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

[Emily Lake]

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

It’s a manageable issue.

Retrofit third spaces how?

Let's go back several years. My wife got hurt while we were visiting her family. While she could walk it was only with considerable pain. She was taking absolutely as few steps as she could and only with assistance. Time to fly home. PVG is a modern airport, built this century when there was a recognition of the need for family restrooms. No problem. Connection, LAX. That airport has been there quite a while, no family restrooms, no place to put family restrooms--I walked the entire terminal in case there were just a few. I had to wheel her into the men's room.

I asked you this previously, and you declined to answer. So I'll ask it again:

WHY did you wheel her into the men's room? Why did you NOT wheel her into the women's room?

 

[Toni]

Who make the rules that the rest of us ( but not you) must follow. Someone acknowledged that a person with a female appearing body would likely not fare well in a men’s locker room. I’m guessing lot of gay guys don’t feel comfortable—with good reason! in a lot of male restrooms or locker rooms/showers.

Rapes by trans people in women's restrooms: zero.

Probably not zero.

But what does that have to do with how welcoming and accepting trans people in male restrooms?

For example: How many trans people do you suppose are raped, beaten in men’s restrooms? How many gay people? How many bisexuals? Just not sufficiently masculine appearing men? How many women? How murdered by men?

You have fucking got a lot of damn nerve trying to tell women what we must accept from someone with an XY chromosome.

 

[seanie]

Physically, psychologically and emotionally

Be more specific.

What physical, psychological and emotional changes are required for a male to become a woman?

We need metrics.

 

[Emily Lake]

Why is it so hard to take a woman's word for it when she tells you who and what she is?

I'm a progressive. I told you this, you have to take my word for it.

 

[laughing dog]

A female is not necessarily a woman. If you don't know the difference, you really have no business in this thread/

A sexually mature female human being is literally a woman.

A sexually mature female human being might not be figuratively a woman.

A sexually immature female is literally not a woman.

So, making spaces “women only” is false advertising if girls are allowed.

Context being abused by wankers is going to be the downfall of civilization.

You’re the one with rigid definitions, not me. You’re the one railing against false advertising, not me.

At this point in time in our society, we are struggling to treat cis and trans with as much dignity and safety as possible. It means struggling with strongly held false beliefs, and balancing legitimate concerns with safety vs personal issues.

There is no way at this time to insure on whatever rule on who gets to use what space is 100% enforced with no errors. It seems to me your fears are overblown because bad actors don’t need to pretend anything in order to misbehave. You disagree.

Establishing female only spaces requires some enforcement, because general social acceptance only goes so far. How is this to be enforced?

 

[laughing dog]

Physically, psychologically and emotionally

Be more specific.

What physical, psychological and emotional changes are required for a male to become a woman?

We need metrics.

Why? You cannot understand sex is not binary.

 

[seanie]

Why exactly is it the male person’s problem and not your?

Misogyny and male entitlement perfectly captured.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

In what women's restroom would you see an "exposed penis" from a TG woman? There are no OPEN urinals in women's restrooms. And 'fear' of rape is not, in my opinion, a reasonable argument against TG women using the women's restroom. If a MAN wanted to enter the restroom for nefarious reasons, they would have done so already. The number of 'rapes' by men pretending to be women in bathrooms is effectively nill and not significant enough to deny rights to TG men and women.

There are those abominations of restrooms without stall doors.

But you have an extra word here: "effectively". There are zero reported cases.

 

[seanie]

Physically, psychologically and emotionally

Be more specific.

What physical, psychological and emotional changes are required for a male to become a woman?

We need metrics.

Why? You cannot understand sex is not binary.

You’ve yet to explain why it isn’t.

Assertion is not explanation.

 

[Jarhyn]

Human sex is not binary. No matter how much you wish human sex to be binary, it isn'

So saying that sex in humans is binary, and that in some circumstances female humans are entitled to spaces free from male humans, is the equivalent of being a Nazi?

That seems a little unhinged.

Not as unhinged as stomping one's foot and claiming a falsehood is a fact.

Like, I don't get how it's even hard to understand, trying to manufacture this illusion that "biological sex" is binary is unethical and dishonest and yes, NAZI.

For everyone who has half a goddamn brain and even the tiniest lick of integrity, sex is not binary; when narrowly defined it is 4-nary, "male, female, both, neither", and immaterial to most concerned, and the arguments presented don't really solve problems; the strictness of the 'insane commitment to sex separation deontology' is exactly as broken as, say, the 'insane commitment to abortion deontology'.

It's clear that the intent has nothing to do with helping people who fear violation in private places, and everything to do with violating people for existing anywhere at all.

Of course, Nazis try to keep their ideology "mostly right", with its wrong parts engineered to be tucked behind and out of the way, behind false "common sense" and massive circular logics and easily overlooked normative/purity impulses many people have.

It's going to seem reasonable even to the people pushing it, because of it didn't, Nazi Germany never would have happened because it wouldn't have seemed reasonable at the time.

