NHS Fife tribunal around trans doctor

Forums New posts
emerald green said:
relax jimmy.

We all get trained every year on equality and diversity in the NHS, (or variants there of).
Click to expand...
There’s a government saving right there. Ever wondered how strange this is EGers? And every feckin year?!

You can’t be trained in an ideology btw, only indoctrinated. It’s not like wiring a plug.
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
Smug sneering? Or just reality?

No one heard of the nurse or the doctor until he wanted to invade the nurses space.

I thought safe spaces were all the rage these days?

Unless you are a female or so it seems.
Click to expand...
WTF are you on about?

Is it no time for your breakfast?
 
egb_hibs said:
There’s a government saving right there. Ever wondered how strange this is EGers? And every feckin year?!

You can’t be trained in an ideology btw, only indoctrinated. It’s not like wiring a plug.
Click to expand...
Nope not in the slightest. There are MANY training courses mostly on line that are yearly. This ensures all upto date changes in any legislation are taken account of.

Calm doon, there are as many courses that we all have to do every 2years and also every 3 years. No one is being trained in ideology mate. Relax yersel.
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
Smug sneering? Or just reality?

No one heard of the nurse or the doctor until he wanted to invade the nurses space.

I thought safe spaces were all the rage these days?

Unless you are a female or so it seems.
Click to expand...

Did you read my whole post? Or just the bit that hurt your feelings?
 
emerald green said:
Nope not in the slightest. There are MANY training courses mostly on line that are yearly. This ensures all upto date changes in any legislation are taken account of.

Calm doon, there are as many courses that we all have to do every 2years and also every 3 years. No one is being trained in ideology mate. Relax yersel.
Click to expand...
I can absolutely understand you being regularly trained on medical updates, procedural matters and so on. In fact that’s pretty much essential in a health service I’d have thought.

That wasn’t the question EGers. Well trained you seem to be, mind.
 
emerald green said:
Equality laws?
Click to expand...
Single sex spaces are still permissible under EA2010. Gender Reassignment is a protected characteristic but not Gender per se. And even if a man has undergone re-assignment surgery and has a GRC, he can still be disbarred from spaces of the opposite sex if it is considered proportionate.
EA2010 was introduced before same sex marriage was legalised as a work around for same sex couples, allowing them to marry if one identified as the opposite sex. It's now redundant and should be repealed imo as it just muddies the waters. Too many organisations don't seem to understand the law as it stands, not as Stonewall has told them it is.
There is a law lecturer at Glasgow University called Michael Foran who is excellent on this. Posts dispassionately and objectively on X about this stuff.
For his troubles the "be kind" brigade have tried to get him fired from his job. Fortunately unsuccessfully.
 
Two Headed Boy said:
Did you read my whole post? Or just the bit that hurt your feelings?
Click to expand...
You've no hurt my feelings. And yes I did read it all. I read every post. Even Ryan's.

And I've just had my brekkie EG. Beans on toast. The toast was likena bit sandpaper or the roof of the mouth 😞
 
Sancho Panza said:
Single sex spaces are still permissible under EA2010. Gender Reassignment is a protected characteristic but not Gender per se. And even if a man has undergone re-assignment surgery and has a GRC, he can still be disbarred from spaces of the opposite sex if it is considered proportionate.
EA2010 was introduced before same sex marriage was legalised as a work around for same sex couples, allowing them to marry if one identified as the opposite sex. It's now redundant and should be repealed imo as it just muddies the waters. Too many organisations don't seem to understand the law as it stands, not as Stonewall has told them it is.
There is a law lecturer at Glasgow University called Michael Foran who is excellent on this. Posts dispassionately and objectively on X about this stuff.
For his troubles the "be kind" brigade have tried to get him fired from his job. Fortunately unsuccessfully.
Click to expand...
Are you sure they don’t understand, versus being run by cultists?
 
egb_hibs said:
I can absolutely understand you being regularly trained on medical updates, procedural matters and so on. In fact that’s pretty much essential in a health service I’d have thought.

That wasn’t the question EGers. Well trained you seem to be, mind.
Click to expand...
What about being trained on jpeople who have disabilities? What ideology is that? What about people who get treated differently because of the colour of their skin. What about people getting treated differently because they are gay? Should your gay daughter be discriminated against for being openly gay?

Do we go back to the 70s? You dinnae ken what people should be trained on in the Health Service.
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
You've no hurt my feelings. And yes I did read it all. I read every post. Even Ryan's.

And I've just had my brekkie EG. Beans on toast. The toast was likena bit sandpaper or the roof of the mouth 😞
Click to expand...
Well STFU, saying the exact same post on this subject over and over again, day after day, moving the same words about.
 
emerald green said:
What about being trained on jpeople who have disabilities? What ideology is that? What about people who get treated differently because of the colour of their skin. What about people getting treated differently because they are gay? Should your gay daughter be discriminated against for being openly gay?

Do we go back to the 70s? You dinnae ken what people should be trained on in the Health Service.
Click to expand...
Are there not laws regarding discrimination?

I didn't know there were laws against lifestyle choices though.
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
Are there not laws regarding discrimination?

I didn't know there were laws against lifestyle choices though.
Click to expand...
Jimmy, people who dinnae fit in to your categories should still be treated with decency and fairness. Just like you should be treated with dignity and fairness. The bigotted gunt at my work shouldnt be able to discriminate against gay people or people of colour or people who have a sexuality different from him. Sorry that upsets ye.
 
emerald green said:
Jimmy, people who dinnae fit in to your categories should still be treated with decency and fairness. Just like you should be treated with dignity and fairness. The bigotted gunt at my work shouldnt be able to discriminate against gay people or people of colour or people who have a sexuality different from him. Sorry that upsets ye.
Click to expand...
Who has said any different? I'll state again. He can dress and pretend all he wants. Fill his boots.

But he is not a biological female. Jesus fuck EG that's no being upset. It's pointing out a fact.

And lassies should be treated decent and fairly. They should not be forced to share changing rooms with men.

Nothing to do with how he dresses.
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
Who has said any different? I'll state again. He can dress and pretend all he wants. Fill his boots.

But he is not a biological female. Jesus fuck EG that's no being upset. It's pointing out a fact.

And lassies should be treated decent and fairly. They should not be forced to share changing rooms with men.

Nothing to do with how he dresses.
Click to expand...
What a revelation jimmy.
 
emerald green said:
What about being trained on jpeople who have disabilities? What ideology is that? What about people who get treated differently because of the colour of their skin. What about people getting treated differently because they are gay? Should your gay daughter be discriminated against for being openly gay?
Click to expand...
What training is required here EGers, and annually? Is the workforce particularly slow on the uptake? Why isn’t a ‘dinnae discriminate against anybody’ message upon induction - which really ought to be as superfluous as ‘this is a no smoking flight / cinema’ - not sufficient?*

Don’t get me wrong, this bammery happens in other places, but given how cash strapped the NHS is, this seems fckng bonkers.

That said I understand there are bams in the service who would deny a woman’s right to a female doctor for intimate procedures, so perhaps it is a particularly problematic workforce.
emerald green said:
Do we go back to the 70s? You dinnae ken what people should be trained on in the Health Service.
Click to expand...
yes I do fella. a) healthcare and medical stuff - and yes I don’t know the detail of that and b) general workplace stuff which is the same everywhere.

The NHS is not magic, and you are no more a doctor than I am. You of course know more than me on what specific technical training is required in blood services. You don’t hold some arcane knowledge on training requirements for the entire NHS.

Finally, given biological sex is absolutely central to medical practice, I hope relevant staff are taught when and where the pretence must end.

* the healthcare needs that arise from disability is a different thing - that’s healthcare, and what the NHS should be doing.
 
Last edited:
And I also think lassies have rights and protections as well.

Hopefully they show this at the next round of voting.
 
egb_hibs said:
What training is required here EGers, and annually? Is the workforce particularly slow on the uptake?
Click to expand...
Oh egb I dont know. But I did state that when any course is yearly it can be for example to encapsulate any new legislation. Its the biggest employer in the UK, im sure there are levels within that workforce.
egb_hibs said:
Why isn’t a ‘dinnae discriminate against anybody’ message upon induction - which really ought to be as superfluous as ‘this is a no smoking flight / cinema’ - not sufficient?*
Click to expand...
Calm doon. Its about rights and it takes about 30mins to complete.
egb_hibs said:
Don’t get me wrong, this bammery happens in other places, but given how cash strapped the NHS is, this seems fckng bonkers.
Click to expand...
Its not bammery. It seems bonkers to you. Doesnt make it such.
egb_hibs said:
That said I understand there are bams in the service who would deny a woman’s right to a female doctor for intimate procedures, so perhaps it is a particularly problematic workforce.
Click to expand...
Perhaps its not a particulary problematic workforce. The NHS has to adhere to the policies, rules and regs of the day. They have to try and ensure that everyone gets treated with dignoty and respect. The NHS is NOT there to have any opinions on who you shag. What you want to be called, or what fucking colour of skin you have. Take that as its read. There are no inferences, nothing underhand. Just that. Sorry thats upsetting.
egb_hibs said:
yes I do fella. a) healthcare and medical stuff - and yes I don’t know the detail of that and b) general workplace stuff which is the same everywhere.
Click to expand...
No. You dont.
egb_hibs said:
The NHS is not magic, and you are no more a doctor than I am.
Click to expand...
The NHS is not magic. WTF are you on about? No im not a doctor. WTF has a doctor got to do with anything? What kind of doctor are you talking about?
egb_hibs said:
You of course know more than me on what specific technical training is required in blood services. You don’t hold some arcane knowledge on training requirements for the entire NHS.
Click to expand...
Its about treated people fairly. Its not abouot which part of the nhs someone works in! Your making an idiot of yourself.
egb_hibs said:
* the healthcare needs that arise from disability is a different thing - that’s healthcare, and what the NHS should be doing.
Click to expand...
Oh thank you, the disabled amongst us can be treated with respect.
 
emerald green said:
Oh egb I dont know. But I did state that when any course is yearly it can be for example to encapsulate any new legislation. Its the biggest employer in the UK, im sure there are levels within that workforce.

Calm doon. Its about rights and it takes about 30mins to complete.

Its not bammery. It seems bonkers to you. Doesnt make it such.

Perhaps its not a particulary problematic workforce. The NHS has to adhere to the policies, rules and regs of the day. They have to try and ensure that everyone gets treated with dignoty and respect. The NHS is NOT there to have any opinions on who you shag. What you want to be called, or what fucking colour of skin you have. Take that as its read. There are no inferences, nothing underhand. Just that. Sorry thats upsetting.

No. You dont.

The NHS is not magic. WTF are you on about? No im not a doctor. WTF has a doctor got to do with anything? What kind of doctor are you talking about?

Its about treated people fairly. Its not abouot which part of the nhs someone works in! Your making an idiot of yourself.

Oh thank you, the disabled amongst us can be treated with respect.
Click to expand...
Put your straw men away. Who is denying that people should be treated with respect ?

Out of interest, does training include measures to educate those that might denounce women as bigots for requesting a female doctor, and moreover be clear that their requests should be met? Or that women’s wards should be for women? There do seem to have been cases where loonballs on the payroll have been confused on such points.

I do appreciate that there are complexities for the NHS here, but they are not insurmountable ; when people are in need of medical care is not the time to be challenging their sense of self, nevertheless this needs to be balanced with the rights of women and indeed objective reality when it comes to medical treatment.

Something like that should be the principle. Not sure how we end up with the occasional maniac running around getting it so wrong, especially with all that training.
 
Sancho Panza said:
Single sex spaces are still permissible under EA2010. Gender Reassignment is a protected characteristic but not Gender per se. And even if a man has undergone re-assignment surgery and has a GRC, he can still be disbarred from spaces of the opposite sex if it is considered proportionate.
EA2010 was introduced before same sex marriage was legalised as a work around for same sex couples, allowing them to marry if one identified as the opposite sex. It's now redundant and should be repealed imo as it just muddies the waters. Too many organisations don't seem to understand the law as it stands, not as Stonewall has told them it is.
There is a law lecturer at Glasgow University called Michael Foran who is excellent on this. Posts dispassionately and objectively on X about this stuff.
For his troubles the "be kind" brigade have tried to get him fired from his job. Fortunately unsuccessfully.
Click to expand...

This is interesting. It's the considered proportionate bit that likely needs further clarification.

I honestly think if single sex spaces, what qualifies as a complete gender reassignment, and how that impacts access to those spaces was legally concrete, and that information well publicised, it would end a lot of froth around this.
 
Two Headed Boy said:
This is interesting. It's the considered proportionate bit that likely needs further clarification.

I honestly think if single sex spaces, what qualifies as a complete gender reassignment, and how that impacts access to those spaces was legally concrete, and that information well publicised, it would end a lot froth around this.
Click to expand...
Indeed. The main problem is that there is no comprehensive definition of what "trans" is or means. Leaving aside for the moment the objective fact that human beings can't change sex, how is a woman supposed to tell if an obviously male person in their single sex space is a threat or not? They can't, which is why we have this long-recognised social contract. Women are conditioned to see men as a threat. It's a sense that has developed over thousands of years.
I like to think of myself as a good man who would never hurt a woman but how would they know that? They don't, that's why all men should stay out of women's spaces.
Women are not a shield for men with fetishes and mental health issues. Third spaces are the obvious solution in toilets, sports etc but they are rejected as it doesn't make these men feel validated. It's the violation of women's boundaries that gets them off. If they were any sort of woman they would understand women's concerns and fears but they aren't so they don't. This should be about men being more accepting of gender non-conforming men. It shouldn't be a problem for women to sort out.
This post from author Jane Harris shows just how difficult it is to define trans. All these groups fall under the umbrella but have nothing in common.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Last edited:
egb_hibs said:
Put your straw men away. Who is denying that people should be treated with respect ?
Click to expand...
Enough. Im telling you why there is training of Equality in the NHS. Please refer to my earlier post. Its non of the NHS business how people live their lives, what colour or creed they are and what their sexuality is. Do.You.Understand.This? Cant you accept that at face value? Is there always some leftwing insidious anti christian liberal agenda working behind the scenes to unhinge the likes of yourself.

Pop yersel over to private health care, to help your blood pressure (oh wait! the British consultants and Doctors and specialists and nurses were all trained by the NHS. These bastards all did the courses tae. Yer fuckt)
egb_hibs said:
Out of interest, does training include measures to educate those that might denounce women as bigots for requesting a female doctor, and moreover be clear that their requests should be met? Or that women’s wards should be for women? There do seem to have been cases where loonballs on the payroll have been confused on such points.
Click to expand...
Loonballs on the payroll Those who denounce women as bigots. Do you think online training deals with that? WTF 😆
egb_hibs said:
I do appreciate that there are complexities for the NHS here, but they are not insurmountable ; when people are in need of medical care is not the time to be challenging their sense of self, nevertheless this needs to be balanced with the rights of women and indeed objective reality when it comes to medical treatment.
Click to expand...
Whats that got to do with online training?
egb_hibs said:
Something like that should be the principle. Not sure how we end up with the occasional maniac running around getting it so wrong, especially with all that training.
Click to expand...
Eh?
 
emerald green said:
Jimmy, people who dinnae fit in to your categories should still be treated with decency and fairness. Just like you should be treated with dignity and fairness. The bigotted gunt at my work shouldnt be able to discriminate against gay people or people of colour or people who have a sexuality different from him. Sorry that upsets ye.
Click to expand...
I think this touches on a key issue in this "debate" -- which by the way, must be in the running for the greatest amount of heat ever generated relative to the number of people it actually affects.

The thing is that 1) one does not have to accept that "trans women are women" in order to treat a trans person with dignity and respect. The latter does not rely on the former; and the reality surely is that pretty much everyone would should they come into contact with a trans person, just as they would any other person. However, "activists" and/or believers are simply not willing to settle for that. And people -- rightly -- are aggrieved that these people are allowed to continue to hector away in government and in education, and this is called "progressive" and therefore just. Basically, the aim of these people isn't really "decency and fairness", it's universal acceptance of their assertion.

But that's why 2) the "your categories" you've aimed at Jimmy here is important. The trans issue centres around a category that has been a basic building block of human civilisation since there have been humans, and in fact is consistent across basically the entirety of organic life. This is not a category that contains an infinite spectrum like skin colour. It is binary. This is not a category that deals with enacted preference, like sexuality. It is an objective physical reality.

The ultimate aim of the trans lobby, though, is for people to accept, believe, and say that this category is mutable, when that is -- and I use the world advisedly -- categorically untrue.

I don't actually get that hot and bothered about it in general, to be honest, because I remain totally convinced that the vast majority of humanity does not and will not ever accept that. But where I do take issue is, as I've alluded to above, the extent to which it has started to creep into government and education. We should neither be legislating nor teaching reality denial.
Sancho Panza said:
Indeed. The main problem is that there is no comprehensive definition of what "trans" is or means. Leaving aside for the moment the objective fact that human beings can't change sex, how is a woman supposed to tell if an obviously male person in their single sex space is a threat or not? They can't, which is why we have this long-recognised social contract. Women are conditioned to see men as a threat. It's a sense that has developed over thousands of years.
I like to think of myself as a good man who would never hurt a woman but how would they know that? They don't, that's why all men should stay out of women's spaces.
Women are not a shield for men with fetishes and mental health issues. Third spaces are the obvious solution in toilets, sports etc but they are rejected as it doesn't make these men feel validated. It's the violation of women's boundaries that gets them off. If they were any sort of woman they would understand women's concerns and fears but they aren't so they don't. This should be about men being more accepting of gender non-conforming men. It should be a problem for women to sort out.
This post from author Jane Harris shows just how difficult it is to define trans. All these groups fall under the umbrella but have nothing in common.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
Click to expand...

Good post, quite agree.
 
emerald green said:
Enough. Im telling you why there is training of Equality in the NHS. Please refer to my earlier post. Its non of the NHS business how people live their lives, what colour or creed they are and what their sexuality is. Do.You.Understand.This? Cant you accept that at face value? Is there always some leftwing insidious anti christian liberal agenda working behind the scenes to unhinge the likes of yourself.

Pop yersel over to private health care, to help your blood pressure (oh wait! the British consultants and Doctors and specialists and nurses were all trained by the NHS. These bastards all did the courses tae. Yer fuckt)

Loonballs on the payroll Those who denounce women as bigots. Do you think online training deals with that? WTF 😆

Whats that got to do with online training?

Eh?
Click to expand...
What are you on about EG? You’re straw manning again. My principle you struggled to understand addressed what you are preaching about, but put it in context. Your corporate commandments are, incidentally, identical to those that could have applied anywhere - at least until the era where the rainbow flags came out and staff and customers started to be instructed on rightthink. I do agree however, that they are particularly important in the NHS.

The context I gave is relevant, because despite you piously insisting that the NHS needs to train staff to treat people with respect, it seems unable to teach people to treat female patients with dignity, judging by episodes where it keeps failing to do so.

It certainly shouldn’t be beyond the wit of CBT courses you previously suggested address diversity and equality.

Why do you have so many loonballs on the payroll who don’t know how to treat female patients with dignity, anyway? Why the hell would it require training not send in a beardy cnut to do a smear when a women has requested female staff, for example? Or to place biological men on women’s wards. These things require a truly unusual degree of insensitivity, to a degree I wouldn’t think easily found outside of ideologically programmed groups. And lets not even go there on the maddies butchering or chemically castrating children.
 
I treat people with the respect they deserve if they are decent with me I'll be decent back.

But don't force your illusions on folks.

How many of you accept the Merricks illusion that they have 400,000 fan (nies) waiting on season tickets?

We know that's not true.
 
egb_hibs said:
The case is based on him being a bloke, her legal team are hardly going to describe him as a woman. What prejudices have been exposed ?
Click to expand...
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Sancho Panza said:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
Click to expand...

You can’t enforce the refutation of objective reality, or at least in a secular liberal country. By all means the NHS can ask staff to do this, but it ought not to be enforceable. Then again we aren’t in a secular liberal country.
 
egb_hibs said:
The case is based on him being a bloke, her legal team are hardly going to describe him as a woman. What prejudices have been exposed ?
Click to expand...
Just how I interpreted it from the news story that the nurse stated during the hearing to pre existing ‘views’ on the subject of trans people.
EH17 Jimmy said:
Ah ok. But her point of view will be declared illegal then if she loses. Would that be true?

So massive amounts of voters wouldnalsi be guilty of holding similar views.

Still hopefully lassies mind this when it comes to casting votes.
Click to expand...
Not illegal Jimmy but her point of view might influence the outcome. Remember, the judge has to take a dispassionate decision and if one of the protagonists has, what could be termed as, a pre existing prejudice, it could influence the outcome.

I’m only speaking from an outsiders view of how the court case might go and not on the trans minefield.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
  • Menu
  • Home
  • Hibs Chat
  • New Posts
  • Just Back
  • Chatroom