Missed the whole "Brexit" thing, did you?Maniacal transphobes and legal threats force transwomen out of UK Girl Guides.
Hopefully the EU courts will reverse this nonsense.
Trans girls banned from joining Girlguiding
Girls’ adventure charity says it made decision after seeking legal advice in wake of supreme court ruling on genderwww.theguardian.com
This is an amusing response. Are they not absorbing what gender is, or do they just use a different definition than you do. You've been so insistent that the gender critical folks are too inflexible about what the word "woman" means, and yet here you are, fixated on some definition of gender and insisting that anyone else who uses a different definition must be wrong.
The choice is entirely yours as to whether or not you want to discuss things seriously. But not only is that not a direct quote, it's not even an accurate paraphrase or description. It is explicitly a lie.
Yes, it is. But sex isn't gender, something you've been adamant about in the past. "Nonbinary" can refer to gender, not sex. "Gender fluid" refers explicitly to gender, not sex. So sex being binary does not preclude anyone from being nonbinary or gender fluid.
Like they're mentally ill? That's a position you have condemned others for. Well, that plus the whole "pervert" accusation. But that part is a lie. Nobody here thinks that all trans people are perverts. But some of them absolutely are, and that's all anyone here has claimed. So your condemnation, if honest, can only rely on the "mentally ill" part. Which is then hypocritical.
Indeed, it's total nonsense to think that anything can ever be sex segregated. In fact, "Girlguiding" should be banned entirely on account of its discriminatory name. They should just do what the Boy Scouts did* and let any child of any sex or gender join, because boys and girls are completely interchangeable.
He seems to think EU courts have jurisdiction not just over UK organizations, but UK courts as well.
Reminds me of when arth said he didn't know about the science, but assumed it was on his side. catsmate appears to be in a similar state of mind about the courts.
It's not acceptable to acknowledge this truth anymore. The sexes have to be both interchangeable and malleable.
Only in the fever dreams of the most radical trans activists. Any one with a brain and a pulse knows that transgender identified males have NO place in Brownies or Girl Guides.
And The Women's Institute...
Amused beats the feigned befuddlement, anyway.
Yeah, someone might have mentioned getting clarification on what the ◊◊◊◊ it actually means for a year or so, right in this very tread.
I've been using the one that TRAs provided: your internal sense of self. But they change that usage when convenient, which I heartily and repeatedly object to.
Then we've been reading different threads.
And remain so, yes.
Right. What gender actually *is* precludes anyone from being nonbinary or gender fluid. Option Ocelot does not exist.
Not to those who look to bicker instead of discuss.
No, like they're full of ◊◊◊◊. We just went over that. Doing the "lol, lookit me, I'm so random" thing is unhelpful in an already contentious and difficult subject.
I've slammed others for declaring themselves medical doctors, and for pretending AGP as something it is not, and for the other random medical diagnoses. I believe one of your more whacky ones was that transpeople do not actually exist, but are all faking it.
You really need to catch up on the thread.
See, this is what I mean: look at the lengths you just went to to fabricate a different explanation than the stated and obvious one. I said they were full of ◊◊◊◊. You did a contorted dance to reword that as mentally ill.
That depends on whether we believe it's an inborn trait like sexual orientation or (somewhat less controversially) asparagus anosmia. I think most people (even skeptics and other science fans) sort of assume without much reflection that trans identity is invariably a deep-rooted "born this way" sort of thing rather than something socially layered upon gender non-conforming behavior, which crops up everywhere and everywhen.
No, I am trying to distinguish between groups lobbying against all things transgender and groups lobbying against youth gender medicine in particular. My working hypothesis is that there are actually rather few of the latter who are not acting as catspaws for the former, but I'm open to reevaluating it.
Sometimes courts grant extraordinary powers of consent to medical treatment to people under the age of legal majority because of exigent circumstances, for example, 15-y.o. girls hoping to receive help continuing or terminating their pregnancy against parental advice.
What is worse than boring to me is when people on discussion boards take time out from addressing arguments to characterize the people making the arguments. This isn't a team sport where people have to swap out jerseys to indicate home or away, this is a discussion ranging across disparate issues and it is okay to play both sides in order to test the strength of arguments applied to each one. By using social pressure to force people to wear one jersey or another, you are unduly limiting the universe of possible discussion. That approach makes sense in a parliamentary setting or even a tribal council but this is not a decision-making body.
Hear, hear. I've been doing this too, and kinda hate myself for it.
We have a working definition, slippery though it is. It's your internal sense of self, in terms of being a man or woman. That suffices for social interaction, and differentiates enough from being a butch gal or a girly guy.
One wonders what they think the point of a women's institute even is.
You also mentioned getting clarification on what "woman" meant, and then when provided such clarification, you basically rejected it as extremist. The fact that you ask for clarification doesn't mean you actually want it. Nor is it even necessary for anyone else to clarify what you mean by the words you use. Only you can do that.
OK, we finally have a definition from you. It's somewhat lacking as stated, since for example it probably should specify only a subset of their sense of self. How tall they feel they are, how smart they feel they are, many qualities of a person's sense of self should not be included in gender. But let's set that aside, and assume that we're only talking about their self of self in regards to sex and sex-related properties. My point isn't actually to quibble about what is or is not included within "gender".
What gender is, according to you, is just one's internal sense of self (or presumably a subset of this). But why can't this be nonbinary? Why can't it be gender fluid? Why can't it be Ocelot? I understand why you can't actually be a non-binary sex (or an actual ocelot), but gender isn't sex. What prevents you from being nonbinary gender, if gender is just an internal sense of self?
If that definition sufficed for social interaction, there'd be no call for preferred pronouns. An internal sense can't suffice for social interaction, because nobody else can perceive your internal senses. In order to interact with others in society, you need to account for how they perceive you. Traditionally, this was done by making a noticeable effort to "pass" as the opposite gender. But this was back when gender was synonymous with sex, and society's gendered expectations about dress and behavior were much more rigid and well-defined.
Nothing capricious about it. Gender and sex have always been interlinked concepts in our society. Gender decoupled from sex has no practical applications. Your actual complaint, based on your recent arguments is that we're not capricious enough in decoupling gender from sex (e.g., again, women's restrooms; the sex-based definition, applied consistently, handles this case just fine, but you want to capriciously be inconsistent in this one case).
We already have a hard line distinction: Adult human female. According to this definition, it doesn't matter what you think of yourself as in the showers, but it does matter that you're showering in the sex-segregated facility appropriate to your sex.
What if you don't feel that you are either? What if you feel that you are both?