Munroe Bergdorf in the Observer

[LittleBitofBread]

I was intending to read this article, in the spirit of keeping an open and non-judgemental mind, but couldn’t get past the line ‘On 16 April the UK Supreme Court ruled that the legal definition of “sex” is based on biological sex assigned at birth’.

Fuck’s sake. Can they genuinely not help themselves, or are they deliberately trolling people?

https://observer.co.uk/news/profile/article/munroe-bergdorf-meets-the-momentObserver

From the crown of his head to his little toe, MB is totally fake.

biological sex assigned at birth
And there was me thinking it was determined at conception.
What an idiot I am! Silly me!

Have an earworm 😊

Hoping this doesn't signal a shift in the Observer's editorial line on women's rights now they have a new owner.

Christ. How UNLUCKY to be sacked from three jobs because of nasty tweets/bad behaviour.

Clearly everyone is out to get Monroe 🙄🙄🙄

clearly it’s not Monroe’s fault. What an arse-licky article.

Also on this week’s episode of Fearne Cotton’s podcast.

Cor blimey, that was a lot of words to say very little. What a poor article which conveyed zero insights.

think I’ll be giving his book and film a miss

"Transwoman", model, activist, author...
Such a redundancy of fakeness for only one lifetime!

There’s a lot of mentions in the article of racism but there does seem to be irony there when you consider it’s coming from someone identifying as something they’re biologically not.

Outspoken and highly influential, the model, author and activist is a force for our times

Never heard of them - have I missed anything?

@LittleBitofBread which part of the observers description of the law lords decision do you disagree with?

sex cannot be assigned before birth can it? Can we assign any characteristics to a foetus? Sex can be assumed prior to birth of course. But do we take DNA from a foetus? If so, I didn't know that.

and is DNA the only characteristic (or even the most important charactetistc) we allow a person.

there you go, I've dared to poke the bear.

Yes, you can take DNA from the foetus. It is in the mother's blood. The test is called NIPT.

Them appears to have missed the most important one:

Vicious, bullying gobshite. I wonder if them will request a correction?

Even easier, they look for a willy on the scans!

and is DNA the only characteristic (or even the most important charactetistc) we allow a person.and is DNA the only characteristic (or even the most important charactetistc) we allow a person.

From the perspective of evolution, yes DNA is the only thing that matters.

Sex isn’t assigned, it’s observed silly!

user1471453601 I had a midwife who could correctly identify the sex of the baby from the different sound of the heartbeat in the uterus via Doppler. Boys were more chugga chugga like a train and girls more badum badum. She was right but that's >30 years of experience for you. The sonographer was also correct in identifying the sex of the babies during scans. Actually viewing the baby at birth and observing the sex was the third time of confirming sex - I could have had blood tests while pregnant too, which would have made four times.

No one used a sorting hat to assign a sex. And no doctor went any where near the baby before the sex was recorded.

@user1471453601 sex is not assigned at any point. It is determined at conception, and never changes. It may be observed at birth, or may be measured sooner than that by various means (sometimes done to establish if the developing foetus has any congenital illnesses) or may need to be measured later if a disorder of sexual development has had a significant effect. Gender may develop a lot later, depending on how toxic a sexist culture the child grows up in, and is an entirely different phenomenon.

Sigh..... isn't it tiring trying to explain reality to the captured?

I could only read half of it, because I found it SO boringly narcissistic and uninteresting. What is the actual point of this man, other than to seek out discrimination at every turn about every aspect of himself? He’s a walking, talking cliche. Why are these people so unbearably obsessed with themselves? I bet he’s great fun at parties.

Polar, brown, or spectacled?

He’s been very active over the years. He worked with other vicious activists to cause the wonderful Baroness Nicholson (women’s rights campaigner both for UK women and Yezidi women) to be sacked, vilified and ostracised from her Vice President role of the Booker prize (established by her late husband).

He made a speech criticising women for talking about issues related to our bodies and had a group of lesbians banned from a Pride parade.

He was sacked by the NSPCC for breached safeguarding rules - inviting children to contact him privately and posing for sexualised pictures but such was a the power of the trans lobby, the BBC and others intervened on his behalf and the NSPCC ended up apologising.

There also other issues.

I presume they will be renaming The Observer. "The Assigner" seems appropriate.

Well, here's a little taster of what MB is like.

January saw the second annual Women’s March in major cities in the US and UK. Rightfully charged up in the wake of the #MeToo and #TimesUp movements, hundreds of thousands of women took to the streets to show a united front against abuse and harassment. But in among the banners, a well-intentioned yet misguided symbol of women’s equality was worn by protestors – the pink pussy hat. It might seem like a fun, inoffensive and light-hearted accessory, designed to unite women, but it feeds into a narrative that continues to push us apart. Last month, prior to the march I tweeted a reminder to those participating that it was an event for all women. I said, for the day to be truly progressive, it should focus on elevating the voices and experiences of those who are most often silenced and ignored in society. Guess who that means!

graziadaily.co.uk/life/opinion/munroe-bergdorf-women-getting-feminism-wrong/

The assigned at birth reference actually makes me very angry. It's irresponsible at best, and cynically seeking to undermine the law at worst.

If that's really what they ruled, then Imane Khelif is suffering a travesty of justice right now, and the Supreme Court supports males boxing females at the Olympics.

This misinformation matters.