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

[Loren Pechtel]

I don’t know what you’re suggesting for sports. What standards need to be agreed?

Exactly who qualifies as "female".

Those who never underwent male puberty are unquestionably equal to females in competition.

Why do you believe that? The sports record for prepubescent boys is better than the record for girls of the same age in almost every event.

My understanding was that they were equal.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

There is a cluster of positions that generally travel together and can reasonably be considered anti-trans.

No doubt; but what does that have to do with the discussion here? Do you see anybody in the thread defending Trump's order to kick people with gender dysphoria out of the military? People are called anti-trans here for not agreeing that the progressive stack is the correct way to decide public policy and matters of fact. It is not anti-trans to say transwomen aren't women any more than it's anti-Muslim to say Mohammad wasn't God's Prophet; it's simply failing to pretend to believe and uncritically recite some subculture's intellectually vapid loyalty oath. Likewise, it is not anti-trans to say trans people have exactly the same rights as the rest of us but no extra rights on account of being trans, any more than it's anti-black to say black students have the right to be considered for college admission based on the same standard of qualification as everyone else, but no right to favoritism on account of being black.

What you seem to be missing is that the "progressive" approach is what's been done in reality without undue consequences. The anti-trans position is about rolling back the clock, not defending the status quo!

And it's not that some opponents made a weak argument, but that basically all of them use the same flawed argument. When everyone trying to establish X makes the same mistake in the process it's highly suggestive that X is false.

Dude, I already asked you which argument you're calling "the anti-trans argument" that you propose to kick a pillar out from under. "X" is not an answer! What is this flawed argument that you claim basically all of them make? Emily at least has repeatedly made it very clear she thinks intersex conditions have no bearing on trans issues; as for me, I never claimed sex is a strict binary; and I'm guessing you classify both of us as "anti-trans".

That everyone is unequivocally male or female.

And you're still not getting it--it's not saying the trans exist, but that the argument of why they don't is invalid.

Oh for the love of god! Stop getting your understanding of people's viewpoints at second-hand from the ad hominem propaganda of their opponents. You aren't willing to believe Ukrainians are Nazis on barbos's say-so, are you? So go to the source. Who the heck here has argued that the trans don't exist?!? Of course they exist! But their existence doesn't prove they are what they think they are, any more than a Hindu's undisputed existence proves she's the reincarnation of a sacred cow.

If they exist what is supposed to be done?

You mean the reproductive anatomy, I take it. Brain wiring is anatomy.

Since we don't know how it manifests in the brain we can't establish that it's wiring and thus "anatomy" might not be relevant.

I lost you. You don't believe in souls, do you? What else is there besides brain wiring to account for the physical phenomenon of a person thinking she is or isn't a member of some set? I'm not seeing a whole lot of metastable cross-coupled Nand-gates in there.

The brain is more than connections. We know hormones have major effects. We know other things exist without being able to find anything in the hardware that's related. Perhaps you are considering such thing as "wiring", I was picturing the neural connections as "wiring"--hardware, not software.

Thus it is unquestionable that there can be a gender to the mind.

No, it is unquestionable that there can be a gender identity to the mind. Gender and gender identity are not the same concept. An awful lot of trans ideology's arguments rely on equivocating them.

What is there to distinguish between them?

"Gender refers to the characteristics of women, men, girls and boys that are socially constructed. This includes norms, behaviours and roles associated with being a woman, man, girl or boy, as well as relationships with each other. As a social construct, gender varies from society to society and can change over time.​

...​

Gender and sex are related to but different from gender identity. Gender identity refers to a person’s deeply felt, internal and individual experience of gender, which may or may not correspond to the person’s physiology or designated sex at birth".​

- World Health Organization​

To oversimplify: your gender identity is the sex-linked category you think of yourself as being in; your gender is the sex-linked category other people typically think of you as being in. That's what "socially constructed" involves.

But how others think of you is based on how you present yourself. You're not showing off your anatomy. In environments where people don't see me and don't hear my non-electronic voice (I don't know what the telephone does to my voice, but it is very common for people to think it's female) I am routinely thought female. Does that make a mismatch between my gender and my gender identity?? (Not that I really have a personal sense of gender. I have male bits, I'm fine with that, but it seems rather irrelevant.)

It says nothing about how that should actually be handled in society.

For how to handle it, observe what happens. The suicide rate amongst those allowed to live as their preferred gender is lower than amongst those who aren't.

Argumentum ad suicide? Whether a person who thinks he or she is the other sex would benefit from drafting the whole population into his or her care team, and getting them all to help the person self-perceive as the other sex, medicinally, by making an effort to conceal contrary data, has no implications one way or the other as to whether he or she is, in point of fact, the other sex.

Who is being drafted?

I'm simply saying that allowing them to live as the gender of their choice has a better outcome than not. And the claims of a burden on society don't show up in the data.

What does "allowing them to live as the gender of their choice" mean? What would "not allowing them to live as the gender of their choice" involve? Banning women from cutting their hair short and wearing traditionally male clothing and getting traditionally male jobs and changing their names to male-sounding names? Nobody does that! That sort of thing went out of style over fifty years ago. Women get to do everything men get to do and don't even get considered trans for it, just tomboys. So getting to live as they please can't be what you're talking about. Surely what you're talking about must be how other people live -- whether other people alter their own behavior to pretend they don't know perfectly well that the male-identifying woman is in point of fact female.

That's who's being drafted. If the point of all this society-wide lying the trans-activists are demanding from the rest of us is for a better mental health outcome for their favorite oppressed group, that means we're being drafted into their care team. Well, if we're going to be part of their care team, shouldn't we be getting paid for it?

I think you don't realize that we are asking for basically the status quo, you are not.

 

[seanie]

My understanding was that they were equal.

No, male sporting advantage is less pronounced pre-puberty, but it still exists.

 

[seanie]

It certainly isn’t yours, since nothing you posted requires enforcement by the retailer. Failure to enforce may result in civil action.

So nothing requires enforcement by the retailer…

…it’s just that failure to enforce opens them up to legal liability because it’s unlawful.

 

[seanie]

Pre-Puberty, Children Show Marked Differences in Sport Performance​

 

[Bomb#20]

Those who never underwent male puberty are unquestionably equal to females in competition.

Why do you believe that? The sports record for prepubescent boys is better than the record for girls of the same age in almost every event.

My understanding was that they were equal.

Read the numbers for yourself. http://age-records.125mb.com/

 

[TomC]

Those who never underwent male puberty are unquestionably equal to females in competition.

Why do you believe that? The sports record for prepubescent boys is better than the record for girls of the same age in almost every event.

My understanding was that they were equal.

Read the numbers for yourself. http://age-records.125mb.com/

That's rather how I remember things as well. (Not that I checked out your numbers) Boys were more athletic and physically able than girls, generally.

But it doesn't seem very pronounced, and it's hard to say what is physical and what is cultural. The sportiest of my siblings was definitely my baby sister.
Tom

 

[seanie]

There have been protests about the Supreme Court ruling.

View attachment 076a179b5095a0105d401d90d83bf0626fb88b59.mov

 

[TSwizzle]

one of the protesting women screams “suck my fucking dick”

 

[thebeave]

Those who never underwent male puberty are unquestionably equal to females in competition.

Why do you believe that? The sports record for prepubescent boys is better than the record for girls of the same age in almost every event.

My understanding was that they were equal.

Read the numbers for yourself. http://age-records.125mb.com/

That's rather how I remember things as well. (Not that I checked out your numbers) Boys were more athletic and physically able than girls, generally.

But it doesn't seem very pronounced, and it's hard to say what is physical and what is cultural. The sportiest of my siblings was definitely my baby sister.
Tom

Back when I was in elementary school in the early '70's, we had to participate in the Presidential Physical Fitness Test, like many school age kids across the country at that time. If you scored in the top 15% in all events, you got the Presidential Physical Fitness Awared patch (I got it in 6th grade). The boys had separate, and much higher level achievement requirements than the girls. IIRC, the boys had to do 6 or 7 pullups to qualify for the award, while the girls had to do maybe 2 or 3? Girls could get points for not even doing one pullup...just hanging! Every event had significant disparities between boys and girls. If prepubescent boys and girls were equally capable physically, why would they have separate achievement levels?

Apparently, some of the more unathletic kids were traumatized by all the competition according to this website. Some of it comical, some of it sad. I have fairly fond memories of it myself.

