What is a woman?

[AuroraSaab]

The SC judgement was quite narrowly related to their assessment of the intent of the terms in the equalities act at the time it was written. I suspect history will show that the scope of the initial reactions we are now seeing from a range of quarters isn't really much to do with the SC judgment.

It does not, for example, have any bearing on who can play football with who, just on which changing rooms they can use, should one of them happen to be women only.

Yes, it was a ruling about the meaning of 'sex' in the Equality Act, an act which is about discrimination and aimed at the providers of goods and services. There's no genocide, nobody no longer exists or can't participate in public life.

Transgender people retain their protection from discrimination just like everyone else.

What it means is that if a provider says something is single sex then it must be single sex. If it's a Women's football league, it must be for women only. The team must be for women, and the changing facilities for women. If you don't want that, the provider must call it mixed sex. In some cases though it might be indirect discrimination against women not to provide single sex facilities or services.

If it's single sex, you're obliged to exclude the other sex. Otherwise it isn't single sex.

 

[matticus]

The FA are having to rebrand their slogan For All, as from the 1st June all trans men and trans women will be banned from playing, in any section, under their new rules.

CItation?

 

[Bromptonaut]

I also suspect that even if the ECHR doesn't take any further action, there is probably still a need to clarify the GRA and Equalities Acts with respect to trans people.

That. Exactly.

Whether Starmer and his team have the cojones to do it is another question.

 

[monkers]

That. Exactly.

Whether Starmer and his team have the cojones to do it is another question.

He will be at the benches trying to be sitting, standing, and lying down - all at the same time - he doesn't have this level of skill for it.

 

[CXRAndy]

Best headline since 1966

Funnily enough we all knew what a woman was back then


View: https://x.com/SexMattersOrg/status/1918200282254627250?t=U-DvQUU94YjPqBMQ6E20eg&s=19

 

[AndyRM]

Nope, the best football headline ever was this:

 

[classic33]

CItation?

Sky News, on the telly.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Cricket announces rule change update.

https://www.ecb.co.uk/news/4257688/ecb-update-on-transgender-participation-in-womenscricket

 

[CXRAndy]

Cricket announces rule change update.

https://www.ecb.co.uk/news/4257688/ecb-update-on-transgender-participation-in-womenscricket

With immediate effect, only those whose biological sex is female will be eligible to play in women’s cricket and girls’ cricket matches

 

[CXRAndy]

My screen is filled by multiple messages '' You are ignoring content by this member.''

I have Trumpwit Andy and Big Liar AS blocked. Whatever screen ink you two are wasting, it isn't being seen by me so you're wasting your time trying to bait me. I'm done wasting my little precious time left on nasty people.

We, well I, don't care anymore, you're irrelevant, placed yourself in your own isolation ward.

It's surprising, that all these sporting bodies, institutions were just waiting for the earliest opportunity to ditch trans for common sense but were frightened to act.

Supreme court announcement gave them the opportunity to instantly dump the crazy ideology

 

[monkers]

Falkner when she wanted to defend the rights of one group of people to ''ask questions''

Falkner when the group of people she attacked suppose they also have the right to ask questions.

 

[icowden]

Falkner when the group of people she attacked suppose they also have the right to ask questions.

Come on - that's disingenuous and you know it. She is specifically calling out those people and media groups challenging the integrity of the judiciary. The law has been settled. Unless there is a challenge, the law is the law.

There is a history of newspapers and similar attacking the judiciary baselessly for ruling in law. She is not suggesting that people cannot discuss or question the law and how it might be applied - she is specifically asking people not to attack the Judges and their decision.

 

[monkers]

Come on - that's disingenuous and you know it. She is specifically calling out those people and media groups challenging the integrity of the judiciary. The law has been settled. Unless there is a challenge, the law is the law.

There is a history of newspapers and similar attacking the judiciary baselessly for ruling in law. She is not suggesting that people cannot discuss or question the law and how it might be applied - she is specifically asking people not to attack the Judges and their decision.

And you think that people have lost the right to speak about it? You've been discussing it too.

The whole point of freedom of expression it to have the ability to speak truth to power - whoever they are. That's fundamental to democracy.

The British have a long history of lampooning everywhere that power is vested in the UK, the monarchy, the aristocracy, government, parliament, the church, the judiciary, and that was before it became a convention right.

It's is no more wrong to question or criticise a Supreme Court decision than a government decision, and we all do that often enough including you Ian - you were not silent when VAT was added to private school fees.

Some when authority have been closing down our fundamental rights. In the news today, the court ruled that Braverman's law restricting the right to protest overreached.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Scottish Rowing statement. They are now adopting the same policy as GB Rowing, ie Women's rowing is for women.

https://www.scottish-rowing.org.uk/...non-binary-competition-and-eligibility-policy

 

[spen666]

..... In the news today, the court ruled that Braverman's law restricting the right to protest overreached.

Ahh, so when the court makes a finding you agree with, they are the body who decide the law and their judgement is good