What are "sex-based roles and responsibilities"? **MNHQ editing title to note that article references 'rules' not 'roles'**

[CuriousPanda]

In their thread about the dangers of letting people mark their gender as non-binary on their passports, Fair Play For Women mentioned that one of the dangers is that it would allow people to "opt out of sex-based rules and responsibilities".

twitter.com/fairplaywomen/status/1414150978782253059

Some in replies and quote tweets remarked that it just sounds like gender roles.
So, what "sex-based rules and responsibilities" is this referring to, exactly?

It’s clumsily worded for sure.

Maybe something like, if you’re a male gynae doctor, your patients can have a female chaperone. If you were an NB gynae doctor, they wouldn’t (necessarily) have that right.

Or when you’re arrested you have the right to be searched by someone of the same gender. If you’re an NB, and they only have male or female police available, does that mean you can not be searched?

I don’t know. But that’s as close as I can get to it making sense.

How about males keeping out of female spaces? Or men accepting that everything to do with gynaecology, pregnancy, labour, birth and breastfeeding is 100% woman-centred?

rules not roles
For starters:
Avoiding sex discrimination including by making provision specifically for females where needed.
Providing same sex officers for searches.
Providing single sex spaces to protected safety, privacy and dignity of women

It means blokes staying out of female spaces. It's pretty clear to me.

Sex is a protected characteristic in the Equality Act. It is significant and it matters in certain situations, no matter how much people would try and have you believe otherwise. That's why it is entrenched as a characteristic in equality law.

If you’re an NB, and they only have male or female police available, does that mean you can not be searched?

Or if you're a female NB, they still have a duty of care to ensure that you are searched by a female officer, provided with access to period products, and placed in a women's prison.

@JellySlice

If you’re an NB, and they only have male or female police available, does that mean you can not be searched?

Or if you're a female NB, they still have a duty of care to ensure that you are searched by a female officer, provided with access to period products, and placed in a women's prison.

But if you say you’re an NB how would they know?

(I mean, I know, they’d use their eyes, but for all the people who would have us believe you can’t tell.)

OP - can you ask MNHQ to correct the typo in your thread title to 'rules' rather than 'roles'?

FPFW explain the rules within the full thread.

If humans can be 'sexless' it will allow some to 'opt out' of sex-based rules and responsibilities. Trans pressure groups are already promoting the idea that non-binary identities should have access to women-only spaces

And FPFW link to an article that elaborates the issues in fuller detail.

fairplayforwomen.com/stonewalls-non-binary-demands-undermine-womens-protections/

Major typo in your header OP.
Completely changes the meaning of what was actually said.

I guess the rule that men cant go in to womens sex segrated spaces?
Safeguarding responsibilities? DBS checks cant be done on someone who has changed sex marker?

'FairPlayForWomen
@fairplaywomen

1. If humans can be 'sexless' it will allow some to 'opt out' of sex-based rules and responsibilities. Trans pressure groups are already promoting the idea that non-binary identities should have access to women-only spaces'

The Twitter link has the whole thing.

There was a thread on here a couple of weeks ago about a naturist event where they were trying to limit tickets to “women and non-binary people”. Pretty clear where it would end up. Men with no principles will use it to gain entry wherever possible..

If gender trumps sex, NB people should not have access to women's spaces. Nor to men's spaces, either.

Are trans groups saying that NBs should also have access to men's spaces?

There are only two justifications to the claim that NBs should have access to women's spaces:

Males rights activism
Female bodies

Female NBs are already welcome in women's spaces, and always will be.

I also agree you need to get the typo in your thread title changed, OP. It completely changes the meaning of the question.
For what it's worth, I'd describe sex-based responsibilities as those arising from the legal protections within the Equality Act

I think the FPFW Twitter thread makes it perfectly clear,

Attempted TRA gotcha thread highlights good sense of feminists.

TRA to dim to realise this is always how it goes down.

Do you mean rules or roles OP?

A female NB person will still require sanitary protection if they are deprived of their liberty for any reason. Being NB doesn't change that unless they are on LARC that completely stops their periods. In which case they'd need access to a doctor occasionally instead.

What sex based roles (rules?) apply to males? Interested in the OP's thoughts.

I think (although I agree with the sentiment) that is a big mistake to frame things in this way. I feel the same way about "sex based rights" tbh. It just makes it easier for the other side to accuse us of biological determinism/essentialism. (That your sex should determine how society treats you and the roles you should adopt). Far better I think to talk about protections and mitigations.

@drwitch

I think (although I agree with the sentiment) that is a big mistake to frame things in this way. I feel the same way about "sex based rights" tbh. It just makes it easier for the other side to accuse us of biological determinism/essentialism. (That your sex should determine how society treats you and the roles you should adopt). Far better I think to talk about protections and mitigations.

How about you read the original tweet instead of the distortion the OP posted?

flora I have. As I said I don't think even talking about sex based rights is helpful ( for the same reason we wouldn't talk about race based rights).

The central point is that if a group has protection under the law or other institution you need to a)be able to define it and b) ensure that the definition matches up with the underlying reason for the protection. I just think talking about sex based rights is s confusing (and possibly counterproductive) way of expressing it

So what do you think women's rights are predicated on?

If not our sex?

I just think talking about sex based rights is s confusing (and possibly counterproductive) way of expressing it

What's confusing about it, I'd genuinely like to understand? I think most people, other than TRAs and their friends, can readily understand it when explained?

@drwitch

flora I have. As I said I don't think even talking about sex based rights is helpful ( for the same reason we wouldn't talk about race based rights).

Some sex based rights are just human rights. For example the right of female prisoners to only be incarcerated with members of their own sex. I don't think there are any comparable 'race based rights'.

It has also been acknowledged since women were given the right to compete in sports that most sports also need to be separated by sex in order to be fair to women who tend to be smaller, weaker and slower than men.

These are sex based rights which are nothing to do with societal roles, they are just about biological differences between women and men.