Gender again. Sorry!

[Deleted member 159]

Adult Human Female

Is a woman, she doesn't need to have a piece of paper to be identified as such. She just is

 

[monkers]

What on earth makes you think that having been booked to speak at an event ignorant protestors should be allowed to stop that event or threaten the speaker?


This is the very reason that we should be defending Stock:-


Suppression of opinion and denial of discussion is usually the tool of a totalitarian government. Universities are supposed to challenge orthodoxy, challenge beliefs and to introduce students to critical thought. Not stuff cotton wool in their ears and repeat their echo chamber back at them.

You are free to believe what you like, anything is thought policing. In the country freedom of expression is not an absolute convention right but a qualified right granted under domestic legislation. Freedom of speech is not guaranteed as being without consequence. Hate speech is not free speech; the law prohibits it, albeit with a fairly high bar.

Some people like Stock and Stephen Fry that no person has the 'right to be offended'. This is obvious nonsense intent on disguising the fact that convention rights are positively held rights and domestic law are negatively held rights.

Most of all, you can not compel somebody to listen to your own belief system. They must be free to walk away and they must be free to say why they have no wish to hear it.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

These are not word games when you apply words in the most correct possible way. It's word games when you refuse to recognise words according to what @monkers has decided they mean.

By the way,now we know that gender is innate, but not from birth, can you explain at what point it manifests and from where?

 

[monkers]

This is only possible by redefining what 'sex' means to a metaphysical definition.

Clearly not. The EqA makes no mention of biological sex as a stand alone protected characteristic either in terms of 'female' or 'woman'.

If parliament passes an act that trans women are women before the law, then they are. That being the case women before the law, are women in reading the law.

The guidance notes that accompany a GRC make this plain. So much so in fact that (and this is before the equal marriage bill) the rights contained in the right to marry were reversed. Before the GRA a trans woman with a GRC could marry a cis woman or a trans man but not a cis man. After the act a trans woman with a GRC could marry a cis man or a trans man but not a cis woman or another trans woman with a GRC.

The 2004 act removed the 'biology assumption' and clarified it with the formalised legal one of gender identity. Twenty years later and after successful introduction you are bleating your opinions and sense of aggrieved entitlement.

 

[Deleted member 159]

What do you mean by 'biology'. Again that word has various readings according to context. Do you mean:

evolutionary biology
anatomy
homology
legal definition
something else.

Because the single word 'biology' is different in each context.

These are not word games when you apply words in the most correct possible way. It's word games when you refuse to recognise words according to definition, context, and nuance.

I know you simple moronic brain can only manage a single strand. You are like a bald man with a single hair on his head carrying a comb. A comb is for managing hair, you have a hair on your head, therefore you need to own and carry a comb, when what you really need is a pair of scissors to snip it off. Are you done yet?

You ask then almost on virtually every post drop in an insult. To me it's water of a duck's back.

I'm proud to be named by you and others a bigot. I claim the word, because I know I am right, about biological fact, men are males, women are females, you can't change your sex.

I said before you can do what you like when you're an adult, as long as it doesn't impinge on others.

Claiming to be a woman, when you're a man is doing that.

Examples, wanting access to women's toilets, safe spaces, refuges. Calling yourself a woman, when clearly they are not.
Entering women's sports, all those are infringing women's rights.

 

[icowden]

Most of all, you can not compel somebody to listen to your own belief system. They must be free to walk away and they must be free to say why they have no wish to hear it.

Which everyone agrees with. What they don't agree with is that they must also be free to stop other people hearing it. If you don't want to hear Kathleen Stock or Graham Linehan - don't buy tickets to their talks. The same applies to Roy Chubby Brown or Jim Davidson. We have freedom not to go to things.

 

[monkers]

By the way,now we know that gender is innate, but not from birth, can you explain at what point it manifests and from where?

No because despite God making us all in his image, we are all very different (may contain sarcasm). Ask 100 different trans people and get 100 different answers.

Can you imagine the responses from cis folk if they there had to be agreement to the question, ''when did you decide to go straight and how did it manifest itself?''

 

[icowden]

evolutionary biology
anatomy
homology
legal definition
something else.

Because the single word 'biology' is different in each context.

I'm not sure it is. Biology is a branch of science that deals with living organisms and their vital processes. Anatomy is part of biology as is homology. Not sure what "legal definition" is. It's a science, therefore it deals with provable facts. We know that mammals produce gametes and that mammals with an XY chromosome fertilise the eggs produce by a mammal with an XX chromosome. We can prove this. We call those with XX female and those with XY male. We also know that there is always a small evolutionary dead end where infertile variants are produced. We don't redefine male and female because of these variants as they are not significant.

 

[monkers]

Which everyone agrees with. What they don't agree with is that they must also be free to stop other people hearing it. If you don't want to hear Kathleen Stock or Graham Linehan - don't buy tickets to their talks. The same applies to Roy Chubby Brown or Jim Davidson. We have freedom not to go to things.

As Kathleen Stock has already shown and admits to, her opinions are highly controversial, they do not necessarily agree with the law, she has access to many other platforms - or at least she did until the government started closing down free speech because they don't like Steve Bray.

Otherwise I don't mind you saying that no-platforming is going on, just don't say that it just trans activists stopping Stock from speaking while another GC group disinvited her from one of their events.

 

[monkers]

Not sure what "legal definition" is.

For real?

There is no legal definition of 'biological sex'. This is admitted by the EHRC. There is an implied definition from parliament in the GRA - see my post above up there somewhere.

 

[monkers]

Claiming to be a woman, when you're a man is doing that.

I'm not 'claiming' to be a woman. However it is the case that I don't happen to fit with the moronic attempts of others to define what a woman is, though keep having to ask others if they know. According to IanC, I am not a woman because I refuse to be inseminated by him in the missionary position - too farking late anyway, so thankfully I might be safe.

 

[monkers]

We know that mammals produce gametes and that mammals with an XY chromosome fertilise the eggs produce by a mammal with an XX chromosome.

The duck-billed platypus is a mammal but even with XX chromosomes it doesn't bake baby ones. Do you want to try again?

Helpful hint, nature doesn't follow rules.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

According to IanC, I am not a woman because I refuse to be inseminated by him in the missionary position

I thought he was sticking to dictionary definitions?

 

[monkers]

I thought he was sticking to dictionary definitions?

He is more selective than discerning in what he chooses to quote. Multiple definitions of the same word are just too confusing.

We discovered this the other day following a brief battle when it was finally agreed that 'innate' does not only mean 'from birth'. Mind you that agreement is probably null and void by now.

Also I think he has attempted a few definitions of his own.

 

[newfhouse]

I'm not sure it is. Biology is a branch of science that deals with living organisms and their vital processes. Anatomy is part of biology as is homology. Not sure what "legal definition" is. It's a science, therefore it deals with provable facts. We know that mammals produce gametes and that mammals with an XY chromosome fertilise the eggs produce by a mammal with an XX chromosome. We can prove this. We call those with XX female and those with XY male. We also know that there is always a small evolutionary dead end where infertile variants are produced. We don't redefine male and female because of these variants as they are not significant.

A wise man once said
A flower is only
A sexual organ
Beauty is cruelty
And evolution
A wise man once said
That everything could be explained
With mathematics
He had denied
His feminine side
Now where is the wisdom in that?