I think it’s quite ‘normal’ in a way to feel some discomfort with parts of our bodies these days, when there is so much focus on the “perfect body”, “beach body” etc and the amount of images we consume through social media and advertising. I’ve put on a bit of weight in the past few years and my boobs are bigger than they once were a few years ago when I was younger, which makes me a little uncomfortable as they’re a little foreign feeling to me, as they’ve been smaller in the past! My clothes also fit differently. Do I think I have body dysphoria, not at all.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
yeah it is depressing, you would think with women becoming more empowered etc this obsessive focus on loos would be decreased but actually it is now far worse and is becoming the case for men too (albeit still nowhere near as much)
I think for me it's not really to do with the 'perfect body' as such and probably more that I just inherently don't like having any attention on me, so having big boobs is like the ultimate duck you to any hope of that lol. Definitely seems like it's a really indepth issue that is different for everyone, I wonder if that's the difference though that people take 'discomfort' and turn it into 'dysphoria'.
Seriously underestimated, 2 things I don'' compromise on are bras and trainers, everything else can come from a charity shop
Those of you with large breasts, please go to a specialist shop and get measured properly, yes decent bras aren't cheap but I am so grateful that someone took me to a shop in my late 20's, the difference is astounding. I'm a 30F or 32 E and never really liked my boobs, used to cross my arms over them and hunch my back, not anymore, I embrace them because I look so much better with my breasts where they are supposed to be and an upright posture.
Last edited:
Transgender women allowed to play rugby in France after unanimous Federation vote
Transgender women can play rugby in France's domestic competitions next season after the FFR board votes to go against World Rugby guidelines.
www.bbc.co.uk
Very surprised at the decision by France. Knowing that they are a secular culture and don't really bow to personal beliefs this has really surprised me.
And it's bleeping dangerous
Definitely. I have learned the hard way with footwear
I guess we are all hyper aware of everyone these days. 50 or 100 years ago, you would know what people in you neighbourhood thought of your weight or looks, a mean aunt might chip away at you and magazines might have run guides on how to dress or look a certain way, and men would have hassled you as you walked by, but if you wanted to retreat from the gaze and everyones thoughts you could make your home a haven and try to centre yourself worth and attention of other things. Now, we have constant advertising blaring at us everywhere, and you can see what 1000s of people think all at once, e.g. if a once slim celebrity puts on significant weight and is papped, people can see so many people online criticising and tearing that image to shreds, reinforcing expectations. To me, that's far more harsh than a picky aunt telling you to loose a couple of pounds (though that alone is enough to hurt someone).
I wonder if that's why so many girls want top surgery becuase the feedback on their bodies is relentless.
I
I just think everything comes attached with 1000s of opinions these days. We are too much of a hive mind and I think we could all do with retreating a bit from it.
A woman will have to be seriously injured before they stop this. Why should women be cannon fodder?Transgender women allowed to play rugby in France after unanimous Federation vote
Transgender women can play rugby in France's domestic competitions next season after the FFR board votes to go against World Rugby guidelines.www.bbc.co.uk
Very surprised at the decision by France. Knowing that they are a secular culture and don't really bow to personal beliefs this has really surprised me.
And it's bleeping dangerous
france says they don't bow to personal beliefs but they do, they just pick and choose which ones they want to.Transgender women allowed to play rugby in France after unanimous Federation vote
Transgender women can play rugby in France's domestic competitions next season after the FFR board votes to go against World Rugby guidelines.www.bbc.co.uk
Very surprised at the decision by France. Knowing that they are a secular culture and don't really bow to personal beliefs this has really surprised me.
And it's bleeping dangerous
Wow - I didn't know The Guardian even knew the word 'female'. On a more serious note though, this shows why we need to use language that is as clear (and often non-medical) as possible to be able to ensure women know what medical care they need.
www.theguardian.com
Most Britons cannot name all parts of the vulva, survey reveals
Nearly 40% mislabelled clitoris regardless of their gender in study conducted out of concern for female patients
www.theguardian.com
One of my personal pet hates is teaching children different names for their parts. Tuppence, twinkle etc I was convinced i should teach my kid those correct body part names when I read that using other names makes determining if someone has been inappropriate or abusing a child more difficult because the adult can twist the meaning of the words. I fervently hope this is not ever an issue but I want her to have ownership of her body and that means knowing what it’s called. Kids don’t have any shame attached to words like vulva, it might as well be an elbow. Equally important for medical things.
True, I meant 'non-medical' more in the way that people will say 'cervix havers' or 'vulva owners' instead of 'women' and people might not know that it means them.
Ah I see - yes that is also a big problem, especially with non-native speakers.
Re two recent discussions on this thread. I actually feel quite sick that someone tried to compare "transphobia" to antisemitism and the holocaust. On the other hand, I'm kind of glad that they've said something so ignorant and offensive, hopefully it will open people's eyes.
Secondly, re the vulva. I work in the NHS and used to work for the police, and the amount of women who can't name their 'parts' is high enough already without these TRA idiots confusing things further. It's gross.
Secondly, re the vulva. I work in the NHS and used to work for the police, and the amount of women who can't name their 'parts' is high enough already without these TRA idiots confusing things further. It's gross.
WTF? "Your body constantly renews itself and makes new cells so somehow that means a man can be a woman"
Scrolled through that twitter account out of interest. They are really deluded.
Attachments
Liz Truss has recommended that ALL 250 government departments leave Stonewall's Diversity Champions programme.
www.thetimes.co.uk
Not sure if that one's behind their paywall or not, so:
Liz Truss urges official withdrawal from Stonewall diversity scheme
Liz Truss, the equalities minister, is pushing for all government departments to withdraw from Stonewall’s employment scheme following a row over transgender ri
Not sure if that one's behind their paywall or not, so:
Liz Truss, the equalities minister, is pushing for all government departments to withdraw from Stonewall’s employment scheme following a row over transgender rights.
Truss, also the international trade secretary, has told officials that she believes that government bodies should withdraw from the diversity champions scheme run by the equality group.
Several organisations and bodies, including the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) and the employment dispute service Acas, have both withdrawn “for cost reasons”. A source close to Truss said she shared the concerns raised by the EHRC over the scheme’s value for money, particularly as the civil service has its own in-house workplace diversity programme.
The Times understands that responsibility for co-ordinating participation in the scheme rests with the Cabinet Office. The scheme counts 250 government departments and public bodies among its 850 members, which pay for guidance on issues such as pronouns and gender-neutral spaces.
Stonewall says the scheme is “the leading employers’ programme for ensuring all LGBT staff are accepted without exception in the workplace”. Nancy Kelley, its chief executive, came under fire at the weekend for likening “gender-critical” beliefs to antisemitism. Lady Falkner, the EHRC’s new chairwoman, has said that women have the right to question transgender identity without being abused, stigmatised or put at risk of losing their jobs.
Kelley said that although Stonewall believed in freedom of speech it was “not without limit”. She told the BBC: “With all beliefs, including controversial beliefs, there is a right to express those beliefs publicly and where they’re harmful or damaging — whether it’s antisemitic beliefs, gender-critical beliefs, beliefs about disability — we have legal systems that are put in place for people who are harmed by that.”
Several bodies, including the House of Commons and the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, have withdrawn from the scheme in recent weeks. The Crown Prosecution Service has said that it is reviewing its membership.
Participants in the scheme are ranked on a workplace equality index. Among its top employers last year were Newcastle city council, the Ministry of Justice, GlaxoSmithKline, Citi Banking Group and the Welsh government.
Essex University, another member of the diversity champion scheme, apologised this month for dropping two speakers after they were accused of transphobia. The university published an independent report that concluded that Stonewall had provided officials with misleading and potentially illegal advice. The report expressed concern that Stonewall had misrepresented the provisions of the Equality Act 2010 to suggest that the legislation included “gender identity”. Academics have claimed that the alleged misrepresentation has resulted in speakers being prevented from debating trans rights.
Speaking to the BBC, Kelley denied having provided the university with incorrect advice. She said that Stonewall had had nothing to do with the university’s process for deciding external speakers and was “really confident” in its legal advice.
In an interview with The Times this month, Falkner said that it was “entirely reasonable” for people to challenge the biological status of women who were born as men. She said it was a “freedom of belief” that the commission was determined to protect.
Stonewall said: “All employers need to ensure that their staff, including LGBTQ+ staff, are free from discrimination and prejudice at work but it is up to them how they meet this statutory requirement. Since we set up the diversity champions programme in 2001 many large employers have developed major internal programmes to promote diversity and inclusion across their staff.”
Stonewall earns millions of pounds a year from its “diversity champions” scheme, a training programme pitched to companies, public bodies and charities (Jonathan Ames writes).
The gay rights campaigning body, which was launched in the UK 32 years ago, markets the scheme as “the leading employers’ programme for ensuring all LGBTQ+ staff are free to be themselves in the workplace”.
It is understood from those with knowledge of the scheme that fees start at about £2,500.
The organisation’s financial statement for 2019 showed that fee income from the scheme — combined with that from its “global founding partners programme” and its “school champions” and “education champions” schemes — was £3.27 million, a 20 per cent increase over the previous year’s income from those ventures.
Stonewall markets the diversity champions scheme by telling employers that membership will provide them with support in qualifying for the organisation’s workplace equality index, “the definitive benchmarking tool for employers to measure their progress on lesbian, gay, bi and trans inclusion in the workplace”.
Employers are also told that becoming diversity champions will boost their recruitment performance.
Stonewall’s online promotion argues that “a diverse workforce creates diversity of thought, action and innovation. But in a competitive market, your workplace and culture needs to stand out to jobseekers.”
Members are listed on Stonewall’s “proud employers careers site”, which is described as an “LGBTQ-inclusive jobs board, enabling you to attract diverse talent and position your organisation as an inclusive employer of choice”.
Truss, also the international trade secretary, has told officials that she believes that government bodies should withdraw from the diversity champions scheme run by the equality group.
Several organisations and bodies, including the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) and the employment dispute service Acas, have both withdrawn “for cost reasons”. A source close to Truss said she shared the concerns raised by the EHRC over the scheme’s value for money, particularly as the civil service has its own in-house workplace diversity programme.
The Times understands that responsibility for co-ordinating participation in the scheme rests with the Cabinet Office. The scheme counts 250 government departments and public bodies among its 850 members, which pay for guidance on issues such as pronouns and gender-neutral spaces.
Stonewall says the scheme is “the leading employers’ programme for ensuring all LGBT staff are accepted without exception in the workplace”. Nancy Kelley, its chief executive, came under fire at the weekend for likening “gender-critical” beliefs to antisemitism. Lady Falkner, the EHRC’s new chairwoman, has said that women have the right to question transgender identity without being abused, stigmatised or put at risk of losing their jobs.
Kelley said that although Stonewall believed in freedom of speech it was “not without limit”. She told the BBC: “With all beliefs, including controversial beliefs, there is a right to express those beliefs publicly and where they’re harmful or damaging — whether it’s antisemitic beliefs, gender-critical beliefs, beliefs about disability — we have legal systems that are put in place for people who are harmed by that.”
Several bodies, including the House of Commons and the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, have withdrawn from the scheme in recent weeks. The Crown Prosecution Service has said that it is reviewing its membership.
Participants in the scheme are ranked on a workplace equality index. Among its top employers last year were Newcastle city council, the Ministry of Justice, GlaxoSmithKline, Citi Banking Group and the Welsh government.
