The Trans Rights Debate

[Keith_M]

Person with a Cervix? Is that honestly a real expression?

[archie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well, that's the whole debate isn't it. You don't believe or acknowledge transgender or non-binary while others will say you can identify differently to the gender you were assigned at birth.

Alternatively 'observed at birth'!

[Keith_M]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Alternatively 'observed at birth'!

Yeah, that's surely a much more accurate description.

[hibby rae]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

"An SNP equalities officer has apologised for a series of social media outbursts including one threatening violence against women. In now deleted posts, Cameron Downing, 23, said he wanted to “beat the f*** out of some terfs and transphobes”.

In another, he claimed: “I f****** hate terfs and transphobes with such a passion they make me want to SCREAM!” Terf – meaning trans-exclusionary radical feminist – is a derogatory term used against women who do not recognise the gender identity of trans women.

Downing has been an equalities officer for the SNP’s London branch since August 2022 and previously worked in the same role in 2021. When confronted about the Twitter posts, he said: “I apologise for these tweets and for any offence caused to the LGBTQ+ community and have long since deleted them.”

To think some on here have criticised JK Rowling for her tweets supporting women's rights, the above is an outrageous statement and shows the mentality of some of the bams involved in this self-identification mess

That's not accurate from the DR. Men can be TERFs as well, as you don't need to be female to be a feminist

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So, mostly people who self-identify (as I assume people who have actually had surgery will have had the cervix and womb removed, alongside other vestiges of their former gender) or people who prefer not to acknowledge gender, but who have cervix's?

In the circumstances, I feel the use of the term "women" is very much preferable to any other.

My friend Jude is intending to have top surgery but is not decided on lower body surgery. He will therefore still have a cervix

[147lothian]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Alternatively 'observed at birth'!

Well spotted, observed at birth is the reality of what happens, the biological sex of a baby is observed and recorded, no one flips a coin.

[Stairway 2 7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well spotted, observed at birth is the reality of what happens, the biological sex of a baby is observed and recorded, no one flips a coin.

The biological sex never changes, its just how people define themselves. Personally think people can define themselves as they like.

[Hibby Bairn]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

My friend Jude is intending to have top surgery but is not decided on lower body surgery. He will therefore still have a cervix

I've read this six times now and I'm still not sure what's going on 🙃

[Stairway 2 7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I've read this six times now and I'm still not sure what's going on 🙃

He's getting rid of his boobs, but keeping downstairs lady parts

[superfurryhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's not accurate from the DR. Men can be TERFs as well, as you don't need to be female to be a feminist

Considering the context of the discussion, I'm more concerned at the level of aggression in a person appointed by the SNP as an equalities officer than the semantics of the Record's definition of TERf or your views on who can and can't be a feminist.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's not really related but I was ****ed off recently when I went to an appointment with my wife and son and the doctor kept referring to me as the 2nd parent and occasionally co parent.

Firstly I'm my son's dad, secondly I'm not a 2nd parent. Both my wife and I are active in our children's upbringing in a variety of ways. I get that assumptions are off the table now but just ****ing ask people what they want to be called. Is it really all that perjorative to ask someone do you want to be referred to as mother, father or a co parent? Or simply 'what's your relationship to the child?' In the grand scheme of things it's not that big a deal but it seems in an attempt to be inclusive there's an inadvertent consequence that sees people who just want to be dad not called as such. I'm sure my view is grossly heteronormative or something but sorry I'm a dad and would rather just be called as such.

By the way I have no issue with children being raised with 2 mums, 2 dad's, non binary parents, a single parent, co habiting co parents or just about any other arrangement but it's not my situation so just establish that and act accordingly rather than use daft terms like '2nd parent'.

A dad's a dad for aw that.

Assumptions can be clarified as you say, by a simple question. He shakes his heid in despair. I fear it just gives more ammunition for the bigots who exploit this stuff for all they can.

[147lothian]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I've read this six times now and I'm still not sure what's going on 🙃

Just wait for the next chapter when he sues the NHS for not providing him with a prostate checkup institutional discrimination against transmen

[Pretty Boy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The biological sex never changes, its just how people define themselves. Personally think people can define themselves as they like.

Isn't that the whole crux of the debate though?

It's been accepted for quite literally millennia that there are multiple genders and that gender is fluid. It's ultimately a social construct and the removal of barriers in recent times to allow people to more freely express themselves is welcome. It's a small thing but my daughter loves dinosaurs; traditionally clothes featuring dinosaurs would have been in the boys section of a shop, now many shops have removed gender specific sections of their shop so she can wear what she likes without feeling she is wearing 'boys clothes'. That's a flippant example in a serious debate.

The argument now seems to be moving towards an idea of biological sex being a construct of society as well and that's a whole different matter. The term 'assigned at birth' points to that. Your sex isn't assigned at birth, it's defined based on biological observations. There really is only 3 possible outcomes to such observations, male, female and in a tiny percentage of cases intersex. Anyone should be able to choose to live their lives not bound by the social 'norms' of what is expected of men and women. Dress how you like, use what pronouns you like, call yourself what you like and forget all the hysteria and use whatever toilet you like as well. Do I believe though that trans men are wholly men or trans women are wholly women? No, I don't. A woman who doesn't want someone who's muscle development was aided by years of testosterone crashing into her at full pelt on a rugby field isn't a bigot for saying so. A beauty therapist who refuse to carry out a bikini wax on someone with male sexual organs isn't a bigot. Women who were raped by someone with a ***** and testicles are not bigots for not wanting someone with those same organs heading up a rape support charity or providing counselling services for them.

I daresay I'm a bigot for saying what I have have above but I stand by it. I've no issue with much of self ID, access to reassignment services and hormone therapy should be widespread, across a huge spectrum of areas trans people should have exactly the same rights as anyone else and I can't see why anyone would argue differently. However there can't just be a complete abandonment of biological reality and that means there has to be a tiny number of areas were exceptions are made. Simply screaming 'trans women are women' or 'trans men are men' is every bit as detrimental to the debate as people screaming 'there's only 2 genders'.

[Hibby Bairn]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He's getting rid of his boobs, but keeping downstairs lady parts

So is Jude a man or a woman?

[Stairway 2 7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So is Jude a man or a woman?

Well born a female and transitioning to man

[KWJ]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Isn't that the whole crux of the debate though?

It's been accepted for quite literally millennia that there are multiple genders and that gender is fluid. It's ultimately a social construct and the removal of barriers in recent times to allow people to more freely express themselves is welcome. It's a small thing but my daughter loves dinosaurs; traditionally clothes featuring dinosaurs would have been in the boys section of a shop, now many shops have removed gender specific sections of their shop so she can wear what she likes without feeling she is wearing 'boys clothes'. That's a flippant example in a serious debate.

The argument now seems to be moving towards an idea of biological sex being a construct of society as well and that's a whole different matter. The term 'assigned at birth' points to that. Your sex isn't assigned at birth, it's defined based on biological observations. There really is only 3 possible outcomes to such observations, male, female and in a tiny percentage of cases intersex. Anyone should be able to choose to live their lives not bound by the social 'norms' of what is expected of men and women. Dress how you like, use what pronouns you like, call yourself what you like and forget all the hysteria and use whatever toilet you like as well. Do I believe though that trans men are wholly men or trans women are wholly women? No, I don't. A woman who doesn't want someone who's muscle development was aided by years of testosterone crashing into her at full pelt on a rugby field isn't a bigot for saying so. A beauty therapist who refuse to carry out a bikini wax on someone with male sexual organs isn't a bigot. Women who were raped by someone with a ***** and testicles are not bigots for not wanting someone with those same organs heading up a rape support charity or providing counselling services for them.

I daresay I'm a bigot for saying what I have have above but I stand by it. I've no issue with much of self ID, access to reassignment services and hormone therapy should be widespread, across a huge spectrum of areas trans people should have exactly the same rights as anyone else and I can't see why anyone would argue differently. However there can't just be a complete abandonment of biological reality and that means there has to be a tiny number of areas were exceptions are made. Simply screaming 'trans women are women' or 'trans men are men' is every bit as detrimental to the debate as people screaming 'there's only 2 genders'.

I don't disagree with you but, as I mentioned in an earlier post, I think people are more inclined to immediately think of the situations like you've said above which are extreme, rare but obviously well publicised. While in reality the vast majority of trans people are just trying to get by in their lives, like the rest of us.

The wording and terms debate is another all together and I see it as attempting to be inclusive while others, even those without skin in the game, can't seem to acknowledge any reason to ever use such terms. It's a shame that there's so much anger on both sides which tends to receive as much, if not more, coverage than the actual debate.

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't disagree with you but, as I mentioned in an earlier post, I think people are more inclined to immediately think of the situations like you've said above which are extreme, rare but obviously well publicised. While in reality the vast majority of trans people are just trying to get by in their lives, like the rest of us.

The wording and terms debate is another all together and I see it as attempting to be inclusive while others, even those without skin in the game, can't seem to acknowledge any reason to ever use such terms. It's a shame that there's so much anger on both sides which tends to receive as much, if not more, coverage than the actual debate.

People seem determined to latch onto peripheral issues like toilet provision and rage about them. As if there's a vast conspiracy of male rapists determined to identify as women solely for the purpose of carrying out rapes in toilets.

[Stairway 2 7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

People seem determined to latch onto peripheral issues like toilet provision and rage about them. As if there's a vast conspiracy of male rapists determined to identify as women solely for the purpose of carrying out rapes in toilets.

I think rapes is being used in the extremes of both sides of the argument, it's ridiculous. It's more just that most women asked don't want pre op trans men in there toilets or changing areas. It's about men silencing womens wishes.

A compromise would be making planning laws have ample unisex changing cubicles and toilets. It could be enforced as much as the need for disabled toilets. Might take a while to retrofit and a huge expense, but for new buildings.

[Stairway 2 7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Isn't that the whole crux of the debate though?

It's been accepted for quite literally millennia that there are multiple genders and that gender is fluid. It's ultimately a social construct and the removal of barriers in recent times to allow people to more freely express themselves is welcome. It's a small thing but my daughter loves dinosaurs; traditionally clothes featuring dinosaurs would have been in the boys section of a shop, now many shops have removed gender specific sections of their shop so she can wear what she likes without feeling she is wearing 'boys clothes'. That's a flippant example in a serious debate.

The argument now seems to be moving towards an idea of biological sex being a construct of society as well and that's a whole different matter. The term 'assigned at birth' points to that. Your sex isn't assigned at birth, it's defined based on biological observations. There really is only 3 possible outcomes to such observations, male, female and in a tiny percentage of cases intersex. Anyone should be able to choose to live their lives not bound by the social 'norms' of what is expected of men and women. Dress how you like, use what pronouns you like, call yourself what you like and forget all the hysteria and use whatever toilet you like as well. Do I believe though that trans men are wholly men or trans women are wholly women? No, I don't. A woman who doesn't want someone who's muscle development was aided by years of testosterone crashing into her at full pelt on a rugby field isn't a bigot for saying so. A beauty therapist who refuse to carry out a bikini wax on someone with male sexual organs isn't a bigot. Women who were raped by someone with a ***** and testicles are not bigots for not wanting someone with those same organs heading up a rape support charity or providing counselling services for them.

I daresay I'm a bigot for saying what I have have above but I stand by it. I've no issue with much of self ID, access to reassignment services and hormone therapy should be widespread, across a huge spectrum of areas trans people should have exactly the same rights as anyone else and I can't see why anyone would argue differently. However there can't just be a complete abandonment of biological reality and that means there has to be a tiny number of areas were exceptions are made. Simply screaming 'trans women are women' or 'trans men are men' is every bit as detrimental to the debate as people screaming 'there's only 2 genders'.

I think 99% of people would agree with this.

[archie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

People seem determined to latch onto peripheral issues like toilet provision and rage about them. As if there's a vast conspiracy of male rapists determined to identify as women solely for the purpose of carrying out rapes in toilets.

Now I think that comment goes to the heart of the debate. A man says it's a peripheral issue. But many women disagree. The recent coverage of Primark's changing rooms policy and their reversal of it following harrassment of women is illustrative. I think the issue is exacerbated by the vagueness and fuzzyness about what being trans actually is. Added to that is the proposed legislation that largely strips out any process around changing gender. I genuinely believe that the majority of people are very supportive of what trans people go through. But I think that support is predicated on a vision of trans that is someone who is physically transitioning. And I really think the aggressive, sexualised stuff around 'suck my lady dick' is really setting the cause back.

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Now I think that comment goes to the heart of the debate. A man says it's a peripheral issue. But many women disagree. The recent coverage of Primark's changing rooms policy and their reversal of it following harrassment of women is illustrative. I think the issue is exacerbated by the vagueness and fuzzyness about what being trans actually is. Added to that is the proposed legislation that largely strips out any process around changing gender. I genuinely believe that the majority of people are very supportive of what trans people go through. But I think that support is predicated on a vision of trans that is someone who is physically transitioning. And I really think the aggressive, sexualised stuff around 'suck my lady dick' is really setting the cause back.

I really think that's unfair. Many women say it's a peripheral issue and many men disagree. As it happens, I don't have a particularly strong or well formed opinion on the subject, I just see loads of rage flying past on twitter, mainly, so I was agreeing with KWJ.

[archie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I really think that's unfair. Many women say it's a peripheral issue and many men disagree. As it happens, I don't have a particularly strong or well formed opinion on the subject, I just see loads of rage flying past on twitter, mainly, so I was agreeing with KWJ.

I think that's the danger of framing something as 'peripheral' when for many people it's not.

[superfurryhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well born a female and transitioning to man

A man with a fanny, but getting rid of the breests. Each to their own I suppose.

[hibby rae]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

]Considering the context of the discussion, I'm more concerned at the level of aggression in a person appointed by the SNP as an equalities officer than the semantics of the Record's definition of TERf or your views on who can and can't be a feminist.[/B]

I understand that, but the semantics are very important if the DR is writing up the story as someone who has made threats against women, when in actual fact they haven't. By extension then, their role as an Equalities officer is less important, their threats are not based against those of a certain gender, they are based against those of a certain ideology. Because as I said before, men and women can be TERFS and men and women can be feminists. That is just a fact.

They have distorted the truth to suit a certain story and headline.

[Stairway 2 7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I understand that, but the semantics are very important if the DR is writing up the story as someone who has made threats against women, when in actual fact they haven't. By extension then, their role as an Equalities officer is less important, their threats are not based against those of a certain gender, they are based against those of a certain ideology. Because as I said before, men and women can be TERFS and men and women can be feminists. That is just a fact.

They have distorted the truth to suit a certain story and headline.

I don't think an equalities officer for the government should be saying he wants to beat up men with a different viewpoint on social media either.

[147lothian]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think that's the danger of framing something as 'peripheral' when for many people it's not.

It's not a peripheral issue for feminist woman who have campaigned for their sex-based rights since they got the right to vote, however in the strange times that we now live in people pretend they don't know what a woman is to support the new ideology of transgenderism, which see's women as an identity category rather than as the reality of biological sex

Women were campaigning against the GRA not because they are transphobic or have anything against trans people but because in creating a situation where it is easier for men to identify as women and gain entry to woman only spaces, a loophole is being created for a small number of men who pose a threat to women to exploit.

When a woman is in a night club, and they want to get away from the advances of a man who comes onto them, what do they do? They go to the toilet, the reason for this is because it's what they see this as a safe space that is for women only that men can't enter.

[hibby rae]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't think an equalities officer for the government should be saying he wants to beat up men with a different viewpoint on social media either.

Obviously no government official should. But again, their role is irrelevent. And the reporting is inaccurate.

[KWJ]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's not a peripheral issue for feminist woman who have campaigned for their sex-based rights since they got the right to vote, however in the strange times that we now live in people pretend they don't know what a woman is to support the new ideology of transgenderism, which see's women as an identity category rather than as the reality of biological sex

Women were campaigning against the GRA not because they are transphobic or have anything against trans people but because in creating a situation where it is easier for men to identify as women and gain entry to woman only spaces, a loophole is being created for a small number of men who pose a threat to women to exploit.

When a woman is in a night club, and they want to get away from the advances of a man who comes onto them, what do they do? They go to the toilet, the reason for this is because it's what they see this as a safe space that is for women only that men can't enter.

Research was carried out in advance of the GRA and found that there wasn't any evidence to suggest that men claimed to be transwomen for malicious reasons in women only spaces. They also found zero evidence to support that women were more likely to be sexually assaulted by trans women than women from birth.

[hibby rae]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's not a peripheral issue for feminist woman who have campaigned for their sex-based rights since they got the right to vote, however in the strange times that we now live in people pretend they don't know what a woman is to support the new ideology of transgenderism, which see's women as an identity category rather than as the reality of biological sex

Women were campaigning against the GRA not because they are transphobic or have anything against trans people but because in creating a situation where it is easier for men to identify as women and gain entry to woman only spaces, a loophole is being created for a small number of men who pose a threat to women to exploit.

When a woman is in a night club, and they want to get away from the advances of a man who comes onto them, what do they do? They go to the toilet, the reason for this is because it's what they see this as a safe space that is for women only that men can't enter.

Are you speaking from experience? Because my experience of working in clubs was often said men would be pointed out, or the women would speak to staff.

Is there any evidence of men posing as women to attack women in gender neutral spaces?

[Stairway 2 7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Are you speaking from experience? Because my experience of working in clubs was often said men would be pointed out, or the women would speak to staff.

Is there any evidence of men posing as women to attack women in gender neutral spaces?

As I've said attacks is used to defend the policy, they are unlikely. But the vast majority of trans women don't have their ***** removed. So even knowing their won't be attacked, women should be allowed to get naked in a gym changing room without someone naked with a ***** next to them. The majority of women polled always say they don't want this so why do we never listen to them.

[superfurryhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I understand that, but the semantics are very important if the DR is writing up the story as someone who has made threats against women, when in actual fact they haven't. By extension then, their role as an Equalities officer is less important, their threats are not based against those of a certain gender, they are based against those of a certain ideology. Because as I said before, men and women can be TERFS and men and women can be feminists. That is just a fact.

They have distorted the truth to suit a certain story and headline.

If we are doing semantics here then your statement that men can be feminists is very much debateable. It's not a "fact", in fact veryfar from it. https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...menbefeminists


"Brian Klocke of the National Organisation for Men against Sexism has argued: "Although I believe that men can be pro-feminist and anti-sexist, I do not believe we can be feminists in the strictest sense of the word in today's society. Men, in this patriarchal system, cannot remove themselves from their power and privilege in relation to women. To be a feminist one must be a member of the targeted group (ie a woman) not only as a matter of classification but as having one's directly-lived experience inform one's theory and praxis."

Women feminists have also voiced misgivings about men's involvement in the movement. Some men, they argue, automatically assume a dominant role when they become activists, claiming to be better feminists than feminist women, and failing to recognise and challenge their own sexist behaviour".

As for your "fact" about TERf, have a read of this (I think it's a good, basic explanation of the gender critical position) https://gcritical.org/gender-critical-or-terf/

"Most radical feminists do not accept that men can be “feminists” at all (even if they are allies) because they cannot experience the oppression women feel. For this reason, men cannot be radical feminists. If anyone tells you a man is a TERF, that person has no idea what radical feminism, or a TERF, is".

An interesting juxtaposition, a man (I assume you are?) deciding unequivocally who can be a feminist and deflecting from a hate based attack against women with a particular ideological stance. Does that not sail close to the wind in terms of misogyny?

On that note, can a fully transitioned transgender woman become a feminist? My first thoughts are aye, of course they can.

My family member was born female, transitioned and is now a bloke, a gay bloke. I find it all confusing.