Cambridge University ignoring the Supreme Court ruling?

[yoursweetpotatoesarebland]

Dd is going to the Cambridge open day coming up, I got an email through about the colleges and was having a read through. There’s a section about “gender identity” and how it impacts on what colleges you can apply to. There are two women’s colleges but both accept anyone who identifies as a woman!

This is from Murray Edwards:
“At the admissions level, we will consider any student who, at the point of application, identifies as a woman“

How can this still be allowed? It’s self ID too so has NEVER been legal for the purposes of the eqA.

Didn’t they once declare having an interest in make up was a female ‘behaviour’.

it is incredibly superficial and really inappropriate.

Transmen seem to try to emulate teenage boys or young men in their early 20s, but only cool and trendy ones.

Not All Transmen :P Some of us try to emulate mature bears. will forever mourn lack of proper pilosity

It's never stuff like feeling obliged to care for aging parents or making sure the bathroom is clean for guests is it?

Not that I consider those things inherently womanly either of course. But I don't think being a woman is defined by "commonalties" rather than sex.

One might almost think that the people placing such weight on "commonalities" do not even have any idea what the actual "commonalities" might be. One might think they are basing their beliefs on the most superficial of observations because they in reality know very little and care even less about the actual social and domestic experiences of and pressures on female people.

The frantic attempts using stereotypes are solely to have a group of biological women that transidentified men can then get in with as a group.

As with single sex spaces of all kinds: the desire is absolutely to have something exclusively for and about biological women for these men to be able to have the met desire to join it as proof of their 'real' womanhood. It's about the same reason as wanting sex with lesbians.

To support it, you have to see women as just props and resources for men, and the harms and exclusions to women and the damage to their resources as nothing so long as these men are happy. It's male supremacism basically. Standing on a platform of fundamental disrespect for women (as a sex class).

Which raises the interesting question of whether the man who transitions at 18 because he sees himself as a soft and sexy anime lolita or the man who transitions at 45 because he likes himself in makeup and tights goes on to experience changing "commonalties" in line with women of his own age as he ages, or if his "woman" persona is specific to and fixed in the "commonalities" he felt when he transitioned?

The 'commonalities' also vanish when you see: there is zero interest in women, women's lives, women's voices, women's experiences, women's thoughts and feelings - it's never about 'joining' women or 'commonalities' with women, and many of the 'joined' groups ended up being destroyed or going underground to escape men invading them because those men had no interest in being part of the group and wanted merely to own and control it and have access to the women in it. The men who tried to get police to force their access into the private home of one of the women leading a rape survivors group comes to mind, when the group were desperate to escape those men. Who for some reason really wanted to be with women talking about their sexual abuse stories, and for those women to know there would no escaping them.

This is about costume and access to biological women - with no doubt on anyone's part who or what a biological woman is. And forced access is fine, control is writ large on this. As is the frequently very highly sexualised use of costume and behaviours, and the very frequent and fast default to threats of extremely sexual violence.

But you want to organise the world in terms of “typical behaviours”.

If you can’t simply identify these, and claim it would take a whole thread to do so, how is that a practical basis on which to organise services for “men” and “women” where such a division is necessary.

This poster then concludes that the most appropriate way to classify people now is no longer by sex, but by how well they conform to the "typical woman" profile or the "typical man" profile, and then refer to them as women or men according to how well they conform to the male or female profile.

No not what I said. The context was personal identity formation where its a matter of self identification so an individual could go either way (sex or gender) dependant on their values or beliefs.

The context here isn't about you & your values/beliefs but how individuals see themselves….which they have every right to an belief/opinion on as you do.

A bit of vitriol towards Sex Matters there. Careful not to let your spite show.

You only have to look at Eddie Izzard to see how his trans persona is very much fixed. What woman of that age would dress in such a way. His look is not only far too young, but also highly dated - in a 1970s way. Fetishes take on highly specific contours. All of the guys I see have tried to perfect a certain look.

I have learnt today that as a biological woman for 45 years I am in fact a man.
Who knew?

Is this correct @Baileyonice

I do not wear makeup I play golf, I work in men’s sport and I have short hair.

Am I a man and if not why not?

'Now now it's rude to be spiteful to enablers of misogynistic & racist far right fascism!'

And, going back to the original purpose of the thread and the SCJ, mixed sex spaces alongside single sex spaces allow everyone to do.

Clearly marked. And honest.

Women's single sex spaces cannot be sacrificed to this, because the women who want and need single sex spaces are equally about how individuals see themselves and their right to a belief too - plus the necessary needs of biological women as a group (of half the population of the planet.)

Many of the guys I'm aware of continue to pursue typically masculine interests and pursuits; still associating and identifying with other men. ( football, gaming, tech)

Which is absolutely what rights for women are alllll about.

I think that's the final reveal there.

Of course, because 'gender' is constructed out of nothing but superficial and imaginal fancies and social aesthetics. Gender is a performance ( Judith Butler).

‘Community Integration: Trans women actively participate in, contribute to, and form bonds within women's spaces, sports, and advocacy groups’

Possibly not in the way they might have expected to 😂

Are you saying SexMatters are misogynists?

To be honest, your reasoning powers seem a bit muddled. It’s probably a side effect of all the post-modernism and having to twist your brain inside out to pretend that:

a. Sex is terribly complicated and indefinable (despite us all knowing where babies come from)

b. Men and women are much better defined by their typical/common behavioural traits.

(Although how you work out which traits belong to men and which to women when you don’t accept the biological definition of men and women in the first place is a circular piece of logic that eludes me.)

I don't think that poster is coming from a post modernist position. Their posts don't have the coherence of an underlying organising philosophy.

No, I think they are coming from the "Haha so now it's ok to say men and women are different is it? Such delicious irony to see Feminists hoist by their own petard! Bet they wish they'd never started with all that 'women are equal to men amd can do the same jobs and shouldn't be banned from golf clubs' malarky. Serves the uppity b*tches right!" side of the house.

For anyone who wants to read the Mail on Sunday article BON alluded to, instead of a Turkish pop science ChatGPT version, it’s here:

https://archive.ph/CQmJt

Since when has Pink News been a source of legal scholarship?

So many of these men seem to despise the very sex that they want to become. The MH issues can be seen from space

Thanks for the laugh.

I slept in my husbands t-shirt last night and farted. I demand to be allowed into gay men saunas forthwith as I am a man and fancy men so am gay. Don’t let my visible pregnancy form part of the nazi racist judgment from said gay men to exclude me from their genital exclusive fetishistic nonsense. I am a gay man and as I am biological and I have the right for a gay man to devour my man vagina.

M husband might object but you know that’s just the coercive mind control patriarchy.

Well if you are cognitively impaired they may seem inspiring. It’s all a matter of perspective.

They obviously don't read the other boards on mumsnet, complaining about men. The women in relationships with men, who complain that

• she does the housework and look after the kids while he is up all night gaming
• she does the life admin
• she runs round after his aging parents, as well as her own
• she writes Christmas and birthday cards and buys presents, for his family as well as her own
• when his family or friends stay over, she is the one shopping, cooking, cleaning and making beds
• she does the school run while he lies in bed
• she gets up with the baby or other children, while he lies in bed
• she is left with the jobs at the weekend while he plays golf all day
• if the kids are sick, she stays home with them, because he can't take time off from his Big Job

And that's before you get into actual abusive behaviour.

I wonder if the trans-identifying men in relationships see themselves reflected here, and if so, which role they play? Though I'm guessing very few have children.