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

[seanie]

Well, the issue is that sex is a well defined category across a vast array of plants and animals.

And when it comes to trans rights activism there has been a concerted effort to deny the reality of sex.

That it’s a spectrum, a Victorian/colonial invention, that it’s incredibly complex, undefinable, “INTERSEX!”, “CLOWNFISH!!!!”

And that’s all ideological horseshit.

Do you believe that sex and gender are the same thing?

I'm certain that one big problem here is that seanie and I and people like us can and do distinguish between sex and gender.

It's the people who refuse to distinguish between sex and gender that are creating the problems for the rest of us. Seanie and I get the difference. Does @laughing dog?
Tom

Which do you believe plays more importance in people's lives? Sex or gender?

Sex.

Gender might be very important for some people, and how they consider themselves.

To most people it’s not even a question. Not least because most people have only a vague notion of what the term is supposed to mean.

What is it?

So we have a subjective, (undefined?), sense of self, and an objective material reality that is a person’s sex.

Which is the better basis for policy and law?

 

[Toni]

You realize that trees are not in the same kingdom as human beings, right?

Do you know that at least 10 different species of animals actually do change sex, depending on a host of factors, including temperature and light?

But humans aren’t one of them.

So your point is moot.

A lot more relevant that whatever the fuck you were on about re: trees.

Humans are animals and yes, there are various genetic variations that dictate how sex and gender are expressed in humans.

You are aware, of course, that for humans, at least, sex serves as more than a mere reproductive mechanism. And that gender and sex do not always align the way you expect or want them to.

 

[seanie]

And let’s take a moment to remind ourselves of the forum we’re on.

We’ve been told that anyone who considers themselves ia woman is a woman.

That someone who sincerely and truthfully believes themselves to be a woman is a woman, regardless of them being male.

The sincerity of belief is enough.

Well that’s bang on brand isn’t it?

Belief trumping material reality?

Or is this just a different situation, because the negative effects of the denial of sex as an important and material reality, mostly affect women.

And this forum is mostly men, who don’t actually give much of a shit about that.

 

[Toni]

Well, the issue is that sex is a well defined category across a vast array of plants and animals.

And when it comes to trans rights activism there has been a concerted effort to deny the reality of sex.

That it’s a spectrum, a Victorian/colonial invention, that it’s incredibly complex, undefinable, “INTERSEX!”, “CLOWNFISH!!!!”

And that’s all ideological horseshit.

Do you believe that sex and gender are the same thing?

I'm certain that one big problem here is that seanie and I and people like us can and do distinguish between sex and gender.

It's the people who refuse to distinguish between sex and gender that are creating the problems for the rest of us. Seanie and I get the difference. Does @laughing dog?
Tom

Which do you believe plays more importance in people's lives? Sex or gender?

Sex.

Gender might be very important for some people, and how they consider themselves.

To most people it’s not even a question. Not least because most people have only a vague notion of what the term is supposed to mean.

What is it?

So we have a subjective, (undefined?), sense of self, and an objective material reality that is a person’s sex.

Which is the better basis for policy and law?

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.

Just because a majority of people are cis-gendered, does not de-legitimize the fact that not everybody is cis-gendered. Just as most people’s IQ’s fall between 80 and 120: but not everybody’s IQ is within that range. Most people fall within a certain range of height; most are born with two arms and two legs and 10 each fingers and toes. Not everyone does, though. Most people are born with two kidneys but some are born with 3 or 4. And so on.

Some people have a harder time than others if things do not fit into neatly described boxes. That is what is known as a them problem, not a universal problem that everybody must solve for such afflicted people.

 

[Politesse]

It’s very straightforward 99.98% of the time.

There's that completely imagined number again...

It's not imagined. Only 0.02% of all babies are born with reproductive ambiguities. 99.98% are unambiguously male or female.

Just saying, "nuh uh it is real" doesn't make it so...

In the probably vain hope of laying your trumped-up charge that the number is made-up to rest once and for all, here again is the post where seanie cited his source:

View attachment 50518

And how is that number any less of an invention? They list out the most common forms of intersex conditions, then insist without justification that those should not be considered intersex condifions and that therefore the "real" number is lower than that which - they freely admit - the actual scholarly consensus maintains it to be. That isn't research, it's an opinion piece, and not especially convincing.

My thanks for pointing out this post though, I had missed it.

 

[Politesse]

Belief trumping material reality?

Says a guy blindly defending Christian tradition for no logical reason...

 

[seanie]

A lot more relevant that whatever the fuck you were on about re: trees.

Humans are animals and yes, there are various genetic variations that dictate how sex and gender are expressed in humans.

You are aware, of course, that for humans, at least, sex serves as more than a mere reproductive mechanism. And that gender and sex do not always align the way you expect or want them to.

The relevance was the binary of sex, across both animals and plants, even when species manifest that binary in different ways.

It is not a spectrum, there is no third sex.

This has been pointed out multiple times, but for some reason keeps being missed.

Anyhoo, tell us what you mean by gender?

 

[WAB]

Belief trumping material reality?

Says a guy blindly defending Christian tradition for no logical reason...

I haven't seen that at all. ???

 

[seanie]

Says a guy blindly defending Christian tradition for no logical reason...

Christian tradition?

I recognise the evolved reality of sex.

 

[seanie]

And how is that number any less of an invention? They list out the most common forms of intersex conditions, then insist without justification that those should not be considered intersex condifions and that therefore the "real" number is lower than that which - they freely admit - the actual scholarly consensus maintains it to be. That isn't research, it's an opinion piece, and not especially convincing.

There are many “intersex” conditions in which a person’s sex is not remotely ambiguous. There is a tiny subsection of DSDs where it is.

 

[Emily Lake]

All-gender sports? All-gender prisons? All-gender refuges?

In many ways public restrooms may be the least of the issues.

Very much the least of the issues... which is why the trans activist side always focuses on them and sidesteps the pricklier issues.

I prefer single sex restrooms. But as long as there are reasonably solid doors with good latches and not a lot of peeking space, it's not the absolute end of the world if it's a mixed sex restroom. There are still things that women - not men - end up giving up if all restrooms end up being mixed sex, and I don't think those are negligible or unimportant. But they're things that are arguably less important at the end of the day.

For example:

• Most women and girls, especially if they're younger, don't want to have men around when we're dealing with a menstrual issue. And while most men will think "changing a pad or tampon" and go no further, that can also include severely heavy bleeding, blood on clothing that needs to be cleaned, and all too often diarrhea that accompanies severe cramps for a lot of women. It's not particularly comfortable to be washing your undies in the sink when there are other women around, but other women understand - we've all been there or know someone who has, and we get it. I can't imagine the discomfort and indignity of doing so when there are men in the restroom with you! So unless someone is proposing completely enclosed bathrooms with their own sinks and towels/dryers, there's going to be situations where a woman is partially unclothed washing her skivvies where anyone coming in might see her. And that is super sucky.
• In some venues - bars, nightclubs, and similar - women use bathrooms as a refuge to escape from men who won't leave us the fuck alone. It's incredibly common for a woman who's being pursued by some guy who can't take the hint to go to the bathroom and just chill there for 10 to 15 minutes in the hope that he'll lose interest or get distracted (works pretty well). Sometimes we even enlist the assistance of other women who are complete strangers to help tell the dude to back off.
• There are also muslim and orthodox jewish women who are prohibited from using mixed sex restrooms. I don't believe in their gods, nor do I have any soft spot for their faiths... but I also think that they should have a reasonable right to adhere to their beliefs. And let's not forget that for some of those muslim women, if they do end up with a male in their bathroom, it's the women who get punished for it. And I'm not at all okay with creating a situation that increases such risks for them.

These are things that trans activists ignore, but then most of the vocal transactivists are also men.

But if it comes right down to it, there are other spaces and services that are more critical to me to keep sex-specific. Prisons, domestic violence and rape shelters, rape survivor support groups. Sports. The right to have an intimate carer be of the same sex. The right to have a same-sex person do a pat down or body search.

It's just a whole lot easier for the activists to force the discussion to stay focused on bathrooms so they can avoid having to address those other issues. Same way it's easier for the activists to stay focused on nitpicking the holy fuck out of the definition of sex and bringing up algae and clownfish and DSDs instead of having to actually explain why they think that a perfectly normal male with a completely intact male body should be granted the entitlement to override female boundaries because of his internal lady-feels.

 

[Emily Lake]

Really, urinals are unusable for 2 categories of unisex restroom clientele - women and the unabled. It seems an application of common sense to replace urinals with stalls to increase the availability to all.

I'll take the opposing view.

Think about it like self-service check out, or the express lane at the grocery store. If we end up with unisex restrooms, I think having at least a few urinals (depending on the number of facilities overall, of course) makes a lot of sense. Provide a partition, because some men are self-conscious too and I don't think men should be subjected to looky-loos either. But realistically I think the most efficient arrangement would be more stalls than in a typical male restroom, but still at least a couple of urinals. That lets bepenised people get in and out very fast, which keeps the whole thing moving at a better pace.

I'd still prefer single-sex restrooms with an available sole-user unisex/family room overall.

 

[seanie]

Some people have a harder time than others if things do not fit into neatly described boxes. That is what is known as a them problem, not a universal problem that everybody must solve for such afflicted people.

What boxes are you referring to?

Because if the boxes are sex, it is indeed a binary tick,

If the boxes are all the societal expectations that are put upon those ticks, then no, people should not have to conform with that.

Extreme trans ideology requires those boxes. It’s not enough to be a male who feels comfortable considering themselves female, presenting as such, identifying as such.

Access to female only spaces is required for validation, and the rights of females mean nothing.

 

[Emily Lake]

Urinals only make sense in men-only restrooms.

A variety of devices exist to permit a woman to urinate while standing. They are typically used in outdoor environments but could perfectly well be used at a urinal.

"Why can't women just be more like men?"

 

[seanie]

Why can’t a woman be more like a man?

 

[Emily Lake]

The fact is, I am also greatly concerned with their feelings and concerns on the matter because it is my very existence they are objecting to.

Nobody objects to your existence. Don't be daft.

Many people might very well object if you believe that your feelings about your internal identity should give you license to invade female spaces without consent. The objection is not based on your identity - it's based on the fact that you are male.

 

[Emily Lake]

Again, the obsession with public restrooms, when they’re possibly the least important situation.

It's your side that obsesses about them.

Really?

Despite me repeatedly saying public restrooms are probably the least important issue? Certainly in practical terms.

Do you think trans women should be allowed to use women's restrooms?

Not as a right, no. I do not believe that any male should have the right to use female restrooms. An occasional accommodation or exception once in a while sure, but not as a right.

 

[Emily Lake]

Do you think trans men should be allowed to use women's restrooms?

Do you think transmen should be sent to the men's prison?

 

[seanie]

Requiring all males to stay out of female only spaces is not unreasonable.

 

[Emily Lake]

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?