Does anyone else feel disheartened?

[ItsCoolForCats]

I was so elated at the ruling and the implications for women's sex-based protections.

And I am happy that certain media outlets have realised (begrudgingly in some cases) that refusing to air the concerns of women over the last decade has lead to a very one-sided debate. It's great to see orgs such as Sex Matters being quoted so extensively now.

However, I'm really disheartened by the sheer scale of the push back and by the fact that so many women don't support the ruling. I mean, why would anyone think that women don't deserve fair and safe sporting opportunities, for example? Why is it always women that are expected to forgo their rights?

The Supreme Court ruling should be definitive, but it doesn't feel like the end. There is the judge bringing the case to the ECHR (I know some legal experts have dismissed any chances of success), but I think activists are going to pile a lot of pressure on the government to make concessions and look at amending the law. The disquiet about the ruling amongst so many Labour MPs about the ruling is concerning me.

Is anyone else feeling a bit dejected?

Getting the TRA bingo card out. I think we've had quite a few already. Does 'elimination' count as 'literal violence' do we think?

And does anyone have the updated version with genocide, shadowy right wing/Trump etc?

yup.

I don't see "genocide" on there.

You're lying. I went looking for that Declaration, and I searched for the word "elimination". It appears 13 times. The only time it's related to trans people is in the following paragraph:

"This should include the elimination of that act and practice of discrimination against women which comprises the inclusion of men who claim to have a female ‘gender identity’ in the category of women. Such inclusion erodes women’s rights to safety, dignity and equality."

This is not calling for the elimination of trans people as you said in a previous comment: " trans elimination has been the stated goal of Gender Critical / TE rad fem thinking for decades"

You're a big liar who lies.

Good luck, anyone going in. Give us a shout when you need a break for Tunnocks and we'll haul you out

I've been trans for 13 years.

I was in the community for years.

But THANK YOU so very much for demonstrating that you do NOT speak for all trans people, and that you exclude anyone within the trans "community" who doesn't follow the party line. That was brilliant! I couldn't have hoped for a more blatant example.

Dammit, now I've got an earworm

You've got to ac-cent-tu-ate the positive
E-lim-i-nate the negative
Latch on to the affirmative
Don't mess with Mr. In-Between

I posted a quote and a link to an informed and qualified analysis of the document, that lays things out exactly as I claim. Tell me what parts you dispute.

The same organisation also submitted this to Parliament. Their intentions are clear.

"an informed and qualified analysis"
😂😂

Your description of our community and especially the GRA stuff, was comical. You perform well.

The question on this thread is, underneath the jubilation you are so keen to demonstrate, are you feeling disheartened?

It’s almost like words have no meaning for some people.

The UN definition of genocide is

Definition
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group

https://www.un.org/en/genocide-prevention/definition

What national, ethnical, racial or religious group do "trans" identifying people belong to?

BTW Just repeating genocide over & over doesn't mean it's true.

Well when you've spent years gaslighting the population that men are now women, that the language of women is bigotry and that knowing that sex is binary is transphobic, the overreach is always plain to see.

Oh definitely @MrsOvertonsWindow

I don't care one bit about that analysis, because it wasn't the topic of your affirmation that ""The Declaration on Women's Sex-Based Rights" says otherwise. "Elimination" is the word they use." No, they don't. You lied.

What you're attempting right now is called moving the goalposts if I'm not mistaken. It's a dishonest tactic. But then you're a liar, so which by definition means you're dishonest, so it fits.

Please explain what is "comical" about describing my own ~lived experience~ among the trans community.

Please demonstrate that I am wrong about the GRA.

I won't be waiting, to be honest.

I do agree but do many positive examples of feet being held to the fire. I do think we just have to keep plugging away and put up with no bullshit.

Scoring cheap points off me doesn't change the message, you're just offering excuses to not engage with it.

Engage with some of the issues for women hon, then come back and do a bit more scolding ;)

Did anyone else's irony meter just explode as well?

Yup. So it’s pointed out @MadBadDaddy was spouting nonsense but apparently we’re baddies for pointing this out. I’d have thought he’d be relieved that no one was actually eliminating trans people.

If you hang round here longer you will realise that there are some very knowledgeable posters on this board who will fact check any assertions you make.
So you had better ensure that when you state something to be true that it is true.
By relying on someone else's incorrect interpretation/analysis of a document rather than reading it yourself and then calling it a 'cheap point' rather than appologising for being inaccurate, you do your argument no favours.

When a chap pops up on a women's rights forum to scold the wims (for having rights in this case), it's not usually about wanting any actual information.

Can I add “unraveled” in reference to a friendly welcoming thread, that’s still going on in a perfectly reasonable fashion?

Asking for a friend….

You have a message?