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

[Derec]

Actually, Derec HAS implied that Harris is less qualified than a number of other candidates who are white and male.

Unless you think that KH is the most qualified out of all the candidates Biden might have picked, then there are candidates more qualified than her, be they white men or not.
That said, I NEVER implied that she lacked qualifications. She is obviously eminently qualified. The issue with her has always been her poor judgment. She made some boneheaded decisions during the 2020 campaign that doomed it well before Iowa (e.g. banning fracking and Bussinggate). And she continued that form in 2024 (e.g. focus on celebrities and vibes, choosing Tim "Knucklehead" Walz as running mate).

No one, especially Derec, ever bats an eyelash at a white male being chosen: it is assumed that he earned all of his qualifications on his own merits

That is certainly not assumed. Take W. He is white and nobody thinks he earned his qualifications on his own merits.

while anyone who is not a white male is assumed to have earned their qualifications only because of Affirmative Action or DEI policies, not because they are actually well qualified.

Not necessarily. In this case, Biden was not even coy. He was explicit in artificially restricting himself. Just like he restricted himself on the choice of SCTUS justice. Just like Gavin Newsom restricted himself when he appointed US Sentator from California. They were not even trying to hide the fact that these were AA/DEI picks.

Derec further insults Harris because once upon a time, she had a romantic relationship with a man of some power and influence.

Who was also twice her age and put her on state boards.

Frequently in Derec's posts, he not only highlights but harps upon an individuals race and or gender and religion, if it is Islam rather than any qualifications or evidence of guilt or innocence.

I do not harp on race and gender, other than to say that decisions on appointments should not be made on the basis of race and gender, as they certainly were in the case of KH being picked as running mate.
Religion is different. It is not an immutable quality. It is a set of beliefs and practices, and those can tell us a lot about a candidate for office.

Yes, Biden DID state he wanted to choose a black woman as his running mate.

Which makes any pick he makes an AA/DEI pick by definition.

For more than 200 years, it was simply understood that a white male would be POTUS and another white male would be VP and the same applied to every high office in the land and much of the world.

So you think white men today should be discriminated against because of what was happening 200 years ago?
And note that it was not just the running mate pick. He also restricted eligibility for SCOTUS seat to black women even though the last man a Democratic president put on SCOTUS was in 1994, more than 30 years ago!

Men have always been the DEI hires:

Wrong.

they were specifically in the candidate pool because they were white and male, anything else being entirely disqualifying. So someone actually said they were deliberately looking outside that particular pool. Oh, the horrors!!

Two wrong don't make a right.

It is not as though there were no or only one or two black women who were highly qualified and had sufficient national recognition to be VP.

Maybe three. Kamala Harris, Susan Rice and Val Demmings.

But for bigots, actually saying outloud that someone is looking for someone who is something other than white and male is evidence of discrimination against white males, despite the fact that white males have only had each other to compete against for the last hundreds of years.

Not considering anybody who was either white or male (or worst thing for left wing identitarians, even both! Clutch the radfem and black nationalist pearls!) is discrimination on the basis of race and sex on its face. It is positively Trumpian in the level of reality denial to claim otherwise!

 

[Derec]

I’m not aware that ‘quotas’ for women exist.

Of course they do exist.

The issue seems to pertain to sports, refuges and women’s wards in hospitals, not jobs. Those can be thorny issues for women as they can involve physical safety and maintaining what gains women have made in terms of equity ( in sports).

Note your use of "equity" rather than "equality".

It is definitely better for someone undergoing heart surgery to be treated by doctors, nurses and other staff with specific tracing rather than an obstetrical team, for example.

Of course. What does that have to do with quotas though?

You should feel reassured that an employment and wage gap still exists in the UK.

In the UK there was a court decision that mandated a company pay equal pay for women even if they do an easier job (such as cashier) than men (such as warehouse work).
So you are wrong as usual.

 

[Derec]

I have a ton of evidence — the contents of his posts.

Nothing in my posts conforms to your blatant and libelous misrepresentation of them.

Also he, and you it would appear, are the actual tribalists.

Wrong.

I am anti-tribal, in favor of that dreaded DEI — Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.

You are tribal. DEI, as actually practiced, is a way to discriminate against certain groups, chiefly whites and men.

Derec is not against quotas.

I am.

He is in favor of returning to quotas for white, heterosexual, cisgendered men. The evidence of this abounds from his posts.

Bullshit. And no, there is nothing like that in my posts. You can look until you are blue in the face, you won't find it. And no, saying mean things against Kamala Harris is not "evidence" of this made up claim either.

 

[Derec]

No, I was talking about Derec’s characterization of people in certain positions previously ( and currently) which exclusively went to white males who do not belong to the category white male.

I think Biden's decision to only consider black women for SCOTUS and running mate was wrong. I also think that it is legitimate to criticize him for it. You (and others) think that anybody who disagrees is some kind of sexist and racist. It's a very close-minded position.

