Legal definition of woman is based on biological sex, UK supreme court rules

[Bomb#20]

...
I'm not bothering because the Democratic party is ran by people like you who have decided to gleefully use people like me as a constant punching bag. Keep on with Revenge Tour '25, I'm sure it'll yield tremendous results. I mean sure, the Dems have only lost ALL THREE BRANCHES of the federal government. Surely that hasn't moved realistic and achievable progress back a solid 20 years.

I sure as hell won't vote for the GOP either. I could be brought back to the Dems, but I'll eat a bag of horse cocks before I pull the lever for Trumps and Fundies.

In the meantime, keep on keepin' on. It won't affect me.

A plague on both their houses.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Sounds like revenge.

Biden and every single POTUS except Obama were chosen because they are white and male. Except for three women, every VP was chosen because of the color of his skin and what is between his legs.

You think it is revenge to be asked to even consider what it is like to be a woman or black or both?

My God the privilege you live in! You poor little baby who cannot face the possibility of having to compete in a world where what’s between your legs and what color you skin dies not give you the loooongg head start you think you are entitled to because. Just because.

In other words, it is revenge. You're part of the problem, not part of the solution.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And? Derec doesn't call her that because she's not a white male. He calls her that because Biden decided he'd choose a black woman before he decided to choose her. His implication isn't that she's likely to be less qualified than someone else would have been because she's a black woman; his implication is that she's likely to be less qualified than someone else would have been because she isn't the winner of a qualifications contest.

Exactly. If you set out to find someone with irrelevant attribute X it's automatically a DEI hire.

However, VP is normally a DEI hire anyway, just not always so blatantly.

Is being white and make an irrelevant attribute?

In the past it's been about diversity of other attributes. It's still diversity, though.

Note that I'm counting Harris as a DEI pick but I am not counting Obama as one.

 

[laughing dog]

Sounds like revenge.

Biden and every single POTUS except Obama were chosen because they are white and male. Except for three women, every VP was chosen because of the color of his skin and what is between his legs.

You think it is revenge to be asked to even consider what it is like to be a woman or black or both?

My God the privilege you live in! You poor little baby who cannot face the possibility of having to compete in a world where what’s between your legs and what color you skin dies not give you the loooongg head start you think you are entitled to because. Just because.

In other words, it is revenge. You're part of the problem, not part of the solution.

You need to explain how DEI is revenge because I don't think that word means what you think it means.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Over and over we are told that Harris was a DEI hire because Biden himself declared that he would only select a black woman.

This claim might have validity only IF the following fact were true, which it is not: that in the past, black women have been seriously considered for vice president, along with everyone else.

Since they have not been, the complaint is entirely without merit.

So discrimination in favor of X is proper since X was discriminated against the past?

No, this is a big problem with the left. You can't fix past wrongs, the attempt simply perpetuates the wrong rather than fixing it.

This is silly. It is simply a way to rig the game yet again favor of cis straight white men. Someone can lie and say, “I’m going to consider everyone” but then keep on hiring only cis straight white men. OTOH if someone is sincere and then really does hire a qualified black woman, the pick will still be castigated as discrimination against cis straight white men. In fact there is not and never has been discrimination against cis straight white men. Removing unearned privileges is not discrimination.

If someone is actually discriminating go after them. However, if it's properly blinded how do they discriminate??

And it's the current situation that causes people to question the credentials of anyone who could be thought to be DEI.

And how can you say there has never been discrimination against cis het white men?? When you try to balance the racial mix of your employees you are inherently discriminating against them! The current crop of new hires is not responsible for any past discrimination but you are stacking the deck against them.

Really? Just how is it that you know that the white males are not the least qualified?

How are you discriminating against the employees hired?

Why is it that you believe the most qualified candidates are white and male?

There have been multiple discrimination lawsuits because white males were being unfairly excluded. Never have I heard a defense that the claims were false.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Or if there were no highly qualified black women to comprise a good pool of candidates.

But they are not the only ones who are "highly qualified". So why restrict SCOTUS and running mate nominations to that relatively small demographic?
And of course, what made Biden's decision even worse is that he made both these race and gender restrictions at about the same time, about two high-profile nominations.

Perhaps to make a point that those in a group or groups who have been entirely or nearly entirely excluded from consideration would now get first consideration.

I know I am repeating myself but only an idiot would think that Biden did not already have a list of candidates for VP who met all of his criteria before he made that statement.

"Would now get first consideration" -- discrimination. Period. You can't fix old wrongs, you inherently end up discriminating against those who have done nothing wrong. Only by introducing the artificial notion of harm to groups can you disguise the evil you're seeking.

So it is better to continue to discriminate against the groups who have been traditionally discriminated against?

Why? Because they are used to it?

Or is it because white men are too fragile to have to face competition from other than white male candidates?

And herein lies the problem: you are assuming there must be discrimination and would prefer white males to be the victims. I'm saying I don't want anybody discriminated against.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

"Would now get first consideration" -- discrimination. Period. You can't fix old wrongs, you inherently end up discriminating against those who have done nothing wrong. Only by introducing the artificial notion of harm to groups can you disguise the evil you're seeking.

What did Harris do wrong, aside from being born female with dark skin?

Saying she's a DEI hire doesn't mean she did anything wrong.

The fact is that some white people just cannot get over not being first in line for any and all good jobs.

And some people can't understand that there's a difference between equal standing and being put behind others.

Out of a limited pool of candidates, Biden wanted to pick someone he could work well with and who would bring something different to the table. Many times, perhaps most of the time, the person chosen as VP candidate brings something to help balance the ticket—often geographically determined. No one complains about that.

Yeah--but that is diversity. DEI. It's not automatically wrong. But skin color is not relevant to running the country.

And no one complained that Obama chose a white man to be his running mate. I wonder why. I absolutely understand why Biden was chosen and yes, white and male were almost certainly major factors.

Not a single complaint that a woman or a person of color was not chosen.

We aren't complaining that a person of color was chosen. We are complaining that she was chosen because she was black.

White men just cannot get over once in a while not being in the pool. It’s almost as if they fail to recognize that there is a pool of highly qualified candidates without them being in the center of it.

It's just as wrong to exclude them as it is to pick only them.

If it stings: maybe quit grousing and start recognizing that this is what it is still like to be a person of color or a woman, not to mention both.

Sounds like revenge.

Asking someone to reach deep within themselves and find a shred of empathy for those who do not look like you is revenge?

The mere suggestion that perhaps you need some empathy is painful to you?

Justice and fairness = revenge in your book?

I realize women are expected to just lay back and take it but that don’t play anymore.

You are asking to take the wrong and turn it upon those who are simply like the wrongdoers. Empathy isn't relevant, I do not support discrimination. Against anyone, not merely against those you like. It's like freedom of speech, it's meaningless if you don't protect the unpopular.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

"Would now get first consideration" -- discrimination. Period. You can't fix old wrongs, you inherently end up discriminating against those who have done nothing wrong. Only by introducing the artificial notion of harm to groups can you disguise the evil you're seeking.

What did Harris do wrong, aside from being born female with dark skin?

Saying she's a DEI hire doesn't mean she did anything wrong.

It is an insult.

It's an insult to our system, not to her. VP is about appealing to a wider audience. Diversity. The first letter of DEI.

And no one complained that Obama chose a white man to be his running mate. I wonder why. I absolutely understand why Biden was chosen and yes, white and male were almost certainly major factors.

Not a single complaint that a woman or a person of color was not chosen.

We aren't complaining that a person of color was chosen. We are complaining that she was chosen because she was black.

That is a flat out false claim. It is absurdly ignorant. She was selected to help drive voter turnout for the Presidential candidate, not because she was black. She was a US Senator, State Attorney General, City Prosecutor. Harris was more than her color, but that is all you see in her.

It was stated that he was looking for a black female. Thus it's because she was a black female.

If it stings: maybe quit grousing and start recognizing that this is what it is still like to be a person of color or a woman, not to mention both.

Sounds like revenge.

You need to get your ears checked. The first time a black woman is nominated to be a on a major Presidential ticket and you folks whine about it. That is what I hear.

If I had a problem with black you would have seen me objecting to Obama. If I had a problem with female you would have seen me objecting to Hillary. (I did say she was unelectable, but that was because of decades of demonization, not because she was female.) Rather, I consider all VPs to be DEI. Her, more so because Biden set out to pick a black female. That's not her fault!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm not voting anymore. I'm not bothering because the Democratic party is ran by people like you who have decided to gleefully use people like me as a constant punching bag. Keep on with Revenge Tour '25, I'm sure it'll yield tremendous results. I mean sure, the Dems have only lost ALL THREE BRANCHES of the federal government. Surely that hasn't moved realistic and achievable progress back a solid 20 years.

Exhibit A for the problem caused by reverse discrimination.

But you should vote Democrat anyway as it's better than the alternative. Too late for that now, though.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Interesting that you believe you are being used as a punching bag because I suggested that maybe white men should try to put themselves in the position of women, and especially women of color. Especially given the statistics re: domestic abuse. Asking for empathy in your mind = treating you as a punching bag. That says way more about you as a person than it does me or about your politics or mine or anybody's.

And you illustrate the problem: you don't even recognize that you're using him as a punching bag. It is not that you are asking for empathy, it is that you are asking white males to accept second class citizen status as compensation for past wrongs they had no part in committing.

 

[Toni]

Sounds like revenge.

Biden and every single POTUS except Obama were chosen because they are white and male. Except for three women, every VP was chosen because of the color of his skin and what is between his legs.

You think it is revenge to be asked to even consider what it is like to be a woman or black or both?

My God the privilege you live in! You poor little baby who cannot face the possibility of having to compete in a world where what’s between your legs and what color you skin dies not give you the loooongg head start you think you are entitled to because. Just because.

In other words, it is revenge. You're part of the problem, not part of the solution.

No. Affording all people access to the same opportunities as have long been enjoyed by men is NOT revenge.

It is justice.

And? Derec doesn't call her that because she's not a white male. He calls her that because Biden decided he'd choose a black woman before he decided to choose her. His implication isn't that she's likely to be less qualified than someone else would have been because she's a black woman; his implication is that she's likely to be less qualified than someone else would have been because she isn't the winner of a qualifications contest.

Exactly. If you set out to find someone with irrelevant attribute X it's automatically a DEI hire.

However, VP is normally a DEI hire anyway, just not always so blatantly.

Is being white and make an irrelevant attribute?

In the past it's been about diversity of other attributes. It's still diversity, though.

Note that I'm counting Harris as a DEI pick but I am not counting Obama as one.

of course. How very generous..or something..of you.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

1. One of the most important matters I handle in my job is domestic violence. I had a three day trial back in November for DV. filed another one just this week, and I have another trial coming up in May for the same thing. Both men and women commit DV, btw. I've represented women who've done eye-popping things which meant there was no other solution except to cop to a shorter restraining order because trial would've gotten them the full five years. It's true that men commit DV more often than women, but it's wrong and dishonest to make sweeping claims about it being solely a male thing.

My understanding is that it's about equal, it's just that when men do it it tends to be more serious. The cases that reach the courtroom are highly skewed. And you get things like the local politician many years back who was being criticized for calling the cops on his wife? over DV despite being something like 3x her size. Sure he could have defended himself physically, but the right thing to do is not to put yourself in the position of having to.

2. I don't want empathy. You're willfully mischaracterizing what I said. What I want is to not be told that I'm an oppressor when I'm not. I tried to intellectualize it for the past 20+ years before finally throwing up my hands and saying fuck it because it resulted in Trump becoming POTUS. How out of fucking touch must a party be to lose to Trump twice? How did the Dems lose the union vote? How did any of this happen???

While you are quite correct about the oppressor bit I think the election was far more due to disinformation than actual positions.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

2. I don't want empathy. You're willfully mischaracterizing what I said. What I want is to not be told that I'm an oppressor when I'm not. I tried to intellectualize it for the past 20+ years before finally throwing up my hands and saying fuck it because it resulted in Trump becoming POTUS. How out of fucking touch must a party be to lose to Trump twice? How did the Dems lose the union vote? How did any of this happen???

FFS. who is pointing to you and showing that your actions are oppressive. Generalizations are about PREDOMINANT things.

Or are you disagreeing that historically, that white men have been oppressive in Western Civilization>

Historically, yes. But you continue to treat white males as if they are the oppressors of old. Not only do you keep accusing the innocent of oppression but you treat them as so stupid they can't comprehend they are oppressing.

One explanation is backlash. People are driven away, angered into spite voting, or they just lose interest. The other is that the Democratic party is run by incompetent, iron-bubble asshats who would rather double down on losing social issues than win elections that would allow at least some measure of progress.

The backlash is real even if it mostly snowflake behavior. Which means that the Democrats have to figure out a way to somehow deal with that backlash and move forward.

It's not snowflake. And what they need to do is stop standing on the side of oppression.

Harris was bad candidate because of her past stances on losing social issues. At the time I didn't care about that. I voted for her and gave her campaign $1500 dollars. That wasn't because I thought she was a great candidate though; it was because Trump is disgraceful for too man reasons to list.

Again, keep dismissing what me and others like me are saying. What you seem to fail to understand is that it won't hurt us, and it's already been devastating to the groups you claim to care about.

Trump's policies are hurting lots of people and will hurt even more. So, it may hurt you.

Yeah, not voting is very much a frying pan to the fire type action.

 

[Toni]

Interesting that you believe you are being used as a punching bag because I suggested that maybe white men should try to put themselves in the position of women, and especially women of color. Especially given the statistics re: domestic abuse. Asking for empathy in your mind = treating you as a punching bag. That says way more about you as a person than it does me or about your politics or mine or anybody's.

And you illustrate the problem: you don't even recognize that you're using him as a punching bag. It is not that you are asking for empathy, it is that you are asking white males to accept second class citizen status as compensation for past wrongs they had no part in committing.

Not at all. It’s that (some) white makes believe that not being first is accepting a position as second class.

What I fully expect is that people start treating each other as equals and those who have had the greatest privilege quit whining about sharing equally with those who have always been treated as second class people lower by the exact same criteria as what has long given white men their first class status: skin color and gender.

If you think being treated as equal to all people without regards to gender or skin color is to be considered second class, even you might consider what it has been like to be not white and not male.

Grow the fuck up.

 

[Toni]

"Would now get first consideration" -- discrimination. Period. You can't fix old wrongs, you inherently end up discriminating against those who have done nothing wrong. Only by introducing the artificial notion of harm to groups can you disguise the evil you're seeking.

What did Harris do wrong, aside from being born female with dark skin?

Saying she's a DEI hire doesn't mean she did anything wrong.

It is an insult.

It's an insult to our system, not to her. VP is about appealing to a wider audience. Diversity. The first letter of DEI.

And no one complained that Obama chose a white man to be his running mate. I wonder why. I absolutely understand why Biden was chosen and yes, white and male were almost certainly major factors.

Not a single complaint that a woman or a person of color was not chosen.

We aren't complaining that a person of color was chosen. We are complaining that she was chosen because she was black.

That is a flat out false claim. It is absurdly ignorant. She was selected to help drive voter turnout for the Presidential candidate, not because she was black. She was a US Senator, State Attorney General, City Prosecutor. Harris was more than her color, but that is all you see in her.

It was stated that he was looking for a black female. Thus it's because she was a black female.

If it stings: maybe quit grousing and start recognizing that this is what it is still like to be a person of color or a woman, not to mention both.

Sounds like revenge.

You need to get your ears checked. The first time a black woman is nominated to be a on a major Presidential ticket and you folks whine about it. That is what I hear.

If I had a problem with black you would have seen me objecting to Obama. If I had a problem with female you would have seen me objecting to Hillary. (I did say she was unelectable, but that was because of decades of demonization, not because she was female.) Rather, I consider all VPs to be DEI. Her, more so because Biden set out to pick a black female. That's not her fault!

FFS, Loren. Biden, who is no longer president, said that he intended to chose as a running mate a black female. Only an idiot would believe that he did not already have, ready and vetted a small set of highly qualified black women.

Yes, he was looking to valance the ticket between an older white make establishment candidate and someone who wanted a younger, perhaps female and perhaps not white VP to demonstrate that he was not an old fogey stuck in tired, racist, sexist old ways.

Every post you make just reconfirms that your anti DEI bias is rooted in sexism and racism and the firm belief that the best leaders are white men.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Sounds like revenge.

Biden and every single POTUS except Obama were chosen because they are white and male. Except for three women, every VP was chosen because of the color of his skin and what is between his legs.

You think it is revenge to be asked to even consider what it is like to be a woman or black or both?

My God the privilege you live in! You poor little baby who cannot face the possibility of having to compete in a world where what’s between your legs and what color you skin dies not give you the loooongg head start you think you are entitled to because. Just because.

In other words, it is revenge. You're part of the problem, not part of the solution.

You need to explain how DEI is revenge because I don't think that word means what you think it means.

The objective should be equality. Not inflicting past harms on the innocent as a form of redress.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Sounds like revenge.

Biden and every single POTUS except Obama were chosen because they are white and male. Except for three women, every VP was chosen because of the color of his skin and what is between his legs.

You think it is revenge to be asked to even consider what it is like to be a woman or black or both?

My God the privilege you live in! You poor little baby who cannot face the possibility of having to compete in a world where what’s between your legs and what color you skin dies not give you the loooongg head start you think you are entitled to because. Just because.

In other words, it is revenge. You're part of the problem, not part of the solution.