We shouldn't give an inch to such mealy-mouthed apologetics trying to shit on more formal and complex understandings of subjects like sex and gender.

 

[Emily Lake]

For the most part, for most individuals, sex is binary in terms of procreation potential. But that’s not an all inclusive way of looking at sex, whether it is an action or a way of being.

Any other way of looking at sex is ideologically driven faith, not science. Evolution doesn't give a single fuck about being inclusive, and sex is an evolutionary result.

Sex is defined based on the type of reproductive system within an anisogamous species. For ALL species that reproduce sexually (regardless of whether individuals in that species actually reproduce), there has evolved two different systems. One system evolved to support the production of small gametes, and we call individuals with that type of system males. Another different system evolved to support the production of large gametes, and we call individuals with that type of system females.

This definition of sex is universal across every single species that reproduces via the merging of two different-sized gametes. It does not require that any individual actually reproduce, it doesn't require that any individual be fertile, and it doesn't even require that every single element of a system is present or functional.

Sex is strictly binary in all anisogamous species.

Nope. You are thinking of sex as strictly a reproductive function and furthermore you are gripping hard onto that one single aspect of sex in order to make your point but at the same time, you do not so tightly embrace sex as the sole, major or even relevant factor in other aspects of being human. Women are more than child bearers and nurturers and in fact some of us never do either, out of choice or because of luck—bad or good. Men are more than sperm donators or bread winners. They may be neither by choice or by luck, good or bad.

This is absurd, Toni. Your view is tantamount to intelligent design.

Sex is literally the result of reproductive function. That is what it is. That does not mean that every individual must reproduce. It does not reduce other elements of a person to sex. It doesn't supplant the variety and complexity of personality at all.

But sex is actually, completely, really a result of reproduction. It evolved part and parcel with anisogamous reproduction. Sexual reproduction is why sex exists!

The fact that YOU think acknowledging the binary nature of sex in every single anisogamous species out there somehow negates all the other characteristics that make us human is a you problem.

People aren’t at all binary when it comes to sexual attraction, either.

Nobody said they were, not sure why you think this is relevant.

Society has assigned a lot of roles and expectations based solely upon external genitalia.

You're preaching to the choir. Now take this one step further. Do you think that adoption and acceptance of any of those roles and expectations is what MAKES someone a certain sex?

It’s not a question of testimony, it’s a question of fact.

A person’s sex is an objective, material reality.

If someone doesn’t consider themselves to be the biological sex they are, that’s fine. But sometimes a person’s actual sex matters, regardless of how they consider themselves.

A person's sex is not always as clear cut as you wish to believe

It's not necessarily easy to discern - I'll absolutely agree to that. But sex is absolutely that clear cut, it is absolutely male or female - no other options exist in humans.

{Sqrt(16) - 3)} + (15/3 - 144/24 + 2) = 5902/2951

That's not easy to discern, it take a moment to work through it, it's not immediately apparent. But the result is still extremely clear cut.

 

[Emily Lake]

What’s false about it?

Human sex is not binary. No matter how much you wish human sex to be binary, it isn't.

What other type of gamete do humans have?
What other sort of reproductive system has been observed in humans that produces this different gamete?

 

[Emily Lake]

Sex, across a very wide number of species, including humans, is an evolved means of reproduction, that is binary, based on the developmental pathway evolved to produce either large or small gametes: female and male.

The actual production of said gametes is not required.

Sex is determined at fertilisation, and embryos develop down either the Müllerian or Wolffian pathway: female or male.

Every human is either male or female, something that can be objectively determined.

Adult human females are called women, and adult human males are called men.

Minor clarification: sex in humans is determined at fertilization.

Actually, sex in all mammals and all birds is determined at fertilization. The mechanism of sex determination varies in reptiles... but there are still only two sexes of alligators

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And yeah, sometimes there were men in the women’s restroom, usually showering with their girlfriend. Generally not a problem but I can think of one or two guys who lived in my dorm whose presence in the women’s restroom would definitely have been very very threatening. Not trans at all. Just wears af in a very rapey way. As in these were guys I went way out of my way to try to keep them from knowing which was my room, to the extent that I sometimes walked the whole way up the stairs to the 11th floor to avoid being in the elevator with them

In other words, male looking males that appear to be a threat. I don't think anyone is denying they exist and I think you would have had every right to have them thrown out and banned.

But given that we are talking about an instant reaction—not everyone will immediately think: trans woman. Many if not most might immediately see threat, even if there is no actual threat. And will have to, in the moment, suppress that reaction and be concerned more about making the other person feel comfortable than about their own feelings.

And I've spooked more than one woman by simply walking quickly down the same route they were on. It's simply not something the law should protect you from.

Yep, sounds like exactly what is always expected of women.

I don’t mean to be glib. I genuinely think that everybody should be able to feel safe and accepted and to be safe and accepted.

The problem is you are focusing on a non-threat. It has not been established that there is any overlap between the creeps you talk about and the ones trying to pass. There are zero reported rapes by the ones trying to pass. Just because they share a bit of anatomy with the actual problems doesn't make them a problem. Discrimination.

 

[Emily Lake]

Why should their sex matter more than their gender

Because one is objectively real and scientifically verifiable. The other is purely a social construct that cannot be validated in any way whatsoever.

Sex is real, gender is souls.

 

[seanie]

Like, I don't get how it's even hard to understand, trying to manufacture this illusion that "biological sex" is binary is unethical and dishonest and yes, NAZI.

For everyone who has half a goddamn brain and even the tiniest lick of integrity, sex is not binary; when narrowly defined it is 4-nary, "male, female, both, neither", and immaterial to most concerned, and the arguments presented don't really solve problems; the strictness of the 'insane commitment to sex separation deontology' is exactly as broken as, say, the 'insane commitment to abortion deontology'.

The problem you have, is that what you’ve said is horseshit.

From a biological perspective, sex in humans is binary. That’s just reality.

That doesn’t mean the binary of sex should be the basis of policy and law. An argument could be made that sex is always and everywhere, irrelevant.

Not a convincing argument, obviously.

But denying material reality is not only daft, it’s a huge strategic error. It makes those who do so look very, very silly.

 

[Emily Lake]

It doesn't make you a Nazi, but within our current political system, it necessarily puts you in bed with them. If not for the rise of neo-fascism, we would not be having this conversation to begin with. This and immigration are the wedge issues they have chosen to use to break the spine of the centrist left, and you've fallen for the gambit hook, line, and sinker.

"Shut up and accept our dogma, and let males who say magic words share showers with non-consenting women or else you're a nazi!"

Totally the best and most convincing argument ever made.

 

[Toni]

And yeah, sometimes there were men in the women’s restroom, usually showering with their girlfriend. Generally not a problem but I can think of one or two guys who lived in my dorm whose presence in the women’s restroom would definitely have been very very threatening. Not trans at all. Just wears af in a very rapey way. As in these were guys I went way out of my way to try to keep them from knowing which was my room, to the extent that I sometimes walked the whole way up the stairs to the 11th floor to avoid being in the elevator with them

In other words, male looking males that appear to be a threat. I don't think anyone is denying they exist and I think you would have had every right to have them thrown out and banned.

But given that we are talking about an instant reaction—not everyone will immediately think: trans woman. Many if not most might immediately see threat, even if there is no actual threat. And will have to, in the moment, suppress that reaction and be concerned more about making the other person feel comfortable than about their own feelings.

And I've spooked more than one woman by simply walking quickly down the same route they were on. It's simply not something the law should protect you from.

Yep, sounds like exactly what is always expected of women.

I don’t mean to be glib. I genuinely think that everybody should be able to feel safe and accepted and to be safe and accepted.

The problem is you are focusing on a non-threat. It has not been established that there is any overlap between the creeps you talk about and the ones trying to pass. There are zero reported rapes by the ones trying to pass. Just because they share a bit of anatomy with the actual problems doesn't make them a problem. Discrimination.

No, I’m focusing on what YOU assume to be a non-threat basically because it is not a threat to YOU.

You are expecting women to in an instant evaluate a male appearing body in their locker room as a non-threat even though women all know —mostly from experience—that it is impossible to tell by looking which male is a threat what which is not.

It may be the case that you use a public street as a urinal but likely that’s frowned upon if not actually illegal. Just like walking around without your pants on may be totally fine in your own home but generally not in public.

We are NOT talking about public spaces. We are talking about spaces where women expect to only see other women, where they are likely to be in some state of disrobe. Where they are particularly vulnerable.

Please do some reading about empathy and how to get some.

Also if women frequently cross the street when they see you, you need to do some serious self-evaluation and maybe enlist the help of a mental health professional.

 

[Emily Lake]

no biologist who isn't on drugs is going to tell you that ants and bees have more than two sexes

One just did.

Of course, it depends on having a less strict definition of what constitutes a sex than yours; But that's the entire fucking point. Your "strict binary" definition is not particularly useful; There are very few situations in which lumping worker ants in with queens, and separate from aners, is more useful than putting them into a third category, but biologists tend to do so because they are used to doing so - it's a habit, not a fact about ants.

It's incredibly useful to acknowledge that strict binary. It's useful to understand both how reproduction occurs and to understand the evolutionary pathways that result in it.

It's not particularly useful to indulge in self-serving human exceptionalism and gendery souls as an article of faith. And it's definitely not useful to invent special-pleading one-time-use definitions of sex based on very rare congenital conditions of people who are not transgender in order to try to coerce women into letting any fucking man who ways magic words into our intimate spaces.

 

[Emily Lake]

Human sex is not binary. No matter how much you wish human sex to be binary, it isn'

So saying that sex in humans is binary, and that in some circumstances female humans are entitled to spaces free from male humans, is the equivalent of being a Nazi?

That seems a little unhinged.

Not as unhinged as stomping one's foot and claiming a falsehood is a fact.

Please demonstrate the third gamete and third type of reproductive system that has evolved in humans.