Canadian Court imposes $750k fine for not believing in gender ideology

[Igmum]

What is this madness? https://x.com/HJoyceGender/status/2024566072066683251

In the same way that some people believe an omnipotent being created them, they have a soul inside them and that they will live an eternity with that being, there are people who believe that gender is not defined by physiology. You are man/woman/both/neither if you believe you are. Gender and sex are not necessarily correlated and are not the deciding factor. Your inner feelings are the deciding factor.

I guess you could see it as the equivalent to believing you have a soul and that the soul rather than your body is your true essence and what defines your humanity. For those who believe in GI, their inner gender essence, rather than their body, is what defines their gender.

I think...

Quickening is something no male can ever feel.

Where do I start??
OK, your starter for 10: female puberty.
[eta for clarity: 'the feeling of experiencing....']

If woman doesn't mean "female" then whatever they're feeling, they wouldn't know if other women felt that, or if it was related in any way to being a woman, unless they were clear which kind of people women are.

So far we know that women-gender people are people who are male or female - but then so are men-gender, NB, agender, etc. There must be some way of differentiating these people - yet they never say what it is because it would be clear it's based on sexist stereotypes and offensive concepts of masculinity and femininity

In the context of the discussion.
That people of either sex feel and know that it means you're a woman.

Eta - the post I quoted - it was in my post - specified people who are physically male yet felt female.

Do keep up, wims!

I think you're saying something other than what I thought you were saying - you're playing devil's advocate a bit, aren't you? I took your q about feelings at face value, sorry.

There is a very simple way of defining these people. They tell you what their inner essence tells them and you accept it. Same way as a religious person will tell you which religion they believe in and you accept it. You are just making this way more complicated than it needs to be.

Look, a squirrel!!!!

I'm not playing devil's avocado or anything of the sort.. I'm trying to get the people who constantly claim male people "feel female" to articulate even one such feeling.

The closest anyone has come is a trans man on here who has opened up admirably - yet it's still basically a mystery to me, some perception of the body. (And for them, not really to do with inner gender identity as some have it).

It's fascinating for sure, and if "trans' still meant having strong gender dysphoria from a young age and it was clearly about the sex of the body and not femmemascgenderfeels, then I would likely still be sympathetic.

This is genuinely horrifying. Has he actually paid it?

What is their inner essence saying that makes them think they are female?

Female, or women? Because to say the two are the same is against the law in Canada...

Anyway, as others have said, this is akin to saying people who don't believe Jesus died for your sins don't believe Christians exist. Just a primary-school level of logic.

Sorry again, in that case!😄

I'm not unsympathetic towards people who have deep feelings about an important aspect of themselves which are demonstrably, factually wrong.
I'm even less unsympathetic towards young people who have been sold the lie that they can 'transition' out of their biological sex.

I had what is called 'gender dysphoria' [a contested concept I accept] so I can be very sympathetic to others who feel the same way.
My experience tells me that the sympathetic way to act is not to reinforce those feelings, but to be honest about biological reality, and to provide support towards accepting their body for what it is.

#becruel to #bekind - well not cruel of course, but very honest and direct: this is the sex you were born with, and there's no changing it, so how can we help you accept who you are and grow up strong and confident in the body you were born with, which has nothing wrong with it, and don't let anybody tell you it's wrong!'

That's being sympathetic, in my opinion.

In the good old medieval days saying you didn't believe in God got you burnt at the stake for heresy, the Catholic church were after the soul. In postmodernist Canada saying you don't believe in GI gets you a big, big fine, it seems the GI's don't care about the soul they just want the money, money, money.

As for 'gender non conforming' - don't get me started. Who the fuck decided there was anything to 'conform' to and has popped along to impose it? Women are just women, short hair, long hair, parking or no parking, tears or no tears, nurturing or completely disinterested, skirts or jeans.

The whole 'I am non conforming' essentially means 'I am stuffing you in this rigid box and reducing you to nothing more than the box so that I can identify as out of your box and be more exciting than you'.

It's sad. I am absolutely over any sympathy for this shit, it's not the territory of the mentally and emotionally well or successful.

I am asking what is their inner essence saying to them in order to try and get TRAs to identify exactly what it is they think makes them a woman/adult human female. No answer yet.

Absolutely Marie.... the idea that we see people saying "but I don't think I, as a person, am similar to what society says a man is/a woman is" ... we don't unpick the labels and expose them as ridiculous and wrong, we say "ah, sorry kid, in that case there are all sorts of things wrong with your body, and how you look is going to be key to your mental health in future".

It's compelled belief and thought control

You will believe in 'made up nonsense' because we will punish you if you don't.

It's 1984 :

On Forced Reality: "The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command".

On Doublethink: "In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it".

It doesn't actually matter what the forced belief is - it could be anything - religion, flat earth, gender ideology.

It's that you are compelled to 'believe' and punished if you don't.

You are no longer allowed to make up your own mind about what you believe.

Yes. They are enforcing it just to show everyone that they can.

Oh no! Poor Christopher Lambert.

@CassOle It's worse than that - it's about to happen to Henry Cavill - poor chap. (but it's okay because they're only pretending)

It is deeply worrying.

Even more so that even by its own lights, the logic in the judgement does not stand.

Transpeople are, by definition, people “whose gender identity does not align with the sex assigned to them at birth”: Hansman at para. 12. If a person elects not to “believe” that gender identity is separate from sex assigned at birth, then they do not “believe” in transpeople. This is a form of existential denial: Oger (No. 7) at para. 61. It is not, as Mr. Neufeld argues, akin to religious beliefs. A person does not need to believe in Christianity to accept that another person is Christian. However, to accept that a person is transgender, one must accept that their gender identity is different than their sex assigned at birth.

The bolded test presupposes that gender identity exists, and therefore it is impossible that any logic based on that axiom could ever find it didn't. It does not, however, prove that gender identity exists, because that assertion is made outside the logic.

Valid logic would be:

Transpeople are, by definition, people “who believe they have a gender identity that does not align with the sex assigned to them at birth”. If a person elects not to “believe” that gender identity exists, then they do not “believe” that transpeople are correct in that belief. Just as a person does not need to believe in Christianity to accept that another person is Christian, a person can accept that a person is transgender because they believe they have a gender identity which is different than their sex assigned at birth.

This is not a form of existential denial.. It is akin to religious beliefs.

or

Transpeople are people who define themselves as "people whose gender identity that does not align with the sex assigned to them at birth”. If a person elects not to “believe” that gender identity exists then they simple believe that transpeople are mistaken. This is akin to religious beliefs. A person does not need to believe in Christianity to accept that another person is Christian, and a person does not need to believe in gender identity to accept a person is transgender.

Interestingly, it's exactly the same as a trivial example I was taught at school as a demonstration of bad logic:

"God is perfect.
To be truly perfect a thing must exist.
Therefore, God exists"

The flaw is that in saying "God is perfect", one presupposes that God exists. "is" - the present form of the verb "to be". The logically valid statement would be "God, if she/he exists, is perfect" or "God, as conceived, is perfect".

I cannot believe an educated judge fell into such a trivial error, and therefore the judge must be knowingly making a false comparison. It is disgusting and despicable.

And it is going to immediately fall down when faced with a person who does not believe they have a gender identity and therefore does not accept being defined as "the same" as an opposite sex transgender person, because the same legal ruling would need to be applied in that scenario (if you do not accept my self reported identity you are saying I do not exist), which directly undermines the first.

Gender identity is part of the belief system. It is only relevant as a concept to those who believe.

To other people it's just words that have no meaning.

Unfortunately it has been accepted into too many public structures - NHS, education etc as though it is something real and uncontroversial. How to get it out again is a real task.

The phrasing around electing to believe is very revealing.

It's both a demand to turn off your critical faculties when they may lead you to a conclusion that isn't in line with the 'right' belief and inadvertently shows the extent to which trans ideology isn't about what you really think, but what you present yourself as thinking.

It clearly highlights how it is TRAs and allies are comfortable with portraying anyone who doesn't share their views on reality as ethically lacking. There is, for them, a right conclusion and a wrong one, and you freely choose which to align yourself to. Critical thinking doesn't enter into it.

In fact, that whole passage cited above is indicative of someone who not only hasn't interrogated any of these concepts themselves but blithely assumes everyone else is on the same page. The whole very thorny concept of 'gender identity' is skimmed over as though it were a simple idea commonly shared and understood.

The alternative, of course, is that this judge knows full well what they're doing. I.e. the usual TRA thing of presenting difficult (you might even say impossible) concepts as both blindingly obvious and inevitably leading to a single morally correct conclusion.

The alternative, of course, is that this judge knows full well what they're doing. I.e. the usual TRA thing of presenting difficult (you might even say impossible) concepts as both blindingly obvious and inevitably leading to a single morally correct conclusion.

..or that they got AI to write it😁