No. Affording all people access to the same opportunities as have long been enjoyed by men is NOT revenge.

It is justice.

"as have long been enjoyed"--you're asking for the oppression of the past to be applied to the present, most of whom have not been in a position where they could have done wrong, let alone have done wrong. You're perpetuating the cycle, not solving it.

And? Derec doesn't call her that because she's not a white male. He calls her that because Biden decided he'd choose a black woman before he decided to choose her. His implication isn't that she's likely to be less qualified than someone else would have been because she's a black woman; his implication is that she's likely to be less qualified than someone else would have been because she isn't the winner of a qualifications contest.

Exactly. If you set out to find someone with irrelevant attribute X it's automatically a DEI hire.

However, VP is normally a DEI hire anyway, just not always so blatantly.

Is being white and make an irrelevant attribute?

In the past it's been about diversity of other attributes. It's still diversity, though.

Note that I'm counting Harris as a DEI pick but I am not counting Obama as one.

of course. How very generous..or something..of you.

The point is if I felt that black was automatically DEI I would have objected to him.

 

[Playball40]

Or if there were no highly qualified black women to comprise a good pool of candidates.

But they are not the only ones who are "highly qualified". So why restrict SCOTUS and running mate nominations to that relatively small demographic?
And of course, what made Biden's decision even worse is that he made both these race and gender restrictions at about the same time, about two high-profile nominations.

Perhaps to make a point that those in a group or groups who have been entirely or nearly entirely excluded from consideration would now get first consideration.

I know I am repeating myself but only an idiot would think that Biden did not already have a list of candidates for VP who met all of his criteria before he made that statement.

"Would now get first consideration" -- discrimination. Period. You can't fix old wrongs, you inherently end up discriminating against those who have done nothing wrong. Only by introducing the artificial notion of harm to groups can you disguise the evil you're seeking.

If it stings: maybe quit grousing and start recognizing that this is what it is still like to be a person of color or a woman, not to mention both.

Truer words have not been spoken!!!!

 

[Toni]

Sounds like revenge.

Biden and every single POTUS except Obama were chosen because they are white and male. Except for three women, every VP was chosen because of the color of his skin and what is between his legs.

You think it is revenge to be asked to even consider what it is like to be a woman or black or both?

My God the privilege you live in! You poor little baby who cannot face the possibility of having to compete in a world where what’s between your legs and what color you skin dies not give you the loooongg head start you think you are entitled to because. Just because.

In other words, it is revenge. You're part of the problem, not part of the solution.

You need to explain how DEI is revenge because I don't think that word means what you think it means.

The objective should be equality. Not inflicting past harms on the innocent as a form of redress.

Nobody is inflicting harm on white men!

Please take your head out of your ass
And actually start considering people who are not male and not white as being every bit as worthy of being considered as white men.

Over and over we are told that Harris was a DEI hire because Biden himself declared that he would only select a black woman.

This claim might have validity only IF the following fact were true, which it is not: that in the past, black women have been seriously considered for vice president, along with everyone else.

Since they have not been, the complaint is entirely without merit.

So discrimination in favor of X is proper since X was discriminated against the past?

No, this is a big problem with the left. You can't fix past wrongs, the attempt simply perpetuates the wrong rather than fixing it.

This is silly. It is simply a way to rig the game yet again favor of cis straight white men. Someone can lie and say, “I’m going to consider everyone” but then keep on hiring only cis straight white men. OTOH if someone is sincere and then really does hire a qualified black woman, the pick will still be castigated as discrimination against cis straight white men. In fact there is not and never has been discrimination against cis straight white men. Removing unearned privileges is not discrimination.

If someone is actually discriminating go after them. However, if it's properly blinded how do they discriminate??

And it's the current situation that causes people to question the credentials of anyone who could be thought to be DEI.

And how can you say there has never been discrimination against cis het white men?? When you try to balance the racial mix of your employees you are inherently discriminating against them! The current crop of new hires is not responsible for any past discrimination but you are stacking the deck against them.

Really? Just how is it that you know that the white males are not the least qualified?

How are you discriminating against the employees hired?

Why is it that you believe the most qualified candidates are white and male?

There have been multiple discrimination lawsuits because white males were being unfairly excluded. Never have I heard a defense that the claims were false.

What is it that makes you so certain that white men are the best candidates??

 

[Playball40]

• Female Doctor Who... yeah... white men are upset

They're apeshit now too. Black and gay! Oh and he cries. Sorry, off topic - but it's so ridiculous.