Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Sacked doctor sues former employer for refusing to call trans-woman "she"

Options
12324262829

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 16,124 ✭✭✭✭AMKC
    Ms


    Where is your source for this?

    I doubt that somehow. Yes some do keep it and some even want to have both it and a Vulva with all it's parts. it's a new thing but being on hormones and trying to keep a functional penis too is more complicated than not keeping it as the hormones have to be regulated so there is enough testosterone so it can get hard but not too much to effect the estrogen too.

    Live long and Prosper

    Peace and long life.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,590 ✭✭✭LLMMLL


    Female is not just a biological term. It tends to be used interchangeably with "woman" when people use adjectives.

    So people say "female engineer" because "woman engineer" sounds clunky. It doesn't mean they are doing some kind of science.

    People also tend to say "woman" instead of "female" when using it as a noun because saying "female" makes you sound like a massive incel weirdo.

    Scientists also use "female" instead of woman.

    It doesn't mean "female" is a scientific term. It means that when scientists use "female" in a scientific setting it is a scientific term.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,590 ✭✭✭LLMMLL


    You have been provided with a definition of women earlier in the thread.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Let's not do this again. I genuinely don't have the time.

    I advise anyone interested to simply read the thread and see just how pathetic and threadbare your attempts to define male human beings as women are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,590 ✭✭✭LLMMLL


    I think the difference is that bubbly doesn't give a flying f how you define woman. It's you who is making the fuss. Not her.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Ah yes!

    "Women are people with XX chromosomes who do not identify as men, and people with XY chromosomes who identify as belonging to that group (people with XX chromosomes who do not identify as men)"

    Just out of interest how are you defining "men" in that sentence?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It's not a widely publicised number but you can do the maths relatively easily. Nobody seriously disputes it, hence the need to push the concept of 'girldick' and 'girlbulge' (don't google these terms).

    Based on my own experience I'd say more than 90% retain their penis but that's anecdotal



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,590 ✭✭✭LLMMLL


    I guess this is where the content free ad hominem attacks you were talking about a few posts ago really start.

    Look if you can't argue against my points that's fine. But don't pretend they're not valid.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    As usual, you misrepresent everything. And yes, I'm definitely done with you.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Literally nothing you have said is valid.

    It is all, from top to tail, complete nonsense. And the sad thing is I think you know it.

    Look, I'll say it out loud for you all before leaving this conversation for good. "Gender identity" wants to define woman as someone who does 'woman' things, plays with 'girly' toys, has 'woman' hobbies, wears women's clothes, heels and make-up etc. You want to define "woman" as a social role and a set of prejudices about how "women" behave.

    Because once you ditch biological sex, that's all you've got. There is nowhere else to go.

    I'm taking leave of this conversation, but I advise any lurkers to look into this subject, read as much as they can from all perspectives, and make their own minds up. It is sexist, misogynistic, illiterate, unscientific trash.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Maybe not yet but I do think in the future they will be able to have babies.

    Why do you think that? What in the genetic makeup of a male human would give you the impression that they will be able to give birth?

    They are Women they were just not born with all the parts.

    No they aren't. They are men who are born genuinely believing they should be women.

    So is a Woman to you who has never had a baby or can not have a baby even do they have all the internal parts to you not a Woman?

    That's not even close to what I said or alluded to. A woman is an adult human female. Whether they have babies or not is nothing to do with it.

    I disagree.

    A Trans person does not believe that they are a female in a male body or a male in a female body they know they are. The only part that is right is there brain. They know the bodies they have are wrong and most hate the parts they have and have to put up with it untill they can transition.

    So absolutely EVERY other part of their body is wrong except for their brain? Do you extend that to anorexics or people with body integrity dysphoria who genuinely hold the belief that they need to amputate a limb?



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,590 ✭✭✭LLMMLL


    I misrepresented nothing. Your point was clear and I captured it exactly. You're ignoring me because you've been caught out.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,590 ✭✭✭LLMMLL


    I pointed out how language is only scientific when it's used in a scientific setting such as most people outside of science using "female" simply as an adjectival form of "woman".

    You didn't mention this at all and went on a rant about something else I said. You don't even deal with what I said previously just a rant about how in your opinion it's nonsense.

    I think it's pretty clear when someone goes intk rant mode instead of engaging that they've lost the argument.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,925 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    It’s really easy to do, but you’re starting from the premise of assuming that what you define as adult male human beings, are actually adult male human beings. The whole point of anyone having autonomy and agency as an individual recognised in law is that they can determine their identity for themselves - not that they’re identifying out of, or into anything else, but simply identifying what they always were in the first place.

    You appear to have forgotten that the most vital organs in the human body aren’t the reproductive system, they are the brain in the central nervous system, the heart in the circulatory system, and the lungs in the respiratory system. Your chosen over-emphasis on the reproductive organs (and it is an example you bring up again and again if the bearded 6ft5 bloke, etc) is just that - how you choose to categorise human beings.

    In any case, it’s not a question of biology, it’s simply a question of linguistics. The material reality won’t change, and what it is named can be easily changed, y’know, like our first and surnames for example. The system of classification currently in use has only been around for 300 years or so -

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linnaean_taxonomy


    Even young earth types are willing to accept that human beings have been around for a lot longer than that, we weren’t always called male and female, woman and man 😒



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I'm ignoring you because you consistently misrepresent what has been provided, argue statements that weren't made, and to cap it off, make personal attacks on other posters while claiming victim of such attacks. All the while, you deflect when opposed, ignore or twist what is written in response to you.

