.

I've brought my kids up so that they're not under any impression or obligation that they owe me anything - they don't.

And I think that care duties tend to end up on the shoulders of daughters.

But i think this may be off topic (sorry).


----------



## Boxer123

O2.0 said:


> I don't think it matters why someone is lonely or alone or whether they're a man or a woman - or neither.
> I see it all as a reminder of the need for community and to help each other out however we can.
> I don't care what "label" we put on elderly people, what their family status is. Just take care of people. Who cares why they don't have support. If you see someone who needs support and you are able to, you help. Seems pretty darned simple to me.
> Communities always do a better job of caring for people than any government can.


This was my point. My neighbour was born in her house she wishes to stay. The council have tried to put her in sheltered accommodation but she has enough support and people who love her in the village so can manage.


----------



## O2.0

Oof said:


> And I think that care duties tend to end up on the shoulders of daughters.
> 
> But i think this may be off topic (sorry).


No, I think this is a very on-topic point - that women do end up shouldering the duty of care to so many.


----------



## MollySmith

It offends me that anyone feels like they have to justify they didn’t have kids to care for them. I’m not so stupid. It’s insulting. It - once again - wasn’t the original point. The post was a gentle reminder that there are more men who aren’t fathers which has been skipped over in favour of a sentence so obvious to me I didn’t even think the thread would derail.

I agree ageing is not a reason to have a child; I never said otherwise. Neither does the link. My parents didn’t have me for this reason either, but when I think of the volume of care that my four great grandparents needed; my four grandparents and twelve great uncles/aunts, it is terrifying to think that through no fault of my own I will likely be alone.

I imagine some unhealthy relationships did; we have at least one in a past generation in my family and it was an awful. The fact is that more people do have someone who may inherit stuff, to - at the very least - be an executor unless one is going to entirely cut them off and I do not imagine anyone does that intentionally. It’s a privilege of being a parent if one obtains the minor miracle of still having them in ones life at the end and with a good relationship. Again no so stupid or up my own arse I don’t recognise this. Yet I’ve just watched the Spire Healthcare advert - every single ageing patient has a younger form of a family. It’s convenient for the system if people have a one but lots of life events mean we do not, even parents. Systems and society doesn’t allow for loneliness but how bloody amazing to have researchers and campaigners who do care.

We all age. We all die and that’s our shared storm but the boats we sail to get there are different. Let’s at least be kind about that.

I would appreciate the courtesy of at least looking (even briefly) at a link as I look at all the links shared to me. Leaping onto threads and taking words without context is unfair and hurtful. If one can’t be bothered to do that then there’s no need to reply. I’m livid and in no mood for this.


----------



## Oof

MollySmith said:


> It offends me that anyone feels like they have to justify they didn't have kids to care for them. I'm not so stupid. It's insulting. It - once again - wasn't the original point. The post was a gentle reminder that there are more men who aren't fathers which has been skipped over in favour of a sentence so obvious to me I didn't even think the thread would derail.
> 
> I agree ageing is not a reason to have a child; I never said otherwise. Neither does the link. My parents didn't have me for this reason either, but when I think of the volume of care that my four great grandparents needed; my four grandparents and twelve great uncles/aunts, it is terrifying to think that through no fault of my own I will likely be alone.
> 
> I imagine some unhealthy relationships did; we have at least one in a past generation in my family and it was an awful. The fact is that more people do have someone who may inherit stuff, to - at the very least - be an executor unless one is going to entirely cut them off and I do not imagine anyone does that intentionally. It's a privilege of being a parent if one obtains the minor miracle of still having them in ones life at the end and with a good relationship. Again no so stupid or up my own arse I don't recognise this. Yet I've just watched the Spire Healthcare advert - every single ageing patient has a younger form of a family. It's convenient for the system if people have a one but lots of life events mean we do not, even parents. Systems and society doesn't allow for loneliness but how bloody amazing to have researchers and campaigners who do care.
> 
> We all age. We all die and that's our shared storm but the boats we sail to get there are different. Let's at least be kind about that.
> 
> I would appreciate the courtesy of at least looking (even briefly) at a link as I look at all the links shared to me. Leaping onto threads and taking words without context is unfair and hurtful. If one can't be bothered to do that then there's no need to reply. I'm livid and in no mood for this.


I'm sorry if I'm the one that's insulted you. If I did it wasn't intentional - not that that makes things any better.
My post was a continuation of Mrs Phas'. It wasn't in response to anything else; i just thought I could add to it. I wasn't trying to make a point towards anyone on this forum. I don't come here to fight or derail threads (although I'm definitely guilty of that at times).

As for the ageing parent situation: the angle I was coming from was my own experience. It was a 'given' that I would take care of elderly relatives. The pattern I've noticed is that it does tend to be women lumped with care duties rather than men.

Something that I thought would be relevant to a womens rights thread.


----------



## Rafa

I live alone and have done for thirteen years.

I have two Sons, aged 43 and 38 now. The older one lives very close to me and the younger in the Netherlands.

One of my biggest fears is that either of them would ever feel they have to take care of me. The three of us are very close and I do know they worry about me, but take care of me? No, I would hate that.

My Sons have no obligation to me. I chose to have them and I want their lives to be their own and never centre around me.


----------



## lullabydream

Rafa said:


> I live alone and have done for thirteen years.
> 
> I have two Sons, aged 43 and 38 now. The older one lives very close to me and the younger in the Netherlands.
> 
> One of my biggest fears is that either of them would ever feel they have to take care of me. The three of us are very close and I do know they worry about me, but take care of me? No, I would hate that.
> 
> My Sons have no obligation to me. I chose to have them and I want their lives to be their own and never centre around me.


I feel the same about my son's too.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## mrs phas

MollySmith said:


> Clearly my words are once again being cherry picked without anyone reading the link.


I read the link in its entirety, and several of his blogs, most interesting
I wasn't cherry picking your words, in fact I feel a little hurt you'd think that I would, ever, do that
I was merely doing what @Oof explained very succinctly
edit to add, they weren't even your words I quoted, but those of Dr Hadley



Oof said:


> I think what @mrs phas was referring to was the notion that someone would bring a child into the world for the purpose of being the primary carer for the aging adult (or at least that's what I interpreted from it)


Thank you


----------



## Sairy

MollySmith said:


> It offends me that anyone feels like they have to justify they didn't have kids to care for them. I'm not so stupid. It's insulting. It - once again - wasn't the original point. The post was a gentle reminder that there are more men who aren't fathers which has been skipped over in favour of a sentence so obvious to me I didn't even think the thread would derail.
> 
> I agree ageing is not a reason to have a child; I never said otherwise. Neither does the link. My parents didn't have me for this reason either, but when I think of the volume of care that my four great grandparents needed; my four grandparents and twelve great uncles/aunts, it is terrifying to think that through no fault of my own I will likely be alone.
> 
> I imagine some unhealthy relationships did; we have at least one in a past generation in my family and it was an awful. The fact is that more people do have someone who may inherit stuff, to - at the very least - be an executor unless one is going to entirely cut them off and I do not imagine anyone does that intentionally. It's a privilege of being a parent if one obtains the minor miracle of still having them in ones life at the end and with a good relationship. Again no so stupid or up my own arse I don't recognise this. Yet I've just watched the Spire Healthcare advert - every single ageing patient has a younger form of a family. It's convenient for the system if people have a one but lots of life events mean we do not, even parents. Systems and society doesn't allow for loneliness but how bloody amazing to have researchers and campaigners who do care.
> 
> We all age. We all die and that's our shared storm but the boats we sail to get there are different. Let's at least be kind about that.
> 
> I would appreciate the courtesy of at least looking (even briefly) at a link as I look at all the links shared to me. Leaping onto threads and taking words without context is unfair and hurtful. If one can't be bothered to do that then there's no need to reply. I'm livid and in no mood for this.


My great uncle is incredibly lucky that his carers go in 4 times per day, as well as my Dad living next door and visiting several times per day. I know that a lot of people (with or without children) do not receive anything like this level of care.

If it helps, I understood the point of what you are trying to share. From what I understand the awwoc organisation is to try and support those who need care and are not going to receive any help from family, either due to not having children at all or due to children not being willing to help. I also don't want my son to be worrying about looking after me when I am old, but I think there is an assumption by the state that family will do just that.

Even when children do not do much of the day to day care, it is often the children (or other family members) who do the fighting to make sure that the elderly relative is being cared for by someone. A friend of mine has just gone through a horrific ordeal with her grandmother who was being "cared for" in hospital. The family were having a video call with her and overheard a nurse verbally abusing her over the call (the nurse clearly didn't realise she was on a call). The family then put in a massive complaint and fought for the nan so that she could come home and be cared for in her final days.

I actually never considered why more men than women might be childless and I'm trying to think why that might be.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> "92% OF ALL UNPAID CARE IN THE UK IS PROVIDED BY FAMILY".


What is unpaid care? 
We don't have an NHS in the US or anything similar, most of the world doesn't.

When a parent cares for an adult child who can't care for themselves, is that unpaid care? 
What about if a partner cares for a spouse with a disability?


----------



## Jobeth

O2.0 said:


> What is unpaid care?
> We don't have an NHS in the US or anything similar, most of the world doesn't.
> 
> When a parent cares for an adult child who can't care for themselves, is that unpaid care?
> What about if a partner cares for a spouse with a disability?


This explains it: https://carerscentral.org.uk/are-you-an-unpaid-carer/
If you provide 35 hours of care a week then (under certain conditions) you could get £69.70 a week. That is way below what you would receive as a paid carer under the national living wage of £9.50 an hour https://www.gov.uk/carers-allowance


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## O2.0

Jobeth said:


> This explains it: https://carerscentral.org.uk/are-you-an-unpaid-carer/
> If you provide 35 hours of care a week then (under certain conditions) you could get £69.70 a week. That is way below what you would receive as a paid carer under the national living wage of £9.50 an hour https://www.gov.uk/carers-allowance


Wow. This is so outside of the realm of anything I'm familiar with I don't really know what to think. 
No wonder wires get crossed sometimes on here. 
You guys do realize how unusual this is worldwide right?


----------



## Jobeth

O2.0 said:


> Wow. This is so outside of the realm of anything I'm familiar with I don't really know what to think.
> No wonder wires get crossed sometimes on here.
> You guys do realize how unusual this is worldwide right?


Yes but we do pay for it through National Insurance. It's deducted from your wage. If you have assets below £20,000 your care will be met by the government. Between £20,000 and £100,000 it is subsided.


----------



## Deguslave

Whenever someone in the UK needs care, its always family first, if they want to stay in their own home.

It's an uphill battle to get paid care unless you fully fund it yourself privately, especially if there are relatives who can do it, and most people are only allotted care by the state in 15min sections, with some getting less than a hour a day. A carer to help get you washed and dressed, another to get you ready for bed, and its not always the same carer so they may not be familiar with either your condition or your needs. If you cannot cook for yourself, you could qualify for meals on wheels, and a hot meal will be bought daily to your door for a weekly fee.

During the pandemic a lot of care was withdrawn, especially if it was what we call day care which is when you go to a day centre so your full time carers (relatives) can have some respite. These day centres were a lifeline to both the carer and caree as its sometimes the only contact they have with other people.


----------



## Jobeth

Deguslave said:


> Whenever someone in the UK needs care, its always family first, if they want to stay in their own home.
> 
> It's an uphill battle to get paid care unless you fully fund it yourself privately, especially if there are relatives who can do it, and most people are only allotted care by the state in 15min sections, with some getting less than a hour a day. A carer to help get you washed and dressed, another to get you ready for bed, and its not always the same carer so they may not be familiar with either your condition or your needs. If you cannot cook for yourself, you could qualify for meals on wheels, and a hot meal will be bought daily to your door for a weekly fee.
> 
> During the pandemic a lot of care was withdrawn, especially if it was what we call day care which is when you go to a day centre so your full time carers (relatives) can have some respite. These day centres were a lifeline to both the carer and caree as its sometimes the only contact they have with other people.


I think that the level of 'care' provided is definitely something that needs to be addressed.


----------



## 1507601

@O2.0 I'm a bit confused about your posts. In the US, if someone requires full time care, how does the carer survive as they're unable to have a job? 
And we don't have that small village mentality here anymore that allows for someone to be cared for by multiple people. Most places, nobody really knows each other and they don't want to. We're lucky in that we've moved somewhere a bit more old fashioned, although we're still outsiders, lol. As an aside, I'm an unpaid carer for my husband who has a neurological condition and mental health issues. We run a business together, but it is a massive struggle and I do believe I should have been granted carer's allowance. I believe I am entitled to some form of support but I really can't be bothered, how would I even find time in which he doesn't need me with him to get it?
Sorry, bit of a rant there...
My husband and I will never have anyone to look after us when we're old, except each other. We don't intend to get to a stage where we're completely unable to care for ourselves. Having seen my brother in law die at 21, I don't worry too much about old age; I'll be happy if I get there.


----------



## Cleo38

Deguslave said:


> Whenever someone in the UK needs care, its always family first, if they want to stay in their own home.
> 
> It's an uphill battle to get paid care unless you fully fund it yourself privately, especially if there are relatives who can do it, and most people are only allotted care by the state in 15min sections, with some getting less than a hour a day. A carer to help get you washed and dressed, another to get you ready for bed, and its not always the same carer so they may not be familiar with either your condition or your needs. If you cannot cook for yourself, you could qualify for meals on wheels, and a hot meal will be bought daily to your door for a weekly fee.
> 
> During the pandemic a lot of care was withdrawn, especially if it was what we call day care which is when you go to a day centre so your full time carers (relatives) can have some respite. These day centres were a lifeline to both the carer and caree as its sometimes the only contact they have with other people.


I only had experience of the care system when my mum was in the later stages of cancer (mesothelioma) & tbh it was shocking. Unfortunately it right at the start of the Covid pandemic & whilst I appreciate this was a very difficult & unusual time the agencies involved showed how incapable they were with communication.

There was so many of them who couldn't wait to pass the buck & when we finally did get someone to come round & assess my mum they phoned her instead to 'see if she was ok'. I was livid.

Luckily she had my sister & I but it made me feel so sad (still does) for people who don't have anyone to help them out in such difficult times.

Also my mum was typical of her generation of women in being 'fine' no matter what was happening. She could barely walk without becoming breathless (her cancer affected her breathing as it was tumors in the lining of her lungs), she was vomiting, couldn't eat, etc yet when the nurse rang to see how she was she was 'fine'.

I see so many women still the same, not thinking of themselves but always of others, not wanting to be a burden, etc & I do find it so sad. I think we have sort of been told (condoned) that it's selfish to think of ourselves .... but so what if it is?!

I don't have children & am single so don't have anyone to help in my old age. I don't really think about it atm but just get on with stuff. I am stubborn old sod so never ask for help but do most jobs around the house/garden myself unless they need expert input or are so physically demanding that i can't do it.

Am not sure what not having children is to do with care, lots of families do not help out during times of need, many do not live locally, many people need specialist care, etc so many different circumstances so there arenlt really any comparisons. Everyone has their own struggles & they are all valid


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Deguslave

I too live alone, I too am childless (by choice), I'm also disabled. I have no carers, no family, and have no option but to soldier on. I can also only get out if the weather permits.

The only people I see, to talk to, on a regular basis are my neighbour who I see once a week in the summer when the bin men arrive, the delivery drivers who drop off my shopping, pet food, etc, taxi drivers when I can get out, the window cleaner and the lad who does the garden. In the winter, and during the pandemic, I didn't have a conversation with another living human being for over 3 months. My phone rarely rings.

If it wasn't for my degu fur babies, I have nothing living apart from plants, in my life. I don't qualify for care because I soldier on.


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> Thanks . Apparently the Police threaten to arrest the woman on the bench but not the Men in Black ! I cant find any reference or reports to this elsewhere. Cant believe it.


Unfortunately I can 

The campaign group Standing For Women had planned an event allowing women to speak out against rights being eroded when this was hijacked by (allegedly) mainly men in black wearing ninja style masks to intimidate the group.

Sad to see but unfortunately I am not surprised, us women are being silenced on social media, in our careers, in the mainstream media, in the sporting world, etc. JK Rowling had a great response to them though 

JK Rowling mocks trans protesters for scoring 'hilarious own goal' by 'dressing up as ninjas' | Daily Mail Online


----------



## Magyarmum

I'm 82 and due to Covid it was less than a week ago that I saw my son and DIL for the first time in 3 years.

At my age 3 years is a long time to go without seeing the people you love most in the world, and did occur to me I might die before I saw them again. However I saw no point in moaning or feeling sorry for myself about a situation over which I had no control so just got on with life! I'm more fortunate than most people of my age in that I have no health problems and am still able to drive a car, do the shopping etc and take my dogs for a walk I live on my own in a tiny village and since the lockdown if I didn't take my Schnauzer boys for training I could go for weeks without seeing or speaking to anyone,

I've told my son and DIL that I intend to remain independent for as long as possible and if I feel I need help I'll employ someone to come in each day to help. I've no intention in becoming a burden to them as they have their own lives to live.


----------



## O2.0

Lucy2020 said:


> @O2.0 I'm a bit confused about your posts. In the US, if someone requires full time care, how does the carer survive as they're unable to have a job?


Well, from the sounds of posts on here, people look out for each other a hell of a lot more here than there for one...

It just depends on the situation. My daughter has a friend who's sister has down's syndrome and will never be independent. Dad works, mom doesn't and cares for the child. There is government assistance for things like physical and occupational therapy, and once the child is of working age, she can go on permanent disability and there are also government facilities to care for adults who can't life independently, but they're hard to get in to and vary in terms of care. Those who can afford to make different arrangements as I'm sure this child's parents will. The biggest concern of course is how the adult child will be cared for once the parents are gone.

Another friend's sister (adult) had a stroke and is not able to care for herself. She (the woman who had the stroke) is in a facility for long-term rehab patients like her that her insurance covers, and she will eventually go on long-term disability. (When I was hospitalized while pregnant, I had short-term disability to help a little). "Disability" covers a percentage of your salary. My friend goes and visits her sister every day after work, but the "village" also pitches in and we do all sorts of things from going to visit the sister in the facility to go over and clean both houses, fix meals, stock the fridge, since she doesn't have time between work and visits to do much else.

Another friend's mom died of ALS, my friend moved her in to her home and cared for her herself while also working full time. Then she hired a part time nurse though her mother's insurance, then a full time nurse, now with savings. Another friend's husband had the same condition but deteriorated much quicker and my friend basically used her sick leave at work (paid) until he passed.

If you have a job with decent benefits there are options. If you're poor enough there are government programs that can help. If you work enough to get by but don't have good benefits at your work, you're screwed. And that's the reality for more of the world than not. You can make this political all day long, but the truth is most of the world doesn't have anything close to the NHS which 100% shapes attitudes about just about everything from the job you choose to the people you surround yourself with, and how you show care and compassion to others.


----------



## Cleo38

Magyarmum said:


> I'm 82 and due to Covid it was less than a week ago that I saw my son and DIL for the first time in 3 years.
> 
> At my age 3 years is a long time to go without seeing the people you love most in the world, and did occur to me I might die before I saw them again. However I saw no point in moaning or feeling sorry for myself about a situation over which I had no control so just got on with life! I'm more fortunate than most people of my age in that I have no health problems and am still able to drive a car, do the shopping etc and take my dogs for a walk I live on my own in a tiny village and since the lockdown if I didn't take my Schnauzer boys for training I could go for weeks without seeing or speaking to anyone,
> 
> I've told my son and DIL that I intend to remain independent for as long as possible and if I feel I need help I'll employ someone to come in each day to help. I've no intention in becoming a burden to them as they have their own lives to live.


I honestly think some of us are able to cope better than other tho. My mum (before her illness) was so sociable, always out with friends, spent hours on the phone with them, etc. Although she was still seeing me every day when Covid kicked in (no way was I not seeing my dying mum regardless of any rules) she still missed her friends so much & it was so difficult for her to spend time indoors. She was used to lovely long lunches, trips to museums & galleries, or an afternoon at the theatre not sat in her house 

I am much more suited to lockdown life. I am fine if I don't see anyone as long as I have the dogs. I can go days without speaking to people & it really doesn't affect me me at all. I sort of have the opposite in that the more isolated I am the more I find it difficult to get back in to social situations & I do have to push myself to not cut myself off completely.


----------



## Siskin

Cleo38 said:


> I honestly think some of us are able to cope better than other tho. My mum (before her illness) was so sociable, always out with friends, spent hours on the phone with them, etc. Although she was still seeing me every day when Covid kicked in (no way was I not seeing my dying mum regardless of any rules) she still missed her friends so much & it was so difficult for her to spend time indoors. She was used to lovely long lunches, trips to museums & galleries, or an afternoon at the theatre not sat in her house
> 
> I am much more suited to lockdown life. I am fine if I don't see anyone as long as I have the dogs. I can go days without speaking to people & it really doesn't affect me me at all. I sort of have the opposite in that the more isolated I am the more I find it difficult to get back in to social situations & I do have to push myself to not cut myself off completely.


My SIL is in a similar position to you in some ways.
She was just an ordinary wife and mum of two working as a teacher when her husband (my husbands brother) was diagnosed with Huntington's disease at the age of 50. He survived another 9 years but during that time D (my SIL) became his carer and it took quite a toll on her. When her husband died she had a few years of recovering and getting back to a life when her parents health began to fail more. Initially it was merely a matter of regular visits, but eventually she ended up moving close to them and over the next 8 years became their carer. Her mother had had a stroke 20 years ago and was pretty much incapacitated physically and had funded carers coming in 3 times a day which helped as she didn't want her daughter doing personal care.
D's mum died two years ago and she has been able to pick up her life again, but it's left her very much in limbo as she seems unable to make a decision about what to do with her life. She's currently renting and luckily has a good landlord who is happy to continue with her as a tenant, but that could change without a lot of notice. We've told her that she can always come and live with us and continue to come and go as she pleases visiting all her friends.
D also has an older brother who is a long term sufferer of ME who can manage at the moment, but his wife has dementia and is becoming increasingly worse meaning her husband will be less likely to continue managing her. Knowing D I can easily imagine that she will go and help and end up caring for them both. D is a naturally caring type of person, but it seems such a shame that much of her life has been looking after other people rather then doing the things she loves doing such as travelling. D also says she doesn't want her children looking after her when she needs care and has plans for a 'way out'.


----------



## Boxer123

O2.0 said:


> Well, from the sounds of posts on here, people look out for each other a hell of a lot more here than there for one...
> 
> It just depends on the situation. My daughter has a friend who's sister has down's syndrome and will never be independent. Dad works, mom doesn't and cares for the child. There is government assistance for things like physical and occupational therapy, and once the child is of working age, she can go on permanent disability and there are also government facilities to care for adults who can't life independently, but they're hard to get in to and vary in terms of care. Those who can afford to make different arrangements as I'm sure this child's parents will. The biggest concern of course is how the adult child will be cared for once the parents are gone.
> 
> Another friend's sister (adult) had a stroke and is not able to care for herself. She (the woman who had the stroke) is in a facility for long-term rehab patients like her that her insurance covers, and she will eventually go on long-term disability. (When I was hospitalized while pregnant, I had short-term disability to help a little). "Disability" covers a percentage of your salary. My friend goes and visits her sister every day after work, but the "village" also pitches in and we do all sorts of things from going to visit the sister in the facility to go over and clean both houses, fix meals, stock the fridge, since she doesn't have time between work and visits to do much else.
> 
> Another friend's mom died of ALS, my friend moved her in to her home and cared for her herself while also working full time. Then she hired a part time nurse though her mother's insurance, then a full time nurse, now with savings. Another friend's husband had the same condition but deteriorated much quicker and my friend basically used her sick leave at work (paid) until he passed.
> 
> If you have a job with decent benefits there are options. If you're poor enough there are government programs that can help. If you work enough to get by but don't have good benefits at your work, you're screwed. And that's the reality for more of the world than not. You can make this political all day long, but the truth is most of the world doesn't have anything close to the NHS which 100% shapes attitudes about just about everything from the job you choose to the people you surround yourself with, and how you show care and compassion to others.


That's a bit harsh direct me to the post where people said they don't look after others. It's a bit different doing shopping and cooking or looking after someone full time. Carers in this country save the NHS thousands. The carers allowance they get is a pittance people like @Lucy2020 are doing amazing jobs on very little.


----------



## Cleo38

Siskin said:


> My SIL is in a similar position to you in some ways.
> She was just an ordinary wife and mum of two working as a teacher when her husband (my husbands brother) was diagnosed with Huntington's disease at the age of 50. He survived another 9 years but during that time D (my SIL) became his carer and it took quite a toll on her. When her husband died she had a few years of recovering and getting back to a life when her parents health began to fail more. Initially it was merely a matter of regular visits, but eventually she ended up moving close to them and over the next 8 years became their carer. Her mother had had a stroke 20 years ago and was pretty much incapacitated physically and had funded carers coming in 3 times a day which helped as she didn't want her daughter doing personal care.
> D's mum died two years ago and she has been able to pick up her life again, but it's left her very much in limbo as she seems unable to make a decision about what to do with her life. She's currently renting and luckily has a good landlord who is happy to continue with her as a tenant, but that could change without a lot of notice. We've told her that she can always come and live with us and continue to come and go as she pleases visiting all her friends.
> D also has an older brother who is a long term sufferer of ME who can manage at the moment, but his wife has dementia and is becoming increasingly worse meaning her husband will be less likely to continue managing her. Knowing D I can easily imagine that she will go and help and end up caring for them both. D is a naturally caring type of person, but it seems such a shame that much of her life has been looking after other people rather then doing the things she loves doing such as travelling. D also says she doesn't want her children looking after her when she needs care and has plans for a 'way out'.


OMG, such a lot of sadness & so much to cope with. My mum was one of those people who would always help others out no matter who they were.

When my dad was in the final stages of his life (complicated story, he was a violent alcoholic who I hadn't seen for years & didn't want to) he suddenly wanted to see us all so my mum & my sister ended up getting sucked in to caring for him & sorting out accommodation, nurses, etc. I was so worried my mum would be burdened with him despite all the sh*t he put her through but my sister was great Although very helpful she was clear on boundaries & didn't let him dictate to anyone what they should be doing. I honestly think if she hadn't of my mum would have been run ragged with his demands.

I do think some people are better at this role but there is a danger of them being the one that everyone turns to & they then end up being forgotten about. I must admit I am quite a selfish person & I do think of myself (maybe a but too much times!) & I really wish my mum had been more like that & thought of herself a bit more but ....


----------



## O2.0

Boxer123 said:


> That's a bit harsh direct me to the post where people said they don't look after others. It's a bit different doing shopping and cooking or looking after someone full time. Carers in this country save the NHS thousands. The carers allowance they get is a pittance people like @Lucy2020 are doing amazing jobs on very little.


Harsh as in the situation is harsh or I'm being harsh? I suppose both are true.

And yes, shopping and cooking is different than full time care, I gave examples of full time care also. My friend who's mother died of ALS was changing her diapers and staying up nights to clear her airways. Even though she was still working, I feel sure she considered what she was doing for her mom a full time responsibility too.

On topic to the thread, I find it telling that every single example folks have given are of women in the role of caretaker, never men. So the people losing pay, working crazy hours, quitting their job to care for others are overwhelmingly women.


----------



## Siskin

Cleo38 said:


> OMG, such a lot of sadness & so much to cope with. My mum was one of those people who would always help others out no matter who they were.
> 
> When my dad was in the final stages of his life (complicated story, he was a violent alcoholic who I hadn't seen for years & didn't want to) he suddenly wanted to see us all so my mum & my sister ended up getting sucked in to caring for him & sorting out accommodation, nurses, etc. I was so worried my mum would be burdened with him despite all the sh*t he put her through but my sister was great Although very helpful she was clear on boundaries & didn't let him dictate to anyone what they should be doing. I honestly think if she hadn't of my mum would have been run ragged with his demands.
> 
> I do think some people are better at this role but there is a danger of them being the one that everyone turns to & they then end up being forgotten about. I must admit I am quite a selfish person & I do think of myself (maybe a but too much times!) & I really wish my mum had been more like that & thought of herself a bit more but ....


I'm not a good carer type, I'm pretty selfish as well and would end up feeling resentful far to quickly.
A friend here in Suffolk I feel is the same although she's not admitted to it. Her husband seemed to suddenly get a form of dementia and he's now in a care home which he hates but he would be next to impossible at home. My friend is small and has a form of blood cancer so isn't able to manhandle him at all. He did have two carers coming in regularly during the day pre Covid, but when Covid hit care homes round the country people started taking their relatives out of the homes and then needed carers at home. It ended up with my friend having to put her husband into a home as the carer facility was unable to provide two carers anymore and as it needed two people to deal with him. The only good thing was that she had plenty of choices of home and was able to get him into a nice one. Unfortunately he's now at a stage where his behaviour is getting very difficult and he may need to go to a dementia nursing type home.


----------



## Boxer123

O2.0 said:


> Harsh as in the situation is harsh or I'm being harsh? I suppose both are true.
> 
> And yes, shopping and cooking is different than full time care, I gave examples of full time care also. My friend who's mother died of ALS was changing her diapers and staying up nights to clear her airways. Even though she was still working, I feel sure she considered what she was doing for her mom a full time responsibility too.
> 
> On topic to the thread, I find it telling that every single example folks have given are of women in the role of caretaker, never men. So the people losing pay, working crazy hours, quitting their job to care for others are overwhelmingly women.


Yep it was you being harsh @O2.2  I am very grateful to our NHS but many folk miss out it has many problems. Many of the parents I have worked with simply couldn't go to work and act as a carer. I'll say it again the carers allowance is a pittance. Sadly it is mostly women in caring roles.


----------



## O2.0

Boxer123 said:


> Yep it was you being harsh @O2.2  I am very grateful to our NHS but many folk miss out it has many problems. Many of the parents I have worked with simply couldn't go to work and act as a carer. I'll say it again the carers allowance is a pittance. Sadly it is mostly women in caring roles.


The NHS is great, but I think you (general you) forget what an unimaginable luxury it is for most of the world. So yes, I imagine I do come across as harsh but I've never lived in any situation remotely like what living with that kind of safety net is like, so my world view is very much shaped by that.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

O2.0 said:


> The NHS is great, but I think you (general you) forget what an unimaginable luxury it is for most of the world. So yes, I imagine I do come across as harsh but I've never lived in any situation remotely like what living with that kind of safety net is like, so my world view is very much shaped by that.


The NHS does not pay for care in the UK, well there is Continuing Health Care but hardly anyone fits the criteria for that. There is no such thing as free adult care provided by the state, even if the person requiring care have no saving they will still be making a contribution out of any income they receive, pension etc. There are many thousands of people in the UK providing unpaid care in the UK regardless of us having an NHS or NI, depending on circumstances some will be able to still work full time and provide care, others will not. The UK having a NHS and NI does not mean we are any less looking out for each other.


----------



## Cleo38

Siskin said:


> I'm not a good carer type, I'm pretty selfish as well and would end up feeling resentful far to quickly.
> A friend here in Suffolk I feel is the same although she's not admitted to it. Her husband seemed to suddenly get a form of dementia and he's now in a care home which he hates but he would be next to impossible at home. My friend is small and has a form of blood cancer so isn't able to manhandle him at all. He did have two carers coming in regularly during the day pre Covid, but when Covid hit care homes round the country people started taking their relatives out of the homes and then needed carers at home. It ended up with my friend having to put her husband into a home as the carer facility was unable to provide two carers anymore and as it needed two people to deal with him. The only good thing was that she had plenty of choices of home and was able to get him into a nice one. Unfortunately he's now at a stage where his behaviour is getting very difficult and he may need to go to a dementia nursing type home.


My mum went in to a nursing home for the last week of her life. Luckily it was lovely & recommended by a nurse at the hospice she was at. But it was during lockdown so although we kept in touch via phone am sure she was pretty isolated despite the staff trying their best. It is something I doubt I will ever get over tbh.

But the stories I have heard from friends who had family in care homes or worked in them are so desperately sad Residents being so isolated & then the staff trying their best but then being lied to about taking in patients from hospitals who were positive for Covid (or hadn't been tested) ... so many people suffering so badly. It really is heartbreaking.

I have so much admiration for people who work in those professions


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> No, america is in the minority when it comes to both free and universal healthcare: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_universal_health_care


The level of care the NHS provides and the social services you have available is an unimaginable luxury to most of the word. 
Yes, countries like Cuba and Venezuela have free universal health care. Are you aware of what that 'health care' entails? 
Do you understand why charities like Doctor's Without Borders exist and regularly travel to countries with free universal health care?



bmr10 said:


> And regardless of what a country currently offers, I think we should all be striving for improvement and the care that we deserve (in my opinion).


I agree that we should be striving for improvement. I don't agree with basing it off what people think they deserve. Like I don't think breast implants for vanity reasons are a human right. After mastectomy surgery? Sure. Though even there if funding is tight, I'd rather see it go to more life-saving procedures.


----------



## O2.0

3dogs2cats said:


> The UK having a NHS and NI does not mean we are any less looking out for each other.


That comment was in response to @Lucy2020 saying "we don't have that small village mentality here anymore that allows for someone to be cared for by multiple people. Most places, nobody really knows each other and they don't want to."


----------



## 1507601

O2.0 said:


> That comment was in response to @Lucy2020 saying "we don't have that small village mentality here anymore that allows for someone to be cared for by multiple people. Most places, nobody really knows each other and they don't want to."


Just to clarify, as my wording wasn't clear, I meant most people don't want to endeavour to get to know each other.


----------



## Jobeth

O2.0 said:


> The level of care the NHS provides and the social services you have available is an unimaginable luxury to most of the word.
> Yes, countries like Cuba and Venezuela have free universal health care. Are you aware of what that 'health care' entails?
> Do you understand why charities like Doctor's Without Borders exist and regularly travel to countries with free universal health care?


The hospital for the area that I worked in had 200 beds for 100 000 people and was 19 miles to a road with tarmac. Whilst free (funding is shared between the Salvation Army and the Zambia government) it was very basic compared to what we have provided for us. It frequently had to use the emergency generator and you couldn't drink water from the taps.


----------



## 1507601

I don't think that we are any less caring than the rest of the world, which it seems like you're saying @O2.0 , particularly here:


O2.0 said:


> but the truth is most of the world doesn't have anything close to the NHS which 100% shapes attitudes about just about everything from the job you choose to the people you surround yourself with, and how you show care and compassion to others.


But we tend to live in densely populated areas where people simply don't know each other, so they don't know people need help. When you live in a densely populated area it's true that you just keep your head down and mostly just socialise with family and friends, and maybe say hello to your neighbour sometimes. Living in a small village is very different, seems like a lot of people are well acquainted and look out for each other - and maybe a part of that is also that we live in the north up a massive hill, so we get some pretty extreme weather, meaning you can't leave and potentially have no power for a week... But people do mostly live in towns or cities.

My dad is my mum's carer and also cared for my great-uncle who had Alzheimers. My mother in law is currently caring for my grandmother in law who is now bed bound and has cancer amongst numerous other conditions basically just caused by her age (she's 90-something). We do care. There might be some cultural differences - we do worry about being rude and stepping in where we're not wanted, and people 'keep up appearances' so you might never know anything is wrong (my granddad hid the fact he lost his teeth from my grandmother for ages!!!) - but we're not really any different to you guys.


----------



## O2.0

Jobeth said:


> The hospital for the area that I worked in had 200 beds for 100 000 people and was 19 miles to a road with tarmac. Whilst free (funding is shared between the Salvation Army and the Zambia government) it was very basic compared to what we have provided for us. It frequently had to use the emergency generator and you couldn't drink water from the taps.


Right, exactly  
So again, my point about the UK's system being an unimaginable luxury for most of the world. 
I'm not saying that to knock the UK's system. Quite the opposite. But understand that people who don't live under a system like that are going to have a very different world view about taking care of themselves and their loved ones.


----------



## O2.0

Lucy2020 said:


> I don't think that we are any less caring than the rest of the world, which it seems like you're saying @O2.0 , particularly here:


Nope, I'm simply saying that you have it good in the UK.
And not everyone shares the same experiences. We all come at our attitudes from different life experiences.

I grew up in 3rd world countries. It doesn't occur to me to depend on the government to take care of me. That's not because I'm callous or don't think people need taking care of, it just means my own life experiences mean it doesn't occur to me to depend on the government. When things aren't an option, you tend not to think about them. So we take care of ourselves and take care of others because it doesn't occur to us that anyone else will.


----------



## Siskin

I live in a typical rural English village which largely still has that caring mentality, very noticeable during the Covid lockdowns. Sometimes city folk move in and for some reason seem to want to totally isolate themselves from the neighbours and not join clubs or come to village events. Those tend to be the ones that sell up and leave citing unfriendly locals, but then there is only so many times you can knock on the door inviting them to things only to have continual refusals.
There is one particular lady who is probably close to 80 who is so kind. She isn’t the one popping round all the time or searching out gossip, she lives a quiet life. But if she hears anyone is poorly or having other problems, she’s there on the phone offering help and consoling words


----------



## Jobeth

O2.0 said:


> it just means my own life experiences mean it doesn't occur to me to depend on the government. When things aren't an option, you tend not to think about them. So we take care of ourselves and take care of others because it doesn't occur to us that anyone else will.


I know what that level of community is like and you wouldn't manage without it.


----------



## Boxer123

O2.0 said:


> The NHS is great, but I think you (general you) forget what an unimaginable luxury it is for most of the world. So yes, I imagine I do come across as harsh but I've never lived in any situation remotely like what living with that kind of safety net is like, so my world view is very much shaped by that.


The NHS don't fund carers allowance though for most carers they are left with little or no support. I don't think it makes us less caring than others which is what I was responding to.

If I broke my ankle I know my neighbours would look after me. They would offer to walk boxers, shop and garden for me. If I was hit by a bus needing 24 hour care that would have to come from somewhere else.


----------



## Lurcherlad

Deguslave said:


> I too live alone, I too am childless (by choice), I'm also disabled. I have no carers, no family, and have no option but to soldier on. I can also only get out if the weather permits.
> 
> The only people I see, to talk to, on a regular basis are my neighbour who I see once a week in the summer when the bin men arrive, the delivery drivers who drop off my shopping, pet food, etc, taxi drivers when I can get out, the window cleaner and the lad who does the garden. In the winter, and during the pandemic, I didn't have a conversation with another living human being for over 3 months. My phone rarely rings.
> 
> If it wasn't for my degu fur babies, I have nothing living apart from plants, in my life. I don't qualify for care because I soldier on.


If you want some help or company, are their any agencies or clubs locally that you could get in touch with?

We have a few different options round here, depending on age, interests, disability, etc.


----------



## O2.0

Boxer123 said:


> The NHS don't fund carers allowance though for most carers they are left with little or no support. I don't think it makes us less caring than others which is what I was responding to.


I don't think I said you were less caring?

I don't know why you would care what I think anyway. I'm not in the UK, I don't vote in the UK, I have no influence whatsoever over UK policies so what I think about how the government takes care of you or how you care for yourselves shouldn't matter.

I know, I know, I'm coming across as harsh again, but I'm just confused as to what the big deal is. 
My sole point was that the NHS and other social services you have in the UK whatever their flaws may be, are an incredible luxury that most people worldwide don't have.

So when we talk about women (because it's mainly women) shouldering the burden of caring for people who can't care for themselves, I think it matters to look at things from a worldview as well as a local view. Most of the world doesn't have government services to help them the way you can expect help in the UK.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Sairy

O2.0 said:


> On topic to the thread, I find it telling that every single example folks have given are of women in the role of caretaker, never men. So the people losing pay, working crazy hours, quitting their job to care for others are overwhelmingly women.


I think my dad is the exception on this thread, caring for his Uncle. My great uncle does not want my mum helping out with his care, particularly involving anything where she would see him in a state of undress. Although he now has carers going in as well as my dad, for a while my dad (who is almost 70 and has a busy life himself) had to do all the care by himself. This included many incidents of cleaning him up after he had had toilet accidents, and one where my dad had to sit up all night with him (16 hours) because my uncle had fallen in the bath and they were waiting all that time for an ambulance.

The concept of the NHS is a wonderful thing and I honestly cannot imagine living somewhere where I couldn't see a doctor if I needed to, but it is so broken at the moment with appalling waiting times and is severely underfunded.


----------



## Rafa

Cleo38 said:


> Am not sure what not having children is to do with care,


Me neither.

We have so many Nursing Homes, full of elderly people who cannot care for themselves, to show that Family very often does not step in.

For the last three years of his life, my Dad became unable to look after himself. My Sisters and I found him a place in a lovely Home on the edge of the estate where I and two of my Sisters live. We all went to see him regularly, some of us every day. It was rare to see a visitor for another resident.

On Mothers Day', a fair few people turned up with flowers. When I commented to the lady who ran the place, she said "It's the only day of the year these people come. We won't see them again until next year".

On balance, I think not having children is largely irrelevant.


----------



## Sairy

Rafa said:


> Me neither.
> 
> We have so many Nursing Homes, full of elderly people who cannot care for themselves, to show that Family very often does not step in.
> 
> For the last three years of his life, my Dad became unable to look after himself. My Sisters and I found him a place in a lovely Home on the edge of the estate where I and two of my Sisters live. We all went to see him regularly, some of us every day. It was rare to see a visitor for another resident.
> 
> On Mothers Day', a fair few people turned up with flowers. When I commented to the lady who ran the place, she said "It's the only day of the year these people come. We won't see them again until next year".
> 
> On balance, I think not having children is largely irrelevant.


That is very sad that some people only turned up once per year.


----------



## Cleo38

Rafa said:


> Me neither.
> 
> We have so many Nursing Homes, full of elderly people who cannot care for themselves, to show that Family very often does not step in.
> 
> For the last three years of his life, my Dad became unable to look after himself. My Sisters and I found him a place in a lovely Home on the edge of the estate where I and two of my Sisters live. We all went to see him regularly, some of us every day. It was rare to see a visitor for another resident.
> 
> On Mothers Day', a fair few people turned up with flowers. When I commented to the lady who ran the place, she said "It's the only day of the year these people come. We won't see them again until next year".
> 
> On balance, I think not having children is largely irrelevant.


That is so, so sad


----------



## Magyarmum

Jobeth said:


> The hospital for the area that I worked in had 200 beds for 100 000 people and was 19 miles to a road with tarmac. Whilst free (funding is shared between the Salvation Army and the Zambia government) it was very basic compared to what we have provided for us. It frequently had to use the emergency generator and you couldn't drink water from the taps.


That sounds very much like the hospital I visited in Tanzania. Basically several barracks with beds in them and a lot of the basic care being provided by family members who slept on the floor next to the bed. When my granddaughter was small and contracted malaria in Tanga she was put in a ward alongside children who were suffering from cholera.

The hospital I worked in, in South Africa didn't fall under the NHS and was well run but lacked a lot of basic equipment, The operating theatres left a lot to be desired! Today I wouldn't let my dog be treated in a South African state hospital. Many are filthy with patients sleeping on beds with no sheets and soiled bandages and blood lying on corridor floors and in lifts.

By comparison my late son received "no expenses spared" treatment under the French NHS which included flying him from Reunion to mainland France a couple of times for cancer treatment Unfortunately as with so many countries the French health care system is now struggling

My local state hospital is a teaching hospital and part of the university. Wards are very 1950'ish but clean and well run, The nursing staff tend to be rather brusque and no nonsense. Patients have to provide their own toilet rolls, cutlery, plates, mugs/glasses and water. Food is very basic - a couple of slices of bread, some marge, and luncheon meat and herbal tea for breakfast and supper and a barely edible 2 or 3 course lunch. Needless to say many patients eat food brought in by their visitors. The system is also struggling and to prevent so many doctors and nurses leaving the Hungarian government has increased salaries by 14 to 20%

The last time I was in a UK hospital was 7 years ago for a hip replacement. I can't fault the treatment and care I received. It was excellent! Like @0.20, I don't think people in the UK appreciate how lucky they are to have the NHS.


----------



## Jobeth

Magyarmum said:


> That sounds very much like the hospital I visited in Tanzania. Basically several barracks with beds in them and a lot of the basic care being provided by family members who slept on the floor next to the bed. When my granddaughter was small and contracted malaria in Tanga she was put in a ward alongside children who were suffering from cholera.
> 
> The hospital I worked in, in South Africa didn't fall under the NHS and was well run but lacked a lot of basic equipment, The operating theatres left a lot to be desired! Today I wouldn't let my dog be treated in a South African state hospital. Many are filthy with patients sleeping on beds with no sheets and soiled bandages and blood lying on corridor floors and in lifts.
> 
> By comparison my late son received "no expenses spared" treatment under the French NHS which included flying him from Reunion to mainland France a couple of times for cancer treatment Unfortunately as with so many countries the French health care system is now struggling
> 
> My local state hospital is a teaching hospital and part of the university. Wards are very 1950'ish but clean and well run, The nursing staff tend to be rather brusque and no nonsense. Patients have to provide their own toilet rolls, cutlery, plates, mugs/glasses and water. Food is very basic - a couple of slices of bread, some marge, and luncheon meat and herbal tea for breakfast and supper and a barely edible 2 or 3 course lunch. Needless to say many patients eat food brought in by their visitors. The system is also struggling and to prevent so many doctors and nurses leaving the Hungarian government has increased salaries by 14 to 20%
> 
> The last time I was in a UK hospital was 7 years ago for a hip replacement. I can't fault the treatment and care I received. It was excellent! Like @0.20, I don't think people in the UK appreciate how lucky they are to have the NHS.


The level of care was there as the doctors were from the Salvation Army but what they had available was limited. When I got malaria I stayed in the house of one of the doctor's as I taught their children. I think there is a lot you forget to appreciate when there is so much poverty elsewhere.


----------



## Cleo38

Absolutely disgusting!! These 'activists' talk of women's right's not being threatened yet act like this ...

Copied from Fair Play For Women FB group:

_In the Telegraph:_
A feminist campaigner has claimed police threatened to arrest her for a peaceful protest at a statue of Emmeline Pankhurst, where she was allegedly assaulted by balaclava-clad trans activists.
Aleks Kovacevic, 44, was hailed by JK Rowling for standing firm in the face of "intimidation" from a group of masked counter-protesters who disrupted an event organised by gender-critical campaigners in Manchester on Sunday.
Greater Manchester Police are facing criticism for failing to intervene in what Ms Kovacevic claimed to be a minute-long scuffle, which saw her pushed on to a stone ledge by the rival group, as she held a suffragette flag aloft.
The chef from Nottingham told The Telegraph she was then herself threatened with arrest by the officers for a breach of the peace, but now intends to file a criminal complaint of assault against the trans activists.
The confrontation took place when supporters of the Standing for Women (SFW) group arrived for speeches planned next to the suffragette statue, on the issue of women's rights being eroded by "trans ideology".
Instead, they found the monument encircled by protesters wearing balaclavas and dressed entirely in black, who had responded to the call of Manchester Trans Rise Up (MTRU) for an "emergency protest against a transphobic gathering".
Supporters of a group called the Anarchist Federation were also said to be in attendance.
Tensions boiled over and Ms Kovacevic claimed she was targeted by several of the balaclava-clad activists when she stood on the ledge next to the statue with her flag.
Ms Kovacevic told The Telegraph: "It was near Emmeline Pankhurst and we are today's suffragettes, we thought there was space there and we would go and stand there because we all have our rights to peaceful assembly.
"We are literally a group of five middle-aged women. I climbed on the wall and one of [the counter-protesters] clung on to my leg and tried to pull me off, but when I jumped off the wall three of them just attacked me.
"Some were pushing me, some were pulling me. They lost their way a little bit, one pushed me so hard that I had to sit down."
The final moments of the skirmish were captured on film, showing another trans activist separating the group and the police officer approaching Ms Kovacevic.
"The police officer was really strange about it. He told me that if it happened again, I would be arrested for causing a breach of peace," she said.
"Nothing was done. That whole scuffle lasted a full minute, my friends and another guy had to separate it.
"The police came and told me that I needed to move, but my friend told me I didn't need to move and I said 'yes, as a matter of fact, I don't have to move, I have the right to sit here' - and he told me if anything happens I will be arrested for causing a breach of the peace."
Officers are trained to follow a five-step appeal to avoid the breach of the peace which involves the possibility of arrest if necessary, but it is understood such a possibility was not considered necessary by the officer in Sunday's incident.
Soon after, the footage had gone viral and was shared by Rowling, the Harry Potter author who has faced fierce criticism from trans activists for her gender-critical belief.
She wrote on Twitter:
"I never expected the right side of history to include so many people in masks intimidating and assaulting
women, did you?
But she never dropped her flag. Emmelline would be proud."
Rowling added that the balaclava-clad protesters had "scored an unintentionally hilarious own goal" by getting "dressed up as ninjas to block public access to a statue of a suffragette".
Ms Kovacevic said it had been "incredible" to receive such praise from Rowling.
MTRU, the trans activists who organised the counter-protest, suggested on social media the balaclava wearers were not affiliated with them, but said they had been acting in "self-defence". Ms Kovacevic described this as a "lie".
The group has previously targeted similar gender-critical events in Manchester, including a meeting of Women's Place in March, which was besieged by trans activists and reportedly required police to intervene and help attendees leave the venue.
Declaring Sunday's counter-protest a success, the trans rights group wrote on Twitter: "They didn't get hold of the statute at any point. We claimed the space for the entire time. Well done."
Greater Manchester Police was on Monday facing questions over its handling of the incident involving Ms Kovacevic.
Sarah Phillimore, a barrister and co-founder of the campaign group Fair Cop, said: "It is sadly not remarkable that the police chose to lecture a woman rather than protect her. It's an inevitable consequence of a politicised police force."
A spokesman for Greater Manchester Police said: "We are aware of a video circulating online of a brief altercation at a protest in St. Peter's Square during a protest on Sunday May 15.
"This incident was not seen by officers present at the time but a nearby patrol did make their way over to the area as it appeared there had been some disturbance. The officer spoke to the woman and encouraged her away from the area to discuss the incident, which she didn't wish to do.
"No reports were made to the officers, and no video footage was shown when requested of those nearby.
"However, should anyone wish to make a report, then we will investigate and pursue all available lines of enquiry."
Harry Miller, a former police officer, founded Fair Cop to work with forces on protecting freedom of speech, after winning a legal challenge against Humberside Police for visiting him at work over allegedly transphobic tweets.
He told The Telegraph: "One of the interesting questions is what would have happened if [the feminist campaigners] had all turned up wearing balaclavas?
"I think they would have been arrested for causing harassment, alarm and distress - that is the problem.
"The police need to operate at all times, to both sides, without fear and without favour."

JK Rowling backs feminist campaigner who was 'assaulted' by balaclava-clad trans activists (telegraph.co.uk)


----------



## Cleo38

And here is some photos & video of one of the women being assaulted yet the police stand by & do nothing. Scary times for women atm  ......
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...tml?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=1490


----------



## Siskin

My word those hooded persons look intimidating. Why didn’t the police stop this threatening behaviour. I wonder how much longer the statue will remain unscathed


----------



## Cleo38

Siskin said:


> My word those hooded persons look intimidating. Why didn't the police stop this threatening behaviour. I wonder how much longer the statue will remain unscathed


Exactly. I wonder what the agenda is with the police as they were very keen to disrupt a peaceful vigil of mainly women after the horrific murder of Sarah Everard (from one of 'their own') yet turn a blind eye to assault by a man in intimidating dress whose identity is hidden. I find it very worrying


----------



## O2.0

So just to clarify. Women who are worried about their safety showed up to protest in front of a statue of a suffragette. And trans activists came and made them feel unsafe and attacked them? Yeah... I'd say they're proving the whole point aren't they?


----------



## Jesthar

O2.0 said:


> So just to clarify. Women who are worried about their safety showed up to protest in front of a statue of a suffragette. And trans activists came and made them feel unsafe and attacked them? Yeah... I'd say they're proving the whole point aren't they?


Trans activists who dressed all in black with full face balaclavas no less:


----------



## picaresque

The absolute state. Can’t decide if they’re more frightening or ridiculous. Antifa style dress up then back to their cushy middle class lives.They’re all spoiled brats. Every time.
Not surprised at the actions of the police. They are definitely politicised and that’s really concerning. I think it’s totally great for private individuals and even businesses to have rainbow /trans flags up etc but it’s weird as hell seeing them on police cars. I also wonder why LGBT is the only cause to get this treatment (not that they give a shit about the L evidently)


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> So just to clarify. Women who are worried about their safety showed up to protest in front of a statue of a suffragette. And trans activists came and made them feel unsafe and attacked them? Yeah... I'd say they're proving the whole point aren't they?


The ignorance & arrogance of these trans 'activists' is unbelievable ..... Kellie-Jay Keen / Posie Parker - Piers Morgan Talk TV - YouTube

(WARNING:SWEARING IN VIDEO)


----------



## Sairy

Cleo38 said:


> The ignorance & arrogance of these trans 'activists' is unbelievable ..... Kellie-Jay Keen / Posie Parker - Piers Morgan Talk TV - YouTube
> 
> (WARNING:SWEARING IN VIDEO)


Good Lord, I never thought I'd see the day when Piers Morgan was the one being rudely interrupted in an interview! If that trans spokesperson is supposed to be a suitable representative of their movement then God help them! Interrupting (when they'd previously asked not to be interrupted themselves), looking away like they aren't even paying full attention to the interview, swearing, failing to answer questions, hurling insults etc. Just basically an incredibly arrogant individual throwing their toys out of the pram.

This is so far removed from the LGBT community that I knew 10 years ago or so.


----------



## Cleo38

Sairy said:


> Good Lord, I never thought I'd see the day when Piers Morgan was the one being rudely interrupted in an interview! If that trans spokesperson is supposed to be a suitable representative of their movement then God help them! Interrupting (when they'd previously asked not to be interrupted themselves), looking away like they aren't even paying full attention to the interview, swearing, failing to answer questions, hurling insults etc. Just basically an incredibly arrogant individual throwing their toys out of the pram.
> 
> This is so far removed from the LGBT community that I knew 10 years ago or so.


Exactly. It is like watching a petulant child but then one who obviously feels it's fine to assault women if they don't agree with you. Someone also pointed out that he uses the name Jame which may be a reference to Jame Gumb (aka as Buffalo Bill) the serial killer who creates a costume from the skin of women he has murdered in The Silence of the Lambs


----------



## picaresque

Cleo38 said:


> The ignorance & arrogance of these trans 'activists' is unbelievable ..... Kellie-Jay Keen / Posie Parker - Piers Morgan Talk TV - YouTube
> 
> (WARNING:SWEARING IN VIDEO)


Yep, another spoiled brat.
So is Piers tbf but at least he's not hiding his face pretending to be some freedom fighter while espousing the establishment position (like I said, there are police cars countrywide decked out in trans colours - not the most oppressed minority in the UK).


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Jesthar

bmr10 said:


> Considering she's a trans woman, I think it's more likely that her names "Jane" but they do sound very similar (I have seen news articles using both variations).


Statistically speaking, if there is more than one original source of articles using the unusual name, it's more likely that the others are incorrectly using the common name having either misheard or incorrectly assumed it's a typo.