Essex University, another member of the diversity champion scheme, apologised this month for dropping two speakers after they were accused of transphobia. The university published an independent report that concluded that Stonewall had provided officials with misleading and potentially illegal advice. The report expressed concern that Stonewall had misrepresented the provisions of the Equality Act 2010 to suggest that the legislation included “gender identity”. Academics have claimed that the alleged misrepresentation has resulted in speakers being prevented from debating trans rights.
Speaking to the BBC, Kelley denied having provided the university with incorrect advice. She said that Stonewall had had nothing to do with the university’s process for deciding external speakers and was “really confident” in its legal advice.
In an interview with The Times this month, Falkner said that it was “entirely reasonable” for people to challenge the biological status of women who were born as men. She said it was a “freedom of belief” that the commission was determined to protect.
Stonewall said: “All employers need to ensure that their staff, including LGBTQ+ staff, are free from discrimination and prejudice at work but it is up to them how they meet this statutory requirement. Since we set up the diversity champions programme in 2001 many large employers have developed major internal programmes to promote diversity and inclusion across their staff.”
Stonewall earns millions of pounds a year from its “diversity champions” scheme, a training programme pitched to companies, public bodies and charities (Jonathan Ames writes).
The gay rights campaigning body, which was launched in the UK 32 years ago, markets the scheme as “the leading employers’ programme for ensuring all LGBTQ+ staff are free to be themselves in the workplace”.
It is understood from those with knowledge of the scheme that fees start at about £2,500.
The organisation’s financial statement for 2019 showed that fee income from the scheme — combined with that from its “global founding partners programme” and its “school champions” and “education champions” schemes — was £3.27 million, a 20 per cent increase over the previous year’s income from those ventures.
Stonewall markets the diversity champions scheme by telling employers that membership will provide them with support in qualifying for the organisation’s workplace equality index, “the definitive benchmarking tool for employers to measure their progress on lesbian, gay, bi and trans inclusion in the workplace”.
Employers are also told that becoming diversity champions will boost their recruitment performance.
Stonewall’s online promotion argues that “a diverse workforce creates diversity of thought, action and innovation. But in a competitive market, your workplace and culture needs to stand out to jobseekers.”
Members are listed on Stonewall’s “proud employers careers site”, which is described as an “LGBTQ-inclusive jobs board, enabling you to attract diverse talent and position your organisation as an inclusive employer of choice”.
I’ve talked about it before here but I have large breasts that are uneven. They have caused me so many problems to my physical and mental health. I’ve gone as far as strapping them down. A few years ago I heard that someone I knew from school had top surgery done on the NHS. I was refused surgery on the NHS because they won’t do surgery for mental health and I was told ‘just get a better bra’ for the pain I experience. And I have often thought in my darkest moments, gosh I wish I could say I’m trans and get top surgery done. That would stop the pain.
This makes me so cross. the NHS refused multiple times to fix the internal damage I have from carrying twins. My abdominal muscles are torn and I'm in pain every single day, I haven't been able to lift my own children in 8 months. They have relented and I'm on an incredibly long waiting list, but it does sund like asking to become a woman is easier than fixing female related issues
I know it's awful but I would suggest keep trying, don't talk about your mental health at all (my surgeon actually advised that I never discuss any emotional issues with ANY of the related surgery staff or they'll doubt me!) and highlight how bad the pain is.
This chart shows Hubbard’s performance in both sex sections. Pisses me off big time.
It’s like that Tiktok meme - “tell me that non-binary identities are rooted in hatred of the female body, without telling me that non-binary identities are rooted in hatred of the female body”.
I have total sympathy by the way, and I’m glad that I’ve always had small boobs (although when I was in my late teens/early 20s I desperately wished they were bigger). Having large breasts means you get sexually harassed from such an early age. It doesn’t surprise me one bit that the seeds of wishing them gone are sown in the early teenage years, and only get worse with age and physical discomfort.
- Status