Ian H
Legendary Member
I was only speaking theoretically (also, I do have that friend who's good at insults).
Gender again. Sorry!
- Thread starter theclaud
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
I was only speaking theoretically (also, I do have that friend who's good at insults).
monkers
Legendary Member
This is perfectly correct - the attached document that is. However it would have been helpful if you had also said that this was carefully considered by the Select Committee after listening to the evidence of all interested parties. The Select Committee then agreed with the Stonewall view.
Theresa May said that she intended to implement the recommendations, but didn't due to getting booted over arguments over Brexit.
Last edited:
AuroraSaab
Squire
It's not the law then is it as whether the committee agreed or not it was never implemented.
I see the 'No quoting' didn't last long.
I see the 'No quoting' didn't last long.
monkers
Legendary Member
True story, but I'm not attacking you or your views. I reminded you that we had reached agreement yesterday. I agreed with you posting the attachment - I agree it is factual. I pointed out that for the sake of completeness that there was something you might have usefully added - that is all, very light touch as criticisms go I think.
The Mhari Black speech is honest and earnest. I think her points are worth hearing: that places no obligation for anyone to agree with her.
I felt we made progress yesterday, I'd like that to continue.
AuroraSaab
Squire
That wasn't the discussion at that point though (though it might be a valid discussion to have). We weren't talking about femininism and white supremacy. We were talking about the reasonableness of women not wanting to be around males in certain situations - specifically in prisons for the last umpteenth pages - and whether that is, in fact, a reasonable demand or if such and similar demands have 'echoes' of racism.
It's a stretch to link a woman wanting their intimate care to be from a female nurse rather than a transwoman nurse to being the same as the racist trope that black women are less 'women' than white women.
Last edited:
mudsticks
Squire
This was me too.
I was saying it wasn't fair to compare a generalised aversion by some women to having male bodied people present in their vulnerable states (whether those male bodied people are biological males or transwomen)
To racism.
The two things are not the same.
Saying one prejudice has 'echoes' of the other prejudice is still not fair.
The first (aversion to men) is based on the lived social experience of many women.
The second is just raw prejudice.
It does a disservice to those who experience racism, to suggest that they are experiencing a similar prejudice, to that experienced by men.
Men are often not trusted (as a class) for good reason.
People with different skin tones, are discriminated against for no good reason.
We could run and run on the 'Classy Barbs'
Ian H
Legendary Member
Back to Mills & Boon (could be rhyming slang).
Clive James' barb on Barb: "Twin miracles of mascara, her eyes looked like the corpses of two small crows that had crashed into a chalk cliff.".
Last edited:
mudsticks
Squire
Clive was just jealous.
Legend has it that Babs C worked from the comfort of her own bed.
Now if that's not 'winning' at life, I don't know what is.💜💚
monkers
Legendary Member
Again I repeat the agreement we had yesterday. Both the 2004 Act and the 2010 make clear, that the legal sex of trans women is female.
Persistent use of the word 'male' to describe them is unlawful especially when they have successfully met the requirements of the GRA and hold an amended birth certificate.
AuroraSaab
Squire
So it's compelled preferred pronouns then?
monkers
Legendary Member
The law obliges us to behaviour in certain ways. If you choose to break the law, you choose to live with the consequences.
Free speech is one of the most misunderstood concepts in this country.
AuroraSaab
Squire
Noone is compelled to recognise your internal gender identity. How would we even know what it is?
If someone doesn't have a GRC you are no more forced to refer to them by their chosen pronouns than you are to say 'Peace by upon him' every time you talk about Muhammed or put 'Our Lord' in front of 'Jesus'. The law doesn't compel people to validate other people's internal beliefs, whether it's pronouns or anything else. Gender critical beliefs are protected in law just like religious or philosophical ones are.
You could argue that intentional and continual refusal to use a colleague's preferred pronouns violates a company policy on harassment, or rudeness, and would be grounds for dismissal. But the same would apply if you mocked someone's religion.
If someone doesn't have a GRC you are no more forced to refer to them by their chosen pronouns than you are to say 'Peace by upon him' every time you talk about Muhammed or put 'Our Lord' in front of 'Jesus'. The law doesn't compel people to validate other people's internal beliefs, whether it's pronouns or anything else. Gender critical beliefs are protected in law just like religious or philosophical ones are.
You could argue that intentional and continual refusal to use a colleague's preferred pronouns violates a company policy on harassment, or rudeness, and would be grounds for dismissal. But the same would apply if you mocked someone's religion.
newfhouse
pleb
I'm not and I wasn't.
The similarity, such as it is, is that fear, whether justifiable or not, can be exploited by people that have none of our interests at heart. The reaction to my pointing that out indicates to me that it is a technique that often works even with thoughtful people.
monkers
Legendary Member
You are continuing with your 'compelled' theme. Nobody can stop you saying stuff, but if you do there can be consequences. I'm just advising you that the things you say are unlawful.
You might choose to say that you are not transphobic. Some people might take that to mean that you are not. Others may be tempted to this this going down the 'I'm not a racist but ...' line.
In your case I am alleging nothing, the jury is out as they say, but the repeated use of transphobic language does little to persuade that you are not.
But you have choices, and people may judge you on it - that's one consequence.
Last edited:
