Gender Identity in Modern Ireland (Mod warnings and Threadbanned Users in OP)

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Deleted User wrote: »

womens skulls getting smashed- "lol, cricket joke"

i dunno, for a side of the debate that are very quick to scream about everyone being a terf or anti-trans theres a high proportion of yis that sure seem......like really, genuinely hostile to cis women

only observing myself, so no data, but its almost always those who identify as mtf trans who really do seem either alarmingly unfeeling or strikingly callous about the concerns or fears from cis women about the rights being demanded with little debate

i mean hey its only perceptions but i dunno.

really bad look, imo

They often very quickly betray a contempt for women. On Twitter, their bios will often say ‘feminist’. Yeah right. Some of the more conservative heads in these threads show far more respect for the female experience than any of those ‘male feminist’ goobers.

km991148

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

Your dismissive attitude to sexual assault of women speaks volumes...

"Discussion using words and sentences..."
Indeed.


Misogyny much?

False equivalence much? Strawman much?

Dont try and weedle your way around made up examples in an attempt to put words into my mouth or dismiss my own opinions.

Incidentally - you came in talking about a GYN - you didn't mention if this was an examination as a result of a sexual assault in your entirely made up example.

EDIT: fopr clarity - here is the original post where the straw was set:

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

If you'd consented to a being examined by a woman obstetrician/gynacologist who subsequently turned out to be trans-woman, is that sexual assault I wonder.

The handling of the situation would be checking with the patient that it was ok to proceed BEFORE the examination (or sexual assault in your terminology) took place - but its hard to know how exactly this would be handled because the doctor, the patient nor the hospital actually exist.. do you see the trouble we get to when you start going off piste?

mohawk

MynamesColm wrote: »

When that happens you may have something to complain about. But you don't know, and I don't know what rules will be established by organisations in the future.


Ive just had a look at Fallon Fox's wiki, and seems like the requirements for her to be a licensed fighter were pretty strict...si yes, I'm okay with it.

Well I think the safety of women and girls should come first. Testosterone is not the only reason men have an advantage in most sports.
Fallon Fox broke a women’s skull. But hey as long as your okay with it.

46 Long

LLMMLL wrote: »

A trans woman doctor is a woman.

What is a woman?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

MynamesColm wrote: »

I guess Fallon Fox has won all her fights so, what with the massive advantag....oh...no...she hasn't?



I don't claim to be an expert, but there are rules in place for trans mma fighters.


Its not a reason to deny people rights or recognition.

It denies women places in sport. Is sport important or isn’t it?

Gervais08

46 Long wrote: »

What is a woman?

An adult human female.

IAMAMORON

IAMAMORON wrote: »

No human has the right to enforce a life or lifestyle on another.

so vague as to be meaningless.

try telling yr boss that next time you dont like an order

or the bank manager when they refuse you a mortgage

what human right- an actual agreed, defined one- is being denied anyone if another person (and especially in their private capacity) does not believe they have changed gender from birth?

conversely- what right has *anyone* to tell anyone else that they *must* believe or profess to believe that, if they do not agree?


thats the crux of it i think- the claim of a right to tell anyone else what to believe or how to express that belief. and for all that i see trans rights crews claiming that they are the victims of this, its that side that are actually lobbying left, right and centre (with some venom) for this right over others.

be trans, be fluid, be nb. ppl probably dont care too much.

dont demand that anyone else has to deal with your self-identity issues in your chosen way, and your chosen way only. thats not a right anyone gets!

IAMAMORON

46 Long wrote: »

What is a woman?

Ah here, enough with the technical questions already, it is getting late in the day.

Manach

Given the willingness of Progressives to legalise "hate-speech" laws for those that diverge from their doctrines on this and other issues, not saying a thing.

Gruffalux

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

They often very quickly betray a contempt for women. On Twitter, their bios will often say ‘feminist’. Yeah right. Some of the more conservative heads in these threads show far more respect for the female experience than any of those ‘male feminist’ goobers.

Goobers! Oh can we somehow please make this a much more frequent word?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

IAMAMORON wrote: »

In your quote above you are stating that non transgendered persons have a fundamental right above transgenders, you have sighted instances were transgenders are looking to impede on other human rights.

Give me the quote where I said that. Third time asking you. Come on. If you think I have said this, show me where. What’s the problem?

jam_mac_jam

mohawk wrote: »

Well I think the safety of women and girls should come first. Testosterone is not the only reason men have an advantage in most sports.
Fallon Fox broke a women’s skull. But hey as long as your okay with it.

I wonder how many broken skulls before it becomes a problem?

You give an example, its not enough, you need 50.

Everything seems to be hardly ever happens, not enough examples, hypothetical, doesn't happen in Ireland.

km991148

Manach wrote: »

Given the willingness of Progressives to legalise "hate-speech" laws for those that diverge from their doctrines on this and other issues, not saying a thing.

you pretty much did (not say a thing)..

Gruffalux

Manach wrote: »

Given the willingness of Progressives to legalise "hate-speech" laws for those that diverge from their doctrines on this and other issues, not saying a thing.

Don't be afraìd of the list, Manach! Be on the list. Embrace the list. Ultimately all the cool people will be on the list, I guarantee it.

IAMAMORON

Deleted User wrote: »

so vague as to be meaningless.

try telling yr boss that next time you dont like an order

or the bank manager when they refuse you a mortgage

what human right- an actual agreed, defined one- is being denied anyone if another person (and especially in their private capacity) does not believe they have changed gender from birth?

conversely- what right has *anyone* to tell anyone else that they *must* believe or profess to believe that, if they do not agree?


thats the crux of it i think- the claim of a right to tell anyone else what to believe or how to express that belief. and for all that i see trans rights crews claiming that they are the victims of this, its that side that are actually lobbying left, right and centre (with some venom) for this right over others.

be trans, be fluid, be nb. ppl probably dont care too much.

dont demand that anyone else has to deal with your self-identity issues in your chosen way, and your chosen way only. thats not a right anyone gets!

As I said earlier, it astonishes me how it is only non transgenders that suffer with the concept so much.

Transsexuals are only asking for respect and to be allowed be who they want to be. I don't understand people holding any adversity towards it. At the end of the day it is no one elses' business anyway.

km991148

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I wonder how many broken skulls before it becomes a problem?

You give an example, its not enough, you need 50.

Everything seems to be hardly ever happens, not enough examples, hypothetical, doesn't happen in Ireland.

The person who smashed a skull should be dealt with. The made up creepy 50 year old - the same.

Checks and balances should be put in place to stop bad things happening (which is harder in the later case, because it was entirely made up).

Unfortunately (and I say this with sincerity, because its often with absolute tragedy) things go wrong before they get it right. Happens in all areas of life.

Gatling

Gruffalux wrote: »

Don't be afraìd of the list, Manach! Be on the list. Embrace the list. Ultimately all the cool people will be on the list, I guarantee it.

Imagine what twitter and Mumsnet dwellers life's actually look like

IAMAMORON

IAMAMORON wrote: »

As I said earlier, it astonishes me how it is only non transgenders that suffer with the concept so much.

Transsexuals are only asking for respect and to be allowed be who they want to be. I don't understand people holding any adversity towards it. At the end of the day it is no one elses' business anyway.

so vague as to be meaningless

and my post set out why, but you ignored that obviously

Smacruairi

LLMMLL wrote: »

It's actually TERFs who centred the debate around cis women.

Can you please stop using that term. I have asked you politely, feeling that you use it in a way to denigrate and insult. Please refrain from insulting people who have repeatedly asked you in the previous thread to avoid doing so. I do not identify myself by that term, I find it to be provocative and that you use it as a slur. Please refrain.

km991148

Gatling wrote: »

Imagine what twitter and Mumsnet dwellers life's actually look like

Right but now you are just being silly by trying to extrapolate the views of one group of people on one single issue on to a whole other set of people.

Twitter is full of nuts from all walks of life and all sides of the political spectrum. mumsnet I have no clue - but it appears like an attempt to offend or belittle?..

Wibbs

MynamesColm wrote: »

Fallon Fox (an mma fighter): Licensed fighter with strict rules for licensing trans fighters. "to be licensed, transgender female fighters must undergo complete "surgical anatomical changes ..., including external genitalia and gonadectomy and subsequently a minimum of two years of hormone replacement therapy, administered by a board certified specialist."

Then that "board certified specialist" is either a moron, or pressured into passing Fox because of external forces looking to appear progressive. Because it's a bloody nonsense.

Now we'll forget the deluded daftness and politic and it is a politic that says a Transexual women is an actual women for a moment, but Fox was over 30 years old when they transitioned. They had been a large framed man who had around 15 years of testosterone coursing through his body and training during that time, building a bigger frame, bigger joints, bigger hands, wider shoulders, different limb proportions, narrower hips, bigger and thicker skull, higher bone densities, more fast twitch muscle fibres, thicker and stronger skin and sinews and other connective tissue, bigger organs, never mind larger blood and lung volumes. They then medically transitioned and took female hormones for two years. That can never reset that previous development to pre puberty, never mind to an actual woman who has a completely different hormone soup going on, never mind genetically based differences out of the box built up over the same time period. Oestrogen will actually retain most of the gains in bone densities and frames, shoulders, hands, joints don't shrink.

Whatever about Trans women competing in other sports against women and the inequality in that, but contact sports are a complete bloody insanity and it seems an increasingly shared insanity as far as some in some sports bodies are concerned.

Gatling

km991148 wrote: »

Twitter is full of nuts from all walks of life and all sides of the political spectrum. mumsnet I have no clue - but it appears like an attempt to offend or belittle?..

Jesus wept .

Offend and belittle who ,

Actually don't bother

Wibbs

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Transsexuals are only asking for respect and to be allowed be who they want to be. I don't understand people holding any adversity towards it. At the end of the day it is no one elses' business anyway.

Agreed, right up to the point where it becomes someone else's business when it comes to their lives and especially their personal safety.

km991148

Gatling wrote: »

Jesus wept .

Offend and belittle who ,

Actually don't bother

good question - what was your point - I obviously missed it - and if so I apologise?

IAMAMORON

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I wonder how many broken skulls before it becomes a problem?

You give an example, its not enough, you need 50.

Everything seems to be hardly ever happens, not enough examples, hypothetical, doesn't happen in Ireland.

As I said earlier, clinging to the example of maybe 50 transgendered persons participating in one sport or another is not a big enough reason to dispute transgender rights. It is something which each particular sporting body need to address.

It certainly is not a sufficient quotient for raising as an issue on gender equality or in the human rights of transsexuals.

People may not have the tenacity to comprehend what transsexualism is all about, but certainly screaming whataboutery about a few examples of professional sportspersons only clarifies their lack of temerity in the discussion.

Baggly

LLMMLL wrote: »

So if you can't tell then how can you ensure that you always have a cis woman doctor or strip searched by a cis woman?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

They often very quickly betray a contempt for women. On Twitter, their bios will often say ‘feminist’. Yeah right. Some of the more conservative heads in these threads show far more respect for the female experience than any of those ‘male feminist’ goobers.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Give me the quote where I said that. Third time asking you. Come on. If you think I have said this, show me where. What’s the problem?

Gatling wrote: »

Imagine what twitter and Mumsnet dwellers life's actually look like

Gatling wrote: »

Jesus wept .

Offend and belittle who ,

Actually don't bother

Mod

All of you can take a week off from this thread to evaluate your standard of posting here today. Any issues, my pm inbox is open.

IAMAMORON

Wibbs wrote: »

Agreed, right up to the point where it becomes someone else's business when it comes to their lives and especially their personal safety.

Personal safety has nothing to do with someone's gender identity?

How do you mean?

Are you bringing up surgery?

MynamesColm

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I wonder how many broken skulls before it becomes a problem?

You give an example, its not enough, you need 50.

Everything seems to be hardly ever happens, not enough examples, hypothetical, doesn't happen in Ireland.

I'm sorry, but injuries in mma are not a new thing.



Has Fox won all her matches? Have other female fighters suffered horrific injuries fighting non trans fighters?



An amateur mma fighter lost her life this year... but that's not notable because she wasn't fighting a trans fighter?




Forgive me for not buying a pair of pearls and clutching them at the idea that an mma fighter was injured.

km991148

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Personal safety has nothing to do with someone's gender identity?

How do you mean?

Are you bringing up surgery?

Presumably they mean the isolated case where a skull got broken?

Or am I missing something?

Wibbs

Manach wrote: »

Given the willingness of Progressives to legalise "hate-speech" laws for those that diverge from their doctrines on this and other issues, not saying a thing.

Good point. The new doctrine is getting close to the full set: a credo that is unscientific, relying more on feelings and faith, a hardline to the catechism priesthood, growing laity with pious crawthumpers who will cry "Heresy!!" at even the easiest question, or statement of provable fact and now a potential inquisition to run to with the laws to make it a legal blasphemy. Though with the actual inquisitions if you recanted and asked for grace you almost always got it and off you went, now one tweet can have someone potentially excommunicated for good.

km991148

46 Long wrote: »

It becomes our business when challenging mental illness becomes 'hate speech' and we're expected to redefine language and pretend that biological reality doesn't exist.

And now I really don't follow - Unless you mean all people with gender issues have a 'mental illness' - and if so - who are we to 'challenge' it - and then who exactly is calling that 'challenge' hate speech (I mean I Imagine it could be hate speech, it could be a question I guess?)

km991148

km991148 wrote: »

I simply fail to see how trading hypothetical situations about made up pervy transgendered 50 year old swimmers or hospitals with transgendered gynaecologists (that are at the same time completely ignorant of transgender issues) any use? What are you trying to prove? I could invoke any imaginary situation to prove any point I wanted if that were the case?

*Checks OP thread rules

Baggly wrote: »

Gender identity is a very current and heated debate in Ireland at the moment.

There have been a number of threads in the Current Affairs forum that have dealt with specific talking points on the topic in the media, but they have largely become less 'current' and so this thread is more on the 'Honest Opinion' side of the forums purpose.

What is your opinion on gender identity?

A few reminder notes from the mod team

[*]This thread is for discussing the above OP. Please do so.

We're talking about gender identity and implications. Pretty wide ranging scope, as it seems the thread direction would attest

km991148 wrote: »

False equivalence much? Strawman much?

Dont try and weedle your way around made up examples in an attempt to put words into my mouth or dismiss my own opinions.

Incidentally - you came in talking about a GYN - you didn't mention if this was an examination as a result of a sexual assault in your entirely made up example.

EDIT: fopr clarity - here is the original post where the straw was set:

The handling of the situation would be checking with the patient that it was ok to proceed BEFORE the examination (or sexual assault in your terminology) took place - but its hard to know how exactly this would be handled because the doctor, the patient nor the hospital actually exist.. do you see the trouble we get to when you start going off piste?

Weedle....off piste....Oh dear me.

You replied and dismissed the sexual assault of a woman as something that can be resolved by a
"Discussion using words and sentences"
A misogynistic attitude in my opinion. Hence...

So not a strawman- unless you were referring to a different post, different context (As you now seem to be trying to "clarify". I'm not sure, you're all over the shop. Now that would make sense, but you've besmirched yourself with the goto card of those floundering, the reliable 'strawman".

As I have you, you're also using "false equivalence" incorrectly. At the risk of repeating myself, its a general discussion on gender identity.
I haven't compared anything, incorrectly or otherwise.


Apologies for thread hogging to all.

Baggly

Mod

I would kindly ask those who are soapboxing about the issues at large to please reread the OP and return to some level of constructive debate based on the posts made in this thread.

IAMAMORON

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Give me the quote where I said that. Third time asking you. Come on. If you think I have said this, show me where. What’s the problem?

Check post 300, I am not getting into a clusterphuck of quotes here.

I mean what I said.

Annasopra

biko wrote: »

An adult can make decisions on their legal gender and receive surgery.
Before that, no chemicals or surgery.
m2c

That makes no sense. No surgery until they receive surgery?

Baggly

MynamesColm wrote: »

Oh, the hypothetical victim I was thinking of preferred to have a doctor she was familiar and comfortable with.


You prefer her doctor was a cold fingered woman who didn't believe she had been raped? Crikey!

Gervais08 wrote: »

And you think that’s someone that resembles the bastard who attacked her?

Or more likely would it be someone who can understand how she might be feeling?

Mod

Both of you can take a week off for bad faith posting, too.

46 Long

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Who is "our" , when you are referring to "our business"?

The 99.9% of the population who would rather not mutilate our genitalia and don't wish to see regressive, reductive terminology like 'people with a cervix' used to describe women.

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Furthermore, what has mental illness got to do with gender identity ?

Gee, I don't know. Might be that gender dysphoria is classified in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5)? Or the fact that treating it falls under the specialty of psychiatry and psychology?

km991148

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

*Checks OP thread rules





We're talking about gender identity and implications. Pretty wide ranging scope, as it seems the thread direction would attest





Weedle....off piste....Oh dear me.

You replied and dismissed the sexual assault of a woman as something that can be resolved by a
"Discussion using words and sentences"
A misogynistic attitude in my opinion. Hence...

