To think the world has gone fucking mad

This is beyond the pale, seriously. You can’t change your bio sex - wtf from a so-called educated person!

I believe that a fella called Jason does.

I could be wrong.

What bull shit is this. I'm so fed up with this and genuinely worried for my girls future.

Maybe we should start questioning what a man is!!!!

Your first post was to shame Sal Grover.

No, it was intended to show she made a Horlicks of presenting her case.

what about lesbian trans-women, surely they'd be up for some lady-penis action?

It is about validation. Because it was a female single sex space was exactly why he demanded access.

This man winning this case cannot reasonably be supported or explained. The damage this decision could do for women in every area of their lives is immense.

Sal expected to lose. And the women supported her financially also held little hope.

This is a court case that is that important to have to test what the law says in Australia after the changes over ten years ago by Gillard. It is past due to be challenged.

Do you understand just how many women are now discussing this issue hot off the back of two male boxers punching female boxers in the face? And the women's rally in Melbourne over the weekend where it was very widely reported on the news showing the violence and intimidation by extreme trans activists? Particularly after all the reports from the UK that was being shown on Australia media showing violent males.

The law has to be tested so that the women in Australia understand what the situation is now.

It seems to you underestimate the reach of this case in the current environment.

Your first post was to shame Sal Grover.

I agree that strengthening the Equality Act is much easier and should be a political priority.

But bad laws can and should be repealed. People's 'gender' is immaterial, and doesn't need recognition. Birth certificates are statements of fact, and shouldn't be changeable at whim. Sex is immutable. I don't think the GRA will be repealed any time soon, but this madness isn't over until this piece of nonsense is recognised as obsolete and removed from the statute.

Fucking Prick
In every sense of the word.

It is not possible to uphold women's hard-won sex-based rights if the definition of WOMAN is changed to include MEN.

This ruling makes a complete mockery of women's rights. It's a disgrace.

why was he trying soo hard to get into this group? surely there are more important matters in life?? It's a women's only space... can't we even have that???

YANBU, for all the reasons already given on here.

My first post was intended to make the point that Sal Grover's conduct in court wasn't helping her case. I've lost count of the number of cases, albeit on subjects totally different to this, I've sat through where one party or the other dug their own grave by focusing aggressively on stuff that didn't help.

If the law is as @legalalien says then Ms Grover was pretty much bound to lose anyway.

Pretty sure the suffragettes did a lot of what your describing as "entitled" thinking around accessing male only spaces. I realise a dating ap is frivolous but how is humanity helped by exclusion?

Absolutely all this.

I could cry.

I'm trying to get my DD19 to understand this ruling and what it means for women. She said 'but where are the TWs supposed to go. It's not very fair on them is it'. 😑 this particular post and this whole thread will be so helpful to explain how this will affect her massively now but also in the future.

And this is where #bekind has got us. 🤦‍♀️ I just feel utter despair.

None of these male people are women. Not one. Not "my lovely trans friends" invading women's spaces, not chancers like Tickle, not misogynistic media "personalities" like India Willoughby, not rapists like Isla Bryson.

They are all a problem for women's rights, to a greater or lesser extent. I hope this is becoming clearer to people who didn't think it was too much of an issue.

I'm sorry but this has gone to far now

Roxxie Tickle?

He may as well have called himself Widow Twanky. The whole thing smacks of pantomime dame with delusions of grandeur.

This is disgusting, absolutely bonkers.

Then I guess that you have failed at that on this thread today.

It does make you look as if you have no rationale or arguments for all this but that's your call I suppose.

Goes with the territory I guess @MrsOvertonsWindow

Except you haven't educated anyone. Posting curt sentences clarifies nothing. It does make you look as if you have no rationale or arguments for all this but that's your call I suppose.

No male can ever experience life as a woman. They can only ever experience life as a male person who believes they are a woman.

Even when they 'act' like a woman, they are acting as they believe a 'woman' should act. Which is fucking misogynistic!

Even if they are treated 'as a woman' by some people, they are being treated as a 'male who presents as a woman and believes they are a woman'. Because their every reaction is based on that. Not on them being female in any way.

Even when they have extreme body modifications, it is to be their own concept of what a female looks like to them. It is not what a female is. How can it be?

The only way a person can experience life as a woman, is to have a female body, formed around the production of large gametes, even if it doesn't produce those and to navigate their life based on the decisions they and society makes that revolve around them having that body.

A male can conceptualise what it might be like to be a female, but that is all it ever is - their concept of being female.

They may do it because they don't feel they fit into how they conceptualise how a male person interacts with the world (ie. their own stereotypes around being male) or they do it because they want to be seen as a female (using their own stereotypes of how a female navigates life). It really doesn't matter though. Their motivation is irrelevant to the outcome.

Which is that they will always be just a male who believes they are something they are objectively not.

How can the material reality be any different? This is why someone's gender is only based on someone's philosophical belief. And philosophical beliefs are fine for people to hold, but not one person in the UK has to comply with another's philosophical belief.

The logic cannot be any different than that I am afraid.

Public legal education.

Your first post was a snide dig at Sal Grover. How is that "public legal education" exactly?