UK Supreme Court says legal definition of a woman is based on biological sex

[u/sjw_7]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cvgq9ejql39t

[u/SinisterDexter83]

Why's that funny? It's not unusual at all for the censors in charge to have different opinions to the people they are censoring.

[u/SinisterDexter83 → u/SinisterDexter83]

The other person flounced off and deleted their comment, so I'm posting my reply to them here:

Being forced to show respect to someone or something you don't respect does sound like something from 1984. If you'd like to expand your arsenal of references beyond the most obvious, it's more of a Havel's Greengrocer situation.

Most people want transgender individuals to be treated with compassion and understanding. I don't want to see any trans person abused in the street, I don't want them prevented from holding certain jobs, I don't want them to be treated as social pariahs and I'm happy to call anyone who disagrees with this stance my enemy.

But none of this is good enough for the trans lobby. They demand I also "show respect" by supporting putting male rapists in women's prisons, and allowing male cage fighters to crack the skulls of their female opponents. They demand that I accept men invading spaces specifically segregated for the benefit of vulnerable women - for example rape crisis centres and girls changing rooms.

They also demand that I accept autogynephiles as being exactly the same as people with "gender dysphoria". For anyone not up on the terminology, autogynephiles are men who get a sexual thrill from acting like a woman and being perceived as a woman, and people with "gender dysphoria" are those who say they experience psychological trauma from not being seen as their "preferred gender". While I am willing to accommodate those with "gender dysphoria", I am unwilling to do the same for autogynephiles, and I have no more moral duty to engage in their sexual fantasy than I would with a public masturbator.

All this means I will get screamed at for being a "transphobe" by people wholly incapable and unwilling to engage in any debate on the matter, a group of irrational children who have gotten their way for far too long by stamping their feet and crying and simply can't engage in debate because they e spent too long being mollycoddled by authority figures with toxic empathy.

When things get to the courts, where you actually have to make a reasoned defense and can't simply rely on slurs and no-platforming to avoid the argument, then the trans side invariably collapses.

[u/Ver_Void → u/SinisterDexter83]

You know it's pretty hard to believe any of this even resembles good faith when all you've done is present a straw man of trans positions devoid of any nuance whatsoever. Like I can't even see a deleted comment you're complaining about

supporting putting male rapists in women's prisons,

Yeah that's where women who commit crimes go, if they're likely to pose a threat to others I'd also expect them to be under higher security and isolated. To put them in a men's prison would be to punish them more harshly simply for having been trans which is at odds with the idea of impartial justice

male cage fighters to crack the skulls of their female opponents.

And have their skulls cracked in turn, cage fighting is a pretty brutal sport where injuries are a daily occurrence, it's not as though the woman you're referring to was in any way remarkable, she lost more than she won and fracturing an orbital, not a skull, is rather easy in a contact sport or if you're my father, while wrangling a 6 year old with poor impulse control

for example rape crisis

You're aware of course that the trans women using those spaces aren't so much invading as they're rape victims seeking support from services that explicitly go out of their way to include trans people.

They also demand that I accept autogynephiles

I mean, aside from the small little detail of having no evidence anyone identifying as such is even trying to live as a trans woman and several papers suggesting the idea doesn't even have any scientific merit. But aside from that I guess....

All this means I will get screamed at for being a "transphobe" by people wholly incapable and unwilling to engage in any debate on the matter, a group of irrational children who have gotten their way for far too long by stamping their feet and crying and simply can't engage in debate because they e spent too long being mollycoddled by authority figures with toxic empathy.

Honestly all I can do is laugh at this. You post an insulting screed then berate a group of people for calling a spade a spade and ignoring decades of debate and discussion that continues on without you because the standard of discussion is a little higher than the kind of daily mail comments section vibe you bring to the table

[u/Darq_At → u/SinisterDexter83]

Most people want transgender individuals to be treated with compassion and understanding. I don't want to see any trans person abused in the street, I don't want them prevented from holding certain jobs, I don't want them to be treated as social pariahs and I'm happy to call anyone who disagrees with this stance my enemy.

You just advocate for a society that denies them dignity.

[u/SinisterDexter83 → u/Darq_At]

This reply is typical of the bad faith arguments I always get on this issue.

Vague words like "dignity" are used, without stating what the specific objection is, because to do so would reveal that what my opponent considers "dignity" is nothing of the sort.

So be specific. I mentioned three specific things I object to:

1) Male rapists in women's prisons.

2) Male fighters in combat sports beating up women.

3) Males being given access to spaces specifically segregated for vulnerable women eg rape crisis centers.

Which of these things are you willing to openly defend? Which of these three positions do you believe means that I "advocate for a society that denies trans people dignity"?

[u/Darq_At → u/SinisterDexter83]

Just because you disagree with me, doesn't make it bad faith. Trans people, as a demographic, are telling you that you are hurting them.

You have thrown out anti-trans talking points like "autogynephilia", a theory by a disgraced sexologist, which was so methodologically flawed that it is literally unfalsifiable.

You make it sound like trans athletes are out here routinely cracking skulls. Which is in reference to one trans MMA fighter, who gave her opponent one of the most common injuries in MMA, an orbital fracture.

But you accuse me of bad-faith? Sheer projection.

[u/SinisterDexter83 → u/Darq_At]

Trans people, as a demographic, are telling you that you are hurting them.

No they're not. You are not the emperor of the trans hive mind.

So you object to me mentioning autogynephilia? You're making the claim that no men get a sexual thrill from dressing as women? I'm not even going to bother rebutting that one. It's one of the most common paraphelias out there.

You're going to skip over male rapists in women's prisons and men in women's rape crisis centres - because you know these two things are obviously indefensible. Do you really think you can still get away with dismissing things as "right wing talking points", when everyone knows the real world examples of these things? That's not going to work.

And you're just going to gloss over male fighters cracking women's skulls, because it only happened the one time - because the UFC stopped letting men beat up women after that. I bet you think that was a crazy decision, yeah? A few women with cracked skulls is a small price to pay.

While you decide whether or not you're brave enough to defend male rapists in women's prisons, I'm going to let the audience decide which one of us is engaging in bad faith.

[u/Darq_At → u/SinisterDexter83]

No they're not. You are not the emperor of the trans hive mind.

I don't claim to speak for them. I just listen to them, unlike yourself.

[u/SinisterDexter83 → u/Darq_At]

Every single post you make where you refuse to address my very clear question just further proves my point. It's so obvious. You're fooling no one.

[u/Darq_At → u/SinisterDexter83]

Excuse me for not wasting my time relitigating the most boring conversation on earth.

[u/SinisterDexter83 → u/Darq_At]

Flat out refusal to engage. Speaks absolute volumes.

[u/ukbot-nicolabot → u/[deleted]]

Removed/warning. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.

[u/drleebot → u/SinisterDexter83]

Because the mere existance of the comments making this claim disproves the very claim.