 

[Bomb#20]

I know a woman who installed curtains in her car windows so she could go out to the parking lot to pee in privacy, because her workplace in its infinite wisdom decided to make the women's restroom "gender neutral".

There were no doors on the stalls?

I can't even.

Why not?

Why did you ask "There were no doors on the stalls?"? Was that a serious question? Do you genuinely think "The stall doors were missing." is a more likely explanation for why a woman would pee in a jar in the parking lot than that it's psychologically less awful for her than having to pee with a man she doesn't know right outside the stall? Or was it a rhetorical question, intended to convey a sentiment to the effect of "Why can't a woman be more like a man?"? Either way, for you to write something that tone-deaf makes me wonder if you even know any women.

I already told the story of working at a concert venue and announcing my self before entering the women's restroom/shower area and a woman on the toilet in a stall told me to come on in.

And if instead she'd asked you to wait a minute until she finished, you would have, right? You acknowledged her right to reserve the space, you asked permission, and you had a universally recognized good reason for going in -- restrooms need to be cleaned and insisting that only women clean women's rooms is impractical and everyone understands that. Being okay with a janitor just doing his job is of course psychologically easier than being okay with a male restroom user who perfectly well could have used the men's room twenty feet away, but instead chose to encroach on a female space for reasons of his own. And even the janitor is expected by custom to announce himself and ask permission, because everyone understands that different women's comfort level varies.

Frankly, the woman in your story sounds like a prude.

So, a rhetorical question meaning "Why can't a woman be more like a man?", then. "Prude." Classy.

The reason people add insult to injury isn't usually that they're just jerks. More often it's because they want to remain the hero of their own narrative, but they know they're being hurtful. Any story they can tell themselves for why the victim deserves it relieves the cognitive dissonance, so it's apt to be latched onto.

Does she think men think women don't actually urinate? Was she 14 years old?

Case in point. Any more insults you need to get out of your system to convince yourself your cause is just? She's fifty-something, by the way.

Are you familiar with how urination works, physiologically? In case you haven't given it any thought lately, we have muscles around our urethras that normally hold the urethra closed by means of continuously maintained muscle tension. Urination involves relaxing them. Men typically don't have much trouble relaxing in the presence of women, so it stands to reason that women should have little trouble relaxing in the presence of men, eh?

 

[seanie]

The Equality and Human Rights Commission is the regulatory body for the UK Equality Act.

They’ve put draft guidance out for consultation, on how to comply with the law in light of the Supreme Court ruling.

Here is one practical example:

 

[Bomb#20]

Read the numbers for yourself. http://age-records.125mb.com/

That's rather how I remember things as well. (Not that I checked out your numbers) Boys were more athletic and physically able than girls, generally.

But it doesn't seem very pronounced, and it's hard to say what is physical and what is cultural. The sportiest of my siblings was definitely my baby sister.
Tom

For those who don't check the numbers, I picked a random sample of world records:

60 m run, 10-year-olds -- girls: 7.86 sec, boys 7.90 sec.
High jump, 6-year-olds -- girls: 3' 5.25", boys 3' 6.25"
Standing high jump - 7-year-olds -- girls 2' 9.5", boys 2' 11.75"
0.4 kg javelin throw, 5-year-olds -- girls 32' 3", boys 53' 7"
0.3 kg ball throw, 8-year-olds -- girls 83' 5", boys 101' 5"​

So yeah, boys have an edge overall, not very pronounced for most events. But there may be some truth to the old saw about throwing like a girl.

 

[TSwizzle]

California high school junior AB Hernandez, a transgender athlete, won CIF titles in the girls long jump and triple jump at the Southern Section finals. Hernandez's winning triple jump was 41 feet, 4 inches, beating second-place finisher Reese Hogan of Crean Lutheran by just over 4 feet (37-02). Hernandez currently holds the state's top marks in long jump (20-1.5) and triple jump (41-4) in girls track and field.

News

Hernandez has been beaten by actual females in some events but there may be a reason for that.

 

[TomC]

Hernandez has been beaten by actual females in some events but there may be a reason for that.

What was the top male score in that event?
Tom

 

[seanie]

With sport, the physiological differences between males and females is undeniably important, if you’re concerned with safety and fairness, but there are also significant social factors.

There is a huge overlap in performance between males and females. Serena Williams can beat close to a 100% of males on the planet at tennis.

But several hundred men could still beat her.

Without a separate female tennis competition, Serena wouldn’t have won a single title, despite being an incredible player. Male physiology confers an unfair advantage.

But that also leads to a default where male excellence in sport is valued and rewarded, and female excellence isn’t. Girls are less inclined to do sports, especially when they go into puberty. Girls drop out of sports.

And that’s not going to be helped by allowing young males who identify as female to compete with them.

That’s absurd, unfair, and offensive.

 

[ZiprHead]

I know a woman who installed curtains in her car windows so she could go out to the parking lot to pee in privacy, because her workplace in its infinite wisdom decided to make the women's restroom "gender neutral".

There were no doors on the stalls?

I can't even.

Why not?

Why did you ask "There were no doors on the stalls?"? Was that a serious question? Do you genuinely think "The stall doors were missing." is a more likely explanation for why a woman would pee in a jar in the parking lot than that it's psychologically less awful for her than having to pee with a man she doesn't know right outside the stall? Or was it a rhetorical question, intended to convey a sentiment to the effect of "Why can't a woman be more like a man?"? Either way, for you to write something that tone-deaf makes me wonder if you even know any women.

I already told the story of working at a concert venue and announcing my self before entering the women's restroom/shower area and a woman on the toilet in a stall told me to come on in.

And if instead she'd asked you to wait a minute until she finished, you would have, right? You acknowledged her right to reserve the space, you asked permission, and you had a universally recognized good reason for going in -- restrooms need to be cleaned and insisting that only women clean women's rooms is impractical and everyone understands that. Being okay with a janitor just doing his job is of course psychologically easier than being okay with a male restroom user who perfectly well could have used the men's room twenty feet away, but instead chose to encroach on a female space for reasons of his own. And even the janitor is expected by custom to announce himself and ask permission, because everyone understands that different women's comfort level varies.

Yes. I would. Why wouldn't I?

Frankly, the woman in your story sounds like a prude.

So, a rhetorical question meaning "Why can't a woman be more like a man?", then. "Prude." Classy.

The reason people add insult to injury isn't usually that they're just jerks. More often it's because they want to remain the hero of their own narrative, but they know they're being hurtful. Any story they can tell themselves for why the victim deserves it relieves the cognitive dissonance, so it's apt to be latched onto.

Does she think men think women don't actually urinate? Was she 14 years old?

Case in point. Any more insults you need to get out of your system to convince yourself your cause is just? She's fifty-something, by the way.

Are you familiar with how urination works, physiologically? In case you haven't given it any thought lately, we have muscles around our urethras that normally hold the urethra closed by means of continuously maintained muscle tension. Urination involves relaxing them. Men typically don't have much trouble relaxing in the presence of women, so it stands to reason that women should have little trouble relaxing in the presence of men, eh?

Yes, I do. Do you understand why they do?

Going to the extent of putting curtains in her car and making other unknown arrangements to urinate there without making a mess must have been quite an undertaking. That is what makes her a prude in my book.

 

[TomC]

Going to the extent of putting curtains in her car and making other unknown arrangements to urinate there without making a mess must have been quite an undertaking. That is what makes her a prude in my book.

So, a female woman who has been so traumatized by a male that she'd go out to her car to pee is a prude, by your standards?

What a patriarch.
Tom

 

[ZiprHead]

Going to the extent of putting curtains in her car and making other unknown arrangements to urinate there without making a mess must have been quite an undertaking. That is what makes her a prude in my book.

So, a female woman who has been so traumatized by a male that she'd go out to her car to pee is a prude, by your standards?

What a patriarch.
Tom

I have seen no evidence she was traumatized by anyone. Do you have some? Her parents could have been prudes and taught it to her.

 

[TomC]

Going to the extent of putting curtains in her car and making other unknown arrangements to urinate there without making a mess must have been quite an undertaking. That is what makes her a prude in my book.

So, a female woman who has been so traumatized by a male that she'd go out to her car to pee is a prude, by your standards?

What a patriarch.
Tom

I have seen no evidence she was traumatized by anyone. Do you have some? Her parents could have been prudes and taught it to her.

I've seen no evidence about why she decided to go pee in a car.
Only that she did.

Why do you assume that you know why she did that?
You specifically called her a prude. I'm saying I don't know why she did it.
Tom