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

[seanie]

That wouldn’t be lawful in the UK given the Supreme Court ruling,

 

[Bomb#20]

If anyone, it's folks like you who think that those dumb broads need to get over their feelings and concerns.

And you accuse me of putting words in people's mouths! You need to wash yours out with soap, because that is an unashamed lie. I have never said anything remotely like that, and I never would.

So does that mean you're okay with other people calling what you say lies?

Be that as it may, Tom didn't say you said it. He said folks like you think it. That there are folks who think it is not in dispute, and Tom is perfectly entitled to express an opinion as to whether those folks are "like you". Calling what Tom said a "lie" is libelous -- he expressed an opinion, and you have no basis for supposing he doesn't sincerely think it's the truth. If he's wrong, tell him he's wrong, but when you tell him he's lying, you're in the wrong.

And furthermore, you have been no slouch at drawing dubious inferences about what's going on in other people's minds. Don't dish it out if you can't take it.

 

[seanie]

And giving service providers the right to provide that service however they wish has proved problematic in the past.

“No Irish. No blacks. No dogs.”

 

[TomC]

That wouldn’t be lawful in the UK given the Supreme Court ruling,

Why do you Scots ruin Scotland?

If I, as a private owner of a pub in Scotland, decided that I don't care who uses the restroom, the government would attack me?
Tom

 

[TomC]

And giving service providers the right to provide that service however they wish has proved problematic in the past.

“No Irish. No blacks. No dogs.”

Would you patronize an establishment with that publicly posted on the window? I might, I'd tell them I'm Scottish if they asked. Probably not, but I can be difficult when I want to be.
Tom

 

[seanie]

The Equality Act is not Scottish legislation. It was passed by the Uk government in Westminster.

It was a consolidation of various acts trying to prohibit unfair discrimination, whist setting out the circumstances where discrimination was justified, because rights can clash.

 

[TomC]

The Equality Act is not Scottish legislation. It was passed by the Uk government in Westminster.

It was a consolidation of various acts trying to prohibit unfair discrimination, whist setting out the circumstances where discrimination was justified, because rights can clash.

I'd still say I was Scottish to avoid unpleasantness. Everyone knows what those people are like.
Tom

 

[Loren Pechtel]

How it will play out is that some women will simply stop utilizing athletic facilities, something that I think will bother exactly zero men.

It’s not like women actually count as full citizens with equal rights so NBD.

You have it backwards. I'm saying what will enforcement of your bathroom notions look like?

You are referring to the current reality--which wasn't causing a problem until the Republicans wanted a bogeyman.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Took me under 30 seconds:

Loren has been shown several different instances of the thing he insists hasn't ever happened not even once. I'm pretty sure he thinks that if he just ignores it and keeps repeating himself, it will magically become true.

No. The conditions I specified:

1) Someone living as female.

2) Rape or similar offense.

3) In a women's room.

Cases have been presented:

1) Rape in the women's room, but not by someone living as female.

2) Rape not in the women's room.

3) Unspecified crimes, the range included simply looking too much--something that's not realistically provable one way or the other.

Yes, my list is restrictive--because I'm counting only the crimes that could possibly be prevented by a change to how bathrooms are handled.

Yes, those girls might not have been raised if the school had had a different policy with respect to how bathrooms were handheld.

I presume that's supposed to be "raped". But your article said it's probably not a trans situation. And it simply said "skirt", not "female appearance". You are seeing a legit threat and focusing on the wrong indication of the threat. From what the article didn't say we can reasonably conclude he was male presenting. And where have I said those who are male presenting should be allowed in women's rooms??

What I cited was a case where, almost certainly, a person feigned being trans in order to have better access to victims—in two separate schools.

This is exactly the scenario that Emily Lake has said might happen and in fact, she cited her own cases.

Where does it say that he feigned being trans?! You want this case to support your fears but it doesn't.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

But what’s your point?

They’re male.

With an extremely rare DSD , 5 alpha reductase deficiency.

What on earth has this to do with males without that condition being allowed into female only spaces?

If there is one case that isn't clear between male and female then you can't say that it's cut and dried. Things like that aren't in isolation, if there's one there's a range.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The problem here is you are so focused on the rules that you're completely ignoring how it will play out. What are you going to do, challenge that 2%? And if not, what's the point of the rule in the fir

Some spaces are closely managed, some are not.

Competitive sports?

A one off cheek swab as a screen, with follow up testing if required.

It’s easy to enforce.

I'm talking about bathrooms. How will it work?

Sports we simply need to agree on what the standards are, enforcement isn't going to be an issue.

 

[seanie]

You can confidently say that it’s cut and dried the overwhelmingly majority of the time.

 

[seanie]

I'm talking about bathrooms. How will it work?

Sports we simply need to agree on what the standards are, enforcement isn't going to be an iss

Depends on the context. Some spaces are more managed than others.

And what do you mean by the standards for sport?

 

[ZiprHead]

Sorry. If a woman can't pee with a man in earshot, that's prudery.

That is the only part of the story I'm addressing. Nothing else.

In the TV show Ally McBeal (late '90's, early 2000's) they had an "all gender" bathroom. The men and women lawyers would go in the same bathroom and an use adjacent stalls.

My wife watched that show. I'll have to ask about it.

It skeeved me out. I was trying to imagine my own former office workplace filled with young men and women who had secret crushes, and office rumor mills constantly churning out gossip. The idea of sitting in a stall next to the hot girl and listening to her tooting out a bunch of noisy, noxious sounds and smells (or me doing the same to her) was unbecoming. Not to mention all the subsequent office gossip about which chick (or guy) has the smelliest shit or the noisiest farts. Its a situation that I could see getting really disruptive and out of hand. It would definitely keep HR busy though.

Really? The people I used to work with were all adults and would ignore such juvenile prattle. Not to mention if you don't want your stuff commented on then don't comment about others.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

1) Someone living as female.

What does that mean?

How do females live?

Define your terms.

You perfectly well know what that means.

 

[seanie]

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

 

[Loren Pechtel]

No it doesn’t.

The legal position is that a person’s sex is a material fact that can be determined. It’s not like someone’s sex is an ineffable mystery.

It’s obvious 99.98% of the time.

You keep saying that over and over like I'm going to suddenly agree that .02% of the population simply doesn't matter. I do not. Legally, they are citizens like anyone else. Scientifically, they prove your hypothesis incorrect. Morally, targeting a minority for persecution with no justification except that they are a minority is abominable.

And it's a bullshit made-up number anyway. The error rate for such a question would be difficult to rigorously test, and given the arbitrary nature of sex categorizations, different experiments would net you very different numbers depending the criteria you used to define the "correct" categorization.

If there's a "real" number for the error rate of incorrect or inappropriate sex assignments at birth, that number is not posskble to know unless we were to agree on what constitutes a correct assignment in the first place.

It's the standard right wing answer to everything: the normal is the only acceptable thing.

 

[seanie]

There’s nothing right wing about recognising that sex in mammals is binary, and not remotely hard to discern most of the time.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If anyone, it's folks like you who think that those dumb broads need to get over their feelings and concerns.

And you accuse me of putting words in people's mouths! You need to wash yours out with soap, because that is an unashamed lie. I have never said anything remotely like that, and I never would.

You have consistently dismissed the concerns of real women who don't want a male in the restroom with them.
Tom

You have consistently dismissed the concerns of real whites who don't want a black in the restroom with them.

(Yeah, I know, not you personally. I'm just pointing out the equivalent.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Exactly. I see this whole thing as providing legal support for being a prude. And I do not believe prudery deserves legal protection.

Yeah, I don't think male privilege deserves legal protection either.
That's what this is. A male wants the right to use a restroom labeled "women". Women don't want him in their room. You're insisting on his entitlements.
Tom

A female presenting person wants to use a restroom. What causes the least problems?

And the flip side that keeps being ignored: A male presenting person wants to use a restroom.

The answers are either every ambiguous case uses the men's room, or that the ambiguous cases cease to exist.