Is a man a man and a woman a woman?

[NFN FC 1,123]

26 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

It isn't. But it will be. The Tories will make it so. Because it's one of the few things where the majority of people agree with the fundamental thrust of their argument. We're male or we're female. I have absolutely no issue with people feeling like they are the opposite sex and dressing how they think they should to reflect that. In reality, I think those feelings only exist because as a society we still enforce rigid gender stereotypes. If everyone was allowed to wear what they wanted and play with the toys they felt like playing with as a kid, I don't think gender dysphoria would exist. There would just be more men wearing dresses and crocheting and more women in suits and playing Rugby. Neither would, nor should, feel out of place.

The goal should be for men in skirts to feel comfortable taking a slash in the gents and to not be abused for feeling comfortable embarking on a harmless way of life, nor should they feel they need to change their pronouns or mutilate themselves through surgery to be happy.

However, until that goal can be achieved, women's only spaces and sports should not be sacrificed to appease a minority who understandably don't feel entirely comfortable in society as it is today. Most people think that but Starmer is too scared to side with that opinion, hence the Tory strategy of shining a spotlight on it.

Having said that, he was quite happy to say it in the Labour leadership election, but then he was happy to lie through his teeth to achieve victory in that particular sphere. I'm not sure anything he pledged in that contest has survived his time as leader of the opposition. And no one really bats any eyelid at a level of brazen, overt duplicitiousness that might even make Boris blush.

I agree with what you are saying.

What is the responsibility of the government in this?

[Fen Canary 874]

4 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Really? She wasn't on a chat show and asked her opinion. She wasn't writing another novel. She tweeted and entered the fray.

That she received death threats is appalling. But just because she is a famous author doesn't give her the excuse that she will actually use the term menstruate to voice her opinion. Did any of you actually read her tweet?

The disturbing thing is your willingness to give a binary decision on a subject that doesn't involve you. You are not in  the position of someone who feels trapped and confused. But no benevolencefrom you. No. You are a man and a man you will be. Now fcuk off and act like a man is your prevailing attitude.

I have no grounds to give a decision one way or the other. I am just prepeared to give these people a bit of consideration.

So she’s not allowed an opinion on the matter, even though as a woman it is her and other women that would potentially have to give up their single sex spaces to biological men just because the man says he feels like a woman? And because you deem her opinion to be incorrect the abuse on X/Twitter is entirely justified?

Also why doesn’t the subject involve me? I have female friends and family members who would be affected by allowing biological men to compete in women’s sport for instance, and their opinions and safety would affect me. Therefore I feel I have as much right to an opinion on the subject as anybody else. Resorting to insults is simply childish.

You also still haven’t answered my question. Would you be happy for a close female family member to have to share a changing room with Eddie Izzard? 

[Herman 9,838]

1 hour ago, Fen Canary said:

People are quite capable of talking about more than one subject at any given time. There’s plenty of other threads about the various problems the country faces if you want to discuss them but this one is about the transgender debate, therefore I think replies should be centred around the subject 

I'm not talking about this forum in particular, we are more than capable of having more than one conversation, of course.

[Fen Canary 874]

Just now, Herman said:

I'm not talking about this forum in particular, we are more than capable of having more than one conversation, of course.

Fair enough, apologies then. It wasn’t aimed at you particularly but I get sick of threads that go off an a tangent because one side uses distraction 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

17 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

So she’s not allowed an opinion on the matter, even though as a woman it is her and other women that would potentially have to give up their single sex spaces to biological men just because the man says he feels like a woman? And because you deem her opinion to be incorrect the abuse on X/Twitter is entirely justified?

Also why doesn’t the subject involve me? I have female friends and family members who would be affected by allowing biological men to compete in women’s sport for instance, and their opinions and safety would affect me. Therefore I feel I have as much right to an opinion on the subject as anybody else. Resorting to insults is simply childish.

You also still haven’t answered my question. Would you be happy for a close female family member to have to share a changing room with Eddie Izzard? 

Why bring sport into it? Most sports are not allowing transgenders to compete. How was I being childish and insulting? I just said you were pigeonholing all involved in the transgender argument. I have already said the frivilous ones are annoying. But because I have no idea how a genuine transgender person feels, I am prepared to cut them some slack which you obviously will not.

And of course it wouldn't bother me about Izzard. What do you think he would do? I was bigoted once. My wife and I married young and had our first child within a year. One evening we were to go out and my wife got a friend to babysit. It was a chap she knew. While out she told me he was gay. I was angry. Letting a gay babysit. But as we talked it became clear that this guy would not harm our baby. And ever since that night I have totally abandoned prejudice and after becoming a union secretary have always sought compromise.

 

[canarydan23 4,060]

23 minutes ago, NFN FC said:

I agree with what you are saying.

What is the responsibility of the government in this?

The government's responsibility is, and should always be, to improve the lives of its citizens; otherwise, what's the point? In my humble but insignificant opinion, they should;

1) Ban the prescribing of puberty blockers to minors

2) Issue guidance to sports governing agencies to refuse male-born individuals participation in female sports, from grassroots level up

3) Sort out the horrendous metal health provision in this country and create widespread access to therapists on the NHS. Just a tiny portion of a wealth tax or a negligible financial transactions tax would generate enough to fund a system whereby seeing a therapist would be as easy as seeing a GP. This would undoubtedly prevent most people feeling they need to go down the surgical route to deal with their dysphoria

4) Deal harshly with any proven cases of abuse or assault on individuals based on their gender identity

The Tories won't do any of this, as they see the issue as a potentially profitable political football. Labour won't do any of this because Keir Starmer is scared of his own shadow, never mind the shadows and corporeal forms of journalists, his financial backers and lobbyists.

[canarydan23 4,060]

23 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

Fair enough, apologies then. It wasn’t aimed at you particularly but I get sick of threads that go off an a tangent because one side uses distraction 

So you're sick of people causing threads on an insignificant football forum to go off on an tangent by using distraction, but no bothered by the UK Government doing something similar on a national scale?!

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

1 minute ago, canarydan23 said:

The government's responsibility is, and should always be, to improve the lives of its citizens; otherwise, what's the point? In my humble but insignificant opinion, they should;

1) Ban the prescribing of puberty blockers to minors

2) Issue guidance to sports governing agencies to refuse male-born individuals participation in female sports, from grassroots level up

3) Sort out the horrendous metal health provision in this country and create widespread access to therapists on the NHS. Just a tiny portion of a wealth tax or a negligible financial transactions tax would generate enough to fund a system whereby seeing a therapist would be as easy as seeing a GP. This would undoubtedly prevent most people feeling they need to go down the surgical route to deal with their dysphoria

4) Deal harshly with any proven cases of abuse or assault on individuals based on their gender identity

The Tories won't do any of this, as they see the issue as a potentially profitable political football. Labour won't do any of this because Keir Starmer is scared of his own shadow, never mind the shadows and corporeal forms of journalists, his financial backers and lobbyists.

Agree with virtually all except in 2 it has to be reciprocal and in 3 I think the patient has to have a second opinion. I am particularly concerned about suicide.

[canarydan23 4,060]

1 minute ago, keelansgrandad said:

Agree with virtually all except in 2 it has to be reciprocal and in 3 I think the patient has to have a second opinion. I am particularly concerned about suicide.

Two is a no brainer for me, it can't be reciprocal because if you have a male-born athlete adamant that they should be able to play with females, there should be guidance or legislation that organisers can point to that says, nope, sorry, you're out. I'm all for creating a third, mixed stream to be more inclusive to trans people, but female sports should remain for females only. I have two daughters and have reams and reams of anecdotal, first-hand evidence of how massive a benefit participation in sport can have for young and teenage girls. Chuck a boy-by-birth person into those environments and several girls will leave. Not just the one who is dropped to make space (because that's how sports work, squads of all sport have finite numbers).