    I see absolutely no value in engaging any kind of discussion with you. Quite honestly, I find you to be a hypocrite of the highest order, applying a wide range of double standards, and complete disregard for the bitter irony you often present.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,590 ✭✭✭LLMMLL


    Interesting how you can only claim to be misrepresented whereas I have offered proof by quoting what we both said and show how I represented you accurately. It's very telling that instead of replying with your own proof, you suddenly refuse to engage, even though you were happy to engage up to that point. Very interesting.

    I haven't made any personal attacks. Please don't misrepresent me.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    You did call him anti trans. That is an insult in the same way that your ideology could be said to be anti-woman, but there are none so childish as to throw that accusation around.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,124 ✭✭✭✭AMKC
    Ms



    Why do you think that? What in the genetic makeup of a male human would give you the impression that they will be able to give birth?

    I never said a male human would could give birth.

    I said a Trans Woman and and when that happens they will them be full complete Women.


    No they aren't. They are men who are born genuinely believing they should be women.

    Maybe some do but many know they have the wrong parts and body and want out.

    That's not even close to what I said or alluded to. A woman is an adult human female. Whether they have babies or not is nothing to do with it.

    Exactly so a Trans Woman is a Woman too

    So absolutely EVERY other part of their body is wrong except for their brain? Do you extend that to anorexics or people with body integrity dysphoria who genuinely hold the belief that they need to amputate a limb?


    Well not every part just the parts that define who they do not want to be for a mtf it would be hair on there face, there adams apple and there parts between there legs. For a ftm it would be there breasts, there long hair and parts between there legs.

    Live long and Prosper

    Peace and long life.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,277 ✭✭✭km991148


    Its demonstrably true tho. Why do you think posts keep getting removed?

    I could also say your your statement could come across as loaded and I could also say that it is inflammatory to throw words like ideology around in an attempt to belittle other people opinions (but of course I would never, because I am as not childish as you are not childish..)



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    If some posters being anti trans is demonstrably true, other posters can be demonstrated to be anti woman. The point is these un useful terms get us nowhere and only serve to reduce the conversation to insults. I would ask you to demonstrate it but we can’t even agree on definitions in this threads.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    "I never said a male human would could give birth.

    I said a Trans Woman and and when that happens they will them be full complete Women."

    A trans woman is a male human. There is absolutely no denying that. Unless you are of the incredibly misguided and uninformed belief that because someone identifies as trans, they can change their biology. If that is your genuine belief, it is frightening.

    "Maybe some do but many know they have the wrong parts and body and want out"

    They can't get "out", no more than if someone wanted to be black, taller, or younger. It is what it is.

    "Exactly so a Trans Woman is a Woman too"

    Because some females can't have babies and ALL males can't have babies they are the same? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you were just being unclear there because that is a ridiculous position to take.

    "Well not every part just the parts that define who they do not want to be for a mtf it would be hair on there face, there adams apple and there parts between there legs. For a ftm it would be there breasts, there long hair and parts between there legs."

    See there's your problem chief. It's not breasts, hair and vaginas that make a woman. It's their genetics. You seem wildly off the point in your assertion of what a man and a woman actually is. What you are talking about is a cosmetic change, not a biological one.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,277 ✭✭✭km991148


    I think very few people on these threads want to actually get anywhere. There is too much shouting at each other with the same nonsense.

    Also - Don't you think a post like yours is part of the same problem that you are accusing other of? Food for thought, certainly.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,925 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    That doesn’t follow, well logically speaking it doesn’t. Posters being anti-trans is demonstrably true, because they want to place limits on people by virtue of them being transgender. That has nothing to do with wanting to protect women or women’s rights, because in other conversations regarding women’s rights, they’ll argue that women’s rights should be limited. When it comes to conversations about men’s rights… well the same posters will argue that men are the bottom of the victim pile, and nobody will speak for us.

    It’s that kind of disingenuous shìt makes any kind of conversation difficult.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    That was precisely the point, to get you to stop with the insults by showing how the same could be done to you. I’m sure you’re free to do as you please though.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    “That has nothing to do with wanting to protect women or women’s rights, because in other conversations regarding women’s rights, they’ll argue that women’s rights should be limited”

    “This has nothing to do with women’s rights because some people don’t think like that.” Come on now Jack…. That is disingenuous bullshit and you’re smart enough to know that!

    Anyone allowing people grown who grew up as men and all that comes with that (increased bone density, muscle mass, broader shoulders,etc..) to compete against women is anti women. They don’t want women to win medals. It’s very easily done Jack… come on now…🤨.

    I’m not advocating to use insults like anti-woman but pointing out the hypocrisy in some users using the term ‘anti-trans’. It’s belittling and demeaning in the way it’s being used. It’s being used as a pejorative, an insult to shut down conversation, not expand it. If someone came on here and said ‘I hate trans people’ then feel free to use it.

    The lack of being genuine is on the side that accept anti woman as an insult but not anti trans. They are both reductive and insulting.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,590 ✭✭✭LLMMLL


    Which post did I called him anti trans in? I just looked through all my posts with klaz and can't see it.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    You are completely right.

    One person cares about the definition of women because of the ramifications that come with the definition (access to women only spaces/sports etc) and the other doesn't "give a flying f".



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,590 ✭✭✭LLMMLL


    Considering out of both of them bubbly is the only one who will actually share that space she is perfectly entitled to be ok with that.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Considering that the other has indicated that he has female children and other female relatives, he is entitled not to be ok with it.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,590 ✭✭✭LLMMLL


    Yes he is part of that unique and rare group of people who have female relatives.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement