High court refuses gender neutral passports

[OunceOfFlounce]

Seems like a little reason to be cheerful this Friday perhaps?

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-44575229

That and, as we have seen "No other country has a problem with it" is demonstrably not true in other closely associated areas.

Snappity, women already face sexual assault from men seated next to them on flights. We know that some men will sexually abuse children, many more men than women. It's evident from the prior two statements that seating women next to unaccompanied children will reduce the risk of that child being sexually molested during the flight. KLM have, or at least had when I last flew, a policy of placing women next to unaccompanied children, which would require knowing the sex of passengers before they boarded in order to sensibly apply it. Otherwise you have cabin crew trying to rearrange people between rows, as opposed to asking me and my then-boyfriend to swap back to our assigned seats (we had self-swapped because I prefer the aisle). Reducing the accuracy of passport sex data would effectively force airlines to consider "non binary" as male for the purposes of child safeguarding, reducing the pool of known females who can sit next to the child. Removing sex data completely as suggested upthread would prevent the airlines from pre-planning their flight seating around child safeguarding.

I'm pretty sure all of this is getting out of hand now.

"changing attributes of sex"

Exactly. If attributes of sex can be changed then sex cannot be invariant birth sex. And if you read the examples, changing social presentation changes an attribute of sex. So sex in EA2010 cannot just be biological sex.

"Removing sex data completely as suggested upthread would prevent the airlines from pre-planning their flight seating around child safeguarding."

I don't think airlines should accept unaccompanied minors anyway.

Q Why have sex recognition on passport?
A For example, to assist in the provision of XYZ service
Q I don't think we should offer XYZ service anyway

Erm... attributes = characteristics of something, something understood as being typical of, assigned as being representative of...

... read the examples, changing social presentation changes an attribute of sex actually means changing how you look means you seem to be more A than B.

Absolutely fuck all to do with changing sex and everything to do with the appearance of...

I haven't had a chance to read it yet but here's the full judgment if anyone is interested.

www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2018/1530.html

Ye gods! Don't read it, I'll paraphrase for you

1.1 All applications are required to select either the gender Male or Female on the passport application form.... gender... gender... gender... gender... gender... gender

@snappity: I don't think airlines should accept unaccompanied minors anyway.

Lucky you that you have the privilege to be able to afford to send an adult chaperone with your child on every flight they take. Not everyone has that level of wealth and so the unaccompanied minors service is needed.

I don't think airlines should accept unaccompanied minors anyway.
Why not? It seems to have worked pretty well up to now. Why should airlines have to change their business practices to suit a small minority?

I don't think airlines should accept unaccompanied minors anyway

FFS.

"Look at the King! Look at the the King!
Look at the King, the King, the King!
The King is in the altogether, but altogether, the altogether
He's altogether as naked as the day that he was born
The King is in the altogether, but altogether, the altogether
It's altogether the very least the King has ever worn"

Of course we need a gender on a passport... sake.

Of course - airlines should remove a valuable service for children because men want to do something, and if they do that thing then existing safeguarding practices can't be applied.... That seems reasonable, and not at all like the tail wagging the dog...

"Why not? It seems to have worked pretty well up to now. Why should airlines have to change their business practices to suit a small minority?"

Because I think it is poor parenting.

Interesting points/posts HaXXor. There really is nothing I abhor more than people who want to prioritise their ‘rights’ over the safeguarding of children. Now you’ve pointed it out, I’ve realised these people are generally men.

Oh Snappity thinks it's poor parenting then. So everything much change to suit Snappity. Whose tactics are those? They sound familiar.

I sent all my daughters on flights as unaccompanied minors otherwise they wouldn't have been able to go places as they did. They'd have had to stay at home.

Yep, those are the tactics of MRAs.

I find it fascinating that women are generally pressing for rights which prioritize safety and the ability to hold a hand up and say 'stop'.
Men appear to be pressing for the rights to be able to access things that have been held back from them, often for safety reasons.

Bit ‘rape Culture’ isn’t it floral

Hmm. Almost like the penis is an odd physical metaphor for how they see their role in the world. Their rights must penetrate. Golly, it's almost like biology runs through everything we experience...

@snappity Because I think it is poor parenting.

My parents put me and my younger sister on trains unaccompanied for three hours at a time when I was still a teen. It was the only way we could go to stay with our grandma during the school holidays whilst my parents carried on at work. The british train services have much laxxer safeguarding rules than the airlines and I would not want to have travelled without my sister with me. Had my grandma lived in Ireland, we would have flown under the unaccompanied minors system. It's no more poor parenting than letting your child walk to school or ride the public bus alone. One of the things that makes it not poor parenting is that the airlines have established safeguarding policies.

Because I think it is poor parenting
Well you're entitled to your opinion of course, just as other people are entitled to ignore your opinion. Especially when they know more about the subject than you do.

One of the things that makes itnotpoor parenting is that the airlines have established safeguarding policies.

This.

Makes me question whether these men genuinely don't understand why safeguarding procedure have to be in place, they understand but their hurt feelings trump everything or if they want to reduce safety for children?

This is rage inducing.

Dh is the nicest, least threatening person in the world. He is no threat whatsoever to any child and yet he understands that the rules are not a personal slur to him, but are there because men as a class are more dangerous and therefore he abides by them. ditto public loos, and all other areas where men are excluded. he is aware enough to not see it as any threat or insult to him as an individual

The mind boggles as to why any man would challenge such rules. They are either incredibly self centred, too dim to understand why the rules are there or an active danger. None of those options are good.

We have also had to swap seats by the way to sit with a minor on a flight and we have done it happily. The safety and well-being of the CHILD is the priority. Our feelings are irrelevant