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

[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.

Playball40 points out that DEI is about including everyone - it not inflicting real harm on anyone.

Saying that doesn't make it true.

The reason to select a black woman is because of what happened in the past. That's revenge. Period.

I am for including everyone. But look at Toni's words 5 quotes up--that's about excluding white males.

 

[seanie]

No, just keep males out of female only spaces, and provide third spaces if necessary.

It’s a manageable issue.

 

[laughing dog]

You said they were men.

Then they weren’t.

Whatever surgeries or hormone treatments they’ve undertaken, and regardless of how well they “pass”, they’re still men.

Nope.

 

[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.

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

Playball40 points out that DEI is about including everyone - it not inflicting real harm on anyone.

Saying that doesn't make it true.

The reason to select a black woman is because of what happened in the past. That's revenge. Period.

Saying that doesn’t make it true. Period.

 

[laughing dog]

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. ....

No, I don't.

You keep comparing evidence of modern discrimination against white males by referring to when white males were the ones doing the discriminating.

Not only do you keep accusing the innocent of oppression but you treat them as so stupid they can't comprehend they are oppressing.

Having one's feelings bruised is not oppression.

You're doing it again. Pretending that there's nothing there to see.

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.

I have heard enough from like Colonel Saunders, they are snowflakes. Just like Trump - imagining themselves as victims when they are not.

And you're doing it again, saying they aren't victims.

Let me get this straight. When white men say they are oppressed or victims of discrimination, you accept their word but when someone of color says they are oppressed or a victim of discrimination, you claim they aren’t.

 

[laughing dog]

Or is “passing” an important metric?

Given you highlighted that?

So should access for males to female only spaces be based on “passing”?

How’s that going to work?

The way it’s worked up to now. Duh.

Explain.

Should male access to female spaces be based on “passing”, or not?

Should has nothing to do with it. For the most part, any trans or female impersonator who passes and behaves appropriately has no trouble using women’s facilities. That’s the way it has been working.

 

[Emily Lake]

I’ve known a couple of men who went through the entire transformative process.
It was painful in many dimensions, but they emerged better people. They easily passed as cis women.

So men then.

Men who “pass” as women.

But still men.

Maybe men should be more accepting of other men who are gender non-conforming?

Accept them into male spaces?

Given that they are male?

Just a thought.

Since they aren’t men, think better.

In what way are men with gender identity issues not men?

More specifically, exactly what observable and verifiable characteristic to men with gender identity issues have in common with women in general, that they do NOT also have in common with men?

 

[Emily Lake]

Oh, so now it's just peeping that's the crime we're trying to prevent. Which is weird, because you have gone on and on about how much time you spend looking at other women's genitals in bathrooms.

It's fairly transparent, of course, that one end goal of this line of thinking is the banning of gays from the same spaces. Once you've gotten what you want with regard to trans people but still need something to campaign about, the next group to be accused of future crimes will be obvious.

Don't engage in malicious libel. If you have to invent falsehoods in order to justify your position, you haven't got a position worth defending.

 

[Emily Lake]

Every individual just decides for themself?

That is how things have worked for centuries, before the alt-right got everyone up in a froth.

For centuries, any dude that tosses on a dress has been allowed to invade female-only nude spas with their dick out? For centuries, any bearded bro with lipstick on has been allowed to go into the ladies changing rooms and strip down?

 

[Emily Lake]

Or is “passing” an important metric?

Given you highlighted that?

So should access for males to female only spaces be based on “passing”?

How’s that going to work?

The way it’s worked up to now. Duh.

Explain.

Should male access to female spaces be based on “passing”, or not?

Should has nothing to do with it. For the most part, any trans or female impersonator who passes and behaves appropriately has no trouble using women’s facilities. That’s the way it has been working.

That's the way it WAS working. That's not how it's working NOW. NOW any dude who says they're trans, regardless of whether they even remotely come close to passing, and regardless of whether they behave reasonably or not, feels entitled to use women's facilities.

Seriously, do you think Darren Merager with his tumescent dick "passed" and "behaved appropriately" when he invaded WiSpa?

 

[laughing dog]

I’ve known a couple of men who went through the entire transformative process.
It was painful in many dimensions, but they emerged better people. They easily passed as cis women.

So men then.

Men who “pass” as women.

But still men.

Maybe men should be more accepting of other men who are gender non-conforming?

Accept them into male spaces?

Given that they are male?

Just a thought.

Since they aren’t men, think better.

In what way are men with gender identity issues not men?

More specifically, exactly what observable and verifiable characteristic to men with gender identity issues have in common with women in general, that they do NOT also have in common with men?

My answer was in the context of men who went through a complete transformation. When finished, they had no gender issues: they were women. So your first question is moot given the context.

For transwomen who have completed the transition, no penis is the obvious answer.

 

[laughing dog]

Or is “passing” an important metric?

Given you highlighted that?

So should access for males to female only spaces be based on “passing”?

How’s that going to work?

The way it’s worked up to now. Duh.

Explain.

Should male access to female spaces be based on “passing”, or not?

Should has nothing to do with it. For the most part, any trans or female impersonator who passes and behaves appropriately has no trouble using women’s facilities. That’s the way it has been working.

That's the way it WAS working. That's not how it's working NOW. NOW any dude who says they're trans, regardless of whether they even remotely come close to passing, and regardless of whether they behave reasonably or not, feels entitled to use women's facilities.

Seriously, do you think Darren Merager with his tumescent dick "passed" and "behaved appropriately" when he invaded WiSpa?

Darren Merager is a predicate career criminal, sex offender, and poseur. Using him as a typical example is silly.

Just to be clear, I have no oroblem with the UK ruling. It is clear.

I do have a problem with the hysteria snd mean-spirited views used to make honest well-meaning people’s lives unnecessarily difficult and sad.

 

[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.

Second class citizen status? Really. That is hyperbolic nonsense. That concept is on par with Christians that are being “persecuted” just by people not bowing to them or letting them have exclusive access to public space for their holy displays.

Muslims regard all non-Muslims as second class citizens.

 

[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.

Second class citizen status? Really. That is hyperbolic nonsense. That concept is on par with Christians that are being “persecuted” just by people not bowing to them or letting them have exclusive access to public space for their holy displays.

Muslims regard all non-Muslims as second class citizens.

Perhaps some Muslins do but none that I’ve ever known. Of course many Americans regard the rest of the world as, at best, second class citizens. Plenty of Iranians and Saudis seem to regard most of the rest of the works as second class. Pretty sure that not that long ago, Germans regarded in-Aryans as sub human. We haven’ t even mentioned how whites viewed those they enslaved and indigenous people. Or that plenty of Americans are not much better today.

And of course, in most of the world, including in the US, ( some) people like to view women as second class citizens. In the US, women could not establish credit on their own or get a mortgage until the 1970’s, and a lot of people went tonnage it difficult for women to vote or control their own bodies or seek out the medical care they want or need. Women are still under treated for pain and for heart attacks, for example.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So a college local to me has a 70% non-white staff in an area that's over 50% white, and that doesn't indicate a problem to you?

What problem does that indicate to you?

Without knowing the proportion of people in the area who are competent to become college staff, and the size of the staff in question, that statistic alone is insufficient to indicate a problem to me.

Why does it matter what proportion of college staff are white? Surely all that matters is what proportion are competent in their role.

Think about how you would react if the ratios were the other way around.

 

[Politesse]

Every individual just decides for themself?

That is how things have worked for centuries, before the alt-right got everyone up in a froth.

For centuries, any dude that tosses on a dress has been allowed to invade female-only nude spas with their dick out? For centuries, any bearded bro with lipstick on has been allowed to go into the ladies changing rooms and strip down?

"Female-only nude spas" have not existed for that long. But no, we got by just fine without an authoritarian government rigidly defining our gender for us based on pseudoscience.

 

[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.

Actual equality of opportunity does not mean second-class citizenship for white males, unless you think removing unearned white-male privilege is the same as making them second-class citizens.

I support equality. But equality means equality, it doesn't mean punishing people who did no wrongs for acts of their ancestors with the same skin color. When you try to fix the past disparity you end up giving the short end of the stick (sometimes not even that--we had a school that one year admitted only women) to people who did no wrong. You're perpetuating the problem, not fixing it. We have gone past equality and yet many are trying to drive us still further. Pretending there's no wrong is one of the things that lead to #47 and the probable ruin of our country.

 

[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.

Playball40 points out that DEI is about including everyone - it not inflicting real harm on anyone.

Saying that doesn't make it true.

The reason to select a black woman is because of what happened in the past. That's revenge. Period.

I am for including everyone. But look at Toni's words 5 quotes up--that's about excluding white males.

You see justice as revenge.

You see for one time! ONE SINGLE FUCKING TIME purposefully choosing from among a group of highly competent, highly qualified, highly accomplished black women instead of bunch of piddly ass white boys who wouldn’t have gotten anywhere without the color of their skin and what’s hanging between their legs plus their daddy’s money as…revenge?

Seriously?

What the hell do you call centuries of white men white men Uber Alles as?

Justice? Earned?

Is what all of that white boy power was supposed to do? Let women and black people know their place and that that place was cleaning up after white boys were done filling their plates? Or rather having their plates filled for them? You’re begrudging women and black people even the scraps after white boys bellies are full.

Just how much power do you think it would take to fill up that empty spot inside enough that you don’t think that giving a black woman a chance is something other than revenge?

Revenge would be burning the place down and your white ass hanging from the tree.

Women and people are just asking for their turn. A fair shot.

If it’s revenge you see then maybe, just maybe deep inside you recognize the injustice done to people who do not look like you for the sin of not looking like you.

That fear of revenge is maybe a tiny shred of guilt because you know it’s never been fair and you’re afraid that women and black folks—never mind a black woman—want to do to you what your kind has been doing to them all of these years.

That’s the thing about not being consumed with maintaining a position that you only have because the odds and the laws were always written to hand you the edge and not because you all the way earned it. You don’t really have confidence. Bullies don’t. They know they don’t deserve their power and they’re scared of what happens if they lose it. They’re scared their victims will take revenge the bullies believe they deserve.

Here’s the thing:

The best revenge is living your own life and letting those it bothers drown in their own hate and insecurity.

 

[seanie]

Should has nothing to do with it. For the most part, any trans or female impersonator who passes and behaves appropriately has no trouble using women’s facilities. That’s the way it has been working.

And what about all the trans women accessing women’s spaces who don’t pass?

And the vast majority of trans women who have not had surgery or hormone treatments?

How does it work in those instances?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I never said that. I’ve said third spaces.

That is a nice magical solution. Almost as good as prayer. Seeing there are no third spaces and pushing out "third spaces" isn't viable in existing construction and only viable for future construction, it isn't a solution.

And calling trans women “male” or “men”, is an accurate description of reality. You can pretend otherwise, but they are.

Exactly. This need to relabel people isn't a good sign. Oh... my bad... it is okay when you do it, because you don't mean anything against it.

And it’s OK for men to identify as women. It really is.

When you say "identify as women" you make it sound like it is a choice. That it is arbitrary.

Females deserve some female only spaces.

Dude, we can't even get to this point of the discussion, because you refuse to acknowledge that transgenders are legitimate.