Trans former judge to take government to ECHR

[CervixSampler]

Trans former judge is taking the government to the European Court of Human Rights over SC ruling

You don't sound bored, you sound fuming

I had been willing to take your comments as in good faith, but your behaviour since then has shown that they were not. FlakyCritic has been no more rude and offensive than you. I did not assume that you had the same viewpoint as mine; it seemed unlikely, but as you started out polite and respectful I defended you until you stopped being polite and respectful.

Calling me a terf is amusing. I am not trans exclusionary, I am not radical, and I am not arrogant enough to honour myself with the title "feminist". To explain that last point a little, I am a man with a lot of respect for women but as a man I don't think I can be any more than an ally to feminists. In reality, I don't even support every feminist position, but I do support women's right to their own words to describe themselves, and to their own spaces, and their right to stand up for their own interests.

Very few people can pull that "I'm so detached from this boring and irrelevant discussion that you hate full bigots waste so much time on I'm practically floating in a hot air balloon at the edge of space, I'm just amusing myself by taunting you guys from my lofty heights of coolness" manoeuvre off convincingly. It takes style and panache both sadly missing here.

I hate to tell you this, but Clive Lewis MP used the term "hermaphrodite" in all seriousness on Politics Live last week 🤦‍♀️

What a mad statement by Stonewall!
Not only is the ruling law, it has been since the EA2010 came into force. If organisations wait, they will be knowingly acting unlawfully.

Statutory guidance is guidance on the law, it's not going to contradict what the law says. Or shouldn't. And if there is conflict, the law obviously trumps the statutory guidance.

Edited for clarity

Roxietrees · Yesterday 22:20

Again, just proving my point about you terfs shouting down those who doesn’t agree with you, you’re just as bad as TRAs.

Where "shouting down" is presenting facts, which run counter to what you laughingly describe as "an argument. "

Literally impossible to have any kind of reasonable discussion because you’re so unreasonable.

It's not unreasonable to point out exactly how and why you're spouting pure mince on toast. Disagreeing with you doesn't make us unreasonable, especially not when presenting you with actual facts, with which you disagree, even though you confess to not knowing of what you speak.

I hate to tell you this, but Clive Lewis MP used the term "hermaphrodite" in all seriousness on Politics Live last week

Just being an MP doesn't stop him spouting rubbish.

A clear sign he is only listening to activists.

Akua Reindorf is patiently putting out to the general public that a lot of mis information is being spread.

She's been kind enough so far not to get more explicit, but at this point she and Baroness Faulkner must be about ready to go nuclear. It is in many ways a plus that the crazy is in full splurge while the guidance is being written; so many loopholes can now be anticipated and shut down in the text.

Someone will be made an example of and will get stung BADLY.

Oh, definitely, he also wheeled out the "1.7% of people are intersex" stat

I know, it’s so very “internet try hard”.

I don't know that I have seen it done well, tbh.

But I feel like if it was, decent SPAG would be a key component.

Ageist as well as sexist. You sound lovely.
Like to hit any more of the bigotry bingo card items?

I think the idea is supposed to be that nobody can know their sex, so sex is irrelevant to law. This is very obviously not true, so doesn't get you anywhere.

To argue that people are both male and female you have to use two different methods to categorise sex - so e.g. somebody with Swyers is genetically male and phenotypically female - but somebody with Swyers has no working gonads - that is why they are phenotypically female. It's an anomaly that can't be generalised.

Even if you wanted to argue that medical treatment can create a condition that is similar to a disorder of sexual development, the ECtHR has already made it clear that such a treatment could not be mandated to obtain a GRC.

It's not clear why the SC decision is supposed to have changed the status of somebody with Swyers who would be registered as female at birth, and it's not clear why they are helped by arguing that their situation is the same as a father of 3 who announces in later life that he is a trans woman.

NHS Fife

"Pick me!" is the term I believe

@Merrymouse

"I think the idea is supposed to be that nobody can know their sex, so sex is irrelevant to law."

Anecdotically: I actually know my chromosomal sex! I got my DNA tested by two different labs for personal reasons. Unsurprisingly, it came back XX. I mean, I've been pregnant and given birth to a child, so I kinda expected it :D

More seriously: this doesn't make any sense! The whole point of being trans is that you feel like your body is the wrong sex. Being trans literally depends on having a determined sex! So all this talk about DSDs is entirely irrelevant to being trans, on top of being appropriative, and I really wish so-called allies would stop bringing it up.

And despite being shown to be utterly wrong about something as fundamental as DSDs, this poster doesn't seem to even tentatively question if they might be wrong on other stuff as well.

There was a small statue of Hermaphroditus at the Lady Lever Art Gallery in Port Sunlight. I've not been for decades and should really go again. It's not currently on display

https://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/artifact/statuette-of-standing-hermaphrodite

The blue haired have been at the description, bless. But clearly hermaphrodite can exist. You just need to be the son of two gods, get assaulted by a nymph, who prays to the gods (unspecified) to never be separated from you. The said gods were on glue happy to oblige, although i suspect malicious compliance.

Fairly straightforward procedure I'd say. I'm surprised we're not finding them on every street corner.

Apologies for the unsolicited dick pic. I can't put a sensitivity filter on it.

The key is not to actually think about it (as demonstrated by so many male podcasters).

Funnily enough, a much bigger proportion of people these days do know their chromosomal sex, thanks to non-invasive prenatal testing. In Australia around 25-50% of pregnant women get NIPT, and the available evidence suggests about 75% of these include sex chromosome testing. So parents of maybe a quarter of all the children born would know their chromosomal sex before birth. As NIPT gets cheaper and more widely adopted, that may be even higher.

Oh dear, I'm now waiting for some woolly headed spoon to claim that there ARE human hermaphrodites, because Cakey has posted a picture of an anatomically correct, actual human historical figure...

Yes, this is true.

1.8 people per 10,000 have a DSD, and it seems like most of those discover this when they are told during childhood or adolesence.

So if you ask 10,000 adults their chromosomes I would argue that there is a very good chance that 9,998 of them would "guess" correctly that they were XX or XY, and the other 2 would know for a fact what their chromosomes were and what DSD they had.

So you know what, for all intents and purposes we all know our chromosomal sex.