UK Supreme Court Decision on Gender

[unloadonme]

Latest:

Trans women should use toilets based on biological sex, Phillipson says

Bridget Phillipson was responding to questions following the Supreme Court's gender ruling.

www.bbc.co.uk

The government minister responsible for equality issues has said that trans women should use toilets (bathrooms for Americans) according to their biological sex. Apparently she avoided saying specifically that that means men's toilets, but clearly that's what it does mean.

The Prime Minister has said the Supreme Court decision provided "real clarity in an area where we did need clarity" and was a "welcome step forward".

 

[luckynumbah7]

If a woman was an adult female then they wouldn't have a clarifying bit that trans guys could be kicked out for being too masculine. But they did include that, so it isn't really based on the vagina, is it.

So no, the supreme court are two faced liars at best. It was never about protecting anybody.

 

[unloadonme]

... they wouldn't have a clarifying bit that trans guys could be kicked out for being too masculine ...

Where did you see that? As I read it, the Supreme Court judgement is based simply on biological sex. I don't recall the decision being dependant on degrees of masculinity or femininity.

 

[unloadonme]

More from the Prime Minister, who has backtracked on what he said a couple of years ago.

Keir Starmer does not believe trans women are women, No 10 says

The UK Supreme Court has ruled that the legal definition of a woman should be based on biological sex.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[luckynumbah7]

Where did you see that? As I read it, the Supreme Court judgement is based simply on biological sex. I don't recall the decision being dependant on degrees of masculinity or femininity.

Two things. The first is that bathrooms have always been largely self policing by nosy fuckers and in the case of the women's room that includes masculinity so that has yet to change, largely based in racism and class. The second is that we can be ejected from women's space due to 'the gender reassignment process [having] given [us] a masculine appearance or attributes to which reasonable objection might be taken in the context of the women-only service being provided”.

 

[unloadonme]

Two things. The first is that bathrooms have always been largely self policing by nosy fuckers and in the case of the women's room that includes masculinity so that has yet to change, largely based in racism and class. The second is that we can be ejected from women's space due to 'the gender reassignment process [having] given [us] a masculine appearance or attributes to which reasonable objection might be taken in the context of the women-only service being provided”.

I see. I thought you had decided that the UK Supreme Court judges were "two faced liars" because their judgement included a "clarifying bit that trans guys could be kicked out for being too masculine". Your comments appear, however, to be entirely based on anecdotal evidence of the experiences of trans women in the US.

Interesting btw that you say that the "gender reassignment process [having] given [us] a masculine appearance". I'd suggest that the masculine appearance of some trans women has more to do with them having being born biologically male than it has to do with the reassignment process.

 

[rareboy]

Latest:

Trans women should use toilets based on biological sex, Phillipson says

Bridget Phillipson was responding to questions following the Supreme Court's gender ruling.

www.bbc.co.uk

The government minister responsible for equality issues has said that trans women should use toilets (bathrooms for Americans) according to their biological sex. Apparently she avoided saying specifically that that means men's toilets, but clearly that's what it does mean.

The Prime Minister has said the Supreme Court decision provided "real clarity in an area where we did need clarity" and was a "welcome step forward".

Great Britain looks so ridiculously stupid over this whole issue.

 

[TX-Beau]

Great Britain looks so ridiculously stupid over this whole issue.

The haters started with this here a few years ago. Now look at what it's morphed into. It may look silly, but I wonder if this is just a test, like the same legislation that began here.

BTW, this is an effective ban on Trans people being able to use public facilities.

 

[unloadonme]

The latest consequence of the Supreme Court case is that trans women are likely to be excluded from all-women candidate lists on the basis that they're really men. Trans men would be eligible.

Trans women expected to be excluded from all-women candidate lists

Updated guidance is expected following last week's Supreme Court ruling that sex is biological.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[TX-Beau]

The latest consequence of the Supreme Court case is that trans women are likely to be excluded from all-women candidate lists on the basis that they're really men. Trans men would be eligible.

Trans women expected to be excluded from all-women candidate lists

Updated guidance is expected following last week's Supreme Court ruling that sex is biological.

www.bbc.co.uk

The first domino falls.

 

[rareboy]

Give it time.

They'll get to the erasure of the pillow biting queers eventually.

Can't even imagine what the Brits will do without their nancy boys in drag.

I am just hoping that since we now have only a very vague colonial connection with GB, that with a Liberal government in place, and our own Charter of Rights and Freedoms, we will not fall prey to the
cis white het radicals looking to hurt people because of their own psycho-social issues.

 

[unloadonme]

The first domino falls.

I'm not sure it's a question of dominoes. The principle established by the judgement is that trans women are legally men rather than women and should be excluded from anything and everything which is justifiably for women only, be that lavatories, changing rooms, political candidate lists or whatever. There will be consequences in sport too. Women have been complaining for some time about trans women competing in women's events. I'm sure the judgement will scupper any future possibility of that happening.

 

[TX-Beau]

I'm not sure it's a question of dominoes. The principle established by the judgement is that trans women are legally men rather than women and should be excluded from anything and everything which is justifiably for women only, be that lavatories, changing rooms, political candidate lists or whatever. There will be consequences in sport too. Women have been complaining for some time about trans women competing in women's events. I'm sure the judgement will scupper any future possibility of that happening.

If you choose to be complacent about this stuff, you;re going to get your ass bit. What your courts have done is sanction discrimination against the easiest target, and the people who made that happen will not stop there.

I don't know why it doesn't bother you that a court is legislating, and that is precisely what this is: who you can be, and enforcing sanctions on people because of who they are. You may think that Trans people deserve it for some reason, and if you do, it's only a matter of time before they get to you.

This isn't speculation; it happened here and in other places, and the playbook is always the same: start with the easiest target, test the boundaries, get people used to being haters, and then, when Trans people are justifiably vilified for their "perversion" how different are they really from gay men, it's gay men who want to dress up like women and pretend to be Trans after all...

 

[unloadonme]

Can't even imagine what the Brits will do without their nancy boys in drag.

The drag queens I know are gay men rather than trans.

 

[TX-Beau]

It's always disturbing that the people who enact these laws and make excuses for them blithely ignore that there isn't a problem. Trans men and women have been using those restrooms all along, and there is no epidemic of abuse or assault, anywhere. It just seems that anyone who makes excuses for this shit is just opposed to the idea of Trans people and wants them to vanish or something. It's bigotry, plain and straightforward, sanction them for no reason, just because you don't like them.

 

[TX-Beau]

The drag queens I know are gay men rather than trans.

You think that makes a difference to anyone but us? It doesn't. The haters think you are a perverse straight guy who deserves what's coming for choosing perversion just because, and who gives a shit if you put on a dress, it's just more evidence of your obscenity.

 

[unloadonme]

If you choose to be complacent about this stuff, you;re going to get your ass bit. What your courts have done is sanction discrimination against the easiest target, and the people who made that happen will not stop there.

I don't know why it doesn't bother you that a court is legislating, and that is precisely what this is: who you can be, and enforcing sanctions on people because of who they are. You may think that Trans people deserve it for some reason, and if you do, it's only a matter of time before they get to you.

This isn't speculation; it happened here and in other places, and the playbook is always the same: start with the easiest target, test the boundaries, get people used to being haters, and then, when Trans people are justifiably vilified for their "perversion" how different are they really from gay men, it's gay men who want to dress up like women and pretend to be Trans after all...

If you were to actually read the judgement, you'd see that the court went to great lengths to say that they were clarifying what was a woman for the purposes of the Equality Act and that the other statutory provisions which prohibit discrimination on the grounds of various protected characteristics (including trans) remain untouched. The court wasn't saying that a person can't be a trans woman, only that for the purposes of the legislation woman means biological woman.

 

[TX-Beau]

If you were to actually read the judgement, you'd see that the court went to great lengths to say that they were clarifying what was a woman for the purposes of the Equality Act and that the other statutory provisions which prohibit discrimination on the grounds of various protected characteristics (including trans) remain untouched. The court wasn't saying that a person can't be a trans woman, only that for the purposes of the legislation woman means biological woman.

I'm sure they did. Guess what gets to fall next? Also, that doesn't alter the fact that these kinds of decisions sanction real discrimination against Trans people in their daily lives from people who are utterly uninterested in the niceties of legal nitpicking.

Why do you agree with this anyway? What is your justification?

 

[rareboy]

If you were to actually read the judgement, you'd see that the court went to great lengths to say that they were clarifying what was a woman for the purposes of the Equality Act and that the other statutory provisions which prohibit discrimination on the grounds of various protected characteristics (including trans) remain untouched. The court wasn't saying that a person can't be a trans woman, only that for the purposes of the legislation woman means biological woman.

erasure is erasure is erasure.

I am sure the UK homos are as delighted as Joanne and her TERF squad are.

But they don't realize the portal they've opened will eventually mean they also will be erased.

 

[luckynumbah7]

erasure is erasure is erasure.

I am sure the UK homos are as delighted as Joanne and her TERF squad are.

But they don't realize the portal they've opened will eventually mean they o start complaining w

erasure is erasure is erasure.

I am sure the UK homos are as delighted as Joanne and her TERF squad are.

But they don't realize the portal they've opened will eventually mean they also will be erased.

I dunno that too many of the butch lesbians would be happy - they're usually on the chopping block in the bathroom wars due to masculinity.

In other news I have given up explaining the clarification I posted wasn't discussing trans women, he doesn't seem to get the distinction. It was referring to anyone masculine with a factory equipped vag instead one o'those customizable after-market models. Part of that whole willful erasure I suspect.