Will the Supreme Court protect Women's Rights?

If you enjoyed X, you'll probably enjoy Spiked too; some very sharp but funny articles on there.

I've just been reading some of the fabulous posts on X Galaxy; the memes about Stonewall are especially good!

X has been very funny these past two days. Someone has just pointed out that Daly Thompson ( who is a great defender of women's rights) will be the last gender critical person in the country to find out about the ruling

Dickens. you hit the nail on the head.
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.

So far, on the media, there hasn’t been much mutual consideration from those on the TW side who caused the need for a legal decision about the truth to be necessary.

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

That’s a really vague, but definitely virtue signalling statement.

However, to be fair, I’ve had no trouble sharing my views on protecting women’s spaces either, though it’s not something I regularly do and depending on the attitude of the trans I’ve had contact with, they have been well accepted or fiercely argued against, with accusations of transphobia or discrimination.
Do you suppose the fiercely argumentative ones will have a different, more respectful attitude following the Supreme Court ruling?

Yes, that's it in a nutshell, Doodledog.

Transpeople will or won't be welcome in a few limited spaces depending on whether they are using the ones designed for their sex. In the same way as everyone else. Otherwise they will be able to go about their business as usual.

The ruling has made it clear that opinions don't come into it any longer. Sex is based on biology, not opinion.

I would suggest that trans people have the same right to fight for rights that women do. But I think the fear is that this ruling will divide the country into places where trans people are or are not welcome based on the opinion of those running the place. We will not know fully where anyone stands on that until the equality act is laid out on what organisations responsibilities are to trans people and women and what actually does qualify as a safe space for biological women. In other words, this will be tricky to navigate for a while and i would hope does not cause further attacks from women or trans people to each other.

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?

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.