Future of Legal Gender academic talk

Or is it pass-time?

*past-time

AmTran is a popular part-time,or so I hear...

I’m waiting for AmateurTransUk to get in on the action

Or could there be some sort of Pro / Am pair up?

I can't think of anything more biological essentialist than demanding tax payers spend 20,000 to hack a penis off or slice off arm flesh to roll up and stitch to a groin.

🤣 I am enjoying the latest scattershot name calling across various threads.

I shouldn't think the research teams are at all bothered about the whining of outdated biological essentialist rad-fems. A philosophy which was never more than a fringe affair, and has lost credibility still further by its apparent loathing of trans people.

Love that comment Driechdrizzle. Lets hope the research teams read it!

If this was a grassroots movement trans would be picketing registry offices to stop parents "coercively assigning" sex or whatever it is they are supposed to be doing.

If the LSE got their way on this little bit of social engineering I think there would be a lot of very angry parents and grandparents, furious that they couldn't record the sex of the newest member of their family on the birth certificate. I can't imagine there would be many people who would want to go along with it apart from wanky hipsters who want to call their latest accessory/baby a theyby.

So this is their next propoganda event where they are still talking about us having a "legal gender" - 8 November in London.www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/what-if-state-law-no-longer-sexed-us-tickets-74426795549

And it is part of this festival. esrc.ukri.org/public-engagement/festival-of-social-science/

The tsunami of trans ideology is not abating and everything that is about women and their sex based rights are being over run.

The massive backlash against their idiotic project means that any draft bill submitted would surely not get very far.

The problem is there is NO backlash. The reality is that this projected is not only supported but enabled by funders. (There is a whole week of ERSC funded projects).

Its not just the ideas, but the fact the survey work does not meet professional standards. All these has been pointed out to the ERSC (and the university I think) and they dont care.

I'm afraid that however positive it is for those of us who post on mumsnet to find others who object to gender submerging sex and all that leads on from that, the world at large either doesn't know, or if they do they dont care.

Never for get that even if you are right in your opinion if you are thought to be female / old / feminist you will be immediately discounted.

Yeah, sadly they know what they’re doing.

t's a bit like when toddlers hide their head under a blanket and think they're invisible.

Good analogy, but yes I agree that there are people involved who know what they are doing.

That's a charitable interpretation by the way, which I don't think applies to all of the people involved in this project.

How can we “name the problem” if we cannot legally refer to it???

I think the queer pomo bullshit artists would say that there isn't any objective reality and things only exist because we socially construct them with language and such.

So if we can't name the problem then there isn't a problem. We will have deconstructed it by removing all the words and the problem will have gone away.

It's a bit like when toddlers hide their head under a blanket and think they're invisible.

Wow, I hadn’t seen the text of the yogakarta principles before. Really shocking.

I simply do NOT understand how the same people / political position can support on the one hand metoo/yesallwomen/name the problem (male violence), whilst at the same time support legislation that will eliminate ANY legal status to male / female?

How can we “name the problem” if we cannot legally refer to it???

Well colour me surprised!

Sorry MNHQ mods - I know you have a job to do, but you also know that it's true.

Anyhoo, normal service will resume now.

I love Jane. Always straight to the point. Essentialism is ‘people exist’. Quite.

Step one: force participants to accept that everyone has an innate gender identity and then get all snippy and surprised when some of them call you out on it.

I’m sure it’s right up the street of all the male feminists whose feminism consists of threatening women who disagree with them with violence.

I liked Dr Jane Clare Jones' take:

twitter.com/janeclarejones/status/1190227846012264448?s=20

A "feminist law reform project"

twitter.com/DavinaCooper5/status/1061256888795435008?s=20

FFS, Ershkigal that’s awful and I can’t even see her original tweet. I hope someone somewhere has a screen shot. I don’t know how to use caches etc but apparently it was posted on 12 October. She has developed a dislike for radical feminists for some reason and is trying to misrepresent and smear us.

Julie Bindel and her partner has done real on the ground work actively fighting for women’s rights, vastly improving their lives. See for instance Sally Challen, Emma Humphreys etc. Direct tangible effect on law. What the hell has Prof Cooper done that could even come close to comparing to that? Someone who could make a genuine difference should have had that money.

This reminds me of when Ash Sarkar claimed that Julie had done nothing to help women in prison by doing a twitter search. These people will say what the hell they want with no accountability, no fact checking. Just smearing people in the process and not caring about the consequences.

The massive backlash against their idiotic project means that any draft bill submitted would surely not get very far. If they really think that removing all reference to sex on any registration will work, it will get shot down in an instant due to the valid arguments about needing statistical evidence. It would be pretty stupid to put that forward. If they submit something like a self-ID law, then that has already been done and halted due to backlash. So that would be totally unoriginal.

I think they have massively overestimated what they can do here and their influence in changing the law. Their interests seem very niche and incomprehensible by the average person on the street. I don’t think they can add anything useful really and I am pretty surprised that this got the funding it did. They should have left it to someone with much more experience in policy-work. When you’re dealing with policy, ‘queering the norm’ isn’t really what you want to be doing. Might go down well at a gender studies conference but not so much in the real world.

If they weren’t so disingenuous, I’d feel sorry for them. I think they will end up looking like idiots.

Just open mouthed at her claim that rad fems don’t focus on violence from men within the family. That is basically what radical feminism is about. She can’t be this dumb- this is a deliberate strategy to smear radical feminists. She knows that is an outright lie.

Re what stumbledin said below:

Someone has just pointed out this comment, which shows that they are aware that they are being scrutinised by mumsnet even if they try and make it seem like a joke:

https://twitter.com/bindelj/status/1183379219839102976

It's worth reading the whole Twitter convo, especially the argument between Julie Bindel and Cooper. Cooper apparently tweeted smearing gender critical and radical feminists and then deleted and refused to discuss the wording.