GC protected belief and use of cis

Inches are oppressive.

6 inches is incorrectly represented on all rulers and tape measures.

I’m just glad that engineers still rely on facts and reality. Really glad...

What other parts of well established science need to be discarded as they are built on illusory foundations? If it's a nonsense belief that human mammals have the same two sexes as other mammals?

And has there been any research into why we are different? That the old ideas about human males producing sperm, and human females becoming pregnant by an egg being fertilised when a sperm fuses with it, and the femal giving birth to live young and producing milk to nourish the young...

Are humans not mammals now? Or how does that work?

'Also GC beliefs are not protected. Your right to have the belief is protected that's all. I can still call it out as nonsense etc'

If believing that the most basic, always known, universal to mammals and many other animals and plants, fact of male and female and sperm and egg, is 'nonsense' then where does that leave us?

In real life sex matters.

Why when Daesh take people for sex slavery do they know how to choose? Because it's vagina people. Who are deemed to be 'old enough' once they start growing public hair. Who are traded to other men when their current owner tires of them.

Boys on the other hand are indoctrinated and forced to fight- child soldiers.

All over the world all the time there are consequences for people due to their sex.

If it's nonsense then it's very widespread nonsense. And taking on correcting it will be a huge task. And is it really likely that the people who do these things are going to start doing it on gender ID rather than sex?

I haven't misunderstood have I? I don't think so.

Please do let me know if this is not what you're saying.

I am very uncomfortable with the idea that the idea that knowing as 99.999% of the world does, what male and female are, and using the words in their language for man woman boy girl etc. Is no more than a belief.

The fact that 'belief' in material reality and the scientific method are valid philosophical beliefs does not in any way negate that they are based on objective truths. This way of treating them is, I think, a way to deal with the fact that there are people who dont believe in material reality or also believe in other stuff.

and yeah, must be boring when all you can do is say the equivalent of no you smell

Succinct and beautifully put as ever Bernard.

Your right to have the belief is protected that's all. I can still call it out as nonsense etc

and I can call out the belief in gender ideology as nonsense, etc., and can do so without being discriminated against, abused, harassed or threatened - marvellous isn't it.

The only people who have been behaving as if we have blasphemy laws are those steeped in gender ideology, their actions and words are straight out of the heresy trials of old.

oldsquare.co.uk/forstater-v-cgd-europe-others/

This is into the realms of the USA extreme religious types who want the creation story taught next to evolution in science because evolution is 'only' a theory'.

It's either a total lack of understanding about theory proof etc in science, or a deliberate misunderstanding.

It gives drives me mad tbh and now it's a 'belief' that mammals that are human come in two sexes, with well established differences in their role in reproduction and other physiological areas.

I mean seriously?

I get that case was about MF not believing that humans can change sex but the end point, that the most basic fundamental thing that humans will have known from before we had language is nothing more than a belief, is incredibly worrying to me.

We know who is funding our GC movement - we are

yep

and yeah, must be boring when all you can do is say the equivalent of 'no you smell'

I can still call it out as nonsense etc

That would be interesting. On what factual
basis? When did you prove it was possible to be born into the wrong sex body for your innate gender essence?

Cis is the equivalent of work policy calling me a heretic, apostate or unbeliever - when atheist is the accurate term.

Well put.

cis isn't a slur, its a recognised term.

You're wildly missing the point. 'Man's is also a recognised term but does that make it appropriate to call a transwoman that? Cis has a particular meaning in relation to gender identity. I actually don't have a problem with women who want to and believe they have a gender identity, calling themselves cis. I also don't mind too much if people ask me if that fits for me. What I DO object to is people assuming that they can call me cis - because that is basically assuming they know my gender identity (when I don't have one).

Misgendering is either a problem for everyone (in which case you should not call anyone cis without knowing (by asking or them telling you, no guessing allowed) whether that's what they identify as; or it's a problem for no-one (in which case I can call a person who looks like a man a man). Which one it is because it can't be both.

"Women! Sit down and SHUT UP! I WILL DECIDE WHAT YOU CAN AND CANNOT OFFEND YOU!"

Telling women what they perceive as a slur and what they should not is a massive own goal.

Bless

It’s a slur. Recently seen on the t-shirt of a 6”4 blonde with the words ‘kill’ next to it. And let’s face it, when certain people use it, you know it’s meant as an insult.

Hands up who agrees?
✋

So how come loads of women say ‘no I don’t like it, it’s a slur don’t use it’ and get told ‘no it’s not, we will use it anyway’ - and then her their language policed as to what they must call others (lest it be literal, actual murder)?

This is my difficulty with your position Adam: it is all on the facts. Para 99 (screenshot again below) is emphatic. I understand your desire to find a simple tweetable one-size test. Employers do need to advise (and be advised) ofc. But I think over-distilling is incorrect [PD includes a screenshot of relevant ruling.]

twitter.com/peter_daly/status/1409143714065403911?s=20

Ludwig considers:

The new cases I think we are going to see more of are claims by GC people alleging harassment by other employees/ fellow trade unionists etc saying comments like TERF and bigot; as social media suggests that the implications of Forstater haven't filtered through

It will be interesting if cis within a workplace setting is eventually established as compelling participation in a belief system that an individual doesn't share.

As the court said, this is not a license to keep misgendering people with impunity. I don't 'identify as cisgender'. So please don't misgender me.

cis isn't a slur, its a recognised term.

Recognised by whom? and please point me to the relevant law that states this.

It is not recognised by me and many other women and I don't consent to it being used to describe me.

I can still call it out as nonsense etc. as I can Christianity and any other ideology.

Absolutely. However if you insisted on calling somebody 'cis' against their wishes, it is possible that this could be classed as harassment, just as misgendering could be classed as harassment depending on context.

I completely support your right to discuss gender in a theoretical way, and would love to know why you think anyone would assume that any woman would identify with gendered expectations, because to me that seems like the definition of sexism.

GC beliefs are protected in the same way as any other belief - (even though they're based on fact - like 'belief' in evolution). I don't think anyone is implying otherwise so not sure what the point of that post was.

We know who is funding our GC movement - we are.

Re OP
cis isn't a slur, its a recognised term. Also GC beliefs are not protected. Your right to have the belief is protected that's all. I can still call it out as nonsense etc. as I can Christianity and any other ideology. If you think being GC is protected then you need to sue the judge in MFs case as he claled it out for what it was. Its why we have no blasphemy laws anymore and if anyone thinks being GC is more important than christianity then you better check who's funding the GC movement.

no answer about the defining characteristics of the shared gender that women and males who identify as women share then

it's amazing how even the most vociferous posters go quiet when you ask that one

Referring to me as Cis is akin to misgendering me; I can’t be cis if I don’t have a gender identity.

If it’s disrespectful to do that to trans identifying people, it’s disrespectful to us.