Agree on three, but in a properly-funded NHS, it wouldn't be difficult to get two separate opinions on anything, whether that's a physical or mental health issue.

[Nuff Said 5,179]

The thing about improved mental health provision is that it would *in the long term* probably save the country more than it costs. Reduced sickness rates so less cost to business (and the government as less statutory sick pay), people treated before they become emergencies putting additional strain on the health service as it needs to provide urgent intensive care, reduced suicide rates so less impact on the emergency services, improved quality of life for those treated and probably more. 
 

But are we going to see Rishi “long term” Sunak acting? Are we ****.

[Naturalcynic 677]

1 hour ago, keelansgrandad said:

Really? She wasn't on a chat show and asked her opinion. She wasn't writing another novel. She tweeted and entered the fray.

That she received death threats is appalling. But just because she is a famous author doesn't give her the excuse that she will actually use the term menstruate to voice her opinion. Did any of you actually read her tweet?

The disturbing thing is your willingness to give a binary decision on a subject that doesn't involve you. You are not in  the position of someone who feels trapped and confused. But no benevolencefrom you. No. You are a man and a man you will be. Now fcuk off and act like a man is your prevailing attitude.

I have no grounds to give a decision one way or the other. I am just prepeared to give these people a bit of consideration.

But seemingly not JK Rowling.

[Barbe bleu 833]

7 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

 

As Gary Lineker said, this is the politics of Germany in the 1930's. I'm a bit shocked that it still works. Some people need to read a history book and take a long hard look at themselves. 

If Hitler had got involved in a long running debate about whether sex and gender are social constructs with a footballer who had retired in 1899 we could have avoided a lot of unpleasantness and because these debates go on so long that we could be looking forward to  the 100th year of world peace

 

Edited October 5, 2023 by Barbe bleu

[Aggy 766]

9 hours ago, Herman said:

Why is this an issue that gets the right wingers so irate? Most sensible people are of the live and let live attitude, whether they get it or not. 

I haven’t bothered reading the rest of this thread but my guess is there is no sensible response to this.

[Fen Canary 874]

1 hour ago, keelansgrandad said:

Why bring sport into it? Most sports are not allowing transgenders to compete. How was I being childish and insulting? I just said you were pigeonholing all involved in the transgender argument. I have already said the frivilous ones are annoying. But because I have no idea how a genuine transgender person feels, I am prepared to cut them some slack which you obviously will not.

And of course it wouldn't bother me about Izzard. What do you think he would do? I was bigoted once. My wife and I married young and had our first child within a year. One evening we were to go out and my wife got a friend to babysit. It was a chap she knew. While out she told me he was gay. I was angry. Letting a gay babysit. But as we talked it became clear that this guy would not harm our baby. And ever since that night I have totally abandoned prejudice and after becoming a union secretary have always sought compromise.

 

I’m not sure what you being homophobic as a youngster has to do with making women undress in front of men personally. You may be comfortable with your family members sharing changing rooms with men but would your wife be happy to do so?

Taking your argument to its logical conclusion, you see no need for changing rooms to be segregated? 

Edited October 5, 2023 by Fen Canary

[Fen Canary 874]

28 minutes ago, Aggy said:

I haven’t bothered reading the rest of this thread but my guess is there is no sensible response to this.

You should probably read it then, many people have expressed their concerns regarding the matter.

Also most of the abuse online has come from the left 

[Aggy 766]

1 minute ago, Fen Canary said:

You should probably read it then, many people have expressed their concerns regarding the matter.

Also most of the abuse online has come from the left 

Why don’t you summarise it for me. 

[Fen Canary 874]

Just now, Aggy said:

Why don’t you summarise it for me. 

Essentially many people feel that single sex spaces such as changing rooms, shelters and prisons, as well as women’s sports should be only for biological women.

Those who claim to be pro trans are generally in favour of allowing biological males into these spaces if they claim to feel female (Eddie Izzard bring the most high profile example).

Those who support the first example are labelled as right wingers

[Aggy 766]

10 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

Essentially many people feel that single sex spaces such as changing rooms, shelters and prisons, as well as women’s sports should be only for biological women.

Those who claim to be pro trans are generally in favour of allowing biological males into these spaces if they claim to feel female (Eddie Izzard bring the most high profile example).

Those who support the first example are labelled as right wingers

Surely they are different points.

I have been to many a bar/club where the toilets are not male and female specific. People have concerns about that, but the concerns aren’t about men identifying as men or otherwise.

Edited October 5, 2023 by Aggy

[Fen Canary 874]

19 minutes ago, Aggy said:

Surely they are different points.

I have been to many a bar/club where the toilets are not male and female specific. People have concerns about that, but the concerns aren’t about men identifying as men or otherwise.

I’ve also been in unisex toilets with individual cubicles, but surely you can see that’s different to a changing room or prison? 

[Well b back 3,283]

5 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

I’ve also been in unisex toilets with individual cubicles, but surely you can see that’s different to a changing room or prison? 

The comments made were not aimed at what happens, they were to stir up a dislike of trans people.

[Aggy 766]

13 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

I’ve also been in unisex toilets with individual cubicles, but surely you can see that’s different to a changing room or prison? 

Not really. The points you’ve summarised are ones of safety (and, in the case of sport, fairness). They aren’t anything to do with whether biological men should be able to identify as female (or vice versa) or go through a sex change procedure etc.

I couldn’t care less if the guy next to me in the changing room is straight or gay - as long as he doesn’t try to assault me. I also couldn’t care less if he was born a biological woman but is now identifying as a man as long as he doesn’t try to assault me either. Why on earth would I?

 

Our prime minister has apparently decided whether people should be required to ‘identify’ as their biological birth gender is an issue politicians need to get involved in. I wonder whether his next campaign announcement will be about my neighbours’ curtain choices - another example of somebody else’s personal choice which simply doesn’t affect me or anyone else (even if I wouldn’t put them up in my own front room).

 

[Fen Canary 874]

19 minutes ago, Aggy said:

Not really. The points you’ve summarised are ones of safety (and, in the case of sport, fairness). They aren’t anything to do with whether biological men should be able to identify as female (or vice versa) or go through a sex change procedure etc.

I couldn’t care less if the guy next to me in the changing room is straight or gay - as long as he doesn’t try to assault me. I also couldn’t care less if he was born a biological woman but is now identifying as a man as long as he doesn’t try to assault me either. Why on earth would I?

 

Our prime minister has apparently decided whether people should be required to ‘identify’ as their biological birth gender is an issue politicians need to get involved in. I wonder whether his next campaign announcement will be about my neighbours’ curtain choices - another example of somebody else’s personal choice which simply doesn’t affect me or anyone else (even if I wouldn’t put them up in my own front room).

 

So you don’t think women should have seperate changing rooms to men? Surely you can see it’s different for women to have change in front of men compared to the other way around? 

Edited October 5, 2023 by Fen Canary

[Fen Canary 874]

46 minutes ago, Well b back said:

The comments made were not aimed at what happens, they were to stir up a dislike of trans people.

No they weren’t. They were pointing out what happens when people can use facilities designed for the opposite sex just because they say they’re trans.

Answer the following questions yes or no 

Isla Bryson/Adam Graham - Should he/she be housed in a women’s prison?

Lia Thomas - Should he/she be allowed to compete against biological women?

Eddie Izzard - Should he/she be allowed to use womens changing rooms just because he says he’s in girl mode for the day?

Kathleen Stock - Should she faced threats and harassment (and hounded out of her job) for stating her belief that single sex spaces should be reserved for biological females? 

