Will the Supreme Court protect Women's Rights?

Do you believe that yourself? That "all trans people hate females" is a valid impression that could be undone were every trans person state otherwise? How do you or I know they aren't? Where would this required platform to do so in a way we could perhaps take a tally be? I simply do not understand how this would work.

To be fair the gender critical trans identifying men were called everything under the sun by the activists.

I think most non-trans people are ready to condemn other non-trans people who bully and harass trans people for merely the fact of being trans, without the Trans person committing any crimes. In some countries, and in some demographics in the UK, the proportion varies, but there are voices who are ready to speak up against unfairness,

However, if none of the quiet trans people make their voices heard in condemning some of the bad behaviour, attitude and violence of the more aggressive trans activists, they are not doing anything to counter the impression that all trans people hate females and have no tolerance of any different tradition by anyone else that goes counter to their own convictions.

I can understand them staying below the radar, but maybe they are being too quiet, and allowing those with the loudest voices to set the standard profile?

Thanks for your explanation Luminance

I think if I met a transwoman in a group setting say, and they introduced themselves to me as Lucy, say, then I would go along with that and even refer if I had to, to ‘her’.We would all know the truth of course.If I met a transman in the same setting who said he was called Ken then I would do the same.
Probably tho, apart from saying hello I wouldn’t need to say anything more, but if need arose then I would do.

Oreo

What sort of work do you do with trans people Luminance?
I don’t think anyone on this forum wishes them any harm and would respect a name or pronoun if introduced to a trans person.It’s all the other stuff we’re not so keen on.

I'm a nurse in mental health. I won't say where if you don't mind. I have however dealt with patients who have been attacked, harassed and intimidated, women and trans women in differing circumstances. I suppose that would be why I respect the needs of both. Both have often experienced violence. I suppose that makes me look at the problem rather differently, perpetrator and victim. Entire groups of people do not come into it. I would not expect a man to publicly condemn another man for violence, I would simply hope he would stand against it were he witness and it was safe to do so. Often women's children feel they are responsible for the behaviour of another parent, that they didn't do enough. They are not and must be helped to understand that.

I would never use a female pronoun to describe a man. It is part of why we ended up where we are.

What sort of work do you do with trans people Luminance?
I don’t think anyone on this forum wishes them any harm and would respect a name or pronoun if introduced to a trans person.It’s all the other stuff we’re not so keen on.

Luminance

Where are trans people supposed to come out and publicly condemn people? What an odd thing to say.

Perhaps in the same media comments where Trans Rights Activists have been actively condemning and cancelling any public figure who doesn't agree with their pronouncements?

One of the attitudes that ought to be challenged is that it is non-trans women who need to add "cis" or "natal" to their definition to distinguish themselves from those who wish to join them as Associate Members.

I have no problem with trans people having rights (that is, rights which do not strip a right from someone else) and not being harassed, provided they do not use them to harass anyone else or threaten to do so, physically, verbally or silently) but adult human females are women They are not "cis women" who haven't decided to cross the Alps of transitioning, and the vast majority of them are not even considering it.

I say real women cos it’s usually transwomen kicking up a rumpus and not transmen.

Lathyrus3

Oh you posted while I was typing.

Yes, I hope it makes rather more sense now. I work with trans people, they do feel afraid. Perhaps no one here is harassing them but asking if people feel they should keep their rights and protections and if the comment I pointed out is a violation of that had an entirely mixed response. Yet I am rather interested to know how women feel towards trans people. I am rather interested to know if using pronouns is an issue or where the line is for people? I would obviously challenge any thing that I feel crosses a line, as should we all, when safe to do so.

Luminance have to say I’m baffled as to what lots of your comments really mean, 14.38.55 post for example, the last sentence is clear but why is anything cruel to trans people?
They still have rights within society as we all do, just not the ones that they wanted which was that society had to treat them as real women.

I'm rather at a loss as to what it is that you're searching for Luminance? Firstly you raised objections to the term "jocks in frocks" being used and so I went to great lengths to show you how, why and when the term came into use. You might not like the term, but that's ok; you don't have to. This doesn't satisfy you and you still search for an apology from the poster.

Then you started to demand that posters agree we all in favour of trans people keeping the protections they are afforded against discrimination and harassment, which the court clearly stated. You've received several responses, including my own, confirming long held views that ordinary, quiet living, peaceable people, who happen to be trans, are welcomed, treated with the same respect and dignity as anyone else. The angry, violent, aggressive TRAs, not so much and again, the reasons for this have been explained to you several times--with examples of why such great damage has been done--

Dickens has given an excellent post at 13.37; none confrontational, simply explained why we ended up in the position we were and, crucially added again that it was the TRA that she was referring to. You're still not satisfied. I suspect that you're not going to get the answers you're searching for here. It's still very early days; the ruling was made just 24 hours ago and people are still coming to terms with how everyone will be impacted. Personally, I think that little will change for those in the trans communities who just want to live quietly, go about their business and bother no one. No one is expecting them to apologise for the aggressive, violent agitators who caused so much disruption that they actually probably contributed to yesterday's ruling. The trans communities still have the same protections against discrimination and harassment as they had on Monday; nothing has changed there.

You've got, as far as I can see, everything you searched for.

Oh you posted while I was typing.

Luminance

Publicly condemn. Which is rather how I feel having agreed with the ruling but still pointed out that trans people have protections and should be free from discrimination and harassment. Why is that?

Publicly condemn doesn’t mean anything like apologise.

You condemn others for the actions they are responsible for

You apologise for the actions you are responsible for.

The meaning is almost the opposite.

For instance youcould apologise for misrepresenting what Mollygo said.

Or you could condemn her for saying it if you wished.

But in no way would they mean the same thing.

Luminance

Publicly condemn. Which is rather how I feel having agreed with the ruling but still pointed out that trans people have protections and should be free from discrimination and harassment. Why is that?

What colour is the sky on your planet, Luminance?

Your posts are making less and less sense.

Nobody is advocating discrimination or harrassment, or removal of protection from same.

I don't know why I put publicly apologise instead of publicly condemn, I suppose that is what it would feel like were I forced to do so as it would suggest some sort of responsibility. We are not accountable for the behaviour of others. The only time I would say that someone must condemn a behaviour is if they were present when it happened and said nothing but only should it be safe for them to do so. I agree with the ruling but I condemn any comments that are cruel to trans people as discriminatory. Case in point.

Luminance

I see this is far from over and more excuses are needed. Now every trans person whether involved in what went on or not must publicly apologise. Do we put them in stocks while they do it?

Hope this jogs your memory

You have absolutely hit the nail on the head there, Dickens.

Publicly condemn. Which is rather how I feel having agreed with the ruling but still pointed out that trans people have protections and should be free from discrimination and harassment. Why is that?

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Julie Bindel:

“But men who identify as women have felt it necessary to bully their way into our changing rooms, sports, prison wings, and domestic violence and rape crisis centres. It is now time to stop. We have had enough. The women have revolted, and the end of a destructive era is now in sight.

I personally hope to never have to utter the words “gender identity” again, and to go back to dedicating 100 per cent of my campaigning time to fighting the male violence that is still so prevalent today.”

I personally hope to never have to utter the words “gender identity” again...

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with the phrase, nor the feeling of having a gender identity that doesn't coincide with your biological sex.

I suspect there are both men and women whose inner identity compels them to act in a way that doesn't strictly conform to their biological sex, nor what 'society' broadly expects. And think little of it themselves, neither do their family or friends. It becomes their 'personality', or part of it.

It is the clamouring, insistent, and not infrequently foul-mouthed men insulting and threatening (with their "girl-dick") women, who have turned 'gender identity' into a war cry. It's them who have led us to this ridiculous situation where a woman now has to be legally-defined.

Hormone therapy and surgery can change your physical characteristics, but chromosomes are a constant which are determined at birth. At this moment, there is no known science that will change your chromosomes to alter your underlying genetic make-up.

That we have come to this is an indication of just how far TRAs will push their agenda, for whatever reason; whether it's to indulge their gynephilia, fetish, or even to claim the territory of women in order to subdue their feminist power... it's misogyny.

Such TRAs have never, with goodwill, ever sat down to debate with women. Their response when challenged is a typical male response, one that usually incorporates threats of violence, or is abusive.

I don't expect the TRAs - and it is them I am talking about, will quietly accept this ruling.

It actually hit our news this evening. Unusual. We usually only hear about Trump and the USA.

Nope can’t see anything about every trans person having to publicly apologise at all.

Point me to it.

But you weren't answering Mollygo. She suggested those trans who don't agree with how TRA's have behaved publicly condemn them.

It's you who mentioned apologising, not Mollygo.

Lathyrus3

Please could you post a link to the part of the judgement that says “every trans person must now publicly apologise.”

I can’t seem to see it.

I was answering Mollygo with that, perhaps you can address the comment not my answer to it?