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

[ZiprHead]

To end separate men and women’s sports?

My niece plays in a mixed sex softball league.

 

[TomC]

Seance loooves to demand that people define terms but dies not respond well when the same is asked of her or when someone points out inconsistencies or overly close definitions. Well, Seanie loves to demand, period.

It gets difficult sometimes, like when a poster insists that a person with XY chromosomes and a penis is a woman. Therefore they are entitled to mess with the other women in the room labeled Women.
Tom

 

[seanie]

Oh, what was it about the word “use” that confused you?

Happy to help if I can.

 

[seanie]

To end separate men and women’s sports?

My niece plays in a mixed sex softball league.

And how is that organised?

 

[seanie]

Can a team turn up with every player male?

 

[seanie]

What do you mean when you use the terms “male” and “female”?

You need to define what you mean by "use". Be specific.

The depth of your insight is an inspiration to us all

Tom

Tom, you really should not get so upset when someone demonstrates that they are more clever.

Seance loooves to demand that people define terms but dies not respond well when the same is asked of her or when someone points out inconsistencies or overly close definitions. Well, Seanie loves to demand, period.

The definition of the words “male” and “female” are obviously contested and pertinent to the discussion.

The definition of “use” is not.

Try to be more serious.

 

[seanie]

There’s mixed doubles in tennis.

You can’t enter a team of two males.

 

[seanie]

Why is that?

 

[seanie]

What could the reason be?

 

[seanie]

It’s a mystery.

 

[TomC]

There’s mixed doubles in tennis.

You can’t enter a team of two males.

What if one of them is a male woman?
Tom

 

[seanie]

Well, as long as one of the men considers themselves to be a woman, truthfully and sincerely, we shouldn’t ask questions.

 

[ZiprHead]

Seance loooves to demand that people define terms but dies not respond well when the same is asked of her or when someone points out inconsistencies or overly close definitions. Well, Seanie loves to demand, period.

It gets difficult sometimes, like when a poster insists that a person with XY chromosomes and a penis is a woman. Therefore they are entitled to mess with the other women in the room labeled Women.
Tom

Who said that???

 

[laughing dog]

What do you mean when you use the terms “male” and “female”?

You need to define what you mean by "use". Be specific.

No, I don’t.

Asking people to define their terms, when those terms are unclear/disputed, is perfectly reasonable.

Asking what “use” means is infantile.

It is no more infantile than adking for a definition of “complete”.
What are you afraid of?
After defining what you mean by “use “, define what you mean by “reasonable” and “infantile”.

Please put all definitions in one post. I find multiple consecutive short posts tedious and childish. That practice suggests an inability to construct or maintain a coherent train of thought.

 

[seanie]

No, what “complete” means in “complete physical transformation” begs the question of what physical transformation constitutes “complete”.

Is it a claim that a physical transformation can make a trans woman “completely” physically indistinguishable from a biological female?

What’s the difference between a “complete” physical transformation and a “less than complete” transformation?

What’s are the key physical transformations that differentiate between the two states?

How could one tell when the process was “complete”?

 

[seanie]

And if you’re unsure what infantile means, best you avoid using the term.

 

[seanie]

Who said that???

Well we’ve been assured that anyone who considers themselves to be a woman is one.

Are you suggesting some differentiation between women that are female and women that are male?

Heaven forfend!

 

[bigfield]

OK how how would this work in practice?

Legally?

The organisations with decent legal advice seem to be changing their policies and signs, to provide female only, male only, and gender neutral facilities.

That leaves all of the organisations that don't have that legal advice, plus the ones who do have that legal advice but haven't completed the necessary renovations to add the third restroom. For some time to come, people in a lot of places will still need to use restrooms that haven't implemented this legal advice.

But by in practice I wasn't asking about legal advice to organisations. The question you replied to was just meant as a preface to the ones that followed, and those are more specific. By in practice I'm asking about how you think people should act such that everyone can use the restrooms and no-one gets in trouble.

Here are the questions again, for reference.

You should use the restroom of your sex, or a gender neutral alternative. People should be accepting of gender non-conforming people in their single sex space. They aren’t required to be accepting of people of the opposite sex in their single sex space. But this issue pertains more to female single sex spaces, than it does to male single sex spaces.

OK how how would this work in practice?

You should use the restroom of your sex, or a gender neutral alternative.

Which restroom should a trans man use if he looks like a man?

People should be accepting of gender non-conforming people in their single sex space.

Women should be accepting of trans men in women's restrooms?

What if they clock the trans man as a man?

They aren’t required to be accepting of people of the opposite sex in their single sex space.

Would it be OK for men to refuse to accept trans men in the men's restrooms?

 

[seanie]

I think if a trans man passes as male then they should be fine using the male restroom, though legally they would be best using a gender neutral option.

I think women should be accepting of all women in women’s restrooms, regardless of how they present or identify, though if the person genuinely passes for male, and would be perceived as such, that could cause difficulty for others. Hence the Supreme Court observing that, in some situations , it may be proportionate and legitimate to exclude trans men from spaces intended for women. So a gender neutral option would seem sensible.

And personally, I wouldn’t object to either trans women or trans men in men’s restrooms, but I can only speak for myself in that point.

It goes back to legitimate aim in the first place. Are many women uncomfortable with males, or male appearing persons, in a space where they have concerns for safety, privacy, and dignity?

Yes.

Do men share a similar level of concern about the presence of female, or female appearing persons?

Not really. Certainly not to the same degree.

Which is why, in many instances, I think two options may be sufficient: gender neutral/unisex, and female.

 

[ZiprHead]

Who said that???

Well we’ve been assured that anyone who considers themselves to be a woman is one.

Are you suggesting some differentiation between women that are female and women that are male?

Heaven forfend!

I notice you cut out the statement my question was in response to then ignored the actual context of the question. Your dishonesty is noted.