Appeal on whether NB can be recorded on a GRC - dismissed

Genderism’s attitude to medicine has a LOT in common with GLaDOS’ attitude to ‘science’ - who cares how badly injured someone is if the experiments are cool and at least some of us benefit from them and “there’s no use crying over every mistake” 🤷‍♀️ Yup, the cake is definitely a lie.

To clarify, I didn't mean "sense of self" in the mystical inner genderwoo celebrate myself way, I meant awareness of my own body. My sense of myself as a physical living entity, and the sensations I experience in and from of my body being part of my experience of being me.

I’m a solicitor and many template documents have words along the lines of “a reference to one gender includes a reference to the other genders” in the boilerplate. In the olden days it would have said something like “references to the masculine includes the feminine” but that’s too binary these day.

If I didn’t need to keep my job I’d be tempted to ask someone to explain how many other genders there are, what they are all called, and why this has any impact on the interpretation of a legal document given that English law only recognises male & female.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0780622/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0_tt_7_nm_1_in_0_q_teeth

Too much!! Brain exploded!

If he slaps a pair of dentures in there would that make it a fully-functional mouth?

Probably, same logic isn't it! not envy

Well yes, that's probably the main reason 'gender' started to be used as a euphemism for sex in the first place.

Even the act part though...surely anyone who thinks a skin-lined tube is a 'fully functioning vagina' obviously hasn't had any experience from either perspective of a female orgasm?

If he slaps a pair of dentures in there would that make it a fully-functional mouth?

Oh yes, some have even admitted that their definition of a 'woman' is essentially 'someone who is fucked'. The "dead eyes, open mouth and expectant arsehole" or the penetrated rather than the penetrator, if you prefer.

Just want to edit this a bit:

That 'fully functioning vagina' description is a bit of an aha moment for me. For men the consequence of being a sex is status and the role of reproductive organs is limited to the act of sex, therefore this man can't see further than ego affirmation and the act of sex.

(Perhaps there is an argument for having different words for 'sex' and 'sex'...)

I am however flummoxed that this description would be used in court.

same. I want someone to say in what way is it functional?

Let's hear the misogyny.

There is a legitimate feminist case for wanting a sex-neutral title to be available (other than earning the right to Dr) - it comes up regularly in threads about Miss/Mrs/Ms . I've never heard of a woman making that sort of ruction and apparently wanting to punish a company rather than trying to get them to change their policy in a more civil manner though.

"It's as much a part of her physical and emotional sense of self as the feel of her breathing and the tension in her shoulders."

For me, the whole point is that I have to live with my female reproductive system regardless of whether I feel it is part of my sense of self.

Periods, pregnancy, miscarriage, menopause, female specific illnesses - I have very limited control over these things. When I have control, e.g. contraception, it depends completely on external services that can be withdrawn.

That 'fully functioning vagina' description is a bit of an aha moment for me. For men the consequence of sex is status and the role of reproductive organs is limited to sex, therefore this man can't see further than ego affirmation and sex.

I am however flummoxed that this description would be used in court.

I wonder what the financial ombudsman thought the grounds were?

I'm not sure whether non binary people are even covered in law under 'gender reassignment', given that they cannot be in the process of seeking gender reassignment.

I think there should be a 'don't care, use my first name' option.

The FO operates as an arm of Stonewall.

There are some efforts to sneak in "non-binary" recognition though appealing to other authorities too.

This guy got £330 compensation from Direct Line after complaining to the Financial Ombudsman, because they refused to recognise his "Mx" title.

Another is raising a similar case with the Financial Ombudsman and the Information Commissioner's Office because Barclays didn't put "Mx" on a drop-down box in some web form.

It feels a bit Stonewall Law.

Don’t give them ideas

But also, if it's not lined with any kind of penile material, isn't it literally as arousing as having a hole say, in your arm?

It's a classic house built on the sand.

It really is another bit of the foundations crumbling away, isn’t it?

I can’t think of anything more male than a man getting a ‘neovagina’ behind his penis. It screams ‘male fetish’.

Take it away @AstonUniversityPotholeDepartment

I came on this thread to post that his Bluesky post was a quote from GLaDOS, but not only have I been pipped to the post by FlirtsWithRhinos, but Cake has managed to get in a perfectly apposite reference to Aperture Science.

I have nothing left to contribute except to say I'm the best one in my family at doing the Portal song on karaoke.

I doubt this "vagina" even performs the function of providing male sexual pleasure as well as a real one, quite apart from not having any of the other functions a vagina might have.