Behind the ruling: how ‘Sex Matters’ is shaping UK policy on trans rights

You lost, get over it (YLGOI)

Let’s not go down that route 😂. But if we did we need to have a theme tune too

Is GCIM another term for ‘established science’?

Bee is throwing mud and hoping that some of it will stick.

This is what transactivists do, because they do not have a cogent, persuasive case to make for allowing a subset of men into women's spaces. They do not want to fight for their own spaces because getting into the women's spaces is necessary either for validation of for fetishistic purposes.

I, too, have been meaning to increase my Sex Matters subscription and will do so today. Thanks Bee

they’re not disgruntled. They’re fucking raging and frothing at the mouth.

What’s GCIM??

Edit: ooh hahaha they can’t help themselves can they. When there’s a word women use TRAs just have to take it for themselves and pretend to be victimised. Maybe grow some logic based on reality instead, it will work better

Do we get a flag too? All subdivisions and permeations need a flag

Why are there so many of these weird threads lately? Is it because women won the SC to have rights and the men are disgruntled that men don’t have more rights than women?

Not long ago there was a large petition calling for parliament to amend the Equality Act to make it clear that sex meant biological sex. The official government response was that it was not necessary to amend the Equality Act because it was already clear. Separately, I believe there was another petition calling for parliament to amend the Equality Act to make sex mean identified sex.

"Ideology". Another one of those words that the TRAs noticed being used to describe their Genderist movement, a use where it makes complete sense, and picked it up to use as a label to discredit anyone saying No to them, where it makes no sense at all.

It makes so little sense that they can't be understanding what they are saying. They must just be thinking "that sounds bad, we aren't bad so we can't be it, they are bad so they must be it." It really is that playground level.

If they actually understood words and wanted to use them to communicate, understand and find common groubd instead of throwing them around wildly to obscure, they'd know that "ideology" isn't even a criticism. Feminism is an ideological movement and I'm all for it.

If you disagree with the tenets of an Ideology, for example Feminism, then by all means tackle that, that's a rational adult way to engage. Yelling "ugh Ideology" and then running away is not.

The UK Supreme Court ruling redefined ‘sex’

Even the first sentence is an absurd lie

The Supreme court just reaffirmed that it meant that the same as it ever was

I heard that the far right, the church and feminists all believe the earth isnt flat too.

"GCIM" - seriously 😂

Gotta label everything

I prefer sex realist. The only ideology here is gender ideology.

A thousand times this.

Years before the Supreme Court ruling, Sex Matters were meeting with the EHRC behind closed doors to discuss a redefinition of ‘sex’ in the Equality Act to mean ‘biological sex’.

No.

The people trying to redefine sex here the ones who wanted it to mean identified sex.

The Supreme Court just confirmed that it has always meant biological sex.

You wanna engage on this @BeeSouriante , or are you just here to tell the mummies they are wrong?

Do you agree female people have the right to define ourselves as female, talk about what that means for us and stand against our sex based oppression even though that by definition excludes you, or not?

Stop trying to make "gender critical ideology movement (GCIM)" happen.

It's not going to happen.

PS - Believing that female people are real and deserve to exist in law and have some sex based rights is not an ideology. This principle was enshrined in law in the Equality Act before the phrase "gender critical" ever entered our collective vocabulary. Believing that everyone has a gender identity which is assigned by the magic gender fairy and which usually "matches" our genitalia, but in the case of trans people doesn't match their genitalia because the magic gender fairy is a disruptive little shit who wants to make some people miserable and that it is your magical gender identity and not your sex that makes you a man or a woman very much is an ideology though.

I think defining what the word woman means doesn’t need a huge amount of input. Just people who understand basic biology and mammalian evolution. No one has been eliminated, but we all now understand that our biological sex can’t be changed.

Thankyou for this Kumquat.

This reasoning also misses the bit that I see time and again on this board, and highlighted in the SC ruling - that trans people shouldn’t be discriminated against for being trans

• in access to jobs/housing/benefits/ spaces and services
• that they should have access to evidence-based healthcare, and specifically need to be included in sex-based screening programmes (which changing their sex marker tends to obliterate)
• that appropriate toilet/changing facilities, services etc should be available for them in a way which does not impinge on the rights of other groups to single-sex facilities and services

Humans can be classified in countless ways: by profession, income, age, allergies, eye colour, number of children, or even postcode. Some classifications align with how people see themselves, others don’t and being correctly classified can cause upset.

In some situations, a single category takes priority - often for practical reasons. For example, weight can determine rollercoaster access for safety purposes. This may conflict with someone's self-perception, especially if they believe other aspects, like their fitness or attractiveness, are being overlooked.

Navigating life successfully requires navigating the tension between practical labels and personal meaning. Transwomen find sex classification upsetting. There are many contexts where their sex is irrelevant, but in contexts where sex matters it can’t be overlooked. Attacking those who are highlighting where sex matters and suggesting they are seeking to eliminate trans people from being in society is nothing short of absurd. Denying trans people access to opposite sex essential provision would prevent them from being included in society in a dignified way IF alternative provision wasn’t being provided - but the law states it must be.

For what it’s worth, I am sympathetic to the upset this causes trans people and recognise that it cuts to the core of their identity.

If you genuinely want to support trans people, open your eyes to the fact that the law means single sex provision is for one sex only and that women advocating for this are motivated by the needs of females, not by a desire to harm transwomen. The power of this lie in silencing women who were fearful of the consequences of speaking up is diminishing, yet it’s power to make trans people wrongly feel hated and rejected is as strong as ever. Why don’t you direct your advocacy towards ensuring alternative provision for trans people is adequate in quality and number and that trans people can, where needed, access support to build resilience so they feel able to navigate a world where their identity won’t always align with how society is organised and how others perceive them.

People will have stupid views and god knows men will fail to see women as real people and to understand that women deserve rights and boundaries, and Bee is an example of that kind of man.

we can’t make him be not sexist and bonkers. All we can do is make sure his views are seen for the lunacy they are. Sex Matters are very good at that. I’m glad they exist

@BeeSouriante Half the trans friends I have are busily leading normal lives without anyone being able to 'tell'.

You have absolutely ZERO way of knowing that no one can tell because you can't see into people's heads. People are polite/scared/uninterested etc etc.
It's comforting for you/your friends to tell yourselves that, though.

Anyway, what are the other half doing? No...actually, don't answer that.

Ignoring the posts which don’t suit Bee’s narrative would be par for the course. This poster is putting out a lot of pretty ridiculous statements (GC = right wing, McGuire was quite right (when he called women nazis) etc) but has, sadly, completely failed to engage in any actual debate.

Gross.