Gender again. Sorry!

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
From today, for the purposes of the Equality Act none of us are no longer necessarily the sex stated on our birth certificates. In fact there exists no document we can carry to give evidence of our biological sex. Discrimination at the point of contact with another person has become legitimised by perception.

That's simply not true. Apart from which no certificates were required previously.

What it will do is stop men who identify as women claiming that they are legally women because they have a GRC and that having a GRC admits them to women's spaces and services. The EHRC made it clear that exemptions under the Equality Act still applied and this ruling crystallises that.

Lesbians can now exclude men from their groups without worrying about being sued. This is a good thing.
 

Stevo 666

Regular
A handy empirical definition of this nebulous concept would be helpful, otherwise I'll be forced to assume it means "how people like ME feel".

And then I'll just have to refer back to my previous observation, won't I?

So you reckon that our rights end where your feelings begin? Sorry, no.

As far as I'm concerned you can pretend to be whoever or whatever you want. It's just that you can't make everyone else pretend. How is that not common sense?
 
Another entirely predictable win for the bigots, and an important step on the way to the eradication of an infinitesimal proportion of people who are Not Like Them.
The changes demanded by what you claim is a tiny number of people had far reaching consequences for all women and girls in language, safeguarding, and law. It's not bigotry to draw attention to that.

So, once they're gone - or at least pushed so far to the margins that you can happily kid yourself they're all dead - who's next on your list?

This is the hyperbolic why-can't-you-all-just-be-kind-and-let-men-do-what-they-want? emotional blackmail that women have faced for a hundred years. It's bs. These men are neither Martin Niemuller nor Rosa Parkes.
 

CXRAndy

Veteran
It would seem that all us so called bigots were correct morally and in law to stand up for women and girls.

Congratulations to all the women who took the fight all the way


20230711_092132.gif
 

AndyRM

Elder Goth
It would seem that all us so called bigots were correct morally and in law to stand up for women and girls.

Congratulations to all the women who took the fight all the way


View attachment 7936

F*ck it, I'll directly reply.

When have you done that then, I mean stood up for women's and girls' rights?

Or is your activism limited to "Yeah, I chucked a badly animated gif and some clickbait on a forum more niche than 'fascinating shoelaces I once found in Slovakia admirers'"?
 

CXRAndy

Veteran
I always thought you were a bloke. I never realised you were a pantyhose and skirts sort of person.🤣🤣🤣

Always been in touch with my feminine side :laugh:
 

AndyRM

Elder Goth
Calm down tiger, just because you played with the wrong team and lost.

Except your loss with grace, allow the women a moment or two to gloat

:dance:

I still play for my team, and I accept the "loss" such as it is.

It was a pretty simple question really, and I'm not really surprised by your answer.
 

monkers

Squire
I have the following posters blocked, Steevo, CXRTrumpwit, and Aurora. This thread is important to me, I don't wish to read their bullshit and bollock, but as a consequence the thread is difficult to follow. So this post and future posts are unrelated to anything that the morons may or may not have said.

The judgment of the Supreme Court today is problematic for all kinds of reasons.

On the one hand I can understand the principle that the working definition of who a woman is, and for that matter who a man is, is made easier in comprehension if it is consistent across the Equality Act. In that sense, the simplification does make sense, though it imagines that we are insufficient in our intellect or sophistication to read clauses in context.

Because reproductive sex is binary and immutable, and referring to their example, it is unnecessary to state that under the protected characteristic of pregnancy to clarify that only those with the reproductive sex of being female or women can become pregnant.

More than this, they have now created the situation that a person can be female in the context of some statutes and male in the context of other statutes, making not just the operation of the Equality Act impractical in some senses, but making the practical application of a number of statutes unworkable.

The court referred to definitions found in previous acts. The fact that these acts were repealed shows that they no longer aligned or agreed with what parliament intended post 2004. And to further that timeline, it seems inconceivable that parliament intended sex to have one definition in the 2004 Act and the opposite in the 2010 Act.

The judgment will serve to have a very negative effect on the lives of trans people, but also a negative effect on all people.

I haven't read all 88 pages today. I was at a funeral today; unfortunately I'm at another funeral tomorrow.

What I have done is use the search function instead using key words to find points of interest. I found no results for ''convention rights'', ''birth certificate'', ''Goodwin'', ''Human Rights Act'', ''ECHR'', ''ECtHR''. All produced null results. Very concerning.
 

They always could legally enter women's spaces. I certainly don't mind if they do. They are welcome in women's sports and domestic violence refuges and jails because they are women, and despite their appearance their presence is no threat. In fact, several transmen compete in sports in the Women's category without problems from other competitors and of the 50 transmen in UK jails as of March 2024 all were in the women's estate without complaints from others.

I don't think they would be safe in men's jails or homeless hostels but presumably you would like to see transmen forced to go to male prisons and hostels?

Maybe you could follow women's lead and welcome non conforming people of your sex into your spaces rather than expecting women to accomodate them in theirs?
 

CXRAndy

Veteran
Today the supreme court decided the needs of the many(women and girls) outweigh the need of the few.

I would not be surprised that TiMs will dwindle now their avenue of validation at the expense of women has been blocked by the Supreme court
 
Top Bottom