Either way, I suspect it's a nom de plumbing-the-depths  And if it is 'Jame' it is a very telling choice.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Magyarmum

https://babynames.com/name/jame
*Jame*

Gender: Neutral
Origin: Hebrew
Meaning: Supplanter


----------



## Cleo38

bmr10 said:


> Or it may be that Pier's doesn't enunciate his words and Jane/Jame sound very similar? Regardless, her name is unknown and may be Jane or may be Jame.


His name was listed as Jame & he was referred to as Jame, this would have been discussed before they went live on air. . He didn't correct it so I would think that's his name.

I honestly hope that it isn't some sort sinister nod to a serial killer but considering the violence & misogyny these groups display then am not entirely convinced it's not atm


----------



## kimthecat

O2.0 said:


> So just to clarify. Women who are worried about their safety showed up to protest in front of a statue of a suffragette. And trans activists came and made them feel unsafe and attacked them? Yeah... I'd say they're proving the whole point aren't they?


One of them manhandled a woman holding a flag , grabbing her and trying to take it from her but she wouldn't let go , the police did nothing except threatened to arrest her when she was waving it .

ETA its all in the film . sory for repeating whats already been said.

Whatever happened to #MeToo , It's certainly not trending now.


----------



## picaresque

Magyarmum said:


> https://babynames.com/name/jame
> *Jame*
> 
> Gender: Neutral
> Origin: Hebrew
> Meaning: Supplanter


:Bag


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## mrs phas

Magyarmum said:


> https://babynames.com/name/jame
> *Jame*
> 
> Gender: Neutral
> Origin: Hebrew
> Meaning: Supplanter


Supplanter 
noun. *someone or something taking the place of another, as through force, scheming, strategy, or the like*:

Says it all really


----------



## O2.0

Finally had a chance to watch the video with Piers Morgan. 
Without addressing a thing that was said, the fact that one person being interviewed felt the need to disguise themselves and the other person did not says most of what you need to know. Listening to the words simply confirms it. 

I also agree with Kellie Jay King that if being called transphobic is the price to pay for talking about women's issues then so be it. We have to stop being afraid of words and get to actual issues.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Finally had a chance to watch the video with Piers Morgan.
> Without addressing a thing that was said, the fact that one person being interviewed felt the need to disguise themselves and the other person did not says most of what you need to know. Listening to the words simply confirms it.
> 
> I also agree with Kellie Jay King that if being called transphobic is the price to pay for talking about women's issues then so be it. We have to stop being afraid of words and get to actual issues.


I've been called all sorts of hateful names by these sort of 'activists' & have been labelled transphobic despite disputing this myself. I think these sort of groups tho can't or won't have any discussion & anyone will be labelled as phobic if they do not toe the line.

Again I don't care anymore, they can label me how they want. It really doesn't matter to me.

I noticed the idiot Jame through in the slurs racist & fascist just for good measure as well


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Cleo38

bmr10 said:


> Going to be honest, if I had the chance to call Piers Morgan racist, transphobic, and a liar I'd take it. And if he insisted he's "always stood up for trans rights" then I'd be inclined to call him a bullsh*tting c*nt too, I don't see a point trying to reason with someone who's a liar. I'd probably cover up my face too as I wouldn't want a rabid horde of his fans doxing me or worse.


The you would look like an idiot ... IMO obviously  

Surely that is a massive opportunity to speak about a cause that you feel passionately about & to resort to personal insults is such a waste.

That @rse Jame looked pathetic, he wasted his platform & probably caused more damage to his cause simply to behave like a child.

Funny how the women involved speak out & don't cover their identity & put themselves at risk yet these men won't .... so brave


----------



## Sairy

When fighting for any cause it never helps to just throw out insults. I used to get really fed up during the gay marriage debates of advocates labelling anyone against gay marriage as a homophobe. It does nothing to actually address the issues and simply makes people less likely to listen when you throw out personal insults. And this is coming from someone who desperately wanted it to be legalised. No matter how frustrated you are about a situation, if you can't put forward your arguments in a coherent manner then you stand little chance of changing minds.

One of the things that had the biggest impact during the gay marriage debates was showing those who were against it that we gay couples are real people living normal lives, just like them. How can you possibly do that if you are wearing a mask to cover your identity?


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Magyarmum

bmr10 said:


> I believe in picking your battles. As I said, I don't see a point in trying to reason with Piers Morgan or the majority of his fan base. I don't think they have the empathy or selflessness to actually consider a different opinion than their own. I think Jame did try to reason, however, at the beginning of the interview but once Piers insisted that he's always fought for trans rights Jame, rightfully in my opinion, realised there was no point trying to get through to him and just decided to let him know what she thinks of him.


She could have always refused to appear in the interview particularly knowing what Piers Morgan is like.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Cleo38

bmr10 said:


> I believe in picking your battles. As I said, I don't see a point in trying to reason with Piers Morgan or the majority of his fan base. I don't think they have the empathy or selflessness to actually consider a different opinion than their own. *I think Jame did try to reason, however, at the beginning of the interview* but once Piers insisted that he's always fought for trans rights Jame, rightfully in my opinion, realised there was no point trying to get through to him and just decided to let him know what she thinks of him. I kind of expect a baseline of common decency and maturity from people and if you're too egotistical to consider another point of view then I'm not going to waste my time. I believe Piers just wanted an argument.


Wow, really? We must have watched different videos 

Of course Piers wanted an argument, that's what he's about. I don't like him (although I do agree with him on alot of trans issues). Surely everyone know that he loves controversy, he actively courts people who dislike him, he must have heard that said about him thousands of times & am sure he doesn't give a toss, as long as ratings are up & he's making headlines that's what matters. So surely knowing all that being clever with your dialogue & playing him at his own game would be far more effective & p*ss him off more than just insulting him .... he must be so used to that by now!

A child like man in disguise swearing on TV really is poor representation IMO. And where is this footage he spoke of showing that the trans 'activists' were attacked? I haven't seen anything of it. If it really existed & showed what happened then they would have been posting it everywhere by now .... no sign of it.

These people are nasty, cowardly bullies who hide behind disguises in order to intimidate women ..... shameful


----------



## Sairy

Jame also said at the end of the interview "I only came on here because I thought it would be kind of funny."

I'm sorry, but nothing about fighting for rights is funny. And I were part of this trans movement that she is supposed to be representing then I would be beyond furious at that comment. It shows a complete lack of seriousness of the cause you are fighting for and absolutely makes you look like a complete moron.


----------



## Cleo38

Sairy said:


> Jame also said at the end of the interview "I only came on here because I thought it would be kind of funny."
> 
> I'm sorry, but nothing about fighting for rights is funny. And I were part of this trans movement that she is supposed to be representing then I would be beyond furious at that comment. It shows a complete lack of seriousness of the cause you are fighting for and absolutely makes you look like a complete moron.


This is such a good point. So many gay men & women have fought so hard for basic rights yet people like this seem to think they can rubbish all that now.

I grew up in the AIDs era & homophobia was rampant then. Since that time the gay community has made such progress in changing views, laws, etc & although homophobia still exists I think we tend to forget how bad things were & what sacrifices so many people made at that time.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Sairy

bmr10 said:


> Each to their own, I just wouldn't pass up the opportunity to let him know what I think of him. I've got no interest in attempting to reason with him or any of his viewers, I'm not wasting effort on people who aren't even open to listening. I'm happy for them to exist in their bitter little bubble while the rest of the UK improves trans rights and lives. If they're open to having an actual mature discussion backed up by statistics then yeah sure, but if you're going to insist you're not transphobic despite making jokes about trans people in the past then I don't think there's any point. That's just my rationale


But then it's not just an opportunity to change Piers's mind, you've got the opportunity to change the minds of anyone who watches that interview. And even if the majority of people are not open to what you have to say and only, say, 10 people out of the entire audience can see your point, that's 10 minds you have changed. Changing minds about these difficult topics is a lengthy process. It doesn't happen overnight, it happens bit at a time. This interview is more likely to have turned people even further the other way.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> Each to their own, I just wouldn't pass up the opportunity to let him know what I think of him. I've got no interest in attempting to reason with him or any of his viewers, I'm not wasting effort on people who aren't even open to listening. I'm happy for them to exist in their bitter little bubble while the rest of the UK improves trans rights and lives. If they're open to having an actual mature discussion backed up by statistics then yeah sure, but if you're going to insist you're not transphobic despite making jokes about trans people in the past then I don't think there's any point. That's just my rationale


How would any of this be helpful to the cause of fighting for trans rights and acceptance? 
Do you think Piers gives two flying flamingos what you think of him? 
What does insulting anyone in front of an audience accomplish other than point scoring, which makes you look childish and selfish.


----------



## HarlequinCat

bmr10 said:


> Each to their own, I just wouldn't pass up the opportunity to let him know what I think of him. I've got no interest in attempting to reason with him or any of his viewers, I'm not wasting effort on people who aren't even open to listening. I'm happy for them to exist in their bitter little bubble while the rest of the UK improves trans rights and lives. If they're open to having an actual mature discussion backed up by statistics then yeah sure, but if you're going to insist you're not transphobic despite making jokes about trans people in the past then I don't think there's any point. That's just my rationale


But surely labelling all his viewers as transphobe and homophobe and saying that Jame may as well just act up because Piers viewers would disagree with Jame anyway, makes that interview pointless. Hiding your identity, and swearing etc is just going to cement in people's head that these activists or whatever aren't worth listening to. I think this just takes the gay and trans conversation backwards. Being argumentative and down right rude does not endear people to their cause. 
People who have debated and been polite have slowly changed peoples mindset on those issues, in a far better way than these almost militant minorities in the community do. In fact I'd say they are making things worse


----------



## O2.0

@Sairy your points about gay rights movement and how that was fought for vs. how the trans movement seems to be going reminds me of this talk. 
Start at about 4 minutes in:


----------



## Sairy

O2.0 said:


> @Sairy your points about gay rights movement and how that was fought for vs. how the trans movement seems to be going reminds me of this talk.
> Start at about 4 minutes in:


Very interesting. I was particularly struck by what she said about telling blatant lies. Nothing is black and white. We have to acknowledge where there are differences and stop pretending that everything is exactly the same. The majority of the population is going to disagree that a biological woman and a trans woman are exactly the same. It does not mean that trans woman should not be afforded the same protection under the law.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Jesthar

bmr10 said:


> I believe in picking your battles. As I said, I don't see a point in trying to reason with Piers Morgan or the majority of his fan base. I don't think they have the empathy or selflessness to actually consider a different opinion than their own. I think Jame did try to reason, however, at the beginning of the interview but once Piers insisted that he's always fought for trans rights Jame, rightfully in my opinion, realised there was no point trying to get through to him and just decided to let him know what she thinks of him. I kind of expect a baseline of common decency and maturity from people and if you're too egotistical to consider another point of view then I'm not going to waste my time. I believe Piers just wanted an argument.


Then Jame picked a stupid battle to fight.

If you are on national TV, then you should remember that you are not talking to the host, you are talking to the audience. What you say and how you behave can either advance your cause, make people go 'meh', or cause people to turn away from it.

Yes, the host might be a turd. But you don't win over the audience to your cause when you respond to the turd by turning into an epic turd flinger yourself. You win over the audience by tact, diplomacy, and remaining polite, factual and well articulated in the face of provocation. It's also very easy to politely demolish a rude host if you are a halfway decent communicator. If you can't do that, then politely terminate the interview, or just don't agree to it in the first place.

Jame appears to have forgotten that, and made a complete idiot of not only themselves but whatever cause was supposed to be represented.

Still, it was 15 minutes of fame and a bit of a laugh, right? Which, judging by the closing remark, was the only real reason for going on the show...


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Sairy

bmr10 said:


> Perhaps you have more patience than I do then  But I also think that if someone views an interview, thinks the person involved is rude and then presumes everyone fighting for the same cause is rude by association then they probably lack critical thinking.


I agree, but I don't think that the issue is that people will think that every trans activist is rude. The issue is that this person, when given the opportunity to justify the protest and actions that were taken against the women at the scene, did not put forward any valuable arguments or reasoning but instead resorted to personal insults. A regular person watching that would probably think that there was no justifiable reason for the activists to behave like this. If you are going to protest then you need to be ready to answer questions on what you are protesting about. You need to be passionate and put forward your arguments for people to hear. Otherwise it is a completed wasted opportunity and one that makes you, and the group you are with, look foolish.


----------



## Jesthar

bmr10 said:


> I respect your opinion but, just not for me  I don't form my opinions about certain causes based upon the people who support said causes, personally, but to each their own. I wouldn't have minded telling Piers he's a bad person because, in my opinion, he's a bad person who is not open to change. I wouldn't have been interested in changing the audience's mind because it's a right-wing TV channel and it's not really my job to educate people. I don't rely on spokespersons to educate me, I learn about a topic on my own to decide whether I agree or disagree with something. That's all really and I can understand if others don't agree.


Then I really suggest a psychology 101 class of some kind. Most people are not you (well, technically no-one else is you), and most people are going to be strongly influenced by external input, whether consciously or unconsciously.

Even you are, in reality, even though you do your own independent research (which is still external input by - you guessed it - spokesmen for a viewpoint). Most people don't do extensive extra research (for various reasons), so what a spokesman says is very important. Jame was a disiaster of a spokesman, as the general conclusion for anyone watching was more likely to be that people supporting that particular cause had no valid points to their debate, only insults.

Also, if you are going to be interviewed about something, then yes it IS your job to educate people - _even if you don't think those people will listen_. That's what being a spokesman means.


----------



## Sairy

bmr10 said:


> I wouldn't have been interested in changing the audience's mind because it's a right-wing TV channel and it's not really my job to educate people.


OK, I totally get that you, yourself, do your own research on things which is great. However, here we are talking about someone who was acting as a spokesperson for their cause. Just because a TV channel might have a majority of viewers as right wing:

A. That doesn't mean that people who are generally right wing cannot be supportive of certain issues that are classed as left wing

B. The video will reach more than just right wing people. For one, it has made its way onto PF where it will have been viewed not solely by right wing people.

_"It's not my job to educate people"_

No, it's not YOUR job to educate people, but if you are fighting for a cause and particularly if you come on TV as a spokesperson for your cause then it IS your job to educate people. You have a small slot in which what you say can make a difference to what people think about a certain subject. You either choose to engage in the subject and put forward your valid points in the hopes that maybe somewhere one or two people might hear you or you decide to admit defeat and muck about instead.

Again I say, I sympathise with activists who will have been frustrated with this interview.


----------



## StormyThai

The Piers interview just reminded me of this:








Could work for either party really :Muted


----------



## Jesthar

Sairy said:


> The video will reach more than just right wing people. For one, it has made its way onto PF where it will have been viewed not solely by right wing people


And just to add to that, which gets more attention:

A) Piers Morgan schooled in <topic> by polite and respectful representitive of Cause X

or

B) Piers Morgan subjected to expletive filled tirade by foul mouthed representitive of Cause X

Pretty sure if Jame had gone with Option A, we wouldn't be talking about it...


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## Cleo38

bmr10 said:


> I wasn't really asking for advice. I did an entire year of psychology as part of my degree and have very little interest in doing it again, but thank you.
> 
> I did say "to each their own" and that "I understand if others disagree" with my way of educating myself. I am well aware that the majority of people don't follow my methodology but if I am interviewed about my opinions on a protest that has taken place (and accusations of assault) then it's not my obligation to delve into other topics and educate the host and viewers about them. Additionally, if I don't like the host or the show's demographic and find them to be rude, narrowminded, and self-centred then I'm going to be less willing to hold my tongue when said host lies through their teeth about a topic I'm passionate about. Whether people agree or disagree with Jame's actions is up to them, I was just saying I would have been likely to do the same as her. If you (or others) don't think that would've been a good idea that's okay, I'm not fussed at all, I was just posting my thoughts about the video


Yes & that's obviously fine. I think I am just very surprised as you come across as very intelligent & someone who could do well in that sort of interview & could probably do a good job of putting Piers down in a constructive way (regardless of whether I agreed with your opinion or not).


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> I don't really think it accomplishes anything, but I don't think I ever said it did. I just said I wouldn't pass up the opportunity.


Then you care more about your ego than helping the people you claim to represent. - I say this hypothetically, not about you literally. But if you're more interested in the opportunity to insult someone than furthering your cause, it's not the cause you're prioritizing.


----------



## HarlequinCat

bmr10 said:


> Perhaps you have more patience than I do then  But I also think that if someone views an interview, thinks the person involved is rude and then presumes everyone fighting for the same cause is rude by association then they probably lack critical thinking.


Ahh but this is just one instance where a masked person has been rude disruptive etc. At that statue there were peaceful demonstrations, then they got involved and were being blatantly confrontational towards these women, staring them down and not even talking or reasoning with them. It's just another example of their rudeness and unwillingness to debate. Maybe they lack critical thinking....


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## O2.0

Sairy said:


> Very interesting. I was particularly struck by what she said about telling blatant lies. Nothing is black and white. We have to acknowledge where there are differences and stop pretending that everything is exactly the same. The majority of the population is going to disagree that a biological woman and a trans woman are exactly the same. It does not mean that trans woman should not be afforded the same protection under the law.


Yes, I think some of it is a little harsh (hey look at me being sensitive ) 
But I do think some things are black and white. It is true that a couple consisting of two men or two women can't conceive a child, however they can absolutely parent a child. So arguing against physical reality claiming that yes they can conceive a child is, well, dumb. But saying we can parent a child every bit as well as a straight couple, and that sexual orientation has zero bearing on your ability to parent makes perfect sense.

It does feel like the trans movement is about trying to change reality. 
I mean, which is the more helpful argument? That trans women are the same as biological women, trans men are the same as biological men, or that trans people are all people who deserve to be treated with respect and compassion and not be discriminated against?


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## StormyThai

Piers Morgan is douche.
Everyone knows that he is an attention seeking douche...he has shown himself to be xenophobic, racist, misogynistic, is a bigot and many other things...all he wants is attention.
So...with that in mind I think that it says more about the character of the person accepting an interview from said Douche, than it does about the douche behaving in a predictably douchey manner.
If indeed it was about "Telling their side of the story" then they should have chosen a better platform - one that didn't have a high chance of turning into a circus maybe!
Wearing a full face covering is an interesting choice...


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> Pier's won't listen and the majority of his demographic probably won't listen either.


I find this such an arrogant and elitist attitude. 
Clearly you don't see Piers' demographic as equals because if you did, you'd be open to having an honest discussion with them.

I know, I'm back to being harsh. I don't mean this to sound as aggressive as it comes across, but it is something that I find really problematic in this new progressiveness on the left.

I consider myself a liberal - an old-school liberal who believes in freedom of speech, being accepting of others whatever their views may be, and open to differences.

Are you familiar with the work of Daryl Davis? He has a few TED talks that are really powerful. Megan Phelps is another one worth checking out. 
Basically they listen to other people and start from there. Daryl Davis listens to white supremacists, lets them talk. He doesn't try to change their minds, he simply listens. Once people feel heard, then you can have a productive conversation.

TRA seem to be more interested in shutting down conversation and shutting women up. Well, there's a lot of us, we've had people trying to shut us up since the beginning of humanity. It has yet to work...


----------



## £54etgfb6

O2.0 said:


> I find this such an arrogant and elitist attitude.
> Clearly you don't see Piers' demographic as equals because if you did, you'd be open to having an honest discussion with them.


Amazingly, I do see them as equals, I just presume that on this one topic they are probably quite passionate and as they watch a show led by a man who is self-centred, egotistical, and uninterested in debates unless it involves him talking over and down to the other participant, I'd presume they hold the same values. If you're going to willingly give up your free time to watch someone like that, you probably like him and agree with a lot of his opinions. I don't think someone that likes him would be open to discussion since he himself is not. Similarly, I would presume that people who vote for Trump have a negative view of women's rights and probably wouldn't be the most receptive audience when it comes to discussing these things and I very much wouldn't want to have a discussion with them due to this. If other people are willing to, that's on them. Similarly, if some people would rather avoid them, fair enough and I'd be in that category. If you find it arrogant and elitist that's fine, but that's my line of thinking.

I'm only familiar with Megan Phelps.



O2.0 said:


> TRA seem to be more interested in shutting down conversation and shutting women up.




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1525861689022894080A cis woman is handed the mic by the leader of Standing For Women and yet when she advocates for trans rights, she's chased and grabbed at. I think bad apples are to be found in every group of people. If TRA is supposedly only interested in "shutting down conversations and shutting women up", then from this video it can be gathered that Standing For Women only stands for women who share their opinions. As I don't share their opinions, they must not stand for me and I'm a woman. Conversely, I've never had a trans rights activist try to shut me down.


----------



## Dimwit

O2.0 said:


> I find this such an arrogant and elitist attitude.
> Clearly you don't see Piers' demographic as equals because if you did, you'd be open to having an honest discussion with them.


Exactly. Maybe they are not your intellectual equal, and maybe they have a strong tendency to believe everything the Daily Mail spoon feeds them. But maybe instead of labelling them all as transphobic scum they were treated as people, with someone from the TRA logically and cohesively explaining the issues and what they are fighting for, some of them might start to consider an alternative viewpoint. 
Maybe if Jame had actually been a good spokesperson for the cause they may have been picked up by more high-brow media and given more of a platform to give their view.

But the TRA don't seem to actually want to engage in any kind of conversation, preferring to intimidate and threaten women, and scream abuse at and label as transphobic anyone who dares to question them...


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> I just presume that on this one topic they are probably quite passionate and as they watch a show led by a man who is self-centred, egotistical, and uninterested in debates unless it involves him talking over and down to the other participant, I'd presume they hold the same values.


That's a lot of presumptions. 
Have you considered that your assumptions about people who watch that show might be wrong? What if they are wrong? What if people watch TV shows for all sorts of reasons? 
Why would you assume people hold the same values as someone they watch on TV, that's a really odd take to me.



bmr10 said:


> If you're going to willingly give up your free time to watch someone like that, you probably like him and agree with a lot of his opinions.


Didn't you just give up your free time to watch a video of Piers interviewing 2 people?



bmr10 said:


> I don't think someone that likes him would be open to discussion since he himself is not. Similarly, I would presume that people who vote for Trump have a negative view of women's rights and probably wouldn't be the most receptive audience when it comes to discussing these things and I very much wouldn't want to have a discussion with them due to this.


You realize Trump was running against someone that a lot of feminists found very distasteful right? Many, many people held their noses while voting for Trump. Many people voted for their financial interests despite disagreeing with him socially and morally. Many people vote straight party regardless of who's running because they know the office of the president only holds limited powers in the US system....

I'm friends with a lot of people who voted for Trump. They are every day, normal people just like you and I and we agree on a lot more than we disagree on. I know this because I don't consider myself too good to talk to people who vote differently than I do or watch different TV shows than I do.


----------



## Sairy

bmr10 said:


> Amazingly, I do see them as equals, I just presume that on this one topic they are probably quite passionate and as they watch a show led by a man who is self-centred, egotistical, and uninterested in debates unless it involves him talking over and down to the other participant, I'd presume they hold the same values. If you're going to willingly give up your free time to watch someone like that, you probably like him and agree with a lot of his opinions.


Nope, there are so many examples of people watching TV shows where they disagree with the host/presenter/main person. One obvious example on this forum is all the people (myself included) who have watched episodes of the show "Dogs behaving (very) badly", often shouting at the screen because of awful suggestions and comments made by the trainer who the program is about.

I often find myself watching Loose Women (I know, don't shoot me!). There are some discussions that I find interesting and agree with and others that wind me up so much that I'm left wondering why on Earth I do it to myself. I used to watch Good Morning Britain a lot and have to say I found it more enjoyable when Piers Morgan was on it, not because I think he's wonderful and agree with everything that he says but because I kind of enjoyed some of the drama and cringeworthyness of some of the interviews.


----------



## kimthecat

bmr10 said:


> I respect your opinion but, just not for me  I don't form my opinions about certain causes based upon the people who support said causes, personally, but to each their own. I wouldn't have minded telling Piers he's a bad person because, in my opinion, he's a bad person who is not open to change. I wouldn't have been interested in changing the audience's mind because it's a right-wing TV channel and i*t's not really my job to educate people. I don't rely on spokespersons to educate me,* I learn about a topic on my own to decide whether I agree or disagree with something. That's all really and I can understand if others don't agree.


I get how you feel about Piers!

A bit OT but this is an interesting point, in the bold segment . Ive heard this often said by different groups ( this doesn' t include you or in reference to you  )
" Its not my job to educate people" I dont get it . Why not ? People don't have to educate themselves , to be honest , at the moment , I feel with all these arguments , that Frankly, I don't give a damn.  To me it's lazy and arrogant, if you can't be bothered , why should I ? Why not learn about a topic straight from the horses mouth? I used to be HOH and now am deaf with a small d , ( labels  ) if I meet people I always explain how they can help me , I dont expect them to know . If the topic comes up online , I wouldn't accuse them of being ignorant . I would rather people got the info from someone who is deaf rather than someone who isnt and might not be accurate .

I follow trans people and it really helped to see their side of the story from their experiences and how they have suffered .


----------



## Cleo38

Dimwit said:


> Maybe if Jame had actually been a good spokesperson for the cause they may have been picked up by more high-brow media and given more of a platform to give their view.
> 
> .


Maybe he was the best they had :Jawdrop


----------



## £54etgfb6

O2.0 said:


> That's a lot of presumptions.
> Have you considered that your assumptions about people who watch that show might be wrong? What if they are wrong?


They could well be wrong, I did say in an earlier post there may be viewers that would be open to listening. If they're wrong then, I suppose not much happens as I did say I wouldn't be able to continue the interview purely due to Pier's own reaction. The audience wouldn't really matter in that case.



O2.0 said:


> Didn't you just give up your free time to watch a video of Piers interviewing 2 people?


Only watched 'til the end of Jame's interview as I don't like KJK. When I said viewers I meant regular TV viewers.



O2.0 said:


> I'm friends with a lot of people who voted for Trump. They are every day, normal people just like you and I and we agree on a lot more than we disagree on. I know this because I don't consider myself too good to talk to people who vote differently than I do or watch different TV shows than I do.


I do speak to people who vote differently than I do (mostly because I don't ask people who they vote for) but I don't engage in a political discussion if they show no willingness to consider alternative points of view, which was the reason I originally provided for being unable to educate audiences in an interview. If someone had fundamentally different moral opinions that I felt were harmful then I'd rather not be friends with them but I would not be opposed to speaking.


----------



## Dimwit

bmr10 said:


> I just presume that on this one topic they are probably quite passionate and as they watch a show led by a man who is self-centred, egotistical, and uninterested in debates unless it involves him talking over and down to the other participant, I'd presume they hold the same values.


That's a pretty huge presumption. I felt very passionately about how the government handled COVID and one of the most distressing outcomes for me was that I agreed with Piers about this. Does this mean I agree with him about everything? Of course not. The fact is that you can agree with a person about one thing and not another. I have never watched his show because I can't stand him but I don't think for a minute that those who do share all his values. That's just not how people work.

In terms of voting for Trump, or the Conservatives in this country - the choice of who to vote for is often much more nuanced than just agreeing with everything they say. It often comes down to a balance, or voting for the things you care most about while compromising on your other beliefs. Or maybe people voted Tory because 'say what you like about Boris, but he's such a character', or because there was no viable alternative.

I know people who voted Conservative, and on many issues I disagree with them, but I understand their viewpoint is shaped by their life experiences and I respect their views. On the issue of trans rights (to bring this back to topic) maybe it is not something they have ever though about, and so they have not bothered to educate themselves, but if everyone on the side of trans rights takes the attitude of 'it's not my job to educate them' then they will never learn...


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## O2.0

bmr10 said:


> I like to look online for various points of view


I think this is a huge part of the problem we have right now in people being so polarized. I notice too it's mostly younger people - not saying that to be ageist, just an observation.

Here's the thing, online is not the real world. Online there is little nuance, emotion, and personality. It's all prepared, and algorithms definitely affect what you see, no matter how smart you think you are about making sure they don't influence you.

I interact with multiple people all day long of all sorts of walks of life. A few weekends ago I drove 3 hours with a dog training friend who is much more conservative than me and we talked social issues, dog training, and all sorts of stuff in those 3 hours. We disagree on some things but mostly found common ground. This summer I'll drive with a group of colleagues to different training events and again it's long drives, lots of talking, and finding where we have commonalities. I eat lunch with a group of colleagues and we're all over the map in our beliefs. I interact with parents who come from all walks of life. It's very rare that I encounter someone I have nothing in common with or who's POV I can't understand and appreciate even if I don't agree with it.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## mrs phas

You can always trust a Boris luvvie

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61491785


----------



## Cleo38

mrs phas said:


> You can always trust a Boris luvvie
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61491785


That man is a joke but this just shows what a vile joke of man he is to make light of such serious allegations


----------



## O2.0

Sairy said:


> One obvious example on this forum is all the people (myself included) who have watched episodes of the show "Dogs behaving (very) badly", often shouting at the screen because of awful suggestions and comments made by the trainer who the program is about.


LOL that made me laugh 

@bmr10 on the one hand you say you actively seek out opposing opinions, yet you also say you only watched the portion of the Piers interview with Jame because you don't like KJK. Might be worth considering you're not as open to opposing opinions as you think you are?

As for the internet being the epitome of information, don't forget there are still a few generations of us left who managed to get diverse and extensive educations before the internet even existed, having human interactions with our teachers. 
From where I'm looking I don't think the world seems any smarter since blogs and twitter.

Don't get me wrong, youtube is great for DIY, some things you have to put hands on to learn. Including humans.


----------



## £54etgfb6

.


----------



## O2.0

Hey, how 'bout some good news? 

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/18/1099...evvfmvWqqXleFBfxwGmMvUMEEdkBqoDmiL0GpXv8FGxE4


----------



## picaresque

Kind of surprised to see this from a mainstream liberal comedian but pleasantly so 





Favourite quote (paraphrasing) 'Maybe girls who don't like girly things should know that being female doesn't have to mean acting like a Kardashian'


----------



## O2.0

picaresque said:


> Kind of surprised to see this from a mainstream liberal comedian but pleasantly so
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Favourite quote (paraphrasing) 'Maybe girls who don't like girly things should know that being female doesn't have to mean acting like a Kardashian'


I friggin' love Bill Maher. He's an old-school liberal and he talks a whole lot of sense!
He's been around for donkey's years and he hasn't changed from his "politically incorrect" days.
He says he hasn't changed, the left has.


----------



## picaresque

O2.0 said:


> I friggin' love Bill Maher. He's an old-school liberal and he talks a whole lot of sense!
> He's been around for donkey's years and he hasn't changed from his "politically incorrect" days.
> He says he hasn't changed, the left has.


Was going to say old school liberals seem in short supply these days but actually don't think that's true, they're just not in vogue/given much of a platform. Although this is changing.


----------



## mrs phas

picaresque said:


> Kind of surprised to see this from a mainstream liberal comedian but pleasantly so
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Favourite quote (paraphrasing) 'Maybe girls who don't like girly things should know that being female doesn't have to mean acting like a Kardashian'


Totally tickled my chuckle buds 
Thank you for sharing


----------



## O2.0

In case anyone was wondering, the tweet Bill Maher mentions:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1524431029473316866
Note what is glaringly absent from that list. 
Women.
Erased again.


----------



## Cleo38

That is a fantastic clip @O2.0., so funny but so relevent.

And yes I saw the tweet on a FB group. It was like it was a satirical post .... how the f*ck can women not be top of this list?!


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> how the f*ck can women not be top of this list?!


It's a head scratcher isn't it? 
Abortion... Hmm who might that affect the most? Hard to figure that one out...

You know what my cynic side says? It says certain groups are jealous of the attention women are perceived to be getting over this, and with us being half of the population we can't exactly be considered a marginalized group, and how dare a group that's not marginalized hog all the attention about abortion rights. So let's make it about us. Even thought it has very little if anything to do with us.


----------



## Sairy

O2.0 said:


> It's a head scratcher isn't it?
> Abortion... Hmm who might that affect the most? Hard to figure that one out...
> 
> You know what my cynic side says? It says certain groups are jealous of the attention women are perceived to be getting over this, and with us being half of the population we can't exactly be considered a marginalized group, and how dare a group that's not marginalized hog all the attention about abortion rights. So let's make it about us. Even thought it has very little if anything to do with us.


I'm also confused as to why LGBTQ people are second on the list. Not to say that they wouldn't be affected, but if anything I would think it would be less of an issue in the LGBTQ population due to a large number being in same-sex relationships and therefore unlikely to have an unplanned pregnancy.

Obviously women should be top of the list as the most glaringly obvious of the groups affected.


----------



## O2.0

Sairy said:


> I'm also confused as to why LGBTQ people are second on the list. Not to say that they wouldn't be affected, but if anything I would think it would be less of an issue in the LGBTQ population due to a large number being in same-sex relationships and therefore unlikely to have an unplanned pregnancy.
> 
> Obviously women should be top of the list as the most glaringly obvious of the groups affected.


I imagine a lot of people in the LGBTQ community are confused how they ended up on the list of people disproportionately affected by abortion bans. 
Affected? Sure.
Disproportionately affected? I don't think so, like you say, unwanted pregnancies in same sex couples is not generally a big issue.


----------



## Cleo38

So awful. Vulnerable women put at risk of biological men again, both inmates & guards 

https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/how-to-erase-male-violence-lessons?s=r
"This is a nightmare": Female Inmate Speaks Out Against Trans-Identifying Male Transfers (substack.com)


----------



## O2.0

You know, I think it would really go a long if the trans lobby would speak out against these predatory men self-IDing as women and getting in to spaces that are so important to keep safe for biological women, like prisons.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> You know, I think it would really go a long if the trans lobby would speak out against these predatory men self-IDing as women and getting in to spaces that are so important to keep safe for biological women, like prisons.


 And that's what I find so strange tbh. I just can't understand how these violent men are put in with women. And then the issues with the male prison officers is appalling.


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> And that's what I find so strange tbh. I just can't understand how these violent men are put in with women. And then the issues with the male prison officers is appalling.


It feels like women inmates aren't worth protecting doesn't it?


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> It feels like women inmates aren't worth protecting doesn't it?


It really does especially as one of the male inmates was moved to a men's prison at his request due to the levels of violence in the women's one ...


----------



## picaresque

They don’t say anything because they don’t care. I’ve never ever seen a trans rights activist or anyone who prides themselves on being on the ‘right side’ regarding trans issues, including on this forum, say yeah you know what this isn’t right, I believe transwomen are women but I can see that the system can be abused and it is wrong that vulnerable women are literally being raped by male inmates while incarcerated - not all men who say the magic words are trans and also sometimes sex segregation matters. It’s just ignored, and they say something vague about the ‘shocking attitudes’ and bigotry of the terfy types, but they never say what exactly is so terrible about the beliefs being voiced (as is the case with the monstering of JK Rowling). It’s because they don’t care, and the people who hold these luxury beliefs are either men who aren’t affected anyway or women who are very unlikely to end up in jail or in a homeless shelter etc where they have little or no choice in the matter. They don’t mind using the same loos as their lovely trans friends when they’re on a night out, what’s the difference right?

And it goes along with this pervasive belief that transwomen are the most vulnerable and oppressed group ever, they even shoehorned a po-faced reference to this in to the comedy show Brooklyn Nine Nine when the main cop character was in prison. ‘Who has the worst time in jail? Oh of course, transwomen’. Yeah tell that to the women incarcerated with Karen White, just one example out of dozens and dozens that we know about (and the rest). Wait though, wrong kind of Karen isn’t it. Not a middle aged woman with opinions so not worth demonising. Just a rapist, and one of the protected class. Say nothing.


----------



## picaresque

Congrats to Billy Bragg on managing to compare people who know what a woman is with nazis in a fresh new way that is even stupider and more offensive than usual


----------



## Cleo38

picaresque said:


> Congrats to Billy Bragg on managing to compare people who know what a woman is with nazis in a fresh new way that is even stupider and more offensive than usual
> 
> View attachment 492033


Love all these leftie blokes who tried to convince everyone they were feminists at one time yet are so quick to now demonize us


----------



## O2.0

picaresque said:


> Congrats to Billy Bragg on managing to compare people who know what a woman is with nazis in a fresh new way that is even stupider and more offensive than usual
> 
> View attachment 492033


That's... 
Wait, but...
*big sigh*

Nope. I got nothing.


----------



## O2.0

There is a documentary out by the Daily Wire (conservative media company) called "What is a Woman?" I've not seen it because I'm not going to subscribe for $14 a year so I'm waiting for someone to upload it to youtube. 
Anyway, apparently they were sabotaged trying on the day of the premiere trying to block the documentary's release
https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-...eative01213_traffic&utm_source=facebook&xid=0

I do think it's a fair question though. If we're going to say you can _identify_ as a woman then we have to be able to define what that is.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> There is a documentary out by the Daily Wire (conservative media company) called "What is a Woman?" I've not seen it because I'm not going to subscribe for $14 a year so I'm waiting for someone to upload it to youtube.
> Anyway, apparently they were sabotaged trying on the day of the premiere trying to block the documentary's release
> https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-...eative01213_traffic&utm_source=facebook&xid=0
> 
> I do think it's a fair question though. If we're going to say you can _identify_ as a woman then we have to be able to define what that is.


I don't identify as a woman ... I am a woman. My definition is simple: an adult female human

Can men identify as women ... IMHO no. They can be trans women (& am sure there are many variations & many discussions) but as a 'woman' then no.

Edited to add: @O2.0, here is a link to the documentary. It came up on my FB newsfeed. I've not watched it yet so have no idea what it's like but definitely interested in watching it later

What is a Woman? (2022) (odysee.com)


----------



## Siskin

Cleo38 said:


> I don't identify as a woman ... I am a woman. My definition is simple: an adult female human
> 
> Can men identify as women ... IMHO no. They can be trans women (& am sure there are many variations & many discussions) but as a 'woman' then no.
> 
> Edited to add: @O2.0, here is a link to the documentary. It came up on my FB newsfeed. I've not watched it yet so have no idea what it's like but definitely interested in watching it later
> 
> What is a Woman? (2022) (odysee.com)


My feelings exactly


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> I don't identify as a woman ... I am a woman. My definition is simple: an adult female human
> 
> Can men identify as women ... IMHO no. They can be trans women (& am sure there are many variations & many discussions) but as a 'woman' then no.
> 
> Edited to add: @O2.0, here is a link to the documentary. It came up on my FB newsfeed. I've not watched it yet so have no idea what it's like but definitely interested in watching it later
> 
> What is a Woman? (2022) (odysee.com)


I'm at the part where he's trying to explain non-binary to a Masai elder and I'm laughing because my friend and I were trying to do the same thing for her 87 year old father and it went just about as well as this is going


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> I'm at the part where he's trying to explain non-binary to a Masai elder and I'm laughing because my friend and I were trying to do the same thing for her 87 year old father and it went just about as well as this is going


Hahahaha! I just started watching it & laughed when he said I like scented candles & I've watched Sex In The City .... I don't think the therapist got the sarcasm


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> Hahahaha! I just started watching it & laughed when he said I like scented candles & I've watched Sex In The City .... I don't think the therapist got the sarcasm


No LOL I don't think she did either 

Let me know when you're done, I just finished while doing dishes - can't say I watched the whole thing, but I did listen to the whole thing.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> No LOL I don't think she did either
> 
> Let me know when you're done, I just finished while doing dishes - can't say I watched the whole thing, but I did listen to the whole thing.


OMG, bloody funny initially. The professor at the University was hilarious. It was like a spoof. Someone who is supposed to be so clever who could not answer a simple question, WTF!!! Then got angry when he realised what a [email protected] he was making of himself.

But then turned & was very scary regarding what is happening to children. How can this be ok? really, really scary how they are being experimented on & not being given proper support. Truly awful to think of desperate young people being exploited to fit an ideology 

I had read a few articles of the father who was interviewed & how the legal system had threatened & silenced him so much. And of the rapes at the school who had covered them up (it's a shame this wasn't discussed more) as the attacks on the female students were particularly horrible & they were the ones who were threatened by the school authorities until the story was made public.

I am surprised that no feminist groups took part in this tho as I thought many would welcome the chance to be part of something so important. Interesting film & a much needed one.


----------



## O2.0

The professor was something wasn't it? 
When he said "I'm really uncomfortable with that language" I had to rewind and figure out what Matt Walsh had said, because I thought I had missed something. Nope. He just said "I'm just trying to get to the truth" 
What's so wrong with trying to find a shared reality? 

I mean, seriously how can we even have a discussion about any of this if we can't even ask "what is a woman"?


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> The professor was something wasn't it?
> When he said "I'm really uncomfortable with that language" I had to rewind and figure out what Matt Walsh had said, because I thought I had missed something. Nope. He just said "I'm just trying to get to the truth"
> What's so wrong with trying to find a shared reality?
> 
> I mean, seriously how can we even have a discussion about any of this if we can't even ask "what is a woman"?


And the paediatrician who got angry when questioned over prescribing drugs to children. How can she seriously think it OK to do this simply because the child says so?! They cannot make an informed choice


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> And the paediatrician who got angry when questioned over prescribing drugs to children. How can she seriously think it OK to do this simply because the child says so?! They cannot make an informed choice


You know what I kept thinking about? 
Remember a while back when consent was the buzzword of the day and there was even this lovely little cartoon about tea and making someone a cup of tea and relating that back to consent?

What happened? 
We know children can't consent at 12, 13, 14 years of age. We know this. But we're allowing them to decide if they should have puberty blockers and sex hormones, and surgery to remove healthy breasts.

The harm to children part really upsets me. 
I wish they had covered social contagion more. I've worked with teens for nearly 3 decades now. I've seen the different social contagions, eating disorders, self-harm, and now gender dysphoria. It's frightening.

The other part that I kept thinking throughout when he would give examples of animals in nature is this hubris that humans are somehow too special and different than chickens and biology doesn't apply to us.
And the hubris of thinking this is "normal" when really all this gender fluidity stuff is a very westernized luxury belief that most of the world doesn't even contemplate.


----------



## Sairy

I am planning to watch the program tomorrow as I will be on my own with baby Lily (and as she's a good sleeper I shall pick a time when she's asleep to watch). The whole experimenting on children thing makes me incredibly uncomfortable. Children aged 13, 14 etc are too young to vote on our country's leader yet apparently are old enough to make life-changing decisions about their body and health. Very scary.


----------



## Sairy

Watching it now. Good grief, the social scientist :Banghead

Love the question "what is a woman?"

Interesting listening to some of the answers from the public. One woman said "someone who is pretty and delicate". Well I'm definitely a woman and I would definitely say I am not delicate!


----------



## Cleo38

Sairy said:


> Watching it now. Good grief, the social scientist :Banghead
> 
> Love the question "what is a woman?"
> 
> Interesting listening to some of the answers from the public. One woman said "someone who is pretty and delicate". Well I'm definitely a woman and I would definitely say I am not delicate!


Hahahaha, me neither!!! This is what I struggle with, women come in all shapes & sizes, we can look very different, have different interests, goals in life, sexual preferences, etc yet we are women because of our biology.

There was a tweet recently by India Willouby (trans woman) regarding the meeting with JKR & some female friends who were discussing women's rights. India posted a pic with some comment relating to some of them not 'looking like women' .... for me that just shows that India is not understanding being a woman at all. That it is not simply a costume of what stereotypically looks like a women (if that makes sense) to be a woman. The women in question did not have to 'look' like women because they were women.

And the social scientist was my fave! Despite it being a serious subject it was so funny watching him get tied up in his word salad language, flounder, avoid the most simple question then get angry


----------



## Sairy

That poor woman who transitioned into a man and regrets it. She has infections every couple of months and probably won't live very long. My heart goes out to her


----------



## Cleo38

Sairy said:


> That poor woman who transitioned into a man and regrets it. She has infections every couple of months and probably won't live very long. My heart goes out to her


Just awful. That's why I can't understand how children are being prescribed such powerful drugs when there is no long term studies done. Even adults can't make informed choices due to the lack of data so no way can children.

And surgeries being carried out ..... just awful. I have read several articles about the twins mentioned & what tragic lives they had. It really is heartbreaking that this is allowed & encouraged. I just don't understand what the agenda is .... is it purely money form the big pharma companies? Why are people so keen to push this rather than trying to support the children who may be confused (as that's exactly what happens to most kids although I do understand to different degrees).


----------



## Sairy

Cleo38 said:


> Just awful. That's why I can't understand how children are being prescribed such powerful drugs when there is no long term studies done. Even adults can't make informed choices due to the lack of data so no way can children.
> 
> And surgeries being carried out ..... just awful. I have read several articles about the twins mentioned & what tragic lives they had. It really is heartbreaking that this is allowed & encouraged. I just don't understand what the agenda is .... is it purely money form the big pharma companies? Why are people so keen to push this rather than trying to support the children who may be confused (as that's exactly what happens to most kids although I do understand to different degrees).


Unfortunately i think big pharma companies have a massive influence over so many aspects of our lives. It's really frightening.

I do think that it's much more important to teach children to love the bodies they have. You can be a boy and be super feminine, wear dresses, have long hair, play with dolls etc but still be a boy. And you can be a super masculine girl, like rough and tumble games, wear boy clothes etc and still be a woman.


----------



## Sairy

Well I'm reluctant to say I enjoyed the documentary as I really find some of it quite frightening, but it was certainly thought-provoking, especially when so many people struggled to actually define what a woman is. If you can't define what one is then how can you possibly know that you are one?


----------



## Cleo38

Sairy said:


> Unfortunately i think big pharma companies have a massive influence over so many aspects of our lives. It's really frightening.
> 
> I do think that it's much more important to teach children to love the bodies they have. You can be a boy and be super feminine, wear dresses, have long hair, play with dolls etc but still be a boy. And you can be a super masculine girl, like rough and tumble games, wear boy clothes etc and still be a woman.


And this is what I cannot get my head around. We seem to be returning to rigid stereotypes in order to define gender when it is not true. Most people I know do not fall in to these. Growing up I think I was far more of a 'tom boy' (although I don't even like that term as it implies I wasn't a 'proper girl') as I liked more traditionally boys things but I was a girl & never wanted to be a boy. However as I got older I had some issue with my body & who I was so maybe I could have been vulnerable to pressures from these nutjobs had they been around



Sairy said:


> Well I'm reluctant to say I enjoyed the documentary as I really find some of it quite frightening, but it was certainly thought-provoking, especially when so many people struggled to actually define what a woman is. If you can't define what one is then how can you possibly know that you are one?


I found it funny that most couldn't define what a woman was but trans women were definitely women ....eh?!!


----------



## O2.0

Sairy said:


> Watching it now. Good grief, the social scientist :Banghead
> 
> Love the question "what is a woman?"
> 
> Interesting listening to some of the answers from the public. One woman said "someone who is pretty and delicate". Well I'm definitely a woman and I would definitely say I am not delicate!


The answers from the public gave me a chuckle too. But the guy who said he's a man because he has a dick cracked me up  
Another one here who's definitely not delicate, who doesn't fit into many stereotypical definitions of women, but I am very much a woman.



Sairy said:


> That poor woman who transitioned into a man and regrets it. She has infections every couple of months and probably won't live very long. My heart goes out to her


She hurt my heart too. 
You know, this is true of many surgeries, where doctors don't tell you the potential complications, not fully. So I don't know why we would think it's any different for bottom surgeries. However the failure rate that high? Jesus....



Sairy said:


> Well I'm reluctant to say I enjoyed the documentary as I really find some of it quite frightening, but it was certainly thought-provoking, especially when so many people struggled to actually define what a woman is. If you can't define what one is then how can you possibly know that you are one?


Bingo!! Exactly!


----------



## Cleo38

I would have loved to have had the conversations of the Maasai people translated afterwards. I'll bet they think everyone in the West are crazy


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> I would have loved to have had the conversations of the Maasai people translated afterwards. I'll bet they think everyone in the West are crazy


I loved that part. 
One of the most enlightening things we can do is try to explain elements of our own culture to another culture. If the explanation is easy it tells you something, if it's very difficult, that too tells you something.

Particularly if you start thinking what your culture does just makes sense.


----------



## Cleo38

I wondered why there were no prominent feminists in the documentary or people from the gay community (as there has been stories of pressure to consider trans as sexual partners despite not being the same sex) & I presume it's because Matt Walsh is a Conservative & anti abortion. I'm not too familiar with US politics (actually that's an understatement!!) so although I realised he was right wing I didn't really know who he is.

It doesn't really matter to me in some ways as I still thought it was an interesting film but does seem a shame that it wasn't more balanced & included those who are assumed to be left wing .... although maybe they didn't want to appear in it.

I agree with alot of what Blair White says in her review: "What Is A Woman?" Reaction to Matt Walsh's CRAZY Trans Movie - YouTube


----------



## O2.0

Yes, there was definitely a heavy conservative bias to the film. But again, the fact that so many people couldn't answer the question of what is a woman is extremely concerning. Not just for women's rights but for trans rights too. If you want to say that you can transition to a woman, you have to be able to define what a woman is. If we can't define "woman" then there is no such thing as trans.

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but for those who don't understand how disrespectful this whole "identify as..." is, I invite you to watch a small clip of the film where a human claims they identify as a wolf, or a wolf anime, I'm not exactly sure. 





Does anyone else find this totally dismissive and disrespectful to actual wolves? To say that you can get on your hands and knees and howl and that makes you a wolf?


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Yes, there was definitely a heavy conservative bias to the film. But again, the fact that so many people couldn't answer the question of what is a woman is extremely concerning. Not just for women's rights but for trans rights too. If you want to say that you can transition to a woman, you have to be able to define what a woman is. If we can't define "woman" then there is no such thing as trans.
> 
> I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but for those who don't understand how disrespectful this whole "identify as..." is, I invite you to watch a small clip of the film where a human claims they identify as a wolf, or a wolf anime, I'm not exactly sure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does anyone else find this totally dismissive and disrespectful to actual wolves? To say that you can get on your hands and knees and howl and that makes you a wolf?


Very disrespectful to wolves!

Do you think people are just top worried to answer the question now tho? As there is so much cancel culture about & I wonder if people were so aware that could ruin their careers, etc if they gave an answer that wasn't considered to be the 'right' one.

I honestly don't know why this simple question is so difficult tho. For me it's very clear


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> Very disrespectful to wolves!
> 
> Do you think people are just top worried to answer the question now tho? As there is so much cancel culture about & I wonder if people were so aware that could ruin their careers, etc if they gave an answer that wasn't considered to be the 'right' one.
> 
> I honestly don't know why this simple question is so difficult tho. For me it's very clear


Yes, maybe? IDK?
I don't know why it's such a difficult question, I don't know why it's hateful to say that a trans woman is not a woman, and I don't know why we're not having discussions about trans men either. 
There really is a lot about this that mystifies me, I don't know what started it, I don't know what's driving it, and none of the arguments about not putting a definition on women even make sense.

I do know that when it comes to actual women's rights issues, we don't seem to have any confusion. I've said it before on this thread, but no one seems unclear on what a woman is in places where it's far less safe to be a woman. 
No one in Somalia seems unclear on what a woman is when they're cutting off girl's genitals for example. 
No one in Afghanistan seems unclear on what a woman is when they're denying girls an education. 
No one seems confused on who to deny voting rights too in countries where women still aren't allowed to vote. Heck, we in the western world sure weren't confused about who was a woman when we fought for the right to vote!

And I do wonder how far the transgender community has looked in to this argument. If there is no definition of "woman" that essentially erases transgenderism doesn't it? If there is no "woman" then there is no gender dysphoria.
I mean, it's almost like you're denying the existence of transpeople when you refuse to define what a woman is....


----------



## Sairy

Cleo38 said:


> Very disrespectful to wolves!
> 
> Do you think people are just top worried to answer the question now tho? As there is so much cancel culture about & I wonder if people were so aware that could ruin their careers, etc if they gave an answer that wasn't considered to be the 'right' one.
> 
> I honestly don't know why this simple question is so difficult tho. For me it's very clear


I 100% think there is an element of people being afraid of not giving giving "right" answer. I consider myself to be fairly progressive, but I have no idea what the "correct" terminology is these days. There are so many letters now for what I generally term the "queer" community. 10 years ago it was LGBT, but now it is LGBTQIA+ and I had to Google what the other letters mean.


----------



## O2.0

The dirty little secret is, everyone knows what a woman is, we absolutely can define "woman". 
So the question then becomes not _what_ is a woman, but *why* are so many people scared to say it out loud?


----------



## Sairy

Dictionary.com and Wikipedia have no issue defining what a woman is.


----------



## kimthecat

Sharron Davies "If I was 2return to international swimming tomorrow with the amount of testosterone (a WADA banned list substance because it aids performance) in my system as Emily Bridges is allowed I’d receive an immediate 4 year ban! How is this fair?"


----------



## Sairy

Deleted


----------



## Cleo38

Sairy said:


> I think my cat identifies as a human baby!
> 
> View attachment 493425


Hahahaha! Always straight in to anything. That's such a great pic


----------



## picaresque

Sairy said:


> I think my cat identifies as a human baby!
> 
> View attachment 493425


'I am the captain baby now'


----------



## Sairy

I feel like he just needs a bonnet to complete the look!


----------



## O2.0

Sairy said:


> I feel like he just needs a bonnet to complete the look!


Oh please please put a bonnet on him!!


----------



## Sairy

O2.0 said:


> Oh please please put a bonnet on him!!


If I can find something suitable I will try, although I might get sliced open in the process :Hilarious


----------



## StormyThai

Sorry to spoil the fun but could we please make sure that this thread doesn't turn into something that just makes fun of people please.
There has been some interesting conversations which I would hate to close.


----------



## Sairy

StormyThai said:


> Sorry to spoil the fun but could we please make sure that this thread doesn't turn into something that just makes fun of people please.
> There has been some interesting conversations which I would hate to close.


I am sorry, it was meant in a light-hearted way. I didn't mean to upset anyone.


----------



## StormyThai

Sairy said:


> I am sorry, it was meant in a light-hearted way. I didn't mean to upset anyone.


I understand and you haven't upset anyone as far as I know... your post came across as humour ☺
Just a friendly heads up :Bag


----------



## catz4m8z

kimthecat said:


> Sharron Davies "If I was 2return to international swimming tomorrow with the amount of testosterone (a WADA banned list substance because it aids performance) in my system as Emily Bridges is allowed I'd receive an immediate 4 year ban! How is this fair?"


I think sport is a tricky subject and its going to be a headache going forward because it is so hard to judge if hormone replacement therapy has a significant effect. I mean its easy to look at a giant 'girl' dwarfing the competitiors and say they had an unfair advantage but there are also competitive swimmers and boxers who are trans men so how do you judge? (basically I wouldnt want to touch the issue with a 10 ft pole!!LOL).

Im all for letting people identify as whatever they want TBH. You can be born in the wrong body and to a certain extent medicine can fix alot of that for you. Im not going to say someone isnt a woman/man just because science cant yet flip your chromosomes and make you fully what you are!


----------



## Boxer123

I agree @catz4m8z its hard to read stories such as this one and think anything different.

https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/04/...er-stephanie-hirst-opens-up-about-transition/

I see her as a woman end off.


----------



## O2.0

catz4m8z said:


> because it is so hard to judge if hormone replacement therapy has a significant effect.


We can actually quantify the effect of testosterone levels on performance, but advantage in sport is so much more than hormone levels.
Men have different body compositions than women, they have denser bones that break less easily, they have more fast twitch muscles, they have a greater VO2 max among other things.

Yes, sports is hard but I think mainly because for most people, we don't see it ourselves in real-life. In our day to day lives the physical differences between men and women don't affect us. And there is such a range in humans anyway, there are going to be many women who are taller, stronger, and faster than men. 
I'm tall for a woman and what I call "good peasant stock"  I'm stronger than the average woman, I grew up working in barns and back in the day I would haul hay and pull fences with men and keep up just fine.

But when you move in to elite levels of sports, the differences really stand out. An elite woman athlete will generally beat out an average male athlete, but the elite male athlete will always beat out the elite female athlete. Just look up male and female records in quantifiable sports like running, swimming, cycling etc.

I was listening to a podcast where they brought up Lia Thomas, and one of the presenters had been an elite swimmer and he made a good point.
When you choose to become an elite athlete - in any sport, you have to make choices that include giving up certain things. You may have to stall a career move or personal plans so that you can focus on the sport while you're at your physical peak. Younger athletes sacrifice social lives so that they can get the sleep and rest they need for their sport, they can't go out drinking and clubbing and then perform at their best. There's all sorts of compromises you make when you choose to pursue your sport to the top ranks. Transitioning might be another of those things that as an elite athlete you have to sacrifice one or the other. You have to choose what matters more to you, transitioning, or performing at your best as an athlete.

Being an elite athlete is not a "right" of anyone. It's a choice. If your mental health requires that you transition immediately, then your position in a sport may have to be one of the compromises you make. That doesn't mean swimmers can't swim, runners can't run etc. They just can't do it at the elite levels. And frankly, that should be okay.


----------



## StormyThai

Interesting article...I would be very worried if I heard a "high pitched noise" when I went to the toilet though!


----------



## Cleo38

catz4m8z said:


> I think sport is a tricky subject and its going to be a headache going forward because it is so hard to judge if hormone replacement therapy has a significant effect. I mean its easy to look at a giant 'girl' dwarfing the competitiors and say they had an unfair advantage *but there are also competitive swimmers and boxers who are trans men so how do you judge?* (basically I wouldnt want to touch the issue with a 10 ft pole!!LOL).
> 
> Im all for letting people identify as whatever they want TBH. You can be born in the wrong body and to a certain extent medicine can fix alot of that for you. Im not going to say someone isnt a woman/man just because science cant yet flip your chromosomes and make you fully what you are!


But do these trans men compete against men? I only know of one trans man (a swimmer called Schuyler Bailar) who does but the others I have heard of either compete against women or retired from competitive sport following their transition. Although sport isn't really my thing I would be interested to hear of others.

I know how I would judge .... compete as your biological sex


----------



## Jesthar

catz4m8z said:


> I think sport is a tricky subject and its going to be a headache going forward because it is so hard to judge if hormone replacement therapy has a significant effect. I mean its easy to look at a giant 'girl' dwarfing the competitiors and say they had an unfair advantage but there are also competitive swimmers and boxers who are trans men so how do you judge? (basically I wouldnt want to touch the issue with a 10 ft pole!!LOL).


I don't think it needs to be that hard. In fact, it is ridiculously simple. Give the currently promoted ideology that "trans-X are X" (especially the "trans-X are biologically X" line that has recently emerged), then it follows logically that all women should be bound by exactly the same doping laws based on female biology, regardless of original biology. Same for the men, obviously. No need to complicate things with two sets of rules, if you want to compete in a mens or womens division, you just have to meet the existing rules. 



catz4m8z said:


> Im all for letting people identify as whatever they want TBH. You can be born in the wrong body and to a certain extent medicine can fix alot of that for you. Im not going to say someone isnt a woman/man just because science cant yet flip your chromosomes and make you fully what you are!


To be honest, I find it impossible to agree with that. Our body is our body, our biology our biology, and we can be varying degrees of happy or unhappy with it. Saying someone is born in the wrong body is such a strange concept (although if it is accepted, I wonder how long it will be before someone sues their parents - more specifically their father - for giving them the wrong biology?), especially as it appears to be mainly biology based social expectations that lie at the roots of the unhappiness.


----------



## catz4m8z

StormyThai said:


> Interesting article...I would be very worried if I heard a "high pitched noise" when I went to the toilet though!


yes, I think mine might be broken.....Ive never squeeked down there when I pee!!LOL:Hilarious



Cleo38 said:


> But do these trans men compete against men? I only know of one trans man (a swimmer called Schuyler Bailar) who does but the others I have heard of either compete against women or retired from competitive sport following their transition. Although sport isn't really my thing I would be interested to hear of others.
> 
> I know how I would judge .... compete as your biological sex


I think there are more trans athletes in college sports, I suppose because thats the kind fo age group when you work some stuff out!
It is tricky though....judging purely by biology you are sending a message that somebody isnt valid in their gender. Maybe they should add some sort of height/weight catagories to sports like with boxing? That way you would be judged on your size and not specifically on your gender?


----------



## Cleo38

catz4m8z said:


> yes, I think mine might be broken.....Ive never squeeked down there when I pee!!LOL:Hilarious
> 
> I think there are more trans athletes in college sports, I suppose because thats the kind fo age group when you work some stuff out!
> It is tricky though....judging purely by biology you are sending a message that somebody isnt valid in their gender. Maybe they should add some sort of height/weight catagories to sports like with boxing? That way you would be judged on your size and not specifically on your gender?


But by getting rid of divisions for biological sex then you are effectively getting rid of women's sports. Height & weight are still not comparable. A man of my similar weight/height will still be stronger than me.

Personally I don't find it a coincidence that biological men are now starting to enter women's sports now that there is more money, more focus etc on this area. Women's sports were always side lined before & the past few years there really seems to have been so much more focus & attention which is such great news for female athletes ... now this


----------



## Jesthar

catz4m8z said:


> It is tricky though....judging purely by biology you are sending a message that somebody isnt valid in their gender. Maybe they should add some sort of height/weight catagories to sports like with boxing? That way you would be judged on your size and not specifically on your gender?


Nah, wouldn't work - at school our fastest sprinter was a lad so small of stature he went by the nickname "Toddler" 

And they can't have it both ways - if they truly want it accepted that trans-X is X, then they can't opt out of that when it doesn't suit...


----------



## StormyThai

Jesthar said:


> all women should be bound by exactly the same doping laws based on female biology, regardless of original biology.


Yes, yes and yes again...except I would just say ALL should be bound by the same rules.
It sucks if you transitioned and still wanted to be competitive in sport and don't fit the parameters and I get that...I would still like to be competitive in running and dressage but I am not so I don't take part - simple.


----------



## O2.0

Boxer123 said:


> I agree @catz4m8z its hard to read stories such as this one and think anything different.
> 
> https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/04/...er-stephanie-hirst-opens-up-about-transition/
> 
> I see her as a woman end off.


If I were to encounter her on the street she's a woman to me too. 
But that's why we have to define what it is to be a woman. 
Because when she goes to her doctor, her biology does matter. If she were to compete in elite sports, her biology does matter.


----------



## catz4m8z

Cleo38 said:


> Height & weight are still not comparable. A man of my similar weight/height will still be stronger than me.
> 
> Personally I don't find it a coincidence that biological men are now starting to enter women's sports now that there is more money, more focus etc on this area. Women's sports were always side lined before & the past few years there really seems to have been so much more focus & attention which is such great news for female athletes ... now this


ok, devils advocate...... a man of the same weight/height who is all fat isnt going to be stronger then a woman of the same height/weight who is all muscle. Not to mention somebody who has trained for 15yrs is going to have an advantage over somebody who has trained for 2 years.
Although I do agree its much harder to justify when people are at the top of their sport and then transition as it does feel unfair.



Jesthar said:


> Nah, wouldn't work - at school our fastest sprinter was a lad so small of stature he went by the nickname "Toddler"


I don think it makes much of a difference at school though as puberty hasnt kicked in so girls and boys are pretty much the same.....and little kids have to run fast to avoid all the bullies!


----------



## Dimwit

O2.0 said:


> We can actually quantify the effect of testosterone levels on performance, but advantage in sport is so much more than hormone levels.


Absolutely this. Yes, testosterone improves performance - which is why it is a banned substance and why biological women who produce higher than usual levels of testosterone are banned from various sports (although trans women are allowed a higher level of testosterone than biological women in some sports for some unfathomable reason).

But, hormone levels on the day are only part of the picture - this article looks at differences between biological males and females which are present even before puberty https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-020-01389-3

There has been a lot of media attention on cycling in the UK at the moment with Emily Bridges competing against biological women. There is clear evidence that biological males have an advantage over females in cycling because of their bone structure etc. giving them a mechanical advantage and this doesn't go away when they transition. Yet Emily Bridges is quoted as saying "I don't want special treatment from anyone, I just want the same opportunities as my fellow female athletes"...


----------



## Cleo38

catz4m8z said:


> ok, devils advocate...... a man of the same weight/height who is all fat isnt going to be stronger then a woman of the same height/weight who is all muscle. Not to mention somebody who has trained for 15yrs is going to have an advantage over somebody who has trained for 2 years.
> Although I do agree its much harder to justify when people are at the top of their sport and then transition as it does feel unfair.
> 
> I don think it makes much of a difference at school though as puberty hasnt kicked in so girls and boys are pretty much the same.....and little kids have to run fast to avoid all the bullies!


But you are changing parameters. Athletes will be at their peak fitness levels so women are unable to compare to biological men in the same realm.

A man at his peak fitness even being a relative newcomer to a sport would have an advantage over a female athlete due to his biology.

Pre puberty is different. When I take my dogs over a local park for training sessions I see little kids playing football, both boys & girls which is great but they ate more evenly matched at that age.


----------



## mrs phas

catz4m8z said:


> Im all for letting people identify as whatever they want TBH. You can be born in the wrong body and to a certain extent medicine can fix alot of that for you. Im not going to say someone isnt a woman/man just because science cant yet flip your chromosomes and make you fully what you are!


Totally and utterly 100% agree with the above

Originally though, 77 pages ago, this thread wasn't about being born into the wrong body or anything to do with trans issues
It was about how women are let down across the world, despite women, allegedly, having equal rights and it being the 21st century.
The fact that fgm still happens, not just 'abroad' but here in the UK
The fact that, for women, the Taliban has taken their rights back to nothing since UN withdrawal 
The facts that many states in the US, Texas seemingly the worse, are stripping the basics of rights for a woman to have power over her own body, and giving those rights to, amongst others, pedophile's, rapists, incest perpetrators, etc
It morphed, several times, as threads do,
until it seems to have grounded on the rocks of the dangers of men self identifying as women 
Skewing crime rates 
having ingress into biological female safe spaces 
And 
Berating anyone who says they are female, a woman, identifying as their birth assigned gender -however you want to put it

I wouldn't think anyone in their right mind would deny that there is a condition that covers body diamorphism, be it a physical or mental (or both) condition
I don't think any reasonable person has a problem with ANYONE dressing or identifying as whatever they wish (or they shouldn't have at least)
I view the present 'shock horror' scenarios a bit like the backlash when women first wore trousers or showed their ankles in public etc
The only problem I see, myself, 
are 
the facts that the men who *'self identify'* for nefarious reasons, are allowed
Access to traditional safe places,
Allowed to perpetuate the myth that they are women, to the detriment of those who are actual women, assigned female at birth
Usurp the rights of those born in the female gender, rights that were hard fought and some died for
And
Are referred to as female despite showing full on, traditionally viewed, male attributes, such as beards (yes I know about pcos, hence the 'traditionally viewed')
Wearing a dress, and a bit of slap, does not a female or a woman make.

I am female, and bi, im proud to be both,
but 
I would never have a relationship with a self identifying male, or female
That doesn't make me a terf to say that, it makes me, me, just like you are you (general you not personal to anyone)
Respect goes both ways

If you got here, well done, you're a trooper:Kiss
If you think I've come across, anywhere, as patronising, I apologise 
If you think anywhere I've used 'you' it's directed personally, that's your problem, not mine 
Love others,be kind to others, be peaceful with others 
Keep strong and travel your own journey, because that's the only one that matters, the rest are choices to involve yourself with or not
You're never a bad person when you say ...
Not my monkey 
Not my circus 
So don't let others make you think you are

Diatribe over


----------



## Deguslave

I must admit I've skipped sections of this thread because it was just too hard going on my frazzled brain, but... I keep reading that we need a clear definition on what a woman is, I may have missed it, but I've yet to read anywhere any calls for a clear definition of what a man is. Until we stop this one-sided clear gender definition cry, all women are doing is derailing their arguments and rights. And from what I can see, this clear definition argument has deliberately been thrown into the women's rights debate by men. Not all men, but certainly some, and certainly supported by the media. Its was designed to confuse and tie us in mental knots while they keep telling us our rights can be eroded because we can't agree on this point of what defines a woman.

We don't need to be defined, we exist in all shapes, sizes and orientation. That should be enough and we need to stop playing the definition game and get back to fighting for our rights as human beings.

Rant over.


----------



## Magyarmum

I haven't followed this thread from the beginning so might be off topic, or behind the times? I did watch the Matt Walsh documentary and for me one of the most interesting parts was the interview with Dr Miriam Grossman and her comments about Drs Alfred Kinsey and John Money. The Kinsey reports I'm reasonably well acquainted with but knew little or nothing about Dr John Money's work, so having done some research discovered this BBC documentary called "The boy who was turned into a girl".

Admittidly it was made in 2002 and scientific knowledge has moved on since then but nevertheless is IMO well worth watching.


----------



## Cleo38

Magyarmum said:


> I haven't followed this thread from the beginning so might be off topic, or behind the times? I did watch the Matt Walsh documentary and for me one of the most interesting parts was the interview with Dr Miriam Grossman and her comments about Drs Alfred Kinsey and John Money. The Kinsey reports I'm reasonably well acquainted with but knew little or nothing about Dr John Money's work, so having done some research discovered this BBC documentary called "The boy who was turned into a girl".
> 
> Admittidly it was made in 2002 and scientific knowledge has moved on since then but nevertheless is IMO well worth watching.


Thanks, I was trying to remember where I had watched this documentary. Just a really tragic story for the family


----------



## O2.0

Dimwit said:


> But, hormone levels on the day are only part of the picture - this article looks at differences between biological males and females which are present even before puberty https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-020-01389-3


Super article, I hope everyone reads it.

I just got back from coaching over 30 kids in cross country running. Ages range from 12 to 17, co-ed. 
We train together, girls run with boys. We do the same workout, same strength routine, same yoga routine. There are clear differences between the sexes! My girls are more flexible, they are less top-heavy, their center of gravity is different. 
When they compete later this fall there are two categories, boys and girls. For the region and state meets we can only run our top 7 athletes in each category. It's completely objective, based on their time over the last 10 races. If I were to take only my top 14 overall, I would have 2 girls running, maybe just one because one of my younger boys had a massive growth spurt and has figured out where his legs are.
That's how opportunities for girls get eroded.

I know a lot of people on this thread don't care about sports and don't get why people get so worked up about it, but believe me, for those girls I'm coaching, it matters. What would be the point of them working as hard as they are all summer knowing that no matter what, no matter how hard they work, how many miles they put in, they will never be good enough to make it to state. And yeah, so what, a state title what's the big deal? Well in the US, it can mean access to university that you wouldn't otherwise have, it can mean access to coaching that you wouldn't otherwise have, and it just plain is affirming to know that there is a place for you in a sport you love.

It _does_ matter how we define women because if we can't say what a woman is, how on earth can we protect them and their rights?


----------



## O2.0

And just for smiles, Penny has become an integral part of the program too 

On the bike:









And on the trails


----------



## Boxer123

mrs phas said:


> Totally and utterly 100% agree with the above
> 
> Originally though, 77 pages ago, this thread wasn't about being born into the wrong body or anything to do with trans issues
> It was about how women are let down across the world, despite women, allegedly, having equal rights and it being the 21st century.
> The fact that fgm still happens, not just 'abroad' but here in the UK
> The fact that, for women, the Taliban has taken their rights back to nothing since UN withdrawal
> The facts that many states in the US, Texas seemingly the worse, are stripping the basics of rights for a woman to have power over her own body, and giving those rights to, amongst others, pedophile's, rapists, incest perpetrators, etc
> It morphed, several times, as threads do,
> until it seems to have grounded on the rocks of the dangers of men self identifying as women
> Skewing crime rates
> having ingress into biological female safe spaces
> And
> Berating anyone who says they are female, a woman, identifying as their birth assigned gender -however you want to put it
> 
> I wouldn't think anyone in their right mind would deny that there is a condition that covers body diamorphism, be it a physical or mental (or both) condition
> I don't think any reasonable person has a problem with ANYONE dressing or identifying as whatever they wish (or they shouldn't have at least)
> I view the present 'shock horror' scenarios a bit like the backlash when women first wore trousers or showed their ankles in public etc
> 
> Diatribe over


I agree this is not why I started this thread and if I'm honest I feel quite uncomfortable the direction it has taken. It certainly does not align with my beliefs. Many of the sensationalist stories posted on this thread are not representative of what is happening on the ground.

There are so many issues women face.

The march on the met happened only yesterday protesting against misogyny in the police. 
Reproductive rights in America 
The number of women who are murdered in the UK
Stalking statistics 
Digital strip search of rape victims with only 1% of rape cases being prosecuted

With regards to sports I won't pretend I know enough about the science.

There are many aspects that make elite sports unfair. In particular wealth makes a huge difference when it comes to participation.

Do we need to protect women in sports ? Yes absolutely but why aren't we getting angry about;

Girls mental health and body image in elite sports
Girls being forced to wear tiny knickers in games whilst men can wear what they like
The sexual abuse scandals where girls have spoken out but been ignored or disbelieved.


----------



## O2.0

Boxer123 said:


> There are many aspects that make elite sports unfair. In particular wealth makes a huge difference when it comes to participation.
> 
> Do we need to protect women in sports ? Yes absolutely but why aren't we getting angry about;
> 
> Girls mental health and body image in elite sports
> Girls being forced to wear tiny knickers in games whilst men can wear what they like
> The sexual abuse scandals where girls have spoken out but been ignored or disbelieved.


It's all related IME. Particularly here in the US where the only opportunity poor kids have to do any kind of competitive sport is through public schools. The CT runners cheated out of state titles were public school runners because private schools - who don't receive federal funding, can make their own rules.

I can be worried about "my" girls having the same opportunities as the boys and _also_ worry about their mental health, body image, and safety. I worry about all of it. 
I am so crazy protective of these girls and their opportunities to compete being fair is just one of the many ways I feel very "mama bear" about them.

BTW the gymnasts who won against Larry Nassar are now also suing the FBI for their handling of the case and I'm all here for that too.
"The women are collectively seeking more than $1 billion from the FBI in a lawsuit filed under the Federal Tort Claims Act, a 1946 law that makes the United States liable for injuries "caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the Government while acting within the scope of his office or employment." They join 13 others who in April filed a similar lawsuit against the FBI, citing a July report released by the Justice Department's inspector general that found the bureau failed to properly investigate serious sex-abuse allegations against Nassar."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/olympics/2022/06/08/larry-nassar-victims-fbi-lawsuit/


----------



## Jesthar

Boxer123 said:


> I agree this is not why I started this thread and if I'm honest I feel quite uncomfortable the direction it has taken. It certainly does not align with my beliefs. Many of the sensationalist stories posted on this thread are not representative of what is happening on the ground.
> 
> There are so many issues women face.
> 
> The march on the met happened only yesterday protesting against misogyny in the police.
> Reproductive rights in America
> The number of women who are murdered in the UK
> Stalking statistics
> Digital strip search of rape victims with only 1% of rape cases being prosecuted
> 
> With regards to sports I won't pretend I know enough about the science.
> 
> There are many aspects that make elite sports unfair. In particular wealth makes a huge difference when it comes to participation.
> 
> Do we need to protect women in sports ? Yes absolutely but why aren't we getting angry about;
> 
> Girls mental health and body image in elite sports
> Girls being forced to wear tiny knickers in games whilst men can wear what they like
> The sexual abuse scandals where girls have spoken out but been ignored or disbelieved.


To be fair, if memory serves we've covered all that and more at various points. It all matters.

For example, can't stand the Amber Heard/Johnny Depp case (not followed it beyond the basics), and yes it's a celebrity ding dong - but it matters because it affects how people judge women when it comes to problems in relationships. Was it technically a domestic abuse case - no. But that's what a lot of people will remember it as, and that it was ruled that Amber lost despite awful behavour on both sides. Will that mean fewer women come forward to report domestic abuse? Or that more people will look at women to do step forwards with suspicion, and put the character of the woman on trial? Probably.

Elite sports may not interest everyone, but what happens there will influence what is acceptable in other areas - the same as sexualisation via mandatory skimpy outfits. It is high profile, and if it is decided there that social gender is more important than biology when it comes to competing in events classified as female, even when male biology gives a natural advantage, then that stance will start to affect not only the grassroots kids that people like O2.0 train, but also invite abuse of that ruling. Some people already do lots of actually illegal things to succeed at the Elite level, it is a safe bet that some will regard faking being a trans-woman as a way to be succesful in womens sport as opposed to average at mens sport. Extreme? Yes. Unfair to biological women? Yes. Offensive to genuine trans? Yes - but someone is going to have low enough morals to try it, and probably have the balls to get away with it too.

Some of these are very tricky and uncomfortable to debate. In a meeting just last week, a group I am in had to decide whether to support a national proposal from a trans equality committee to more closely involve the trans community in something pretty innocuous - environmental issues, or something similar, I'm struggling to remember specifics as we reviewed several dozen proposals over a whole day! Either way, it was pretty routine and easy to agree with - barring one sub-clause.

Tucked away about two thirds of the way down was a paragraph calling for (and I'm paraphrasing here) the challenging and closing down of all 'gender critical' language, opinions and viewpoints. The way it was worded placed no limitations on what could be interpreted as 'gender critical', nor did it define the term or give examples. I could see many were uncomfortable with that part, especially as it was utterly unrelated to the rest of the proposal, but no-one was willing to challenge it and the recommendation from the (male) chair was strong acceptance.

So I bit the bullet and spoke up about the potential for the abuse of that clause without proper definition. Next thing I knew all the women - and some of the men - were echoing those concerns. I even had private messages (it was an online meeting) thanking me for actually speaking up as they wanted to but didn't feel they could. It was all very polite and respectful, and we ended up not supporting it and agreeing to request clarification instead.

Is that a big thing in the scheme of things? Not really. But it matters, because if you don't ask these questions when you can, then it might not be possible later. Also, if the motives of the proposers are decent, they won't mind clarifying anyway


----------



## mrs phas

Jesthar said:


> Will that mean fewer women come forward to report domestic abuse?


Or
could it mean more men will come forward and get the help THEY need as victims of domestic abuse
After all if
"the great Johnny Depp"
Is going to stand up and say
_*"YES, *_
I am a victim of domestic abuse,"
and be believed ( yes we all know it was supposed to be about defamation,but it still turned into a mud slinging, $h1t show anyway)
Then, maybe we can too

Did you know,
as an example of beliefs re abusers v abusee's
There is not a single specifically named safe house for male victims of rape or partner/spousal violence in the UK
And
According to ManKind only 20 'safe spaces' countrywide specifically allocated to male victims of DV

Yes I agree, before anyone shouts, female victims, probably, outnumber male victims of intimate violence by 100 to 1, if not, possibly more
But
With 67 million+ people in this country alone, those 1's add up
I know this is a thread about women's rights triggers and I don't want to take anything away from that
But
Surely, whilst upholding the rights of women, worldwide,
we have to recognise, that, women, can be hidden perpetrators of evil, too

Edit because my phone keeps changing male to make


----------



## Boxer123

Jesthar said:


> To be fair, if memory serves we've covered all that and more at various points. It all matters.
> 
> For example, can't stand the Amber Heard/Johnny Depp case (not followed it beyond the basics), and yes it's a celebrity ding dong - but it matters because it affects how people judge women when it comes to problems in relationships. Was it technically a domestic abuse case - no. But that's what a lot of people will remember it as, and that it was ruled that Amber lost despite awful behavour on both sides. Will that mean fewer women come forward to report domestic abuse? Or that more people will look at women to do step forwards with suspicion, and put the character of the woman on trial? Probably.
> 
> Elite sports may not interest everyone, but what happens there will influence what is acceptable in other areas - the same as sexualisation via mandatory skimpy outfits. It is high profile, and if it is decided there that social gender is more important than biology when it comes to competing in events classified as female, even when male biology gives a natural advantage, then that stance will start to affect not only the grassroots kids that people like O2.0 train, but also invite abuse of that ruling. Some people already do lots of actually illegal things to succeed at the Elite level, it is a safe bet that some will regard faking being a trans-woman as a way to be succesful in womens sport as opposed to average at mens sport. Extreme? Yes. Unfair to biological women? Yes. Offensive to genuine trans? Yes - but someone is going to have low enough morals to try it, and probably have the balls to get away with it too.
> 
> Some of these are very tricky and uncomfortable to debate. In a meeting just last week, a group I am in had to decide whether to support a national proposal from a trans equality committee to more closely involve the trans community in something pretty innocuous - environmental issues, or something similar, I'm struggling to remember specifics as we reviewed several dozen proposals over a whole day! Either way, it was pretty routine and easy to agree with - barring one sub-clause.
> 
> Tucked away about two thirds of the way down was a paragraph calling for (and I'm paraphrasing here) the challenging and closing down of all 'gender critical' language, opinions and viewpoints. The way it was worded placed no limitations on what could be interpreted as 'gender critical', nor did it define the term or give examples. I could see many were uncomfortable with that part, especially as it was utterly unrelated to the rest of the proposal, but no-one was willing to challenge it and the recommendation from the (male) chair was strong acceptance.
> 
> So I bit the bullet and spoke up about the potential for the abuse of that clause without proper definition. Next thing I knew all the women - and some of the men - were echoing those concerns. I even had private messages (it was an online meeting) thanking me for actually speaking up as they wanted to but didn't feel they could. It was all very polite and respectful, and we ended up not supporting it and agreeing to request clarification instead.
> 
> Is that a big thing in the scheme of things? Not really. But it matters, because if you don't ask these questions when you can, then it might not be possible later. Also, if the motives of the proposers are decent, they won't mind clarifying anyway


Amber Heard wasn't discussed on this thread she had her own. If you look back we have had pages and pages debating trans women in sports when let's face the numbers we are probably taking about are tiny. It is worthy of a discussion but do we really believe men are pretending to be trans to access women sport? If they are it's not only damaging to women but to trans people so we are on the same side !

Once again no one is shouting about financial fairness in sport.

There are so many other issues that face women. We also need to recognise the difficulties trans people face. I think about 41% have been victims of a hate crime. The articles and videos posted are sensationalist and not really representative of the community as @mrs phas said let's be kind.

I don't think we are getting much of a debate because some voices are louder then others. We are covering the same material over and over again. Do you think a trans person visiting this forum for pet advice would feel comfortable after reading this thread? I will bow out now.


----------



## Cleo38

Boxer123 said:


> Amber Heard wasn't discussed on this thread she had her own. If you look back *we have had pages and pages debating trans women in sports* when let's face the numbers we are probably taking about are tiny. It is worthy of a discussion but do we really believe men are pretending to be trans to access women sport? If they are it's not only damaging to women but to trans people so we are on the same side !
> 
> Once again no one is shouting about financial fairness in sport.
> 
> There are so many other issues that face women. We also need to recognise the difficulties trans people face. I think about 41% have been victims of a hate crime. The articles and videos posted are sensationalist and not really representative of the community as @mrs phas said let's be kind.
> 
> I don't think we are getting much of a debate because some voices are louder then others. We are covering the same material over and over again. Do you think a trans person visiting this forum for pet advice would feel comfortable after reading this thread? I will bow out now.


But IMO it is very important. I am not an athlete or have any interest in sports tbh but it is still an issue that I feel strongly about. As @O2.0 states this is about women/girls being recognised, achieving college places (which will then affect their futures) as a sense of personal achievement, encouraging other women/girls in to sports (which is great as I understand that in some school, etc the numbers of women/girls in sport are low). It is also a subject that is very of the moment & clearly demonstrates an unfairness toward women who are then silenced & not allowed to speak up as they are afraid ... regardless what subject this relates to if women are in this position I find it incredible sad & worrying.

I think there has been many different voices on here representing different opinion & I hope everyone contributes if they feel they want to. I think a while back we had this where I said I welcomed opposing opinions. It is a shame one of the members doesn't appear to be on the forum anymore.

I also don't think anyone has been abusive, if that is the case or anyone feels this then maybe they should report to the mods or tell the member. I think sometimes people get passionate & maybe don't realise that they may have over stepped the line. or maybe some people feel victimised because others don't agree with them .. forums are just like that & I think this thread is a actually a good representation of people discussing issues without personally attacking others.

I think the subjects posted about are very representative, they affect women, women are talking about them (where they are allowed to) & women are demonstrating about them (when they are allowed to). This is surely a space where we can discuss a variety of subjects & as long as we are respectful then why should we worry what others may think? No one has been abusive

I hope everyone feels they can post here regardless of the subject that is affecting women, The subject went back to the trans issue again due to the release of the Matt Walsh film which again IMO was an important subject to discuss. It was all over social media & mentioned in several of the feminist pages on FB so a very relevant topic.

I would rather people be respectful than 'kind' ... sorry that's just my opinion as I find that phrase is often used to shut down differences of opinion especially to women


----------



## Jobeth

Boxer123 said:


> Amber Heard wasn't discussed on this thread she had her own. If you look back we have had pages and pages debating trans women in sports when let's face the numbers we are probably taking about are tiny. It is worthy of a discussion but do we really believe men are pretending to be trans to access women sport? If they are it's not only damaging to women but to trans people so we are on the same side !
> 
> Once again no one is shouting about financial fairness in sport.
> 
> There are so many other issues that face women. We also need to recognise the difficulties trans people face. I think about 41% have been victims of a hate crime. The articles and videos posted are sensationalist and not really representative of the community as @mrs phas said let's be kind.
> 
> I don't think we are getting much of a debate because some voices are louder then others. We are covering the same material over and over again. Do you think a trans person visiting this forum for pet advice would feel comfortable after reading this thread? I will bow out now.


Thank you for this. As I've said before my cousin is transgender and just wants to leave her life like anyone else. I'm glad the mocking of self-identifying was stopped when it did and really wish we'd move on from it. One poster has already left over this and has deleted loads of their posts.


----------



## Cleo38

Jobeth said:


> Thank you for this. As I've said before my cousin is transgender and just wants to leave her life like anyone else. I'm glad the mocking of self-identifying was stopped when it did and really wish we'd move on from it. One poster has already left over this and has deleted loads of their posts.


And am sure most are like your cousin but unfortunately there is a loud & aggressive TRA element that IMO are creating divisions rather than encouraging inclusivity.

I know we are not allowed to discuss members (so mods please delete this part of my comment if necessary)& it is a shame she has left the forum but ultimately it was her choice over a decision made. I have had threads deleted, posts edited, etc previously which I thought unfair but I am still here. (I think she left over a post that was edited rather than content posted on here ... but I might be wrong so apologies if I am  )

I hope people feel free to post on any subject that affects women regardless of their POV.


----------



## O2.0

Boxer123 said:


> Once again no one is shouting about financial fairness in sport.


I was and was shouted back down. I don't know if it was this thread or another but I brought up the equal pay for women's soccer (football) issue that was going on here in the states and was told that the women's team shouldn't be paid as much because they don't sell as many tickets.

Honestly, we're shouted down on so many women's issues - even the JD/AH trial whenever someone brought up the misogyny aspect of the JD fans it turned right back into "women can be abusers too!" which of course they can and this case proved that but um... misogyny is still not okay is it not?



Boxer123 said:


> Do you think a trans person visiting this forum for pet advice would feel comfortable after reading this thread?


I think a lot of things there. 
I think most trans people agree with a lot of what is said on this thread. I don't think TRA = everyday trans people just trying to live their lives. And I don't think the majority of trans people agree with a lot of the TRA narrative either. For example all this self-ID and gender fluid stuff is at it's core dismissive of the trans experience of wanting to change one's gender. If there is no gender or anyone can be any gender, then what's the point of medical transition?
It also seems that a lot of trans people disagree with puberty blockers and transitioning very young. Another issue we've covered.

And then of course there's people who read stuff and simply disregard it, I mean, look at all the threads about wanting to breed my doodle to a pug, it would take 5 seconds to encounter a thread about poor breeding practices and/or the health issues with pugs yet people come on here all the time and jump right in.

And finally, if anyone spends the days it would require to slog through this thread start to finish, they're braver than me!

But we have to be able to at least talk about things. And I know that every time I bring up women in sports it might sound anti-trans but that's just the 'woke' bias coming through. My posts are not anti-anything. They're PRO-women and girls, who still need a lot of protection even as far as we've come in the western world. 
When I say protect women's sports that's pro women. 
When I say protect the word woman in healthcare settings (we are not bleeders or birthing people) that's pro women. 
When I ask to define what a woman is, it's so that we can have real conversations about who we're protecting, including trans women because if we can't say what is a woman then we certainly can't say what a trans woman is, and we need to be able to do that.


----------



## Jesthar

O2.0 said:


> I was and was shouted back down. I don't know if it was this thread or another but I brought up the equal pay for women's soccer (football) issue that was going on here in the states and was told that the women's team shouldn't be paid as much because they don't sell as many tickets


You can 'thank' the UK FA for that.

During WW1, womens football became a phenomenon in the UK whilst the men were off fighting, attracting massive crowds and raising huge amounts of money for the war effort.

Post WW1, the womens game remained vastly more popular, attracting far higher numbers of spectators than the men and breaking gate attendance records at the grounds they played at. The matches weren't frequent, and never interfered with the mens schedule, but they were always much more popular than the mens matches. The Dick, Kerr's Ladies and St Helens Ladies match brought 53,000 fans through the Goodison Park turnstiles on Boxing Day 1920, believed at the time to be the largest gate at any football match in England since records began.

The FA of the day thought that was too embarrassing for the men's game, so in 1921 they passed a resolution declaring the sport "quite unsuitable for females" and banning womens matches from all FA team grounds. And so the womens game was sidelined - indeed, mainly forgotten about - for decades, and only allowed strict amateur status after the womens FA was finally formed in 1969. They became part of the main FA in 1993 - and even today, the FA only acknowledges that womens football existed from that date, holding a "20 years of womens football" event in 2013.

Isn't history fun!


----------



## Jobeth

Male and female are biological facts but the concept of women/men changes with time and culture. You need a male and female to produce a child. However, when I work with children I don’t then assume the parents they live with are a man and woman. It is culturally unacceptable here to walk down the high street as a woman showing your breasts. Where I worked in Zambia showing your knees was offensive. Therefore there is no general agreement on what part of the body is deemed sexual.

When it comes to sport then someone pretending to be transgender to gain advantage should be treated in the same way as those that take drugs. I think it’s a case of fraud rather than a transgender issue.


----------



## Jesthar

Jobeth said:


> When it comes to sport then someone pretending to be transgender to gain advantage should be treated in the same way as those that take drugs. I think it's a case of fraud rather than a transgender issue.


Agreed, but... how do you decide who is genuine and who is a fraud?

With drugs, it's (relatviely) easy to define, even if it always going to be a cat and mouse game. You have banned substances and testing regimes on one side, and cheats trying to circumvent those rules on the other.

But how do you legislate for something that can't be tested for or measured - that we are told isn't even physical? That's a genuine question, as I have no idea. Either way, it will be biological women and genuine trans who lose, as someone that determined to cheat won't worry about playing the discrimination card often and loudly.


----------



## Jobeth

Jesthar said:


> Agreed, but... how do you decide who is genuine and who is a fraud?
> 
> With drugs, it's (relatviely) easy to define, even if it always going to be a cat and mouse game. You have banned substances and testing regimes on one side, and cheats trying to circumvent those rules on the other.
> 
> But how do you legislate for something that can't be tested for or measured - that we are told isn't even physical? That's a genuine question, as I have no idea. Either way, it will be biological women and genuine trans who lose, as someone that determined to cheat won't worry about playing the discrimination card often and loudly.


I'd assume that someone who is genuinely transgender would live a transitioned life. If someone was a fraud then it would only be whilst racing etc. I don't think it's really an issue here though as it wouldn't help you access university etc.


----------



## Sairy

Jobeth said:


> Thank you for this. As I've said before my cousin is transgender and just wants to leave her life like anyone else. I'm glad the mocking of self-identifying was stopped when it did and really wish we'd move on from it. One poster has already left over this and has deleted loads of their posts.


I have now deleted the post in question (although I can't do anything about posts where people have quoted it) and again I am sorry that it offended you - it was never meant to offend anyone, but I have a pretty warped sense of humour (usually I'm the subject of my own jokes) which isn't really appropriate for a public forum where people don't know me and cannot tell what my intentions are. I will attempt to explain myself, and possibly redeem myself from being the a-hole I have evidently come across as, before I bow out of this thread.

I absolutely support a person's right to live an authentic life and be the person that they are. As someone who had to battle with her own sexuality for many years and went through a huge amount of emotional trauma herself, including rejection from my own family, I know how it feels to be a social outcast. Of course we should be kind to people, that should go without saying. Of course people should be treated with respect. If you are trans then I will use your preferred pronoun and preferred name, and I will not treat you any differently to anyone else. The issue for me with human rights is when the advancement of rights of one group of people steps on the rights of another group of people (example being trans women competing against cis women in sport). When gay marriage was being debated I was against religious organisations being forced to conduct same sex marriages for the exact same reason - why should the rights of gay people be more important than the rights of religious freedom?

I have a trans friend. She came out to me in her early 20s after I had known her as a man for many years. I was very supportive, helped her dress, showed her how to apply makeup and of course I loved her the exact same as I had for years. But she and I used to take the mick out of each other - I the lesbian and she the trans woman. I have lots of gay and lesbian friends and again we take the mick out of each other, but there is no malice whatsoever.

The reason I thought of the picture of my cat in a carrycot was because in the Matt Walsh documentary he asked someone to define what a cat was. It made me think of Herbie, who is apparently a cat but no-one seems to have told him this and he behaves like a range of different species, including a human baby. My post was meant to just lighten the mood a little, but I accept that it was inappropriate.

And on that note, and to avoid risk of causing further offence, I shall now bow out of this thread.


----------



## O2.0

And another voice silenced because we're not allowed to say certain things, discuss certain things 

I like Ricky Gervais' take. He jokes about trans people along with everyone else because he wants to be inclusive - so he includes the trans community in his jokes too. 

Or better yet, Aayan Hirsi Ali's take that if you are afraid of offending that means you don't see the other person as an equal, you don't think them capable of handling a difference of opinion. It's condescending.


----------



## Lurcherlad

I’ve typed out numerous posts then deleted them…. Just not worth the agg tbh


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> And another voice silenced because we're not allowed to say certain things, discuss certain things
> 
> I like Ricky Gervais' take. He jokes about trans people along with everyone else because he wants to be inclusive - so he includes the trans community in his jokes too.
> 
> Or better yet, Aayan Hirsi Ali's take that if you are afraid of offending that means you don't see the other person as an equal, you don't think them capable of handling a difference of opinion. It's condescending.


I watched the latest Ricky Gervais stand up show the other night ... OMG so bloody funny!!

Personally I think jokes should be made about everyone, no-one should feel they are so fragile that they are exempt. I do have a dark sense of humour which I do appreciate some people don't but at the same time a joke is subjective & what one person will find offensive many others will find funny. If it's meant in good humour then I honestly don't see the problem but ....


----------



## Oof

I've been reading this thread because, admittedly, I know little about 'women's rights' and what affects them. I tend to avoid the news, so I've been using this thread to gain knowledge and different perspectives. I want to be more educated on it, I want to have enough awareness to educate my daughters' on various issues.

There's been lots of posts that I haven't agreed with, even more that I don't understand , but they're all valid and relevant (imo at least :Bag).

I hate the idea of censorship - subtle or not. I think part of the problem with the internet is it's near impossible to interpret meaning behind the posts. With a thread such as this, it's hard not to take everything at face value - it's a serious topic being discussed. However, lots of people use humour as a medium to communicate a message. 

Anyway, thems my thoughts. Probably irrelevant :Hilarious


----------



## Cleo38

Oof said:


> I've been reading this thread because, admittedly, I know little about 'women's rights' and what affects them. I tend to avoid the news, so I've been using this thread to gain knowledge and different perspectives. I want to be more educated on it, I want to have enough awareness to educate my daughters' on various issues.
> 
> There's been lots of posts that I haven't agreed with, even more that I don't understand , but they're all valid and relevant (imo at least :Bag).
> 
> I hate the idea of censorship - subtle or not. I think part of the problem with the internet is it's near impossible to interpret meaning behind the posts. With a thread such as this, it's hard not to take everything at face value - it's a serious topic being discussed. *However, lots of people use humour as a medium to communicate a message*.
> 
> Anyway, thems my thoughts. Probably irrelevant :Hilarious


Exactly or to change a mood if things get heated or just to raise s smile. I honestly don't think @Sairy meant anything derogatory by the post at all. It was just a funny pic of her lovely cat. I hope you do continue to post @Sairy, it is a shame if you don't contribute (If you want to ) 

As I said in earlier post, I actually think this thread is a good example of a serious issue being discussed without getting personal so I hope it continues.


----------



## mrs phas

> Medical gaslighting exists if you're a woman.


https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/medical-gaslighting-women-nhs-crisis-b2096771.html


----------



## Oof

Cleo38 said:


> Exactly or to change a mood if things get heated or just to raise s smile. I honestly don't think @Sairy meant anything derogatory by the post at all. It was just a funny pic of her lovely cat. I hope you do continue to post @Sairy, it is a shame if you don't contribute (If you want to )
> 
> As I said in earlier post, I actually think this thread is a good example of a serious issue being discussed without getting personal so I hope it continues.


At risk of this coming across in the wrong way - I think sometimes it's good for people to throw caution to the wind and say things that _could _cause offence. When people speak with caution because they're terrified of other people being offended, ideas, thoughts and views go unheard. If they're not voiced, they remain unchallenged and the person misses out on an opportunity to grow.

I'm not saying it's ok to be horrid for the sake of it. I think it's a real shame for folks to be scared off (or decide it's just not worth the aggro) because something they've said is met with hostility _before_ a dialogue has opened up to find out why that person thinks that way.

That's just me anyway. And I realise I've gone off on one AGAIN and this has nothing to do with women's rights. Or maybe it does - does it count as a piece on free speech lol? Sorry for the tangent


----------



## O2.0

I think we've discussed this briefly on this thread - Brittney Griner, the WNBA player who has been detained in Russia since February. 
There is a lot to unpack, the fact that she has to play overseas during the off season because they simply don't make enough money as the male NBA stars, the fact that there has been so little news coverage over a US citizen being wrongfully detained, that she's still there after more than 3 months... 
And you have to ask if it's because she's a woman and a lesbian that no one seems to care?
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/13/spor...-state-department-meeting-spt-intl/index.html


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> I think we've discussed this briefly on this thread - Brittney Griner, the WNBA player who has been detained in Russia since February.
> There is a lot to unpack, the fact that she has to play overseas during the off season because they simply don't make enough money as the male NBA stars, the fact that there has been so little news coverage over a US citizen being wrongfully detained, that she's still there after more than 3 months...
> And you have to ask if it's because she's a woman and a lesbian that no one seems to care?
> https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/13/spor...-state-department-meeting-spt-intl/index.html


That's terrible. I must admit I'm not a sports fan so wouldn't know who she was but even as a person caught up in this political conflict I would have thought I'd been aware of her but I can't remember seeing anything.


----------



## Magyarmum

Cleo38 said:


> That's terrible. I must admit I'm not a sports fan so wouldn't know who she was but even as a person caught up in this political conflict I would have thought I'd been aware of her but I can't remember seeing anything.


There's been quite a bit about her in the media, but I think it's been overshadowed by the release of Trver Reed and of course the war in Ukraine.


----------



## Cleo38

I read about this case a while ago & wondered what was happening. This is so terrible .... Woman cleared of lying about gang rape takes fight to ECHR | The Independent


----------



## O2.0

That poor woman!! How utterly horrible. And how incredibly strong of her to pursue it. I hope she gets some justice!


----------



## Dimwit

It is such a terrible case and good for her for having the strength to fight this.


----------



## picaresque

Cleo38 said:


> I read about this case a while ago & wondered what was happening. This is so terrible .... Woman cleared of lying about gang rape takes fight to ECHR | The Independent


I remember this too and feeling sick at how gleeful the internet's 'manosphere' were over it. They love a good 'see, women lie!' story even if it's false. 
I hope she has a lot of support from family and loved ones, she's so young as well.


----------



## Cleo38

Wow, common sense again!!!

Sajid Javid orders NHS bosses to stop dropping 'women' from online advice pages | Daily Mail Online


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> Wow, common sense again!!!
> 
> Sajid Javid orders NHS bosses to stop dropping 'women' from online advice pages | Daily Mail Online


That's a good point about how many people don't even realize if they have a cervix or a prostate, but people do know if they're male or female. 
I was talking to a 20-something woman the other day and she didn't realize that only men have prostates.


----------



## Magyarmum

O2.0 said:


> That's a good point about how many people don't even realize if they have a cervix or a prostate, but people do know if they're male or female.
> I was talking to a 20-something woman the other day and she didn't realize that only men have prostates.


I remember shortly after having my first child, hearing a man loudly threatening to sue the maternity home for injuring his new born son. I was later told that he didn't know that the "injury" he was ranting about was actually the baby's umbilical cord


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> That's a good point about how many people don't even realize if they have a cervix or a prostate, but people do know if they're male or female.
> I was talking to a 20-something woman the other day and she didn't realize that only men have prostates.


I know, it sounds obvious but not always. "People who have ovaries" sounds so odd & broad. I also know alot of people skim medical stuff (myself included at times) so may only really notice words that are relevant, woman/women definitely being one of them!!

And I go back to David Lammy (Labour MP) who thought trans women could have a cervix after 'procedures' enguin

But it does demonstrate that we are not all aware of our biology &/or terminology


----------



## Dimwit

O2.0 said:


> That's a good point about how many people don't even realize if they have a cervix or a prostate, but people do know if they're male or female.
> I was talking to a 20-something woman the other day and she didn't realize that only men have prostates.


One of the main things people picked up on with the NHS website was the inequality (yet again). If you search for prostate cancer the website includes the following:
"The prostate is a small gland in the pelvis and is part of the male reproductive system."

"The chances of developing prostate cancer increase as you get older. Most cases develop in men aged 50 or older.
For reasons not yet understood, prostate cancer is more common in black men and less common in Asian men.
Men whose father or brother were affected by prostate cancer are at slightly increased risk themselves."

So, yet again it is just women who are being erased - there was no mention that this can affect trans women, or even people with a prostate - it was all about men. Inclusive language is only inclusive if it applied equally.

I am currently working on writing some manuscripts with results from clinical trials of a breast cancer drug, and I am very careful not to just use women or females because this does affect men as well, but if you are talking about something that affects either male or female specific anatomy then you should be able to use the correct biological sex.


----------



## Lurcherlad

It was good to hear the new Women’s Health Ambassador referring to menopausal women (and being one herself).

How long before she gets her knuckles rapped and her title changed, I wonder?


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Hopefully, knowing Lesley Regan as I do (well, not personally, but from her work) I'd be surprised if she'd allow herself to be berated. You don't get to be a female Professor of O&G without being seriously tough. She is also the Chair of the charity Wellbeing of Women - which still rather bravely has women in it's name


----------



## picaresque

Mr Menno wisdom


----------



## mrs phas

Sorry that it's a daily fail link, but I think it's on BBC news too

International cycling and swimming bodies are making a stand in favour of women athletes

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/s...r-athletes-swimming-cycling-change-rules.html

Edit to add there is

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/swimming/61853450


----------



## Lurcherlad

Excerpt re the swimming body FINA … a common sense approach.


----------



## O2.0

It has been interesting seeing the reaction to the FINA decision. Most of the headlines have used some form of the word "banned" for the transgender athletes and that's interestingly not what the ruling is. No one is banned from competing, you either compete in your sex category or compete in the open category. 

It has also been interesting reading some of the comments. The vast majority of people agree with the ruling, including LGBT allies who are also athletes themselves like Martina Naratilova and Caitlyn Jenner. 

I've said it before, I don't think the trans activist agenda represents most trans people. I think most trans people are as frustrated with the activists as the rest of us.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> It has been interesting seeing the reaction to the FINA decision. Most of the headlines have used some form of the word "banned" for the transgender athletes and that's interestingly not what the ruling is. No one is banned from competing, you either compete in your sex category or compete in the open category.
> 
> It has also been interesting reading some of the comments. The vast majority of people agree with the ruling, including LGBT allies who are also athletes themselves like Martina Naratilova and Caitlyn Jenner.
> 
> I've said it before, I don't think the trans activist agenda represents most trans people. I think most trans people are as frustrated with the activists as the rest of us.


I've been reading quite a few articles about this & the word 'banned' seems to be being thrown around as a bit but as you point out trans athletes are not 'banned' from competing at all, they are still able to compete in their biological sex group. 

I am so please that this decision has been made for all those female athletes who never have the same attention. money, etc put in to their sectors as the men & have to work so hard to gain the recognition they deserve.


----------



## Siskin

Reading something today that said some of the other British sports associations are looking at the FINA decision with interest and may follow their lead.

A friends son is a water polo coach for a young girls team (teenagers). They take part in a number of events in this country and abroad representing GB. I will have to ask if any trans girls have approached him to be in the team and what he feels about it, just curious really as he feels a huge amount of responsibility for these young girls.


----------



## Dimwit

O2.0 said:


> It has been interesting seeing the reaction to the FINA decision.


Did you see the hysteria on twitter that this would mean that people will DROWN


----------



## Siskin

Dimwit said:


> Did you see the hysteria on twitter that this would mean that people will DROWN


Drown?😱


----------



## O2.0

Dimwit said:


> Did you see the hysteria on twitter that this would mean that people will DROWN


Oh geez, I missed that thankfully! I don't do twitter


----------



## O2.0

Siskin said:


> he feels a huge amount of responsibility for these young girls.


I feel that too. A good coaching relationship is a very strong bond and you feel so protective of "your" kids.


----------



## Cleo38

This was the tweet @O2.0 ..... WTF?!!! How can a ban on trans women competing in women's swim races lead to higher drowning rates? This ruling has nothing to do with trans people learning to swim Honestly ..... 😲


----------



## Siskin

Cleo38 said:


> This was the tweet @O2.0 ..... WTF?!!! How can a ban on trans women competing in women's swim races lead to higher drowning rates? This ruling has nothing to do with trans people learning to swim Honestly ..... 😲
> View attachment 573490


How utterly stupid can someone be. The subject was about competition not swimming lessons. There’s obviously 91 other equally stupid people going by the likes


----------



## Magyarmum

Cleo38 said:


> This was the tweet @O2.0 ..... WTF?!!! How can a ban on trans women competing in women's swim races lead to higher drowning rates? This ruling has nothing to do with trans people learning to swim Honestly ..... 😲
> View attachment 573490





Siskin said:


> How utterly stupid can someone be. The subject was about competition not swimming lessons. There’s obviously 91 other equally stupid people going by the likes


That reminds me of a conversation I once overheard when Barcelona was hosting the Olympics.

I was sitting having a coffee in a cafe in Fuengirola close to a table occupied by two elderly, blue haired American ladies.

One said to the other "Why is it there are no black swimmers competing in the swimming events?"

The other one replied "That's because black people's skins are porous and if they go in the water they'll just sink to the bottom".


----------



## Cleo38

Siskin said:


> How utterly stupid can someone be. The subject was about competition not swimming lessons. There’s obviously 91 other equally stupid people going by the likes


I know, it bears no relevence to the ruling at all!


Magyarmum said:


> That reminds me of a conversation I once overheard when Barcelona was hosting the Olympics.
> 
> I was sitting having a coffee in a cafe in Fuengirola close to a table occupied by two elderly, blue haired American ladies.
> 
> One said to the other "Why is it there are no black swimmers competing in the swimming events?"
> 
> The other one replied "That's because black people's skins are porous and if they go in the water they'll just sink to the bottom".


Hahahahahaha, OMG!!! 😲


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> This was the tweet @O2.0 ..... WTF?!!! How can a ban on trans women competing in women's swim races lead to higher drowning rates? This ruling has nothing to do with trans people learning to swim Honestly ..... 😲
> View attachment 573490


Oh just the usual logic and reason applied to the argument I see 

I was listening to Caitlyn Jenner talking about this on some talk show and the host kept pushing the narrative that trans athletes are being banned, Caitlyn kept coming back with "this isn't about banning anyone, this is about saving women's sports." Which is spot on IMO.


----------



## mrs phas

Magyarmum said:


> One said to the other "Why is it there are no black swimmers competing in the swimming events?"
> 
> The other one replied "That's because black people's skins are porous and if they go in the water they'll just sink to the bottom


I remember my dad telling me their leg/arm proportions were wrong and their bones were too heavy back in the 70s, probably around the 72 Olympics
And
Then saying Eric Moussambani Malonga, aka, 'eric the eel', in the 2000 Olympics, was proof of the analogy
And
That the 'African' runners were so good, at middle and long distance running ,because they were used to keeping up speeds, over long distances, when hunting zebra, wildebeest etc and running from lions and leopards
But then,
He also told me that lions don't lay with lesser beasts, when I started out dating (he would've killed me and mum had he known I was already on the pill)


----------



## Dimwit

Meanwhile, while trans women are moaning about not being ‘validated’ and having to compete fairly in sport, this American woman could have died…




__





US woman denied abortion in Malta flies to Spain to terminate pregnancy | Abortion | The Guardian


Andrea Prudente, who was on holiday in Gozo when she began to miscarry, was denied the procedure due to the country’s total ban




amp.theguardian.com


----------



## Siskin

Dimwit said:


> Meanwhile, while trans women are moaning about not being ‘validated’ and having to compete fairly in sport, this American woman could have died…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> US woman denied abortion in Malta flies to Spain to terminate pregnancy | Abortion | The Guardian
> 
> 
> Andrea Prudente, who was on holiday in Gozo when she began to miscarry, was denied the procedure due to the country’s total ban
> 
> 
> 
> 
> amp.theguardian.com


Wow. So presumably a women with an ectopic pregnancy has to die if she can’t afford to go to Spain.


----------



## Cleo38

Dimwit said:


> Meanwhile, while trans women are moaning about not being ‘validated’ and having to compete fairly in sport, this American woman could have died…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> US woman denied abortion in Malta flies to Spain to terminate pregnancy | Abortion | The Guardian
> 
> 
> Andrea Prudente, who was on holiday in Gozo when she began to miscarry, was denied the procedure due to the country’s total ban
> 
> 
> 
> 
> amp.theguardian.com


That poor woman. A horrible & traumatic experience made so much worse for her 😢


----------



## Siskin

I feel so sorry for this man and the position he has now found himself in, but is he right the sue the NHS? He does seem to have been is a desperate state of mind and appears to have panicked and ended up not receiving adequate counselling. I hope he does get help now.









Anguish of young man who had sex organs removed as he SUES NHS


He complains that doctors did not warn him of the drastic outcome of the body-altering surgery which has left him infertile, incontinent and feeling like a 'sexual eunuch'.




www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## StormyThai

Siskin said:


> I feel so sorry for this man and the position he has now found himself in, but is he right the sue the NHS? He does seem to have been is a desperate state of mind and appears to have panicked and ended up not receiving adequate counselling. I hope he does get help now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anguish of young man who had sex organs removed as he SUES NHS
> 
> 
> He complains that doctors did not warn him of the drastic outcome of the body-altering surgery which has left him infertile, incontinent and feeling like a 'sexual eunuch'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I find it a bit hard to believe that a 25 year old would not know the pitfalls of removing their genitals


----------



## Siskin

StormyThai said:


> I find it a bit hard to believe that a 25 year old would not know the pitfalls of removing their genitals


Quite.

Awful about his ’wee’ issues though. Is this a case of botched surgery or would all trans women who have the op end up suffering this way


----------



## O2.0

In the "What is a Woman" documentary they did discuss how little doctors emphasize the risks of "bottom" surgery. They have a massively high failure rate and that's not being discussed openly


----------



## Jesthar

Siskin said:


> Quite.
> 
> Awful about his ’wee’ issues though. Is this a case of botched surgery or would all trans women who have the op end up suffering this way


I believe it's a very high risk surgery, and he would have had to sign paperwork stating he knew and accepted the risks.


----------



## mrs phas

BBC News - US Supreme Court strikes down abortion rights
US Supreme Court strikes down abortion rights


----------



## Oof

mrs phas said:


> BBC News - US Supreme Court strikes down abortion rights
> US Supreme Court strikes down abortion rights


This sort of stuff terrifies me.


----------



## O2.0

I just read that too and I'm a little nauseous with this reality hitting me. 
I don't even know what to say right now.


----------



## Oof

I don't really "get" how politics work, especially in the US, but why is it going so backwards?? Is it religion that's influencing it?


----------



## Deguslave

Its very much being driven by religion I'm afraid. The US constitution was written with God in mind. Its the same argument with their gun laws, they believe that God gave them the right to carry weapons which is why they won't give them up.

IMO America is a country that's now running in reverse, and it won't stop with the abortion laws, they seem to have this overwhelming passion for oppressing women rights.


----------



## Siskin

mrs phas said:


> BBC News - US Supreme Court strikes down abortion rights
> US Supreme Court strikes down abortion rights


Good grief. The next thing will be birth control


----------



## OrientalSlave

Siskin said:


> Wow. So presumably a women with an ectopic pregnancy has to die if she can’t afford to go to Spain.


It wasn't an ectopic pregnancy. "Doctors told her the placenta was partly detached and her pregnancy was no longer viable. "









Fears for US woman's life as abortion denied in Malta


Andrea's pregnancy is no longer viable but doctors cannot intervene unless she goes into labour or develops sepsis.



www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## OrientalSlave

Siskin said:


> Good grief. The next thing will be birth control


In many ways it already is. Getting affordable birth control is very hard in many states & cities


----------



## Siskin

OrientalSlave said:


> It wasn't an ectopic pregnancy. "Doctors told her the placenta was partly detached and her pregnancy was no longer viable. "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fears for US woman's life as abortion denied in Malta
> 
> 
> Andrea's pregnancy is no longer viable but doctors cannot intervene unless she goes into labour or develops sepsis.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.co.uk


I know she didn’t, I was thinking of future women😔


----------



## O2.0

Deguslave said:


> Its very much being driven by religion I'm afraid. The US constitution was written with God in mind. Its the same argument with their gun laws, they believe that God gave them the right to carry weapons which is why they won't give them up.
> 
> IMO America is a country that's now running in reverse, and it won't stop with the abortion laws, they seem to have this overwhelming passion for oppressing women rights.


Yes and no. 
Religious organizations have a lot of political pull but this is a 100% conservative move - political move. Many people voted for Trump on this issue alone, knowing he would have the chance to nominate at least one, maybe two new supreme court justices and the chance to overturn RvW.

The constitution was NOT written with God in mind. Most of our founding fathers were very secular minded, if you read their letters to each other, they were not trying to make this a religious country at all, in fact quite the opposite, there are many parts of our Constitution that specifically prohibit the inclusion of religion. Separation of Church and State was/is a big deal in our laws. 

As for gun laws, no, that's not a religious thing either. It's a cultural thing. I think our gun violence is a cultural thing too. Many countries have as much gun ownership as we do but don't have the issues with gun violence that we do. I own guns and have managed to never shoot anyone. BTW I learned to shoot in Spain, as a kid, hitting cans and bottles propped up on an abandoned rail road track, unsupervised by adults so... yeah... 

I am desperately hoping the conservative pendulum will swing back and states will continue to support reproductive rights until we can get a more evenly distributed supreme court.


----------



## OrientalSlave

Oof said:


> I don't really "get" how politics work, especially in the US, but why is it going so backwards?? Is it religion that's influencing it?


The US has been gerrymandered for years, Trump was the last straw as he managed to get 3 very conservative and young Supreme Court Justices appointed who will be with us for a long time. He was helped by Mitch McConnell refusing Obama his pick as he was close to an election - but was quite happy to let Trump pick a judge (Amy Coney Barrett) in the same situation. So the USA is lumbered with a Supreme Court whose makeup & beliefs matches that of a minority - remember, Trump LOST the popular vote, and 60% or so of Americans support abortion in all or most circumstances.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

I too feel distressed by the ruling today. How can we be going backwards? How can it be that more and more women will be forced into having a backstreet abortion? 

I actually don't feel very strongly about many things - but I feel so passionately about this. I will defend a woman's right to choose until the end of my days. I wish there was something we could do to help our American sisters in this fight.


----------



## DogLover1981

I have a real distaste for the culture of New Hampshire and New England in general. I just _really_ do not like American culture. I avoid many of the holidays here as well, including Independence day.

About the constitution, all a constitution really is is merely a piece of paper. It's the culture and customs that surround it that gives it any real meaning. The USA constitution was written over 200 years ago by people that lived in a very different world. They were far from angels and their world had its own controversies.

I do not like the set up of the elections here either. The USA is one of the earliest fully functioning democracies of sorts and it shows, everything here is rather odd (and dated?) compared to some younger democracies at this point. The USA has had a stable two party system for about 150 years and I did read that democracies with at least three major political parties tend to produce less animosity. Two party systems tend to create even more of a us vs them mentality and that makes sense to me. I think, too, that some of it is just due to the craziness of American culture.


----------



## DogLover1981

On a depressing note, the possibly tricky access to abortions for unwanted pregnancies and the abundance of guns here is not a good combination. I'm fairly certain there's much more guns here than the last time abortions were highly restricted. Even on my road, everyone has a bunch of guns.  O.O


----------



## 1507601

QUOTE="mrs phas, post: 1065929981, member: 1411860"]
BBC News - US Supreme Court strikes down abortion rights
US Supreme Court strikes down abortion rights
[/QUOTE]

Oh god, this is horrible.  And half the states plan to ban/near enough... Really scary.


----------



## DogLover1981

I find it a little jarring to think about the fact that practically everywhere on earth has more restrictive gun laws than here in the states. I'd love to move overseas someday and basically, I would have to get used to more rules regarding guns. The USA is a such outlier regarding guns. I'm rather indifferent about guns and gun laws, personally.

Edit: Even, Ukraine, outside of wartime, has more restrictive gun laws than here. O.O


----------



## 1507601

DogLover1981 said:


> I find it a little jarring to think about the fact that practically everywhere on earth has more restrictive gun laws than here in the states. I'd love to move overseas someday and basically, I would have to get used to more rules regarding guns. The USA is a such outlier regarding guns. I'm rather indifferent about guns and gun laws, personally.
> 
> Edit: Even, Ukraine, outside of wartime, has more restrictive gun laws than here. O.O


This is a women's rights thread, about being a woman, not gun law


----------



## DogLover1981

Lucy2020 said:


> This is a women's rights thread, about being a woman, not gun law


True. You're right. Guns were mentioned and it made me think of it.


----------



## DogLover1981

It can be tricky at times to limit your own posts to merely one subject. Everything is related to other subjects in one way or another.


----------



## 1507601

DogLover1981, post: 1065930178, member: 19252"]
It can be tricky at times to limit your own posts to merely one subject. Everything is related to other subjects in one way or another.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, but you seemed to be getting quite into the subject of guns and I know how that goes, soon enough we'd just have a thread about gun law instead.

Not sure what's going on with my phone changing where I'm typing and deleting the first bit... Can't find a square bracket on my keyboard to fix it


----------



## DogLover1981

One problem of many with restricting abortions is that the line between an induced abortion and a natural miscarriage could be a blurry one. I have seen worries about women being under suspicion or even investigations for having miscarriages in some places. Not what women should be dealing with.


----------



## Deguslave

There is also the issue that if you remove the legal/safe route, you leave only the illegal/dangerous route. Will this bring a rise in deaths from the back street abortions we used to see in the past?


----------



## Boxer123

I’m shocked and don’t have the words so upset by this. I see some companies are offering to support travel for staff if they need an abortion.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Deguslave said:


> There is also the issue that if you remove the legal/safe route, you leave only the illegal/dangerous route. Will this bring a rise in deaths from the back street abortions we used to see in the past?


I’m sure it will. That and suicide. Let alone deaths in women with an ectopic that ruptures, or a molar pregnancy.

Oh it just doesn’t bear thinking about. My pal in the States is worried about the knock on effect on contraception access too…because that would be helpful, when you’ve removed the right to have a termination :/


----------



## Mrs Funkin

We really are so lucky in the UK. Free contraception and pretty reasonable access to terminations, well over 90% of which are NHS funded.


----------



## Cleo38

How can contraception be restricted/limited? What is the 'reasoning' behind that? FFS our bodies are our bodies not those of the state


----------



## catz4m8z

It is sickening to hear that so many states are going to ban abortions. Ive seen it point ed out before but those pro-lifers are only pro-life when it comes to embryos (which cant survive outside of the womb). They dont actually care about the lives of the women that will be ruined or ended because of their selfish views. They dont care about child poverty or homelessness or health care or education or all the other things that forcing unwanted children onto women will result in.

nope...that will be someone else problem, wont it!?


----------



## Dimwit

Cleo38 said:


> How can contraception be restricted/limited? What is the 'reasoning' behind that? FFS our bodies are our bodies not those of the state


It’s all about control - putting women back where they belong. 
I read somewhere that in some states it is already becoming difficult for women to get contraception and this morning on twitter many people are advising women to delete any period-tracking apps or data. It is so scary. 

I see Stonewall have also taken this as an opportunity to promote their cause - spinning this as yet another factor in the war on gender.


----------



## Cleo38

Dimwit said:


> It’s all about control - putting women back where they belong.
> I read somewhere that in some states it is already becoming difficult for women to get contraception and this morning on twitter many people are advising women to delete any period-tracking apps or data. It is so scary.
> 
> I see Stonewall have also taken this as an opportunity to promote their cause - spinning this as yet another factor in the war on gender.


It is so bloody scary. How is this happening? Why are our rights being eroded? This has been happening for a while now & is getting worse.

This FB was spot on regarding abortion/contraception


----------



## Deguslave

catz4m8z said:


> It is sickening to hear that so many states are going to ban abortions. Ive seen it point ed out before but those pro-lifers are only pro-life when it comes to embryos (which cant survive outside of the womb). They dont actually care about the lives of the women that will be ruined or ended because of their selfish views. They dont care about child poverty or homelessness or health care or education or all the other things that forcing unwanted children onto women will result in.
> 
> nope...that will be someone else problem, wont it!?


Its not just what it will do to the mother, it could seriously damage the mental health of the child. Can you imagine a childhood where you know you aren't wanted, or worse still were conceived from a rape or incest? That's not going result in a very healthy mother/child relationship and could result in some seriously mentally damaged adults.


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> How can contraception be restricted/limited? What is the 'reasoning' behind that? FFS our bodies are our bodies not those of the state


Because the people writing these laws don't understand women's bodies, our cycles, how reproduction works.... 
So being on the pill gets conflated with the pills you might take for an early abortion. 

And yes, it's all about control. Women can conceive and give life and that has always terrified men. Think about all the things men do related to women being able to give birth - rape, it's about control, abortion laws - about control, FGM - about control... Now we have men saying they can be women too - more about controlling us. All because of the one thing men can't do.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Because the people writing these laws don't understand women's bodies, our cycles, how reproduction works....
> So being on the pill gets conflated with the pills you might take for an early abortion.
> 
> And yes, it's all about control. Women can conceive and give life and that has always terrified men. Think about all the things men do related to women being able to give birth - rape, it's about control, abortion laws - about control, FGM - about control... Now we have men saying they can be women too - more about controlling us. All because of the one thing men can't do.


Oh yes, it always has been about controlling women & power I just honestly can't believe we are at this stage in 2022 & wondered what BS reasons they could come up with to justify this.

I wonder how the left will deal these issues or will certain groups just concern themselves that the use of the word 'woman' is being used to much & it should be about people & rights ?!


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> Oh yes, it always has been about controlling women & power I just honestly can't believe we are at this stage in 2022 & wondered what BS reasons they could come up with to justify this.
> 
> I wonder how the left will deal these issues or will certain groups just concern themselves that the use of the word 'woman' is being used to much & it should be about people & rights ?!


In my more cynical moments I feel like it's not a political left/right thing but just an anti-woman thing. The left has the trans movement which is at it's core misogynist and homophobic in nature, and the right has the religious/conservative movement which is also misogynist and homophobic. 

In my less cynical moments I feel like it's all just water swishing back and forth trying to find it's level, it will swing extreme right, extreme left and eventually settle down in to a reasonable level. I just hope we can survive the destruction as it swings back and forth.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> In my more cynical moments I feel like it's not a political left/right thing but just an anti-woman thing. The left has the trans movement which is at it's core misogynist and homophobic in nature, and the right has the religious/conservative movement which is also misogynist and homophobic.
> 
> In my less cynical moments I feel like it's all just water swishing back and forth trying to find it's level, it will swing extreme right, extreme left and eventually settle down in to a reasonable level. I just hope we can survive the destruction as it swings back and forth.


I agree, I think that lvels of misogyny now demonstrated on the left shows that it is anti-woman rather than a political leaning. 

I hope it is about swings of extremism but I honestly don't know anymore. When I see recent pics of women meeting in Bristol (regarding women's rights) & see yet more balaclava clad men shouting abuse & threats whilst the police stand by & watch I feel very despondent


----------



## mrs phas

Media companies will pay expenses for employees to go out of state for family planning and abortions 


Roe v. Wade: Disney, Amazon, Netflix expected to cover employees’ travel benefits for abortions


----------



## Oof

Now may be a good time to (finally) join The Satanic Temple 😏

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1540381792049430530


----------



## Mrs Funkin

How to support abortion access in a post-Roe America


From stocking up on abortion pills to donating to abortion funds, rights advocates share ways to support reproductive autonomy




www.theguardian.com





Interesting article, lots of ways to hopefully help. I'm thankful for the bravery of newspapers putting their heads above the parapet.


----------



## Cleo38

And yet again despite us women having our rights taken away some still can't even bring themselves to say the bloody word.

Pic taken from a feminist FB page which shows a screenshot of a tweet from a female state representative from Wisconsin

FFS if we can't even use the word woman now how are can we fight back on issues that only directly affect us? Words define who we are & without definition then we are nothing ...as is now being shown


----------



## Deguslave

Maybe we need to start calling men 'persons with dicks'.


----------



## Maurey

Cleo38 said:


> And yet again despite us women having our rights taken away some still can't even bring themselves to say the bloody word.
> 
> Pic taken from a feminist FB page which shows a screenshot of a tweet from a female state representative from Wisconsin
> 
> FFS if we can't even use the word woman now how are can we fight back on issues that only directly affect us? Words define who we are & without definition then we are nothing ...as is now being shown
> View attachment 573702


Why is inclusive language such an issue for you? Trans women are women. Trans men are men, but in many cases still able to give birth if they wish to biologically reproduce. Non-binary people exist. So do cisgender women without a uterus, or those otherwise unable to get pregnant. Let’s not forget intersex people, either. Why is validating and including a not insignificant cohort of people offensive?

I am non-binary. I have a uterus and could have children if I decided I wanted to. Being included and validated is nice, and it doesn’t exclude cis women.




Deguslave said:


> Maybe we need to start calling men 'persons with dicks'.


People with testicles is more relevant/accurate


----------



## Cleo38

Maurey said:


> Why is inclusive language such an issue for you? Trans women are women. Trans men are men, but in many cases still able to give birth if they wish to biologically reproduce. Non-binary people exist. So do cisgender women without a uterus, or those otherwise unable to get pregnant. Let’s not forget intersex people, either. Why is validating and including a not insignificant cohort of people offensive?
> 
> I am non-binary. I have a uterus and could have children if I decided I wanted to. Being included and validated is nice, and it doesn’t exclude cis women.
> 
> 
> 
> People with testicles is more relevant/accurate


Because I am a woman (not a cis woman) & this word is being erased. Trans women are trans women they are not women. You are a woman ..... 

Why is the word woman being erased from many NHS guidelines (on certain articles regarding cervical screening) yet the word men (for prostate exagminiations) isn't?

IMO what is now happening in the US is a result of what happens when a group are not recognised.


----------



## Maurey

Cleo38 said:


> Because I am a woman (not a cis woman) & this word is being erased. Trans women are trans women they are not women. You are a woman .....
> 
> Why is the word woman being erased from many NHS guidelines (on certain articles regarding cervical screening) yet the word men (for prostate exagminiations) isn't?
> 
> IMO what is now happening in the US is a result of what happens when a group are not recognised.


What horrible ignorance and bigotry. You have no right to dictate what I or other LGBT people are. Just because other people are more understanding and inclusive than you are doesn’t make them wrong or “anti-woman”. If you’re not LGBT you don’t have much right to speak on these matters, especially in such a bigoted, exclusionary way.


----------



## Cleo38

Maurey said:


> What horrible ignorance and bigotry. You have no right to dictate what I or other LGBT people are. Just because other people are more understanding and inclusive than you are doesn’t make them wrong or “anti-woman”.


Why is this bigotry & ignorant? I have expressed this is how I feel posts ago. It doesn't mean I feel people should be denied rights or be treated badly but biological sex exists & is important.

You can be whatever you want to be but you can't dictate to other people what they should think


----------



## O2.0

Maurey said:


> Trans women are women.


Okay, then what does "woman" mean? If we're going to say that trans women are women, which I'm open to, can we define "woman"? Can you? 

We can't defend the rights of a group we can't even define.


----------



## Maurey

O2.0 said:


> Okay, then what does "woman" mean? If we're going to say that trans women are women, which I'm open to, can we define "woman"? Can you?
> 
> We can't defend the rights of a group we can't even define.


Women and men are arbitrary gender categories that are a human construct rooted in traditional gender roles to some degree. Biological sex is based on what we’re assigned at birth, which isn’t always correct (see intersex, XXY, etc). Biological sex matters, but it shouldn’t overshadow gender in non-medical matters. Even then, trans care is specific to trans people post-HRT.


----------



## O2.0

Maurey said:


> Women and men are arbitrary gender categories that are a human construct. Biological sex is based on what we’re assigned at birth, which isn’t always correct (see intersex, XXY, etc). Biological sex matters, but it shouldn’t overshadow gender in non-medical matters. Even then, trans care is specific to trans people post-HRT.


It sounds like you're saying "woman" is an arbitrary category with no real definition. 
When a trans person transitions to being a woman, what are they transitioning to?
When you are non-binary, what are the two binaries you're not?

Again, if we can't give a clear definition for women, then we can't defend their rights. And I agree with Cleo that this in part leads to our right being eroded as in the case of overturning Roe v Wade.


----------



## HarlequinCat

Maurey said:


> Women and men are arbitrary gender categories that are a human construct rooted in traditional gender roles to some degree. Biological sex is based on what we’re assigned at birth, which isn’t always correct (see intersex, XXY, etc). Biological sex matters, but it shouldn’t overshadow gender in non-medical matters. Even then, trans care is specific to trans people post-HRT.


It's not arbitrary though, it is. If you want to be trans or not defined by gender, fine. The vast, vast majority are men and women. The 0.1% that don't want such labels should be able to have it on their medical files that they don't want to be known as such, and just person with testicle or person with uterus. 
Many of the LGBTQ don't want such wording. They are gay or trans etc, but that doesn't make it so man and woman are a void concept.

Of the LGBTQ community what percentage want to give up women as a gender?


----------



## 1507601

"Birthing bodies"... Ew, what a horrible term. There's so much wrong with it I wouldn't know where to start.


----------



## Magyarmum

Lucy2020 said:


> "Birthing bodies"... Ew, what a horrible term. There's so much wrong with it I wouldn't know where to start.


I find it insulting and am quite sure as a 24 year old giving birth to her first child I would have been extremely upset, being at my most vulnerable..


----------



## Lurcherlad

What century is this? 🙁


----------



## O2.0

I think many women find the term "birthing bodies" offensive at best. For many of us it can even be triggering. I was not 'allowed' to birth my babies and missed the entire experience of labor and delivery. And it was a whole grieving process to come to terms with everything around that. I know many may not understand but I know many more women who feel similarly to me and being called a "birthing body" when birth is the one thing you couldn't do can be pretty darned upsetting. 15 years ago it would probably have given me a few tears.

This is what I don't get about "inclusive" language. So much of it just doesn't make any sense. If inclusivity is about being kind and making people How is it inclusive if you're upsetting the majority of the people for whom the language is intended?

Or just from a logical angle, if woman is just a random term that means nothing then how is it not inclusive?
Or if trans women are women, then woman refers to them and they shouldn't object to it's use.


----------



## Maurey

O2.0 said:


> Or if trans women are women, then woman refers to them and they shouldn't object to it's use.


FWIW I don’t like the term birthing body, either. There are better ways to say it inclusively. That I do agree with. I don’t agree with inclusive language being bad, in general, though there are people who take it too far, for sure.

Trans women don’t object to being called women, and if I implied that, I didn’t intend to. The crux is that abortion laws also affect trans men, as many don’t undergo more invasive operations for bottom surgeries, so they’re able to get pregnant. I have a trans friend in the states that was recently assaulted, thank goodness his mother convinced him to take a test, or he may have been too late to get an abortion.


----------



## O2.0

Maurey said:


> There are better ways to say it inclusively.


Like woman? That includes everyone who falls under that description. If we agree that woman is an adult female human. 



Maurey said:


> The crux is that abortion laws also affect trans men, as many don’t undergo more invasive operations for bottom surgeries, so they’re able to get pregnant. I have a trans friend in the states that was recently assaulted, thank goodness his mother convinced him to take a test, or he may have been too late to get an abortion.


Abortion laws affect women worldwide. Most women around the world don't have the luxury of calling themselves trans men. This is why we need to use the term women because it is women who are affected.


----------



## Mrs Funkin

I cannot say what I feel because it's something I could be hauled over the coals for, which also distresses me.

It's so upsetting for me on a day to day basis to see women's pregnancy and birth experiences be reduced to being a "birthing person" and to see women removed from policies, protocols and guidelines. If I was a pregnant woman, I'd be royally pissed off that I was being removed. 

My career has been spent trying my hardest to empower women - often disempowered, under privileged women - and we are being removed. It's just bloody wrong. I know there is a lot more to this thread than "just" pregnancy and birth but heck. I just can't. 

I don't think I can visit this thread any longer. Sorry.


----------



## Cleo38

@Mrs Funkin, the descriptions now being used for women as well as the fact you are unable to state your opinion for fear of reprisal makes me so very sad 😥


----------



## Cleo38

I honestly believe that the erasure of the word woman from certain medical/government/media sites, the silencing of women who speak out about male violence or what it means to be a woman, the figures for violent crime against women or the misogyny which now seems to to be celebrated is related to recent events in the US 

JULIE BINDEL says she is going to sue the council which banned her from giving a talk at a library | Daily Mail Online


----------



## Lurcherlad




----------



## Dimwit

Cleo38 said:


> I honestly believe that the erasure of the word woman from certain medical/government/media sites, the silencing of women who speak out about male violence or what it means to be a woman, the figures for violent crime against women or the misogyny which now seems to to be celebrated is related to recent events in the US


I absolute agree. Women have been dehumanised and reduced to just a body part - and when you do that it is easy to start to strip away our rights because we are just people with a uterus.


----------



## Jesthar

Dimwit said:


> I absolute agree. Women have been dehumanised and reduced to just a body part - and when you do that it is easy to start to strip away our rights because we are just people with a uterus.


Maybe we should rebrand men as 'testicle people'  See how they like it!


----------



## O2.0

Yup...
If anyone doubts the misogyny and thinks this is just about inclusivity, just look at the language around men. We're not calling men "people with prostates" in literature about prostate cancer, we're not calling men "testicle havers" in medical literature about testicular health. 
It's only women's health that is being infiltrated with "inclusive" language that sounds like thinly veiled objectification - at best. 
And people with kind, good intentions are sucked in to using this language of inclusion because they don't want to hurt anyone's feelings. But it's no where near a majority in the LGBT community who even want this language. Most of them don't like it either.


----------



## DogLover1981

I keep thinking about what an enforcement nightmare it will be for laws banning abortions. Slightly more than half of the population of the USA strongly feels that it should be legal which is going to create major problems for law enforcement. I think, much like with prohibition, you will see people pretty casually violate laws against abortion and people refusing to cooperate with investigations. Many district attorneys may simply choose to avoid prosecuting abortion cases because of all the headaches. Not to mention, they may have to deal with possible protests and volatile arrests.


----------



## mrs phas

BBC News - Woman suing rape charity over transgender row
Woman suing rape charity over transgender row


----------



## DogLover1981

Apparently religious groups are planning to sue over abortions restrictions because abortions do not go against their religion and with some religions, their religion even calls for abortions in certain circumstances.

I find it bizarre that, over the years and decades past, the courts have entertained the argument that religion should be able to bypass laws. Anyone can make their own religion and claim a law violates their religion. You shouldn't be able to violate laws merely due to your religion, IMO. This lawsuit is amusing, however, because it does put the courts in an awkward spot. O.O









Florida abortion ban violates Jews' religious freedom, lawsuit says


Florida's ban on abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy violates the religious freedom of Jews because Jewish law requires the procedure in some cases, a Boynton Beach synagogue said in a lawsuit.




www.reuters.com


----------



## mrs phas

What a complete tool, and not even the useful buzzing kind. 










Women ‘don’t have an absolute right to bodily autonomy’, says Tory MP


The MP for Devizes sparked fury after claiming that UK politicians shouldn’t lecture’ their US counterparts over abortion rights




www.standard.co.uk


----------



## DogLover1981

I think banning abortion is quite gross after reading this. Even the exceptions to abortion bans can't account for everything. The bans can even affect women who aren't pregnant. It can basically complicate the regular healthcare for women. 









Even Exceptions To Abortion Bans Pit A Mother’s Life Against Doctors’ Fears


Medical professionals, legal experts and researchers we spoke to said abortion exceptions for the life of the mother are usually vague, creating an environment where patients have to meet some unspoken and arbitrary criteria to get treatment.




fivethirtyeight.com


----------



## Chihuahua Lover

I agree to some degree of what you are all saying. But it stops very firmly at abortion. Everyone goes on and on about the women's rights without giving the LIVING baby a single thought. Do you even care about what is going on in the womb? The baby that will laugh, cry and live a life just like the mother got a chance to? In California a law is being debated on killing babies even after they are born, through a while month. How did we even get into that situation? The Lord made every single person, and every single one is precious. If the woman doesn't want the baby, then they should give up for adoption. The reality is that there are many good and willing families in the world willing to take a child in. Just imagine for a second, if you, or your siblings, your child, your mother, got aborted? Not even given a chance. Deos that change how you feel about about abortion when you think of your loved ones?


----------



## 1507601

Chihuahua Lover said:


> Deos that change how you feel about about abortion when you think of your loved ones?


No.


----------



## 1507601

P.S. This is a women's rights thread, not a debate about abortion which to be honest very much goes against women's rights, so I think many of us would appreciate it if you kept it out of here.


----------



## Jesthar

Chihuahua Lover said:


> I agree to some degree of what you are all saying. But it stops very firmly at abortion. Everyone goes on and on about the women's rights without giving the LIVING baby a single thought. Do you even care about what is going on in the womb? The baby that will laugh, cry and live a life just like the mother got a chance to? In California a law is being debated on killing babies even after they are born, through a while month. How did we even get into that situation? The Lord made every single person, and every single one is precious. If the woman doesn't want the baby, then they should give up for adoption. The reality is that there are many good and willing families in the world willing to take a child in. Just imagine for a second, if you, or your siblings, your child, your mother, got aborted? Not even given a chance. Deos that change how you feel about about abortion when you think of your loved ones?


Even when being pregnant endangers the health, or even the life of the mother? Condemn the mother to save the child? Not so easy then, is it?

And then there are the women who ended up in jail because they had a miscarriage, but someone accused them of having an abortion. Worst day of my LIFE was accompanying a friend to a clearout operation when she miscarried (again) but the foetus didn't exit her body. Imagine if someone then accused her of deliberately aborting and hoping to get away with it, but her body betrayed her crime?

Don't get me wrong, I don't like implanted abortion as a birth control method (for clarity, I don't view the morning after pill as abortion) and I'd much rather see prevention, abstention and proper support for mothers, but a total ban on abortion including medical reasons is not good for womens health overall.

And to take that to it's logical conclusion, if the campaingners are really concerned about the babies themselves, shouldn't such laws should be accompanied by the promise of full state financial support for the child of an impoverished mother, the hard line enforcing of child support payments from the father when necessary, that kind of thing? It seems it's very easy to tell a mother "you have to have your baby no matter what" - and as soon as the kid is born, not care about it or the mother any more.

On a lighter note, if I were a woman in the US right now I'd be buying a chastity belt (and maybe some 'personal pleasure' items if my taste ran that way) and declaring myself strictly off limits to men 

Anyway, you might want to start your own thread, this one is about general womens rights, not an abortion debate.


----------



## DogLover1981

I find how our culture is regarding abortions to be bizarre. We humans terminate pregnancies in dogs with little thought even though there's very little difference between a dog fetus and a human fetus for example, especially early in pregnancy. I eat animals far more sentient than a fetus. I have also had dogs euthanized that are far more sentient than a fetus. People hunt and kill animals for sport that are far more sentient than a fetus. People neglect adults that are far more sentient than a fetus, people can even be indifferent to the homeless. Some people expect a pregnant women who is also far more sentient than a fetus to risk her own health for a fetus when it really should be her own decision.

...and.... _We don't even have enough resources as it is to feed everyone on this overpopulated planet right now. There's the possible mass famine due to the war in Ukraine._

More than anything, it's impossible to ban abortions without creating an environment of fear for doctors treating women, regardless of whether or not they are pregnant. It interferes with the healthcare of women.

If I was aborted, I obviously wouldn't be around to be aware of the fact so I'm pretty "meh" about that. The same is true of relatives.


----------



## DogLover1981

On a side note, laws against abortions are close to near impossible to enforce. People are already sharing about how to get or make abortion drugs that are undetectable because it looks like a miscarriage in the end. The line between an induced abortion and a natural miscarriage can be a blurry one too. All abortions laws do is make doctors fearful of treating women.


----------



## OrientalSlave

Chihuahua Lover said:


> I agree to some degree of what you are all saying. But it stops very firmly at abortion. Everyone goes on and on about the women's rights without giving the LIVING baby a single thought. Do you even care about what is going on in the womb? The baby that will laugh, cry and live a life just like the mother got a chance to? In California a law is being debated on killing babies even after they are born, through a while month. How did we even get into that situation? The Lord made every single person, and every single one is precious. If the woman doesn't want the baby, then they should give up for adoption. The reality is that there are many good and willing families in the world willing to take a child in. Just imagine for a second, if you, or your siblings, your child, your mother, got aborted? Not even given a chance. Deos that change how you feel about about abortion when you think of your loved ones?


What seems to be lost - or unacceptable - to most anti-choice people in the US is that the best way to prevent abortion is to provide readily available, free (or low cost), reliable, contraception. Plus, in general they support the rights of unborn but once they are born abandon them.

Abortion in my view is a necessary evil. Making it illegal won't stop it, but it will lead to increased maternal mortality and many of those women already have children.

And in both the UK and US, there are organisations that are anti-choice appearing in their adverts as pro-choice.

There may be families wanting to adopt a child - preferably a baby - but it's not up to me or other women to fulfil that desire.

Maybe the Lord made us - and maybe he/she/it doesn't exist. Your religious beliefs shouldn't run my life.

The most astonishing thing in some ways about the recent US ruling is that the Republicans - who the majority in the US Supreme Court adhere to - say they are all for minimal state & federal interference in people's lives, but here they are interfering in a very major way in the most intimate, private aspects of women's lives.


----------



## Chihuahua Lover

The problem is that with the abortion rights, it allows anyone to get an abortion. Not just the mothers who are sick, or had something else aweful happen them. But those mothers who just don't care about the life they hold in their womb. And if I am not allowed to discuss here, am I allowed to create a thread so I can share what I know?


----------



## LinznMilly

Chihuahua Lover said:


> And if I am not allowed to discuss here, am I allowed to create a thread so I can share what I know?


Absolutely!


----------



## DogLover1981

I didn't even really touch on the religious aspect of the discussion as that's an endless circle. I could easily make my own religion and claim abortions are a part of my religion, even approved by whatever deity, god or goddess. In fact, there are Jewish people suing because abortions are not against their religion.


----------



## mrs phas

Chihuahua Lover said:


> Everyone goes on and on about the women's rights without giving the LIVING baby a single thought.


Until it is born, had the umbilical cut, and, taken their first and subsequent breaths
It's, legally, not a baby, it's a foetus, which is why babies born sleeping are still called that


> In UK law a foetus doesn’t have rights. An unborn baby doesn’t become a separate person with legal rights until they are born and draw breath by themselves.



As proven today, in the sentencing of the scum that killed Logan Mwangi
Some would've been better, to have been much better aborted, than having lived the life they are dealt 



> And if I am not allowed to discuss here, am I allowed to create a thread so I can share what I know?


If you do then I will asks mods to move my reply there


----------



## Oof

The idea of living in a country where abortion is illegal (or 'legal' but near impossible to attain) is terrifying. It literally makes me feel sick at the thought, and I cannot begin to imagine how many Americans (and obv others around the world) feel when put into the situation of not being able to continue with a pregnancy for whatever reason.

What's going on in America is a monumental step backwards for women's rights. 



Chihuahua Lover said:


> I agree to some degree of what you are all saying. But it stops very firmly at abortion. Everyone goes on and on about the women's rights without giving the LIVING baby a single thought. Do you even care about what is going on in the womb? The baby that will laugh, cry and live a life just like the mother got a chance to? In California a law is being debated on killing babies even after they are born, through a while month. How did we even get into that situation? The Lord made every single person, and every single one is precious. If the woman doesn't want the baby, then they should give up for adoption. The reality is that there are many good and willing families in the world willing to take a child in. Just imagine for a second, if you, or your siblings, your child, your mother, got aborted? Not even given a chance. Deos that change how you feel about about abortion when you think of your loved ones?


So, speaking as someone that has had an abortion - no, I couldn't have given it up for adoption. If I had been forced to continue with that pregnancy, I would've ended my own life. 

I think it comes from a place of great ignorance to suggest women should just "stay pregnant, then give it up for adoption! Lol!".

Perhaps on the thread you are suggesting to star, we could further discuss your view on it as I'm interested in what and why you think that.


----------



## DogLover1981

Oof said:


> The idea of living in a country where abortion is illegal (or 'legal' but near impossible to attain) is terrifying. It literally makes me feel sick at the thought, and I cannot begin to imagine how many Americans (and obv others around the world) feel when put into the situation of not being able to continue with a pregnancy for whatever reason.
> 
> What's going on in America is a monumental step backwards for women's rights.


I think some parts of the USA could be heading towards a world where abortions are technically illegal but easy to obtain and safe. "safe and illegal" if you will. Abortion drugs did not exist 50 years ago. There's already more research ongoing and the drugs may get better with time.

Personally, I'm definitely a law abiding person but if I were women, abortion and my own body is about the only issue where I would _not_ care about the law is and I would _not_ care what other people think of abortions, to put it bluntly. If I wanted an abortion, I'd find a way. I can quite understand why some women go outside the law. O.O


----------



## O2.0

I really do understand the passion on both sides of the abortion debate. I am pro-choice, but I very much understand and empathize with some of the pro-life arguments.
With both sides as passionate as they are it's hard to have any kind of productive discussion about the act of abortion, but I do think both sides can find a lot of common ground before it gets to the point of discussion abortion. 
No one wants to see a woman in the position where she is contemplating ending a pregnancy. I think we can all agree on that. And there are many ways we can agree about how to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Making birth control of all kinds available and affordable would be a great start. 
Focusing on woman education and empowerment so that women aren't stuck in poverty with fewer choices to leave bad situations. More education with young people around consent, drinking and drug behavior, that's another important area to address. There are SO many ways we can help women not end up having to consider abortion and I would love it if both sides could focus more on that than our differences. 

But I also feel strongly that abortion is not something that needs to be discussed in legislature or in the courtroom. Or on a forum for that matter. Ending a pregnancy it something to be discussed in private with a woman and her doctor. That's it.


----------



## Oof

Why shouldn't abortion be discussed on a forum? On a women's rights thread?

Not trying to be confrontational. I'm wondering if I've crossed some kind of boundary?


----------



## Chihuahua Lover

Oof said:


> Why shouldn't abortion be discussed on a forum? On a women's rights thread?
> 
> Not trying to be confrontational. I'm wondering if I've crossed some kind of boundary?


In order to find the one truth, you have to hear what everyone has to say. Ignoring what the other side has to say is like being deaf while talking.


----------



## O2.0

Oh I didn't mean that it's not up for discussion, I just think that when it comes down to the decision to continue or terminate a pregnancy, that should be a private discussion between a woman and her doctor and that legislators (and forum opinionites) have no business getting involved.


----------



## DogLover1981

In some ways, I'd think easily obtainable drugs would be preferable over seeing a doctor. At home, it's even more private. There would be no dealing with possible protesters or whatnot at a clinic.


----------



## Oof

O2.0 said:


> Oh I didn't mean that it's not up for discussion, I just think that when it comes down to the decision to continue or terminate a pregnancy, that should be a private discussion between a woman and her doctor and that legislators (and forum opinionites) have no business getting involved.


Oh ok, phew I thought I'd broken some forum code then 😅 sorry about that.


----------



## Sairy

Chihuahua Lover said:


> If the woman doesn't want the baby, then they should give up for adoption.


There are currently around 117,000 children in the US waiting to be adopted, so they would just be adding to these numbers. Also, for many women the need for an abortion has nothing to do with whether or not they are able to look after a baby. A huge number of women need an abortion for medical reasons - maybe the fetus has not developed properly and has no chance of life, or continuing with the pregnancy puts the woman's life in danger. Would you deny a woman in one of these situations an abortion?

I also totally get the emotional aspect. I gave birth to a baby boy at 17 weeks. He was born alive and died in my arms after a few minutes. He was perfectly formed and just needed more time in my womb to grow so that he could survive outside the womb, but sadly he did not get that chance. It was devastating. That experience makes me feel very sad about the idea of abortion - it's heartbreaking that many babies at this stage of development (and further along) will be aborted. I'm not sure I could personally get an abortion after my experience (although thankfully I've never been in the position where I've needed to consider one), but my own emotional feelings and experience should not have a bearing on the law. If I was against abortion then I simply would make sure that I didn't get an abortion. I have no right to dictate what someone else does with their body.


----------



## Chihuahua Lover

Sairy said:


> There are currently around 117,000 children in the US waiting to be adopted, so they would just be adding to these numbers. Also, for many women the need for an abortion has nothing to do with whether or not they are able to look after a baby. A huge number of women need an abortion for medical reasons - maybe the fetus has not developed properly and has no chance of life, or continuing with the pregnancy puts the woman's life in danger. Would you deny a woman in one of these situations an abortion?
> 
> I also totally get the emotional aspect. I gave birth to a baby boy at 17 weeks. He was born alive and died in my arms after a few minutes. He was perfectly formed and just needed more time in my womb to grow so that he could survive outside the womb, but sadly he did not get that chance. It was devastating. That experience makes me feel very sad about the idea of abortion - it's heartbreaking that many babies at this stage of development (and further along) will be aborted. I'm not sure I could personally get an abortion after my experience (although thankfully I've never been in the position where I've needed to consider one), but my own emotional feelings and experience should not have a bearing on the law. If I was against abortion then I simply would make sure that I didn't get an abortion. I have no right to dictate what someone else does with their body.


If the baby or the mother will not survive, that's a very different situation. But here are the statistics 








I added up all the unnecessary reasons woman have abortions


----------



## Sairy

Chihuahua Lover said:


> If the baby or the mother will not survive, that's a very different situation. But here are the statistics
> View attachment 573956
> 
> I added up all the unnecessary reasons woman have abortions
> View attachment 573957
> 
> View attachment 573958


But the point is that the states banning abortion WILL have an effect on those seeking one for medical reasons, as I understand it everyone is pretty much getting lumped together. If the country cares that much about babies then it should be supporting those mothers who cannot afford to look after their children, along with those who need support in other ways.

Also the fact that there are so many couples waiting to adopt should not mean that women are forced to carry pregnancies against their will.


----------



## Boxer123

Chihuahua Lover said:


> If the baby or the mother will not survive, that's a very different situation. But here are the statistics
> View attachment 573956
> 
> I added up all the unnecessary reasons woman have abortions
> View attachment 573957
> 
> View attachment 573958


It’s not a different situation is it ? As these women are being forced to continue with pregnancies. Women can go to jail for terminating a pregnancy after being raped and get more time than the rapist. What’s your stance on this?

Where is the financial package to support women who can’t afford another child ? Where is the extra support and education around contraception? Where are the laws dictating how fathers need to co parent, enforced maintenance? Where is the law around men ?

I firmly believe women should have the right to decide what happens to their own body. Very few women have an abortion on a whim. It is something they will have their own reasons for.

I cannot believe we are having this conversation in 2022.


----------



## OrientalSlave

UK abortion statistics. I think it's worth of note that 85%+ take place before 10 weeks gestation (4.9), and there is a strong correlation with deprivation (4.19, 4.20). 





__





Abortion statistics, England and Wales: 2020







www.gov.uk


----------



## Magyarmum

You can check and compare abortion legislation and data throughout Europe on this website. 

This is the data for Hungary where abortion is legal.





__





HUNGARY – ABORT report






abort-report.eu


----------



## Dimwit

Chihuahua Lover said:


> I added up all the unnecessary reasons woman have abortions


But that is YOUR opinion of what is unnecessary. What gives you the right to impose your views on other women?

Some of the reasons you deem unnecessary seem perfectly sensible to me and even the ones I disagree with I realise are just my personal opinion. 

Where do you think the homes are going to come from for all of these babies? The facts are that there are not enough adoptive homes as it is. Adoption is also not the fairytale ending that you seem to think it is. 

I thought that it had already been said that this thread is not the place to discuss this, but bringing this back to woman’s rights - no woman should be forced to put her body through pregnancy and the trauma of childbirth if she doesn’t want to.


----------



## Lurcherlad

I can only assume that anyone suggesting a woman be forced to grow and carry a baby inside her for 9 months, go through a birth and then just hand it over has never been pregnant nor given birth.


----------



## O2.0

Chihuahua Lover said:


> If the baby or the mother will not survive, that's a very different situation. But here are the statistics


I'm not sure how accurate those statistics are...
Are you counting the morning after pill as abortion? A D&C as an abortion?

As for adoptions, if you had any experience with the foster care system in this country you would know that there are not enough homes as it is. And people wanting to adopt can be picky to put it gently. They don't want black babies, they don't want latino babies, they don't want addicted babies... Sure, plenty of people want to adopt a perfect white baby from a "good" Christian girl, but who cares about the other rejects right? 

Unless you're in the trenches offering to adopt or care for the kids who need it, spare me the adopt don't abort lecture.


----------



## mrs phas

@Chihuahua Lover 
We're waiting for you to start you're thread to discuss the rights of the child over the rights of the mother 
Or 
Whatever you're going to call it 
Shame if you've changed your mind was looking forward to the debate


----------



## O2.0

It's a holiday weekend here in the US and I believe Chihuahualover is in the US. It's very possible they're off with family or friends enjoying the holiday and not logging on to social media


----------



## mrs phas

O2.0 said:


> It's a holiday weekend here in the US and I believe Chihuahualover is in the US. It's very possible they're off with family or friends enjoying the holiday and not logging on to social media


Oh, of course it's July 4th, I'd forgotten 
Not a holiday we Brits celebrate, for obvs reasons


----------



## O2.0

mrs phas said:


> Oh, of course it's July 4th, I'd forgotten
> Not a holiday we Brits celebrate, for obvs reasons


Oh I dunno... I might be celebrating being rid of those colonials given how they've been behaving lately


----------



## Siskin

O2.0 said:


> Oh I dunno... I might be celebrating being rid of those colonials given how they've been behaving lately


Ha ha, speak for yourself🤣


----------



## Chihuahua Lover

Oh, I have just busy lately and been taking a phone break. I am going to be starting the thread, maybe sometime today


----------



## DogLover1981

O2.0 said:


> I really do understand the passion on both sides of the abortion debate. I am pro-choice, but I very much understand and empathize with some of the pro-life arguments.


Personally, I'm not pro-choice or even pro-life.

I'm not pro-life as that is an exercise in futility, IMO, as sperm is alive, eggs are alive, embryos are alive, dogs are alive, moose are live, deer are live, bacteria is alive, etc. At no point during reproduction is there something that is _not_ alive. People also kill animals for food, hunt animals for mere sport and euthanize animals which are all far more sentient than an embryo or fetus.

Edit: Heck, people even kill fully sentient human adults in self defense.

I'm not pro-choice as that implies an ethical dilemma which does not exist. It's definitely ethical to have an abortion, especially earlier in pregnancy. Too, It's not really of my concern whether or not a woman has an abortion, I don't know their life circumstances or anything else.

I think I'll quote my own post. 



DogLover1981 said:


> I find how our culture is regarding abortions to be bizarre. We humans terminate pregnancies in dogs with little thought even though there's very little difference between a dog fetus and a human fetus for example, especially early in pregnancy. I eat animals far more sentient than a fetus. I have also had dogs euthanized that are far more sentient than a fetus. People hunt and kill animals for sport that are far more sentient than a fetus. People neglect adults that are far more sentient than a fetus, people can even be indifferent to the homeless. Some people expect a pregnant women who is also far more sentient than a fetus to risk her own health for a fetus when it really should be her own decision.
> 
> ...and.... _We don't even have enough resources as it is to feed everyone on this overpopulated planet right now. There's the possible mass famine due to the war in Ukraine._
> 
> More than anything, it's impossible to ban abortions without creating an environment of fear for doctors treating women, regardless of whether or not they are pregnant. It interferes with the healthcare of women.
> 
> If I was aborted, I obviously wouldn't be around to be aware of the fact so I'm pretty "meh" about that. The same is true of relatives.


----------



## DogLover1981

mrs phas said:


> Oh, of course it's July 4th, I'd forgotten
> Not a holiday we Brits celebrate, for obvs reasons


I have seen people complain about independence days fireworks and celebrations in the UK. That must seem a tad strange to the locals given the history. lol


----------



## Oof

DogLover1981 said:


> Personally, I'm not pro-choice or even pro-life.
> 
> I'm not pro-life as that is an exercise in futility, IMO, as sperm is alive, eggs are alive, embryos are alive, dogs are alive, moose are live, deer are live, bacteria is alive, etc. At not point during reproduction is there something that is _not_ alive. People also kill animals for food, hunt animals for sport and euthanize animals which are far more sentient than an embryo or fetus.
> 
> I'm not pro-choice as that implies an ethical dilemma which does not exist. It's definitely ethical to have an abortion, especially earlier in pregnancy. Too, It's not really of my concern whether or not a woman has an abortion, I don't know their life circumstances or anything else.
> 
> I think I'll quote my own post.


Look at you, PF's philosopher 😉good points.


----------



## Lurcherlad

This actually came to my mind too the other day 😐


----------



## Pawscrossed

More erosion of rights. When I read the words out loud, it sounds like ‘a man says let’s stop women in the U.K. having abortions. Let’s ignore and penalise people who can’t have kids or choose not to, who already pay taxes because the Tory party lack the balls to tax Amazon and their offshore donors.’


----------



## Boxer123

__





10-year-old rape victim forced to travel from Ohio to Indiana for abortion | Ohio | The Guardian


Case places prominent anti-abortion figures in position of balancing rights of women and girls while defending restrictions




amp.theguardian.com





I just can’t find the words how can this be happening?


----------



## Sairy

Pawscrossed said:


> More erosion of rights. When I read the words out loud, it sounds like ‘a man says let’s stop women in the U.K. having abortions. Let’s ignore and penalise people who can’t have kids or choose not to, who already pay taxes because the Tory party lack the balls to tax Amazon and their offshore donors.’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 574101


Is this serious? Good grief, if so then this is wrong on many levels. If anything I think having less children (or none) is no bad thing due to the ever increasing population.


----------



## Boxer123

Pawscrossed said:


> More erosion of rights. When I read the words out loud, it sounds like ‘a man says let’s stop women in the U.K. having abortions. Let’s ignore and penalise people who can’t have kids or choose not to, who already pay taxes because the Tory party lack the balls to tax Amazon and their offshore donors.’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 574101


Exactly a radical idea would be taxing the rich.


----------



## Oof

Out of interest - does anyone consider the body positive movement to impact women's rights in any way?


----------



## Boxer123

Oof said:


> Out of interest - does anyone consider the body positive movement to impact women's rights in any way?


I have mixed feelings about the movement when I first found it I thought it was great. I had never seen normal bodies in the media. I grew up in the 90s, remember ‘nothing tastes as good as being skinny feels? Chris Evens weighing Victoria Beckham on TV two months after she gave birth. I think it’s great we are seeing normal bods in marketing campaigns ect.

What I don’t like. The body positivity movement I believe (sorry if I’m wrong) was started by black women living in bigger bodies demanding change. For example equal medical care. (If a larger person sees a doctor 9 time out of 10 they are told to lose weight despite the problem not being weight related).

The movement seems to have been taken over
by slim white girls who will contort themselves to show the tiniest roll and tell us it’s ok to wear the shorts. 

I saw a post this morning a girl who is 30 size 12 max saying how brave she felt wearing a bikini and telling herfollowers to do the same. Really is this brave ? I’ve never loved my body but my concerns were bigger at 30. Buying a house, getting a job, working 60 hrs a week honestly some of these influencers seem like they are from another planet. 

Some of the influencers will really go after people for losing weight. Adele got loads of grief. Some of them make skits taking the mick out of skinny girls. We need to allwork together if we are to force change. 

Finally a lot of the influencers are young women yes in a big body but beautiful and will pose in undies constantly I think they are still trying to be acceptable to the male gaze. 

It’s a mixed bag. Overall it’s good young women are seeing different bodies.


----------



## Siskin

I do find the attitude of hate thrown at larger women who do lose weight very strange. I suspect it’s a case of they have let the side down and there’s one less ‘famous’ person who is big. Adele has not become super skinny either, she’s still a well rounded lady and I wouldn’t have thought as low as a 10 now.
The major fashion houses have a lot to answer for with regards to size. A model back in the day had plenty of shape (apart from Twiggy) and although slim weren’t skinny with almost every bone showing. I should imagine many of them were round about a size 12.
Now it’s how skinny can they manage to be and clothes can only be made in single number sizes. If larger sizes are made they are poorly designed, just wider and not shaped correctly. Size 12 used to be regarded as average, not someone who was overweight.


----------



## OrientalSlave

Oof said:


> Out of interest - does anyone consider the body positive movement to impact women's rights in any way?


Not really thought about it, but I do think it has a deleterious effect on many women's health by suggesting that being very, very overweight is normal and not a problem. I agree that fashion can have an adverse effect in the reverse sense by making normal-sized women feel overweight, and currently it's suggesting another daft idea which is that stick thin women can have big breasts which they very rarely do unless there has been an augmentation, or that we should have a massive bottom even when thin. In other words promoting any body image that is either underweight, overweight or only achievable though surgery is very bad for women - and, of course, for men.

That goes along with the idea we should have blindingly white, perfectly even teeth. Veneers are great in some situations, but removing a goodly portion of a healthy tooth to have one fitted? Madness.

I also suspect the tattoo fashion will eventually swing the other way. I drive past a tattoo shop from time to time where laser tattoo removal is now more prominent on it's shop front than actual tattooing!


----------



## Boxer123

Siskin said:


> I do find the attitude of hate thrown at larger women who do lose weight very strange. I suspect it’s a case of they have let the side down and there’s one less ‘famous’ person who is big. Adele has not become super skinny either, she’s still a well rounded lady and I wouldn’t have thought as low as a 10 now.
> The major fashion houses have a lot to answer for with regards to size. A model back in the day had plenty of shape (apart from Twiggy) and although slim weren’t skinny with almost every bone showing. I should imagine many of them were round about a size 12.
> Now it’s how skinny can they manage to be and clothes can only be made in single number sizes. If larger sizes are made they are poorly designed, just wider and not shaped correctly. Size 12 used to be regarded as average, not someone who was overweight.
> [/QUOTE)
> 
> 
> It’s scary how thin some models are. I remember once summer when I was 11 doing sit ups for a flat stomach (I’ve always been a size 8 -10 but my tummy isn’t completely flat). I just hope the next generation doesn’t go through this.


----------



## Oof

@Boxer123 , @Siskin, @OrientalSlave thank you all for the replies, you've all made really good points. It's something I thought about asking for a while, but kept chickening out on haha.

I can see the good and the bad about it. I love seeing women feeling good in their own skin, being able to dress how they choose instead of only wearing what fits. And also the awareness that comes with it; that larger women shouldn't be invisible or treated worse due to appearance.
The negative aspect for me at least, would be the "health at every size" campaign. Although I feel this may be more suitable for a separate thread, I think this has had an impact on women's health and well-being.

Only the last 10ish(?) Years I've been able to get clothes that fit me properly - I'm very tall, and I've built up a lot of muscle through powerlifting. I'm very grateful that some standards around size and shape have shifted. It's nice to be able to buy 'womens' clothes instead of mens 😒

Speaking of people being outraged by female celebrities weight loss - I find it very hypocritical. "Be confident in your own body!", "Beauty at every size!", but only if it fits a certain narrative.


----------



## Boxer123

Oof said:


> @Boxer123 , @Siskin, @OrientalSlave thank you all for the replies, you've all made really good points. It's something I thought about asking for a while, but kept chickening out on haha.
> 
> I can see the good and the bad about it. I love seeing women feeling good in their own skin, being able to dress how they choose instead of only wearing what fits. And also the awareness that comes with it; that larger women shouldn't be invisible or treated worse due to appearance.
> The negative aspect for me at least, would be the "health at every size" campaign. Although I feel this may be more suitable for a separate thread, I think this has had an impact on women's health and well-being.
> 
> Only the last 10ish(?) Years I've been able to get clothes that fit me properly - I'm very tall, and I've built up a lot of muscle through powerlifting. I'm very grateful that some standards around size and shape have shifted. It's nice to be able to buy 'womens' clothes instead of mens 😒
> 
> Speaking of people being outraged by female celebrities weight loss - I find it very hypocritical. "Be confident in your own body!", "Beauty at every size!", but only if it fits a certain narrative.


I think I have taken from it that overweight doesn’t automatically mean unhealthy. I do wish it wasn’t all or nothing people should be supported to lose weight safely if they want to. The intuitive eating movement doesn’t work for me because intuitively I want to eat everything.


----------



## Pawscrossed

It’s a real proposition by a Oxford University researcher, Paul Morland.... father of three. Check this out... telegram from the Queen and advice from Boris who has seven known children 













https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/childless-tax-birthrate-uk-cost-of-living-paul-morland/?fbclid=IwAR3gW5iSXAMaTt6mAgF6vuNtmlU9CSEZL5IMD0ryNr2gBpQAzliZoYaOXqQ&fs=e&s=cl



A breach of rights surely, and privacy. Childfree should be celebrated for making choices which will save the planet. Childless respected and given more support.


----------



## OrientalSlave

Boxer123 said:


> I think I have taken from it that overweight doesn’t automatically mean unhealthy. I do wish it wasn’t all or nothing people should be supported to lose weight safely if they want to. The intuitive eating movement doesn’t work for me because intuitively I want to eat everything.


Sadly overweight is unhealthy, but it's not an all or nothing thing - the adverse effects gradually increase as the amount of excess increases. Being underweight is unhealthy as well. BMI isn't the be-all & end-all of deciding if one's weight is right or not - there is increasing emphasis on one's waist : height ratio.


----------



## Pawscrossed

I might‘ve fallen of my chair laughing if it was not for the line create a pronatalist culture. We have one. I go several pages here and see how mystified many of you were by MollySmith (are they still here? Not tagging as I imagine this would make them really mad) comments on reality of childless not by choice; now its men telling people who paid thousands for IVF and counselling to pay even more?! I think he’ll find Brexit and immigration at the heart of this, terror at the climate crisis, poverty and that Great Britain isn’t very great anymore. Tax the Rothermere family, that will raise a few coffers.


----------



## Oof

OrientalSlave said:


> Sadly overweight is unhealthy, but it's not an all or nothing thing - the adverse effects gradually increase as the amount of excess increases. Being underweight is unhealthy as well. BMI isn't the be-all & end-all of deciding if one's weight is right or not - there is increasing emphasis on one's waist : height ratio.


Waist is a very good indicator.

I think it depends on the type of overweight.
I'm overweight on the BMI.Someone could be massively muscley and have heart and kidney problems due to the strain of carrying all the weight... but then it's unlikely anyone would get to that point (naturally) anyway. I think fat causes more issues. 

Either way, it is a shame that women are given healthcare dependent on BMI rather than an actual medical examination.


----------



## Oof

@Pawscrossed - it reminds me of Japan and how it's currently encouraged there for young people to start families because of the aging population etc.
I didn't know the UK was similar? Sounds bizarre to me.
Surely the emphasis should be on caring for the kids that already exist


----------



## Magyarmum

Oof said:


> @Pawscrossed - it reminds me of Japan and how it's currently encouraged there for young people to start families because of the aging population etc.
> I didn't know the UK was similar? Sounds bizarre to me.
> Surely the emphasis should be on caring for the kids that already exist


Not so "bizarre"! Hungary offers incentives for couples having large families.









Helping Hungarians Have All the Babies They Want


11 years after Orban returned to power and made reversing Hungary’s shrinking population a cornerstone of his vision for the future, the results of his pro-family policies have been mixed.




balkaninsight.com


----------



## Boxer123

Pawscrossed said:


> I might‘ve fallen of my chair laughing if it was not for the line create a pronatalist culture. We have one. I go several pages here and see how mystified many of you were by MollySmith (are they still here? Not tagging as I imagine this would make them really mad) comments on reality of childless not by choice; now its men telling people who paid thousands for IVF and counselling to pay even more?! I think he’ll find Brexit and immigration at the heart of this, terror at the climate crisis, poverty and that Great Britain isn’t very great anymore. Tax the Rothermere family, that will raise a few coffers.


Spot on I couldn’t have said it better. Brexit has caused a huge labour shortage. And yes for people who desperately wanted children to be taxed more is horrendous. I don’t have children the world is literally on fire and I’m constantly skint I thought it was a sensible choice. This is an example of someone thinking they are clever but are incredibly stupid.


----------



## Boxer123

OrientalSlave said:


> Sadly overweight is unhealthy, but it's not an all or nothing thing - the adverse effects gradually increase as the amount of excess increases. Being underweight is unhealthy as well. BMI isn't the be-all & end-all of deciding if one's weight is right or not - there is increasing emphasis on one's waist : height ratio.


Of course but there is a lot more to someone’s health. For some who have fought EDs being a bit overweight is better than the alternative. I think it’s just reshaped my thoughts I’ve always been slim so have never understood the difficulties of bigger people.


----------



## Oof

Magyarmum said:


> Not so "bizarre"! Hungary offers incentives for couples having large families.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Helping Hungarians Have All the Babies They Want
> 
> 
> 11 years after Orban returned to power and made reversing Hungary’s shrinking population a cornerstone of his vision for the future, the results of his pro-family policies have been mixed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> balkaninsight.com


Oh i meant bizarre for the UK, sorry, my post wasn't clear. 
That's an interesting article. And Mike Pence is involved in it 🤔


----------



## Deguslave

I don't have kids, never liked them enough to want one, but there are other considerations too. I inherited a genetic condition from my mother, there's a 100% chance of me passing it to an off spring in some degree. That degree could be mild, or it could mean life long disabilities, god knows how many corrective surgeries and zero chance of a normal life - and there's no way of telling which until a few months after its born.

Now am I being sensible by not having children or selfish? And why should I be taxed more for not burdening the state with the cost of their disabilities.


----------



## OrientalSlave

Boxer123 said:


> Of course but there is a lot more to someone’s health. For some who have fought EDs being a bit overweight is better than the alternative. I think it’s just reshaped my thoughts I’ve always been slim so have never understood the difficulties of bigger people.


Of course there are exceptions, you are one, but for the vast majority of people their BMI and waist measurement show if they are the right weight or not.


----------



## 1507601

The idea of being taxed for not having kids is truly disgusting. I suspect it won't happen, it's too ridiculous...


----------



## 1507601

On the subject of issues we face as women...
I asked on the local Facebook page for recommendations for a nearby driving instructor. Apparently the guy from this article is brilliant!








Instructor accuses pupil of flirting


A DRIVING instructor accused of groping a teenage pupil claimed she was flirtatious in previous lessons.




www.thenorthernecho.co.uk




So yeah... I've informed my husband he'll just have to learn first and teach me because that kind of triggered my fears.


----------



## Lurcherlad

There are lots of female driving instructors @Lucy2020


----------



## OrientalSlave

People might find this an interesting article:



https://secondtypewoman.info/woman.htm


----------



## Siskin

OrientalSlave said:


> People might find this an interesting article:
> 
> 
> 
> https://secondtypewoman.info/woman.htm


Very good article, well written and something that needed to be said publicly


----------



## O2.0

Lucy2020 said:


> The idea of being taxed for not having kids is truly disgusting. I suspect it won't happen, it's too ridiculous...


How could you even apply it? Would you tax based on choose not to have kids, or want kids and can't or what if you had a child and he/she didn't survive? I mean, it's horrible to even contemplate. I can't believe any of it is actually seriously being considered?


----------



## O2.0

Oof said:


> Out of interest - does anyone consider the body positive movement to impact women's rights in any way?


Mmm... I don't know?
I do know that women's health is an area that still has a lot of catching up to do since so many human health norms are based off white, European men. Medication dosages for instance, disease symptoms, normal range for blood work and more. 
Body positivity mostly strikes me as another 'trend' in expectations for women - how we should look, feel, and act. Which often feels like more control and unspoken rules.


----------



## O2.0

This article pretty succinctly explains how both far right and far left philosophies are equally detrimental to women.
Women don't count


----------



## mrs phas

Macy Gray joins jk Rowling on the naughty step. 


Piers Morgan defends Macy Gray as singer says surgery doesn't make you a woman


----------



## mrs phas

Sorry to repeat post 
But 

BBC News - Maya Forstater: Woman discriminated against over trans tweets, tribunal rules
Maya Forstater: Woman discriminated against over trans tweets, tribunal rules


----------



## Lurcherlad




----------



## Dimwit

And Sharron Davies seems to be campaigning hard for rugby to do the same. Given the inherent risks of a contact sport it is unthinkable that women’s lives are being endangered by letting biological males compete in ladies rugby


----------



## Dimwit

O2.0 said:


> Body positivity mostly strikes me as another 'trend' in expectations for women - how we should look, feel, and act. Which often feels like more control and unspoken rules.


It seems to be another thing that has been taken to extremes. As someone who is overweight and has struggled with my weight for years I welcome the introduction of different body types in advertising and am as keen as anyone for clothes sizes to cater properly for larger women. 
But, celebrating morbidly obese women is, IMO just as damaging as celebrating size 0 women. There is no denying that being so obese is hugely unhealthy and puts you at risk of many major health problems.
There is a huge (no pun intended) between the average, slightly overweight size 16 woman and a morbidly obese size 32 woman and we should not be promoting this unhealthy body type it the same way that we should not be encouraging eating disorders by promoting extremely underweight women.


----------



## O2.0

I am currently fatter than I'm comfortable being, and I know myself and know the weight will come off when it comes off.
I coach XC runners - young teenage girls, and I am conscious of being 'positive' about my body particularly in front of them. The other day I was teaching them some core strength stuff - it's the 'bridge' pose with one leg up, and I showed off holding it longer than most of them were able to. You can definitely be old and fat and still strong and capable 

I saw a lovely post on either FB or instagram the other day about not telling your daughters (and sons) that they look good when they lose weight or of course commenting if they gain. Say things like 'you look happy' 'you look strong' not related to body. It was much better stated than I have here, but yes, again, we need to stop reducing women to a body or a body part.

@Maurey you were asking what is so problematic about inclusive language and this is essentially it. Women are not a body part or a body function - bodies with vaginas or menstruators.
In the article I posted above she explains the problem well (bold mine):
_"The noble intent behind omitting the word “women” is to make room for the relatively tiny number of transgender men and people identifying as nonbinary who retain aspects of female biological function and can conceive, give birth or breastfeed. But despite a spirit of inclusion, the result has been to shove women to the side.
(...)
But, but, but. Can you blame the sisterhood for feeling a little nervous? For wincing at the presumption of acquiescence? For worrying about the broader implications? *For wondering what kind of message we are sending to young girls about feeling good in their bodies, pride in their sex and the prospects of womanhood? *For essentially ceding to another backlash?
Women didn’t fight this long and this hard only to be told we couldn’t call ourselves women anymore. This isn’t just a semantic issue; it’s also a question of moral harm, an affront to our very sense of ourselves.
It wasn’t so long ago — and in some places the belief persists — that women were considered a mere rib to Adam’s whole. Seeing women as their own complete entities, not just a collection of derivative parts, was an important part of the struggle for sexual equality.
But here we go again, parsing women into organs. Last year the British medical journal The Lancet patted itself on the back for a cover article on menstruation. Yet instead of mentioning the human beings who get to enjoy this monthly biological activity, the cover referred to “bodies with vaginas.” It’s almost as if the other bits and bobs — uteruses, ovaries or even something relatively gender-neutral like brains — were inconsequential. That such things tend to be wrapped together in a human package with two X sex chromosomes is apparently unmentionable."_

To tie it back in to body positivity, it's not really about our bodies is it? It's about how our bodies appear to the rest of the world. It's not about how our bodies feel to us, what we can do with our bodies, our health. It's about how we look. Being a woman is so much more than what we look like.


----------



## Jesthar

_warning - triggers for sexual assault_



Looks like we already have a case of a US rape victim having to cross state lines to obtain an abortion. The victim was just 10 years old...









Man charged with raping Ohio girl, 10, who was denied abortion


The 10-year-old was legally barred from terminating her pregnancy in her home state.



www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Cleo38

Jesthar said:


> _warning - triggers for sexual assault_
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like we already have a case of a US rape victim having to cross state lines to obtain an abortion. The victim was just 10 years old...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Man charged with raping Ohio girl, 10, who was denied abortion
> 
> 
> The 10-year-old was legally barred from terminating her pregnancy in her home state.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.co.uk


That poor child, how horrific


----------



## Dimwit

Jesthar said:


> _warning - triggers for sexual assault_
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like we already have a case of a US rape victim having to cross state lines to obtain an abortion. The victim was just 10 years old...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Man charged with raping Ohio girl, 10, who was denied abortion
> 
> 
> The 10-year-old was legally barred from terminating her pregnancy in her home state.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.co.uk


I read about this - that poor girl was not only denied an abortion but also told to 'think of it as an opportunity'


----------



## Magyarmum

Words fail me!









Missoula GOP state Senate candidate: Women's womb 'serves no specific purpose to her life or well-being'


A former Montana State House Majority Leader and candidate for a potential swing Montana state Senate race said in an email to fellow legislators Monday that a woman’s womb serves no specific purpose to her life or well-being.




missoulacurrent.com





“The womb is the only organ in a woman’s body that serves no specific purpose to her life or well-being,” Tschida said. “It is truly a sanctuary.”


----------



## Sairy

Magyarmum said:


> Words fail me!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missoula GOP state Senate candidate: Women's womb 'serves no specific purpose to her life or well-being'
> 
> 
> A former Montana State House Majority Leader and candidate for a potential swing Montana state Senate race said in an email to fellow legislators Monday that a woman’s womb serves no specific purpose to her life or well-being.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> missoulacurrent.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “The womb is the only organ in a woman’s body that serves no specific purpose to her life or well-being,” Tschida said. “It is truly a sanctuary.”


Of course that statement had to come from a man, who has absolutely no idea what it's like to be pregnant and what carrying a child can do to your body. Ignorance at its best.


----------



## Jesthar

Sairy said:


> Of course that statement had to come from a man, who has absolutely no idea what it's like to be pregnant and what carrying a child can do to your body. Ignorance at its best.


Technically speaking, testicles serve no specific purpose to the life or wellbeing of a man, so maybe we should introduce legislation controlling them...


----------



## Deguslave

Jesthar said:


> Technically speaking, testicles serve no specific purpose to the life or wellbeing of a man, so maybe we should introduce legislating controlling them...


Nah, just remove them, lol.


----------



## Dimwit

Helen, a severely learning-disabled girl: sex-based rights under threat
This is just horrendous. Why are we exposing the most vulnerable members of society to potential abuse just so we don’t hurt the feelings of trans women?


----------



## mrs phas

Dimwit said:


> Helen, a severely learning-disabled girl: sex-based rights under threat
> This is just horrendous. Why are we exposing the most vulnerable members of society to potential abuse just so we don’t hurt the feelings of trans women?


Reading this made me cry so much 

To not put patients, with such extreme needs, above all else, is just heartbreakingly abusive 
I've said it time and time again, just because someone cannot express their needs and wants, doesn't mean they cannot feel, and understand, everything that is happening to them
In cases like these, 
Surely, 
it is imperative that natal sex, comes before chosen gender, each and every time


----------



## OrientalSlave

mrs phas said:


> Reading this made me cry so much
> 
> To not put patients, with such extreme needs, above all else, is just heartbreakingly abusive
> I've said it time and time again, just because someone cannot express their needs and wants, doesn't mean they cannot feel, and understand, everything that is happening to them
> In cases like these,
> Surely,
> it is imperative that natal sex, comes before chosen gender, each and every time


I read it as about letting intimate card be done by a man. Nothing to do with trans rights, possibly to do with nothing like enough carers.

And, sadly, there are women who abuse children & vulnerable people. It's not the exclusive preserve of one sex or gender.


----------



## Cleo38

mrs phas said:


> Reading this made me cry so much
> 
> To not put patients, with such extreme needs, above all else, is just heartbreakingly abusive
> I've said it time and time again, just because someone cannot express their needs and wants, doesn't mean they cannot feel, and understand, everything that is happening to them
> In cases like these,
> Surely,
> it is imperative that natal sex, comes before chosen gender, each and every time


Absolutely terrible, I can't believe I continue to be shocked by how badly vulnerable people are treated in this country & also by how yet more rights are denied. 

How can anyone deny these women their right to have intimate care carried out by other women? It really is bloody heartbreaking


----------



## Lurcherlad

Safeguarding seems to have gone out of the window. I assume it will affect the elderly too and others in care facilities.

Very scary 😟

I hope I stay independent right up to the last minute and just drop dead … the thought of going into the care system in old age fills me with dread tbh


----------



## kimthecat

Dimwit said:


> It seems to be another thing that has been taken to extremes. As someone who is overweight and has struggled with my weight for years I welcome the introduction of different body types in advertising and am as keen as anyone for clothes sizes to cater properly for larger women.
> But, celebrating morbidly obese women is, IMO just as damaging as celebrating size 0 women. There is no denying that being so obese is hugely unhealthy and puts you at risk of many major health problems.
> There is a huge (no pun intended) between the average, slightly overweight size 16 woman and a morbidly obese size 32 woman and we should not be promoting this unhealthy body type it the same way that we should not be encouraging eating disorders by promoting extremely underweight women.


Absolutely .
I was always known as the skinny one when I was younger . I was the second skinniest girl in my class at secondary school . I never had to diet and I wasnt anorexic . Now Im older and in the last few years I have put on weight and I realise how hard it is to lose it.


----------



## Dimwit

OrientalSlave said:


> I read it as about letting intimate card be done by a man. Nothing to do with trans rights, possibly to do with nothing like enough carers.


I think it is the fact that this announcement was made in line with what they claimed was legislation and guidance relating to equality and diversity, and the change in language from same-sex care to cross-gender care. 
Nobody is denying that biological women are capable of abuse etc. but the statistics do show that such attacks are overwhelmingly perpetrated by men.


----------



## Cleo38

Dimwit said:


> I think it is the fact that this announcement was made in line with what they claimed was legislation and guidance relating to equality and diversity, and the change in language from same-sex care to cross-gender care.
> Nobody is denying that biological women are capable of abuse etc. but the statistics do show that such attacks are overwhelmingly perpetrated by men.


Good on JK Rowling (again!) for speaking out about this issue 

JK Rowling defends 16-year-old girl told she couldn't have women-only care in school toilets | Daily Mail Online

So scary to think that other establishments have adopted this ridiculous policy. I really think people should be aware & ask more questions regarding their care & that of relatives/friends, etc


----------



## Lurcherlad

This stood out from that piece:

So if a child or those acting on her behalf don't consent to opposite-sex intimate care, the school would seem to be encouraging the commission of a criminal offence by imposing it on her.

'If schools are worried that it might be discriminatory against male staff members not to let them provide intimate care to girls, that is a groundless fear. 

'Discrimination requires a "detriment", and there's case law to say that an "unjustified sense of grievance" isn't a detriment.'

There is no detriment to a staff member being told they may not give such intimate care to a particular child.

The only detriment would be to the child if it were allowed.

Unbelievable that anyone thought it was right.


----------



## Cleo38

There has been several items on the news lately regarding the many women who have suffered terrible side effects/complications from having vaginal meshes inserted for problems with incontinence (mainly from child birth). It's been disgusting how these women have been treated by the medical profession & how they have had to fight so hard for justice & admissions that this impant has caused so many problems.

As if that weren't bad enough I just read this article which details further misogyny ... it's honestly so depressing to read how these surgeons can act so badly

Are these Britain's most sexist surgeons? | Daily Mail Online


----------



## Dimwit

Cleo38 said:


> As if that weren't bad enough I just read this article which details further misogyny ... it's honestly so depressing to read how these surgeons can act so badly
> 
> Are these Britain's most sexist surgeons? | Daily Mail Online


It is a disgrace, although on the positive side this was a big factor in the introduction of stricter regulation of medical devices which were nowhere near as strict as those for drugs.
I agree, it is depressing to read about surgeons, but not exactly surprising - they are a strange breed and arrogance and sexism run deep. I may have posted this before but a female schoolfriend, when she started her surgical training, was told by a senior surgeon that there are two types of women surgeons: those who shouldn't be surgeons, and those who shouldn't be women...


----------



## Lurcherlad

Just shocking! @Cleo38

It’s a wonder why these men choose gynaecology? So many seem to hold women in contempt.

It seems endemic though in all areas.

A male GP told our hairdresser when asking about HRT for a number of known systems … “you don’t need HRT, just a pair of trainers”.

She reported him.

As for female doctors … one might expect better as they surely have more understanding? Clearly, not all.


----------



## Cleo38

Dimwit said:


> It is a disgrace, although on the positive side this was a big factor in the introduction of stricter regulation of medical devices which were nowhere near as strict as those for drugs.
> I agree, it is depressing to read about surgeons, but not exactly surprising - they are a strange breed and arrogance and sexism run deep. I may have posted this before but a female schoolfriend, when she started her surgical training, was told by a senior surgeon that there are two types of women surgeons: those who shouldn't be surgeons, and those who shouldn't be women...


Really is quite astounding the arrogance. I haven't had many dealing with senior doctors so have been shocked when I have heard of the experiences of others. My sister was telling me of one surgeon at the hospital she worked out basically telling his team that the woman he had just examined didn't have long to live ... before he had told her or her family. How can anyone have such lack of empathy as well as professionalism?!


----------



## Sairy

When I was in labor with George and he got stuck I had to go into theatre for a spinal block and forceps. I had been told not to push at this point (and holding back from pushing whilst having intense contractions is incredibly painful and feels very unnatural). Luckily I didn't see this, but according to my wife the anaesthetist was getting very impatient when he was trying to put the spinal injection in because I wasn't still enough straight away. One of the female staff looking after me sternly informed him that I was having a contraction and obviously couldn't be totally still at that moment.


----------



## ScrapCat

mrs phas said:


> Reading this made me cry so much
> 
> To not put patients, with such extreme needs, above all else, is just heartbreakingly abusive
> I've said it time and time again, just because someone cannot express their needs and wants, doesn't mean they cannot feel, and understand, everything that is happening to them
> In cases like these,
> Surely,
> it is imperative that natal sex, comes before chosen gender, each and every time


As a mom to a severely learning-disabled, nonverbal, autistic girl, this hit home and made me cry, as well. 😢 And the part about Cassie getting HIV from being raped was just awful! That poor woman! 😰

No parent wants to outlive their child (I know I certainly don't), but stories like this make me sometimes hope that either myself or my husband do, just so one of us is always there to make sure our daughter is as happy, safe, and cared for, as can be. 😞


----------



## Cleo38

Sairy said:


> When I was in labor with George and he got stuck I had to go into theatre for a spinal block and forceps. I had been told not to push at this point (and holding back from pushing whilst having intense contractions is incredibly painful and feels very unnatural). Luckily I didn't see this, but according to my wife the anaesthetist was getting very impatient when he was trying to put the spinal injection in because I wasn't still enough straight away. One of the female staff looking after me sternly informed him that I was having a contraction and obviously couldn't be totally still at that moment.


OMG, that is so awful to hear. Surely at traumatic moments like that the team involved need to calm & clear of what they & everyone else is/should be doing to avoid mistakes & adding to complications


----------



## Sairy

Nice bit of sexism at my wife's workplace yesterday. All of the men who work there were sent messages to tell them that they could wear shorts due to the heat. The women were not messaged as they can wear dresses. My wife doesn't have any dresses for work and always wears trousers, so she went in her trousers as usual as she didn't know they were allowed to wear shorts.


----------



## Jesthar

A lady in Cardiff recorded a small part of some prolonged harassment she endured from one man as she was walking down the road (which is apparently not uncommon in that area) and posted it on TikTok to raise awareness. Didn't take long for the TikTok comments to attract apologists saying she must have been wearing skimpy clothes, or otherwise asking for it...









TikTok: Video of woman harassed in Cardiff gets two million views


A student filmed a man harassing her to raise awareness of a problem that happens "all the time".



www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Jaf

Jesthar said:


> A lady in Cardiff recorded a small part of some prolonged harassment she endured from one man as she was walking down the road (which is apparently not uncommon in that area) and posted it on TikTok to raise awareness. Didn't take long for the TikTok comments to attract apologists saying she must have been wearing skimpy clothes, or otherwise asking for it...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TikTok: Video of woman harassed in Cardiff gets two million views
> 
> 
> A student filmed a man harassing her to raise awareness of a problem that happens "all the time".
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.co.uk


That makes me so angry. 

I remember walking to school, in school uniform, as a very young looking 12 year old. Some builder shouted "give me a suck". Was I to blame?!? I almost blame the apologists more than the criminal. I wish I could say I said something, but I ignored it. The first of a lifetime.


----------



## 1507601

I think I've mentioned this before, but when I was having an ECG done in an emergency, half naked, vulnerable and terrified about whether I was actually okay or not, the (male) doctor and his (female) assistant not only messed up the ECG the first time round, but during both were going on at me about why didn't I want children bla bla bla. And no, the issue I was having had zero to do with reproduction, I was having a reaction to a new medication. This doctor wasn't that old/senior either.

I actually found it quite traumatic... My husband doesn't get it though.
Trigger warnings ahead..





I can't remember if it was before or after I was apprehended by a random man on the street who also interrogated me on my lack of children. Without going into details, he was obviously either planning on raping or abducting me. I feel a doctor should have nothing in common with such a man!!!


----------



## Magyarmum

What an odious man!

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1550954716913360896


----------



## DogLover1981

That's gross. I assume it's an insult related to appearance but I'm not sure exactly what he means by "thumb" and I'm not sure I even_ want_ to know.


----------



## Dimwit

I wasn't going to post this because of the potential backlash... but, last week stonewall posted this tweet:









Which got me very angry for many reasons, not least because of the potential harm of telling children at a very suggestible age that they may not actually be a boy or girl. 

The main thing that makes me angry though is that, at that age, their (very tenuous) knowledge of what it means to be a boy or a girl comes pretty much entirely from the attitudes of those around them.

Instead of pressuring nurseries/preschools to teach about trans rights, why not pressure them to teach children that it is absolutely fine not to conform to gender stereotypes and that if a girl wants to cut her hair short and climb trees then that doesn't necessarily make her any less of a girl.

I was absolutely heartbroken recently when my 5-year-old niece said to me 'but aunty dimwit, I can't be a doctor because I'm a girl'. If schools (and parents) spent more time teaching girls (because it DOES seem to be mainly girls) that they can do anything/be anything they want and they don't have to be pretty and wear pretty dresses and marry a footballer then maybe there would be far less 'gender dysphoria'...


----------



## Cleo38

Dimwit said:


> I wasn't going to post this because of the potential backlash... but, last week stonewall posted this tweet:
> View attachment 575233
> 
> 
> Which got me very angry for many reasons, not least because of the potential harm of telling children at a very suggestible age that they may not actually be a boy or girl.
> 
> The main thing that makes me angry though is that, at that age, their (very tenuous) knowledge of what it means to be a boy or a girl comes pretty much entirely from the attitudes of those around them.
> 
> Instead of pressuring nurseries/preschools to teach about trans rights, why not pressure them to teach children that it is absolutely fine not to conform to gender stereotypes and that if a girl wants to cut her hair short and climb trees then that doesn't necessarily make her any less of a girl.
> 
> I was absolutely heartbroken recently when my 5-year-old niece said to me 'but aunty dimwit, I can't be a doctor because I'm a girl'. If schools (and parents) spent more time teaching girls (because it DOES seem to be mainly girls) that they can do anything/be anything they want and they don't have to be pretty and wear pretty dresses and marry a footballer then maybe there would be far less 'gender dysphoria'...


That's so sad that young girls still feel this way. When I read "Invisible Women" the author discussed how children saw roles & how very young children were happy to consider (fictional) male & females characters for the same jobs, it was only when the children got older that they started to divide the sexes & the men were assigned more high powered jobs & the women less so roles.

I don't understand why this is still continues, why are young girls still being told they do not have the same opportunities?


----------



## DogLover1981

Magyarmum said:


> What an odious man!


He's also under investigation for sex trafficking.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/27/sex-trafficking-allegations-matt-gaetz/


----------



## Cleo38

Hope he bloody rots in prison ...

Wayne Couzens loses bid to have sentence reduced for murdering Sarah Everard | Metro News


----------



## Lurcherlad

Cleo38 said:


> Hope he bloody rots in prison ...
> 
> Wayne Couzens loses bid to have sentence reduced for murdering Sarah Everard | Metro News


He “deserves” to be hung, drawn and quartered ….. slowly”, so he should count himself lucky he’s got a life sentence instead 🤬


----------



## Boxer123

Horrific Whatsapps shared by Met Police officers in group with Wayne Couzens revealed


Graphic messages read out in court as three officers go on trial for ‘grossly offensive’ posts




www.independent.co.uk





And his mates.


----------



## Lurcherlad

No words 😶


----------



## kimthecat

RFL & RFU ban trans women from female-only categories


The Rugby Football League (RFL) and Rugby Football Union (RFU) ban transgender women from competing in female-only forms of their games.




www.bbc.co.uk





The Rugby Football League (RFL) and Rugby Football Union (RFU) have banned transgender women from competing in female-only forms of their games.
The RFL's board approved its new policy which will come into effect in August.
The RFU's council voted on Friday to pass its new policy for the 2022-23 season, with "33 in favour, 26 against and two abstaining".
About 30 protestors gathered at the RFU's headquarters at Twickenham Stadium before the vote.
The RFL's new "Gender Participation Policy" applies to contact rugby league from Under-12s and above, while the RFU's guidance kicks-in for Under-12s and above.
There are currently six transgender women playing senior rugby union.


----------



## Lurcherlad

Common sense seems to be prevailing, thank goodness.

Given that some male players are, I believe, seeking to sue the rugby authorities because they are now suffering with MND or early onset dementia allegedly brought on by the heavy contact and impact on the brain in the game, there are serious health considerations here too, not just fair competition.


----------



## Cleo38

Lurcherlad said:


> Common sense seems to be prevailing, thank goodness.
> 
> Given that some male players are, I believe, seeking to sue the rugby authorities because they are now suffering with MND or early onset dementia allegedly brought on by the heavy contact and impact on the brain in the game, there are serious health considerations here too, not just fair competition.


Agreed. Surely ths is a dangerous sport anyway so it is not just unfair to women to have to compete against a biological male but also dangerous. I really hope that people are now beginning to sense.


----------



## Cleo38

I have no interest in sports usually, least of all football but what an amazing achievement for women's sports with England Women's team winning Euro 2022. After all the recent sh*t that women have had to cope with in sports this is such a great moment & I really hope will inspire girls & young women


----------



## simplysardonic

Cleo38 said:


> I have no interest in sports usually, least of all football but what an amazing achievement for women's sports with England Women's team winning Euro 2022. After all the recent sh*t that women have had to cope with in sports this is such a great moment & I really hope will inspire girls & young women


I'm the same about sport, but they did a smashing job.


----------



## O2.0

That match was on TV here in the states, great to watch! And yes, great to see women's sports getting more much deserved attention. Women athletes are no less talented and hardworking that male ones, it's about time they were equally respected as athletes, paid the same, offered the same prize money!


----------



## Cleo38

simplysardonic said:


> I'm the same about sport, but they did a smashing job.


I was reading this article the other day which shows how women were banned from the sport by the FA. Makes me so angry to think of all the opportunities that have been denied to women & girls over the years 









How the FA banned women’s football in 1921 and tried to justify it


A year after more than 50,000 turned up to watch Dick, Kerr Ladies play St Helens, a ban was introduced that was to last half a century




www.theguardian.com


----------



## Siskin

Cleo38 said:


> I have no interest in sports usually, least of all football but what an amazing achievement for women's sports with England Women's team winning Euro 2022. After all the recent sh*t that women have had to cope with in sports this is such a great moment & I really hope will inspire girls & young women


Out of curiosity I read a few replies on a Facebook post celebrating the win. There were a number of bolshy men and a few women who rubbished the women’s achievement many saying they were not good players and an under 21 boys youth team could easily beat them which is entirely missing the point and what this thread is all about. 
Of course a team of men footballers could beat them, they are bigger, stronger, have more lung capacity, all the things that have been brought up about trans women competing in women’s sport.
What the detractors failed to understand is that this is an all women’s competition and England have won the competition and that is what should be celebrated.
Also, much has been made how clean the match was, not only amongst the players who didn’t spend all their time deliberately fouling the opposition, rolling on the floor in pretend agony or arguing with the ref, but how clean and tidy the stands and the surrounds of the stadium were left. No mess everywhere, no puddles of spilt drinks or cans, no piles of vomit. Clean in both senses of the word.


----------



## Cleo38

Siskin said:


> Out of curiosity I read a few replies on a Facebook post celebrating the win. There were a number of bolshy men and a few women who rubbished the women’s achievement many saying they were not good players and an under 21 boys youth team could easily beat them which is entirely missing the point and what this thread is all about.
> Of course a team of men footballers could beat them, they are bigger, stronger, have more lung capacity, all the things that have been brought up about trans women competing in women’s sport.
> What the detractors failed to understand is that this is an all women’s competition and England have won the competition and that is what should be celebrated.
> Also, much has been made how clean the match was, not only amongst the players who didn’t spend all their time deliberately fouling the opposition, rolling on the floor in pretend agony or arguing with the ref, but how clean and tidy the stands and the surrounds of the stadium were left. No mess everywhere, no puddles of spilt drinks or cans, no piles of vomit. Clean in both senses of the word.


Yep! I have seen the same from some very inadequate men who somehow feel threatened that women can compete in 'their' sport & do very well in it. No idea why some women would join them tho .... very odd 

Such a shame that such a fantastic event has to have these people trying to belittle it but then I think it says alot about how we still have a long way to go regarding misogyny


----------



## simplysardonic

Cleo38 said:


> I was reading this article the other day which shows how women were banned from the sport by the FA. Makes me so angry to think of all the opportunities that have been denied to women & girls over the years
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How the FA banned women’s football in 1921 and tried to justify it
> 
> 
> A year after more than 50,000 turned up to watch Dick, Kerr Ladies play St Helens, a ban was introduced that was to last half a century
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com


Amazing what pointless mountains can be moved if a few angry, vocal & insecure men are involved 🙄 

Love this quote from Alice Kell in the article, especially her summary of the men's teams:

“We girls play football in a proper spirit. We do not retaliate if we are bowled over, and we show no fits of temper. We are all simply amazed at the action of the authorities in placing a ban upon the sport we love with all our heart. Surely to goodness we have the right to play any game we think fit without interference from the Football Association! We are all working girls dependent upon our weekly wages and living with our parents and others partly dependent upon us.” 

Just a shame she probably wasn't still around when the ban lifted.


----------



## Boxer123

I’m another one who isn’t into to football but think it’s fantastic. I was watching the news this morning and fans were saying the difference in atmosphere compared to mens football (in a good way) I hope this encourages more girls into sport it’s so important for mental health.


----------



## Dimwit

I am not a football fan but I am thrilled with the result. And this sums up why it is important:









Of course, as one commentator said earlier in the tournament, this only makes a difference if girls are given the same opportunities to play football as boys, starting in the playground where every playtime is dominated by boys playing football and excluding girls.

Of course, what I am most looking forward to is the fashion reports that will surely follow detailing the outfits/hairstyles of the 'husbands and boyfriends'...


----------



## Siskin

Found this one on fb🤣


----------



## Cleo38

Dimwit said:


> Of course, what I am most looking forward to is the fashion reports that will surely follow detailing the outfits/hairstyles of the 'husbands and boyfriends'...


Exactly!! Can you imagine how men would react if that were the case ......


----------



## Siskin

Or……


----------



## mrs phas

Cleo38 said:


> Yep! I have seen the same from some very inadequate men who somehow feel threatened that women can compete in 'their' sport & do very well in it. No idea why some women would join them tho .... very odd
> 
> Such a shame that such a fantastic event has to have these people trying to belittle it but then I think it says alot about how we still have a long way to go regarding misogyny


Loads on one FB page that I 'belong' to
All along the lines of
Won't ever be singing 3 lions again !
So stupid! Don't they know 3 lions is about the world cup, not the euro "viola" (insert common name for instead, used in an offensive way)
When women can win the world cup, like English men did, perhaps I'll take notice!
Lionesses? More like foxes😉😉

And various other mysogenistic and offensive posts

All these toxic males seem to forget, in nature, it's the lionesses that bring home the bacon, every time


----------



## Lurcherlad

Tbh I find the vitriol on both sides to be unnecessary 🙄


----------



## O2.0

Demi Lovato (Pop star, ex-Disney Star) has changed her pronouns back to she/her after using they/them last year. 
"I'm such a fluid person when it comes to my gender, my sexuality, my music, my creativity," 








Demi Lovato says she is using 'she/her' pronouns again


The pop star opened up about the pronouns she uses during an interview on "Spout Podcast."




www.nbcnews.com





Is it any wonder young women (and men) are so confused? 
What happened to telling girls and women that they get to define what it is to be a woman, that being a woman isn't about being "feminine" but being your true self. That you can be a woman and do masculine things, that "masculine" things aren't the sole domain of men. 
Why are we telling women now that if they don't want to wear dresses and make-up that they have to become something other than a woman?


----------



## Siskin

Oh my word, what have I become. I never wear dresses and don’t wear make up. 
Last time I looked I was all women😜


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Demi Lovato (Pop star, ex-Disney Star) has changed her pronouns back to she/her after using they/them last year.
> "I'm such a fluid person when it comes to my gender, my sexuality, my music, my creativity,"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Demi Lovato says she is using 'she/her' pronouns again
> 
> 
> The pop star opened up about the pronouns she uses during an interview on "Spout Podcast."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it any wonder young women (and men) are so confused?
> What happened to telling girls and women that they get to define what it is to be a woman, that being a woman isn't about being "feminine" but being your true self. That you can be a woman and do masculine things, that "masculine" things aren't the sole domain of men.
> Why are we telling women now that if they don't want to wear dresses and make-up that they have to become something other than a woman?


I saw this, what a ridiculous woman! Who is she exactly? I seem to remember hearing about her before for trying to ruin a family run ice cream parlour because their 'fat free' ice creams were 'triggering' for her & she decided to try & shame them in IG. She sounds so far up her own @rse

There was some footage on a feminist FB page the other day about an actor in the US being arrested for assault & child grooming (or something along those sort of lines) & he was shouting at the police officers that they needed to get his pronouns right or they were committing human rights violations    

Seriously, these people are unbelievable.


----------



## Boxer123

Man arrested on suspicion of kidnap as search continues for missing student nurse


Five questioned over disappearance of 24-year-old last seen crossing road with man in Croydon a month ago




www.independent.co.uk





Another young woman


----------



## Lurcherlad

🙄


----------



## Cleo38

Lurcherlad said:


> View attachment 576152
> 
> 
> 🙄


WTF??!!


----------



## Lurcherlad

Cleo38 said:


> WTF??!!


I’m sure there was a woman somewhere capable of doing that job!


----------



## Cleo38

Lurcherlad said:


> I’m sure there was a woman somewhere capable of doing that job!


I was just reading about thiis. The man appointed said "'I think being a man will help me to break down barriers, reduce stigma and encourage more open discussions. Although affecting women directly, periods are an issue for everyone."

So basically mansplaining to us women about our periods then?! Can't imagine this going down well at all


----------



## Deguslave

Cleo38 said:


> I was just reading about thiis. The man appointed said "'I think being a man will help me to break down barriers, reduce stigma and encourage more open discussions. Although affecting women directly, periods are an issue for everyone."
> 
> So basically mansplaining to us women about our periods then?! Can't imagine this going down well at all


I think he's going to get a more open discussion than he bargained for if he tries to explain periods to a group of women with PMT, lol.


----------



## 1507601

It's just insulting...


----------



## 1507601

> "It’s time to normalise these topics and get real around the subject. I believe I can make progress by proving this isn’t just a female topic, encouraging conversations across all genders and educating and engaging new audiences.”


He's supposed to be spreading awareness of free period products. 
What a load of b*****ks. What do men have to talk about here? Other than bitching about how difficult we get at that time of the month, that is.


----------



## Lurcherlad

I agree that men need to be more in tune with women’s issues (and vice versa) but feel they have just got this one so wrong.


----------



## Sairy

Talking about men being in touch with womens' issues makes me think about how my wife was treated when she went to see a male doctor as a teenager because of her painful periods. The pain was so bad that she passed out on many occasions, even with OTC pain relief. The doctor dismissed her and said that she "just can't handle pain."

She went on to suffer the pain for a while before eventually going on the pill to help things. In her early 20s she went and saw a female doctor who took her concerns seriously. After various examinations and tests she had a laparoscopy where they discovered that she had pelvic inflammatory disease which would have been caused by an infection years earlier. The condition caused her to have lots of scarred tissue on her uterus which caused it to stick to her pelvis. No wonder her periods were painful! One of her fallopian tubes was also twisted and stuck to her colon. 

They did what they could to cut away the scarred tissue, but informed her that it would likely stick again and the only solution would be a hysterectomy. She desperately wanted to carry a child so tried for several years to no avail, which is why I ended up carrying both of our children. She hasn't yet had the hysterectomy because she needed to be up and about for me when i was pregnant, but she's going to put herself on the waiting list now as she's had to stay on the pill to stop her having periods due to the pain.

It's such a shame that all of this might have been prevented if the male doctor she saw in her teens had taken her seriously and investigated why her periods were so painful rather than assuming he knew more than her about her own body.


----------



## Deguslave

Why is this new guidance? Why wasn't this always the policy? 









Police officers violent to women will be sacked under new guidance


College of Policing publishes new guidance to "bring consistency" to dealing with police misconduct.



www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Cleo38

Sairy said:


> Talking about men being in touch with womens' issues makes me think about how my wife was treated when she went to see a male doctor as a teenager because of her painful periods. The pain was so bad that she passed out on many occasions, even with OTC pain relief. The doctor dismissed her and said that she "just can't handle pain."
> 
> She went on to suffer the pain for a while before eventually going on the pill to help things. In her early 20s she went and saw a female doctor who took her concerns seriously. After various examinations and tests she had a laparoscopy where they discovered that she had pelvic inflammatory disease which would have been caused by an infection years earlier. The condition caused her to have lots of scarred tissue on her uterus which caused it to stick to her pelvis. No wonder her periods were painful! One of her fallopian tubes was also twisted and stuck to her colon.
> 
> They did what they could to cut away the scarred tissue, but informed her that it would likely stick again and the only solution would be a hysterectomy. She desperately wanted to carry a child so tried for several years to no avail, which is why I ended up carrying both of our children. She hasn't yet had the hysterectomy because she needed to be up and about for me when i was pregnant, but she's going to put herself on the waiting list now as she's had to stay on the pill to stop her having periods due to the pain.
> 
> It's such a shame that all of this might have been prevented if the male doctor she saw in her teens had taken her seriously and investigated why her periods were so painful rather than assuming he knew more than her about her own body.


 That is terrible but unfortunately not an uncommon story. I suffered with period pain terribly during my teens. I used to vomit, had terrible cramps, diarrhea, felt faint, dizzy & had to take time off school every month as it was so bad but no doctor ever bothered to find out why I suffered so badly. I was also told that I had a 'low pain threshold' or that I was trying to get off school 

In the end my problems were resolved when I went on the contraceptive pill but it makes me so angry to think of many girls suffered ( probably still do) due to doctors being so dismissive


----------



## Cleo38

Deguslave said:


> Why is this new guidance? Why wasn't this always the policy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Police officers violent to women will be sacked under new guidance
> 
> 
> College of Policing publishes new guidance to "bring consistency" to dealing with police misconduct.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.co.uk


You would think this would be the norm but ...... I remember reading this article regarding how many male police officers had accusations of domestic violence yet their superiors not doing anything about them

Police perpetrated domestic abuse: Report on the Centre for Women’s Justice super complaint


----------



## Dimwit

Lucy2020 said:


> He's supposed to be spreading awareness of free period products.
> What a load of b*****ks. What do men have to talk about here? Other than bitching about how difficult we get at that time of the month, that is.


Has anybody considered how excruciatingly embarrassing it can be, as a young girl, to talk about periods - why has nobody considered that this embarrassment will be multiplied exponentially by talking to a man about it? I wonder why, in the rush to be inclusive, the basic needs of the demographic he is hired to work with have been ignored.

I can certainly see a role for a man in spreading awareness of issues surrounding periods - many men are woefully ignorant and, like it or not, are more likely to listen to another man, But this is not the roe being discussed here and I find it very sad that the best person to advise women on free sanitary products should be a man...


----------



## O2.0

Dimwit said:


> I wonder why, in the rush to be inclusive, the basic needs of the demographic he is hired to work with have been ignored.


This seems to be the way though doesn't it? At least when it comes to women's issues. No one is co-opting men's issues, but women's issues, sure, put a man in charge of menstruation awareness, have a man be a spokesperson for lesbians. No problem.  

I seriously thought this must have been a satire piece that someone mistook for being real, but no, this is for real! A man, a former tobacco salesman turned fitness trainer is the best option they can come up with for period dignity officer? It reads just like satire. 

Who thought this would be okay?


----------



## Lurcherlad

😐


----------



## Cleo38

Dimwit said:


> I wonder why, in the rush to be inclusive, the basic needs of the demographic he is hired to work with have been ignored.


Funny isn't it how men are promoted in to women's spaces in the guise of being 'inclusive' yet women are basically being shoved out of these spaces under the same BS notion.

The decision recently to portray Joan of Arc as non binary in the new play at The Globe theatre is just another example IMO. Will we see other infamous, courageous historical male figures portrayed as such? I very much doubt it. Women's history has been ignored for so long & yet the the 'liberal left' seem intent in erasing those few. Why can't we celebrate the fact of how courageous & brave she was because she was a woman, why does 'gender non conforming' mean trans? I know we have discussed this so many times but why do gender stereotypes seem so relevant to these people? And why the need to erase those few female historial figue we have? And yet again all in the name of 'inclusivity' 

Why is the Globe making Joan of Arc non-binary? | The Spectator


----------



## Siskin

Dimwit said:


> Has anybody considered how excruciatingly embarrassing it can be, as a young girl, to talk about periods - why has nobody considered that this embarrassment will be multiplied exponentially by talking to a man about it? I wonder why, in the rush to be inclusive, the basic needs of the demographic he is hired to work with have been ignored.
> 
> I can certainly see a role for a man in spreading awareness of issues surrounding periods - many men are woefully ignorant and, like it or not, are more likely to listen to another man, But this is not the roe being discussed here and I find it very sad that the best person to advise women on free sanitary products should be a man...


That is what I’ve been thinking, my mother obviously found the whole thing so embarrassing that she couldn’t talk to me about periods and just gave me a booklet and a bag of ST’s. I too was embarrassed by it all (because mum was) and didn’t speak about it to even close friends until I was much older. The thought of talking to a man about periods would have been totally mortifying, even hearing him speak about periods would have embarrassed me.


----------



## Lurcherlad

And do we really need a tv advert showing a woman sitting on the loo, knickers round her ankles pouring liquid onto a pad to promote sanitary towels?

I’m not embarrassed by the subject at all … but really? Ew! 😕

Unnecessary 🙄


----------



## Cleo38

Lurcherlad said:


> And do we really need a tv advert showing a woman sitting on the loo, knickers round her ankles pouring liquid onto a pad to promote sanitary towels?
> 
> I’m not embarrassed by the subject at all … but really? Ew! 😕
> 
> Unnecessary 🙄


I know, I saw that. It just seems unnecessary IMO. But then as much as issues regarding women's health should be discussed & not hidden away I still don't want to see ads with Jenny Eclair discussing her dry fanny when I'm having a cup of tea in the afternoon


----------



## Dimwit

Cleo38 said:


> The decision recently to portray Joan of Arc as non binary in the new play at The Globe theatre is just another example IMO. Will we see other infamous, courageous historical male figures portrayed as such? I very much doubt it. Women's history has been ignored for so long & yet the the 'liberal left' seem intent in erasing those few. Why can't we celebrate the fact of how courageous & brave she was because she was a woman, why does 'gender non conforming' mean trans? I know we have discussed this so many times but why do gender stereotypes seem so relevant to these people? And why the need to erase those few female historial figue we have? And yet again all in the name of 'inclusivity'
> 
> Why is the Globe making Joan of Arc non-binary? | The Spectator


Exactly - I have seen lots of responses along the lines of 'men played female roles for years so why are we complaining now?' - Perhaps because men historically played those roles because women were banned from acting on the stage. But hey, why not get back to the good old days?

The thing is, we don't know how Joan of Arc identified (although she did refer to herself as the maiden) so why are people trying to push their agenda on her? I also read that the Globe theatre are now saying that Queen Elizabeth 1 may have been non-binary. I find this very worrying - people are effectively erasing all strong female role models and perpetuating harmful gender stereotypes - if a woman was a strong character or did not fit into the traditional female role then she has to be trans. No wonder rates of gender dysphoria are so high among young girls


----------



## Cleo38

Dimwit said:


> Exactly - I have seen lots of responses along the lines of 'men played female roles for years so why are we complaining now?' - Perhaps because men historically played those roles because women were banned from acting on the stage. But hey, why not get back to the good old days?
> 
> The thing is, we don't know how Joan of Arc identified (although she did refer to herself as the maiden) so why are people trying to push their agenda on her? I also read that the Globe theatre are now saying that Queen Elizabeth 1 may have been non-binary. I find this very worrying - people are effectively erasing all strong female role models and perpetuating harmful gender stereotypes - if a woman was a strong character or did not fit into the traditional female role then she has to be trans. No wonder rates of gender dysphoria are so high among young girls


 Wow, so Elizabeth is next? This is so f*cking depressing. Honestly I stupidly thought that women in history would be explored & celebrated more so now. Even though we have been left out of so much there is still so much that can be explored regarding our roles, etc & it would be fascinating to have more focus on this area rather than the traditional male view point but of course not ..... 😢


----------



## Siskin

It is depressing, women will be banned everywhere soon


----------



## O2.0

I talked to two girls about their periods today, what things to try to make running in sweaty clothes more comfortable when you're on your period, what normal things to expect as a woman athlete... 
I'll just say it. This is not the domain of men. I'm going to need them to go sit down. I don't care how woke and inclusive that man is, they don't know.


----------



## Magyarmum

What kind of logic is this???????



https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/08/17/florida-teen-abortion-denied-mature/


----------



## DogLover1981

I think periods were more taboo years ago and much less talked about in the past. I didn't know that periods even existed until I was slightly older. That could have lead to some awkward conversations with a girlfriend when I was younger, if she mentioned it. Now, I'd have to be living under a rock to not know what periods are, especially in the era of the internet.


----------



## mrs phas

Boycott Marks & Spencer trends after supermarket admits it lets customers use either gendered changing room


One customer accused the supermarket chain of putting 'the desires of men over the safety needs of women'




www.gbnews.uk


----------



## tristy

Lurcherlad said:


> And do we really need a tv advert showing a woman sitting on the loo, knickers round her ankles pouring liquid onto a pad to promote sanitary towels?
> 
> I’m not embarrassed by the subject at all … but really? Ew! 😕
> 
> Unnecessary 🙄


I actually complained about that to the ASA and also the Kleenex advert showing a snotty nose, I did have a reply and they said it was okay, but I don't see them on TV now


----------



## kimthecat

Just seen a thread on Twitter saying some Lesbians were asked to leave by the police at the Cardiff Pride March.
Something to do with saying Lesbians don't have penises . 😮



https://twitter.com/search?q=Lesbians&src=trend_click&vertical=trends


----------



## Jaf

Awful, just awful. Reading about "cotton ceiling", which is trans women with penises being upset with lesbians not wanting to have sex with them. Somehow turning it into transphobia.


----------



## JoanneF

Jaf said:


> Awful, just awful. Reading about "cotton ceiling", which is trans women with penises being upset with lesbians not wanting to have sex with them. Somehow turning it into transphobia.


Am I missing something? Nobody should be upset with anyone not wanting to have sex with them.


----------



## Jesthar

JoanneF said:


> Am I missing something? Nobody should be upset with anyone not wanting to have sex with them.


100% correct. But there are some who believe that their chosen gender identity is sacrosanct and supercedes everything else, and therefore anyone who doesn't want to have sex with them because they are not that persons preferred _biology _is phobic and guilty of a hate crime...


----------



## Siskin

Jesthar said:


> 100% correct. But there are some who believe that their chosen gender identity is sacrosanct and supercedes everything else, and therefore anyone who doesn't want to have sex with them because they are not that persons preferred _biology _is phobic and guilty of a hate crime...


So saying I don’t fancy you doesn’t cut it anymore?
Whole thing is getting out of control now.


----------



## tristy

we went to M&S yesterday and the toilets had pictures of both men and women so anyone can use them now. They were 3 single toilets with washbasins.


----------



## Cleo38

Siskin said:


> So saying I don’t fancy you doesn’t cut it anymore?
> Whole thing is getting out of control now.


Yep, lesbians especially seem to be targeted as 'transphobic' because they don't want to have sex with biological men who identify as women. It's so f*cked up 

So if biological sex is no longer deemed relevant by these people that means homosexuality also doesn't exist 

Gay people have had to fight for rights as did women yet these now appear to be trampled on in the name of 'inclusivity'


----------



## Deguslave

Siskin said:


> So saying I don’t fancy you doesn’t cut it anymore?
> Whole thing is getting out of control now.


I'm asexual so using this logic i must be one of the most bigoted people on the planet.


----------



## Pawscrossed

Contains a sexual reference 









Sam Morril on TikTok


#trans #comedy #foryou




www.tiktok.com


----------



## picaresque

Pawscrossed said:


> Contains a sexual reference
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sam Morril on TikTok
> 
> 
> #trans #comedy #foryou
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tiktok.com


I was expecting clapter comedy but at least this bit was kind of funny


----------



## O2.0

Pawscrossed said:


> Contains a sexual reference
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sam Morril on TikTok
> 
> 
> #trans #comedy #foryou
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tiktok.com


That was funny  
And unfortunately also true... Too many people who never gave a fluck about women's sports are now suddenly all for Title IX. And unfortunately again, it makes a mockery out of those who truly do care about women's sports. 

Like me. I just got home from a day at a massive XC meet - thousands of 18 and under runners from all over. The top boys are running 15 minute 5K's, the top girls are running 18 minute 5K's there's simply no comparison. My top girl runner who came in 10th overall - which is phenomenal for a 15 year old, would have come in 234th in the boy's race. 
That's the reality.
And that's why people like me want to protect women's sports.


----------



## Siskin

I was reading a piece today about a trans women playing snooker in the women’s game and there were a lot of complaints from the women saying the trans women had an advantage.
Would they have? I’m not sure. Is there a big difference in the men and women playing snooker? There’s no speed or strength involved. Does anyone know the answer to this one?


----------



## Jesthar

Siskin said:


> I was reading a piece today about a trans women playing snooker in the women’s game and there were a lot of complaints from the women saying the trans women had an advantage.
> Would they have? I’m not sure. Is there a big difference in the men and women playing snooker? There’s no speed or strength involved. Does anyone know the answer to this one?


It's rather more more borderline, true, but snooker does have a power element to it for some shots. And there's also the question of endurance - there aren't many top flight female darts players, either, and I've heard matching the stamina of the men for the longer matches and tournaments is one of the challenges they can face.


----------



## rona

Siskin said:


> I was reading a piece today about a trans women playing snooker in the women’s game and there were a lot of complaints from the women saying the trans women had an advantage.
> Would they have? I’m not sure. Is there a big difference in the men and women playing snooker? There’s no speed or strength involved. Does anyone know the answer to this one?


Could it be about reach?
Generally they would be taller


----------



## Siskin

rona said:


> Could it be about reach?
> Generally they would be taller


No idea
Its interesting that various horse sports such as racing and equestrian men and women compete equally. it Could be said that men have better stamina, strength is less of an issue as controlling a horse well is not down to how strong you are.


----------



## Jesthar

Siskin said:


> No idea
> Its interesting that various horse sports such as racing and equestrian men and women compete equally. it Could be said that men have better stamina, strength is less of an issue as controlling a horse well is not down to how strong you are.


Oh, it can be very much down to how strong you are sometimes! Holding a horse in when it really wants to go is a very tiring fight even with good technique, and possibly one reason why there aren't as many top female riders in racing as there are in eventing, show jumping or dressage.


----------



## mrs phas

Siskin said:


> Is there a big difference in the men and women playing snooker? There’s no speed or strength involved.


I would imagine would have a few disadvantages tbh
For example
Most women have a couple of chesticles that stop them getting as close to table/balls as men
Same chesticles impede reach 
Most women are shorter, ergo their arm span is too, therefore they may need different cues and rests
Things like spin,speed, snookers and angles can be practiced ad infinitum, IF a level playing field to start with
But
I doubt you'd find women playing alongside men, mainly due to the above


----------



## Siskin

mrs phas said:


> I would imagine would have a few disadvantages tbh
> For example
> Most women have a couple of chesticles that stop them getting as close to table/balls as men
> Same chesticles impede reach
> Most women are shorter, ergo their arm span is too, therefore they may need different cues and rests
> Things like spin,speed, snookers and angles can be practiced ad infinitum, IF a level playing field to start with
> But
> I doubt you'd find women playing alongside men, mainly due to the above


Transwomen would have there own pair of chesticles if they’ve gone that far😜


----------



## Lurcherlad

Siskin said:


> Transwomen would have there own pair of chesticles if they’ve gone that far😜


True, but the extra reach may mean they are not in the way?


----------



## picaresque

O2.0 said:


> That was funny
> And unfortunately also true... Too many people who never gave a fluck about women's sports are now suddenly all for Title IX. And unfortunately again, it makes a mockery out of those who truly do care about women's sports.


TBH I’m not interested in sport either, women’s or men’s. However just because it doesn’t interest me doesn’t mean it’s not important and I’m well aware that women have had to fight hard for the freedom to participate and we shouldn’t just let that be thrown away. Same as with other areas of women’s rights.


----------



## picaresque

Meanwhile


----------



## Mrs Funkin

Not been in here for a while - but just wanted to post this. The new Health Sec appears to have some issues with termination of pregnancy. I’ll be back out defending a woman’s right to choose then…









Therese Coffey's views on abortion concerning, charity says


The new health secretary has opposed extending abortion rights but has said the law would not change.



www.bbc.co.uk





Yes, I know it’s only the BBC but heck.


----------



## Cleo38

How the f*ck can this be right?!! 

Judge sends serial sex abuser born a man not legally recognised as female to women's jail | Daily Mail Online


----------



## mrs phas

Cleo38 said:


> How the f*ck can this be right?!!
> 
> Judge sends serial sex abuser born a man not legally recognised as female to women's jail | Daily Mail Online


I wouldn't want to be him in a woman's prison
I hear sugar water is worse than napalm


----------



## picaresque

Cleo38 said:


> How the f*ck can this be right?!!
> 
> Judge sends serial sex abuser born a man not legally recognised as female to women's jail | Daily Mail Online


Another one for the ‘this never happens!’ crowd to ignore 👍

Got an ad on Instagram today that made me laugh. I’m sure the Wild West was a utopia of progressive identity politics lol


----------



## picaresque

Good article on the normalising of ‘sex work’ and porn 









The unbearable coolness of porn


Vancouver progressives are still pushing sexual exploitation as cool and edgy.




www.feministcurrent.com


----------



## mrs phas

The moment that showed the madness of gender ideology


Homosexuality was legalised in England and Wales 55 years ago. The Sexual Offences Act 1967 permitted homosexual acts between two consenting adults over the age of 21. Arguably that – and subsequent liberalisations – really only benefited men; sex acts between women were never criminalised. But...




www.spectator.co.uk


----------



## picaresque

Twenty two year old Mahsa Amini dies in Iran after being arrested by ‘morality police’ for not wearing a hijab 








Death of hijab arrest woman 'unfortunate' - Iran - BBC News


Mahsa Amini, 22, collapsed after being held by morality police for allegedly breaking hijab rules.




www.bbc.com


----------



## Boxer123

picaresque said:


> Twenty two year old Mahsa Amini dies in Iran after being arrested by ‘morality police’ for not wearing a hijab
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Death of hijab arrest woman 'unfortunate' - Iran - BBC News
> 
> 
> Mahsa Amini, 22, collapsed after being held by morality police for allegedly breaking hijab rules.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com


Its unbelievable this still happens in the world. Women are being very brave protesting the death as they also face arrest.


----------



## Cleo38

I honestly can't believe this is real. I had to Google this & check if its a joke but it doesn't appear to be.

How can this man's sexual fetish be ok & accepted in a school environment, I just can't think how this is OK on any level. 









Canadian high school says it is ILLEGAL to criticize trans teacher


The Halton District School Board said it would be against the Ontario Human Rights Code to criticize Oakville Trafalgar High School trans teacher Kayla Lemieux, who wore huge prosthetic breasts.




www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Boxer123

__





Iranian girl, 10, 'shot in head' at protest after woman killed over headscarf | World | News | Express.co.uk


The death of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini sparked a series of protests, including the burning of hijabs, with violent reactions from security forces.




www.express.co.uk





A 10 year old has reportedly been shot in the protests.


----------



## Lurcherlad

Cleo38 said:


> I honestly can't believe this is real. I had to Google this & check if its a joke but it doesn't appear to be.
> 
> How can this man's sexual fetish be ok & accepted in a school environment, I just can't think how this is OK on any level.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Canadian high school says it is ILLEGAL to criticize trans teacher
> 
> 
> The Halton District School Board said it would be against the Ontario Human Rights Code to criticize Oakville Trafalgar High School trans teacher Kayla Lemieux, who wore huge prosthetic breasts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I think this is a case of someone seeing just what they can get away with by using a particular label as their “identity” and it seems to be working because people are scared to be labelled phobic or discriminatory.

The fact they were born a male and never had breasts in the first place, and they are clearly fake (even “joke”) boobs, they are wholly inappropriate.

Would a teacher be allowed to wear a false nose and googly eye glasses in class?


----------



## Dimwit

Cleo38 said:


> I honestly can't believe this is real. I had to Google this & check if its a joke but it doesn't appear to be.
> 
> How can this man's sexual fetish be ok & accepted in a school environment, I just can't think how this is OK on any level.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Canadian high school says it is ILLEGAL to criticize trans teacher
> 
> 
> The Halton District School Board said it would be against the Ontario Human Rights Code to criticize Oakville Trafalgar High School trans teacher Kayla Lemieux, who wore huge prosthetic breasts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


On twitter people looked up the dress code for the school and it specifically prohibits 'clothing that exposes or makes visible genitals or nipples' 
You can bet that if this was a biological female she would have been told to dress appropriately or fired, but as it is a trans woman nobody is allowed to say anything.
I genuinely don't understand why the safeguarding a school full of children is of less importance than indulging one person's fetish


----------



## Cleo38

Dimwit said:


> I genuinely don't understand why the safeguarding a school full of children is of less importance than indulging one person's fetish


Exactly! I honestly thought this was some sort of satirical stunt to shoiw the absurdity of Canada's 'gender identity' laws (I still do in some ways as I can't believe this man thinks this is acceptable).

If this turns him on then there is a time & a place with other consenting adults but NOT in a school. I don;t have kids but if I did I wouldn't want this man anywhere near them & I can't understand how the school board will put his sexual fetish above the needs of the children at the school


----------



## OrientalSlave

Cleo38 said:


> I honestly can't believe this is real. I had to Google this & check if its a joke but it doesn't appear to be.
> 
> How can this man's sexual fetish be ok & accepted in a school environment, I just can't think how this is OK on any level.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Canadian high school says it is ILLEGAL to criticize trans teacher
> 
> 
> The Halton District School Board said it would be against the Ontario Human Rights Code to criticize Oakville Trafalgar High School trans teacher Kayla Lemieux, who wore huge prosthetic breasts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


How come everyone isn't creased up laughing at her?


----------



## Cleo38

OrientalSlave said:


> How come everyone isn't creased up laughing at her?


At him .... probably be threatened with suspension if they do


----------



## ScrapCat

OrientalSlave said:


> How come everyone isn't creased up laughing at her?


For real. Cis or trans, false tiddies that size look terrible on anyone, imo. And those nipples, my god. lol

If she doesn't want implants (which is fair, as some trans ladies don't), then it wouldn't kill her to wear a more natural looking pair of large breasts when at work, and save the fetish pair for home, clubbing, some wild cosplay, etc.


----------



## Cleo38

ScrapCat said:


> For real. Cis or trans, false tiddies that size look terrible on anyone, imo. And those nipples, my god. lol
> 
> If she doesn't want implants (which is fair, as some trans ladies don't), then it wouldn't kill her to wear a more natural looking pair of large breasts when at work, and save the fetish pair for home, clubbing, some wild cosplay, etc.


But then I honestly don't think this is about someone experiencing gender disphoria at all but a pervert who is exploiting the guidelines/laws for his own fetish. This cannot continue. Apparently there is going to be a meeting/protest at the school soon regarding this man & I hope the parents get him removed. Any man who thinks this sort of thing is appropriat for a school environment should not be allowed near kids IMO


----------



## ScrapCat

Cleo38 said:


> But then I honestly don't think this is about someone experiencing gender disphoria at all but a pervert who is exploiting the guidelines/laws for his own fetish. This cannot continue. Apparently there is going to be a meeting/protest at the school soon regarding this man & I hope the parents get him removed. Any man who thinks this sort of thing is appropriat for a school environment should not be allowed near kids IMO


Perverts don't come in one gender. lol And anyone, be they cis or trans, can have fetishes.

I don't know this teacher personally, so I can't assume whether her being trans is genuine or not. Regardless though, I do very much agree that that prosthetic isn't something to be worn around kids, as it's clearly a kink/fetish item, and not made to emulate a pair of natural breasts. So I, too, genuinely hope that something is done about it.


----------



## O2.0

picaresque said:


> Twenty two year old Mahsa Amini dies in Iran after being arrested by ‘morality police’ for not wearing a hijab
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Death of hijab arrest woman 'unfortunate' - Iran - BBC News
> 
> 
> Mahsa Amini, 22, collapsed after being held by morality police for allegedly breaking hijab rules.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com





Cleo38 said:


> I honestly can't believe this is real. I had to Google this & check if its a joke but it doesn't appear to be.
> 
> How can this man's sexual fetish be ok & accepted in a school environment, I just can't think how this is OK on any level.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Canadian high school says it is ILLEGAL to criticize trans teacher
> 
> 
> The Halton District School Board said it would be against the Ontario Human Rights Code to criticize Oakville Trafalgar High School trans teacher Kayla Lemieux, who wore huge prosthetic breasts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


These two extremes are doing my head it. 
In Iran women are fighting for their lives for the right to simply walk the street without being arrested by the "morality" police, and in Canada (could easily be US or UK) the right to wear a cartoonish prosthetic is being defended over the rights of students to not have to deal with that level of distraction in class. 

Yet if you think about it, they both have a frighteningly similar common denominator - men's obsession with women's bodies.


----------



## ScrapCat

I just want to clarify, in case it was missed, that I don't disagree with Cleo38. My previous reply was simply me stating that the teacher could genuinely be trans and also a pervert, as I once knew someone like that. 😔


----------



## Linda Weasel

I’m just too old to be always pc, though I try, but this….

No child of mine would be in the same room as a person who thinks that this theatrical display is acceptable.

I would question his/her mental health if they even think this is normal behaviour.

And with tits like that, stay away from that chop saw.

It brought to mind the scene where Mrs Doubtfire set fire to her boobies.


----------



## mrs phas

Cleo38 said:


> Any man who thinks this sort of thing is appropriat for a school environment should not be allowed near kids IMO





ScrapCat said:


> Perverts don't come in one gender. lol And anyone, be they cis or trans, can have fetishes.
> 
> I don't know this teacher personally, so I can't assume whether her being trans is genuine or not. Regardless though, I do very much agree that that prosthetic isn't something to be worn around kids, as it's clearly a kink/fetish item, and not made to emulate a pair of natural breasts. So I, too, genuinely hope that something is done about it.





Linda Weasel said:


> No child of mine would be in the same room as a person who thinks that this theatrical display is acceptable.



And yet, 
Right here in good old UK, 
We invite them in to do story hour and learn about inclusivity, for 3-11 year olds....









Drag Queen Story Hour UK - Home Page







www.dragqueenstoryhour.co.uk




Now I LOVE a good drag act (season 4 ru-paul drag race started last night)
Would I take a 3 year old to to see a drag act,
No way


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> These two extremes are doing my head it.
> In Iran women are fighting for their lives for the right to simply walk the street without being arrested by the "morality" police, and in Canada (could easily be US or UK) the right to wear a cartoonish prosthetic is being defended over the rights of students to not have to deal with that level of distraction in class.
> 
> Yet if you think about it, they both have a frighteningly similar common denominator - men's obsession with women's bodies.


I agree, when you see what rights women are fighting for in parts of the world it is terrifying & we forget just how little freedoms some have. But then I suppose alot of people (women included) also forget just how much our mothers, grandmothers, etc had to fight for our rights in the west.

And yes, the common theme is men & their obsession with our bodies & their power over us 



ScrapCat said:


> I just want to clarify, in case it was missed, that I don't disagree with Cleo38. My previous reply was simply me stating that the teacher could genuinely be trans and also a pervert, as I once knew someone like that. 😔


Yes, you are right it doesn't have to be one or the other. My friend OH is a police officer who recently arrested a man for parading up & down outside a girls school.wearing incredibly short skirst so his bulging womens underwear was showing. Again he played the trans, self ID , gender BS excuse but luckily we have laws (so far) in this country that recognises a sexual predator regardless of their excuses which of course they will always have for their deviant behaviour


----------



## ScrapCat

Cleo38 said:


> Yes, you are right it doesn't have to be one or the other. My friend OH is a police officer who recently arrested a man for wearing incrdibly short skirst (so his bulging womens underwear was showing) as he paraded up & down outside a girls school. Again he played the trans, self ID , gender BS excuse but luckily we have laws (so far) in this country that recognises a sexual predator regardless of their excuses which of course they will always have for their deviant behaviour


JFC, that's vile. Glad he got arrested for it! 😡
It's disgusting when men do falsely use the trans label to try and excuse predatory behaviour (which I'm not ruling out could be the case with that teacher). They're not only hurting the people whom they expose their indecent behaviour to, but they aren't helping those trans women who are actually decent folk just trying to live as normal a life as possible.


----------



## Cleo38

ScrapCat said:


> JFC, that's vile. Glad he got arrested for it! 😡
> It's disgusting when men do falsely use the trans label to try and excuse predatory behaviour (which I'm not ruling out could be the case with that teacher). They're not only hurting the people whom they expose their indecent behaviour to, but they aren't helping those trans women who are actually decent folk just trying to live as normal a life as possible.


I agree, it's harmful to so many people even if indirectly. I asked on the feminist FB group if any trans groups had spoken out against the teacher in the article as I was interested in how they would deal with this but apparently there hasn't been anything which I find odd & is a shame. But from what I have been told (so this may not be quite correct as I don't know their laws) in Canada you risk being arrested for speaking out against any gender ID issues so maybe people are too worried & that's how this sicko gets away with it.


----------



## Dimwit

Just seen a very sad video on twitter - a young women in Primark in Cambridge, which has unisex changing rooms, had two men separately walk in on her while she was changing (no doors on the changing rooms, just curtains). 
The really sad thing is that she started off by apologising because she is totally in favour of unisex changing rooms because it makes everyone feel included, and she feels stupid getting emotional about it. 
How are we at a point where we are having to warn women not to go into changing rooms alone?


----------



## Cleo38

Dimwit said:


> Just seen a very sad video on twitter - a young women in Primark in Cambridge, which has unisex changing rooms, had two men separately walk in on her while she was changing (no doors on the changing rooms, just curtains).
> The really sad thing is that she started off by apologising because she is totally in favour of unisex changing rooms because it makes everyone feel included, and she feels stupid getting emotional about it.
> How are we at a point where we are having to warn women not to go into changing rooms alone?


I just watched her video ... WTF!!!! It made me angry that she's being so bloody nice about it. Primark staff may have been nice to her but their bloody management obviously don't give a sh*t. How can this be allowed to happen several times?

So young women, their biggest customer base are being putting at risk because of some f*cked up ideology ... this is insane.

I stupidly thought that if unisex changing rooms were offered these would be sealed booths. But of course not, why spend the extra £££'s doing this as it's 'only' women that will be victimised so not worth it


----------



## Dimwit

Cleo38 said:


> I just watched her video ... WTF!!!! It made me angry that she's being so bloody nice about it. Primark staff may have been nice to her but their bloody management obviously don't give a sh*t. How can this be allowed to happen several times?


Yes, the worst but was when she said that Primark said that this has happened before. Yet they have obviously not done anything to safeguard their customers. 

I just don’t know how a massive chain can justify not spending money to secure their changing rooms…


----------



## Pawscrossed

Primark have a long history of not paying their supply chain a living wage, obfuscating animal welfare and taking all the profits. I‘m surprised that anyone thought they’d care at all about changing rooms.

Twitter is trending a # that‘s demanding people must boycott the chain over this incident. Why not boycott for the successive and ongoing other rights violations or is that out of sight out of mind?


----------



## O2.0

Pawscrossed said:


> Twitter is trending a # that‘s demanding people must boycott the chain over this incident.


Good! 
People can boycott for women's right to safety AND living wages, AND animal welfare. Caring about women's rights doesn't erase also caring about other rights


----------



## Pawscrossed

O2.0 said:


> Good!
> People can boycott for women's right to safety AND living wages, AND animal welfare. Caring about women's rights doesn't erase also caring about other rights


In 2008 Primark was revealed as abusing human and animal rights, and it takes this incident to create a trend.


----------



## picaresque

The ethical and environmental impact of Primark and other fast fashion brands has been a big talking point for years, it’s not ignored. This is a thread about women’s rights so we should be able to discuss the predatory behaviour of men and how it’s currently enabled by fashionable gender neutral policies without this whataboutery.


----------



## OrientalSlave

picaresque said:


> The ethical and environmental impact of Primark and other fast fashion brands has been a big talking point for years, it’s not ignored. This is a thread about women’s rights so we should be able to discuss the predatory behaviour of men and how it’s currently enabled by fashionable gender neutral policies without this whataboutery.


There is so much more than gender-neutral policies enabling men to discriminate against, and abuse, women.


----------



## picaresque

OrientalSlave said:


> There is so much more than gender-neutral policies enabling men to discriminate against, and abuse, women.


Thanks, this is brand new information to me… 
Sorry but again this is just an attempt to distract from the the topic at hand.


----------



## O2.0

I feel like there's some hierarchy of causes that I'm not privy to going on.


----------



## kimthecat

Good for Rosie !

MP Rosie Duffield has allegedly threatened to leave the Labour Party if comedian Eddie Izzard is selected to stand in the next general election on an all-women shortlist.
Speaking during a Labour Women’s Declaration (LWD) discussion group at the Labour Conference on Monday (26 September), Duffield allegedly told attendees that she did not believe Izzard was a woman.









Rosie Duffield threatens to quit Labour Party over Eddie Izzard standing as MP


MP Rosie Duffield has allegedly threatened to leave the Labour Party if Eddie Izzard is selected to stand as an MP on an all-women shortlist.




www.pinknews.co.uk


----------



## O2.0

What is the "all woman shortlist" ?
I mean, I kind of get it, but I don't think I understand it enough to comment.


----------



## kimthecat

O2.0 said:


> What is the "all woman shortlist" ?
> I mean, I kind of get it, but I don't think I understand it enough to comment.


Im not sure. I don't actually know either. Sorry .

ETA some people on Twitter are saying that Labour don't have an all womens shortlist  They used to.


----------



## Psygon

O2.0 said:


> What is the "all woman shortlist" ?
> I mean, I kind of get it, but I don't think I understand it enough to comment.


Here is a link that explains it. But it's essentially as simple as it sounds: it's an affirmative action that only allows women to stand in an election for a particular seat to increase the proportion of female MPs.



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-women_shortlist



I thought this practice had been discontinued in the labour party, and this wiki article says the same.


----------



## picaresque

kimthecat said:


> Good for Rosie !
> 
> MP Rosie Duffield has allegedly threatened to leave the Labour Party if comedian Eddie Izzard is selected to stand in the next general election on an all-women shortlist.
> Speaking during a Labour Women’s Declaration (LWD) discussion group at the Labour Conference on Monday (26 September), Duffield allegedly told attendees that she did not believe Izzard was a woman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosie Duffield threatens to quit Labour Party over Eddie Izzard standing as MP
> 
> 
> MP Rosie Duffield has allegedly threatened to leave the Labour Party if Eddie Izzard is selected to stand as an MP on an all-women shortlist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pinknews.co.uk


Good for her for making a stand. Nobody really believes Eddie Izzard is a woman. Nobody. 
It’s a shame he’s gone down this road, considering his old line (paraphrasing) - ‘I’m not wearing women’s clothes. These are my clothes, I bought them’.There was a brief but wonderful time where people could just wear things, like men could put on nail polish or high heels and it didn’t mean they had ‘boy genetics and girl genetics’ (more recent Eddie, the make up and high heels denoting his female biology of course because that’s all that being a woman is, stereotypes. Ah, progress).


----------



## kimthecat

Its frightening the hate coming from men towards the women supporting Rosie
Im wondering when and where she said it though , indeed if she did .

I cant find any mention of it in the usual press. I asked on Twitter and was shown this . I dont think this is any proof .


----------



## picaresque

#notourcrimes #thisneverhappens


----------



## Cleo38

picaresque said:


> #notourcrimes #thisneverhappens
> View attachment 577764


Did you see that Sussex police initially tried to warn people from 'misgendering' this pervert by reminding them that this was a 'woman' & his promounds deserved respecting regardless of his crime. Bloody unbelievable!!! Thankfullly now they have backed down. The comments in their FB page shows exactly what people think of this vile man









Sussex Police issue apology after Home Secretary blasted them


Sussex Police released a humiliating apology for defending the gender of a legally male paedophile online, after the Home Secretary said the force should be focusing on 'catching criminals'.




www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Lurcherlad

And where has he been imprisoned?

I presume wherever he is he will be in solitary confinement…

In a male prison, for his own safety.

In a female prison, for theirs.


----------



## OrientalSlave

picaresque said:


> Thanks, this is brand new information to me…
> Sorry but again this is just an attempt to distract from the the topic at hand.


No it's not. It's an attempt to get wider thinking, beyond a few specific issues. Or is this thread about just one topic only, men being allowed to masquerade as women? If so maybe the title should be changed.


----------



## Cleo38

Lurcherlad said:


> And where has he been imprisoned?
> 
> I presume wherever he is he will be in solitary confinement…
> 
> In a male prison, for his own safety.
> 
> In a female prison, for theirs.


In a female prison of course because he's now a "woman"  

I hope they make his life hell


----------



## Lurcherlad

On BBC site … common sense has prevailed …










Though curtains are inadequate, full stop.


----------



## Cleo38

Yes, I read that @Lurcherlad. That is good news but let's hope they do so quickly & in all their stores but agree that curtains aren't sufficient. Young women should not have to worry about their privacy when trying on clothes. I honestly don't know why this was considered a good idea in the first place


----------



## Dimwit

Utterly gobsmacked to read this on the BBC - what on earth were the CPS thinking and why will people still look for any reason to blame the victim  








'Claims I had sexsomnia destroyed my rape case'


Jade's case failed to reach court because it was suggested she may have a rare sleep disorder.



www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Cleo38

FFS, that is disgusting @Dimwit. Funny how this 'condition' is twisted to excuse rapists but to blame victims


----------



## Pawscrossed

mrs phas said:


> And yet,
> Right here in good old UK,
> We invite them in to do story hour and learn about inclusivity, for 3-11 year olds....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Drag Queen Story Hour UK - Home Page
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dragqueenstoryhour.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now I LOVE a good drag act (season 4 ru-paul drag race started last night)
> Would I take a 3 year old to to see a drag act,
> No way


It‘s story telling. Not a drag act. Go yourself first and find out. Our local bookshop has them and it’s amazing, beats Jackanory. Kids are so open minded and the story tellers dress up as characters as they have imagination. Truly, don’t judge or exclude on what you think you know until you’ve seen it,.


----------



## Cleo38

Pawscrossed said:


> It‘s story telling. Not a drag act. Go yourself first and find out. Our local bookshop has them and it’s amazing, beats Jackanory. Kids are so open minded and the story tellers dress up as characters as they have imagination. Truly, don’t judge or exclude on what you think you know until you’ve seen it,.


Drag is entertainment for adults based on sexual innuendo. Why is it seen as 'inclusive' to have these entertainers in a children's space? So weird & wrong.


----------



## O2.0

Pawscrossed said:


> It‘s story telling. Not a drag act.


Then why call it a drag act if it's not a drag act? 
My children loved to play dress up when they were young. One of their friends, a boy, loved to wear my daughter's princess dresses, it wasn't drag, it was dress-up. My daughter would dress up as Captain Jack Sparrow. It wasn't cross-dressing, it was dress-up. 
Drag is called drag, not dress-up.


----------



## Cleo38

I honestly don't get it at all .... & is there an equivalent where women read stories or is it just for men? 
It's probably great for children to meet all sorts of people but why from an adult industry? IMO its just not appropriate at all.


----------



## picaresque

There’s no way that an actual woman dressed in the sort of clothing and make up drag acts wear would be considered for this sort of thing and that just confirms for me that it’s some weird social experiment. 
Drag can be controversial to some people anyway, elements of ‘woman face’ and stuff but regardless it is adult entertainment. 
Why not just have a range of diverse human beings who do different interesting jobs read to the kids? Show them that gender, race, sexuality, ability etc shouldn’t hold a person back. Why drag queens?


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> is there an equivalent where women read stories or is it just for men?


Ha ha  
This is the question I will continue to ask. Flip it. Where is the woman's equivalent? 



picaresque said:


> Drag can be controversial to some people anyway, elements of ‘woman face’


Yup, that's another very pertinent and apparently not okay to ask question. Appropriating womanhood is fine. Appropriating another culture is not... What's the difference? 









A new 'Great British Bake Off' episode stereotypes Mexican culture, viewers say


While The Great British Bake Off is beloved by many, the show's latest "Mexican Week" episode has left a sour taste in many viewer's mouths.




www.npr.org


----------



## mrs phas

Pawscrossed said:


> It‘s story telling. Not a drag act. Go yourself first and find out. Our local bookshop has them and it’s amazing, beats Jackanory. Kids are so open minded and the story tellers dress up as characters as they have imagination. Truly, don’t judge or exclude on what you think you know until you’ve seen it,.


Somewhat pot kettle there 🤷🤦
You're judging me, from a comment made a couple of weeks ago, as you believe I have no idea what I'm talking about. 
I'll make no comment, re judging, what anyone knows or doesnt
Be nice if you did the same🤐


----------



## Psygon

When I read about this my first thought was what's the problem? 

Ultimately I view it as someone performing, and children seem to like the performance. It's only adults that are attaching something more to it (or at least that's my assumption, having not actually watched a drag queen story time). And is it really any worse than a pantomime dame, or a clown reading stories?

So from that side I'm like what's the problem? 

But then my mind goes to the fact that, as others have said, why is it ok to appropriate being a woman? I do find that a bit strange, I think where drag originally came from it's attached to the tradition of men playing female roles at the theater, ballet, opera etc. Which was repressive. And for me the whole exaggeration of feminity feels, hmm, problematic. I should say this isn't just about drag queen story hour, more the whole concept of drag itself. 

But then, like a pantomime dame, it probably would be no where near as fun for children if that exaggeration wasn't there.

So I don't know...


----------



## Siskin

I didn’t really like pantomime dames as a child, I thought it really strange that a man dressed up as a women and didn‘t look very nice.


----------



## Cleo38

Siskin said:


> I didn’t really like pantomime dames as a child, I thought it really strange that a man dressed up as a women and didn‘t look very nice.


I hated pantomimes as a child. I think it was that aspect as well as how it was all so OTT & loud that I found really disturbing.


----------



## Psygon

Siskin said:


> I didn’t really like pantomime dames as a child, I thought it really strange that a man dressed up as a women and didn‘t look very nice.


For me They were also the worst part of the pantomime too. It was the look and comedy aspect, I don’t remember having any thoughts about the fact a female actor was often playing the lead male role in the pantomime. My little sister loved them tho… but she has always had strange taste 😂


----------



## O2.0

Looking at the website it seems to be about presenting LGBTQ people in a positive light, which is lovely, but.... A teeny tiny proportion of the LGBTQ community participate in drag. It's a very niche part of the community so if it's about being inclusive, it doesn't seem very inclusive.

Take the Mexican caricature on the Great British Bake-Off as an example. Would it be okay to have someone - not a Latino, dress up in a sombrero and sarape, maybe add a fake mustache, and have them read to kids in the name of cultural inclusivity? Or would it be insensitive to Mexican culture? 

Serious question. 
@Pawscrossed ?


----------



## Psygon

O2.0 said:


> Looking at the website it seems to be about presenting LGBTQ people in a positive light, which is lovely, but.... A teeny tiny proportion of the LGBTQ community participate in drag. It's a very niche part of the community so if it's about being inclusive, it doesn't seem very inclusive.
> 
> Take the Mexican caricature on the Great British Bake-Off as an example. Would it be okay to have someone - not a Latino, dress up in a sombrero and sarape, maybe add a fake mustache, and have them read to kids in the name of cultural inclusivity? Or would it be insensitive to Mexican culture?
> 
> Serious question.
> @Pawscrossed ?


I'm sure I recall something a few years back where a drag act was criticized for cultural appropriation because they were dressed as a geisha 😬 if I'm remembering correctly it kinda sends a very weird message. Fine to appropriate feminity, but not of different cultures...


----------



## O2.0

It's weird isn't it? 
From a purely emotional reaction, I do enjoy the theater of a good drag act. But I view it as that - theater, not an identity. 
In the same way I'll laugh with other latinos at some of the funnier cultural stereotypes. And it doesn't bother me when people wear sombreros and sarapes for Cinco the Mayo or whatever. 
I did see some of the clips from The Great British Bake Off and while it didn't offend me exactly, it was definitely an eyeroll reaction. 

I just wish the woke brigade were more intellectually consistent. If we're going to have a hissy fit over British people making tacos in sarapes, (which is an overreaction IMHO), then the same should apply to men in drag. 
And if men in drag is okay, then why does the same not apply to culture and race?


----------



## Happy Paws2

I've never got my head round Drag Queens they are just weird to me. but that's just me.

No offence to anyone.


----------



## Jobeth

This is why I love working with children as they are amazing. Their parents must be so proud of the comments they made at the end.


----------



## OrientalSlave

Happy Paws2 said:


> I've never got my head round Drag Queens they are just weird to me. but that's just me.
> 
> No offence to anyone.


It perplexes me that it's OK for men to dress as fake women, but not white as black.


----------



## Lurcherlad

picaresque said:


> There’s no way that an actual woman dressed in the sort of clothing and make up drag acts wear would be considered for this sort of thing and that just confirms for me that it’s some weird social experiment.
> Drag can be controversial to some people anyway, elements of ‘woman face’ and stuff but regardless it is adult entertainment.
> Why not just have a range of diverse human beings who do different interesting jobs read to the kids? Show them that gender, race, sexuality, ability etc shouldn’t hold a person back. Why drag queens?


There does seem to be a growing trend of young and adolescent boys dressing in full drag (and encouraged), which is odd to say the least, given it’s always been seen as an adult genre.

That is a far cry from a young kid playing “dress up” imo.

Pantomime dames, from my recollection, are comedic… the drag queens I’ve seen are often pretty grotesque and overtly sexual.


----------



## Happy Paws2

Lurcherlad said:


> Pantomime dames, from my recollection, are comedic… the drag queens I’ve seen are often pretty grotesque and overtly sexual.



That's how I see them, I just don't understand them.


----------



## OrientalSlave

Lurcherlad said:


> Pantomime dames, from my recollection, are comedic… the drag queens I’ve seen are often pretty grotesque and overtly sexual.


There can be a lot of innuendo which parents get.


----------



## Cleo38

I've seen a few drag acts; some funny, some not like most entertainment. I don't understand how this can be representative of the LGBT community as it's a very small part. But it is for adults. Some of the drag names are sexual references so how would this be explained to children? Or do they lie about their names?

There was a story a while ago about a young teenage boy who wanted to do drag act at a school talent show & was told he couldn't. There was a big hoo-ha about it & he was on the TV with his mum saying how homophobic it was, etc but it wasn't, it just wasn't appropriate for a young audience according to the school & I agree. There are loads of other things he could have chosen to do

And I also find it odd that 'black face' is not ok but 'woman face' is 'inclusive'. Much as I don't think drag acts should be reading to children I don't find them (that) offensive & certainly don't think they should be banned. But then I also don't think white people dressing as black people is bad either. I think we can learn about the origins of 'black face' etc but it seems like everything has to be policed so heavily as to whether is is acceptable or not.


----------



## StormyThai

Personally I don't see the issue with drag...I hate that it started out due to women not being allowed to act because of religious connections...but men dressing up in drag goes back centuries and it does not have to be anything sexual. 
Drag isn't about impersonating a women...you ask most queens and they will tell you that they don't dress like a women they dress like a drag queen...Drag kings are also a thing but we don't hear about them because it isn't as easy to stir up hate in the press...Drag king does story time doesn't have the same ring!

So long as the queen is dressed appropriately (just as I would expect any person to be in a school setting) and the books read are age appropriate then I see no issue...in fact I think many queens are the perfect people to show children that you can be whatever makes you happy.


----------



## O2.0

Jobeth said:


> This is why I love working with children as they are amazing. Their parents must be so proud of the comments they made at the end.


We don't give kids enough credit - or people in general for that matter. 
Most people don't care if a guy wants to wear make-up and glitter, kids certainly don't. So I don't understand the big push to teach children all about drag and people who are different, kids already are accepting.


----------



## O2.0

And of course this is still going on in Canada.... 










For those who don't know, this is how a high school shop teacher dresses to work with children. Because gender expression.


----------



## OrientalSlave

O2.0 said:


> And of course this is still going on in Canada....
> 
> For those who don't know, this is how a high school shop teacher dresses to work with children. Because gender expression.


How do they not collapse laughing?


----------



## Cleo38

StormyThai said:


> Personally I don't see the issue with drag...I hate that it started out due to women not being allowed to act because of religious connections...but men dressing up in drag goes back centuries and it does not have to be anything sexual.
> Drag isn't about impersonating a women...you ask most queens and they will tell you that they don't dress like a women they dress like a drag queen...Drag kings are also a thing but we don't hear about them because it isn't as easy to stir up hate in the press...Drag king does story time doesn't have the same ring!
> 
> So long as the queen is dressed appropriately (just as I would expect any person to be in a school setting) and the books read are age appropriate then I see no issue...in fact I think many queens are the perfect people to show children that you can be whatever makes you happy.


But drag queens are based on exaggerated female stereotypes. All the ones I have seen have female sexually suggestive names &
(& I saw quite alot years ago as my best friend was a gay man) which again aren't appropriate.

I think the when thing is weird, there are plenty of men & women who don't fit gender norms that would be far more fitting .... if that's what the aim of this is.

OMG, @O2I thought that pervert would have been sacked by now


----------



## StormyThai

Cleo38 said:


> All the ones I have seen have female sexually suggestive names


Not all queens have suggestive names:

Trixie Mattel
Manila Luxon
Courtney Act
Raja
Sophia Stardust 

There are many more, these are just a few that will be well known if people watch RuPaul's (also not a suggestive name)
The few queens that I have known over the years were able to perform at over 18 events and still stay age appropriate for family events.

If we were talking about taking kids to over 18 drag shows then it would be different IMHO.


----------



## O2.0

In my limited experience with drag, it's again, much like theater. There are shows that are family friendly, some that are not. For example, the drag performers impersonating people like Cher and Dolly Parton are fairly family friendly, though you do get the innuendo - which even Disney is known for  

I really don't have an issue with drag queens reading to kids. But I also think parents should be allowed to say that's not for them and their family without being labeled transphobic or not inclusive or whatever. 

And I definitely get annoyed at the lack of intellectual consistency with the arguments for and against these things. 
If drag gets to be it's own thing and not an impersonation of women, then the hosts of The Great British Bake-Off should be able to put on a sombrero and tell terrible jokes about Spanish sounding names without being attacked as insensitive either. They clearly were not trying to "be" Mexican, just putting on a show. 

And somewhere in there we have this teacher in Canada wearing sex fetish boobs to class and that's not only okay, but protected by law. 
I'm not sure how it all fits in together, but I think we've taken a wrong turn somewhere and I don't think making sure children understand that some men wear glitter and sparkles does anything earth shatteringly helpful.


----------



## Jobeth

It’s important because then maybe we wouldn’t have as much hate directed to others that are perceived as different.


----------



## OrientalSlave

O2.0 said:


> <snip>
> And somewhere in there we have this teacher in Canada wearing sex fetish boobs to class and that's not only okay, but protected by law.
> <snip>


That teacher should be required to wear them 24x7. And the children should be given permission to laugh!


----------



## O2.0

Jobeth said:


> It’s important because then maybe we wouldn’t have as much hate directed to others that are perceived as different.


Yeah, see I don't see that connection, sorry. 
Violence and threats of violence are terrible and I would absolutely LOVE it if it were as simple as having a drag queen read to kids and all will be mended, but it's not. You know it's not, so do I. 

Salman Rushdie was nearly killed back in August and JK Rowling was threatened for showing him support. No one cares. You can't even find a news headline about how Mr. Rushdie is doing now. His injuries were life-changing, and still, no one cares. The investigation in to the twitter user who threatened JK Rowling has been dropped. Twitter didn't even think the tweet violated their TOU... 

Teaching people to be kind, tolerant, and accepting is definitely a start. But we have to be just as accepting of the drag queen as we are of the person who doesn't like drag and doesn't want their kids to be read to by a drag queen.


----------



## O2.0

OrientalSlave said:


> That teacher should be required to wear them 24x7. And the children should be given permission to laugh!


At 15 I think I would have found that far more upsetting than funny. 
I don't think kids are laughing. I think they are upset, and rightfully so.


----------



## picaresque

O2.0 said:


> At 15 I think I would have found that far more upsetting than funny.
> I don't think kids are laughing. I think they are upset, and rightfully so.


Especially the girls. Having this horrible fetish driven mockery of womanhood parading in front of them at school, and they can’t do anything about it. It’s a kick in the teeth of normal trans people too, if that’s the only way to get people to care about or acknowledge this.


----------



## Cleo38

picaresque said:


> Especially the girls. Having this horrible fetish driven mockery of womanhood parading in front of them at school, and they can’t do anything about it. It’s a kick in the teeth of normal trans people too, if that’s the only way to get people to care about or acknowledge this.


I honestly was so shocked when I initially read about this, & still ama every time I see that monstrosity. No part of me can even begin to understand how this can be deemed as acceptable. Not in any workplace but especially with children.

I cannot imagine any woman regardless of their sexual orientation or how they want to present turning up with a massive c*ck or balls swinging around their legs ... would this be ok as well?

All this is very male orientated & speaks volumes to me regarding what it's really about ... men & their desires!

Even the drag acts, even if this is ok (which as stated previously I cannot see how), where are the incredibly butch women? Why are they not being represented if the idea is really about gender non-conforming? They are missing because it isn't about anything other than men ... again


----------



## Magyarmum

O2.0 said:


> And of course this is still going on in Canada....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For those who don't know, this is how a high school shop teacher dresses to work with children. Because gender expression.







A couple of weeks ago I watched this documentary "Petite Fille" about Sasha who although born a boy, from an early age identified as a girl. This is the story of the parents fight to get the school to accept Sasha as such.

Total hypocrisy when schools allow someone like this and yet forbid a young child the right to be the person they wish to be


----------



## StormyThai

I thought that this was an interesting one and more fitting for the thread (sorry but I don't see Queens taking our rights or effecting our rights... not true Queens)
To me this is just a couple of men throwing their toys out of the pram because the story is based on Ms Langleys' experience...
If this was a documentary then it may be different...
Legal action 'likely' against Richard III film - BBC News

It will be interesting to see how this plays out!


----------



## kimthecat

I dont mind drag queens or pantomime dames but that Canadian school teacher takes it too far and it looks obscene and shoildnt be allowed in school. Imagine if he or a woman wore a giant penis, Im sure that wouldnt be allowed.


----------



## Pawscrossed

mrs phas said:


> Somewhat pot kettle there 🤷🤦
> You're judging me, from a comment made a couple of weeks ago, as you believe I have no idea what I'm talking about.
> I'll make no comment, re judging, what anyone knows or doesnt
> Be nice if you did the same🤐


I beg your pardon? I was replying to your post here, I have no idea what other posts you’re referencing and merely suggesting it’s worth going to, as it’s possibly not what your post that I replied to, seemed to think. No offence was meant, merely gentle observation.


----------



## Pawscrossed

O2.0 said:


> We don't give kids enough credit - or people in general for that matter.
> Most people don't care if a guy wants to wear make-up and glitter, kids certainly don't. So I don't understand the big push to teach children all about drag and people who are different, kids already are accepting.


Agree. It’s the adults who get hung up on what they think they know.


----------



## Pawscrossed

O2.0 said:


> Looking at the website it seems to be about presenting LGBTQ people in a positive light, which is lovely, but.... A teeny tiny proportion of the LGBTQ community participate in drag. It's a very niche part of the community so if it's about being inclusive, it doesn't seem very inclusive.
> 
> Take the Mexican caricature on the Great British Bake-Off as an example. Would it be okay to have someone - not a Latino, dress up in a sombrero and sarape, maybe add a fake mustache, and have them read to kids in the name of cultural inclusivity? Or would it be insensitive to Mexican culture?
> 
> Serious question.
> @Pawscrossed ?


In reference to GBBO, I have long thought food is so closely connected to culture








How to prevent casual racism on food TV


And why Mexican food should have had a better show on GBBO




morethancurry.substack.com


----------



## Pawscrossed

O2.0 said:


> Then why call it a drag act if it's not a drag act?
> My children loved to play dress up when they were young. One of their friends, a boy, loved to wear my daughter's princess dresses, it wasn't drag, it was dress-up. My daughter would dress up as Captain Jack Sparrow. It wasn't cross-dressing, it was dress-up.
> Drag is called drag, not dress-up.


I imagine determining it as drag is necessary to appease the parents or guardians of the kids. Or to be respectful to the story teller who is a drag act? I’m guessing, I don‘t know but guess there has to be transparency.


----------



## Pawscrossed

OrientalSlave said:


> It perplexes me that it's OK for men to dress as fake women, but not white as black.


It’s character acting, drag acts are exaggerated characters as I see it, vaguely based on women but no woman I know leaves the house looking like a drag act. Most drag acts assume one identify. Blacking up, historically, prevented people who are black from being heard and allowed white people to trade identies to steal the income and rights of others, supressing all history and slavery, it’s mickery.



https://www.advocate.com/arts-entertainment/people/2015/02/04/op-ed-hey-mary-cheney-heres-why-drag-and-blackface-are-different


----------



## Psygon

Pawscrossed said:


> It’s character acting, drag acts are exaggerated characters as I see it, vaguely based on women but no woman I know leaves the house looking like a drag act. Most drag acts assume one identify. Blacking up, historically, prevented people who are black from being heard and allowed white people to trade identies to steal the income and rights of others, supressing all history and slavery, it’s mickery.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.advocate.com/arts-entertainment/people/2015/02/04/op-ed-hey-mary-cheney-heres-why-drag-and-blackface-are-different


I'm still not sure where I stand on this. I do see the point that blackface in particular is different to drag, based on the history of where it came from. But I still think that some drag can be harmful in the same way that other forms of cultural misappropriation are. 

Some of it feels like it's ok to use derogatory language towards women (b$tch, ho etc) , that it's ok to depict women as cliches and stereotypes, and while not all drag act names are overtly sexualized a lot are. I know a lot of it is meant to be about expression and performance... But I just feel that some aspects of it cross a line that turns it into more harmful territory. It feels less celebratory. 

One of the things Rapaul said about drag is the following;

"Because at its core it’s a social statement and a big f-you to male-dominated culture. So for men to do it, it’s really punk rock, because it’s a real rejection of masculinity.”

Is men performing as women really challenging a male dominated culture? I have to say I'm just not sure.


----------



## Pawscrossed

Psygon said:


> I'm still not sure where I stand on this. I do see the point that blackface in particular is different to drag, based on the history of where it came from. But I still think that some drag can be harmful in the same way that other forms of cultural misappropriation are.
> 
> Some of it feels like it's ok to use derogatory language towards women (b$tch, ho etc) , that it's ok to depict women as cliches and stereotypes, and while not all drag act names are overtly sexualized a lot are. I know a lot of it is meant to be about expression and performance... But I just feel that some aspects of it cross a line that turns it into more harmful territory. It feels less celebratory.
> 
> One of the things Rapaul said about drag is the following;
> 
> "Because at its core it’s a social statement and a big f-you to male-dominated culture. So for men to do it, it’s really punk rock, because it’s a real rejection of masculinity.”
> 
> Is men performing as women really challenging a male dominated culture? I have to say I'm just not sure.


I don’t know that I am either other than my partner is a man of colour and I find blacking up horrendously offensive in a way I don’t see drag acts being so as I never see it being anything more than severely amplified of themselves. Some of the shows in the 70s degraded any gender who wasn’t white with monkey impressions and I just feel that’s a whole low level as it affects social attitudes.

My ex girlfriend is Asian and I mentioned this compassion to her this evening as we’ve been to see drag acts and the above is paraphrasing her reply but I’m not sure we’ve expressed it very well and maybe it’s a case of seeing an act to understand they’re not attempting to be real. And she also expressed sorrow at discussing this during this month but as a white woman is not my place to speak on her behalf, nor indeed for anyone who is a drag act. Even though I guess I was a bit! And I also understand the argument and that there is a correlation because I don’t have a clear explanation! I’m also unsure.

I guess we need more evidence from a drag act (queens and maybe kings?) instead of hypothetical replies which I’m aware I’m contributing too. One of those times when the reach of this space isn’t wide enough to accommodate the question! (I like to hear first person accounts not conjecture and bias.) I’m aware I’m bringing in my own bias to my responses.

But I’m genuinely surprised to find the negative to drag acts here, naively so maybe in my part. I’m simply curious and interested I guess and keep an open mind on matters like this.


----------



## O2.0

Pawscrossed said:


> In reference to GBBO, I have long thought food is so closely connected to culture
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How to prevent casual racism on food TV
> 
> 
> And why Mexican food should have had a better show on GBBO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> morethancurry.substack.com


Food is deeply connected to culture. It's a huge part of what connects people. If you were anywhere in the world outside the UK and saw someone eating beans and toast, even if you personally don't like it, you would have a pang of emotion and recognition. So yes, food and culture are connected. This is not new information in any way at all. 

That wasn't my question. Would we be okay with someone dressing up in a sombrero and a sarape in order to read to children? 

BTW, there is a beautiful history of sarapes, the weaving art itself and the meaning behind the patterns in the weave. Not dissimilar to scottish plaids. 

It doesn't bother me when non-Mexicans wear sarapes and I would venture to guess that most Scots don't really care that much if they see someone wearing a kilt. However I do wish people took the time to understand the meaning and history more.


----------



## OrientalSlave

The history of the kilt is somewhat faux. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visit_of_George_IV_to_Scotland


----------



## Cleo38

Oh FFS, are we really getting upset about food & racism. Why should the GBBO have someone Mexican in to judge?

They don't have a vegan in when it was vegan week. That it not what the programme is about, there are two judges & that is the format.
Maybe they should stay safe & ignore all cultures in case they get it wrong, but then that would be wrong as well.

If people can dress up as a stereotyped, exaggerate woman then they can dress up as an exaggerated Mexican stereotype.


----------



## Happy Paws2

The world has gone Crazy, you can't do this or you might be able to this as long as you don't upset someone. 
Do they have to think about every single thing they do just in case someone gets upset, come on get a life.


----------



## O2.0

I brought up culture as a juxtaposition to gender in order to highlight the lack of consistency in the gender expression argument. 
I don't agree that there is such a thing as 'cultural appropriation' at least not in a racist, biased way. I think many people are ignorant, but ignorance is easily fixed with information. All it takes is one taste of a good _mole_ sauce and you can remedy a lot of that ignorance  

The bigger point, that's really too big for a forum post but worth bringing up at least, is that culture really IS on a spectrum in a way that gender so clearly is not. Regardless of what the latest propaganda says, and anomalies aside, there are two types of humans, male ones and female ones with clear biological markers that denote each one. 

Culture on the other hand is much more fluid. You can be born into one culture, raised in another, marry into another, have parents of different cultures, experience living in different cultures... It's very possible for someone to have deep experience and knowledge of multiple cultures and it's equally possible for that same person to transition between those cultures. 
There is no one clear marker of culture either, it's the language you speak, the food you prepare for your loved ones, how you interact with them, the way you raise your children, how you celebrate and what you celebrate, the religion you practice, how you decorate your house, what you spend your money on, and on and on.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> I brought up culture as a juxtaposition to gender in order to highlight the lack of consistency in the gender expression argument.
> I don't agree that there is such a thing as 'cultural appropriation' at least not in a racist, biased way. I think many people are ignorant, but ignorance is easily fixed with information. All it takes is one taste of a good _mole_ sauce and you can remedy a lot of that ignorance
> 
> The bigger point, that's really too big for a forum post but worth bringing up at least, is that culture really IS on a spectrum in a way that gender so clearly is not. Regardless of what the latest propaganda says, and anomalies aside, there are two types of humans, male ones and female ones with clear biological markers that denote each one.
> 
> Culture on the other hand is much more fluid. You can be born into one culture, raised in another, marry into another, have parents of different cultures, experience living in different cultures... It's very possible for someone to have deep experience and knowledge of multiple cultures and it's equally possible for that same person to transition between those cultures.
> There is no one clear marker of culture either, it's the language you speak, the food you prepare for your loved ones, how you interact with them, the way you raise your children, how you celebrate and what you celebrate, the religion you practice, how you decorate your house, what you spend your money on, and on and on.


Yep, I get that. I think there are so many inconsistencies with people being against black face but fine with woman face & try desperately to justify it.

But 'food appropriation' is now a new thing & it's crazy. Jamie Oliver was singled out for this a while (if I remember) as he had a recipe for a jerk seasoning (or something) & people got upset over that. It is crazy! If I want to eat Ethiopian food whilst wearing a sombrero & sari with corn rows in my hair then I bloody will ......  

Surely it's a great that that people are cooking all sorts of dishes & expanding our knowledge of food & therefore culture. If we are going to get upset about one thing then maybe it should be that it's usually women who cook but men who get the fame for it .... if we return to the theme of the thread.


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> If we are going to get upset about one thing then maybe it should be that it's usually women who cook but men who get the fame for it .... if we return to the theme of the thread.


Exactly...


----------



## Siskin

O2.0 said:


> I brought up culture as a juxtaposition to gender in order to highlight the lack of consistency in the gender expression argument.
> I don't agree that there is such a thing as 'cultural appropriation' at least not in a racist, biased way. I think many people are ignorant, but ignorance is easily fixed with information. All it takes is one taste of a good _mole_ sauce and you can remedy a lot of that ignorance
> 
> The bigger point, that's really too big for a forum post but worth bringing up at least, is that culture really IS on a spectrum in a way that gender so clearly is not. Regardless of what the latest propaganda says, and anomalies aside, there are two types of humans, male ones and female ones with clear biological markers that denote each one.
> 
> Culture on the other hand is much more fluid. You can be born into one culture, raised in another, marry into another, have parents of different cultures, experience living in different cultures... It's very possible for someone to have deep experience and knowledge of multiple cultures and it's equally possible for that same person to transition between those cultures.
> There is no one clear marker of culture either, it's the language you speak, the food you prepare for your loved ones, how you interact with them, the way you raise your children, how you celebrate and what you celebrate, the religion you practice, how you decorate your house, what you spend your money on, and on and on.


I was born in England and think of myself as English if asked. However according to Ancestry my DNA is 89% Scottish. My mother was a Scot and my fathers family are only two generation english. I suspect I was speaking with a Scottish accent prior to school age and have no problems understanding a fairly strong Scottish accent. If I lived there would probably pick up the accent although it would likely have a West Country ‘burr‘ as well. 😁. Not going to make me like Haggis though

Cultural approbation is just getting out of hand and it seems to me (whether ‘tis so) that it’s largely driven by others who are assuming those cultures will be upset. That to me is wrong and others not in any way part of that culture should presume to assume
So where does it end? Will we no longer be able to make a curry in our own kitchen unless we invite someone from India to come and make it? What exactly is truly British food, there’s lots of arguments about that in some quarters, even fish n’ chips isn’t safe.


----------



## lullabydream

Probably not relevant to topic as such, but can I point out there are some female drag artists too, as well as transwomen.


----------



## StormyThai

O2.0 said:


> there are two types of humans, male ones and female ones with clear biological markers that denote each one.


And intersex (not non binary who don't identify as either sex, although some intersex people will identify as non binary) which does have variations and accounts for 1.7% of the population which is comparable with the number of people that have red hair.
Some intersex traits may be visible at birth, but many won't show until the child hits puberty.