So not a strawman- unless you were referring to a different post, different context (As you now seem to be trying to "clarify". I'm not sure, you're all over the shop. Now that would make sense, but you've besmirched yourself with the goto card of those floundering, the reliable 'strawman".

As I have you, you're also using "false equivalence" incorrectly. At the risk of repeating myself, its a general discussion on gender identity.
I haven't compared anything, incorrectly or otherwise.


Apologies for thread hogging to all.

In the interest of trying to put some sense to this - there seems to be a misunderstanding (this is the the danger of making up examples).


The set up was accusing me of being dismissive of a sexual assault.

Either this was in reference to the proposed one in the hypothetical (i.e. IF it is consider assault to be examined by a transgendered person when a female was asked for).

OR

in reference to a sexual assault that took place before the imaginary GYN examination.

Your situation was unclear to me.

In either situation, I wasn't being dismissive - I was clarifying that the hospital would know how to deal with this BEFORE the exam took place (by having a conversation with the patient).
Not after the exam (which is what I assume you took from it).

(yes indeed.. this made up stuff IS all over the place..)

keano_afc

Somehow, due to ignorance and inaction of others, a tiny, miniscule minority of people have managed to convince those in power that facts are no longer relevant and feelings are all that matters.

We are now at the stage where the media are banned from reporting on a dangerous, violent man being housed in a women's prison. There's no logic in that, but the feelings of mentally ill men are now more important than the safety of women.

We are at the stage where biological differences between men and women are being ignored because mentally ill men want to compete in womens sports.

We're at the stage where children are encouraged to dress as the opposite sex and spend time in the presence of cross-dressing adults. Question this, and its YOU who have the problem. We're at the stage where children are being lied to and told they are being born in the wrong bodies.

This activism is a massive problem, and only recently have people decided enough is enough.

IAMAMORON

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

That makes no sense. No surgery until they receive surgery?

I think the poster is referring to gender reassignment surgery during adulthood.

To me this really amplifies the ignorance which many people still have around the matter.

Many transsexuals considered transitioning before puberty, never mind during puberty. I get what Biko is saying as regards taking testosterone or oestrogen supplements during adolescence, but such opinions are also patronising of the adolescent mind.

It is actually a much wider debate on when a human is of sound enough mind to be able to consider transitioning. In many cases teenagers are well able to know their gender orientation.

Rodin

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Yes but it's up to rape victim to be kind.

The only responsibility a rape victim has is to tell the truth. If they want to.That's all.

Rodin

46 Long wrote: »

The 99.9% of the population who would rather not mutilate our genitalia and don't wish to see regressive, reductive terminology like 'people with a cervix' used to describe women.



Gee, I don't know. Might be that gender dysphoria is classified in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5)? Or the fact that treating it falls under the specialty of psychiatry and psychology?

If a female has had a hysterectomy or wasn't born with one, is she no longer a 'woman' ?

km991148

km991148 wrote: »

In the interest of trying to put some sense to this - there seems to be a misunderstanding (this is the the danger of making up examples).


The set up was accusing me of being dismissive of a sexual assault.

Either this was in reference to the proposed one in the hypothetical (i.e. IF it is consider assault to be examined by a transgendered person when a female was asked for).

OR

in reference to a sexual assault that took place before the imaginary GYN examination.

Your situation was unclear to me.

In either situation, I wasn't being dismissive - I was clarifying that the hospital would know how to deal with this BEFORE the exam took place (by having a conversation with the patient).
Not after the exam (which is what I assume you took from it).

(yes indeed.. this made up stuff IS all over the place..)

The hypothetical example was fairly clear - a woman consenting to an intimate examination, by a person she thought was a woman, but who subsequently turned out to be a trans-woman.
Is that sexual assault.

(& Maybe the hospital didn't know! Raises another point, are they vicariously liable?)

IMO, it's an interesting brand to toss in the fire; some offered an opinion, but you were the only poster who had an issue with it, and rebuked me for not conforming to your ideals of thread direction.

Nor was it a set up, but I'll accept you werent being misogynistic, just out of context. The error is yours though, don't accuse me of strawman or false equivalency!

mohawk

IAMAMORON wrote: »

As I said earlier, clinging to the example of maybe 50 transgendered persons participating in one sport or another is not a big enough reason to dispute transgender rights. It is something which each particular sporting body need to address.

It certainly is not a sufficient quotient for raising as an issue on gender equality or in the human rights of transsexuals.

People may not have the tenacity to comprehend what transsexualism is all about, but certainly screaming whataboutery about a few examples of professional sportspersons only clarifies their lack of temerity in the discussion.

I haven’t read one post on this thread saying transgender people don’t deserve equality or human rights.

They should face no discrimination when it comes to housing, healthcare, education, employment etc. You won’t get any disagreement there.

Sports is just one area where there is potential conflict between the rights of transwomen and women. Where we have safety concerns versus inclusion.

Many people in Ireland don’t really realise that transgender no longer means transsexual. There is no requirement to live as other sex, or take hormones or have surgery. You don’t need to have gender dysphoria to be transgender anymore. Any person with any level of compassion or empathy would certainly feel for someone with gender dysphoria.

You can wrap the body of a BMW around a Lada engine but it still doesn't make it a BMW!

Rodin

If I was female, Id resent being told Im a 'cis' woman as if there's another equally valid version of being a woman. A transwoman is a male pretending to be female. It's a nonsense.

Rodin

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

The hypothetical example was fairly clear - a woman consenting to an intimate examination, by a person she thought was a woman, but who subsequently turned out to be a trans-woman.
Is that sexual assault.

(& Maybe the hospital didn't know! Raises another point, are they vicariously liable?)

IMO, it's an interesting brand to toss in the fire; some offered an opinion, but you were the only poster who had an issue with it, and rebuked me for not conforming to your ideals of thread direction.

Nor was it a set up, but I'll accept you werent being misogynistic, just out of context. The error is yours though, don't accuse me of strawman or false equivalency!

If she consented to a female doing the exam then it is absolutely an assault and the HSE and therefore govt. are vicariously liable.

jam_mac_jam

mohawk wrote: »

I haven’t read one post on this thread saying transgender people don’t deserve equality or human rights.

They should face no discrimination when it comes to housing, healthcare, education, employment etc. You won’t get any disagreement there.

Sports is just one area where there is potential conflict between the rights of transwomen and women. Where we have safety concerns versus inclusion.

Many people in Ireland don’t really realise that transgender no longer means transsexual. There is no requirement to live as other sex, or take hormones or have surgery. You don’t need to have gender dysphoria to be transgender anymore. Any person with any level of compassion or empathy would certainly feel for someone with gender dysphoria.

I completely agree with you here. All people deserve and are entitled to equality and human rights.

At what point along the process does the man become a trans woman do people accept ?

Questioning their "birth assigned sex"
Coming out
Passing - (Behaving/dressing/styling etc.) as their preferred gender
At self ID via GRA
Hormone therapy?
Sex reassignment surgery?

(Notwithstanding everyone's different!)

km991148

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

The hypothetical example was fairly clear - a woman consenting to an intimate examination, by a person she thought was a woman, but who subsequently turned out to be a trans-woman.
Is that sexual assault.(? sic)

(& Maybe the hospital didn't know! Raises another point, are they vicariously liable?)

IMO, it's an interesting brand to toss in the fire; some offered an opinion, but you were the only poster who had an issue with it, and rebuked me for not conforming to your ideals of thread direction.

Nor was it a set up, but I'll accept you werent being misogynistic, just out of context. The error is yours though, don't accuse me of strawman or false equivalency!

Right - I self corrected at the end of that original post because I guessed it all hung on the IF/Question you asked. At the start of the post I thought you were referring to some other sexual assault before the exam. In my mind we hadn't even answered your original question (and tbh - I actually completely dismissed it, bare with me, below..).


I dismissed it because I would assume in that scenario - if the hospital was working with a transgendered gynaecologist, it would assume they would be fully sensitive to the issues that this may pose and they would know how to handle this - presumably by speaking with both the Doctor and with the patients that requested a specific sex/gender.

And this is where I have an issue with these hypothetical scenarios - good for asking an initial question (And I accept you ask this one in good faith), but hard to reach any agreement as everyone brings further assumptions to the table because we have no facts to base it on (i.e. I assume the hospital would have a transgendered sensitive policy and others may assume they don't and would therefore be negligent - who knows - I( think its entirely reasonable to assume they would, but then people fcuk things up all the time so who knows..).

If there were some news story where some patient was pressing charges for being misinformed (or more likely in Ireland, suing) then we would have a lot more details via news articles etc.