Will the Supreme Court protect Women's Rights?

Surely the 'oh its the interns fault' is getting a bit old now. They need a new line.

Galaxy

Yes there has been lots of silencing it was a key part of the movement.

This is not the definition of mutual. We must only read back to the lack of mutual respect when I shared my own empirical evidence. Many trans people have been silenced by this debate as well, fearing to come forward and have their voices heard with respect. When there are those that demand that they must come forward to condemn behaviour instead of coming forward as themselves, it is no wonder the divide has become so great that individual voices are silenced and cannot speak through fear of angry response.

Luminance

Galaxy

Yes there has been lots of silencing it was a key part of the movement.

This is not the definition of mutual. We must only read back to the lack of mutual respect when I shared my own empirical evidence. Many trans people have been silenced by this debate as well, fearing to come forward and have their voices heard with respect. When there are those that demand that they must come forward to condemn behaviour instead of coming forward as themselves, it is no wonder the divide has become so great that individual voices are silenced and cannot speak through fear of angry response.

We must? Why 'must' we (and again, who are 'we' in this context?).

Don't you remember No Debate? Or the numerous cases of people being hounded out of careers? Or activists disrupting meetings of women, LGB parades or cinema screenings? Of speakers being denied the right to a platform in universities? Of posts on here and elsewhere accusing those who said that men can't become women of Nazism and having 'far right' inclination?

They were all individual voices being silenced and angry responses. We also heard from people working in schools who openly stated that they had been trained to believe in gender dysphoria (despite the tiny number of children diagnosed with it) and that they encouraged trans children to be 'their true selves' and people questioning that had posts deleted.

I will be very pleased if all that silencing stops.

Shh now doodledog, it's like Ocado, we need to pretend that didn't happen.

Galaxy

Shh now doodledog, it's like Ocado, we need to pretend that didn't happen.

Ocado?🤔

Good points raised there Doodledog

I think I read back in the mists of time, a group of militant trans women lobbied Cow and Gate, manufacturers of baby food that they would withdraw their custom if they didn't stop advertising on MN. Strangely, I'm not sure C&G were too shaken by that ominous threat and continued. Could it be that MN has something in the region of 11 million subscribers, not unsurprisingly Cow and Gate were possibly to conclude a fair proportion of their customer base could well be MNs as opposed to a group of disgruntled trans women who might not be in the market for formula milk and mushy baby food.

Some selective amnesia going on here; either that or just wilfully ignoring exactly what it was that brought us to the Supreme Court. But it really doesn't matter; Wednesday was the start of a new, clearer, definitive beginning where everybody knows exactly where they should be. And so long as that's respected by everyone, I can't see what problems their can be.

Well, there is now definitely a structure for big organisations to work within as regards drawing up new guidelines and working with them

but there are inevitably a number of issues where everybody doesn't know where they should be, in practice there will be grey areas that will face both professionals dealing with the public and in personal lives.

Take for example the pronoun issue, which wasn't (as far as I can tell) wasn't dealt with in the ruling.

Trans women who have lived a reasonably or very long time as transwomen but whose first name is female have been addressed by friends, family, workmates, health professionals, as "she" and her" (some not knowing they are trans) -are they forthwith to be addressed as 'he and "him?" - who polices this? Is it the right thing?

I read that a number of trans activists have stated that they will openly defy the law and are lobbying others to commit to doing the same.

That is not respectful, either of the law or other people.

Be respectful does seem to be a one way street. Much like be kind.

Maybe just address a trans person exactly as you would anyone else? Use their name?
I don't know if employers can now insist that employees state their preferred pronoun at the foot of emails? Fine if you choose to but I'd imagine that enforcement would now be problematic.

In regard to pronouns should not each person speak “their truth?”

Hasn’t this been the mantra?

I guess the clarification is that people can no longer lose their jobs or be subjected to abuse because they use the pronoun that is true for them.

As a biological male, I can't pretend I'm a woman and demand to use female toilets, changing rooms and gyms., or gate crash a lesbian event and demand to join because they're trans. The whole trans thing is becoming a joke.

As far as I understand it, the Supreme Court judgement was concerned only with female spaces. I don't think we can expect them sort out the pronouns issue. I think that is a matter for individual organisations.

Lathyrus3

I read that a number of trans activists have stated that they will openly defy the law and are lobbying others to commit to doing the same.

