We've never believed in silencing debate....

RobinMoiraWhite Your pomposity is rather striking

But Robin's met the Pope R0wantrees. Show some respect!

To call someone by their correct honorific title is not to speak a falsehood.

Demanding use of pronouns that are blatantly false is to demand that everyone else lie and comply with the autogynephilic desire to use us as toys in their fantasy.

Again, No means No!

Unless the gender-critical cannot find it in themselves to respect others by their behaviour in such common courtesies, then they will always be isolated. A leap of faith and behaviour is required to join the debate.

Firstly, the gender critical aren’t ‘isolated’. You’d very much like us to be, but the majority of the population is actually gender critical. Secondly, you do not set the rules for when others can join in public debates around legislation and rights. We aren’t required to ‘have faith’ in anything or anyone in order to speak. How dare you. We don’t need to amend our behaviour either, we’re not the ones punching people at meetings or issuing bomb threats.

Respectful debate means respecting others right to opinion, freedom of thought and speech. It does not mean respecting whatever opinion they hold, nor agreeing to change language to adhere to others beliefs. Stop telling us what to do and how to speak.

Unless the gender-critical cannot find it in themselves to respect others by their behaviour in such common courtesies, then they will always be isolated. A leap of faith and behaviour is required to join the debate.

It is when you cross the line in imposing your personal beliefs on others who have a legitimate position in our society that you lose the standing to engage in respectable debate

Your personal belief appears to be in the existence of 'gender' as an important concept. I am a non-believer in gender, and I think it would be better for all of us if this concept was abolished. You have no right to impose your personal belief in gender on me, a gender 'atheist'. I have a legitimate position in society as an adult female human who doesn't believe in gender or genderism.

I decided age 10 that I was an atheist, and have no use for a god. But I still refer to our village priest as ‘Reverend’, and, on the occasion I met the Pope on a State vist as ‘your holiness’. It is when you cross the line in imposing your personal beliefs on others who have a legitimate position in our society that you lose the standing to engage in respectable debate.

Im not religious
I have worked alongside many clergy within the community.

I've called them by their first name, just as they called me by mine.
It was based on mutual respect.

The imposition would be if they insisted their beliefs were imposed on me not visa versa.

RobinMoiraWhite Your pomposity is rather striking

Unless the gender-critical cannot find it in themselves to respect others by their behaviour in such common courtesies, then they will always be isolated. A leap of faith and behaviour is required to join the debate.

Unless autogynephilic males cannot find it in themselves to respect women and girls by their behaviour in such common courtesies as acknowledging and honouring the boundaries they set for themselves, then they will always be isolated. No leap of faith is required but a behavioural leap is required to join any debate.

Except there is no debate about the boundaries set by and for children and women. These boundaries are what they are and are reinforced in law.

A leap of faith and behaviour is required to join the debate

we're debating just fine here without acceding to your terms......

A leap of faith and behaviour is required to join the debate.

Debate on my terms or not at all, how very totalitarian of you.

It is when you cross the line in imposing your personal beliefs on others who have a legitimate position in our society that you lose the standing to engage in respectable debate

the irony.....irony meter rising...can't keep the needle down....

!!

sorry, my irony meter exploded.

How would that be different to the position adopted by a certain regime in Germany in the 1930’s that black athletes were held to be sub-human and should not be competing against white athletes?

Oh Dear. Godwin's Law.

How is using a particular pronoun any different from Zyclon-B?

It's a Toughie.

I understand that. But that is where the leap to accepting others must begin.

What you are demanding here is total capitulation to your desires.

Sorry, but no!

And ... "no" means no.

There is no debate about boundaries females impose for their safety, wellbeing, privacy and dignity.

Sort out your own trans spaces. It is not our job to do this for you.

It is when you cross the line in imposing your personal beliefs on others who have a legitimate position in our society that you lose the standing to engage in respectable debate.

You honestly don't see the irony and double standards you're applying here?

You're imposing your personal beliefs on me, as a woman, with a legitimate position in society.

I understand that. But that is where the leap to accepting others must begin.

I decided age 10 that I was an atheist, and have no use for a god. But I still refer to our village priest as ‘Reverend’, and, on the occasion I met the Pope on a State vist as ‘your holiness’. It is when you cross the line in imposing your personal beliefs on others who have a legitimate position in our society that you lose the standing to engage in respectable debate. It is no more acceptable to misgender a trans person than it is to use perjorative terms for persons of other races or religions or the disabled. Unless the gender-critical cannot find it in themselves to respect others by their behaviour in such common courtesies, then they will always be isolated. A leap of faith and behaviour is required to join the debate.

@JackyHolyoake

I've bookmarked the thread. Thank you

If that's considered disrespectful, then tough shit.

Let's face it. In this context, disrespectful is just another word for which the meaning has been twisted beyond reasonable recognition. It's just a dog whistle for woman says something I don't like.

I have no intention of complying. I will not be "respectful" under these circumstances. I do not care if AWAs call me disrespectful. Not one teensy tiny bit.

This is interesting in the GRA:

"A sport is a gender-affected sport if the physical strength, stamina or physique of average persons of one gender would put them at a disadvantage to average persons of the other gender as competitors in events involving the sport."

So no wibbling about exact modifications, makes it clear that if they wish to, bodies can ignore acquired gender when it comes to sport. Sounds like a GOOD idea to me...............

Although, in all honesty I'm just reading carefully what GRA 2004 actually says and applying common sense to it. Each word has been carefully chosen to achieve a purpose.

Thanks RO.

Jacky you should go on Mastermind!

Your knowledge of this is brilliant.
Thank you

Aw shucks! Thank you all.

Go Jacky thanks for making all of that crstal clear.

Taling of which, in the comments section under the Scottish TA piece, 1984 is so very bloody eloquent. I think I recognise the 'voice' (obviously won't link the 2 pseudonyms...) and can I say thank you too?

Like Lang, I'm in this because of the relentless attacks on the safeguarding of children and grooming them to make life changing decisions before they are of an age to comprehend the implications of the drugs, breast binding and surgery. If that's considered disrespectful, then tough shit. I will not shut up until children are fully protected from those currently targeting them.

This ^^

can I just say how much I love your thorough understanding of the GRA Jacky ?

Me too.