"You seem to think you are a nice person but that’s clearly not reflective of your attitudes towards women."
Bundle, you have nailed it.
So much of the outpourings of highly emotional posting that we have seen since the judgement have been fully ignoring the fact the impact over the past year on female people. They talk about kindness but the sentiments they post are not kind to women and girls.
Look at what a poster has done directly here over the past pages.
Demonise a woman for answering a question from the interviewer, in a discussion about sex based rights, that referred to a person using the correct sex. Using the established conventions of the English language.
While a male barrister, who should know the laws on sex by deception, that negates the consent of others, bragged about how a sex partner didn't even know that the person they were having sex with was male not female until after that sex had happened. Now, of course, for that to be a crime, it would have to be reported and it obviously was not. But how many men could say such a thing on national TV and for it not to have been picked up and highlighted? Yet, I have not seen anything about it. The barrister came across as proud that it happened. Yet, nothing has registered.
So, we have posters actively judging that the woman using correct and established English language simply stating 'he is a man' is worthy of being demonised while ignoring the fact that if the sex partner reported that sex crime, the CPS would have to find that there was cause for prosecution for a sex crime.
The double standards at play here is so stark, yet, I assume it is being done on the basis of being kind.
Then the same poster though posts a dismissive comment about the chances of a female prisoner sharing a cell with a rapist. The dismissal is not new, we have seen it before with other posters, but to come directly after the demonising of a woman and the highly emotive declaration that a potential sex offender's feelings should have been considered, is stark.
Will it sink in to those reading along though? Is sex by deception, ie. putting the sex partner into the position of having non-consensual sex, considered acceptable because the perpetrator is transgender in reader's minds? So much so, that the vilification of a woman making the statement 'he is a man' on national TV is fully acceptable?
Has it sunk in yet, that if all the Supreme Court has done is stated what the law was and has been since 2010 and yet it has caused this massive outpouring of rhetoric about the harm that has just been done to trans people, that those who supported trans people should not have misinterpreted the law in the first place?
Has it sunk in yet that if the law has not changed, yet had been misinterpreted to cause harm to women as it has, that if supporting women's needs = anti trans, then those extreme demands by some trans people were misogynistic.
We know that for the many trans people who make decisions that respect the needs of others, that nothing will have changed for them. We know they are out there, there are some that speak up, there are many who don't. They point out that nothing has changed and that, because they respect female people's needs, they think this result is a good result. And yet, it is the extreme rights activists that are being elevated here, being lionised.
Will it sink in that there is something really amiss.