In Germany they now have three genders and have also banned gender reassignment operations in children and adolescents (unless there is a medical issue)


----------



## Lurcherlad

Cleo38 said:


> Yep, I get that. I think there are so many inconsistencies with people being against black face but fine with woman face & try desperately to justify it.
> 
> But 'food appropriation' is now a new thing & it's crazy. Jamie Oliver was singled out for this a while (if I remember) as he had a recipe for a jerk seasoning (or something) & people got upset over that. It is crazy! If I want to eat Ethiopian food whilst wearing a sombrero & sari with corn rows in my hair then I bloody will ......
> 
> Surely it's a great that that people are cooking all sorts of dishes & expanding our knowledge of food & therefore culture. If we are going to get upset about one thing then maybe it should be that it's usually women who cook but men who get the fame for it .... if we return to the theme of the thread.


Were the Mexican’s in the mariachi band on Extra Slice offended? It didn’t appear so.


----------



## Magyarmum

StormyThai said:


> And intersex (not non binary who don't identify as either sex, although some intersex people will identify as non binary) which does have variations and accounts for 1.7% of the population which is comparable with the number of people that have red hair.
> Some intersex traits may be visible at birth, but many won't show until the child hits puberty.
> 
> In Germany they now have three genders and have also banned gender reassignment operations in children and adolescents (unless there is a medical issue)


Not so in France unfortunately.



https://ghrd.org/intersex-genital-mutilation-france-continues-to-ignore-international-pressure/


----------



## StormyThai

Magyarmum said:


> Not so in France unfortunately.
> 
> 
> 
> https://ghrd.org/intersex-genital-mutilation-france-continues-to-ignore-international-pressure/


The only other place that the operation has been banned is Malta IIRC


----------



## O2.0

StormyThai said:


> And intersex (not non binary who don't identify as either sex, although some intersex people will identify as non binary) which does have variations and accounts for 1.7% of the population which is comparable with the number of people that have red hair.
> Some intersex traits may be visible at birth, but many won't show until the child hits puberty.
> 
> In Germany they now have three genders and have also banned gender reassignment operations in children and adolescents (unless there is a medical issue)


Yes, I said anomalies aside.

I would re-check those numbers, I think those are the numbers for _all_ chromosomal abnormalities which would include down's syndrome, fragile X syndrome and others that don't affect the person's biological sex characteristics.

But again, just because there are biological anomalies, doesn't mean that humans are not a species that has 2 sexes. 
Someone made the perfect analogy, just because some children are born without 2 legs or some people are amputees, doesn't mean that humans are not a bipedal species.

Interestingly if someone does not have legs, we make every effort to help them become bi-pedal and it's not seen as anything other than helpful.


Back to culture, I find the comparison with culture both helpful and quite fascinating as well. 
The same people who decry "cultural appropriation" have no issue with gender self-ID. I wonder if they see the lack of consistency? 

So a man can put on a dress and some make-up and claim to be a woman, lesbian even, and that's perfectly okay. 
But if @Cleo38 makes her jerk chicken sauce with cornrows in her hair that's not okay and offensive even. 

For what it's worth, I don't care what anyone, man or woman chooses to wear, and I'm totally fine with men wearing make-up and dresses and whatever they want. I'm fine with people from any culture wearing clothes from another culture and preparing and eating food from any culture. 

Where I draw the line is when you claim to be something you're not. 
Eating tacos does not make you Mexican any more than wearing a dress makes you a woman. 
And I highly object to having one's culture or womanhood (or manhood) reduced to such banal tropes - that is what is offensive, because it negates the entirety of the experience of being that person. 

We can respect feelings without them trumping reality. Just because you "feel" like a woman doesn't make it so, but if you want to dress as a woman and live as a woman, go for it, and I support that.


----------



## Jesthar

O2.0 said:


> And of course this is still going on in Canada....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For those who don't know, this is how a high school shop teacher dresses to work with children. Because gender expression.


Just catching up with this thread - what the HECK is THAT?!?  Pretty sure I could win at hoopla on those, how can they be acceptable in a classroom?


----------



## O2.0

Jesthar said:


> Just catching up with this thread - what the HECK is THAT?!?  Pretty sure I could win at hoopla on those, how can they be acceptable in a classroom?


It's what happens when you legislate feelings over reality. 

Some people think this is a teacher taking Canadian gender expression laws to the extreme to prove a point, but I'm not so sure. I mean, yes, the point is being proven - the laws protect predators over children. But I'm not convinced this person is not a predator.


----------



## DogLover1981

I get lost in a sea of words that I don't fully understand when I read this thread. I think people get obsessed with labels at times.


----------



## mrs phas

About time


BBC News - MPs back abortion clinic buffer zone law








MPs back abortion clinic buffer zone law


Protesters found breaching 150-metre buffer zones around clinics would face up to six months in jail.



www.bbc.co.uk





Whyever a woman goes to one of these clinics, it's not an easy or light decision
And 
It's no one else's business to interfer


----------



## kimthecat

Has "Laura" Miller been mentioned? i did a search but it didnt come up?
It was mentioned om Twitter . The link they gave had expired,

"Laura Miller, pictured here, has been jailed for sexually assaulting a woman who was "incapable of giving consent". The court only imposed a custodial sentence due to Miller's previous crimes, which are not publicly known due to Miller's identity change . This is in Scotland ."

There is little info about it . i found this link though



https://transcrimeuk.com/2022/02/17/laura-miller/


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> Has "Laura" Miller been mentioned? i did a search but it didnt come up?
> It was mentioned om Twitter . The link they gave had expired,
> 
> "Laura Miller, pictured here, has been jailed for sexually assaulting a woman who was "incapable of giving consent". The court only imposed a custodial sentence due to Miller's previous crimes, which are not publicly known due to Miller's identity change . This is in Scotland ."
> 
> There is little info about it . i found this link though
> 
> 
> 
> https://transcrimeuk.com/2022/02/17/laura-miller/
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 578873


Yes, I read about him. It's worrying that many media sites seem to try & stay away from these offenders & dint report these crimes. That site makes for worrying reading when you see how many predatory men are claiming to be 'women' or non binary.


----------



## kimthecat

Cleo38 said:


> Yes, I read about him. It's worrying that many media sites seem to try & stay away from these offenders & dint report these crimes. That site makes for worrying reading when you see how many predatory men are claiming to be 'women' or non binary.


 It's frightening. Goodness knows where will it end!


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> It's worrying that many media sites seem to try & stay away from these offenders & dint report these crimes.


I was listening to a podcast with Meg Smacker and her documentary Jihad Rehab which was screened by Sundance and by all accounts was on it's way to be a huge success and win prestigious awards - until it was "cancelled." The story is a really fascinating one, and Meg is a fascinating woman, podcast here:








Sam Harris | #300 - A Tale of Cancellation


Sam Harris speaks with Meg Smaker about the controversy around her documentary, "The Unredacted (Jihad Rehab)."




www.samharris.org





Anyway the point of that sidebar was that in the course of the conversation Meg said something about journalists and how if you're a jounalist telling the story of MeToo for example and you come across a story of where a woman lied about what happened to her, it's inconvenient to the story you're trying to tell but you have to include it if you are truly a good, investigative journalist. Otherwise, you're just an activist who writes. 

I agree with you. In the "story" of raising awareness of gender dysphoria and trans people and treating them with kindness and compassion and not discriminating against them, there is also the "story" of self-ID and how people are taking advantage of it in ways that are downright dangerous and damaging to the greater good. 

We need good journalists who will also tell that story - not with malice or used as a stick to beat trans people with, but with integrity and showing that this kind of mockery of self-ID is _more_ damaging to the trans community than helpful. 
Sadly, right now I'm not seeing a lot of real journalism going on. Just a bunch of activists who write.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> I was listening to a podcast with Meg Smacker and her documentary Jihad Rehab which was screened by Sundance and by all accounts was on it's way to be a huge success and win prestigious awards - until it was "cancelled." The story is a really fascinating one, and Meg is a fascinating woman, podcast here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sam Harris | #300 - A Tale of Cancellation
> 
> 
> Sam Harris speaks with Meg Smaker about the controversy around her documentary, "The Unredacted (Jihad Rehab)."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.samharris.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway the point of that sidebar was that in the course of the conversation Meg said something about journalists and how if you're a jounalist telling the story of MeToo for example and you come across a story of where a woman lied about what happened to her, it's inconvenient to the story you're trying to tell but you have to include it if you are truly a good, investigative journalist. Otherwise, you're just an activist who writes.
> 
> I agree with you. In the "story" of raising awareness of gender dysphoria and trans people and treating them with kindness and compassion and not discriminating against them, there is also the "story" of self-ID and how people are taking advantage of it in ways that are downright dangerous and damaging to the greater good.
> 
> We need good journalists who will also tell that story - not with malice or used as a stick to beat trans people with, but with integrity and showing that this kind of mockery of self-ID is _more_ damaging to the trans community than helpful.
> Sadly, right now I'm not seeing a lot of real journalism going on. Just a bunch of activists who write.


I agree, hiding the truth just because it doesn't fit with an author's narrative is wrong. I remember listening to a programme on Woman's Hour (Radio 4) & an Asian businesswoman was saying how she had been approached by a magazine highlighting women in business who were of ethnic minorities but when she didn't have a story to detail how she had fought against racism in her chosen industry she was dropped from the article. So wrong! I wish I remembered her name as she was really interesting & very entertaining to listen to ... considering she was in a business world which is not something I'm usually that interested in.

That's sort of journalism just fuels extremism on both sides, as I mentioned many posts ago with the big stories regarding the Muslim grooming gangs that were suddenly made public after being supressed by the police/media for fear of stirring up racial hatred.


----------



## Cleo38

Copied from Maggie Oliver's FB page:

"Finally, these monsters are to be deported, and not before time!
So many questions around why this has taken almost 10 years to reach this decision…. Millions in legal aid, released before in less than 3 years even though neither showed remorse, admitted guilt despite that being a condition of being given early release and parole.
Adil khan not charged with rape despite getting a 13 year old little girl pregnant and dna from the foetus proving paternity. Cps charging sexual activity with a child because it’s an easier crime to prove and takes less effort, but the victim monumentally let down yet again.
They were then returned to live in ROCHDALE where they were free to pick up their lives, bumping into their victims so they lived in fear.
Khan Even having the nerve to argue he shouldn’t be deported because he wanted to be a ‘role model’ for his own son!!!!
Rage doesn’t even go half way towards explaining my feelings about this entire national scandal, but just imagine how all the victims of these abusers feel.
But this is at least some good news at last - now I’ll wait to see if this really happens, or will there be many more millions of public money spent yet again as lawyers become rich protecting the human rights of those who have forfeited those rights in my opinion through their actions.
And victims rights yet again come nowhere…." 

Rochdale grooming gang members lose appeal against deportation to Pakistan | Lancashire Telegraph


I honestly hope these vile men really are deported this time


.


----------



## picaresque

Better late than never but it’s sickening how authorities have tried desperately to protect these organised rapists because of their demographic. Nobody cares about the vulnerable white girls they victimise though. Daughters of ‘gammons’ aren’t they, so they definitely lose in the game of ‘which of the lower orders shall the media class and TPTB side with to keep the peace’ Top Trumps.


----------



## Cleo38

picaresque said:


> Better late than never but it’s sickening how authorities have tried desperately to protect these organised rapists because of their demographic. Nobody cares about the vulnerable white girls they victimise though. Daughters of ‘gammons’ aren’t they, so they definitely lose in the game of ‘which of the lower orders shall the media class and TPTB side with to keep the peace’ Top Trumps.


I completely agree & its still going on. An absolute travesty for the girls & their families. And although it's been said they will be deported I won't believe it till it happens


----------



## Lurcherlad

😐

Ms Regan was one of 15 senior SNP politicians - including current Finance Secretary Kate Forbes and Business Minister Ivan McKee - who signed a letter in 2019 urging the Scottish government not to "rush" into "changing the definition of male and female".
In her resignation letter, she said: "I have considered the issue of Gender Recognition Reform very carefully over some time. I have concluded that my conscience will not allow me to vote with the government at the Stage 1 of the Bill this afternoon. 
"Consequently, I am writing to resign my position in the Scottish government as minister for community safety. I have greatly valued the opportunity over the last few years to work in government with colleagues to build a better Scotland."
She later tweeted that she believed the legislation "may have negative implications for the safety and dignity of women and girls".

TOO RIGHT!


----------



## picaresque

Eddie Izzard rules out appearing on all-women Labour MP shortlists


Comedian hoping to be next MP for Sheffield Central says she would not stand on such a list as ‘I’m gender fluid’




www.theguardian.com





🙄


> In a short telephone interview with the Guardian on Thursday, Izzard said she had suffered a “torrent of transphobic abuse” since announcing her candidacy, including being photographed by a gender-critical feminist using the women’s toilet.


Not a she (I am allowed to recognise this, I’m not evil); questioning why a male is using the women’s facilities is not transphobic abuse; Eddie was not photographed using the toilet, Eddie was photographed about to enter said public bathroom


----------



## Magyarmum

picaresque said:


> Eddie Izzard rules out appearing on all-women Labour MP shortlists
> 
> 
> Comedian hoping to be next MP for Sheffield Central says she would not stand on such a list as ‘I’m gender fluid’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 🙄
> 
> Not a she (I am allowed to recognise this, I’m not evil); questioning why a male is using the women’s facilities is not transphobic abuse; Eddie was not photographed using the toilet, Eddie was photographed about to enter said public bathroom


Don't know much about Eddie Izzard but thought this was interesting!


----------



## O2.0

I agree that it's so insulting to suggest that being a woman is a costume. It's what you wear. If you have on lipstick you're in girl mode and if you have on trousers you're in boy mode? How does no one see how trivializing and dismissive that is to all women out there?! Argh!!!!

On the other side, why can't you be a man who wears make up and skirts and heels? If this is truly about being accepting and inclusive, why can't we include men who wear heels and lipstick in what it is to be a man? There are masculine women, there are feminine men, can we not be accepting of that?


----------



## Magyarmum

O2.0 said:


> I agree that it's so insulting to suggest that being a woman is a costume. It's what you wear. If you have on lipstick you're in girl mode and if you have on trousers you're in boy mode? How does no one see how trivializing and dismissive that is to all women out there?! Argh!!!!
> 
> On the other side, why can't you be a man who wears make up and skirts and heels? If this is truly about being accepting and inclusive, why can't we include men who wear heels and lipstick in what it is to be a man? There are masculine women, there are feminine men, can we not be accepting of that?


I subscribe to ARTE which is a free European Cultural TV Channel with often differing views to those in the UK or US. I've just finished watching this one from Sweden









Naked - Not Born the Same - Watch the full documentary | ARTE


What does it mean to be a girl, or a boy? Are gender differences innate or acquired? As more and more people define themselves as non-binary, scientists are trying to understand how our environment assigns a gender to our brain. In this first episode, we meet a child raised gender neutral in...




www.arte.tv




.





.


----------



## O2.0

"This video cannot be viewed from your current location" 

I think we're overthinking the whole gender vs. sex thing. Nouns have gender, humans come in 2 sexes (anomalies notwithstanding). 
Gender IS your sex. You can't separate nature and nurture, it's always both. 

I wish as a society we would allow boys to be more effeminate without negative consequences. We need more examples of nurturing men who are comfortable displaying emotions other than anger - that would be so helpful for men in general and for men who don't feel like men in particular. Widen the paradigm of what it is to be a man and a woman.


----------



## Magyarmum

O2.0 said:


> "This video cannot be viewed from your current location"
> 
> I think we're overthinking the whole gender vs. sex thing. Nouns have gender, humans come in 2 sexes (anomalies notwithstanding).
> Gender IS your sex. You can't separate nature and nurture, it's always both.
> 
> I wish as a society we would allow boys to be more effeminate without negative consequences. We need more examples of nurturing men who are comfortable displaying emotions other than anger - that would be so helpful for men in general and for men who don't feel like men in particular. Widen the paradigm of what it is to be a man and a woman.


What a pity because the documentary discusses exactly what you're saying above.


----------



## Pawscrossed

Pawscrossed said:


> It’s character acting, drag acts are exaggerated characters as I see it, vaguely based on women but no woman I know leaves the house looking like a drag act. Most drag acts assume one identify. Blacking up, historically, prevented people who are black from being heard and allowed white people to trade identies to steal the income and rights of others, supressing all history and slavery, it’s mickery.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.advocate.com/arts-entertainment/people/2015/02/04/op-ed-hey-mary-cheney-heres-why-drag-and-blackface-are-different


Makeup and clothes aren't part of women's bodies. A black face mocks people's natural appearance.


----------



## Cleo38

Pawscrossed said:


> Makeup and clothes aren't part of women's bodies. A black face mocks people's natural appearance.


Exaggerated fake boobs are tho


----------



## OrientalSlave

Pawscrossed said:


> Makeup and clothes aren't part of women's bodies. A black face mocks people's natural appearance.


So in my view do the exaggerated cloths, makeup and so on beloved of drag. I've no problem if a chap likes cross dressing, but that's very different to drag.


----------



## O2.0

Drag acts very often DO mock women! 
Depending on how you take it, it's either in good fun or it's insulting. 









How drag degrades women | Dr Em | The Critic Magazine


On 19 February 2022 the Conservative MP Darren Henry was filmed receiving a lap-dance and simulated oral sex from a drag queen at a charity fundraiser for homeless youth. Speaking of the evening'




thecritic.co.uk


----------



## O2.0

This gave me a good giggle today









Love this, my dad would have been bollixed these days www.jasonbyrne.ie | By Jason Byrne | Facebook


၁.၂သန်း views, ၈.၁ထောင် likes, ၄၆၁ loves, ၂.၃ထောင် comments, ၂.၄သောင်း shares, Facebook Watch Videos from Jason Byrne: Love this, my dad would have been bollixed these days www.jasonbyrne.ie




fb.watch


----------



## Cleo38

That is hilarious @O2.0


----------



## Pawscrossed

Pawscrossed said:


> Makeup and clothes aren't part of women's bodies. A black face mocks people's natural appearance.


Women's rights do not come at the expense of others (equality regardless of colour or sexuality, trans) in your opinion, but at some point this thread will endeavour to tell you otherwise by process of quote and word play, despite you having trans friends and a partner of colour who have shared their wisdom and a collective horror of Rowling. Their opinions of course, mean nothing here.


----------



## Cleo38

Pawscrossed said:


> Women's rights do not come at the expense of others (equality regardless of colour or sexuality, trans) in your opinion, but at some point this thread will endeavour to tell you otherwise by process of quote and word play, despite you having trans friends and a partner of colour who have shared their wisdom and a collective horror of Rowling. Their opinions of course, mean nothing here.


I don't understand your post .... what do you mean "quote & word play"? 

Am also not sure why having a partner of colour is relevant to the thread either, unless your partner is a woman & her stories you may wish to share to the thread

And rights of women are being eroded at the expense of others but that's OK coz those others are biological men & we all know that they are far more important than us


----------



## O2.0

@Pawscrossed I don't understand your post either, and I would like to. 
Who are you talking to? 

Or are you deliberately posting cryptic things with some purpose I'm not quite getting? Again, I would like to understand though. 

You say black face mocks people's natural appearance. I don't think anyone is arguing that it doesn't. Certainly not the original purpose of black face in theaters and particularly the south of the US. 

I think the argument is, that we _do_ understand the connotations of black face and why it's not okay, so why do the same principles not apply to drag mocking women? Making a caricature of what being a woman is, and mocking womanhood. Did you read the article I posted? 


That said, I do think it's more complicated than anything that makes a caricature of women or black people is bad.
First of all, nothing and no one should be above being made fun of. As soon as you put something in the category of untouchable by humor, and even mockery, then you've lost, because that absolutely "other" the thing you make untouchable. 
Dave Chappelle and Ricky Gervais have it right. Trans people should be included in comedy skits. _Every_ category of people should. Whether you find it funny or not is a different story, but joking about trans people isn't transphobic any more than joking about black people is racist. 

It's also true that imitation is on a spectrum from flattery to mockery to meanness, and just because one drag act mocks women, another might be more of a tribute to a famous person. There are some beautiful drag acts of Cher and Celine Dion and Dolly Parton that are clearly tributes to a much beloved star. What about drag acts that pay tribute to Tina Turner? Many of them are wearing "black face" as part of the transformation in to the star they are paying tribute to. 
So yes, definitely more complicated. 

I err on the side of free speech and freedom of expression, I don't want to see drag acts abolished, but I also want the freedom of speech for people to express why they don't like drag acts and don't think they're necessarily appropriate for children's story hour. Unless it's a Dolly Parton impersonator sharing her Imagination Library program - which if you're not familiar with, is amazing  








Dolly Parton’s Imagination Library


Dolly Parton’s Imagination Library is a book gifting program that mails free books to children from birth until they begin school in participating areas.




imaginationlibrary.com


----------



## mrs phas

"Human sex is not determined at birth and can legally change, SNP argues in court" Human sex is not determined at birth and can legally change, SNP argues in court


----------



## kimthecat

mrs phas said:


> "Human sex is not determined at birth and can legally change, SNP argues in court" Human sex is not determined at birth and can legally change, SNP argues in court


 It sounds ludicrous.


----------



## Magyarmum

kimthecat said:


> It sounds ludicrous.


Actually not as far fetched as one might think.









Opinion: Biological Science Rejects the Sex Binary, and That’s Good for Humanity


Evidence from various sciences reveals that there are diverse ways of being male, female, or both. An anthropologist argues that embracing these truths will help humans flourish.




www.the-scientist.com


----------



## Dimwit

Magyarmum said:


> Actually not as far fetched as one might think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion: Biological Science Rejects the Sex Binary, and That’s Good for Humanity
> 
> 
> Evidence from various sciences reveals that there are diverse ways of being male, female, or both. An anthropologist argues that embracing these truths will help humans flourish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-scientist.com


While interesting, that article is not hugely relevant to humans, and also seems to confuse sex with gender.
I completely agree that assertions of masculine and feminine roles are not biologically determines, but are a social construct, this still does not mean that humans can simply just change their sex.

Yes, there are examples of fish who can change their biological sex based on environmental pressures but that does not mean that the same is true of humans.
Humans are diploid mammals, meaning we have two sets of chromosomes, one donated from each parental gamete. And gametes (from the father) can either contain the X or the Y chroomosome, while gametes from the mother contain the X chromosome.
Of course, there are exceptions - biology is not perfect and there are people born with with different arrangements of chromosomes, or with ambiguous genitalia, but this is not 'proof' that there is more than one basic sex. There are people born with missing legs but that doesn't mean that, as a species, we are not bipeds.

I do also disagree with the assertion that biological sex has no role in developing a 'masculine' or 'feminine' brain. While gender stereotypes are unhelpful and often very damaging, there are proven differences between female and male brains because of the influences of the different hormonal profiles that are determined largely by biological sex.

There is no evidence that humans can easily change their biological sex. They can change their secondary sexual characteristics through cosmetic surgery and can artificially change their hormome profile, but biological sex remains.


----------



## OrientalSlave

"there are proven differences between female and male brains because of the influences of the different hormonal profiles that are determined largely by biological sex. "









Transgender brains are more like their desired gender from an early age


Brain activity and structure in transgender adolescents more closely resembles the typical activation patterns of their desired gender, according to new research. The findings suggest that differences in brain function may occur early in development and that brain imaging may be a useful tool...



www.sciencedaily.com












Research on the Transgender Brain: What You Should Know


Expanding knowledge of the brain and gender identity




health.clevelandclinic.org












Is There Something Unique about the Transgender Brain?


Imaging studies and other research suggest that there is a biological basis for transgender identity




www.scientificamerican.com


----------



## Dimwit

OrientalSlave said:


> "there are proven differences between female and male brains because of the influences of the different hormonal profiles that are determined largely by biological sex. "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Transgender brains are more like their desired gender from an early age
> 
> 
> Brain activity and structure in transgender adolescents more closely resembles the typical activation patterns of their desired gender, according to new research. The findings suggest that differences in brain function may occur early in development and that brain imaging may be a useful tool...
> 
> 
> 
> www.sciencedaily.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Research on the Transgender Brain: What You Should Know
> 
> 
> Expanding knowledge of the brain and gender identity
> 
> 
> 
> 
> health.clevelandclinic.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is There Something Unique about the Transgender Brain?
> 
> 
> Imaging studies and other research suggest that there is a biological basis for transgender identity
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.scientificamerican.com


I'm not sure why you quoted me there as the links do not disprove my point. I was responding the the article that said that there is no such thing as a 'male brain' or 'female brain' when there are clearly differences in the two - in part, due to the hormone profile.
If there were no differences then why would the brain of a transgender person more closely match a brain of the gender they identify with?

Of course hormones are not the only things that shape brain development - environment and experiences have a huge impact as well...


----------



## OrientalSlave

Dimwit said:


> I'm not sure why you quoted me there as the links do not disprove my point. I was responding the the article that said that there is no such thing as a 'male brain' or 'female brain' when there are clearly differences in the two - in part, due to the hormone profile.
> If there were no differences then why would the brain of a transgender person more closely match a brain of the gender they identify with?
> 
> Of course hormones are not the only things that shape brain development - environment and experiences have a huge impact as well...


You state people can't change their sex. They can't change their sex chromosomes, not sure though if you meant sex or gender. Yes, we can't change our sex, but we can change our gender and for people whose brain isn't sufficiently 'male' or 'female' for them to be comfortable in their sex, changing gender matters.


----------



## Dimwit

OrientalSlave said:


> You state people can't change their sex. They can't change their sex chromosomes, not sure though if you meant sex or gender. Yes, we can't change our sex, but we can change our gender and for people whose brain isn't sufficiently 'male' or 'female' for them to be comfortable in their sex, changing gender matters.


I meant that we can't change our sex, as a response to the article posted earlier. I am well aware that people can change their gender, and that this is very important for those who do not identify with the gender assigned at birth.
I am not in any way disputing that, merely stating that, contrary to what the article suggested, and what I have seen SOME transgender people claiming, that you cannot change your biological sex.


----------



## Dimwit

Meanwhile in Iran…


----------



## OrientalSlave

Dimwit said:


> I meant that we can't change our sex, as a response to the article posted earlier. I am well aware that people can change their gender, and that this is very important for those who do not identify with the gender assigned at birth.
> I am not in any way disputing that, merely stating that, contrary to what the article suggested, and what I have seen SOME transgender people claiming, that you cannot change your biological sex.


Possibly there is confusion about sex & gender where changing sex is claimed.


----------



## OrientalSlave

Dimwit said:


> Meanwhile in Iran…
> ...


I don't dispute this is happening, but here is a link to the article:









“Female prisoners who are virgins must be raped before execution, to prevent them from entering heaven.”


Excerpts of Montazeri’s book on the rape of women in the Iranian regime’s prisons: In December 2000, Hossein Ali-Montazeri, a




women.ncr-iran.org


----------



## O2.0

Isn't arguing that there is no binary when it comes to sex/gender essentially erasing the entire transgender experience? 

Why would someone go through hormone treatment and sometimes surgery if sex/gender is not a thing? 

I would love for us to widen the spectrum of what it is to be a man or a woman, and be more accepting of diversity in gender roles and expression. But for some men, being a feminine man isn't enough and they really do want to exist in the world as women. We have to leave room for that too. For people who are truly transgender.


----------



## Jaf

I can't keep up with medical science, I thought that the whole masculine/ feminine brain thing had been de-bunked. I've had a brain scan, I wonder if they could tell me what my brain looks like. I suspect my brain is more masculine than some. Interesting!


----------



## O2.0

Having raised boy/girl twins, I can 100% attest to there being a difference in the male & female brain!


----------



## Magyarmum

Jaf said:


> I can't keep up with medical science, I thought that the whole masculine/ feminine brain thing had been de-bunked. I've had a brain scan, I wonder if they could tell me what my brain looks like. I suspect my brain is more masculine than some. Interesting!


According to recent studies apart from the difference in size and weight there is no difference between the male and femalel brain "in utero"









Arianne Shahvisi · What’s the difference? Sex in the Brain · LRB 8 September 2022


Being sceptical of sex differences doesn’t detract from the fact that brains are diverse along many other axes, and...




www.lrb.co.uk


----------



## Jaf

Quote from @O2.0 having raised boy/girl twins, I can 100% attest to there being a difference in the male & female brain! End quote.

Hmm but how do you know if it's brain or personality? Or is personality due to brain?? Then one could add body in to the mix...brain might like to be an athlete but body says no!


----------



## Magyarmum

O2.0 said:


> Isn't arguing that there is no binary when it comes to sex/gender essentially erasing the entire transgender experience?
> 
> Why would someone go through hormone treatment and sometimes surgery if sex/gender is not a thing?
> 
> I would love for us to widen the spectrum of what it is to be a man or a woman, and be more accepting of diversity in gender roles and expression. But for some men, being a feminine man isn't enough and they really do want to exist in the world as women. We have to leave room for that too. For people who are truly transgender.


I'm a third of the way through "The Madness of Crowds, Gender, Race and Identity by Douglas Murray who's associate editor of the Spectator. So far I'm finding it not only informative but very thought provoking.






The Boar







theboar.org


----------



## Magyarmum

Jaf said:


> Quote from @O2.0 having raised boy/girl twins, I can 100% attest to there being a difference in the male & female brain! End quote.
> 
> Hmm but how do you know if it's brain or personality? Or is personality due to brain?? Then one could add body in to the mix...brain might like to be an athlete but body says no!


I'm mother to two boys with just 22 months between their ages. Totally opposite in every way possible They don't even look like brothers. Strangely enough my grandson, son of my first child, looks like, and has a very similar personalty to my other son, his uncle!


----------



## mrs phas

My identical twin boys are so different I sometimes wonder if they were birthed and raised by the same people
when I was pregnant everyone would say "oh how wonderful they'll be so close"
The only time they were ever close, was when they had their hands round each others throat 
They had such hatred for each other (envy, competition🤷) that the eldest, by two minutes, used to call his twin
"his spare parts "
Ironically it's the youngest that has had cancer and is waiting for stomach to groin lymph node removal, due to more tumors growing (benign at moment)
Now they're older, they get on much better, but, even at 30, still have their moments with each other


----------



## O2.0

Jaf said:


> Hmm but how do you know if it's brain or personality? Or is personality due to brain?? Then one could add body in to the mix...brain might like to be an athlete but body says no!


Where does your personality come from if not the brain? 
I think we get too hung up on trying to separate things out when every person is a combination of genes, environment, experiences, culture, etc., etc. 

For my own two, there were so many instances of noticing how sex differences affect personality, particularly in puberty of course. One of the funniest (to me) examples was when they were about 5 or 6, we were at the beach and there was a lot of dead seagrass stalks piled up. My daughter made a nest with the stalks and built eggs out of the sand and pretended to be the mama bird. My son made weapons out the stalks and defended the nest. Totally unprompted by either me or OH, we just turned them loose on the beach LOL. 

Regardless of our roles today, evolutionarily women evolved to birth and nurture children. Nature has selected for that.
That's not to say that's what women should be doing today, just to say that our brains evolved differently than men who did not play the same role in the evolution of our species and nature selected differently for men. 

I think it's such hubris to think we're above nature, above evolution and pretend we are these vastly different creatures than our ancestors hunting and gathering on the African savannah. We are creatures of evolution and a few hundred years of "civilization" isn't going to compete with hundreds of thousands of years of evolution.


----------



## Deguslave

But evolution by its nature is still evolving, and my nature certainly isn't to either birth or nurture anything human. I detest human children with a passion that's hard to dream about, I always have, and I'm not overly fond of the adult version either: if it ain't got four legs, fur or feathers, I really don't want to know. Does that make me any less of a woman? No. Does it make me more male? Again, no. What it does make me is a non stereotypical person, in a world where I had no say in defining the stereotypes.

Maybe the human race is starting to evolve so there will be less humans in the future, that's nature, she always finds a way to control a species that's getting too pushy and I do wonder if she's starting to push back against humans. But that's a whole other topic.


----------



## O2.0

@Deguslave I'm just going to quote myself 


O2.0 said:


> That's not to say that's what women should be doing today


Yours is an example of an individual. I'm speaking of humans in general terms. There will always be exceptions. 
If you have a scatter plot of data, there will always be points that don't fit in to the trend on the scatter plot, but that doesn't make the data wrong. 

There are people who are more comfortable transitioning to a different gender and living their lives as something different than what they are biologically. That doesn't make biology wrong, it just highlights the existence of exceptions. 

Yes, maybe we are evolving as a species. But we're not evolving in 10, 20, even 100 years. It took humans _millions_ of years to evolve from an ape-like ancestor. Again, what hubris to think that a few hundred years of women being able to decide if they want to procreate or not is going to change us as a species.

I will always advocate for individual women to have full autonomy of what their role in society will be, but I don't believe myself to be above the laws of nature, above the wisdom of Mother Nature.


----------



## Magyarmum

O2.0 said:


> Where does your personality come from if not the brain?
> I think we get too hung up on trying to separate things out when every person is a combination of genes, environment, experiences, culture, etc., etc.
> 
> For my own two, there were so many instances of noticing how sex differences affect personality, particularly in puberty of course. One of the funniest (to me) examples was when they were about 5 or 6, we were at the beach and there was a lot of dead seagrass stalks piled up. My daughter made a nest with the stalks and built eggs out of the sand and pretended to be the mama bird. My son made weapons out the stalks and defended the nest. Totally unprompted by either me or OH, we just turned them loose on the beach LOL.
> 
> Regardless of our roles today, evolutionarily women evolved to birth and nurture children. Nature has selected for that.
> That's not to say that's what women should be doing today, just to say that our brains evolved differently than men who did not play the same role in the evolution of our species and nature selected differently for men.
> 
> I think it's such hubris to think we're above nature, above evolutio n and pretend we are these vastly different creatures than our ancestors hunting and gathering on the African savannah. We are creatures of evolution and a few hundred years of "civilization" isn't going to compete with hundreds of thousands of years of evolution.



Much of what I learnt studying anthropolgy at university has since been debunked. For example it was thought that only men hunted and women gathered. Archaeological discoveries now show that women also took part in hunting. This was true in many other societies such as the Vikings where it's now believed that women were warriors and also fought alonside men.

Prehistoric female hunter discovery upends gender role assumptions









Warrior women: New evidence of ancient female big-game hunters


Turns out gender assumptions have been going on for quite some time.




bigthink.com


----------



## O2.0

Magyarmum said:


> Much of what I learnt studying anthropolgy at university has since been debunked. For example it was thought that only men hunted and women gathered. Archaeological discoveries now show that women also took part in hunting. This was true in many other societies such as the Vikings where it's now believed that women were warriors and also fought alonside men.
> 
> Prehistoric female hunter discovery upends gender role assumptions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Warrior women: New evidence of ancient female big-game hunters
> 
> 
> Turns out gender assumptions have been going on for quite some time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigthink.com


Again, none of that changes the evolutionary role of the female human to gestate, birth, and nurture the next generation. Woman had many other roles in history, absolutely, and it makes perfect sense that women hunted and fought alongside men. 

Okay, I think we're getting muddled here. 
Humans have been in existence for 2 million years. The agricultural revolution happened 12 thousand years ago give or take. Recorded history is even younger. 
To put it in perspective, humans have only "modernized" for 0.006% of our existence.

You can't extrapolate anything significant in an evolutionary sense from such a miniscule period of time. And again, it's kind of rude to our ancestors to assume that everything there is to know about humans can be gleaned from that tiny little 0.006% of the time we have been on earth. 

We are animals, fauna on the landscape. We would do good to remember that.


----------



## kimthecat

O2.0 said:


> But for some men, being a feminine man isn't enough and they really do want to exist in the world as women. We have to leave room for that too. For people who are truly transgender.


yes. I follow a transgender woman on Twitter and she is about my age and she suffered dreadfully for years but is now happy. 
Ive noticed on line objections from women to the term Transgender woman , saying they should not call themselves women. I object to being called Cis woman but dont have a problem with the term Transgender women. 

Lots of good links and info here , Its certainly complicated.


----------



## Jaf

O2.0 said:


> Where does your personality come from if not the brain?
> I think we get too hung up on trying to separate things out when every person is a combination of genes, environment, experiences, culture, etc., etc.


I suppose the personality is the brain, but is influenced by so many things. So I like Sci fi, and there are books where a brain can be transplanted into a different body or even a space ship. I've often wondered if my personality would change if I were suddenly a male model or a female athlete. Or would I remain the same? 

My older sister and I looked very similar, I often can't tell us apart in photos. Our personalities are very different though. 

I've seen studies with identical twins, separated at birth. They are often very, very similar. Politics, family dynamics, food likes. I'm not sure I like the idea that the brain is designed like that! So I'm actually glad @mrs phas that your boys are different but so sorry that the youngest is poorly.


----------



## O2.0

It's hard to have these conversations when we're confusing two things LOL 

I'm talking about humans in a very general sense. Again, scatter plot type information. All those individual dots on the scatter plot are going to be individuals who differ sometimes greatly from the other dots, but the trend is still visible with enough data. 

For example, that I, as an individual, am taller than most women and a lot of men doesn't change the fact that on average, human males grow taller than human females. 

Individual stories are always fascinating and fun to look at, but there is a reason scientists try to collect a lot of data to make their findings more accurate. 



Jaf said:


> I've often wondered if my personality would change if I were suddenly a male model or a female athlete. Or would I remain the same?


My take is that personality does change with environment. Some core aspects of personality will be harder to change, but I've seen people completely change from tragedy or trauma. So yes, personality can and does change. 

Brains are infinitely malleable and we're finding out more and more about how malleable they are. People with serious brain injuries being able to regain function and all sorts of cool stuff.


----------



## DogLover1981

I did read that the differences between men and women are smallish. Heck, men are even capable of producing milk in unusual circumstances or if their hormones are messed up. Men have intact milk glands. O.O There are personality differences between men and women but it's more of a fuzzy continuum rather than solid personality differences and how much of those differences are cultural vs. genetic or both?

Men can be involved in the raising of children and I imagine it was true of some ancient societies.


----------



## Magyarmum

kimthecat said:


> yes. I follow a transgender woman on Twitter and she is about my age and she suffered dreadfully for years but is now happy.
> Ive noticed on line objections from women to the term Transgender woman , saying they should not call themselves women. I object to being called Cis woman but dont have a problem with the term Transgender women.
> 
> Lots of good links and info here , Its certainly complicated.


I was friends with a Transgender man and his wife in the mid 80's. He'd undergone the full transition some years earlier and subsequently married and was father to a young daughter.

In the 60's I lived on Old Brompton Road opposite the Coleherne Pub which was a well known meeting place for Gays and the "Leather" boys who were very often German bikers. Usually on Saturday nights the place was packed with customers spilling out onto the pavement. I have to admit I often used to sit in my lounge, in the dark with a glass of wine in my hand, watching fascinated at the "goings on"!






Coleherne - LGBT Archive







lgbthistoryuk.org


----------



## Cleo38

Isn't it strange how women have to adhere to a certain criteria to be eligible for a beauty pagent yet a fat bloke can not only enter one but win  









An overweight bloke just won a Miss America beauty pageant


The first trans winner of ‘Miss Greater Derry’ has put the misogyny of transgenderism on full display.




www.spiked-online.com


----------



## Jesthar

Cleo38 said:


> Isn't it strange how women have to adhere to a certain criteria to be eligible for a beauty pagent yet a fat bloke can not only enter one but win
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> An overweight bloke just won a Miss America beauty pageant
> 
> 
> The first trans winner of ‘Miss Greater Derry’ has put the misogyny of transgenderism on full display.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spiked-online.com


Those girls mouths may be smiling, but their eyes tell a different story...


----------



## Cleo38

Jesthar said:


> Those girls mouths may be smiling, but their eyes tell a different story...


Sickening & so bloody insulting


----------



## O2.0

The thing is, those beauty pageants are often lucrative scholarship opportunities for women to help pay for higher education. In a world where women still struggle for equal opportunities to get an education, this is yet another slap in the face to women's rights. 

Also, I can't figure out what Brian's charity work is? Most beauty pageants, particularly the local ones, also require that you have a long record of community service and a particular cause that you are promoting. For example one gal I know has a sister with down's syndrome and she raises awareness and money for that. What's Brian's cause?


----------



## picaresque

I’m not being mean about this trans woman’s looks when I say they are objectively not conventionally attractive. Neither am I incidentally. Beauty pageants are anti-feminist as they come but they are supposed to reward physical beauty, that is the point. Frankly if I were trans I’d find this patronising and insulting. It’s so blatant.


----------



## O2.0

picaresque said:


> Beauty pageants are anti-feminist


Yes, but historically - in this country at least, it was a way for women to earn some money for themselves and use it for education. In my mother's time, most women were discouraged from furthering their education and their families most certainly would not have supported them financially, except the very rich who basically sent their daughters to University to find a husband. If you were willing to put yourself out there, this was a way of funding an education.

That's the piece that I find particularly offensive, men have never had to fight for an education, women have. This is an organization to help _women_ have more access to education.

Women in so many countries are literally dying for basic rights to education, and here we are removing educational opportunities from women and giving them to a man. How's that for a message to young women.


----------



## DogLover1981

I didn't give it much thought before even though I have known about the Miss America contests.

I find human beauty contests to be distasteful. We are taught from a young age that it's rude to tell someone that they're ugly and yet, beauty contests are very publicly stating that one person is more gorgeous or beautiful than another person. Yuck.


----------



## O2.0

DogLover1981 said:


> I didn't give it much thought before even though I have known about the Miss America contests.
> 
> I find human beauty contests to be distasteful. We are taught from a young age that it's rude to tell someone that they're ugly and yet, beauty contests are very publicly stating that one person is more gorgeous or beautiful than another person. Yuck.


How you feel about beauty pageants - however justified, is irrelevant.
The point is, yet again, an opportunity that was created specifically for women, to help them where opportunities were historically not available, is being taken by a man.


----------



## mrs phas

Cleo38 said:


> Isn't it strange how women have to adhere to a certain criteria to be eligible for a beauty pagent yet a fat bloke can not only enter one but win
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> An overweight bloke just won a Miss America beauty pageant
> 
> 
> The first trans winner of ‘Miss Greater Derry’ has put the misogyny of transgenderism on full display.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spiked-online.com


There's a reason many Stephen king horror stories are set in Derry 
Including IT, where a clown makes your worst nightmares come true


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> How you feel about beauty pageants - however justified, is irrelevant.
> The point is, yet again, an opportunity that was created specifically for women, to help them where opportunities were historically not available, is being taken by a man.


Exactly. I doubt if he were a biological women he would have even been allowed to enter & certainly wouldn't have won. How is it that the criteria is so low for him? 

I find this so depressing


----------



## picaresque

> Canada’s top feminist, Justin Trudeau, has put his blackface days behind him in order to promote a more progressive insult – womanface











Justin Trudeau’s Drag Race


His upcoming appearance on the hit show is another milestone in Canada’s descent into clown world.




www.spiked-online.com


----------



## O2.0

The nice thing about the truth is that it does always out. And maybe, just maybe, this is a sign of the tide turning? 

The shooter in the Colorado nightclub tragedy of November 19 claims now to be non-binary. Trans activists aren't having it. Which is a good thing. 

But of course there is much more to the story and this is a good read:








"It Was Obvious That's a Man" : CNN Guest Rejects Colorado Shooter's Non-Binary Claim - Reduxx


After it was revealed that a shooter who killed 5 people and injured 25 others at an LGBT nightclub in Colorado identifies as “non-binary” and uses gender neutral pronouns, trans activists took to social media to express disbelief over his self-declared identity. Anderson Lee Aldrich, 22, opened...




reduxx.info


----------



## Dimwit

O2.0 said:


> But of course there is much more to the story and this is a good read


Did you see the interviews with the shooter’s father? His first concern was not that his kid was a murderer - it was that he might be gay (because it was a gay club) 🙁


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> The nice thing about the truth is that it does always out. And maybe, just maybe, this is a sign of the tide turning?
> 
> The shooter in the Colorado nightclub tragedy of November 19 claims now to be non-binary. Trans activists aren't having it. Which is a good thing.
> 
> But of course there is much more to the story and this is a good read:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "It Was Obvious That's a Man" : CNN Guest Rejects Colorado Shooter's Non-Binary Claim - Reduxx
> 
> 
> After it was revealed that a shooter who killed 5 people and injured 25 others at an LGBT nightclub in Colorado identifies as “non-binary” and uses gender neutral pronouns, trans activists took to social media to express disbelief over his self-declared identity. Anderson Lee Aldrich, 22, opened...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> reduxx.info


Absolutely terrible what happened to those people, no matter how many stories of mass shooting they are still so shocking 

But I don't know how I feel about the gender identity of the shooter (yet another angry, young man IMO) as in the article many TRA's shout down anyone who questions men who claim they are women or non-binary & any suggestion of discussion is deemed transphobic so how can they now decide he is a man?

Obviously he is but then there are many men who are very obviously male claiming to be women & we are told to shut our TERF mouths if we bring it up  

So what is it then? Some people can claim they are trans but not others? How does that work?


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> So what is it then? Some people can claim they are trans but not others? How does that work?


Well that's the thing isn't it? It doesn't work. You can't have it both ways. 
So the web is unravelling - I hope...


----------



## mrs phas

Cleo38 said:


> what is it then? Some people can claim they are trans but not others? How does that work?


Because that's how activists think
As long as nothing upsets their idealistic, mysogynistic, perfect tropes, then everything is A-OK
But
If something as heinous as this happens, especially somewhere that is a SAFE space for the LGBTQ+ community
The perpetrator CANNOT POSSIBLY be part of the trans/non-binary collective
And
Must be a person of birth gender, pretending to be T/NB
Yet they can't see it from the opposite position
That men, pretending to be women (as in those who self identify only), is dangerous to women in THEIR safe places 

Whilst tragic and awful, and my thoughts of peace and healing go to the injured and killed
maybe, just maybe
This could be a start of some sort of clap back, against the hatred perpetrated, against those that dare to have an opposing thought, by said activists


----------



## Dimwit

Cleo38 said:


> But I don't know how I feel about the gender identity of the shooter (yet another angry, young man IMO) as in the article many TRA's shout down anyone who questions men who claim they are women or non-binary & any suggestion of discussion is deemed transphobic so how can they now decide he is a man?
> 
> Obviously he is but then there are many men who are very obviously male claiming to be women & we are told to shut our TERF mouths if we bring it up
> 
> So what is it then? Some people can claim they are trans but not others? How does that work?





O2.0 said:


> Well that's the thing isn't it? It doesn't work. You can't have it both ways.
> So the web is unravelling - I hope...


Yep - anyone who even dared to suggest that people may lie about being trans to get access to vulnerable women, or to get treated more leniently etc. were told that they were TERFs and were evil etc. but now that someone is claiming to be trans to avoid the charge of a hate crime, then suddenly the trans community are telling people that you can tell he is a man just by looking at him - and they have gone very quiet on blaming JK Rowling and other 'TERFs' for radicalising him.

The really sad thing is that people lost their lives but this has been overshadowed by the TRA mob desperate to score points against 'TERFs' and the LGB groups.


----------



## mrs phas

Going back to what this thread was *ORIGINALLY * about, the tightening of freedom and punishment of women across the world.

BBC News - Afghanistan: Parks become latest no-go areas for women in Kabul
Afghanistan: Parks become latest no-go areas for women in Kabul

Last week 3 women and 9 men were publically flogged, in front of thousands, in a football stadium
And
Yet, where is the biggest football competition in the world being staged, right now?
In yet another country that suppress women's freedom, educational prowess
And political voices and views
And, where
Any sign of being part of the LGBTQ+ community carries a death penalty


----------



## Boxer123

mrs phas said:


> Going back to what this thread was *ORIGINALLY * about, the tightening of freedom and punishment of women across the world.
> 
> BBC News - Afghanistan: Parks become latest no-go areas for women in Kabul
> Afghanistan: Parks become latest no-go areas for women in Kabul
> 
> Last week 3 women and 9 men were publically flogged, in front of thousands, in a football stadium
> And
> Yet, where is the biggest football competition in the world being staged, right now?
> In yet another country that suppress women's freedom, educational prowess
> And political voices and views
> And, where
> Any sign of being part of the LGBTQ+ community carries a death penalty


It just seems to have been forgotten by the world, Afghanistan. It’s no life at all for women.


----------



## picaresque

GERMANY: Convicted Rapists Are Being Offered Access to Brothels as Rehabilitation “Therapy” - Reduxx


Marylène Lévesque was just 22 years old when she was found stabbed to death in a hotel room in Quebec City, Canada in 2019. Lévesque, who was in the sex industry, had decided to meet Eustachio Gallese, 51, at the hotel instead of at the massage parlor where she typically operated. Unbeknownst to...




reduxx.info


----------



## Lurcherlad

No words … 🤬


----------



## Magyarmum

picaresque said:


> GERMANY: Convicted Rapists Are Being Offered Access to Brothels as Rehabilitation “Therapy” - Reduxx
> 
> 
> Marylène Lévesque was just 22 years old when she was found stabbed to death in a hotel room in Quebec City, Canada in 2019. Lévesque, who was in the sex industry, had decided to meet Eustachio Gallese, 51, at the hotel instead of at the massage parlor where she typically operated. Unbeknownst to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> reduxx.info


Disgusting!


----------



## Cleo38

I don't even know how to express my anger & disgust at that


----------



## O2.0

Boxer123 said:


> It just seems to have been forgotten by the world, Afghanistan. It’s no life at all for women.


It's awful. And Afghanistan isn't the only place. 
It makes me so angry that a man will frivolously claim to be a woman in a country like the US but were they in Afghanistan, or Somalia they wouldn't even consider it. That right there is so telling to me... 




mrs phas said:


> Any sign of being part of the LGBTQ+ community carries a death penalty


I listened to a very interesting podcast the other day discussing TRA and how a piece of it is actually closeted homophobia. Better to be a trans-woman attracted to men than a gay man. And how this is something that actually does happen in countries where being gay carries such a high penalty. Passing as a woman is a safer alternative


----------



## DogLover1981

I'm willing to bet that there are at least some women in Afghanistan disguised as a stereotypical man in order to live a somewhat better life.


----------



## Jesthar

DogLover1981 said:


> I'm willing to bet that there are at least some women in Afghanistan disguised as a stereotypical man in order to live a somewhat better life.


Not unless they can grow an impressive beard. The taliban will zealously punish men too, and trimming your beard in any way is banned. There is even a mininum beard size, and the religious police carry a measuring device to ensure compliance. Too short a beard will get you a beating, being clean shaven...


----------



## DogLover1981

Jesthar said:


> Not unless they can grow an impressive beard. The taliban will zealously punish men too, and trimming your beard in any way is banned. There is even a mininum beard size, and the religious police carry a measuring device to ensure compliance. Too short a beard will get you a beating, being clean shaven...


That might discourage a good many women but realistic fake beards do exist. I'm not sure how accessible that would be in Afghanistan, especially right now.


----------



## O2.0

While girls around the world are fighting to be educated, being mutilated, and forced in to marriage, we now have an adult male mocking what it is to be a girl and getting paid handsomely for it. Even being invited to the White House! 








Girlhood is not a fetish | Raquel Rosario Sánchez | The Critic Magazine


This week, as the US prepares for the midterm elections, the progressive left is going all out to bring home the message that this is a battle for the soul of the country.




thecritic.co.uk


----------



## mrs phas

O2.0 said:


> While girls around the world are fighting to be educated, being mutilated, and forced in to marriage, we now have an adult male mocking what it is to be a girl and getting paid handsomely for it. Even being invited to the White House!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Girlhood is not a fetish | Raquel Rosario Sánchez | The Critic Magazine
> 
> 
> This week, as the US prepares for the midterm elections, the progressive left is going all out to bring home the message that this is a battle for the soul of the country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thecritic.co.uk


Well pardon me if I've got things wrong here 
But 
That comes across as being one,very small, step away from pedophillia


----------



## TonyG

mrs phas said:


> Well pardon me if I've got things wrong here
> But
> That comes across as being one,very small, step away from pedophillia


And being mentally ill, seems to me…


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> While girls around the world are fighting to be educated, being mutilated, and forced in to marriage, we now have an adult male mocking what it is to be a girl and getting paid handsomely for it. Even being invited to the White House!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Girlhood is not a fetish | Raquel Rosario Sánchez | The Critic Magazine
> 
> 
> This week, as the US prepares for the midterm elections, the progressive left is going all out to bring home the message that this is a battle for the soul of the country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thecritic.co.uk


I recently watched Blaire White's video about this idiot. Like her, I honestly thought he was some sort of performance comedian/impersonater who was taking the p*ss out of transwomen (& women) as he was so OTT & ridiculous.

If I were a trans woman I would be fuming that he had been given such a platform to represent the trans community.

Although I did laugh at one of BW's comments about this meeting at the White House when she described it as a "clown meeting a corpse"


----------



## O2.0

Cleo38 said:


> If I were a trans woman I would be fuming that he had been given such a platform to represent the trans community.


I think Blaire White is fuming about it. And rightly so. 

It does look like a parody doesn't it? Hard to believe it's actually real and not an act, yet it seems people in power are taking it seriously. And Dylan Mulvaney is being paid very handsomely for all this social media notoriety too


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> I think Blaire White is fuming about it. And rightly so.
> 
> It does look like a parody doesn't it? Hard to believe it's actually real and not an act, yet it seems people in power are taking it seriously. And Dylan Mulvaney is being paid very handsomely for all this social media notoriety too


I always think what if this was portraying a person of colour or a gay man then it would be considered offensive so I don't understand how this is ok


----------



## Cleo38

Has anyone watched "Undercover: Sexual Harrassment -The Truth" on Ch4? Just finished watching it & it's bloody terrifying how many predatory men there are.

I suppose it's nothing new & I shouldn't be shocked but just shows how brazen they are to act as such in busy places as well as the sense of entitlement they have.


----------



## Deguslave

Yeah, and when they attack, their defence is always 'she was drunk, she was asking for it.' Hopefully the men in these videos will think twice if they think they are being filmed. Shameful.


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> Has anyone watched "Undercover: Sexual Harrassment -The Truth" on Ch4? Just finished watching it & it's bloody terrifying how many predatory men there are.
> 
> I suppose it's nothing new & I shouldn't be shocked but just shows how brazen they are to act as such in busy places as well as the sense of entitlement they have.


No because it would make me want to throw my shoe at the telly.


----------



## Cleo38

Boxer123 said:


> No because it would make me want to throw my shoe at the telly.


 I was fuming watching it. I wish she'd made their faces public so others could know the identities of these vile men.


----------



## kimthecat

Is this the beginning of the end? 



https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/judge-rules-transwomen-can-take-seats-on-public-boards-set-aside-for-women



Trans women should be regarded as the same as biological women when it comes to achieving a 50-50 balance of men and women on public boards, a Scottish judge has ruled.


Lady Haldane in the Court of Session said trans women who hold a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) can take seats which are earmarked for women.

She said the definition of sex was "not limited to biological or birth sex", that it could include people with GRCs, and as a result trans women can be legally classed as women for the purposes of gender balance.

The landmark case could have major implications for the Scottish Government's Gender Recognition Reform Bill which receives its final reading in Holyrood next week.

However in her judgement Lady Haldane stated that sex and gender reassignment were separate and distinct characteristics but were not necessarily mutually exclusive.

She wrote: "I conclude that in this context... “sex” is not limited to biological or birth sex, but includes those in possession of a GRC obtained in accordance with the 2004 [Gender Recognition] Act stating their acquired gender, and thus their sex."


