Reframe your disappointment

[MissScarletInTheBallroom]

Inspired by a couple of other threads about the reaction to the Supreme Court judgment from trans allies, I thought it might be interesting to have a thread to discuss what to say to people if it comes up in conversation.

Comments I've seen so far seem to suggest:

• the judgment was legally wrong and this isn't the end
• the judgment might have been legally correct but it was morally wrong and the law needs to be changed
• trans rights are now being rolled back
• this is a victory for the far right
• this was orchestrated and bank rolled by the far right
• this decision will now embolden transphobes to harass and victimise trans people

Perhaps we could brainstorm the best ways to respond to these (and any other) talking points, should they arise?

The law isn't about being nice
Well said, RedToothBrush , this is* *such an important point.
It would be a bit boring on a T-shirt, otherwise it's a great slogan😃

The horrors of what Naomi Cunningham phrased as Conspicuously Law Abiding Women.

I still make sounds like Mutley when I hear that line. She's brilliant.

Interesting. So Transwomen, in your opinion, are transitioning/have transitioned from men by way of GRS? So, it follows that you don’t regard those that choose not to go the way of GRS as Transwomen then? They’re still men as far as you are concerned?

Source?

Yes this. And when they wail and gnash their teeth about trans rights being eroded, I would dearly like them to explain which rights exactly they think are being eroded (other than the ‘right’ for male bodies to impose themselves on womens’ spaces). Although obviously we’ve tried all the attempts to calmly and logically debate the issue in a reasoned manner and that never ever worked. As an aside it was very refreshing therefore for the judgment to repeatedly reference the ‘incoherence’ of interpreting ‘women’ and ‘sex’ in any other way than the plain old English language way.

Why don’t they have a womb? Is it a medical condition or is it because they are just men? Some of which have already fathered children, many of which can still get a woman pregnant?

I have genuinely no idea - mainly because I don’t usually make other people’s reproductive systems my business.

My mum hasn’t got one, she was born female but she’s had a hysterectomy, wouldn’t ask her either.

Sure, it’s a complete mystery why a man doesn’t have a womb.

This point could be particularly useful if the subject comes up when talking to Americans, because they may not understand that our judiciary is completely independent of our political system and made up of experienced judges who interpret our laws impartially, not like in the US where Donald Trump gets to stuff the Supreme Court full of his batshit crazy friends. We actually have a grown up legal system and so what the Supreme Court says carries weight and can be trusted.

Not just, or even mainly, Donald Trump.

It's the main approach of Democrat judges is to push political positions in their judgments - to do precisely the opposite of what happened in this judgement in the UK- they look at the constitution and try and figure out how to use it to support modern issues that it's writers never would have thought of, or would have opposed.

Typically it's the conservative judges who will argue that the proper role of the judiciary is to say within a more natural reading or extension of the constitution and laws.

A lot of Marxists these days are not materialists. They are, like all identity politics followers, believers in immaterial essences.

I'm from the 80's. I can't recall that being a thing. Obviously there were lesbophobic women back then just as there are today. I certainly can't recall an era of straight women getting harassed by lesbians in changing rooms.
The only time I ever chatted anyone up/got chatted up was in the toilets of a gay bar. And even that was rare.

20+ years ago I could go to a gay bar knowing that I would only meet real lesbian women and not be approached by 'lesbians' with penis accusing me of transphobia if I don't want their dick.
Today there are no penis free lesbian bars and women who have attempted to create lesbian women only spaces have been targeted and shut down.

20+ years ago I could go on a lesbian dating site and only encounter biologically female women.
Today on lesbian dating sites, every 5th profile is a middle aged man trussed up in frilly underwear and suspenders, and if I specify that I'm interested only in biological females, I get banned.

Which sounds more hateful and homophobic to you?

The fear of AIDS and the homophobia back then was real..I doubt anyone would deny that. But I was more able to meet and associate exclusively with other women , than I am today.

Were you actually there in the 80's or have you only selectively read about it?

Then they're not Marxists.

Really? You have “genuinely no idea” why a man doesn’t have a womb?
Can’t reason with this shit.

Yes the performative stupidity does my head in

Careful now, you see how the debate is "toxic on both sides"

Rude.

In the post you’re all piling on, someone asked whether I’d ask a trans woman to surrogate for me. I said, no that would make no sense as they don’t have wombs - so that would be silly.

I actually highlighted in the reply to that poster that said lack of womb is the difference between a female, and a trans woman.

Some of us believe that there is a biological difference between male and female, but that that isn’t the summing up of our identity.

I am female, biologically born as such, but it’s frankly rude to assume we all think that having a uterus is a defining feature of our womanhood.

Gender identity is real, some identify with their biological sex and some don’t - FWIW I do. But I don’t assume that everyone does, and I don’t discriminate against those who don’t. Some of you should try it sometime.

If you want to be no more than a reproductive system and your biology, do that, but don’t assume that those of us are more than that are stupid.

Some of us believe that there is a biological difference between male and female, but that that isn’t the summing up of our identity.

Tip to help your confusion.

'Male' and 'female' are words for creatures' sexes, not their identities.

HTH

Is anyone saying a uterus is a defining feature of womanhood?
I think the point is that not all women have wombs, but only women can have them.
Pointing this out isn't reducing women to their biology.

I’m an infertile woman so I’m extremely well aware that my womanhood is not remotely linked to my ability to give birth because I can’t. However I remain a woman not a man

if you seriously think that GC women think that an ability to reproduce is thd only thing that makes a woman a woman then you have not been paying any attention

tje only way to be a woman is to be born a juvenile human female and to grow into an adult human female. That is it! That’s literally all it is

have you hsir long or short or shave it off, wear make up or don’t, wear dresses, trousers, shorts a chicken suit if you want, be a lumberjack or a train driver or a nurse or an astronaut. Be whatever the hell you want

it is trans ideology that has force fed society with the utterly regressive idea that pink and long hair and dresses = woman. I am baffled that anyone can think that is positive

gender critical means being critical of gender stereotypes and the biggest proponents of gender stereotypes are TRA

Tip for the confused.

I know.

Male and female describe biological sex.

Man and woman, IMO, describe gender identities - which are quite often informed by social constructs of what those things are.

If gender isn’t real, there are whole university courses that need getting rid of, whole philosophical and cultural pieces of writing that apparently just don’t exist.

I genuinely do not understand how you can just reject gender identity like it’s not real - it quite clearly is.

Reposting because this bears repeating, over and over!

I genuinely do not understand how you can just reject gender identity like it’s not real - it quite clearly is.

Also see:

I genuinely do not understand how you can just reject God like He’s not real - He quite clearly is.

You can't make us share your faith and nor can the law.

Man and woman, IMO, describe gender identities - which are quite often informed by social constructs of what those things are.

Clearly false, as demonstrated by translation dictionaries between languages, which rely on the common meaning of 'adult human female' to associate each language's word for woman.

I genuinely do not understand how you can just reject gender identity like it’s not real - it quite clearly is.

Some uses of the word 'gender' are valid and meaningful, but the concept of 'gender identity' as used by genderists is circular to the point of meaninglessness.

So I don't even know what it is you are saying is real.

This helped me understand that I was right in thinking there was nothing there, years ago. Don't think it's been topped.

Critically Examining the doctrine of gender identity - Rebecca Reilly-Cooper

Nobody is trying to make you do anything.

It is however fairly toxic (as someone tried to joke about above) to call people stupid because they don’t agree with your view.