[News] A woman is a woman.

[superseagull1994]

There are certainly some willing participants in the UK and Australia.

Willing and funded. Including Wes Streeting and the labour party.

Cross-Party Statement on Wes Streeting’s Engagement with Anti-Trans Groups

A cross-party joint statement from LGBT+ Liberal Democrats, Rainbow Greens, LGBTQIA+ Greens, and Out for Independence on Wes Streeting’s engagement with anti-trans organisations and call for his resignation.

lgbt.libdems.org.uk

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

Ruling says the concept of sex is binary​

In an 88-page ruling, Lord Hodge, Lady Rose and Lady Simler said: "The definition of sex in the Equality Act 2010 makes clear that the concept of sex is binary, a person is either a woman or a man.

"Persons who share that protected characteristic for the purposes of the group-based rights and protections are persons of the same sex and provisions that refer to protection for women necessarily exclude men.

"Although the word 'biological' does not appear in this definition, the ordinary meaning of those plain and unambiguous words corresponds with the biological characteristics that make an individual a man or a woman.

"These are assumed to be self-explanatory and to require no further explanation.

"Men and women are on the face of the definition only differentiated as a grouping by the biology they share with their group."

They require no further explanation, but there’s an 88 page document… I love how pompous the law is.

 

[Couldn't Be Hyypia]

They require no further explanation, but there’s an 88 page document… I love how pompous the law is.

I don't think it's pompous, I think it's trying to be unambiguous.

 

[BadFish]

They require no further explanation, but there’s an 88 page document… I love how pompous the law is.

Is science also pompous for not seeing sex as binary?

By birth, then, a baby has five layers of sex. But as with chromosomal sex, each subsequent layer does not always become strictly binary. Furthermore, the layers can conflict with one another, with one being binary and another not: An XX baby can be born with a penis, an XY person may have a vagina, and so on. These kinds of inconsistencies throw a monkey wrench into any plan to assign sex as male or female, categorically and in perpetuity, just by looking at a newborn’s private parts.

https://joelvelasco.net/teaching/3334/fausto-Why_sex_Is_Not_Binary.pdf

 

[DJ NOBO]

I would say it is fully independent of people's understanding of gender dysphoria. The people I was referring to are the ones who are weaponising the issue, i have no idea if they understand it or not.

As you suggest, it is quite possible to not understand it and still be supportive of people who are affected by it.

So do you believe

a) that men can literally become women

B) that the reason some people do not believe this is solely down to them not being educated about it?
As in, if they educated themselves they would agree that a man could literally become a woman



This is not meant to come across as accusatory in tone btw , just clarifying

 

[BadFish]

So do you believe

a) that men can literally become women

B) that the reason some people do not believe this is solely down to them not being educated about it?
As in, if they educated themselves they would agree that a men could literally become a woman



This is not meant to come across as accusatory in tone btw , just clarifying

The idea of men 'becoming' women is unrepresentative of the science behind this.

No-one is 'becoming' anything, people are what they. What I am currently learning is that neither sex nor gender are binary and no one is making any choices.

People are who they are and sometimes those things do not align traditionally.

If you are interested, I have posted a couple of videos on this thread about this subject (post 19 and 24) I found them informative and interesting.

 

[Triggaaar]

the overriding point of this was to confirm sex doesnt equate to gender. changing gender does not lead to changing legal sex for purpose of interpreting the Equalities act, which was vague on the matter.

this was brought up in Scotland as a consequence of their extremely liberal gender change rules, that allowed people to change based on self-certified, 6mth period of living as opposite gender.

Can you give some examples of how the Equalities act would benefit someone who's a woman, as opposed to someone who's a man?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Woman and man are genders, this is different to biological sex. Biological sex is also incredibly complex.

You are correct.

This initial legislation is useful. It does rely on a binary classification of biological sex, which is incorrect, but an understandable first step. Most people fit into one of two categories. Intersex is quite rare. This will have to be accommodated, but one step at a time.

The laws usefully bring in an anti discriminatory element. You can't be discriminated against based on gender (which includes what your brain tells you you are, and intersex which is biological).

What this means is, for example, if you are a trans woman (biologically male, but dressed female, with or without surgical adjustments) you will no longer be able to use the women's toilets and changing rooms. BUT you will need to be provided with facilities BY LAW. You will not be forced to use the gents.

The detail of the antidiscrminatory aspect has not been fleshed out so there will be lots more for the courts to deal with, initially by creation of case law, eventually one suspects by governmental legislation.

I am relaxed about the change - kicks the mad jock ruling into touch, and the momentary empowerment of radical feminists won't be impactful because they cannot discriminate, they must accommodate (except in the Ladies).

 

[drew]

Is science also pompous for not seeing sex as binary?

By birth, then, a baby has five layers of sex. But as with chromosomal sex, each subsequent layer does not always become strictly binary. Furthermore, the layers can conflict with one another, with one being binary and another not: An XX baby can be born with a penis, an XY person may have a vagina, and so on. These kinds of inconsistencies throw a monkey wrench into any plan to assign sex as male or female, categorically and in perpetuity, just by looking at a newborn’s private parts.

https://joelvelasco.net/teaching/3334/fausto-Why_sex_Is_Not_Binary.pdf

I watched the first 15 minutes of that first video clip. He correctly identifies that humans are animals, no problem with that. He then goes on to identify other species that can change their biological sex depending on circumstances, for example, lack of mating opportunities. Humans can't do that (and I mean without surgical/medical intervention). Unlike some species, there is no evidence that humans can influence the sex of their developing foetus merely by change of incubating temperature! As I see it, once born, you remain biologically male or biologically female (notwithstanding medical anomalies which are accidental rather than by design).

That said, how you chose or how you realise you feel you need to live your life is your choice. And that is where the tolerance comes in. However, we need laws not for those of us in society that are tolerant but for those that wish to abuse and manipulate the system. An example of this would be the serial rapist who then decides to identify as a woman in order to be incarcerated in a 'female' prison.

The judgement by the Supreme court has moved the debate on but not ended it. The rights of one section of society should not diminish the rights of another section of society. At the moment, the balance between trans women and women isn't there but hopefully it is moving in the right direction.

 

[Triggaaar]

They require no further explanation, but there’s an 88 page document… I love how pompous the law is.

I don't think it's pompous, I think it's trying to be unambiguous.

There's nothing wrong with trying to be unambiguous, but given that it's taken 88 pages to try and be unambiguous, don't pretend that the ordinary meaning of man and woman are self-explanatory and require no further explanation.

 

[Triggaaar]

What this means is, for example, if you are a trans woman (biologically male, but dressed female, with or without surgical adjustments) you will no longer be able to use the women's toilets and changing rooms. BUT you will need to be provided with facilities BY LAW. You will not be forced to use the gents.

Establishments are allowed to have unisex toilets, right? So can't they also have toilets that are for people with male gender, and people with female gender? Meaning that trans women will be able to use the same toilets as sis women?

I'm not sure this ruling forces establishments to stop trans people from using the toilet that seems appropriate to them.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

My hope for this thread is not conclusion or agreement but it is a chance for people to level up their understanding about this subject. Shit like this ruling relies on people's ignorance on the Topic.

Time to get educated so we can support those affected by it.

Indeed. The definition aspect is almost incidental (which is why the thickies think they have a 'victory').
The key element is the antidiscriminatory element, and this will trigger useful discussion about how it can be put in place.

Where I work there is a proliferation of gender neutral toilets* along side mal and female toilets. That deals with that.
One assumes that gender neutral changing rooms will also soon spring up.

It really isn't rocket science, and one hope that in the end the gender minorities will be safer and more free, despite why they may imagine right now.

*Currently used by males and females.....not everyone gets their knickers twisted over 'safe' spaces.

 

[BadFish]

I watched the first 15 minutes of that first video clip. He correctly identifies that humans are animals, no problem with that. He then goes on to identify other species that can change their biological sex depending on circumstances, for example, lack of mating opportunities. Humans can't do that (and I mean without surgical/medical intervention). Unlike some species, there is no evidence that humans can influence the sex of their developing foetus merely by change of incubating temperature! As I see it, once born, you remain biologically male or biologically female (notwithstanding medical anomalies which are accidental rather than by design).

That said, how you chose or how you realise you feel you need to live your life is your choice. And that is where the tolerance comes in. However, we need laws not for those of us in society that are tolerant but for those that wish to abuse and manipulate the system. An example of this would be the serial rapist who then decides to identify as a woman in order to be incarcerated in a 'female' prison.

The judgement by the Supreme court has moved the debate on but not ended it. The rights of one section of society should not diminish the rights of another section of society. At the moment, the balance between trans women and women isn't there but hopefully it is moving in the right direction.

I agree that we remain as we are when we are born, what I am beginning to learn though is that the definition of biological sex is more complex than I and realised and that as we are discussing, it doesn't always line up with our psychological gender. This is where the dysphoria comes in.

Perhaps this ruling is better than I thought, and an important step on the road to solving some of the problems we are discussing as a society.

 

[DJ NOBO]

The idea of men 'becoming' women is unrepresentative of the science behind this.

No-one is 'becoming' anything, people are what they. What I am currently learning is that neither sex nor gender are binary and no one is making any choices.

People are who they are and sometimes those things do not align traditionally.

If you are interested, I have posted a couple of videos on this thread about this subject (post 19 and 24) I found them informative and interesting.

I think with some very rare exceptions you are either male or female and it is obvious at birth whether you are male or female. I believe that fundamental remains the case throughout your life.
I am open to other views about anything but don’t think i could be educated into believing otherwise . I find it odd that this view may be considered by some as controversial.

Hopefully you don’t confuse this with an agenda against trans people or a dislike of trans people . It’s not the case . Those who are violent or abusive towards transpeople should be brought to justice.,

 

[BadFish]

I think with some very rare exceptions you are either male or female and it is obvious at birth whether you are male or female. I believe that fundamental remains the case throughout your life.
I am open to other views about this or anything but don’t think i could be educated otherwise on what to me is common sense .
Hopefully you don’t confuse this with an agenda against trans people. It’s not the case . I hope anyone who is violent or abusive towards transpeople faces the full force of the law.

I guess the trouble is those 'rare occasions' (a dysphoria when sex and gender do not align - to put it simply) has been thrust into prominence and used a political football. We are all asked to have an opinion on this stuff without fully understanding it.

As I said before, I certainly don't confuse this with an anti trans agenda. No one needs to understand other people's situations and challenges to show empathy and care towards them.

 

[beorhthelm]

Can you give some examples of how the Equalities act would benefit someone who's a woman, as opposed to someone who's a man?

odd question, the Equalities act is supposed to enforce equal treatment of women and (try to) prevent discriminiation. what were you trying to get at?

 

[DJ NOBO]

I guess the trouble is those 'rare occasions' (a dysphoria when sex and gender do not align - to put it simply) has been thrust into prominence and used a political football. We are all asked to have an opinion on this stuff without fully understanding it.

As I said before, I certainly don't confuse this with an anti trans agenda. No one needs to understand other people's situations and challenges to show empathy and care towards them.

The rare occasions I was referring to are intersex people not gender dysphoria.
Of course gender dysphoria exists but I don’t believe there is an outcome when someone born male can literally be a woman at another stage on their life, however much they want to be . Or vice versa.
Others disagree. Fair enough.
And I’m glad you distinguish between those who believe the above and idiots who violently target vulnerable minority communities.

 

[dsr-burnley]

Right I'm going to tackle the womens sport topic. Its culture war [deleted]. Transwomen are banned from competitive womens chess, what competitive advantage do we possess in chess there is no its a political decision with influence from Russia. Do pre-hrt trans women have advantages over cis women absolutely, do trans women who have gone through medical transition have been taking T blockers and estrogen for years have those advatages? No we are actually at a disadvatage at this stage (1) and the FA is the only mainstream sporting body that has a sensible policy in this regard (2).

Sources:
(1) https://www.gendergp.com/new-report...not-have-biomedical-advantage-in-elite-sport/
(2) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c4g7e81nn57o

I understand your argument that there shouldn't need to be a women's chess tournament. (I don't accept your argument that, if it exists, people who are not biological women should be allowed to play in it.)

But you're hardly covering all bases with chess, are you. If a young man wants to play women's rugny, the argument that they do it in chess isn't relevant.

I have often heard the argument that an average sized former-male who takes all these blockers and stuff has no advantage over an average size female who hasn't. How does that work? Do these blockers and stuff genuinely take 4 inches off the man's height, and make his legs and arms shorter, and such? Or is it the opposite argument - that height isn't an adavantage in sport?

 

[Curious Orange]

Where I work there is a proliferation of gender neutral toilets* along side mal and female toilets. That deals with that.
One assumes that gender neutral changing rooms will also soon spring up.

Rather like we often provide separate disabled facilities - which are themselves predominantly gender neutral. Now that the law is settled it should just be a case of updating the guidance to comply with it.

 

[Triggaaar]

odd question, the Equalities act is supposed to enforce equal treatment of women and (try to) prevent discriminiation. what were you trying to get at?

It's not an odd question at all. You said 'changing gender does not lead to changing legal sex for purpose of interpreting the Equalities act, which was vague on the matter.'. If the Equalities act means equal treatment, then what difference does it make whether a trans woman is a woman in law or not?