#WomenWontWheesht

[He's here!]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/activist-marion-millar-charged-with-sending-homophobic-and-transphobic-tweets-5293jhg6v

"It is believed a complaint was made to police suggesting the ribbons represented a noose."

If that's the extent of the outrage then I feel sorry for the police having to get involved.

Just my view, but I think the likes of Joanna Cherry are right to take a stand on this issue which I suspect is bewildering to many:

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19351235.joanna-cherry-says-feminist/

Posted this on another thread, but when you read something like this you wonder where on earth things are headed:

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/replace-term-mother-with-parent-who-has-given-birth-stonewall-tells-employers/

[weecounty hibby]

Where do you stand on the issue? I have stayed well clear of this as I just don't understand what's going on and this is genuinely my first post on the subject. I never tweet about it either. To me, people are people. Black, white, gay, straight, trans etc. Everyone should be treated with respect regardless. But I 100% believe that there are folk who are trying to make political capital out of it. So I'd be interested to hear your view point

[He's here!]

Where do you stand on the issue? I have stayed well clear of this as I just don't understand what's going on and this is genuinely my first post on the subject. I never tweet about it either. To me, people are people. Black, white, gay, straight, trans etc. Everyone should be treated with respect regardless. But I 100% believe that there are folk who are trying to make political capital out of it. So I'd be interested to hear your view point

My viewpoint is that if we go down the road of accepting that any man who simply decides he's a woman literally is one, no questions asked (a policy endorsed by the Scottish Greens) then women's rights and freedoms, so hard won over many, many years, run the risk of being dangerously undermined.

Of course minorities in society require respect and protection, but the number of transwomen legally recognised as 'being female for some purposes' (ie those with a gender recognition certificate) represent such a miniscule percentage of the population that the kind of changes to our daily lives being proposed by the likes of Stonewall are grossly out of proportion.

My fear is that once the Scottish government's hate crime legislation comes into force we'll see just how dangerous this issue has the potential to become, an issue which until now has slipped under the radar to a certain degree because (as you point out) a lot of people don't really understand it.

[Moulin Yarns]

My viewpoint is that if we go down the road of accepting that any man who simply decides he's a woman literally is one, no questions asked (a policy endorsed by the Scottish Greens) then women's rights and freedoms, so hard won over many, many years, run the risk of being dangerously undermined.

Of course minorities in society require respect and protection, but the number of transwomen legally recognised as 'being female for some purposes' (ie those with a gender recognition certificate) represent such a miniscule percentage of the population that the kind of changes to our daily lives being proposed by the likes of Stonewall are grossly out of proportion.

My fear is that once the Scottish government's hate crime legislation comes into force we'll see just how dangerous this issue has the potential to become, an issue which until now has slipped under the radar to a certain degree because (as you point out) a lot of people don't really understand it.

https://greens.scot/scotland-can/ensure-equal-rights-for-lgbti-people

Where does it say that a man can simply decide they're a woman, no questions asked?

[CloudSquall]

This is one of those issues that in real life most people either take a middle of the road position on (advancing rights for all while protecting vulnerable people) or just don't care about, but on Twitter it is made to look like the issue of the century in which you are either a transphobe or someone that hates women, there is no middle ground available.

It's one of the reasons I took myself off of Twitter.

[Moulin Yarns]

This is one of those issues that in real life most people either take a middle of the road position on (advancing rights for all while protecting vulnerable people) or just don't care about, but on Twitter it is made to look like the issue of the century in which you are either a transphobe or someone that hates women, there is no middle ground available.

It's one of the reasons I took myself off of Twitter.

Very true.

This weird idea that a man will call themselves a woman just so that they can enter into female dressing rooms or toilets is a smokescreen, IMHO.

[660]

My viewpoint is that if we go down the road of accepting that any man who simply decides he's a woman literally is one, no questions asked (a policy endorsed by the Scottish Greens) then women's rights and freedoms, so hard won over many, many years, run the risk of being dangerously undermined.

Of course minorities in society require respect and protection, but the number of transwomen legally recognised as 'being female for some purposes' (ie those with a gender recognition certificate) represent such a miniscule percentage of the population that the kind of changes to our daily lives being proposed by the likes of Stonewall are grossly out of proportion.

My fear is that once the Scottish government's hate crime legislation comes into force we'll see just how dangerous this issue has the potential to become, an issue which until now has slipped under the radar to a certain degree because (as you point out) a lot of people don't really understand it.

What are “the kind of changes to our daily lives being proposed by stonewall” exactly?

[wookie70]

It is one of these issues where the reality is nowhere near the scaremongering. It must be torture feeling like you are trapped inside your own body. I hope Scotland as a society can come together and do our best to make everyone living here feel safe and valued. Such a tricky thing to legislate on though.

I have only had personal experience of one person I knew who made the change from living as a man to living as a woman. She was ridiculed by those that should have supported her quickly withdrew from that group. I tried my best to offer support but I lost contact with her thereafter as I only really knew her from the group which she stopped coming along to. It was an older group of people so most were very old fashioned and stuck in their ways. Most you would say were really nice people but they sickened me the night that the lady in question came in dressed as a female for the first time.

I would want all her rights to be protected and for her to be treated as a female if she felt that was her gender.

The other side is the giggling schoolchildren argument about female changing rooms etc. I don't really buy that and it is only an issue because of how prudish most Brits are anyway.

However, there is a real issue in terms of sport and particularly competitive and professional sport. There are cheats of all genders and if money could be made by declaring yourself a woman then I do think that needs some form of law to make sure the playing field is as level as possible. Not that sport is a level playing field as a as a 5 ft male with slim frame may be the same gender as Usain Bolt but is unlikely to ever be able to compete against them.

[Moulin Yarns]

There is a bass player who has been playing with a well known Scottish singer for years who has transitioned from male to female over the years. She is an excellent bassist and a role model for anyone who is looking to transition.

[Pretty Boy]

I find it hard to have an opinion on this because I'm ignorant about so much of the debate. I see people, on both sides, trying to reduce it to 3 word slogans and it leaves me increasingly wary of trying to get involved.

I read an interview with Richard O'Brien recently, it wasn't a new interview but it was new to me. Given his historical background as an advocate of sexual liberation, transvestitism, transgender rights, his own identification as third sex (who uses the he pronoun) and his previous admittance to using estrogen, I assumed he would be of the 'trans women are women' stance. I was quite surprised to see him take quite a firm line that whilst you can change your gender it is fundamentally wrong to say you can alter the sex you were assigned at birth regardless of the surgery, hormone therapy etc you take. He was firmly supportive of the right to self ID, self expression and so on but argued that wasn't the same as ultimately changing sex.

I didn't find the interview particularly enlightening, just confusing. The comments section saw him branded a transphobe and a bigot which seems crazy. I think the encapsulates the nuance of the debate though.

It's something I'd love to know more about so I could form a more rounded opinion of my own. I think of myself as quite middle of the road on it. I don't think I'm either transphobic or a misogynist but the online debate is so polarised I may well be in the eyes of some.

[hibsbollah]

I’ve taken a ‘can see both sides of the argument’ position in terms of the feminist vs trans discussion. I think it’s become ridiculously polarized especially online.

I’m definitely of a generation where men dressing up as women was considered comical, and the trans movement has caught some of us by surprise and challenged our own beliefs. I’ve always enjoyed Paolo Bandinis work as a journalist especially on Italian football. On recent podcasts there was a journo called Nicky Bandini speaking with an extreme falsetto voice, I was extremely confused and did an internet search and she had indeed transitioned a few years ago. An interesting story and she must have quite a few stories to tell about how difficult that must have been in the laddish world she was working in.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/football/2019/aug/16/im-nicky-bandini-and-im-still-a-sports-writer

[Moulin Yarns]

I’ve taken a ‘can see both sides of the argument’ position in terms of the feminist vs trans discussion. I think it’s become ridiculously polarized especially online.

I’m definitely of a generation where men dressing up as women was considered comical, and the trans movement has caught some of us by surprise and challenged our own beliefs. I’ve always enjoyed Paolo Bandinis work as a journalist especially on Italian football. On recent podcasts there was a journo called Nicky Bandini speaking with an extreme falsetto voice, I was extremely confused and did an internet search and she had indeed transitioned a few years ago. An interesting story and she must have quite a few stories to tell about how difficult that must have been in the laddish world she was working in.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/football/2019/aug/16/im-nicky-bandini-and-im-still-a-sports-writer

I think what people don't realise is the time and both physical and psychological issues that transitioning involves.

This is very different to someone choosing to identify as x or y.


My great nephew is 9 and from a very young age has been more interested in dolls, such as elsa from frozen and mermaids, than 'boy toys'. Whether this leads to him identifying as female who knows.

[hibsbollah]

I think what people don't realise is the time and both physical and psychological issues that transitioning involves.

This is very different to someone choosing to identify as x or y.


My great nephew is 9 and from a very young age has been more interested in dolls, such as elsa from frozen and mermaids, than 'boy toys'. Whether this leads to him identifying as female who knows.

As Nicky says; ‘ It would be hypocritical of me to expect other people to instantly digest information that took me countless hours of therapy and lived experience.’

[lord bunberry]

Very true.

This weird idea that a man will call themselves a woman just so that they can enter into female dressing rooms or toilets is a smokescreen, IMHO.
I agree but it is a genuine concern for a lot of women. There’s the case of the male prisoner that said he identified as a woman and was sent to a female prison with disastrous consequences. Tbh it’s a debate that I’ve always avoided and I can’t say I’m in anyway clued up on the facts.

[Ozyhibby]

My only issue is with Sport. People born male should not be able to compete in females sports. Apart from that, they should have every other right that everyone else has.
All the chat about toilets and changing rooms is nonsense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

In what way, can you elaborate please?

Is there any evidence of men identifying as women just to get access to ladies changing rooms or toilets? Or is it just a hypothetical scenario?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[speedy_gonzales]

So far, the hypothetical scenario always seems to be a trans-woman entering a ladies toilet area. I don't recall hearing the hypothetical trans-man entering the gents?
I know a trans-man who from a very young age was forced to use the ladies/girls toilets at school. It was either that or the disabled/accessible toilet which is usually on its own somewhere and stood out. This was very damaging for him.
Schools are getting better now though, many are adopting or trialling unisex toilet areas.

I could be very wrong, and am probably not in the best position to comment with authority, but perhaps the threat to women from trans-women doesn't come from the trans-women themselves but is borne from cis-men who have ogled, catcalled, molested & raped over the course of time?

P.S just to add, in no way is it similar but I once had to have a word with a gym owner as their female cleaner regularly used to walk in to the open plan male changing area. This made me feel uncomfortable, not necessarily because I felt threatened but I didn't feel comfortable with the fact the I or other guys could be in a state of undress whilst she may have had to come in. Apparently, raising the issue was good enough grounds for me or any other complainant to question their sexuality,,,, apparently 🙄.

[He's here!]

What are “the kind of changes to our daily lives being proposed by stonewall” exactly?

I posted a link to some of their latest proposals in my original post.

Stonewall have, in my view, lost the plot of late. Founder member Matthew Parris, who recently quit the charity, wrote an excellent piece on their misguided attempts to wade into the transgender debate:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/stonewall-should-stay-out-of-trans-rights-war-xcz25nhdt

[He's here!]

https://greens.scot/scotland-can/ensure-equal-rights-for-lgbti-people

Where does it say that a man can simply decide they're a woman, no questions asked?

The issue was at the heart of the successful amendment to the Victims of Sexual Offences bill last year, which the Greens voted against and which led to Andy Wightman quitting the party.

Patrick Harvie has also made it clear he believes a transwoman is a woman in any circumstances. If I recall rightly, he drew flak for equating transwomen to black, Jewish or disabled women, as though these groups are in some way different biologically in the way transwomen are.

The issue here goes beyond respect for and understanding of trans men or women. It's about the undermining (and potential criminalisation) of women's rights and free speech when expressing the wholly reasonable belief that we can't just erase the concept of sex. A biological women's experiences are entirely different to those of a transwoman (the most obvious being menstruation, pregnancy, giving birth and menopause - all of which can often be physcially and mentally challenging to a debilitating extent) and in my view have the right to question transgender identity without being abused for it.

[He's here!]

My only issue is with Sport. People born male should not be able to compete in females sports. Apart from that, they should have every other right that everyone else has.
All the chat about toilets and changing rooms is nonsense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This point (among others) was made by a female Abertay University student last month who is apparently now facing disciplinary action:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/student-investigated-for-saying-women-must-have-vaginas-3tnl0f9wb

If you can't access the story due to the paywall, here's what she had to say:

https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/05/18/i-am-being-investigated-by-my-university-for-saying-women-have-vaginas/

[CapitalGreen]

The issue was at the heart of the successful amendment to the Victims of Sexual Offences bill last year, which the Greens voted against and which led to Andy Wightman quitting the party.

Patrick Harvie has also made it clear he believes a transwoman is a woman in any circumstances. If I recall rightly, he drew flak for equating transwomen to black, Jewish or disabled women, as though these groups are in some way different biologically in the way transwomen are.

The issue here goes beyond respect for and understanding of trans men or women. It's about the undermining (and potential criminalisation) of women's rights and free speech when expressing the wholly reasonable belief that we can't just erase the concept of sex. A biological women's experiences are entirely different to those of a transwoman (the most obvious being menstruation, pregnancy, giving birth and menopause - all of which can often be physcially and mentally challenging to a debilitating extent) and in my view have the right to question transgender identity without being abused for it.

Excuse my ignorance on the subject but what rights related to the points in bold are under threat from trans-woman?

[overdrive]

I can see the argument from both sides. One thing on the toilet/changing room issue. Presumably part of the issue is the suspicion that a male to female transgender person might be using their transgender status (either genuine or for the purposes I’m about to say) to somehow perv on women in a state of undress or pounce on them in a vulnerable situation which they wouldn’t have the opportunity to do if they used male facilities.

How is that different to a predatory gay man doing the same thing in male facilities or a predatory lesbian doing so in female changing facilities. Or indeed a male to female transgender person with a sexual preference for males doing so in male facilities?

In the toilet situation, is it actually much different to everyone using unisex toilets?

[Ozyhibby]

I can see the argument from both sides. One thing on the toilet/changing room issue. Presumably part of the issue is the suspicion that a male to female transgender person might be using their transgender status (either genuine or for the purposes I’m about to say) to somehow perv on women in a state of undress or pounce on them in a vulnerable situation which they wouldn’t have the opportunity to do if they used male facilities.

How is that different to a predatory gay man doing the same thing in male facilities or a predatory lesbian doing so in female changing facilities. Or indeed a male to female transgender person with a sexual preference for males doing so in male facilities?

In the toilet situation, is it actually much different to everyone using unisex toilets?

I imagine the same people worried about trans people using the same changing rooms would have also complaining if gay people using the same changing rooms 20/30 years ago.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lapsedhibee]

I'm back in for a response to that! You have some imagination. No need for the not so subtle unfounded homophobic slurs.

:confused: Shirley slurs against homophobes are not homophobic slurs?

[Moulin Yarns]

Some useful links for those who want to understand better.


https://mermaidsuk.org.uk/news/do-you-still-use-the-phrase-born-in-the-wrong-body/

https://quillette.com/2019/09/24/no-one-is-born-in-the-wrong-body/

https://www.transgendertrend.com/born-in-the-wrong-body/

https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/001527.htm


A lot of reading for those who want to.

[CropleyWasGod]

I'm back in for a response to that! You have some imagination. No need for the not so subtle unfounded homophobic slurs.

The point is not about specific people. It's about the attitudes and perceived fears of a part of mainstream society. The themes are very similar to the debates on the 70s and 80s about sexuality issues.

[Moulin Yarns]

I posted a link to some of their latest proposals in my original post.

Stonewall have, in my view, lost the plot of late. Founder member Matthew Parris, who recently quit the charity, wrote an excellent piece on their misguided attempts to wade into the transgender debate:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/stonewall-should-stay-out-of-trans-rights-war-xcz25nhdt

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun/06/stonewall-risks-all-it-has-fought-for-in-accusing-those-who-disagree-with-it-of-hate-speech?__twitter_impression=true

More on stonewall.

[Moulin Yarns]

Im wondering if there is any coincidence the thread was started during Pride Week?

[CropleyWasGod]

Im wondering if there is any coincidence the thread was started during Pride Week?

It'll be running for a while. It's Pride Month.

[Moulin Yarns]

It'll be running for a while. It's Pride Month.

My bad. Just listening to radio 6 and I thought it was just a week. So glad that you are feeling so gay 😊😉

[7 Up]

There's certainly something of a trans panic in the media at the moment, which is quite reminiscent of the gay panic of the 80s. The tropes about bathrooms and children being indoctrinated could almost be copy and paste jobs. The added combustible element this time around is social media. The only other thing I'll add is that hearing Alex Salmond talk solemnly about women's rights during the election campaign made me want to vomit.

[Sergio sledge]

I find it hard to have an opinion on this because I'm ignorant about so much of the debate. I see people, on both sides, trying to reduce it to 3 word slogans and it leaves me increasingly wary of trying to get involved.

I read an interview with Richard O'Brien recently, it wasn't a new interview but it was new to me. Given his historical background as an advocate of sexual liberation, transvestitism, transgender rights, his own identification as third sex (who uses the he pronoun) and his previous admittance to using estrogen, I assumed he would be of the 'trans women are women' stance. I was quite surprised to see him take quite a firm line that whilst you can change your gender it is fundamentally wrong to say you can alter the sex you were assigned at birth regardless of the surgery, hormone therapy etc you take. He was firmly supportive of the right to self ID, self expression and so on but argued that wasn't the same as ultimately changing sex.

I didn't find the interview particularly enlightening, just confusing. The comments section saw him branded a transphobe and a bigot which seems crazy. I think the encapsulates the nuance of the debate though.

It's something I'd love to know more about so I could form a more rounded opinion of my own. I think of myself as quite middle of the road on it. I don't think I'm either transphobic or a misogynist but the online debate is so polarised I may well be in the eyes of some.Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't sex is based on chromosomes at the point of conception, it is not something which is "assigned at birth"? Obviously there is the rare people with DSD but I see this as a totally separate issue to the trans debate (although there may be some crossovers in that some DSD people may be trans).

I personally think that gender is fluid and people can change their gender, but that sex is a biological thing which cannot be changed.

Trans people should have exactly the same rights as everyone else, no question about that. There is a dichotomy here though where it is perceived that by granting rights (in this case the battle ground seems to be over sport and changing facilities) to one group you remove rights from another group. This also cannot be right.

As a male person I don't feel that I should be saying to a female that the changing rooms thing isn't an issue, it's not my place. But that is clearly difficult for trans people who have to either use the male changing rooms (which isn't acceptable imho) or disabled changing rooms, which probably makes them feel isolated where we should be trying to be inclusive and welcoming to people who have probably gone through significant mental trauma to get to the point they are at. I genuinely don't know what the solution to that is. Individual cubicles for all in a unisex changing space? Swimming pools certainly seem to be going down this route and it works quite well.

The sport issue is a bit more clear cut in my opinion, clearly someone who has gone through male puberty and years of male physical development cannot just reverse the effects of that on their body. There is a reason why most sports are divided into male and female sports, because male development leads to physical differences which in general would give males the advantage over females. I think that it is clear that this advantage is retained to some extent despite reductions in testosterone levels. You can see from the results that Laurel Hubbard is getting in weightlifting that she has a significant advantage over women who are biologically female.

https://twitter.com/Scienceofsport/status/1399449040660615171?s=19

I have to read up more on this as there must be more to it that "just" changing rooms and sports, people can't be getting so worked up about it over just that surely.

[He's here!]

Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't sex is based on chromosomes at the point of conception, it is not something which is "assigned at birth"? Obviously there is the rare people with DSD but I see this as a totally separate issue to the trans debate (although there may be some crossovers in that some DSD people may be trans).

I personally think that gender is fluid and people can change their gender, but that sex is a biological thing which cannot be changed.

Trans people should have exactly the same rights as everyone else, no question about that. There is a dichotomy here though where it is perceived that by granting rights (in this case the battle ground seems to be over sport and changing facilities) to one group you remove rights from another group. This also cannot be right.

As a male person I don't feel that I should be saying to a female that the changing rooms thing isn't an issue, it's not my place. But that is clearly difficult for trans people who have to either use the male changing rooms (which isn't acceptable imho) or disabled changing rooms, which probably makes them feel isolated where we should be trying to be inclusive and welcoming to people who have probably gone through significant mental trauma to get to the point they are at. I genuinely don't know what the solution to that is. Individual cubicles for all in a unisex changing space? Swimming pools certainly seem to be going down this route and it works quite well.

The sport issue is a bit more clear cut in my opinion, clearly someone who has gone through male puberty and years of male physical development cannot just reverse the effects of that on their body. There is a reason why most sports are divided into male and female sports, because male development leads to physical differences which in general would give males the advantage over females. I think that it is clear that this advantage is retained to some extent despite reductions in testosterone levels. You can see from the results that Laurel Hubbard is getting in weightlifting that she has a significant advantage over women who are biologically female.

https://twitter.com/Scienceofsport/status/1399449040660615171?s=19 (https://twitter.com/Scienceofsport/status/1399449040660615171?s=19)

I have to read up more on this as there must be more to it that "just" changing rooms and sports, people can't be getting so worked up about it over just that surely.

And yet this perfectly rational opinion is enough to have you thrown to the woke wolves should you dare to express it in public as the likes of J K Rowling have done.

[CropleyWasGod]

And yet this perfectly rational opinion is enough to have you thrown to the woke wolves should you dare to express it in public as the likes of J K Rowling have done.

It's language like "thrown to the woke wolves" that does little service to a rational debate.

[He's here!]

It's language like "thrown to the woke wolves" that does little service to a rational debate.

I reckon that's a pretty diplomatic turn of phrase in the context of what I'm referring to. The abuse and threats Rowling has received for simply expressing a perfectly legitimate opinion are outrageous. At no time has she said anything that could be reasonably construed as transphobic yet for some her remarkable and hard-won literary legacy (though personally I don't rate the books that highly. The films are good though!) and her fantastic commitment to charities are of no consequence when set against the apparently unforgivable crime of believing biology matters. Ditto the likes of Joanna Cherry (whom I otherwise can't abide) and her stance on women's sex-based rights.

[WeeRussell]

I reckon that's a pretty diplomatic turn of phrase in the context of what I'm referring to. The abuse and threats Rowling has received for simply expressing a perfectly legitimate opinion are outrageous. At no time has she said anything that could be reasonably construed as transphobic yet for some her remarkable and hard-won literary legacy (though personally I don't rate the books that highly. The films are good though!) and her fantastic commitment to charities are of no consequence when set against the apparently unforgivable crime of believing biology matters. Ditto the likes of Joanna Cherry (whom I otherwise can't abide) and her stance on women's sex-based rights.

I THINK (like a few I’ve refrained from commenting on much of this as I’m neither well-informed or completely sure where I stand) I’m quite supportive of JK Rowling’s position on this, having not found that in the past with her and politics.

But - if she had said something that was offensive or wrong/out of order, why would Harry Potter and charity donations make it any more acceptable?

[Crunchie]

There's certainly something of a trans panic in the media at the moment, which is quite reminiscent of the gay panic of the 80s. The tropes about bathrooms and children being indoctrinated could almost be copy and paste jobs. The added combustible element this time around is social media. The only other thing I'll add is that hearing Alex Salmond talk solemnly about women's rights during the election campaign made me want to vomit.

It won't be long before there are not enough months in the year for some organisation to claim as their own, that should be interesting :rolleyes:. I don't think there's any kind of panic in the media or general public at all, and Salmond has always had the capacity to make me want to vomit.

[He's here!]

I THINK (like a few I’ve refrained from commenting on much of this as I’m neither well-informed or completely sure where I stand) I’m quite supportive of JK Rowling’s position on this, having not found that in the past with her and politics.

But - if she had said something that was offensive or wrong/out of order, why would Harry Potter and charity donations make it any more acceptable?

It wouldn't. But she didn't say anything that could be reasonably construed as wrong/out of order. Yet she's being lumped by some alongside those 'outed' by the MeToo movement or 'cancel culture', with absurd calls for her books to be banned, for her to be stripped of literary awards etc.

This is a good and inspirational woman who, as a struggling single mother, got where did the hard way and has since used her success and wealth to entertain millions as well as funding some game-changing charitable initiatives, in particular those involving MS. She deserves to be celebrated not demonised.

[CropleyWasGod]

I reckon that's a pretty diplomatic turn of phrase in the context of what I'm referring to.

A pejorative is not a diplomatic turn of phrase.

[He's here!]

A pejorative is not a diplomatic turn of phrase.

How about a restrained turn of phrase?

[WeeRussell]

It wouldn't. But she didn't say anything that could be reasonably construed as wrong/out of order. Yet she's being lumped by some alongside those 'outed' by the MeToo movement or 'cancel culture', with absurd calls for her books to be banned, for her to be stripped of literary awards etc.

This is a good and inspirational woman who, as a struggling single mother, got where did the hard way and has since used her success and wealth to entertain millions as well as funding some game-changing charitable initiatives, in particular those involving MS. She deserves to be celebrated not demonised.

Again, IF she had said something deserving of criticism, your second part is irrelevant.

Hitler wrote a famous book. It doesn't mean his political views shouldn't be criticised.

As I said, I think I am on JK's side, from what little I know about it. My point is how many books she's written, or how much work she has done for charity doesn't make her immune to stick for controversial views. In fact, there are some that would argue that being in the public eye means she has a bigger responsibility than most in being careful about what she says.

[CropleyWasGod]

How about a restrained turn of phrase?

Nope, no havin it 😁

The W word, like its PC predecessor, has become a term of criticism. Its use, in my book, dilutes the rest of what might be a reasonable argument.

[7 Up]

Moral panic over Stonewall and trans rights is fuelled by misinterpretation (https://www.thenational.scot/news/19353731.moral-panic-stonewall-trans-rights-fuelled-misinterpretation/)

[The dalmeny]

My only issue is with Sport. People born male should not be able to compete in females sports. Apart from that, they should have every other right that everyone else has.
All the chat about toilets and changing rooms is nonsense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I was of a similar view but I read someone's comment elsewhere where the observation was made a guy transition into would be on hormone treatment which would affect his sporting ability. Don't know how true this is, the whole thing is a minefield to me.

[Mon Dieu4]

I was of a similar view but I read someone's comment elsewhere where the observation was made a guy transition into would be on hormone treatment which would affect his sporting ability. Don't know how true this is, the whole thing is a minefield to me.

men have larger lungs and hearts which means they get more oxygen into the bloodstream which helps in sport and is an unfair advantage, there is also evidence that hormone treatment has a negligible decrease in performance for sport

If you take every track and field event like 100m,200m, 400m, the long jump, high jump etc then there are examples of countless boys under 18 years of age all beating the women's world record

I'm very laid back about it all and be what you want to be but women who have worked their whole life to achieve success in sport should not have to be beaten by people who have effectively been doping for years

[Hibrandenburg]

I understand the arguments on both sides of the argument, but I really can't see any middle ground that would satisfy both sides. I've previously been involved as a union rep supporting transgender m to f and it's a minefield. It's not quite as black and white as racism where ensuring equal rights doesn't infringe on the rights of others.

[Ozyhibby]

I was of a similar view but I read someone's comment elsewhere where the observation was made a guy transition into would be on hormone treatment which would affect his sporting ability. Don't know how true this is, the whole thing is a minefield to me.

If an athlete goes through the change at age 20 then they have had 6 years of restoring flowing through them where their muscle would have grown in ways that is impossible for a female. That advantage can never be taken away.
Sport is the only area where I believe the same rights can’t be given though. And it’s not unusual either. Sport gets lots of scope to operate outside normal employment law already and this is just one other area.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[marinello59]

I understand the arguments on both sides of the argument, but I really can't see any middle ground that would satisfy both sides. I've previously been involved as a union rep supporting transgender m to f and it's a minefield. It's not quite as black and white as racism where ensuring equal rights doesn't infringe on the rights of others.

It is difficult but not impossible. It won’t be solved by making new laws or tinkering with the existing ones, we will get there by going through the patient process of changing social attitudes to accommodate a section of our society who feel marginalised It’s a pity we have to describe it as an argument with sides when we all want the same things, to be accepted by and feel comfortable with our fellow human beings. When the majority recognise that is all that is being asked for here then solutions will follow.
Even questions surrounding sport are not insurmountable and they many be skewing the argument rather more than it should. There is nothing that can’t be solved by applying goodwill and common sense. It’s doable.

[CropleyWasGod]

It is difficult but not impossible. It won’t be solved by making new laws or tinkering with the existing ones, we will get there by going through the patient process of changing social attitudes to accommodate a section of our society who feel marginalised It’s a pity we have to describe it as an argument with sides when we all want the same things, to be accepted by and feel comfortable with our fellow human beings. When the majority recognise that is all that is being asked for here then solutions will follow.
Even questions surrounding sport are not insurmountable and they many be skewing the argument rather more than it should. There is nothing that can’t be solved by applying goodwill and common sense. It’s doable.

Boom.

That's exactly it. Societal change can't be forced by legislation, only encouraged. The trans debate has so many echoes of past and current debates around marginalised groups, whether it be women, ethnic minorities, sex workers, drug use, LGB rights.

Progress has been made in those issues by allowing mainstream society to come to terms with them in a sensible and mature fashion.

[He's here!]

Again, IF she had said something deserving of criticism, your second part is irrelevant.

Hitler wrote a famous book. It doesn't mean his political views shouldn't be criticised.

As I said, I think I am on JK's side, from what little I know about it. My point is how many books she's written, or how much work she has done for charity doesn't make her immune to stick for controversial views. In fact, there are some that would argue that being in the public eye means she has a bigger responsibility than most in being careful about what she says.

Perhaps a fraction extreme to bring Hitler into a debate about J K Rowling's views on biology? :wink:

I would take your point IF she had said something that to any rational-minded person WAS offensive, but she didn't. In this instance I don't think it's the person in the public eye who needs to be careful about what they said but those who see them as fair game because they're in the public eye yet use their own incognito identities to lambast them.

This kind of nonsense seems especially prevalent at Edinburgh Uni just now:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rector-at-edinburgh-university-feared-for-her-safety-in-trans-row-sr9vr3z99

[He's here!]

It is difficult but not impossible. It won’t be solved by making new laws or tinkering with the existing ones, we will get there by going through the patient process of changing social attitudes to accommodate a section of our society who feel marginalised It’s a pity we have to describe it as an argument with sides when we all want the same things, to be accepted by and feel comfortable with our fellow human beings. When the majority recognise that is all that is being asked for here then solutions will follow.
Even questions surrounding sport are not insurmountable and they many be skewing the argument rather more than it should. There is nothing that can’t be solved by applying goodwill and common sense. It’s doable.

I've not come across examples of trans-men attempting to compete in male sporting events, but that's presumably because they stand a great deal less chance of being successful (depending on the sport of course), but overall what would be the fairest way to accommodate this sector of society in sport? Specific trans events/Olympics etc? Or is that likely to marginalise things further?

[Ozyhibby]

I've not come across examples of trans-men attempting to compete in male sporting events, but that's presumably because they stand a great deal less chance of being successful (depending on the sport of course), but overall what would be the fairest way to accommodate this sector of society in sport? Specific trans events/Olympics etc? Or is that likely to marginalise things further?

Compete in men’s sport.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

Perhaps a fraction extreme to bring Hitler into a debate about J K Rowling's views on biology? :wink:

I would take your point IF she had said something that to any rational-minded person WAS offensive, but she didn't. In this instance I don't think it's the person in the public eye who needs to be careful about what they said but those who see them as fair game because they're in the public eye yet use their own incognito identities to lambast them.

This kind of nonsense seems especially prevalent at Edinburgh Uni just now:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rector-at-edinburgh-university-feared-for-her-safety-in-trans-row-sr9vr3z99

What does the rest of the article say, ie the bit behind the paywall? Presumably, there's comment from the "attackers".

[WeeRussell]

Perhaps a fraction extreme to bring Hitler into a debate about J K Rowling's views on biology? :wink:

I would take your point IF she had said something that to any rational-minded person WAS offensive, but she didn't. In this instance I don't think it's the person in the public eye who needs to be careful about what they said but those who see them as fair game because they're in the public eye yet use their own incognito identities to lambast them.

This kind of nonsense seems especially prevalent at Edinburgh Uni just now:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rector-at-edinburgh-university-feared-for-her-safety-in-trans-row-sr9vr3z99

Perhaps. But it felt like an extreme example was required to get through to you... the point still doesn't seem to have landed so I'm happy to leave it there.

[CropleyWasGod]

I've not come across examples of trans-men attempting to compete in male sporting events, but that's presumably because they stand a great deal less chance of being successful (depending on the sport of course), but overall what would be the fairest way to accommodate this sector of society in sport? Specific trans events/Olympics etc? Or is that likely to marginalise things further?

http://https://www.them.us/story/chris-mosier-trans-man-compete-mens-olympic-trials


https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2019/04/04/transgender-athletes-why-fair-compete/

[Moulin Yarns]

Fair enough. https://t.co/MmbUUnbbo0


Talking of 'woke' 😁😁😁




































Please note, these are not the real pictures 😉

[lapsedhibee]

Fair enough. https://t.co/MmbUUnbbo0


Talking of 'woke' ������




































Please note, these are not the real pictures ��

So, so difficult to decide whether Jenkyns or Dorries is thicker. :bitchy:

[Hibrandenburg]

It is difficult but not impossible. It won’t be solved by making new laws or tinkering with the existing ones, we will get there by going through the patient process of changing social attitudes to accommodate a section of our society who feel marginalised It’s a pity we have to describe it as an argument with sides when we all want the same things, to be accepted by and feel comfortable with our fellow human beings. When the majority recognise that is all that is being asked for here then solutions will follow.
Even questions surrounding sport are not insurmountable and they many be skewing the argument rather more than it should. There is nothing that can’t be solved by applying goodwill and common sense. It’s doable.

I get where you're coming from but I'm still not convinced. I think there's more to being a woman or a man than looking or feeling the part and because of that we might see more acceptance of trans gender people and I sincerely hope we do, but I think transphobia is more complicated than homophobia or racism simply because not all of the the group they want to be equal to believe they belong in that group. Homosexuals are Homosexuals and are accepted as Homosexuals by Homosexuals, ethnic minorities are ethnic minorities and are accepted as ethnic minorities by ethnic minorities and equality is a completely different subject. To achieve equality you first have to be accepted by the group you claim to belong to, with trans gender people that's unfortunately a long way off and is unlikely to change. Like I said earlier, there has to be some middle ground, but for trans gender people looking for equality that is a paradox because accepting the middle ground would be accepting they are something they don't want to be.

Not sure I've articulated that very well.

[CapitalGreen]

I get where you're coming from but I'm still not convinced. I think there's more to being a woman or a man than looking or feeling the part and because of that we might see more acceptance of trans gender people and I sincerely hope we do, but I think transphobia is more complicated than homophobia or racism simply because not all of the the group they want to be equal to believe they belong in that group. Homosexuals are Homosexuals and are accepted as Homosexuals by Homosexuals, ethnic minorities are ethnic minorities and are accepted as ethnic minorities by ethnic minorities and equality is a completely different subject. To achieve equality you first have to be accepted by the group you claim to belong to, with trans gender people that's unfortunately a long way off and is unlikely to change. Like I said earlier, there has to be some middle ground, but for trans gender people looking for equality that is a paradox because accepting the middle ground would be accepting they are something they don't want to be.

Not sure I've articulated that very well.

Is the part in bold entirely true in the case of people identifying as bisexual?

[WeeRussell]

Is the part in bold entirely true in the case of people identifying as bisexual?

I don’t see how not. But are homosexuals not a ‘different’ group to bisexuals in any case?

[CapitalGreen]

I don’t see how not. But are homosexuals not a ‘different’ group to bisexuals in any case?

You’ve helped make my point for me. Some bisexuals would identify themselves as homosexuals while some wouldn’t and some would accept them as identifying as homosexuals while some wouldn’t.

[WeeRussell]

You’ve helped make my point for me. Some bisexuals would identify themselves as homosexuals while some wouldn’t and some would accept them as identifying as homosexuals while some wouldn’t.

Ah.. I’m not sure if I simply managed to miss your point first time round or if I was just questioning it 😂 (it’s been a long day)

What you’re saying does make sense - but is that something that happens quite a bit (e.g. a homosexual person defending their identity as such by refusing to accept a bisexual person as the same) as opposed to just a bit of grey area over the naming? I always imagine the vast majority of the gay community being very accepting of each other in that respect but maybe I’m being naive (I guess some may argue that their identity as a homosexual is very important to them as a person and they don’t accept a bisexual person calling his or herself a homosexual).

I’m slavering now and definitely out of my depth in terms of knowledge on the subject so will call it a night there 😁

[He's here!]

Common sense prevails (eventually):

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/student-investigated-after-saying-women-have-vaginas-is-cleared-qcggvm2c8

[Moulin Yarns]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57426579

[500miles]

There seems to be a concerted effort on the far side of either arguement to treat gender and sex as the same.

I think reconciliation can be found if we accept gender as a spectrum, a sincerely held belief in the same way we protect religion. On the other hand, we must hold sex as scientific reality, binary, where intersex conditions are outliers which exist on either side of that binary.

Homophobes are looking for a new home now that homophobia is so unpopular, and a complex issue like this provides very convenient cover. On the other hand, dysphoria is extremely painful and the ability to convince yourself that biological sex binary is a myth must be pretty soothing.

Both sides have prominent online weirdos. The usual gammon faced right wing on one side and furry weirdos who tweet hardcore anime p0rn on the other. It's so easy to find someone to hate and fear.

[CropleyWasGod]

There seems to be a concerted effort on the far side of either arguement to treat gender and sex as the same.

I think reconciliation can be found if we accept gender as a spectrum, a sincerely held belief in the same way we protect religion. On the other hand, we must hold sex as scientific reality, binary, where intersex conditions are outliers which exist on either side of that binary.

Homophobes are looking for a new home now that homophobia is so unpopular, and a complex issue like this provides very convenient cover. On the other hand, dysphoria is extremely painful and the ability to convince yourself that biological sex binary is a myth must be pretty soothing.

Both sides have prominent online weirdos. The usual gammon faced right wing on one side and furry weirdos who tweet hardcore anime p0rn on the other. It's so easy to find someone to hate and fear.

Spectrum is an important concept in understanding the issues
Again, there's parallels with the LGB debate. Sexuality is a spectrum, and that's a useful starting point for those who want to get some insight.

[lapsedhibee]

There seems to be a concerted effort on the far side of either arguement to treat gender and sex as the same.

I think reconciliation can be found if we accept gender as a spectrum, a sincerely held belief in the same way we protect religion. On the other hand, we must hold sex as scientific reality, binary, where intersex conditions are outliers which exist on either side of that binary.

Homophobes are looking for a new home now that homophobia is so unpopular, and a complex issue like this provides very convenient cover. On the other hand, dysphoria is extremely painful and the ability to convince yourself that biological sex binary is a myth must be pretty soothing.

Both sides have prominent online weirdos. The usual gammon faced right wing on one side and furry weirdos who tweet hardcore anime p0rn on the other. It's so easy to find someone to hate and fear.

Don't think you can have both 'sex is binary' and 'intersex exists'. Like writing computer code with the occasional ½ thrown in.

[500miles]

Don't think you can have both 'sex is binary' and 'intersex exists'. Like writing computer code with the occasional ½ thrown in.

Intersex conditions only exist in relation to male or females. For example, you don't get females with Klinefelter syndrome,because it only affects males, or males with Turner's syndrome as it only affects females. As someone who has had to discuss these issues relating to fertility, I've not come across a doctor or any literature that says different.

[Moulin Yarns]

I'm currently watching a programme called Dispatches from elsewhere on Prime. The star is eve Lindley, a trans actor, she is very talented.

[JeMeSouviens]

Don't think you can have both 'sex is binary' and 'intersex exists'. Like writing computer code with the occasional ½ thrown in.

Floating point? :wink:

On your first sentence, I think the clarification would be to consider sex binary for everyone (the vast majority) born with either of the 2 "normal" sex chromosome pairs: XY or XX. Then intersex exists, but only for the tiny minority with a different layout: X, XXY, etc.

[lapsedhibee]

Floating point? :wink:

On your first sentence, I think the clarification would be to consider sex binary for everyone (the vast majority) born with either of the 2 "normal" sex chromosome pairs: XY or XX. Then intersex exists, but only for the tiny minority with a different layout: X, XXY, etc.

It only needs one black swan to exist to make 'All swans are white' false. So if one person with a different layout exists, 'All people are laid out either XX or XY' is false. I suppose it's a personal preference, but I like CWG's spectrum chat better.

If I understand it right, floating point doesn't exist in the computers herself, only in the heids of computer users, so I'll probably stick with the ½ point. :wink:


Intersex conditions only exist in relation to male or females. For example, you don't get females with Klinefelter syndrome,because it only affects males, or males with Turner's syndrome as it only affects females. As someone who has had to discuss these issues relating to fertility, I've not come across a doctor or any literature that says different.

Would another way of looking at this be that you don't get females with Klinefelter syndrome because Klinefelter syndrome is the name given to a variation from a traditionally 'male' pattern/layout, and you don't get males with Turner's because Turner's is the name given to a variation from a traditionally 'female' pattern/layout?

Declaration: I have no interest whatsoever in gaining access to women's toilets.

[JeMeSouviens]

It only needs one black swan to exist to make 'All swans are white' false. So if one person with a different layout exists, 'All people are laid out either XX or XY' is false. I suppose it's a personal preference, but I like CWG's spectrum chat better.

If I understand it right, floating point doesn't exist in the computers herself, only in the heids of computer users, so I'll probably stick with the ½ point. :wink:



Would another way of looking at this be that you don't get females with Klinefelter syndrome because Klinefelter syndrome is the name given to a variation from a traditionally 'male' pattern/layout, and you don't get males with Turner's because Turner's is the name given to a variation from a traditionally 'female' pattern/layout?

Declaration: I have no interest whatsoever in gaining access to women's toilets.

CWG's spectrum was for sexuality, not sex. I'm fine with that. I think "intersex" is a specific term referring to people who's chromosome layout is non-standard and, as such, should be reserved for them specifically. I don't have a problem with those of a "normal" layout considering themselves wherever they like on a gender spectrum, but they shouldn't use the term "intersex".

[CropleyWasGod]

CWG's spectrum was for sexuality, not sex. I'm fine with that. I think "intersex" is a specific term referring to people who's chromosome layout is non-standard and, as such, should be reserved for them specifically. I don't have a problem with those of a "normal" layout considering themselves wherever they like on a gender spectrum, but they shouldn't use the term "intersex".

This is the NHS' definition of "intersex".

Of course, it's not simple,:greengrin

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/differences-in-sex-development/

[JeMeSouviens]

This is the NHS' definition of "intersex".

Of course, it's not simple,:greengrin

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/differences-in-sex-development/

Ok, so I was too specific. But ...


Differences in sex development (DSD) is a group of rare conditions involving genes, hormones and reproductive organs, including genitals. It means a person's sex development is different to most other people's.

Sometimes the term Disorders of Sex Development is used, as is Variations in Sex Characteristics (VSC) or Diverse Sex Development. Some adults and young people with DSD prefer to use the term intersex.

... I still think we should only use "intersex" to apply to someone with one of these identifiable rare conditions, not to people who are more biologically "standard" but have a fluid or non-binary gender.

[500miles]

It only needs one black swan to exist to make 'All swans are white' false. So if one person with a different layout exists, 'All people are laid out either XX or XY' is false. I suppose it's a personal preference, but I like CWG's spectrum chat better.

If I understand it right, floating point doesn't exist in the computers herself, only in the heids of computer users, so I'll probably stick with the ½ point. :wink:



Would another way of looking at this be that you don't get females with Klinefelter syndrome because Klinefelter syndrome is the name given to a variation from a traditionally 'male' pattern/layout, and you don't get males with Turner's because Turner's is the name given to a variation from a traditionally 'female' pattern/layout?

Declaration: I have no interest whatsoever in gaining access to women's toilets.

Are you suggesting that Turner's and Klinefelter's sufferers should be treated as thier own sexes? I mean they still have sexual development in line with thier observed sex, just with reduced functionality. And again, we're looking conditions which are pretty rare, hence why I've referred to them as outliers rather than a spectrum, despite the fact that I'm entirely open to the idea of a gender spectrum.

[Keith_M]

Are you suggesting that Turner's and Klinefelter's sufferers should be treated as thier own sexes? I mean they still have sexual development in line with thier observed sex, just with reduced functionality. And again, we're looking conditions which are pretty rare, hence why I've referred to them as outliers rather than a spectrum, despite the fact that I'm entirely open to the idea of a gender spectrum.


The number of people that are not easily identified as Male or Female by their physical characteristics is miniscule, so are they just outliers rather than a 'spectrum'?

[Moulin Yarns]

The number of people that are not easily identified as Male or Female by their physical characteristics is miniscule, so are they just outliers rather than a spectrum?

I suppose if you compare eddie izzard with eve Lindley you will see a difference. 😉

Or phillipa York?!

[Keith_M]

On a related note, I read an article by a Guardian Journalist last week about how upset she was that some of her friends criticised her for Gender views that are (in their opinion) not quite 'on message' (presumably ultra-woke).

She thought this was very unfair and that people should be entitled to their point of view, and of 'freedom of speech'.

By an amazing coincidence The Observer, The Guardian's sister paper, had an editorial on Sunday expressing pretty much the same point of view.



Call me cynical but the same people have for years now criticized others for for not being 100% on-message, and demanding the right to Freedom of Speech, but are only now outraged because for once they are the ones on the receiving end.

:hmmm:

Pardon me for engaging in a bit of Schadenfreude

[Keith_M]

I suppose if you compare eddie izzard with eve Lindley you will see a difference. 😉

Or phillipa York?!


If it's OK, I'd rather not, thanks

:wink:

[lapsedhibee]

Are you suggesting that Turner's and Klinefelter's sufferers should be treated as thier own sexes? I mean they still have sexual development in line with thier observed sex, just with reduced functionality. And again, we're looking conditions which are pretty rare, hence why I've referred to them as outliers rather than a spectrum, despite the fact that I'm entirely open to the idea of a gender spectrum.

Not really, no. It's just that the existence of variations from more common patterns, some of them with recognisable labels and some maybe so far without, seem to me to render the 'you're either a male or a female, one or the other, no ifs no buts' position fairly unhelpful (not suggesting that's your position btw). Klinefelter and Turner are long-established variations, but I'd never heard of Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome before seeing CWG's linked article, and I'm thinking that there'll be more labels for more variations as time passes and more genetic delving gets done. At the moment I'm guessing that intersex people's lives are more difficult than they should/need to be because of a general perception that they're not properly one state or the other.

[500miles]

The number of people that are not easily identified as Male or Female by their physical characteristics is miniscule, so are they just outliers rather than a 'spectrum'?

Are you taking about gender expression or sex here?

[Keith_M]

Are you taking about gender expression or sex here?



As you've blatantly avoided answering my question, I'll leave it to you to decide what I meant.

[500miles]

As you've blatantly avoided answering my question, I'll leave it to you to decide what I meant.
Thanks, that was really helpful. What a contribution. Did it maybe occur to you that I was asking so I could actually give you a proper answer?

[Keith_M]

Trans Gender Woman wins Miss Nevada Beauty Pageant

https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/lifestyle/news-transgender-woman-creates-history-as-she-wins-miss-nevada-usa-beauty-pageant-394957

[Keith_M]

Thanks, that was really helpful. What a contribution. Did it maybe occur to you that I was asking so I could actually give you a proper answer?


Sorry, I was being a bit ar5ey.


Please accept my apologies.

[He's here!]

https://www.holyrood.com/news/view,majority-of-scottish-government-civil-servants-say-theyll-never-add-pronouns-to-their-email-signatures

This is something that seems to be becoming increasingly prevalent. Anyone on here use a pronoun with their email signature, or know anyone who does?

[CropleyWasGod]

https://www.holyrood.com/news/view,majority-of-scottish-government-civil-servants-say-theyll-never-add-pronouns-to-their-email-signatures

This is something that seems to be becoming increasingly prevalent. Anyone on here use a pronoun with their email signature, or know anyone who does?

I don't, but know many who do.

Personally, I find it useful.

[1 8 7 5]

https://www.holyrood.com/news/view,majority-of-scottish-government-civil-servants-say-theyll-never-add-pronouns-to-their-email-signatures

This is something that seems to be becoming increasingly prevalent. Anyone on here use a pronoun with their email signature, or know anyone who does?

In my part of the NHS, quite a few people are using it. Most aren't, as there is probably more pressing things going on in their work day.... no-body appears offended by it, so thats positive.

[Future17]

https://www.holyrood.com/news/view,majority-of-scottish-government-civil-servants-say-theyll-never-add-pronouns-to-their-email-signatures

This is something that seems to be becoming increasingly prevalent. Anyone on here use a pronoun with their email signature, or know anyone who does?

The headline states "Majority of Scottish Government civil servants say they'll never add pronouns to their email signatures" but that wasn't even an option on the poll. Makes you wonder what the headline writer's motivation was.

[JeMeSouviens]

https://www.holyrood.com/news/view,majority-of-scottish-government-civil-servants-say-theyll-never-add-pronouns-to-their-email-signatures

This is something that seems to be becoming increasingly prevalent. Anyone on here use a pronoun with their email signature, or know anyone who does?

I don't but I have seen some that do and I think that's quite helpful. I think if they are unspecified it's ok to default to the traditional and know it won't offend.

I do wonder why the need to specify both "he/him", "she/her" etc. though. I mean do the pairings ever get mixed? I'd like "he/them" if you don't mind?

[CropleyWasGod]

I don't but I have seen some that do and I think that's quite helpful. I think if they are unspecified it's ok to default to the traditional and know it won't offend.

I do wonder why the need to specify both "he/him", "she/her" etc. though. I mean do the pairings ever get mixed? I'd like "he/them" if you don't mind?

My guess is to avoid any difficulties for people who might normally struggle with that type of grammar.

"Hedges in accounts wants to be known as "her" now"

"Why does...em...er... her want that?"

As you said, and I said earlier, it's helpful. I've actually seen it suggested that it would be even more helpful to extend it to 3 words, eg "He/him/his"

[He's here!]

I don't but I have seen some that do and I think that's quite helpful. I think if they are unspecified it's ok to default to the traditional and know it won't offend.

I do wonder why the need to specify both "he/him", "she/her" etc. though. I mean do the pairings ever get mixed? I'd like "he/them" if you don't mind?

How about the 'non-standard' pronouns 'zie' and 'zir' which apparently some who class themselves as non-binary prefer? The potential for confusion among those who have no idea what this is all about (most likely a big majority of the population) seems huge.

[nonshinyfinish]

https://www.holyrood.com/news/view,majority-of-scottish-government-civil-servants-say-theyll-never-add-pronouns-to-their-email-signatures

This is something that seems to be becoming increasingly prevalent. Anyone on here use a pronoun with their email signature, or know anyone who does?

I do. Me including 'he/him' in itself doesn't achieve much (people are always going to go for that based on my name), but I have a non-binary colleague who needs to include 'they/them' in their signature if they want people to be aware of their pronouns. If the only people who did so were those who 'need' to, they'd be in a tiny minority. Therefore colleagues doing so is an attempt to help normalise it.

[Moulin Yarns]

I do. Me including 'he/him' in itself doesn't achieve much (people are always going to go for that based on my name), but I have a non-binary colleague who needs to include 'they/them' in their signature if they want people to be aware of their pronouns. If the only people who did so were those who 'need' to, they'd be in a tiny minority. Therefore colleagues doing so is an attempt to help normalise it.

That's interesting. I had never thought about it like that.

[He's here!]

Interesting article on next year's Scottish census.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/scotland-s-census-sex-muddle-is-bad-news-for-transgender-people?utm_medium=email&utm_source=CampaignMonitor_Editorial&utm_campaign=BLND%20%2020210902%20%20House%20Ads%2 0%20SM+CID_9c778a9846d0555119a9c19ae1431114

Doubtless this will be brushed off by some due to the publication it appears in, but Debbie Hayton is a transgender teacher/journalist whose views are always (IMHO) worth a read and (again IMHO) more often than not spot on.

[660]

Interesting article on next year's Scottish census.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/scotland-s-census-sex-muddle-is-bad-news-for-transgender-people?utm_medium=email&utm_source=CampaignMonitor_Editorial&utm_campaign=BLND%20%2020210902%20%20House%20Ads%2 0%20SM+CID_9c778a9846d0555119a9c19ae1431114

Doubtless this will be brushed off by some due to the publication it appears in, but Debbie Hayton is a transgender teacher/journalist whose views are always (IMHO) worth a read and (again IMHO) more often than not spot on.

It’s hard to take this article seriously given the guidance around this hasn’t changed since the last census.