He has repeatedly called Kamala Harris a DEI hire.

Biden was quite explicit that she was. Same goes for KBJ. Same goes for Laphonza Butler - Gov. Goodhair was as explicit about making a DEI pick as Biden.

Never mind that white male has been the preferred DEI hiring category for centuries.

Quite beside the fact that this is not what DEI means - you can't hire somebody based on a category that will not be invented until centuries into
the future - I do not think present-day people should be punished based on advantages some people that kind-of looked like them enjoyed a long time ago.
I think people should be viewed as individuals. Why is that so controversial?

Which has been effective because laws and tradition have assigned the position of ‘leader’ to a single category: white male and some people still cling to the belief that is the best category because it is traditional and customary and does not represent change or a challenge to the status quo.

I am not "some people". I merely think white men should not be excluded from consideration. Apparently you think we should be excluded from consideration based on race and gender. Which one of us is the bigot?

I’m very well aware of how candidates for high office are chosen.

In some cases the decision-makers telegraph their criteria. Like "white men need not apply".

 

[Derec]

How are "biological woman" and "biological sex" defined according to this ruling? There are people with XX chromosomes that have penises, for example, or have XY chromosomes with a vagina.

Not to mention chromosomal abnormalities such as XXY, XYY, XXX, and XO.

 

[Derec]

Even a basketball player who can make the most baskets may not be the best person for a particular opening on a team. A ball hog is eventually resented if they insist on scoring all the shots and even a player in their prime can be injured. It’s a team sport and players need to be able to support one another and not expect to shine all the time. And so it is in life.

Indeed. But if the owner artificially and arbitrarily restricts who may be hired based on demographic characteristics unrelated to basketball skills or how well a player fits the team's needs, do you think it is more or less likely that a suitable player will be found compared to if the owner just says to hire the best man they can get?

 

[Derec]

(Which, as noted upthread, is a dubious inference to draw, because if Biden hadn't applied DEI he'd have probably applied some other non-qualification method instead, so a hypothetical alternate pick wouldn't have been the winner of a qualifications contest either. But that isn't the point -- I'm not saying Derec's reasoning is sound;

I think that my reasoning is sound and not at all dubious. The presidential candidate tries to find a suitable running mate. It will of course not only include qualifications, but also things like balancing the ticket (in many different possible ways) and how well the two will work together also play a role.
So I was not denying the importance of criteria that are not just strictly qualification. It is the fit "for a particular opening on a team" point that Toni made. However, I think that if you consider 100% of possible candidates, rather than a priori restricting yourself to 7% that are black women, that you are more likely to find the best candidate, considering both qualifications and "team fit".

Now, I happen to think that KH did a decent job as running mate in the 2020 campaign. Was she the best Biden could have picked? Probably not. But she was good enough.
Problems with KH began when Biden started declining. She was never a very popular vice president. And without a nomination contest, she was handed the nomination on a silver platter. The same identity politics that led Biden to restrict himself to only black women also made it challenging to not give her the nomination.
I think that this is why it took Biden so long to decide not to run. He (and his team) wanted to foreclose the possibility of even a truncated speed-run primary that may have given the nomination to somebody other than Kamala Harris.

I'm saying ZH's and your criticism of him was based on a misunderstanding. I think Derec has criticized DEI so often he lost track of which criticisms apply to the candidate and which to the employer -- it would have been perfectly fair to criticize Biden for applying DEI without criticizing Harris for benefitting from it.

She certainly benefited from it.

Harris carried out her one and only task just as competently as any alternative pick would have: helping Biden win in 2020.)

I agree as far as that goes. But Biden selecting her in 2020 led to her being the nominee in 2024, without the primary crucible.
And as a result we got Trump 2.0.

 

[Bomb#20]

The UK supreme court has ruled that the terms “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act refer to a biological woman and biological sex, in a victory for gender-critical campaigners. Five judges from the UK supreme court ruled unanimously that the legal definition of a woman in the Equality Act 2010 did not include transgender women who hold gender recognition certificates (GRCs). In a significant defeat for the Scottish government, the court decision will mean that transgender women can no longer sit on public boards in places set aside for women.

Teh Gruaniad

How can we blame this on Trump?

Person complaining about people bringing up Trump... brings up Trump out of the blue.

TSwizzle brought up Trump out of the blue. laughing dog complained about it.

 

[Bomb#20]

Derec further insults Harris because once upon a time, she had a romantic relationship with a man of some power and influence.

And? Derec doesn't call her that because she's not a white male. He calls her that because Biden decided he'd choose a black woman before he decided to choose her. ...

Derek literally accused Harris of sleeping her way to the top, using a very insulting and misogynistic slur.

This is an Affirmative Action thread, not a Derec Is A Jerk thread. Whatever comments he made about Harris's flaws as an individual, as opposed to comments about her getting affirmative action benefits from membership in some group, don't bear on the correctness of the upthread* inference to the effect that his opposing affirmative action for blacks and women means he supports affirmative action for whites and men. So unless you're going to argue that sleeping with Willie Brown is a characteristic of black women in general, they're off-topic and immaterial.

(* "Right, for you, everything should be quotas for white heterosexual cisgendered men." "Yup. Everyone else is a DEI hire and therefore unqualified.")

 

[ZiprHead]

Derek literally accused Harris of sleeping her way to the top,

Not to the top. But she did get her start in politics because her sugar daddy put her on a couple of state boards.

On the misogyny charge I rest my case.

using a very insulting and misogynistic slur.

I am not sure which "slur" you have in mind, but I am sure it is very mild compared to what is bandied about regularly about male politicians.

Such as?

 

[ZiprHead]

Derec further insults Harris because once upon a time, she had a romantic relationship with a man of some power and influence.

And? Derec doesn't call her that because she's not a white male. He calls her that because Biden decided he'd choose a black woman before he decided to choose her. ...

Derek literally accused Harris of sleeping her way to the top, using a very insulting and misogynistic slur.

This is an Affirmative Action thread, not a Derec Is A Jerk thread. Whatever comments he made about Harris's flaws as an individual, as opposed to comments about her getting affirmative action benefits from membership in some group, don't bear on the correctness of the upthread* inference to the effect that his opposing affirmative action for blacks and women means he supports affirmative action for whites and men. So unless you're going to argue that sleeping with Willie Brown is a characteristic of black women in general, they're off-topic and immaterial.

Do you think affirnative action just appeared out of the blue? It came about because of misogyny and racial animosity. Certain members here display those characteristics quite often.

(* "Right, for you, everything should be quotas for white heterosexual cisgendered men." "Yup. Everyone else is a DEI hire and therefore unqualified.")

Trump is attacking DEI by removing references to achievements by women and racial minorities in government run commemorations. Are you going to try to deny this is because Trump and his minions are not misogynists and bigots? What other reasons could you attribute these actions to?

 

[pood]

I am not sure which "slur" you have in mind

Incredible, right?

 

[pood]

Over and over we are told that Harris was a DEI hire because Biden himself declared that he would only select a black woman.

This claim might have validity only IF the following fact were true, which it is not: that in the past, black women have been seriously considered for vice president, along with everyone else.

Since they have not been, the complaint is entirely without merit.

 

[thebeave]

Over and over we are told that Harris was a DEI hire because Biden himself declared that he would only select a black woman.

This claim might have validity only IF the following fact were true, which it is not: that in the past, black some have been seriously considered for vice president, along with everyone else.

Since they have not been, the complaint is entirely without merit.

Or Asian, Hispanic, etc. We seem to not care or even think about selecting them for some reason...

 

[ZiprHead]

Over and over we are told that Harris was a DEI hire because Biden himself declared that he would only select a black woman.

This claim might have validity only IF the following fact were true, which it is not: that in the past, black some have been seriously considered for vice president, along with everyone else.

Since they have not been, the complaint is entirely without merit.

Or Asian, Hispanic, etc. We seem to not care or even think about selecting them for some reason...

Were Asians and Hispanics treated as badly as Africans were here in the US?

According to Wiki:

Lauro Cavazos became the first Hispanic to serve in a president's cabinet when he was appointed Secretary of Education by President Ronald Reagan in 1988. Federico Peña was appointed Secretary of Transportation by President Bill Clinton in 1993 and served as Secretary of Energy during part of Clinton's second term, thus making him the first Latino American to hold two different cabinet positions. Aida Álvarez became the first Latina woman to serve in the president's cabinet when Clinton picked her for the cabinet-rank position of Administrator of the Small Business Administration in 1997. However, the first Latina to lead a permanent cabinet office was Hilda Solis when President Barack Obama appointed her Secretary of Labor in 2009. Mel Martínez, who was born in Cuba, became the first foreign-born Hispanic and Latino American to serve in the presidential cabinet when President George W. Bush named him Secretary of Housing and Urban Development in 2001.

President Joe Biden named the most Hispanic and Latino Americans as secretaries to his initial Cabinet: former California Attorney General Xavier Becerra as Secretary of Health and Human Services; Connecticut Education Commissioner Miguel Cardona as Secretary of Education; and DHS Deputy Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas as Secretary of Homeland security, exceeding by one the record set by President Bill Clinton and equaled by Barack Obama. However, including cabinet reshuffles during his second term in office, Obama still holds the record for most Hispanic and Latino Americans appointed to permanent cabinet positions with five, the most of any presidency, therefore surpassing Clinton's previous number of four.

Here's your consolation prize.

 

[thebeave]

Over and over we are told that Harris was a DEI hire because Biden himself declared that he would only select a black woman.

This claim might have validity only IF the following fact were true, which it is not: that in the past, black some have been seriously considered for vice president, along with everyone else.

Since they have not been, the complaint is entirely without merit.

Or Asian, Hispanic, etc. We seem to not care or even think about selecting them for some reason...

Were Asians and Hispanics treated as badly as Africans were here in the US?

According to Wiki:

Lauro Cavazos became the first Hispanic to serve in a president's cabinet when he was appointed Secretary of Education by President Ronald Reagan in 1988. Federico Peña was appointed Secretary of Transportation by President Bill Clinton in 1993 and served as Secretary of Energy during part of Clinton's second term, thus making him the first Latino American to hold two different cabinet positions. Aida Álvarez became the first Latina woman to serve in the president's cabinet when Clinton picked her for the cabinet-rank position of Administrator of the Small Business Administration in 1997. However, the first Latina to lead a permanent cabinet office was Hilda Solis when President Barack Obama appointed her Secretary of Labor in 2009. Mel Martínez, who was born in Cuba, became the first foreign-born Hispanic and Latino American to serve in the presidential cabinet when President George W. Bush named him Secretary of Housing and Urban Development in 2001.

President Joe Biden named the most Hispanic and Latino Americans as secretaries to his initial Cabinet: former California Attorney General Xavier Becerra as Secretary of Health and Human Services; Connecticut Education Commissioner Miguel Cardona as Secretary of Education; and DHS Deputy Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas as Secretary of Homeland security, exceeding by one the record set by President Bill Clinton and equaled by Barack Obama. However, including cabinet reshuffles during his second term in office, Obama still holds the record for most Hispanic and Latino Americans appointed to permanent cabinet positions with five, the most of any presidency, therefore surpassing Clinton's previous number of four.

Here's your consolation prize. View attachment 50220

Eh, keep the consolation prize for yourself. Pood's comment was directed at the VP position, not random cabinet positions.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

How are "biological woman" and "biological sex" defined according to this ruling? There are people with XX chromosomes that have penises, for example, or have XY chromosomes with a vagina.

That's too complicated for transphobes. They would much rather have that inconvenient information be erased from government databases and public libraries.

 

[Derec]

You're in the "anti-woke" ingroup. And you refuse to see your own tribalist behavior.

There is really no "anti-woke ingroup". "Woke", as used in earnest during the Michael Brown riots (see the type specimen here), is an extremist movement. As such, opposition to it from moderate liberals (such as myself and presumably Bomb) all the way to MAGA. Those people are very different from each other and are in each other's ingroups.

 

[pood]

You're in the "anti-woke" ingroup. And you refuse to see your own tribalist behavior.

There is really no "anti-woke ingroup". "Woke", as used in earnest during the Michael Brown riots, is an extremist movement. As such, opposition to it from moderate liberals (such as myself and presumably Bomb) all the way to MAGA. Those people are very different from each other and are in each other's ingroups.

Woke is not a movement. It’s just a different way of saying an old thing, that we ought to respect and not oppress people different from ourselves. Duh.

 

[Bomb#20]

And? Derec doesn't call her that because she's not a white male. He calls her that because Biden decided he'd choose a black woman before he decided to choose her. ...

Derek literally accused Harris of sleeping her way to the top, using a very insulting and misogynistic slur.

This is an Affirmative Action thread, not a Derec Is A Jerk thread. Whatever comments he made about Harris's flaws as an individual, as opposed to comments about her getting affirmative action benefits from membership in some group, don't bear on the correctness of the upthread* inference to the effect that his opposing affirmative action for blacks and women means he supports affirmative action for whites and men. So unless you're going to argue that sleeping with Willie Brown is a characteristic of black women in general, they're off-topic and immaterial.

Do you think affirnative action just appeared out of the blue? It came about because of misogyny and racial animosity. Certain members here display those characteristics quite often.

What exactly are you arguing here? That some people in the past were misogynists and favored discrimination against women; Derec is a misogynist; therefore Derec favors discrimination against women? That's a guilt-by-association argument.

So Derec has negative attitudes about women. Do you think that implies he wants the government to discriminate against them? You have negative attitudes about Derec. Do you want the government to discriminate against him?

As far as I can see, Derec's statements are all consistent with the hypothesis that his motivation for opposing "set asides" (aka quotas) is straight out of Thales: "Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing."

(* "Right, for you, everything should be quotas for white heterosexual cisgendered men." "Yup. Everyone else is a DEI hire and therefore unqualified.")

Trump is attacking DEI by removing references to achievements by women and racial minorities in government run commemorations. Are you going to try to deny this is because Trump and his minions are not misogynists and bigots? What other reasons could you attribute these actions to?

Well hey, at least now you're staying on-topic.

How can we blame this on Trump?