To be annoyed by tra hyperbole around supreme court judgment

[mids2019]

Just a bit tired of reasoned coherent argument that biological sex gives rights being met with trans people giving the impression a considered ruling clarifying existing law is somehow akin to a personal attack or the announcement of laws in 1930s Germany. So many trans people saying they are scared or fearful of 'dark days to come'.....why? It seems without counterargument tra are trying to give the vague impression of an oppressive society gradually obliterating the 'most fragile of oppressed groups'. The judgment actually reinforced general inability to discriminate for fs.

A judge has simply defined a women for the purposes of law and taken no rights away from any person but indeed reinforced existing rights for 50% of the population which was needed.

Is the MCW initialism I keep seeing Men Cosplaying Women? If so, I am drawn to that in some contexts.

I have. That's why I'm a terf. Duh.

It would be so helpful to us in our endless quest to educate ourselves if you could point us to the peer-reviewed Nobel Prize level research that explains the mechanism that turns a man into a woman, or vice versa. They say the magic words 'I identify as ...', yes, but I'm afraid anybody could do that, and not really mean it. Isla Bryson, Karen White and other male convicted sex offenders have found it very convenient to be able to say that and get put in a female prison as a result, but of course politicians have explained to us that they know those people aren't really trans. Maybe they got Layla Moran to go and have a look into their souls. Maybe she's training up others to do the same thing.

Thankfully the Supreme Court ruling has more impact.

Sex is binary and women does not include men.

Agreed.

Dear me.

@SinnerBoy I'm beginning to think that you're actually a 5th Columnist, surely no one could really believe such a load of mad old bollocks like that?

That, a troll, or someone with a humiliation fetish. At first I thought he was a trans woman who was distraught about the ruling. He waltzed in and began mansplaining everything (even lesbians to lesbians!!) to us poor, uneducated women. But he keeps repeating the same tired arguments, even after we've rejected them. He's misinformed and arrogant and doesn't change his arguments even when it's apparent that those arguments alienate the ppl here.

I've only seen him say things that are clearly false or appeal to emotion. Someone who was actually upset about the ruling wouldn't continue to lecture other posters when that behavior is turning more people against his supposed cause.

When all fails, resort to the thought terminating cliches.

Exactly right, sex and gender aren't the same thing. Transwomen aka trans identified males, can only be men. Their sex class is male, their gender, for those that believe such a thing exists, is whatever they decide it is and they can dress and present however they like.
All that has happened this week is that a boundary has been clarified in law, clearing up confusion. This is a good thing.
Why are TRAs hating on women instead of tackling the issue of why transwomen don't feel safe with men? TRAs have spent so long and so much effort on tackling an issue that didn't exist until they created it.
Time to pivot surely? Time to redirect energy towards tackling misogyny and male violence so that everyone can feel safer? Instead of continuing to try to make it women's problem to fix?

I don’t know about this. I am good with non gender conforming people being protected from discrimination which is, I think, a consequence of protecting gender reassignment. I have seen butch women and feminine men experience discrimination

So you admit the problem is cis men pretending to be trans and not genuine trans people

But it wasn’t required. As the case summary states.. [Trans people].. are able to invoke the provisions on direct discrimination and harassment, and indirect discrimination on the basis of sex. In the light of case law interpreting the relevant provisions, a trans woman can claim sex discrimination because she is perceived to be a woman. A certificated sex reading is not required to give this protection [248]-[263].

No, I say that the problem is male violence and that to keep out the violent and predatory men from places where women and children are vulnerable we keep all males out, and that includes those who say they are trans or non-binary. If you know how to infallibly identify honest, gentle people on sight, you must share this valuable knowledge with us. Nobody else ever has.

Ahhhh, but you're not allowed to allege that somebody isn't 'genuine' trans, as that's apparently transphobic (but what isn't?)! So, in order to safeguard all women and girls, we say that all men have to stay out of their spaces. That's how it works.

Tell me what test you use to ascertain if somebody is 'genuine trans' or not (hint: we can't wait until they commit a crime).

I don't think you understand safeguarding!

But how do you tell the difference when they look the same?

I hope you’re not being transphobic enough to say that trans women who declare there transness shouldn’t automatically be believed?

is it no longer acceptance without exception??

how bigoted of you

Transphobe! Acceptance without exception!

Goodness, no. I’d imagine that most (if not all) women think it good and proper that all women are protected under their immutable sex. Even a woman who identifies as a transman remains biologically a woman, so should be covered according to their female sex.

I sincerely hope that we can all recognise it is good that transmen (women who identify as men) will have correct medical treatment, appropriate to their sex. Although it appears to be somewhat dishonest if they swear to live as a male (forever and ever), and then get pregnant before you can say ‘Jack Robinson’. It does show though, how these biological women should have the protection accorded to their sex. However, it rather makes a nonsense of seeking rights in relation to a sex which you do not belong, and in lieu of your real sex.

Just my opinion.

People who pass for the other gender will likely quietly live as the other gender as they did before. What is less likely though is obvious trans women/ autogynephilic men in our spaces.

People who firmly believe that anyone is a woman if they say they are can they answer this question.

You say the issue is not trans women but men pretending to be trans women. If a man is a woman on the basis of self id without the need for surgery, hormones or even needing to look female how can you tell the difference between a non passing genuine trans woman and a man pretending to be a trans woman to access spaces where vulnerable women are?

I think it’s laughable that they are saying it’s a win for the patriarchy. They cannot admit that women don’t want to share spaces with them. And the argument about trans women being a tiny minority, yes exactly! Why are we meant to capitulate to such a small minority group over something so important to women?

I wonder how the judgment is going to impact schools and the culture within schools. Guidance has become a lot clearer for the protection of girls/womens sports and spaces and I am hoping this will include schools.

I do actually have sympathy for some school leaders who will have to continue to battle accusations of transphobia, lack of inclusivity and aberration of duty of care when they make decisions about toilet provision and sport for instance.

If sex and gender aren’t the same thing, then nothing has been taken from trans people under the protected characteristics of Sex, under the EA2010. So what’s the issue, exactly?

Funnily enough, all men have been excluded from women's spaces for our safety, privacy, and dignity.

Which includes all transwomen, pretend or otherwise.

Yes but short of genital checks we aren't going to know about those who genuinely pass unless they get their willy out. There are trans women and trans men who do pass - they will I am sure continue to use the gendered spaces they align with.

Trevor Philips has laid bare the deceit and bad faith at the heart of the legislation.

https://www.thetimes.com/article/4039df92-15a2-48e8-a73f-aca8dad25d0b?shareToken=fac9197f0581a79518d1234d5ae195e5

When parliament debated the 2010 Equality Act, the extreme activist organisations and their agents in the civil service and government deliberately avoided revealing their true aim. Their strategy was to force authorities to adopt informal policies and practices that undermined the law on sex, race, religion and belief, in the hope of creating an alternative reality that would eventually force legislators to adopt their fantasies.

archive

archive.ph/vyqjy