Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

It's only about half-a-dozen zealots who volunteered to be on that committee anyway. The sort of weirdos who join university political societies, if you get the type. Most junior doctors have enough trouble finding time to sleep to be bothered with that sort of thing.

The law is settled. The SC judgment is final. It's done, and there's just a bit of dusting to do to herd the recalcitrant captured into line, if I may mix my metaphors. But the persuasive-sounding nonsense coming from everyone from Lady Hale to the Fox-killer is just the gnashing of disappointed teeth in the face of a comprehensive defeat.
 
Last edited:
catsmate said:
With all due respect, that is bollocks.

I note the BMA, the professional body for physicians, described the UKSC interpretation of the law as a "hugely disappointing judgment", "biologically nonsensical", "scientifically illiterate" while also stating that the judgement
"has no basis in science or medicine" and also "being actively harmful to transgender and gender-diverse people".

So I rather think the former president of the UKSC has plenty of scientific and medical support for her view.
Click to expand...
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, or if you actually believe that segregation based on binary sex is scientifically illiterate.

Also, there is an astounding lack of evidence that such segregation is "actively harmful to transgender and gender-diverse people".
 
If I can avoid the theatre toilets for a whole evening, because I know they're letting men in dresses in and I won't use a women's facility that isn't single-sex, and not make a song and dance about it, then I think "transgender and gender-diverse people" can find a way to manage. Particularly now that it has been confirmed that if they really, really can't face using the correct single-sex toilet, they can use the disabled facility.

But I don't know what they're so worried about.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1925545483734589856

Meanwhile, from the keyboards of the trans activists, we're hearing of an absolute explosion of violence in women's toilets, as women attack and assault other women they consider to be insufficiently feminine.

Sounds as if the men's is the safe place to be! (Not very bright, some of these guys.)
 
Another pithy comment.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1925688692175163676

Honestly, I don't know what the point is of seagulling into this thread and dropping a Grauniad article about a gender-crazy old woman with a completely out-there view of the SC judgment. We've been discussing it for dozens of pages now, but somehow this one off-the-wall article is some sort of gotcha we need to know about?
 
smartcooky said:
Transgender Americans will still be entitled to the exact same healthcare as every other American.
Click to expand...
Americans will have their hormone therapy covered, except for a small subset who are currently covered for treatment of gender dysphoria.
 
catsmate said:
With all due respect, that is bollocks.

I note the BMA, the professional body for physicians, described the UKSC interpretation of the law as a "hugely disappointing judgment", "biologically nonsensical", "scientifically illiterate" while also stating that the judgement
"has no basis in science or medicine" and also "being actively harmful to transgender and gender-diverse people".

So I rather think the former president of the UKSC has plenty of scientific and medical support for her view.
Click to expand...
The BMA residents are an entirely gender ideology captured group (like the BBC). They will simply parrot whatever talking points their masters spout.
Sex is based on biology. End of. Period.
Anyone who believes otherwise is simply wrong.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
I'd be more upset about this if I saw some convincing science about how hormone therapy is an ethical and effective treatment for gender dysphoria.
Click to expand...
You'll be relieved to know there will never be evidence of this. You cannot treat males who fantasize about being female with hormone therapy. The only feasible treatment is something called "a Reality Check".
 
Rolfe said:
She would, wouldn't she. Seeing as she's about the only judge who has ever taken the opposite view. She has been reversed, with the politest possible form of extreme prejudice. She needs to get over it.
Click to expand...
I suspect there may be a class element here - she's a supreme court judge, her daughter is CEO of the Stock Exchange; I doubt anybody is ever rude to her face, or directly challenges her.

EDIT: Ninja'd by a gay barrister on twitter
 
Last edited:
Rolfe said:
Sall makes a fair point here.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1925703737227501863
Click to expand...
Mere grandstanding. He's trying to imply that if they are not allowed to invade female spaces to pee, they will be forced to pee in exposed places.

The reality is they are probably safer in a disabled toilet than they would be in either a men's or women's toilet... but we all know safety is not the object of the exercise... sticking it to women is the object. We also all know that the majority of transgender self-indentified men just use the men's without any problems - its just the minority, the rampant misogynists among them, who want to force the issue so they can get their jollies making woman uncomfortable.
 
Last edited:
They're not doing themselves any favours with the general public, with stunts like this. It completely destroys the "poor, shy, marginalised" thing they have going on.
 
smartcooky said:
The BMA residents are an entirely gender ideology captured group (like the BBC). They will simply parrot whatever talking points their masters spout.
Sex is based on biology. End of. Period.
Anyone who believes otherwise is simply wrong.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
 
Aber said:
I suspect there may be a class element here - she's a supreme court judge, her daughter is CEO of the Stock Exchange; I doubt anybody is ever rude to her face, or directly challenges her.

EDIT: Ninja'd by a gay barrister on twitter
Click to expand...
Wow. There certainly seems to be a "class element" here.....
 
catsmate said:
I think that anyone who finds themselves on the same side of a social issue as the Rapist-in-Chief and the Maga scum should really think about that....
Click to expand...
This is what happens when you view everything through the lens of partisan politics. The merits of the trans issue itself don’t matter, only where it stands in relation to Trump. That’s why people end up saying stupid ◊◊◊◊ like it’s unscientific to view sex as binary.

Like Marxism, you need to be educated into believing such nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom