Gender Critical in Ireland Part 4

[MaeveofConnaught]

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/craicnet/4777231-gender-critical-in-ireland-part-3?page=40&reply=139277391
Last thread was full so starting a new one.

"But I meant it seems to be playing with words again…trying to broaden the definition of ‘sex’ in the same way some have a broader definition of ‘woman’.
Maybe?
Otherwise I’m not sure why the phrase sex characteristics was chosen rather than just saying sex, unless those who drafted it were simply needlessly verbose (I doubt it)."
I think there is a possibility that DSDs will be used as a way to deconstruct the sex binary. The laws passed last night are merely to lay the groundwork for what is coming down the line.

I don't know why I'm so shocked, but I cannot get my head around the fact that the women in Dáil Éireann didn't speak up about this. HOW have we got to this horrendous situation? It all seems so insidious surely to God in 2024 someone could have spoken out and stopped this?

(And thank you @MaeveofConnaught for the new thread)

Someone on the last thread mentioned scenarios. I always imagine the words “You look like a man” say it to a woman and it is unpleasant but not criminal, but you say it to an transwoman and that’s a hate crime.

Again if you take something unpleasant which women are (at the end of the day) expected to suck up e.g. “She’s such a cunt”, then I expect other protected groups to either suck up the equivalent, or that what is acceptably unpleasant-but-not-criminal is changed for women.

Day 4, admitted it to Gardai but sure everyone should have known that BK didn't mean it.

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/barbie-kardashian-told-gardai-she-made-rape-threats-but-did-not-intend-to-carry-them-out-trial-told-1687260.html

“I snapped and threatened to rape Tegan with an object...I told her, she wasn’t going to be able to have more children,” the accused told gardaí.
“I am a woman and women rape (by) using objects, that’s why I said an ‘object’ and not my genitalia,” the accused said.
“At no point was she (Ms McGhee) raped by me. The threats were made, however I did not intend for her take the threat seriously,” she added.
Ms Kardashian claimed she was also annoyed because after “she (Ms McGhee) said I had a male voice, and I find this extremely offensive and transphobic”.
“She said I sound like a male and I am a female.”
When gardaí put it to Ms Kardashian that she had said that Ms McGhee “deserved to be punished”, the accused told the interviewing officers: “I said this because I wanted the prison authorities to punish her for making false accusations against me”.
Ms Kardashian told gardaí that neither of the two alleged victims could have believed the threats would have been carried out as she was locked in her cell for “22 hours a day” and segregated from the rest of the prison population.

Of course they shouldn't have believed the threats. It's not like BK tried to rip a social worker's eyelids off or anything.

Indeed. He is so violently deranged it's terrifying.

The language is so confusing. It's one thing him claiming to a woman, but claiming to be female 😩 A lot of people have absolutely no idea what a GRC is and all the terminology around it.

I'm pondering the intended meaning of sex characteristics here. Maybe it's an add-on to gender? For example, someone with a vagina would have female sex characteristics but shouldn't consider that this might make them a female/woman. It's just sort of an incidental detail.

In the case of the lovely Barbie K however there should be no doubt the she and her lady penis are 100% female and the reason we know this is because of their gender identity

Amazingly, the Ireland subreddit is fully immersed in reality
https://www.reddit.com/r/ireland/s/rESZ49jNUD

This is interesting - 'sex' was written out of all equality legislation, including the list of protected characteristics and replaced with 'gender'.
[contemporaneous Oireachtas discussions show that everyone, all political parties, thought it was a triffic idea, LifeInAHamsterWheel, and TENI, representing 'the most marginalised group in society' were deferred to as the Fount of All Knowledge by legislators and even medical professionals🙄]

So have they at some point officially brought the word 'sex' back into legislation?
What is the mechanism for changing the wording of legislation?

'Sex characteristics' is a weird phrase though, I'm trying to think how it would restore any legal protection for women, and I don't see how..
well, maybe it would make the c-word 'hate speech', which it is, and I hate the way it has been normalised.

But it might also make it 'hate speech' to point out that a female-identifying man has male sex characteristics and is therefore male.

It's too early in the morning to get my head around the implications of all this, but it highlights the tangled web Irish legislation got itself into by abandoning the terms 'man' meaning male person with XY chromosomes and 'woman' meaning female person with XX chromosomes.

'The law is an ass, and its pronouns are he/haw'

I know that IRL everyone that hears of this case thinks it’s fecking lunacy. I am surprised by the Ireland Subreddit though that’s a big change.

The gender ideologues have always gone quiet on this particular case. So they absolutely know it’s indefensible.

In the canteen at work in a large MNC someone said about the hate speech bill that it’s an attempt to weaponise legislation against those that disagree with government policy. Everyone at the table agreed. Two years ago that conversation wouldn’t have taken place out of fear.

We all have to keep highlighting this lunacy when we come across it because people in general have had enough of ‘be kind’ and no debate.

Some NGO’s are posing an active threat to our democracy. This must be brought up to every politician we meet coming up to the election.

Just saw Barbies been found not guilty...how, he admitted it and there are multiple witnesses. This has just given him he green light to escalate further.

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2024/1025/1477497-barbie-kardashian-verdict/

What the ever loving...

That makes absolutely no sense. The charge was threatening to kill or cause serious harm. Whether Kardashian actually intended to follow through on the threats is surely irrelevant?

I commented on the other thread. Just can't believe it. I hope he's moved to a secure mental facility and kept there forever. He is such a huge threat to women & girls.

Yes, he is.

Obviously his early life with his barbaric father was horrific and left him very badly damaged. I have huge sympathy for the young child he was. However, he is now a very, very dangerous adult man and the only way to protect women and girls from him is to keep him in a secure mental facility.

So for clarity and future reference : when Barbie threatens to rape and murder people he is lying. When he says he is a woman he is telling the truth.

Well yes, because well, uhm, you know, uhm. Don't be such a transphobic bigot!!!

Just saw the not guilty verdict. Am flabbergasted, how on earth is that the jurys decision, did they hear something we didn't?

Jesus Christ BK testified today and reading what was said I have no idea how this was a not guilty verdict

https://www.thejournal.ie/barbie-kardashian-3-6524633-Oct2024/
"Under cross examination from prosecution counsel John O’Sullivan, Kardashian admitted threatening to rape McGhee with an object so that the extent of McGhee’s injuries would be that “she would not be able to have children”.
O’Sullivan asked Kardashian “what object” would be used to rape Ms McGhee.
“I wanted to use an electric rod, but that wasn’t available to me. I remember thinking I wanted to use the handle of a sweeping brush or a mop. I wanted to torture her [Ms McGhee] sexually, I wanted to sexually electrocute her genitalia,” Kardashian replied.
When asked why use the word “object” in the rape threat, Kardashian replied: “Because I am a woman, and women use objects, that’s why I said ‘object’.”
She added: “I hate having male genitalia and I would use an object to commit rape. If a woman wants to rape, that’s how I would commit rape.”
When O’Sullivan put it to Kardashian that the trial heard it was only females that the accused had threatened, Kardashian replied: “I have threatened to sexually assault males since these incidents.”
Kardashian agreed with O’Sullivan that she had “snapped” in a fit of rage after rumours had circulated “for months” about her and the showers.
She admitted in court to making a threat to rape McGhee and making threats to “sexually assault” or “molest” Linnane.
“I wanted to punish them for life for making false allegations about me…I wanted revenge”,” Kardashian said.
O’Sullivan asked Kardashian checked if the accused had stated in her direct evidence “for life”, to which Kardashian replied: “Yes, for life”.
O’Sullivan also asked if Kardashian wanted to inflict “life changing injuries” on the two alleged victims to which Kardashian replied: “That’s correct.”
O’Sullivan put it to Kardashian that “you claim to be a woman yourself” but that the accused wanted to make the women suffer sexually.
Kardashian replied: “Yes, I wanted to make them suffer.”
She agreed with O’Sullivan of having wanted to “torture” the two alleged victims and agreed they had “deserved it”.
“Yes, but the electric rod wasn’t available to me. It applied more to Roisin [Linnane] as I hated her more than Tegan,” Kardashian said.
Kardashian, who had told Gardaí that she had been raped and sexually assaulted a number of times as a child, gave evidence that she had wanted to make “a very extreme threat” against Linnane in order “to make her suffer”.
O’Sullivan asked Kardashian “did you intend” Tegan McGhee to believe the rape threat was real, to which Kardashian replied: “Yes, I wanted her to suffer. I felt she wronged me and I wanted revenge.”"

It just gets worse... he openly admitted that level of thought and detail in court, referred to them as "like my other victims", had multiple witnesses, adjusted threats based on what he could realistically do in prison...what the hell would he have had to do to be found guilty?

https://www.rte.ie/culture/2024/1024/1477312-incel-culture-in-ireland-uncovered-by-rte-documentary-on-one/

This should be interested, very surprised RTÉ are actually covering it to be honest.

Like you, Believerinbiology, I'm not just outraged, I'm genuinely puzzled. From the Irish Times:
The jury found Kardashian “not guilty” of three counts of threatening to kill or cause serious harm to Ms Linnane, intending her to believe the threat would be carried out.
It took the jury two hours and 35 minutes to reach verdicts in respect of three of the counts. Earlier, the trial judge Colin Daly had directed the jury to find Kardashian “not guilty” of one of the counts against Ms Linnane.

(Note it was the jury who found him not guilty, not the judge, who presumably directed a 'not guilty' finding on one of the three counts for legal reasons.
So this is not necessarily a case of Irish judges being useless... they are a mixed bunch, and some are very strong on violence against women cases.)

So could somebody with legal knowledge help us out here?

-Is ' intending her to believe the threat would be carried out' the key issue, i.e. it was not possible for BK to actually carry out the threats?

-Is that part of the legal definition of 'threats to kill or cause serious harm'?

-Do you have to be in a position to carry out the threats?

-Is the fear and distress of having detailed horrific threats made against you not worthy of legal penalty?

-In short, can anybody threaten anybody with rape, torture, death, whatever, and be acquitted on the basis that 'Ah sure he was only mouthin' off, you know what he's like'?

The whole thing makes absolutely no sense. The Countess will be releasing a statement, so it might be clearer then.

All those poor women in Irish prisons (obviously including the female staff).