 

Edited October 5, 2023 by Fen Canary

[Herman 9,838]

10 hours ago, How I Wrote Elastic Man said:

I think questions like this are best left to the experts 🙂

 

 

https://youtu.be/nf0oXY4nDxE?si=8TOMuoCiQDcozXDl

 

[A Load of Squit 5,223]

13 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

To me the entire debate can be whittled down to one simple question.

Would you want your teenage daughter to have to share a changing room with Eddie Izzard? 

My children are fans so they'd probably invite Suzy/Eddie in to get some free jokes.

Edited October 6, 2023 by A Load of Squit

[Aggy 766]

8 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

So you don’t think women should have seperate changing rooms to men? Surely you can see it’s different for women to have change in front of men compared to the other way around? 

The point is that they are different questions.

Women and men don’t have separate changing rooms purely because they are different genders. It’s for safety. Most sexual assaults are men on women. Women in a changing room full of men is an obvious safety issue.

But the PM wasn’t talking about safety concerns, he was talking about people not having to accept other people’s choices. 

Perhaps stretching my earlier curtain analogy a little too far, if my neighbour puts up bright red curtains, it is their choice and doesn’t affect me. If they take those bright red curtains down and start using them to strangle passers by, that does affect me. The PM would seemingly be talking about banning people from choosing bright red curtains - which isn’t really the issue.

Edited October 6, 2023 by Aggy

[Yellowfuture 71]

It wasn't a mere distraction for me when I had to queue for 15mins at the OL stadium in Lyon a few weeks ago for a wee and missed the first 5 minutes of the second half of the Wales Australia RWC game. An over 60,000 seater stadium, beer flowing, drinking at your seat as well as in the concourse, as happens at rugby matches, and guess what, no male urinals, all individual cubicles. 

 

[A Load of Squit 5,223]

8 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

No they weren’t. They were pointing out what happens when people can use facilities designed for the opposite sex just because they say they’re trans.

Answer the following questions yes or no 

Isla Bryson/Adam Graham - Should he/she be housed in a women’s prison?

Lia Thomas - Should he/she be allowed to compete against biological women?

Eddie Izzard - Should he/she be allowed to use womens changing rooms just because he says he’s in girl mode for the day?

Kathleen Stock - Should she faced threats and harassment (and hounded out of her job) for stating her belief that single sex spaces should be reserved for biological females? 

 

That prisoner was held in isolation, at no time did they mix with other prisoners, the Scottish Prison Service has been following this procedure for years, after the procedure was complete they were moved to another prison. 

Sports organisations need to come up with a coherent policy, until then this question will not be resolved.

As long as Suzy/Eddie is minding their own business and they promise not to assault anyone then that's OK.

When these people say they got sacked for stating their beliefs it usually has a bit more nuance than that, like Linehan calling people groomers and child molesters on Twitter then writing in the papers that his views cost him his job, his marriage etc.

[Well b back 3,283]

@Fen Canary

What you seem to be saying ( just like Sunak ) is Trans people are more dangerous than straight people. 
Should teachers not be allowed to share changing rooms with pupils as the odd teacher is a paedophile. 
The comments made as I said were purely aimed at getting people to dislike a certain group.

[Naturalcynic 677]

59 minutes ago, Aggy said:

The point is that they are different questions.

Women and men don’t have separate changing rooms purely because they are different genders. It’s for safety. Most sexual assaults are men on women. Women in a changing room full of men is an obvious safety issue.

But the PM wasn’t talking about safety concerns, he was talking about people not having to accept other people’s choices. 

Perhaps stretching my earlier curtain analogy a little too far, if my neighbour puts up bright red curtains, it is their choice and doesn’t affect me. If they take those bright red curtains down and start using them to strangle passers by, that does affect me. The PM would seemingly be talking about banning people from choosing bright red curtains - which isn’t really the issue.

A better analogy would be if your neighbour put up red curtains but identified them as blue.  He’d be perfectly within his rights to do so provided he didn’t also insist that everyone else agreed his red curtains were blue.