Can someone explain to to me why this has gone to court? Teenage girl pretending to be a boy.

[placemats]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/08/teenage-girl-georgia-bilham-pretended-to-be-boy-duped-second-girl-sex-court-hears

I'm following this and cannot understand why this is being prosecuted.

I think to get back to the core of the case, it is about deception. Not even whether someone claims they are trans or not.

The problem is that the whole of transgender ideology is based on the 'right' of a transitioning person to deceive everyone else. There are clauses in the GRA about when it is legitimate to disclose that someone has a GRC, which means that there are times when it may be necessary to lie in order to not break the law.

In fact, one of the major reasons for the existence of the GRA was so that a transsexual didn't have to out themself to their employer. Or to put it another way, the reason for the GRA was so that a transsexual person could deceive others about their sex, including their employer.

From the LGBT Foundation article:
The conviction then of Kyran Lee leaves us questioning; do trans people actually have the right to hold the details of their trans histories private or must a disclosure happen before engaging in sex with new partners? We know that trans people face stigma, hate crime and violence at a disproportionate rate. We also know that there have been instances where trans people are met with violence and assault when disclosing their trans status before having sex with a new partner, understandably, many trans people choose to not disclose their trans history.

In the cases that I've read about where a trans person didn't disclose that they were not the sex they appeared to be and violence ensued, it was after sexual activity had taken place, and a heterosexual man felt that he had been duped into having sex with another man. The time to disclose is before sexual activity so that the other person can consent, or decide not to go ahead.

Why on earth do they think that the best course of action, if a person might not want to have sex with them if they know the truth, is to withhold the truth?

Why on earth do they think that the best course of action, if a person might not want to have sex with them if they know the truth, is to withhold the truth?

Seems strange doesn't it. They either are taking the chance that they can get away with it without the other person finding out, or maybe they just think in principle that they are the sex they identify with, and other people don't have any right to know their biology.

You're over analysing. It's simpler.

The penis doesn't plan. The penis wants. The brain is essentially Jeeves to the penis' Wooster. It does its best to mitigate and get out of the situations the penis gets its owner into. But it's not in charge.

The penis doesn't plan. The penis wants.

Does transplanted arm tissue grow its own willpower - "Take the airpump and inflate me now, you mere human attachment"? Or does being hopped up on anabolic steroids stop people thinking responsibly?

But anyway there don't seem to be any penises or steroids in the Georgia Bilham case. Just belief or entitlement.

The part of my post that was quoted here wasn't clear out of context - too many instances of 'they' and 'them' referring to different parties. The first 'they' (Why on earth do they think that the best course of action) was referring to the LGBT foundation statement quoted in my post:

do trans people actually have the right to hold the details of their trans histories private or must a disclosure happen before engaging in sex with new partners? ... We also know that there have been instances where trans people are met with violence and assault when disclosing their trans status before having sex with a new partner, understandably, many trans people choose to not disclose their trans history.

Nothing to do with penises being in charge. It's the LGBT foundation suggesting that disclosure of sex before a sexual encounter might be dangerous for the trans person, when in fact, from the several murders of transwomen (when a male partner becomes aware of an unexpected penis during sex), it is obviously far more dangerous not to disclose.

And in the cases being discussed here, which are when women have posed as men, it's the lack of a penis which is the issue. I'm not sure this lack of penis is quite as sentient as the actual penises you refer to.

I'm not sure this lack of penis is quite as sentient as the actual penises you refer to.

I'm sure it's not

Actually I expect that disclosing trans status to a male partner at any stage is dangerous to the trans person. And not disclosing trans status to a female partner is dangerous to the female partner, while disclosing trans status to a female partner isn't dangerous to a trans person.

Although the female partner might then do that terrible dangerous destructive thing called "saying no". A refusal often offends, which is why female partners do need to be aware of a potential partner's trans status before they are alone with them.