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

[seanie]

Because people like you lose your goddamned minds whenever you meet a trans per

I meet trans people frequently. It’s no problem to me at all. People can consider themselves to be whatever they believe.

But females have a right to single sex spaces in some circumstances. And males who consider themselves female are not female.

Sincerity is irrelevant.

 

[bilby]

With about 98% accuracy

...so excluding about six million individuals in the USA alone?

That sounds like a dreadful basis for managing any kind of public provision of anything.

 

[Emily Lake]

Sex is binary by its very nature.

That’s just evolution.

That is not evolution. In nature there are many species that do not have two sexes. Some have none or one or many. In some species individuals can switch between male and female. Do you deny their right to exist?

What species has many?

some algae

 

[Politesse]

Because people like you lose your goddamned minds whenever you meet a trans per

I meet trans people frequently. It’s no problem to me at all. People can consider themselves to be whatever they believe.

Trying to push your government to persecute a class of people is not "in right mind" behavior. Anti-trans bigots think they're "polite" because they smile while they're signing away other people's rights. I'll tell you quite frankly, I'd rather you kick me in the face than tell me what I'm "allowed" to identify as on my passport, and I'm cis. You have a critical problem with comprehension of scale if you believe that you treat your trans neighbors decently. You do not. You disrespect and abuse them daily, on a much more fundamental level than name-calling could ever do.

And no doubt you think I am mean and radical and rude for taking offense!

 

[seanie]

They are women.

Well…but…they’re not.

Are they?

By what possible definition are they women?

 

[seanie]

Trying to push your government to persecute a class of people is not "in right mind" behavior. Anti-trans bigots think they're "polite" because they smile while they're signing away other people's rights. I'll tell you quite frankly, I'd rather you kick me in the face than tell me what I'm "allowed" to identify as on my passport, and I'm cis. You have a critical problem with comprehension of scale if you believe that you treat your trans neighbors decently. You do not. You disrespect and abuse them daily, on a much more fundamental level than name-calling could ever do.

And no doubt you think I am mean and radical and rude for taking offense!

I don’t want anyone to be persecuted.

But rights of different groups can clash, and that needs to be managed.

There are good reasons to have single sex spaces in some circumstances, particularly for females.

Those spaces can’t be managed if access is on the basis of self-identification, or a certificate.

They have to be managed on the basis of sex, however imperfectly or discomforting to some. The alternative is unfair, unworkable, and discomforting to others.

Other people have rights too.

And I don’t think you’re mean or radical or rude. I just don’t think your opinions are of much value. No big deal.

 

[seanie]

...so excluding about six million individuals in the USA alone?

Excluding them from what?

They’re people, with the same rights of others.

And they’re still male or female.

There is no third sex, or absence of sex.

In humans.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

For myself, being in a bathroom or dressing room with a trans woman would not be much of a big deal but I won’t lie and say that I would not be startled to see an unexpected exposed penis or testicles. I’d be more concerned if I felt that I or someone else might be the target of a predatory person, whatever genitalia was present. So yeah, a cis male or female attacking a trans person would definitely be concerning to me. I’ve been pretty fortunate to be able to defend myself and occasionally another person against physical and sexual assault. Not that those experiences don’t leave some trauma/PTSD. But not one of those individuals who attacked me or other girls or women was in a women’s locker room or dressing room or rest room. None of them were trans. I’d put good money down betting that they most likely be dangerous to trans individuals as well as to women. More so, in fact.

Startled, yes. The law shouldn't be expected to protect you from being startled, though. Harmed? The number of such rapes is zero. But if you get your way there will be some very male looking individuals legally in the women's room. Now how do you detect rapists simply walking into the women's room? You can't. You have actually created risk, not removed it.

The othrr thing that occurred to me is that we are expecting women to accept this and not be startled or alarmed or bothered... when the easier solution is for guys to not be fucking assholes and make male spaces intolerable to transgender women.

 

[seanie]

A seminar discussing the recent Supreme Court ruling.

 

[seanie]

The othrr thing that occurred to me is that we are expecting women to accept this and not be startled or alarmed or bothered... when the easier solution is for guys to not be fucking assholes and make male spaces intolerable to transgender women.

Absolutely. And I commend you for you’re insight.

But, quite a few women have been saying the exact same thing for a few years now.

And have mostly been ignored.

Just saying.

 

[ZiprHead]

Trans Or Not Quiz: Can You Spot The Difference?

I got 65%

 

[Loren Pechtel]

View attachment 50529

And how do they control for the study group inherently not being matched with the control group in an important way? Control matching only works when you can be confident you're actually comparing apples to apples.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I’d guess another explanation is that trans people are more likely to be accused, arrested and convicted of crimes compared with cis gendered people but I don’t have any data to back that guess.

I would be surprised if they weren't actually guilty of more crimes than cis people. Think of how some are treated by their parents. Think that won't have an effect??

 

[Loren Pechtel]

View attachment 50531

This is assuming an accurate count of trans individuals. Since that piece of information is unknown this chart is missing one of it's legs.

And what exactly qualifies as "sex offender"? Does it involve any act beyond living as their preferred gender?

 

[Politesse]

But rights of different groups can clash, and that needs to be managed.

Where is the balance, here? Where is the "management"? The government tells you what it thinks you are, and you have no right to appeal. That's not weighing the rights of differing classes and communities and working out reasonable compromises. It's just theocratic authoritarianism, and the disenfranchisement of a minority class that is too small and harried to have meaningful representation in the government.

 

[TSwizzle]

The government tells you what it thinks you are

Not really. The government is telling men or ex men they can no longer compete in women’s sports etc.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

View attachment 50532

When text is replaced with an image it should be considered likely deceptive. Especially in a case like this where converting it to an image removes a link.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Sex is determined at fertilisation by which chromosome the sperm contributes: an x or y.

Sex is usually first observed at the 12 week scan, because by that stage it’s obvious which developmental pathway an embryo has gone down: male or female.

And at birth sex is recorded, because 99.98%of the time it’s absolutely obvious.

None of this is hard.

So which is it: sex is solely chromosomal, or sex is solely sex assigned at birth?

Don't play games.

Sex is not assigned at birth, it's recorded at birth. Sex is "assigned" when the sperm breaches the egg wall. It's the sperm that dictates whether the fetus will follow a mullerian or a wolffian developmental pathway.

Guevedoces. It's not on the Y chromosome, it can be passed from the mother.

 

[Toni]

For myself, being in a bathroom or dressing room with a trans woman would not be much of a big deal but I won’t lie and say that I would not be startled to see an unexpected exposed penis or testicles. I’d be more concerned if I felt that I or someone else might be the target of a predatory person, whatever genitalia was present. So yeah, a cis male or female attacking a trans person would definitely be concerning to me. I’ve been pretty fortunate to be able to defend myself and occasionally another person against physical and sexual assault. Not that those experiences don’t leave some trauma/PTSD. But not one of those individuals who attacked me or other girls or women was in a women’s locker room or dressing room or rest room. None of them were trans. I’d put good money down betting that they most likely be dangerous to trans individuals as well as to women. More so, in fact.

Startled, yes. The law shouldn't be expected to protect you from being startled, though. Harmed? The number of such rapes is zero. But if you get your way there will be some very male looking individuals legally in the women's room. Now how do you detect rapists simply walking into the women's room? You can't. You have actually created risk, not removed it.

The othrr thing that occurred to me is that we are expecting women to accept this and not be startled or alarmed or bothered... when the easier solution is for guys to not be fucking assholes and make male spaces intolerable to transgender women.

Yes, but the thing is, trans women want to be accepted as women. And they deserve to be.

Yes there are so some small number of bad actors who may not be sincere or who have nefarious motives. But that’s not most.

 

[seanie]

Is legal recognition of biological sex a violation of human rights?