EHRC Guidelines are an attempt to erase trans and intersex people from public life, this document is genocidal in nature

Genocide would mean being killed, injured, sterilised, or having their children taken away. The most they can claim is an infringement of their right to practise their protected beliefs, which can be a crime against humanity, if it has the effect of causing a belief community to disappear.

(NB any belief which requires the mandatory participation of non-believers is surely not WORIADS, and therefore not protected.)

Why are you limiting the possibilities to stupid OR insane?

It's not just men doing this. Plenty of women are equally bought into the whole RSOH narrative.

IMO and IME women enforce the social rules of their group just as much as men. Possibly more so since women's position is often more precarious / dependant on social approval.

NAWALT obviously but I believe ironically having lower social power can mean people are more invested in following "the rules" because we can then believe following the rules provides social safety, allowing us to feel we have agency/control over our lives.

To paraphrase... "When you're used to privilege and centring yourself as standard, then equality and having to follow the same rules as everybody else will feel like genocide."

I don't think Burnham is about to be any beacon of truth and honesty either.

I agree on this. As some said on another thread, he will be beholden to the unions, especially, those wonderful bastions of truth and justice for the working people men.

Agree but I think it's useful in that it highlights how totally deranged and lunatic the entire ideology is and how people in positions of responsibility (e.g. teachers, headteachers, DSLs) who should be able to demonstrate they are rational to keep their jobs should not be entertaining it. At all.

The whole thing is just the toddler like unilateral changing of words to mean whatever the toddler person using them wants them to mean and not what they actually mean.

In this case 'genocidal' means the law stating facts. In other areas 'female' can include males. When it actually can't.

It is insulting to those who have been killed in actual genocide but as is so clearly displayed here, entitled men having temper tantrums don't care about anyone else.

There have been absolutely no boundaries on dishonesty in this matter, all this came from an activist body marketing intentionally wrong information and decieving providers of services that it was law. Their aim, to set their preferred practice in place, and for the law to then have to change to fit what they had made common practice. There were no boundaries or consequences for this. We've had the BBC and government freely joining in on disemenating biased, deceptive information that has bordered on actual lies and propaganda, and again, no consequences or boundaries to this.

It's been appalling to watch. I don't think Burnham is about to be any beacon of truth and honesty either. But without boundaries, it's not surprising that unbalanced activists can state this rubbish and expect it to be believed by MPs among others. On another thread at the moment is an activist trying to overturn the guidance without apparently understanding this is not the same as law, and identifying as not wanting to destroy women's rights or gay rights because that's an uncomfortable thought - they seem unable to face their own intent.

They also appropriate the cause of said people with DSDs, which people with DSDs have expressly asked that TRAs not do.

They freely use the word "intersex". Is that not an outdated term in the US then?

At this point it looks like a deliberate farcical joke: "How much stupid can we stuff into a single statement?" The idea that some people can be that dishonest (because it's dishonesty in this case, not just stupidity) saddens me quite a bit.

Barking. Really no point in trying to reason with that amount of distorted thinking.

My favourite sentence in that nonsense was '...on the bizarre notion that services cease to be single-sex if trans people are allowed to use them.'

Of course services cease to be single-sex if people of a different sex use them.

There are massive problems with people digging their heels in like Japanese soldiers still fighting WWII after it ended,
I like that analogy!

Given that women’s toilets tend to be busier and have longer lines, we believe that being able to use the male toilet could actually be described as an advantage. ...

Even with this part, it's so clearly focused solely on what they want, with not the slightest thought given to the women who will have to queue for even longer still if men are using their toilets as well.

Which TRAs have creatively interpreted in exactly the way you might imagine.

Another document that got called “genocidal” was the International Declaration on Women’s Sex Based Rights, because it says:

c) States should “condemn discrimination against women in all its forms, agree to pursue by all appropriate means and without delay a policy of eliminating discrimination against women’’. (CEDAW, Article 2).
This should include the elimination of that act and practice of discrimination against women which comprises the inclusion of men who claim to have a female ‘gender identity’ in the category of women. Such inclusion erodes women’s rights to safety, dignity and equality.

I don’t agree. Sex Matters and FWS are usually involved in cases so get quoted a lot. There are massive problems with people digging their heels in like Japanese soldiers still fighting WWII after it ended, but “The Lemkin Institute” are not the reason for that. They’re shitty, but they’re not the cause. Honestly, TRAs have been inappropriately claiming “genocide” because people challenged their entitlement for a decade. It’s not a new thing.

Absolutely ludicrously testerical

Doesn’t one of the women who started this (Elisa von ???) have a trans child?

The Lemkin Institute identifies as something serious and intellectual. It is neither.

I get what you are saying OP, but it's just another whack-a-mole women have to deal with. Fortunately more people have their listening ears on compared to last year and will understand that this "genocidal" crap isn't worth anything anymore.

Yes, it’s been taken up by TRAs in the UK for a long time. There isn’t much that can be done other than educate people where possible.

I’ll be honest, I had the wool pulled over my eyes on these people. Because of the grand name, “The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention”, and the way people cite it online, I assumed it was some, well-funded organisation with authority.

It isn’t, as people have said.

By its own description, it’s an all-volunteer organisation with about 50 volunteers at any given time, managed by a small group of long-term volunteers. It says it started as a “zero budget organisation” and has even sold merchandise to help keep itself afloat.

they are not researching Rwanda. They are researching blokes in the ladies. Weird.

...and no right to use Raphael Lemkin's name, as they will discover when his family succeed in their legal action against this so-called institute.