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

[Loren Pechtel]

I have a close relative who identifies as a trans man. At this point in their life nobody would clock them as anything other than female. They use the female toilets, which probably makes sense.

That might not always be the case however.

What should be done in "not that case", when your regressive laws force him to go to the women's restroom, and then, after he gets assaulted and raped there by a local protective male, can only seek group therapy in a women's group for female survivors of assault, because the law says that's what he is?

WTF are you smoking that a protective male is going to assault AND RAPE an effectively passing transman IN THE WOMEN'S ROOM?

We have had cases of assault. And we have had a rape by women. (Remember, rape only requires sexual penetration, not that it be with a penis.)

 

[Politesse]

Or cos light is a spectrum?

Light is a spectrum, you uneducated fool! Just how many centuries are you trying to roll us back?

Pretty sure they are saying light IS a spectrum, but that doesn't mean sex is. Like, that clownfish can change sex doesn't mean humans can. You should have quoted their whole post.

That argument doesn't follow in the slightest. And they sure didn't actually make the argument you're "pretty sure" they meant to.

Meaningless anti-science prattling, in any casr. Let the past die.

 

[Politesse]

I have a close relative who identifies as a trans man. At this point in their life nobody would clock them as anything other than female. They use the female toilets, which probably makes sense.

That might not always be the case however.

What should be done in "not that case", when your regressive laws force him to go to the women's restroom, and then, after he gets assaulted and raped there by a local protective male, can only seek group therapy in a women's group for female survivors of assault, because the law says that's what he is?

WTF are you smoking that a protective male is going to assault AND RAPE an effectively passing transman IN THE WOMEN'S ROOM?

We have had cases of assault. And we have had a rape by women. (Remember, rape only requires sexual penetration, not that it be with a penis.)

That is such a bizarre double standard. A trans woman goes to the restroom to pee, and you call that assault. A cis man goes in there specifically to assault a woman, and she's like "well it wasn't rape".

 

[Toni]

The reason that a majority of people don’t send a lot of time contemplating gender is that for a majority of people, sex and gender align pretty well. But not for everybody. In the US, the rights of minorities are as important ( in theory, at least) as the rights of the majority.

Disagree. I don't think we are in a position to know if it's because they align or because they don't care.

I can look at the issue but it doesn't make much sense to me. Ok, I've got guy bits. I've also got blond hair. That's simply the way it is, how is it right or wrong?

Really? What does hair color have to do with sex or gender?

For you and for humans, they do not question whether they are make or female. Their compliment of X and Y chromosomes corresponds well with their genitalia AND with how they perceive themselves.

You don’t question it re: yourself because it fits and makes sense to you. It simply is who you are and there is zero incongruence. It’s even simpler for you because you are ( based on your posts) heterosexual.

For me, no one seeing me would ever mistake me fur anything other than female, despite in my teen years being pretty flat chested and being teased about that rather mercilessly by my sisters who claimed I could not really be a girl. Which went along with the observable fact that I was very much a tomboy who had a number of what were then thought of as typically male interests. And which ignored my typically female interests. For a while I considered that I wished I were a boy but really what I wanted is what I saw as the privilege boys had over girls. In my generation, boys were preferred and certainly my father wanted a son. I was also continually told I was just like my father—and in some ways, that was true. But otoh, my father closely resembled his mother who had died when he was a child. I don’t know if he was like her in personality but I’m guessing he was at least somewhat, based upon the scant knowledge I have of her. Even though I was sometimes teased or ridiculed and occasionally resented for having so-called make attributes, it never for a moment ever occurred to me that I was not female. Instead I believed that it was incorrect to assign interests to either boy or girl. I still do believe that. But as it happens my physical self aligns well with my self perception and I am heterosexual.

But for some people life is not that simple. They do not feel comfortable being called boy because they don’t feel like a boy. Or they don’t feel like a girl even though their body is female. Some individuals feel like they are neither make or female. And that gets complicated because people like assigning others specific boxes. Throw in sexual attraction and all its variants and there simply are a lot of different kinds of people in the world, just considering sex, gender, and sexuality without getting into introvert/extrovert or race or religion or heritage or languages spoken at home or height or weight or hair color or texture and so on.

You and I are fortunate that we’ve never questioned our sex or gender. Most people are like us in that respect.

But not everybody is. And this has been known to be a fact wherever it has not been explicitly suppressed by whatever authorities there were across the globe for at least as long as there’s has been written word and I suspect as long as humans have existed.

Nowadays, we talk about it more because at least some individuals are more open about who they are and are less likely to stay inside the neat little boxes that society put them in. And because it is now being used as a political issue.

I did not catch in this post that my phone changed or deleted a word or two for me. The second sentence should read:

For you and me and for most humans, people do not question whether they are male or female

I really need to quit posting when I am tired and to proof read better. Many apologies

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The registered sex offender, with multiple convictions for exposure, who walked around the Wi Spa female changing room, got away with it.

Case dismissed.

A male registered sex offender walking around a female changing room with his tadger on display?

Fine.

Because in California anyone who considers themselves a woman is one.

Even registered sex offenders.

How progressive.

This is a big problem with the sex offender laws. "Exposure". Is that the trench coat crowd, or is it simply having a penis while in a women's space? In our witch hunting over sex offenders we frequently fail to consider the circumstances. Even looking at the registry there's little indication of what happened other than looking at what level is assigned.

The right needs bogeymen, so they lump minnows in with sharks to up the count. And the flip side is that there are enough minnows that are reported as sharks that some people dismiss sharks as minnows.

 

[WAB]

Or cos light is a spectrum?

Light is a spectrum, you uneducated fool! Just how many centuries are you trying to roll us back?

Pretty sure they are saying light IS a spectrum, but that doesn't mean sex is. Like, that clownfish can change sex doesn't mean humans can. You should have quoted their whole post.

That argument doesn't follow in the slightest. And they sure didn't actually make the argument you're "pretty sure" they meant to.

You might be right, but let's see what seanie has to say.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You will never, in your lifetime, see a trans person with an obvious penis in a women's restroom

Bullshit. I've personally witness TWO "women" adjusting their bulges in the ladies restroom. I've seen a handful of other transgender identified males who were obviously and unambiguously male, and I'd give it 80% odds that they had dicks.

Because over 80% of transgender identified males keep their penises, and have no intention of getting it removed.

Do you have citation for that? IMO, those transwomen are not serious about their gender.

On the otherhand, if your statistic is accurate, IMO, the other 20% are probably serious about their gender.

Matches up with my general understanding.

It's not that they like it, it's that the doctors have a rather limited ability to construct a functional replacement. Wrong but working equipment is superior to right but not working very well equipment.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

View attachment 50985

Which is not remotely the same search he did.

 

[TomC]

View attachment 50985

Which is not remotely the same search he did.

I had never heard the term before, nor did I bother with Google. In the context of this thread it was obvious to me what it meant.
Tom

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Tell us what you mean woman and physical trans formation.

Woman: adult, human, female.

And no, I don’t need to provide a meaning for somebody else’s phrase.

Which is simply kicking the can. Define "female".

And you didn't address the second part at all.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Another article by Naomi Cunningham KC.

“But if we can get back to a situation in which there are clear, unambiguous rules requiring men (however they identify) to stay out of women-only spaces and women (however they identify) to stay out of men-only spaces, rule-breaking will become obvious again. Most people will mostly comply. If we see a man in the ladies’, we don’t have to grapple with whether he is a man pretending to be a woman, or a man who identifies as a woman, or a man who is pretending to identify as a woman, or what the difference between those three things might be anyway. We can just identify him on sight as a rule-breaker, and expect HR or security or the bouncers or whoever to back us up when we complain.

No doubt once in a while there will be a rule-breaker who “passes” well enough to get away with it. That doesn’t mean the rule is impossible to police, or require us to conduct the “genital inspections” that feature in so much hyperventilating commentary from trans activists and allies. It’s nothing more than an observation that perfection in human affairs is rare to vanishing: we don’t abandon speed limits or taxes or the law against theft just because people sometimes break speed limits, evade taxes and steal things without being detected and punished. It is really quite surprising to have to point this out to three eminent lawyers.”

Quite a disconnect from reality.

This will require people who present as the other gender to enter restricted spaces, making it nearly impossible to detect rule breaking.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's not criminalising the mere existence of a minority group.

It's expecting men to stay out of women's spaces.

All men, including those that consider themselves women.

You realize P2025 specifically is about criminalizing their existence?

As I've said repeatedly, there are no grand conspiracies. It's always out in the open, it's just people don't pay attention.

Opinion | Project 2025 proposes banning porn. Here's what that really means.

The far-right game plan for a second Trump term defines pornography to include "transgender ideology."

www.msnbc.com

(Note that the link within this article is dead, but it can be found here: https://www.documentcloud.org/docum...ership-the-conservative-promise/#document/p37 )

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't disagree with you, and if there were any actual feasible way to separate the true genuine trans from the rest in a reliable way, I'd hop on board. But I don't think it's possible any more... so pretty much we have to end up with policies based on biological sex across the board, and then leave it up to the occasional case by case quiet exception. I mean, realistically if the fully transitioned person you envision uses female spaces and passes successfully and behaves appropriate, there's a good chance that they won't ever get challenged. That's kind of what passing means - they succeed at "cheating" the rules and mimic the opposite sex well enough to get by without problems.

Outside the justice system where is there the slightest evidence of fake trans?

That's how it used to work. Women didn't change the rules, the rules got changed without our input. Now we end up with entirely male looking males with all their parts attached invading our spaces, having their dicks out in nude spas and showers around women and young girls, and sharing cells with women in prison - and by and large women are NOT okay with that. Where we used to be considerate and accommodating out of courtesy and sympathy, we found our goodwill abused. It's unfortunate, but that's why we're where we are now.

We shouldn't have to have laws about this. But some people are going to exploit goodwill and kindness for their own jollies or for nefarious reasons. So now we can't have nice things.

You have the right telling you it was abused.

 

[seanie]

Tell us what you mean woman and physical trans formation.

Woman: adult, human, female.

And no, I don’t need to provide a meaning for somebody else’s phrase.

Which is simply kicking the can. Define "female".

And you didn't address the second part at all.

Female: an organism of the sex evolved to produce large gametes.

And quite obviously I didn’t address the second part at all.

Why the fuck would I be providing a definition for someone’s else’s phrase?

That’s silly.

 

[TomC]

Outside the justice system where is there the slightest evidence of fake trans?

I believe that upthread I described Randi P .
A cis-het male who often put on women's attire and tried to bully his way into women's spaces and hit on women (especially lesbians) in really trashy ways. Closest he came to therapy were a couple of court ordered sessions after being convicted of indecent exposure in a department store restroom.
He's nothing like representative of trans women in general, but he does exist.
Tom

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You really need to work on your reading comprehension. No, I definitely did not say that. I said quite the opposite of that. Attacking trans women is doing nothing whatsoever to help cis or trans women in any way. Precisely because the real threats are elsewhere, and you are doing nothing at all to change that by occupying the police and filling the courts with petty complaints and accusations that are anything but credible accusations of rape, abuse, and murder. Which are disturbingly commonplace, and usually go unaddressed.

I hadn't thought about that aspect of it before but I think you're right. Same as the obsession with demonizing strangers when most sexual abuse comes from family or those the family puts in a position of trust.

 

[seanie]

I would point out that the definition of female provided may not be terminologically exact, but broadly applies to a vast array of plants and animals.

As such it’s much better than a definition that would require dinosaurs or trees to “consider” themselves female, for them to be female.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

View attachment 50990

Let's consider that one some more.

Frame #3, what you are missing is that it removes any incentive to better yourself. You'll get the same results if you put in effort or don't.

And all the frames--you think stealing is justice? Why are they going to put on a ball game if they're not paid to do so?

 

[seanie]

Or cos light is a spectrum?

Light is a spectrum, you uneducated fool! Just how many centuries are you trying to roll us back?

Pretty sure they are saying light IS a spectrum, but that doesn't mean sex is. Like, that clownfish can change sex doesn't mean humans can. You should have quoted their whole post.

That argument doesn't follow in the slightest. And they sure didn't actually make the argument you're "pretty sure" they meant to.

You might be right, but let's see what seanie has to say.

Light is indeed a spectrum.

Sex is not.

Clownfish can change sex.

Human’s cannot.

I was referencing Loren’s pointless and silly attempt at an analogy.

 

[seanie]

View attachment 50985

Which is not remotely the same search he did.

No shit.

Who said it was?

Are you adding anything to the discussion with this comment?