****The All In One LGBTQ+ & Related Issues Mega Thread****

[Bobilius]

1 minute ago, Ked said:

I've no idea what you are on about to be honest.

You assumed I was pro-SNP, pro-GRR.

[BlueRiver]

Just now, Bobilius said:

“He’s only hit me once in 25 years. Sure it won’t happen again.”

 

I don't mind if it does depending on the context. If a bill passed by the devolved government fell foul of the criteria for a s.35 order then I'd hope Westminster explored the option. It's why it's there. 

 

 

[BlueRiver]

1 minute ago, Bobilius said:

Wasn’t it just literally to add a line saying “this doesn’t conflict with the EA”?

 

🤣🤣 I'd hope not but knowing politicians there's every chance. 

[Sub4TiddlerMurray]

13 minutes ago, Ked said:

Outlandish ?

 

https://www.scottishlegal.com/articles/amanda-jones-gender-recognition-bill-will-complicate-rather-than-clarify-the-law

 

 

 

 

The article only says that there are general conflicts with a UK wide Bill. In other words, things that would apply to any UK Bill. It does not state that the GRA reduces, weakens or removes any rights for women or anyone else. That is,

 

- The EqA itself is a reserved matter; it cannot be amended or replaced by Scottish legislation;

- The lawful sex of a person will be different in different parts of the UK; a person’s legal change of sex in Scotland will not be recognised in England, Wales or Northern Ireland;

 

- A Scottish GRC will be inferior to a UK one. People might well need to obtain both;

- The proposed amendments do not solve the above issues.

 

These are all technical matters rather than anything that people should get hot under the collar about. If the technical obstacles are removed, then there is absolutely nothing that conflicts with the purpose, meaning and effect of the EqA.

 

 

[Ked]

1 minute ago, Sub4TiddlerMurray said:

 

 

The article only says that there are general conflicts with a UK wide Bill. In other words, things that would apply to any UK Bill. It does not state that the GRA reduces, weakens or removes any rights for women or anyone else. That is,

 

- The EqA itself is a reserved matter; it cannot be amended or replaced by Scottish legislation;

- The lawful sex of a person will be different in different parts of the UK; a person’s legal change of sex in Scotland will not be recognised in England, Wales or Northern Ireland;

 

- A Scottish GRC will be inferior to a UK one. People might well need to obtain both;

- The proposed amendments do not solve the above issues.

 

These are all technical matters rather than anything that people should get hot under the collar about. If the technical obstacles are removed, then there is absolutely nothing that conflicts with the purpose, meaning and effect of the EqA.

 

 

Read on.

[Bobilius]

2 minutes ago, BlueRiver said:

 

I don't mind if it does depending on the context. If a bill passed by the devolved government fell foul of the criteria for a s.35 order then I'd hope Westminster explored the option. It's why it's there. 

 

 

“I deserved to be hit.”

[BlueRiver]

1 minute ago, Sub4TiddlerMurray said:

 

 

The article only says that there are general conflicts with a UK wide Bill. In other words, things that would apply to any UK Bill. It does not state that the GRA reduces, weakens or removes any rights for women or anyone else. That is,

 

- The EqA itself is a reserved matter; it cannot be amended or replaced by Scottish legislation;

- The lawful sex of a person will be different in different parts of the UK; a person’s legal change of sex in Scotland will not be recognised in England, Wales or Northern Ireland;

 

- A Scottish GRC will be inferior to a UK one. People might well need to obtain both;

- The proposed amendments do not solve the above issues.

 

These are all technical matters rather than anything that people should get hot under the collar about. If the technical obstacles are removed, then there is absolutely nothing that conflicts with the purpose, meaning and effect of the EqA.

 

 

 

"[I]ntroduction of a Self-ID system is not incompatible with anti-discrimination rights of biological women, but it could frustrate the equality of opportunity criterion by offering over-inclusive and insufficiently targeted support without the possibility of any alternatives, given the current legal framework. In particular, changing the legal mechanism for acquiring or altering one’s sex such that it becomes easier to do so makes it easier to gain the protection of two separate protected characteristics: sex and gender reassignment. This change can fairly be described as a modification of the law relating to the operation of the Equality Act in Scotland and so regulates a reserved matter. This is so, even if there has been no modification of the provisions of the Equality Act. It is a separate issue whether this would also modify the law in the rest of the UK as that depends upon whether Scottish Gender Recognition Certificates will be recognised outside of Scotland."

 

https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2022/12/21/michael-foran-sex-gender-and-the-scotland-act/

 

It would vary the application of the Equality Act in Scotland indirectly therefore whilst a devolved matter, could logically be argued as modifying a reserved piece of legislation. 

[BlueRiver]

3 minutes ago, