The pope says 'gender theory' causes divisions

[ArabellaScott]

'Peace requires respect for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Attempts to introduce new rights, which are not always acceptable, lead to instances of ideological colonization that create divisions rather than fostering peace, as in the case of gender theory.'

https://twitter.com/Pontifex/status/1746147585331703936

'there is no single experience of "what a female feels". There's no universal internal or external experience that is experienced by all women or only women. So which particular female would they have to feel like in order to feel like a woman in a way that would be authentic to you? That isn't something that's quantifiable.'

Periods, pregnancy and birth. All are only experienced by women. That's three experiences.

Why is a subjective, unverifiable, unfalsifiable feeling of relevance to anyone else?

I think this is the heart of the matter here, could you at least attempt an answer please @PrawnLiberationFront?

And the Vatican has an Academy of Science, and an observatory.

Giving birth, obvs. We all experience birth as birthee. 😀

13% of the Scottish population are Catholic according to the last census.

Do you always twist everything beyond all recognition to try to score points?

Been away for a few pages, and now I can't find the answer to why we should be legislating for "feelings" about sex. Pointers welcome...

Oh hold on a sec. Sorry I missed out the most crucial part. The ladyfeeling men have - which is based on feeling like a woman, but not a specific woman, like women's ladyfeelings - also means that the man is a woman. Like, an actual sexwoman, not just a genderwoman.
Sorry about that. I'm new to this.

dear oh dear Arabella, you mentioned reproduction, Prawn will be right back at you with infertile and post menopausal women

Gosh no, newt. That would be basic logic. Not all women experience those things but only women experience those things.

You beat me to it...I would also add fgm, being beaten for not wearing a headscarf in Iran, being shot for trying to get an education in Afghanistan, being forced into sexual slavery in far too many areas to note, being killed as a baby for being the wrong sex in China, being arrested for leaving the house without a male relative in several countries, being disinherited by your younger brother in the UK.

So far we have a claim that there's no universal female feelings but men's feelings are authentically female and the popes a catholic and did we mention that bears shit in the woods?

If there's no authentication necessary for authenticity am I expected to believe it? What has authenticity become?

Why is a subjective, unverifiable, unfalsifiable feeling of relevance to anyone else?

Not just that, but a feeling that is by definition wrong. It's a feeling (or possibly perception or belief) that doesn't match material reality. A sense of gender identity which doesn't accord with the believer's sex.

Why should that false belief, however genuinely and strongly felt, override the reality which it does not match?

I think I found the ladyfeels!

Helen Joyce has recently been talking about gender identity beliefs potentially failing Grainger criterion 5 - ("It must be worthy of respect in a democratic society, be not incompatible with human dignity and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others") - and examples like the goings on at Edinburgh Rape Relief exhibit the problem there.

But threads like this make me wonder - are we really passing criterion 4 at this stage? "It must attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance." 🤔

But threads like this make me wonder - are we really passing criterion 4 at this stage? "It must attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance."

I've thought that for a while, especially when it comes to neopronouns or "stargender" or whatever.

Taking your arguments in good faith, @PrawnLiberationFront - you say that trans people have a perception of their sex that's at odds with their sexed body. But they don't actually believe this, do they? Like, they don't look down at their male body and see a female one? They know what their actual sex is at all times. What you're describing isn't a perception, but a preference - they would prefer to be the opposite sex, they wish they had been born male/female, and so on. And that's fine - I mean, we all wish we were different in some way, whether that's in age or beauty or even race. But there's no convincing argument as to why this particular subset of "people who aren't 100% happy with how they are" should be granted privileges that the rest of us aren't - and privileges, moreover, that infringe on the rights of other people. Except that they've shouted a lot louder.

Not just that they’ve shouted louder - despite all their claims and counter factual arguments, most of them have penis-privilege so their made-up fantasy ladyfeelz obviously trump our sex-based rights derived from biological reality.

If the Pope was the one pushing the idea that some people needed massive amounts of surgery and medication to change sex, sending priests into schools to tell kids that their parents are evil if they disagree, lobbying for males to compete in women’s sport because of a belief they were women - I think GC women would still be in the same spot. Ie Working for safeguarding of women and children.

As an atheist it seems some want a belief in gender identity and gender expression is to be protected and taken seriously but think a belief in religion or religious expression is open for scorn and jokes. It’s bizarre.

But even if we accept that there’s some inner feeling of womanhood that some men share with women (despite having no real frame of reference for it) why does that mean that people with such differing biological bodies need to share changing rooms etc yet it’s a no no for people with differing bodies AND internal senses of self?

(I’m sorry that so confusing to read)

Helen Joyce has recently been talking about gender identity beliefs potentially failing Grainger criterion 5

That's really interesting. How can they be worthy of respect if no one can explain them?

Imagine this all being explored by a good lawyer in the clear light of an employment tribunal.

Well we don't have to imagine anymore.

True!

Yes, let's hope that the latest ET requires explanation of how someone who is legally and physically male can be female.

What is the meaning of true authentic?
authentic, genuine, bona fide mean being actually and exactly what is claimed. authentic implies being fully trustworthy as according with fact; an authentic account of the perilous journey. it can also stress painstaking or faithful imitation of an original.

But apparently there is no original.

I read about the diminishment of authenticity years ago, about the adoption of it as a mantra in the age of social media where it's anything but.

Prawn seems to epitomise this shallow diminishment of a human value, by not even being able to recall that it was the basic prop she held up to support her claims barely a couple of hours later.