----------



## kimthecat

"Men Are Men": Norwegian Artist Facing Criminal Charges, Potential Prison Sentence Over Gender Comments - Reduxx


A woman in Norway is facing criminal charges and a possible prison sentence of up to three years for stating that men can not be lesbians. Tonje Gjevjon, a lesbian artist, was notified on November 17 that she was under police investigation for hate speech over a statement she posted to Facebook...




reduxx.info




A woman in Norway is facing criminal charges and a possible prison sentence of up to three years for stating that men can not be lesbians. Tonje Gjevjon, a lesbian artist, was notified on November 17 that she was under police investigation for hate speech over a statement she posted to Facebook.


In her post, Gjevjon railed against trans-identified males who call themselves “lesbians,” and condemned trans activists who seek to criminalize women who oppose gender ideology.


“It’s just as impossible for men to become lesbian as it is for men to become pregnant,” Gjevjon wrote, “Men are men regardless of their sexual fetishes.”


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> Is this the beginning of the end?
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/judge-rules-transwomen-can-take-seats-on-public-boards-set-aside-for-women
> 
> 
> 
> Trans women should be regarded as the same as biological women when it comes to achieving a 50-50 balance of men and women on public boards, a Scottish judge has ruled.
> 
> 
> Lady Haldane in the Court of Session said trans women who hold a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) can take seats which are earmarked for women.
> 
> She said the definition of sex was "not limited to biological or birth sex", that it could include people with GRCs, and as a result trans women can be legally classed as women for the purposes of gender balance.
> 
> The landmark case could have major implications for the Scottish Government's Gender Recognition Reform Bill which receives its final reading in Holyrood next week.
> 
> However in her judgement Lady Haldane stated that sex and gender reassignment were separate and distinct characteristics but were not necessarily mutually exclusive.
> 
> She wrote: "I conclude that in this context... “sex” is not limited to biological or birth sex, but includes those in possession of a GRC obtained in accordance with the 2004 [Gender Recognition] Act stating their acquired gender, and thus their sex."


 So disappointing & so very worrying for us women especially if the proposed changes the GRA go ahead


----------



## Dimwit

Cleo38 said:


> Has anyone watched "Undercover: Sexual Harrassment -The Truth" on Ch4? Just finished watching it & it's bloody terrifying how many predatory men there are.
> 
> I suppose it's nothing new & I shouldn't be shocked but just shows how brazen they are to act as such in busy places as well as the sense of entitlement they have.


I watched it last night - it made me so angry, more so as I had been following the sentencing of Zara Aleena's murderer earlier.
Seeing how scared the reporter was at one point, even knowing that she had film crews and security to back her up was shocking, and as she pointed out, this was a busy area with police everywhere and yet nobody intervened when she was obviously being followed.


----------



## Cleo38

Dimwit said:


> I watched it last night - it made me so angry, more so as I had been following the sentencing of Zara Aleena's murderer earlier.
> Seeing how scared the reporter was at one point, even knowing that she had film crews and security to back her up was shocking, and as she pointed out, this was a busy area with police everywhere and yet nobody intervened when she was obviously being followed.


I was so angry on so many levels. It was just how they were obviously just there to target vulnerable young women & how they felt that any woman should be 'up for it'. Absolutely disgusting, how these men have such high opinions of themselves & such low ones of women is very scary.

At the beginning when she was discussing d*ck pics sent on data apps tho, this isn't new. Years ago I met my ex online via a normal dating website. At that time I naively posted a profile of myself (no pic ... & certainly no x rated one!!!! )) & thought I might get the odd message. I was inundated by hundreds of vile message from disgusting men sending me d*ck pics, violent porn, message of how they wanted to abuse me, etc. I honestly was shocked that they felt this was quite acceptable.

I messaged one particularly nasty man back & told him if he ever contacted me again then I would forward his content to the police. He was quite worried but his defence was that it was my fault as I should have said that I didn't want stuff like that ... WTF!!!


----------



## picaresque

Twitter thread by severely disabled woman on the importance of being able to access same sex intimate care (and how this right is threatened by self ID)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1603022204467351556
Another vulnerable minority (like incarcerated women) who it just isn’t fashionable to advocate for. No big banks or police forces or massive corporations on their side.


----------



## Cleo38

picaresque said:


> Twitter thread by severely disabled woman on the importance of being able to access same sex intimate care (and how this right is threatened by self ID)
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1603022204467351556
> Another vulnerable minority (like incarcerated women) who it just isn’t fashionable to advocate for. No big banks or police forces or massive corporations on their side.


That is just so sad. To have to have such reliance on others & then have your requests belittled or refused is horrible. To such little control over who touches you in not acceptable. And her concerns aren't unfounded, I gave read several stories of vulnerable women in care homes who have been raped, one if which was also infected with HIV.

And yes, it does very much depend on who is deemed worthy of public support. Funny how all the celebs who were supporting Mermaids charity suddenly went very quiet when the media ran with stories of concerns, etc (despite this all being public knowledge!)


----------



## picaresque

Cleo38 said:


> That is just so sad. To have to have such reliance on ithers & then have your requests belittled or refused is horrible. To such little control over who touches you in not acceptable. And her concerns aren't unfounded, I gave read several stories of vulnerable women in care homes who have been raped, one if which was also infected with HIV.


There was a case in the US (I think) fairly recently where a woman who had been in a care home in a vegetative state for several years was found to be pregnant. It was one of the (needless to say male) staff who had been raping her.


----------



## Cleo38

picaresque said:


> There was a case in the US (I think) fairly recently where a woman who had been in a care home in a vegetative state for several years was found to be pregnant. It was one of the (needless to say male) staff who had been raping her.



Yes, there was was. There was also one here that was held in closed courts (for some reason), the young woman was severely autistic & non verbal. The abuse of trust in staggering & her poor mother had to fight the system to try & get recognition for the crimes again her daughter.

It is almost laughable when people are so willing to dismiss concerns & tell us that 'it's not all men' & we shouldn't assume there to be so many predators when the documentary I mentioned previously showed this to be BS as within minutes of a young women pretending to be drunk there were men stalking her & that was in plain sight of others


----------



## mrs phas

Cleo38 said:


> It is almost laughable when people are so willing to dismiss concerns & tell us that 'it's not all men'


Sorry but it's NOT all men,
That's a sweeping statement the denigrates those who are decent, polite and well brought up (even if it was in a council house, on a council estate and on benefits)
And 
As a mum of 4 grown men, I'm very insulted that anyone would think that. It reflects upon my parenting of those men, in their formative years
My sons, and, actually, their friends, were brought up to respect women, to offer assistance and help where needed and back off if told no thank you, without getting huffy about it
And
Pour them into a taxi, or walk them home, after a night out, even if they don't know them,
So that they ARE safe 

Don't get me wrong, 
I know, full well, there ARE predators out there 
But 
Despite the redtops and social media (and inflammatory documentaries)
There are still more decent blokes, than not


----------



## Cleo38

mrs phas said:


> Sorry but it's NOT all men,
> That's a sweeping statement the denigrates those who are decent, polite and well brought up (even if it was in a council house, on a council estate and on benefits)
> And
> As a mum of 4 grown men, I'm very insulted that anyone would think that. It reflects upon my parenting of those men, in their formative years
> My sons, and, actually, their friends, were brought up to respect women, to offer assistance and help where needed and back off if told no thank you, without getting huffy about it
> And
> Pour them into a taxi, or walk them home, after a night out, even if they don't know them,
> So that they ARE safe
> 
> Don't get me wrong,
> I know, full well, there ARE predators out there
> But
> Despite the redtops and social media (and inflammatory documentaries)
> There are still more decent blokes, than not


The quote 'not all men' is constantly thrown at any woman who speak out about male violence .. why? No one says it's all men so why do we have to keep reiterating that? Why do we have to keep men happy that we're not targetting all of them?

The fact is there are ALOT of predatory men, there are ALOT of ordinary men with families, etc who are vile towards women. Where are the men's groups speaking up about this? Why shouldn't we be angry about this? Why should we keep quiet in case we upset some men?

Of course there are decent men out there ... where have I said otherwise?


----------



## mrs phas

I'm not going back through this and a myriad of other threads were you've displayed your obvious misandry, 
And 
Your misogyny towards women who, dare, speak up for their partners, brothers, sons, nephews, male friends etc 
I come from a severely abusive background, so much so, that, as I've mentioned before, there are certain actors/films that trigger such emotions I cannot watch them
Do I hate all men, do I look at all other men as abusers or predators 
NO!
Did I push those memories onto my own children 
NO!
Did I raise them to be honest, kind, generous, thoughtful, caring, to have great work ethics (yes, even my son who is on the spectrum) and to step in if they see ANYONE being abused, however that abuse manifests itself
You bet I did 
To make sure the behaviour I grew up with, did not pass through the generations and enable them to become the best selves they could be 
So, NO! 
I won't sit back and read such all encompassing statements, by someone, whom, themselves, doesn't support ALL women out there, including those who are doing a fantastic job of raising great men, with or without great men by their side


----------



## picaresque

Wow has it really taken over a hundred pages to get a non ironic ‘not all men’? @mrs phas I don’t doubt your sons are lovely young men who’ve been raised well. There are loads of good men out there, and kind and gentle boys. No one is denigrating your sons on this thread. I don’t think there are any ‘man haters’ here, including @Cleo38 who’s a valued contributor to the thread and no misogynist either!
I don’t hate men. I don’t hate women who have different political opinions to me. The worst, most violent and abusive person I’ve known in my life was female. I can still recognise that male violence against women and girls is widespread, injustices occur far too often because society just doesn’t like accepting that truth, and we should be able to talk about that here without getting the same old ‘feminazi/terf/karen/misandrist’ stuff from other women!


----------



## Cleo38

mrs phas said:


> I'm not going back through this and a myriad of other threads were you've displayed your obvious misandry,
> And
> Your misogyny towards women who, dare, speak up for their partners, brothers, sons, nephews, male friends etc
> I come from a severely abusive background, so much so, that, as I've mentioned before, there are certain actors/films that trigger such emotions I cannot watch them
> Do I hate all men, do I look at all other men as abusers or predators
> NO!
> Did I push those memories onto my own children
> NO!
> Did I raise them to be honest, kind, generous, thoughtful, caring, to have great work ethics (yes, even my son who is on the spectrum) and to step in if they see ANYONE being abused, however that abuse manifests itself
> You bet I did
> To make sure the behaviour I grew up with, did not pass through the generations and enable them to become the best selves they could be
> So, NO!
> I won't sit back and read such all encompassing statements, by someone, whom, themselves, doesn't support ALL women out there, including those who are doing a fantastic job of raising great men, with or without great men by their side


Can you show me where I have shown any misogyny towards women who disagree with me? Or any misandry? I have no idea why you suddenly feel this outrage. If you disagree with me fine, of course we all have different opinions, but if you are going to accuse me of things then at least provide evidence or otherwise I have no idea what you are on about

It really is tiresome that women's issues cannot be discussed without having to constantly reassure that we don't mean 'all men'


----------



## O2.0

FWIW @Cleo38 as a mother of a young man and the wife of a good husband, who also works with many good men, I don't feel like you've shown any obvious misandry or misogyny. 

I know this thread is difficult and triggering for all of us so I have compassion for all those feelings. I just hope we can take a deep breath and assume the best of fellow posters, not the worst.


----------



## kimthecat

Cleo38 said:


> Why shouldn't we be angry about this? Why should we keep quiet in case we upset some men?
> Of course there are decent men out there ... where have I said otherwise?


i don't think mentioning It's not all men means people are asking women to keep quiet about violence.. Maybe women get upset because their sons and partners are decent men and they dont want them to be tarred with the same brush. if they are not allowed to say this , isnt that keeping women quiet,?

I know you haven't said otherwise . yes. male violence is wide spread , I have been a victim myself . Women are violent to men too but because its not wide spread , it rarely gets mentioned.


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> i don't think mentioning It's not all men means people are asking women to keep quiet about violence.. Maybe women get upset because their sons and partners are decent men and they dont want them to be tarred with the same brush. if they are not allowed to say this , isnt that keeping women quiet,?
> 
> I know you haven't said otherwise . yes. male violence is wide spread , I have been a victim myself . Women are violent to men too but because its not wide spread , it rarely gets mentioned.


But why is this ALWAYS thrown at women who discuss male violence? It completely derails the debate. It happened when the #Metoo movement started & all of a sudden social media was awash with #Notallmen. Was this an underhand way to try to silence women? Very probably IMO

Same with International Women's day, the amount of men whining that this is sexist & "What about men?" are completely missing the point of this & also not even knowing there is an International Men's Day. Maybe if they promoted it a bit more others would be aware .... or are they waiting for us women to organise it?! 

I really don't understand why subjects regarding women constantly seem to get hijacked reminding us that men are victims if violence too ..., of course they are & it's usually from other men so why not start that debate rather than using women's platforms? It really does seem that any space for women whether it be physical one or an online one has to be invaded by men









How Many Ways Can Men Say “Not All Men”?


Very few people seem to find anything offensive about the presumption that feminism is a cover for “misandry.” The stereotype of the man-hating, ball-breaking scold is so deeply entrenched in cultu…




lithub.com


----------



## Lurcherlad

@Cleo38 … perhaps it was this sentence that was seen to imply that all men ARE predators?

“It is almost laughable when people are so willing to dismiss concerns & tell us that 'it's not all men' & we shouldn't assume there to be so many predators when the documentary I mentioned previously showed this to be BS”


----------



## Cleo38

Lurcherlad said:


> @Cleo38 … perhaps it was this sentence that was seen to imply that all men ARE predators?
> 
> “It is almost laughable when people are so willing to dismiss concerns & tell us that 'it's not all men' & we shouldn't assume there to be so many predators when the documentary I mentioned previously showed this to be BS”


The phrase is always thrown in to any debate regarding male violence .... always. It gets so tiresome.

That's was not my intention but if people are now going to get outraged & feel I am 'anti men' then this again is a re-occurring assumption that feminists hate men ..... again tiresome & so very worrying that this patriarchal view is so ingrained in our society 😢


----------



## Lurcherlad

Cleo38 said:


> The phrase is always thrown in to any debate regarding male violence .... always. It gets so tiresome.
> 
> That's was not my intention but if people are now going to get outraged & feel I am 'anti men' then this again is a re-occurring assumption that feminists hate men ..... again tiresome & so very worrying that this patriarchal view is so ingrained in our society 😢


Generalisations just aren’t helpful either way and will elicit a reaction, I guess.


----------



## Cleo38

Lurcherlad said:


> Generalisations just aren’t helpful either way and will elicit a reaction, I guess.


Personally I think we generalise all the time. It just seems some subjects (such as this) we constantly have to reassure that we don't mean 'all men' & find it odd but very typical of our patriarchal society.


----------



## O2.0

This is how it all came across to me:

Wow that show really highlighted how many predators there are out there, and how little is done about it.
Not all men are predatory.

Which frankly does feel dismissive. I feel like it goes without saying that not all men are predatory or dangerous. 
But on the heels of a show that highlights how many predators are out there who are operating quite brazenly how is it not dismissive to say "not all men."?

I think it's similar to responding to "black lives matter" with "all lives matter." Yes, of course all lives matter, but right now we're trying to comment on, discuss, and raise awareness about black lives and how when a person of color goes missing or is killed, there is far less likely to be a resolution or social outrage. It's not that all lives don't matter, it's that right now we're focusing on black lives. And it's okay to do that in this context.


----------



## Boxer123

We know it’s not all men I have some great men in my life. However it is ‘all women’ Find me a woman who hasn’t at some point been scared, leered at, groped. Who hasn’t at some point feared male violence. Leaned against on the train, flashed at, car slowing down when your running, followed.


We are taught from a young age to accept it. ‘Boys will be boys’ ‘he hurts you if he likes you’ ‘what were you wearing? Must have encouraged him’. 1% of rape cases getting a conviction.


O2.0 said:


> This is how it all came across to me:
> 
> Wow that show really highlighted how many predators there are out there, and how little is done about it.
> Not all men are predatory.
> 
> Which frankly does feel dismissive. I feel like it goes without saying that not all men are predatory or dangerous.
> But on the heels of a show that highlights how many predators are out there who are operating quite brazenly how is it not dismissive to say "not all men."?
> 
> I think it's similar to responding to "black lives matter" with "all lives matter." Yes, of course all lives matter, but right now we're trying to comment on, discuss, and raise awareness about black lives and how when a person of color goes missing or is killed, there is far less likely to be a resolution or social outrage. It's not that all lives don't matter, it's that right now we're focusing on black lives. And it's okay to do that in this context.


Just to add of course it’s not all men we know that. But it is all women. I cannot think of a single woman I know who hasn’t had some form of harassment. Groped, followed, flashed, harassed on a night out. 

A lot of these men don’t go on to rape and murder but it’s still a toxic culture where women are taught from a young age to accept it. ‘Boys will be boys, if they hurt you they like you, what were you wearing’

Knowing it’s not all men doesn’t make me feel safer when I’m out running alone and a car slows down to gawk at me or get separated from friends on a night out.


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> This is how it all came a
> cross to me:
> 
> Wow that show really highlighted how many predators there are out there, and how little is done about it.
> Not all men are predatory.
> 
> Which frankly does feel dismissive. I feel like it goes without saying that not all men are predatory or dangerous.
> But on the heels of a show that highlights how many predators are out there who are operating quite brazenly how is it not dismissive to say "not all men."?
> 
> I think it's similar to responding to "black lives matter" with "all lives matter." Yes, of course all lives matter, but right now we're trying to comment on, discuss, and raise awareness about black lives and how when a person of color goes missing or is killed, there is far less likely to be a resolution or social outrage. It's not that all lives don't matter, it's that right now we're focusing on black lives. And it's okay to do that in this context.


Yes, I remember when #BlackLivesMatter started trending & again an instant #AllLivesMatter started to trend again maybe to silence the moment. Much as I may not support the political group as such, I found it odd that people were so immediately defensive. Of course all lives matter, by highlighting cases of violence against black people, etc does not mean that everyone else doesn't count, it's just that some sections of society do not have the same voice (or people listening!) so need to speak out for their specific cause.


----------



## kimthecat

Cleo38 said:


> But why is this ALWAYS thrown at women who discuss male violence? It completely derails the debate. It happened when the #Metoo movement started & all of a sudden social media was awash with #Notallmen. Was this an underhand way to try to silence women? Very probably IMO
> 
> Same with International Women's day, the amount of men whining that this is sexist & "What about men?" are completely missing the point of this & also not even knowing there is an International Men's Day. Maybe if they promoted it a bit more others would be aware .... or are they waiting for us women to organise it?!
> 
> I really don't understand why subjects regarding women constantly seem to get hijacked reminding us that men are victims if violence too ..., of course they are & it's usually from other men so why not start that debate rather than using women's platforms? It really does seem that any space for women whether it be physical one or an online one has to be invaded by men
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Many Ways Can Men Say “Not All Men”?
> 
> 
> Very few people seem to find anything offensive about the presumption that feminism is a cover for “misandry.” The stereotype of the man-hating, ball-breaking scold is so deeply entrenched in cultu…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lithub.com


 I will read that link. Thank you. I hope to reply later but at the moment its bringing back to many bad memories so I'm dropping out now.


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> I will read that link. Thank you. I hope to reply later but at the moment its bringing back to many bad memories so I'm dropping out now.


Sorry, if it's been difficult for you. At times, certain subjects can be painful to discuss. I hope the link explains how I feel more eloquently than I am able to


----------



## picaresque

Oh here we go, eventually every discussion on feminism and women’s rights goes this way. The same with other movements I guess, like the all lives matter thing, which again is technically the truth but just said to shut people up.
There are big issues that affect men. A lot of talk about the high rates of male suicide. _Can you imagine_ going onto a forum thread on that topic and saying ‘but women’. No doubt it happens too, there are pretty tiresome terminally online mostly young libfems who parrot nasty slogans like ‘kill all men’* but the difference is it is absolutely not tolerated.
There’s also the issues of working class white boys and young men who in the UK are the demographic that struggle the most in school and often in other areas. Maybe men could do more about this?

*the irony being that these people pander the most to the patriarchy they say they wish to smash. It’s all just slogans and buzzwords to them, and you could say it’s the result of an insidious long term take down of real feminism which has been replaced with a corporate friendly toothless #bekind (terms and conditions apply) version. When a social movement is embraced by the aforementioned big banks and government entities and multinational corporations you do have to question who exactly is benefiting from it


----------



## Cleo38

picaresque said:


> Oh here we go, eventually every discussion on feminism and women’s rights goes this way. The same with other movements I guess, like the all lives matter thing, which again is technically the truth but just said to shut people up.
> There are big issues that affect men. A lot of talk about the high rates of male suicide. _Can you imagine_ going onto a forum thread on that topic and saying ‘but women’. No doubt it happens too, there are pretty tiresome terminally online mostly young libfems who parrot nasty slogans like ‘kill all men’* but the difference is it is absolutely not tolerated.
> There’s also the issues of working class white boys and young men who in the UK are the demographic that struggle the most in school and often in other areas. Maybe men could do more about this?
> 
> *the irony being that these people pander the most to the patriarchy they say they wish to smash. It’s all just slogans and buzzwords to them, and you could say it’s the result of an insidious long term take down of real feminism which has been replaced with a corporate friendly toothless #bekind (terms and conditions apply) version. When a social movement is embraced by the aforementioned big banks and government entities and multinational corporations you do have to question who exactly is benefiting from it


Yes, we have themed weeks at work highlighting various issues. One focussed on men's mental health as I work in a male dominated environment (construction) & the suicide rate for men in this industry is x3 higher than the national average. 

Despite my cynicism about these events ( lip service IMO as the pressure that is put on people to constantly meet targets continues to get even more unachievable!)but I suppose may help people or start conversations. 

I didn't hear of any comments from women regarding men being the focus of this topic tho


----------



## kimthecat

@Cleo38 Those male types in that link are like dinosaurs from the 70s


----------



## MollySmith

I am on a gender balance network. Every year in the three years I’ve been helping with IWD events, there’s always a guy or group of them who sad ‘what about us’ and one can feel the mansplaining. It’s guaranteed to the point we have a canned response on the team emails highlighting IMD. We have two weeks of events in March, the latest IMD here managed a coffee morning which MIND set up as there’s only 1 guy in our committee and when asked he didn’t want to do anything,

(The only area I’ve found any compassion is infertile men - there is no conclusive data on how many are affected since bullying and banter are too close to call but those who do speak out do so incredibly well and learn from the women who are a few steps ahead).


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> @Cleo38 Those male types in that link are like dinosaurs from the 70s


You'd be surprised at how many of these dinosaurs still exist.

A few years ago an older engineer joined our team, he's been working abroad most of his life (Asia). He used to click his fingers at me (as I sat opposite him) & tell me he had some emails that needed printing. He wasnt in a senior position to me (& even if he were thus would still be unnacceptable).... the joy I took in reminding him we were in the 21st century & actually the printers were so easy to use that even crusty, old engineers could work them!!!

He was 'asked' to leave in the end as he couldn't cope with the fact there were many women in the team: engineers, ecologists, analysts, project managers, quantity surveyors, etc & we had jobs to do which didnt include getting him a coffee or printing his emails 



MollySmith said:


> I am on a gender balance network. Every year in the three years I’ve been helping with IWD events, there’s always a guy or group of them who sad ‘what about us’ and one can feel the mansplaining. It’s guaranteed to the point we have a canned response on the team emails highlighting IMD. We have two weeks of events in March, the latest IMD here managed a coffee morning which MIND set up as there’s only 1 guy in our committee and when asked he didn’t want to do anything,
> 
> (The only area I’ve found any compassion is infertile men - there is no conclusive data on how many are affected since bullying and banter are too close to call but those who do speak out do so incredibly well and learn from the women who are a few steps ahead).


I wonder if because everything does usually centre around men, some really do feel excluded when other groups are made priority. Maybe it's something they've not really had to deal with before so just can't handle it well .....


----------



## picaresque

I know this is petty compared with most of the stuff in this thread but I just had a YouTube short come up in my feed about a ‘Karen’ themed restaurant in Melbourne. In case you’re not aware Karen is a term given to mostly older white women behaving rudely and unreasonably in public, although really it’s aimed at any woman who dares have opinions/stand up for herself. Attractive young waitresses play the part of the Karens for the amusement of the diners, many of them women. Do they not realise that when they get a bit older they’ll be the ‘Karens’ (or whatever the equivalent is by then)? It’s just a not so stealthy sanitised way of calling us bitches/witches/crones and so many women play along because they really don’t want to be on the end of it themselves. ‘I’m not a Karen, I’m a cool girl! Look, there’s one, pick on her instead!’. So much for sisterhood.

ETA I’ve just looked into it further and it’s a chain 🙃 There are restaurants in the UK as well


----------



## O2.0

Some of those Karen videos are really sad too. Clearly there's some MH issues with some of these women, they've reached a breaking point. You're obviously not okay if you lose it because McD's wasn't serving breakfast anymore 

Some of them really are entitled so and so's but that's not gender specific.


----------



## picaresque

O2.0 said:


> Some of those Karen videos are really sad too. Clearly there's some MH issues with some of these women, they've reached a breaking point. You're obviously not okay if you lose it because McD's wasn't serving breakfast anymore
> 
> Some of them really are entitled so and so's but that's not gender specific.


Some of them have obviously been provoked as well. By men usually. Sometimes they’re in fear*. And sometimes they do appear to just be angry, unpleasant people, it’s true. But we’re all lumped in together.

And the joke is that they (‘Karens’) always ask to speak to a manager. I suppose a man asking the same question would be given the benefit of the doubt that he has a good reason. It’s age old misogyny but it’s really popular with young so called progressives.

*that’s reminded me of a ‘Karen’ video which I think began with a traffic altercation that we don’t see but the man filming was angry enough to follow the woman home in his car so naturally when they both got out she was terrified and shouting a bit, and probably called the police (so Karen…). Horrible that most were on the man’s side because of the magic K word.


----------



## Jason25

picaresque said:


> I know this is petty compared with most of the stuff in this thread but I just had a YouTube short come up in my feed about a ‘Karen’ themed restaurant in Melbourne. In case you’re not aware Karen is a term given to mostly older white women behaving rudely and unreasonably in public, although really it’s aimed at any woman who dares have opinions/stand up for herself. Attractive young waitresses play the part of the Karens for the amusement of the diners, many of them women. Do they not realise that when they get a bit older they’ll be the ‘Karens’ (or whatever the equivalent is by then)? It’s just a not so stealthy sanitised way of calling us bitches/witches/crones and so many women play along because they really don’t want to be on the end of it themselves. ‘I’m not a Karen, I’m a cool girl! Look, there’s one, pick on her instead!’. So much for sisterhood.
> 
> ETA I’ve just looked into it further and it’s a chain 🙃 There are restaurants in the UK as well


I seen something about one of these Karen themed restaurants. No idea why you would go eat somewhere where the staff insult you 🤷‍♂️😂 anyway some guy took his daughter to one only for one of the staff to take it too far, called him a nonce in front of her 🤦‍♂️


----------



## Boxer123

Killamarsh deaths: Damien Bendall admits rape and four murders


Damien Bendall carried out "brutal, vicious and cruel attacks" on his defenceless victims.



www.bbc.co.uk





I have no words.


----------



## Cleo38

Boxer123 said:


> Killamarsh deaths: Damien Bendall admits rape and four murders
> 
> 
> Damien Bendall carried out "brutal, vicious and cruel attacks" on his defenceless victims.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no words.


Just bloody awful 😢


----------



## Boxer123

Cleo38 said:


> Just bloody awful 😢


Disgusting I can’t imagine how scared they must have been. Problem is these men are allowed to roam free until they kill someone. All the warning signs are there.


----------



## MollySmith

Andrew Tate arrested in Romania 








Andrew Tate detained in Romania over rape and human trafficking case


The controversial online influencer has been detained in Romania alongside his brother Tristan.



www.bbc.co.uk





and Greta Thunberg and tackling social media (she replied to him this week and allegedly the pizza box in one of his photos he posted to goad her may or may not have lead to his arrest) 








How Greta Thunberg mastered the art of the Twitter clapback


When Andrew Tate decided to seek attention from Thunberg, the climate activist had the perfect retort




www.independent.co.uk


----------



## O2.0

I've spent my entire life never hearing or seeing the name Andrew Tate. Now I can't get away from it.


----------



## Cleo38

Whilst I'm not a fan of Greta Thunberg's, but her posts referring to that pr*ck have been hilarious. Am loving all the memes mocking him.

(Although no way am I making light of the allegations made).


----------



## MollySmith

I’m grateful that I do know Greta’s work and until this week, had no idea of the monster that is Tate. I’ve tamed social media well! Ironic that Musk letting him back on, humiliated him. Sometimes there is karma.


----------



## DogLover1981

I only read about Andrew Tate passingly at one point and I didn't pay much attention to him. I must say that he's a truly vile and disgusting person after reading more about him.

I'm tempted to say that people found guilty of human trafficking or sex trafficking should eligible for the death penalty.


----------



## MollySmith

Helen Pidd on Twitter says "I've been a journalist for 18 years and the trial of Eleanor Williams is of the most unusual cases I've ever covered, with far reaching consequences for the community in Barrow in Furness"









Woman who lied about grooming gang guilty of perverting course of justice


Eleanor Williams, 22, claimed she had been trafficked by Asian gang and made false rape allegations




www.theguardian.com


----------



## Cleo38

MollySmith said:


> Helen Pidd on Twitter says "I've been a journalist for 18 years and the trial of Eleanor Williams is of the most unusual cases I've ever covered, with far reaching consequences for the community in Barrow in Furness"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Woman who lied about grooming gang guilty of perverting course of justice
> 
> 
> Eleanor Williams, 22, claimed she had been trafficked by Asian gang and made false rape allegations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com


I remember reading ( & posting) about this when it first came out. Her 'injuries' were horrific & there were many other young women on social media corroborating her story as well as her family.

There were also stories of the ringleader being involved with a reporter of the local newspaper, cocaine dealing, thrrats of violence, etc .... 

She must she incredibly disturbed but the men involved her had their lives ruined by these allegations, as well as other communities being affected by the fallout from all this. 

I don't doubt this type of crime continues in many areas & police continue to ignore it for many reasons, just seems that this will mean further victims will not get the support they need due this story.


----------



## MollySmith

Cleo38 said:


> I remember reading ( & posting) about this when it first came out. Her 'injuries' were horrific & there were many other young women on social media corroborating her story as well as her family.
> 
> There were also stories of the ringleader being involved with a reporter of the local newspaper, cocaine dealing, thrrats of violence, etc ....
> 
> She must she incredibly disturbed but the men involved her had their lives ruined by these allegations, as well as other communities being affected by the fallout from all this.
> 
> I don't doubt this type of crime continues in many areas & police continue to ignore it for many reasons, just seems that this will mean further victims will not get the support they need due this story.


Exactly. I ran out of words last night, Helen Pidd was talking to the 22 year old whose life was ruined by her accusation and that's awful. But it also undermines those who have experienced this type of crime.

I met someone who claimed to share a similar background to me, (not on the scale of Williams) but it took someone else to query her. The impact was huge on myself and friends who believed her and made us query trust in others. I cannot grasp what makes someone go to Tesco and hit themselves with a claw hammer, and for it to escalate so fast. I hope all get the support required to get past this including Williams, whatever that might be.


----------



## Cleo38

WTF?!!!! A 31yr old biological male is allowed to play football with 15yr old girls & access their changing room!!!

Unsurprisingly he's really happy about this ..... I'll bet the girls aren't tho 









31-year-old Dutch transgender has 'passion' for playing football with young girls, says being allowed into girls' dressing room was 'the best gift I could get'


A Dutch male-to-female transgender person, Marjolein Schepers (31), who was temporarily permitted to play with a team of under-20 girls in the Netherlands, celebrated being allowed to change in the girls’ dressing room by saying it was “the best gift I could get.” Marjolein says playing football...



rmx.news


----------



## Jason25

Cleo38 said:


> WTF?!!!! A 31yr old biological male is allowed to play football with 15yr old girls & access their changing room!!!
> 
> Unsurprisingly he's really happy about this ..... I'll bet the girls aren't tho
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 31-year-old Dutch transgender has 'passion' for playing football with young girls, says being allowed into girls' dressing room was 'the best gift I could get'
> 
> 
> A Dutch male-to-female transgender person, Marjolein Schepers (31), who was temporarily permitted to play with a team of under-20 girls in the Netherlands, celebrated being allowed to change in the girls’ dressing room by saying it was “the best gift I could get.” Marjolein says playing football...
> 
> 
> 
> rmx.news


It's an under 20s team, I can't see anywhere in the article where it states any of them are 15? 🤷‍♂️


----------



## Cleo38

Jason25 said:


> It's an under 20s team, I can't see anywhere in the article where it states any of them are 15? 🤷‍♂️


Apologies, it was another article I read that mentioned some of the girls were 15.

Regardless, this is an adult biological man undressing with young women ..... WRONG!!!

Why is he allowed to join a team for young girls? Pandering to yet another male sexual fetish. It get worse for girls & women every day. Years ago no one would have believed this thistle would be allowed to gapped, yet here we are. And if women & girls complain then we're are demonized & silenced


----------



## O2.0

Transgender stuff aside, why is a 31 year old allowed to play on an U-20 team? So now age doesn't mean anything either? Does that mean I can retire now and collect my social security instead of waiting until I'm 62?


----------



## Cleo38

O2.0 said:


> Transgender stuff aside, why is a 31 year old allowed to play on an U-20 team? So now age doesn't mean anything either? Does that mean I can retire now and collect my social security instead of waiting until I'm 62?


Exactly. Even if it were a biological woman of that age if would not be fair. 

Which leads me to believe this is not about being trans at all but yet another example of a male sexual fetish being promoted under the guise of 'inclusivity'. 

But where are the trans activists speaking out about these men? Apart from Blaire White I've not found many who are vocal.


----------



## O2.0

I found this article in Dutch that google kindly translated for me:
vpro.nl/programmas/tegenlicht/lees/artikelen/2022/Marjolein-Schepers-.html

I keep hearing about trans athletes saying that their sport keeps them going, that not being able to do their sport of choice is imperative to their mental health. Which I get. I've been sidelined from running for almost a year now with one injury after another. Running keeps me sane. So I have to find other outlets to keep me sane. It's called coping. I guess that's a forgotten skill these days? 

Do these players think they're the only ones who are prevented from doing their sport of choice? Players have career ending injuries unfortunately. It's one of those things. And you move on and do something else, or stay in the sport some other way. Why should being transgender be any different? According to this article, the transition itself may have affected Marjolein enough to prevent her from playing without pain. So why the push to overlook her age and find a team? We don't do that for injured players. None of it makes sense and I feel us moving towards realizing how crazy this all is. I sure hope!


----------



## mrs phas

And *this* is the perfect answer to all the sporting controversy 









British Triathlon becomes first body to ban all transgender women from competing in female events


British Triathlon has become the first sports governing body to implement an outright ban on transgender athletes from participating in competitive female triathlon events. The body announced its intention to amend its men’s category to “open,” inviting transgender women who were biologically...



rmx.news


----------



## Soph x

I agree that a 30+ year old individual should not be changing with teenagers, nor should they be allowed to play in an under 20s team, as they, clearly, are not under 20.

However, I do find it sad that transgender individuals are being banned from playing in their sports teams. I understand in some instances they may have a biological advantage, but it is still sad they are excluded like that.


----------



## O2.0

Soph x said:


> transgender individuals are being banned from playing in their sports teams.


There is not a single ban on transgender individuals playing their sports, the only thing they are being asked to do is play according to their biological sex. 

Example: No one said Lia Thomas couldn't continue her swimming career on the men's team. She _chose_ to transition at the height of her career (which would have been a short one as it is for pretty much ALL college athletes) and the transition affected her enough that she was no longer competitive on the men's team at which point she asked to be put on the women's team. 

And that's where it sticks for me. I coach male and female athletes. All sorts of things can happen to curb your edge and make you less competitive than you were the previous season. Sometimes it's injury, sometimes it's illness, sometimes it's a combination of factors, sometimes it's a mind **** going on in your head... But none of these athletes who found their times getting longer and longer had the option to say "oh, let me try an easier team." 

If medical transition is necessary, and I'm not denying that it is for some people, then one of the things to consider is how that's going to affect your sport and your ability to compete in that sport. Just like _every_ athlete has to do with major life decisions.


----------



## mrs phas

Soph x said:


> However, I do find it sad that transgender individuals are being banned from playing in their sports teams. I understand in some instances they may have a biological advantage, but it is still sad they are excluded like that.


No one saying they can't, or are banned from playing in their sports teams
What *IS* being said, however, is that they cannot play in *womens* teams
Let's go back a few years and imagine, just for a moment
Bjorn Borg, changing gender at the height of his playing time and playing Martina Navratilova, at the height of hers, at Wimbledon
Would anyone, for even a second, think that would be a fair match ?
Or
Bringing it more to modern day,
Michael Phelps becoming Michelle Phelps and swimming against Katie Ledecky,
Would that be a fair competition?
Common sense has to prevail, somewhere, surely


----------



## mrs phas

Sorry @O2.0 
We posted similar posts, at same time


----------



## Soph x

O2.0 said:


> There is not a single ban on transgender individuals playing their sports, the only thing they are being asked to do is play according to their biological sex.





mrs phas said:


> No one saying they can't, or are banned from playing in their sports teams
> What *IS* being said, however, is that they cannot play in *womens* teams


Think you both misunderstood what I said. I said they’re being banned from playing in their _sports teams_, not being banned from playing sports altogether. Transgender individuals will play in the team of the gender they identify as, and I find it sad they’re being told they can’t. It’s horrible to know people are being isolated/excluded due to advantages after they’ve made a big life choice to transition and become the person they really are.

I personally don’t agree with it, but we all have our own opinions! 😊


----------



## O2.0

Soph x said:


> It’s horrible to know people are being isolated/excluded due to advantages


Can you explain what this means? What advantages do you mean? Genuinely just wanting to understand your POV here, nothing more


----------



## mrs phas

[/QUOTE]


Soph x said:


> Think you both misunderstood what I said. I said they’re being banned from playing in their _sports teams_, not being banned from playing sports altogether.


Nope didn't misunderstand at all
So much so that i quoted your post that I was rebutting
But
Then quantified my statement by applying common sense

Having open teams in which anyone can chose to play, as with the article I posted above
That means no one is forced to be at a disadvantage, by having to compete against someone who has already gone, even a parsec, into male puberty and the advantages that gives over natal women
Which even you, above, recognise they have





> . It’s horrible to know people are being isolated/excluded due to advantages


Edit cos I, stupidly, quoted my own quote


----------



## Soph x

O2.0 said:


> Can you explain what this means? What advantages do you mean? Genuinely just wanting to understand your POV here, nothing more


Advantages I mean the biological advantages they’re being banned for e.g. I’m not sure who it was but someone posted an article that mentioned about testosterone being a factor etc.

I do understand the reasoning behind it, but I just don’t like it. I completely understand that historically, naturally and/or typically, men are stronger or have more endurance than women. Historically they needed to be!

So I understand why the bans are in place, I’m just not a fan of it. For ages there’s been this HUGE stigma against being a part of the LGBTQ+ community, and it’s only really in recent years there’s started to be more of a breakthrough with the acceptance of the community, but there’s still a long way to go. I just feel sad that transgender individuals have made this big, and probably nerve wrecking, choice to transition into the person they really are after however long of being stuck, and it feels like the world just isn’t quite caught up with it yet.

As I said, it’s only really recently there’s been progression with acceptance of the LGBTQ+ community, so I think it’s a learning curve for everyone at the moment on how some things need to be adapted to suit. For example, gender neutral toilets are becoming more common 😊


----------



## mrs phas

Soph x said:


> I do understand the reasoning behind it, but I just don’t like it. I completely understand that historically, naturally and/or typically, men are stronger or have more endurance than women


Hang on a minute
There's a shed load of difference between running 100m and sharing a toilet block
how can men,
who have transitioned*AFTER* puberty,
*EVER* compete against natal women,
And it be on a level playing field
You're rebutting your own arguement, right there, in your own words
The answer is simple
Whether anyone thinks it's unfair, or not right
They *CAN'T ,*
Its scientifically impossible, however they perceive themselves


----------



## Soph x

mrs phas said:


> Hang on a minute
> There's a shed load of difference between running 100m and sharing a toilet block
> how can men,
> who have transitioned*AFTER* puberty,
> *EVER* compete against natal women,
> And it be on a level playing field
> You're rebutting your own arguement, right there, in your own words
> The answer is simple
> Whether anyone thinks it's unfair, or not right
> They *CAN'T ,*
> Its scientifically impossible, however they perceive themselves


I’m not, I’m literally saying I understand it but just don’t like it.

I also know there’s a big difference between sports and toilets… I’m not thick. It was an example to show how the world is adapting to support the community but we’ve still got a way to go and are all learning, which is what my whole post was about.

I don’t think you’re understanding the point I’m trying to get across, and you’re also being argumentative in a simple discussion so this is the last I’ll say on the matter.


----------



## O2.0

Oh I think I see what you're saying, that it's because of the advantage of being biological male (real or perceived) that transgender women are being excluded from participating on female teams or in female sports. 

I do agree that it's just recently that there has been more acceptance of the LGBT community, though it's been discussed somewhat on this thread that some of the trans activist rhetoric is pretty homophobic at its root. So there's that....

But back to sports. 
I think sometimes these things are easier to talk about when you try to eliminate some of the emotion. 
So let's take age instead of gender. Something people often don't feel like they identify with the age they are, so there is some similarity. 
I think it's clear to all of us that it would not be okay to allow a 16 year old to play rugby on a 10 year old's team. Sure, there might be some really huge 10 year olds out there, and some really tiny, slow to develop 16 year olds that _could_ on some level be a more even match-up, but in general, in most cases, it would be vastly unfair to allow 16 year olds on a 10 year old team. We understand that. It's not being exclusionary to 16 year olds, it's being fair to the 10 year olds. 

There are a lot of things that exclude athletes. Much of which seems arbitrary and unfair, but we don't make concessions for any of them except transgenderism. 
For example as a youngster I was fairly good at artistic gymnastics. Then I had a growth spurt and it was clear I was going to be much taller than the average woman. I was told I could not continue with artistic gymnastics. Not out of unkindness, but simply because a 5'9" woman, no matter how talented, isn't going to have room to do much on a beam that is a set length, or a floor that is a set area, or uneven bars that are a set distance apart. I simply wasn't going to fit on the equipment.

My height is no different from someone's severe gender dysphoria. It's not something I can control, it is what it is, but it also ended any hopes I had of becoming a professional gymnast. I wasn't that set on gymnastics, but you get the idea. I didn't ask for the whole sport to be changed to accommodate me and people like me, I just moved on with my life and on to other activities. 

There are open categories in many sports where men and women can compete together if they chose to. Collegiate fencing for example has women's, men's, and open for both men and women. Most fencers fight in 2 of the 3 categories to give themselves more opportunities to fight different fencers. 
By adding more open categories in sports that don't have them, that allows people to compete. I don't see why there needs to be more adjustment than that. 

Absolutely we need to be accepting and inclusive of transgender people. Society should accept people however they wish to present themselves. No one should be denied a job, or a loan, or housing based on their gender expression. One of the very few places we're asking to draw a line is in sports. And not for wanting to exclude anyone, but to protect women's hard fought spaces in sports. That's not a big ask.


----------



## Linda Weasel

Surely (as @O2.0 says, I think) any huge decision that will be life-changing, needs every aspect of the change given consideration. There will be pros and cons to be weighed up. Some gains and some losses.

Nobody can have everything they want in this life, and if competitive sport is something that can’t be competed in by trans people then surely this should be part of the equation they have already considered.


----------



## mrs phas

Soph x said:


> I don’t think you’re understanding the point I’m trying to get across, and you’re also being argumentative in a simple discussion so this is the last I’ll say on the matter.


Oh I totally understand your point and I'm not being deliberately argumentative, obtuse, nor, if indeed you've thought that, offensive 
Just giving an opposing POV 
But
Just because we don't like something, doesn't mean the majority have to acquiesce to the, very small, but, disproportionately loud , minority wishes

Latest census (2021) shows that less than 1.8 million people, out of nearly 68 million, in the UK, view themselves as part of the LGBTQ+ community
I'm a Rishi Sunak failure, so I have no idea what percentage that is
But
I do know that it's small, compared to the voice it seems to have across platforms, social and in real life


----------



## MollySmith

Duplicated reply


----------



## MollySmith

Soph x said:


> Think you both misunderstood what I said. I said they’re being banned from playing in their _sports teams_, not being banned from playing sports altogether. Transgender individuals will play in the team of the gender they identify as, and I find it sad they’re being told they can’t. It’s horrible to know people are being isolated/excluded due to advantages after they’ve made a big life choice to transition and become the person they really are.
> 
> I personally don’t agree with it, but we all have our own opinions! 😊


I hear you and as a DEIB trainer I sit on my hands a lot! My view is that if an environment doesn’t welcome all genders then it needs to be addressed by a cross section of those it excludes and those who it doesn’t to create learning and change.

I’m increasingly thinking sport has the problem (evidenced by the examples here and the appalling corruption of morals behind the World Cup). What that solution is, I don’t know and I’m the wrong person to answer.


----------



## O2.0

Sports don't have a problem - I mean, they may in other areas, but Competitive Sports, by their very nature are designed to exclude a large number of people, and we need to stop assuming that any act of exclusion is a bad thing. This is where everyone gets a participation trophy has led us. And it's not a good path. 

Again, by their very nature, sports exclude most people. It's called competition. 
If 100 people run a race, 99 of them will be excluded from winning. And of those 100 runners there were thousands more who didn't even qualify to run that race. 
You can't just sign up for the Boston Marathon, you have to qualify by running other sanctioned races fast enough (or raise enough money to run). 
You can't just sign up for the olympics, you have to qualify with your performance, and if you don't you're excluded from participating. That is the nature of competitive practices. 

Now, we can have a conversation about whether competition is a good thing or not. But to pretend that sports are "excluding" trans people without acknowledging that ALL people in sports will be excluded at some point or another is just silly. Athletes age out of their sport. They get injured, they fall ill, they have MH issues that affect their performance (Simone Biles anyone?). And they overcome or move on. It's not easy, but that's another issue, no one said this "life" thing was supposed to be easy. 

We have to accept that sports are not bathrooms. All humans have to pee at some point. Make bathrooms accessible. Sports are not the same category. It's okay to exclude people from sports, in fact, it's the very nature of competition. 
And to be clear, I don't mean recreational sports or doing your own practice, clearly I'm talking about competitive sports which is what the trans activists are talking about too. 

Now, there is very much a conversation to be had about making sports more accessible in underprivileged countries and communities. And forgive me if I find that conversation much more important than some privileged white man getting his kinks in a girls locker room


----------



## Lurcherlad

There is an issue with heterosexual teenage girls leaving football because of the overt sexuality between some lesbian couples in the changing rooms and showers as well as pressure to “convert”.

The governing bodies are aware of it, but have yet to come up with a solution to safeguard everyone for fear of offending the LGBTQ+ community.


----------



## MollySmith

O2.0 said:


> Sports don't have a problem - I mean, they may in other areas, but Competitive Sports, by their very nature are designed to exclude a large number of people, and we need to stop assuming that any act of exclusion is a bad thing. This is where everyone gets a participation trophy has led us. And it's not a good path.
> 
> Again, by their very nature, sports exclude most people. It's called competition.
> If 100 people run a race, 99 of them will be excluded from winning. And of those 100 runners there were thousands more who didn't even qualify to run that race.
> You can't just sign up for the Boston Marathon, you have to qualify by running other sanctioned races fast enough (or raise enough money to run).
> You can't just sign up for the olympics, you have to qualify with your performance, and if you don't you're excluded from participating. That is the nature of competitive practices.
> 
> Now, we can have a conversation about whether competition is a good thing or not. But to pretend that sports are "excluding" trans people without acknowledging that ALL people in sports will be excluded at some point or another is just silly. Athletes age out of their sport. They get injured, they fall ill, they have MH issues that affect their performance (Simone Biles anyone?). And they overcome or move on. It's not easy, but that's another issue, no one said this "life" thing was supposed to be easy.
> 
> We have to accept that sports are not bathrooms. All humans have to pee at some point. Make bathrooms accessible. Sports are not the same category. It's okay to exclude people from sports, in fact, it's the very nature of competition.
> And to be clear, I don't mean recreational sports or doing your own practice, clearly I'm talking about competitive sports which is what the trans activists are talking about too.
> 
> Now, there is very much a conversation to be had about making sports more accessible in underprivileged countries and communities. And forgive me if I find that conversation much more important than some privileged white man getting his kinks in a girls locker room


Thanks for listing all the ways in which sport has a problem. I am very very aware of exclusion with in for other private reasons. Also thanks for useful reminder on how competitive sport and qualification works. I’m sure that’s handy for anyone commenting who isn’t familiar.


----------



## O2.0

MollySmith said:


> Thanks for listing all the ways in which sport has a problem. I am very very aware of exclusion with in for other private reasons. Also thanks for useful reminder on how competitive sport and qualification works. I’m sure that’s handy for anyone commenting who isn’t familiar.


I'm not sure how to interpret this post, I feel like it's trying to be sarcastic on some level, but I'm not sure, so I'm going to take it at face value.

My intent was not to remind anyone that sports is competitive, we all know that. My intent was to remind us that we make exclusions all the time, and that just because someone is excluded is not necessarily a bad thing.

If a coach is putting together an U15s team with the intent of that team being competitive, they're likely going to exclude anyone who has aged out, as well as anyone who's not a good fit for the team - for whatever reason, athletic ability is just one of them. Coaches exclude players with bad attitudes, who have questionable social media presence, all sorts of things. And that is their prerogative as a coach building a team.

Universities exclude students based on academic ability.
Jobs exclude applicants based on qualifications to do the job.
Would you hire someone with no artistic talent and no knowledge of the industry to be a graphic artist? Of course not. Is that being exclusive, or is it being discerning and understanding the requirements of the job?

The flip side is, including someone just to avoid push back is not fair either. Including someone on a team who can't keep up athletically is unfair to the athlete. Hiring someone who's not right for the job just to avoid accusations of bias is not fair to that person.

Inclusivity above everything is not sustainable and nor is it even desirable.


----------



## Deguslave

I can see your point @O2.0. This is where the whole ethos of positive discrimination and the 'we can't have any losers' has got us. Life is competitive on almost every level and the best person for the particular job is the best person for the particular job, be they white, black, male, female, straight, trans, lbgtq or from mars. 

We have a whole generation now who have been taught, yes taught, from a very early age that they the world owes them a living and they are entitled to everything they want. We need to get back to teaching the younger generations about healthy competition and the fact you can't have everything you want in this life and that at some point you have to accept that there will be disappointments.


----------



## MollySmith

O2.0 said:


> I'm not sure how to interpret this post, I feel like it's trying to be sarcastic on some level, but I'm not sure, so I'm going to take it at face value.
> 
> My intent was not to remind anyone that sports is competitive, we all know that. My intent was to remind us that we make exclusions all the time, and that just because someone is excluded is not necessarily a bad thing.
> 
> If a coach is putting together an U15s team with the intent of that team being competitive, they're likely going to exclude anyone who has aged out, as well as anyone who's not a good fit for the team - for whatever reason, athletic ability is just one of them. Coaches exclude players with bad attitudes, who have questionable social media presence, all sorts of things. And that is their prerogative as a coach building a team.
> 
> Universities exclude students based on academic ability.
> Jobs exclude applicants based on qualifications to do the job.
> Would you hire someone with no artistic talent and no knowledge of the industry to be a graphic artist? Of course not. Is that being exclusive, or is it being discerning and understanding the requirements of the job?
> 
> The flip side is, including someone just to avoid push back is not fair either. Including someone on a team who can't keep up athletically is unfair to the athlete. Hiring someone who's not right for the job just to avoid accusations of bias is not fair to that person.
> 
> Inclusivity above everything is not sustainable and nor is it even desirable.


See, I'm not sure how to reply to this as my response was meant well. You highlighted a lot of stuff that I hadn't considered had I lent this the detail that you had. Your post was a good reminder of the wider exclusions beyond the ones we may think we know.

I absolutely do not want to reveal anything so personal on here, but to tell you that I do know physical exclusion. Perhaps - to avoid the jumping on my posts from others which seems to historically happen and isn't good for me or others - we'll leave it there.


----------



## O2.0

Deguslave said:


> We need to get back to teaching the younger generations about healthy competition and the fact you can't have everything you want in this life and that at some point you have to accept that there will be disappointments.


I think it comes from a good place, not wanting someone to feel disappointment, but we forgot that no matter how hard you try to shield someone (parents trying to shield their children), there will be disappointment at some point. 
The kinder option is not to shield people from feeling disappointed, but to support them through disappointment and give them the tools to cope with it in a healthy, productive way. 



MollySmith said:


> I absolutely do not want to reveal anything so personal on here, but to tell you that I do know physical exclusion.


 We all do. This is our common humanity that we will all at some point or another have a physical limitation and be excluded because of it. Every one of us. Sometimes it's temporary, sometimes it's permanent, but it is a common experience for all of us. 
Depending on your self-image and self-identity, and the limitation, it can be a bigger deal for some than others.


----------



## Dimwit

As others have said, sport is inherently exclusionary - it has to be. Whether those exclusions are based on skill level (you wouldn't make a beginner in martial arts fight a black belt), for safety reasons (weight categories in boxing etc.) or to give competitors a level playing field (which is why there are different categories of disability in the paralympics etc). It has long been recognised AND SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN that biological males have an advantage over females for many reasons (strength, muscle mass and distribution, mechanics of a slightly different skeletal system) and this is the reason that female categories were introduced into sports. 
The issue with allowing trans athletes to compete in the category of their desired gender is that this is no longer a level playing field, and no amount of training by biological females can overcome this.

I read an interesting interview with a trans male who was one of the top female swimmers (tipped for the olympics etc.) who now competes in male classes and now pretty much finishes last but accepts that this is the sacrifice that he made and that he gains a lot more from living as a male than he has lost by no longer being competitive.

I am not saying that trans people should not be allowed to compete in sports - they absolutely should, but NOT at the expense of biological females. At best it is unfair as even the best female athlete in the world cannot compete with males at the equivalent level (There was a video somewhere showing that the fastest 400m female runner would be beaten by about 90% of college-level male runners), and at worst it is downright dangerous (looking at contact sports such as rugby etc.). There are still relatively few data but it does seem clear that developmentally being male will still confer an advantage, even if that male then transitions to female and takes hormone blockers etc. and this should be recognised. It should be up to sporting bodies to ensure that there are sufficient categories to allow trans athletes a chance to compete on a level playing field.


----------



## O2.0

Dimwit said:


> I am not saying that trans people should not be allowed to compete in sports - they absolutely should, but NOT at the expense of biological females.


I think this best summarizes it all. What is that saying about how your rights end where they affect mine? Your right to stretch your arm end when it starts hitting my nose? 

Trans athletes absolutely have a place in sports, and so do women. We can't eliminate one to accommodate the other.


----------