That is not respectful, either of the law or other people.

Be respectful does seem to be a one way street. Much like be kind.

I have read this too. Very vocal and militant trans activities have said they intend to keep going into women's bathrooms, for instance, some even saying that they are going to wear body cams so that they can film the outrage from the 'terfs'. Where is the respect there? And yes, the ones who were so quick to bleat about we should all 'be kind' and not hurt their feelings are now equally quick to hurl insults, abuse and even death threats to those who dare to challenge them in any way.

That's what has just been decided Cumbrianmale56, you cant. The whole point of the ruling.

I don’t believe we need to tie ourselves in knots about how we speak to and about trans people we socialise or work with. Geraldine has always been referred to as female because this is how she has been known for years in her workplace

Well you must treat people as you choose as long as you aren't crossing boundaries of what is lawful. I expect it depends on the individual rather. I have always felt that dialogue can be kept respectful and when it isn't, I would regard that as not something I should trouble myself unduly with unless it were something that ought to be reported and dealt with lawfully. I've never had any trouble myself with sharing my views on protecting women's spaces with trans people so would have to be led by that.

Trans women who have lived a reasonably or very long time as transwomen but whose first name is female have been addressed by friends, family, workmates, health professionals, as "she" and her" (some not knowing they are trans) -are they forthwith to be addressed as 'he and "him?" - who polices this? Is it the right thing?

I don't think it will be policed. There is no need, so long as nobody is cancelled for using the wrong one. People can call themselves Princess if they want to, and so long as the title isn't used fraudulently (by which I mean for criminal gain) it's not illegal. Nor, I imagine, will be calling yourself Susan instead of Stephen, and the majority of people will probably go along with that out of politeness. It will only be access to designated female spaces that will change.

Other things will probably follow incrementally, such as questions on surveys about so-called 'gender' being dropped unless they are relevant to the research, and results being based on sex.

I don't think that most people are transphobic - a lot of people have been utterly sick of the coercion and gaslighting, but if that stops, I don't expect there will be any need for policing.

I don't think anyone should control the speech of others. So I expect no comeback if I describe men as men. I think if people want to use she that is also up to them. I don't want people to control the speech of individuals. However I expect my news reports to contain some level of accuracy, so in the same way that I wouldn't expect a news report to say the capital of France is London, I wouldn't expect them to say 'she' committed three incidents of assault when in fact the perpetrator was a male.

I've never had any trouble myself with sharing my views on protecting women's spaces with trans people so would have to be led by that.
Lucky you. Many people have had 'trouble' for sharing their views about sex being immutable. I hope that stops now.

Have I given anyone any trouble for respectfully disclosing their beliefs? "** In a frock" I objected to and received an avalanche of mentions and interrogation as a result. It was as if a mere hint of empathy towards trans people must absolutely be stomped out. I am afraid trans people have been throughout our great history. Hitler himself burned the first ever facility for the treatment of trans people to the ground. Trans people have fought alongside women for rights. I cannot view an individual as anything other than who they are and I do not believe that to be luck, just circumstance but a relevant point none the less.

Lathyrus3

I’m very happy for trans people to have their own designated spaces, toilets, changing rooms, prisons, hospital accommodation, whatever. I’m happy for them to have their own designated categories in sport, literature, the arts, to have a designated quota in situations where quotas are applied.

I absolutely believe they should be able to live their lives free of threat and discrimination.

In short I’m happy for them to have equality and respect.

Now why are they not happy for me, as a woman, to have those things?

I

I’m very happy for trans people to have their own designated spaces, toilets, changing rooms, prisons, hospital accommodation, whatever

But that is not what they want. Certainly not the TRAs anyway. They do not want their own spaces, they want ours. To force us to accept them as women.

That is what all the noise is about.

The TRAs will not give up without a fight.

I've never had any trouble myself with sharing my views on protecting women's spaces with trans people

Pity that Maya Forstater, Sandie Peggie, Kathleen Stock, Jo Bartosch, Suzanne Moore, Jo Phoenix and Jennifer Melle didn't have your good fortune isn't it?

Luminance do you feel the same level of empathy towards all the women who have been vilified, abused, harassed, spat at, sued and been made jobless because of they dared even suggest that women's spaces should be kept strictly for women?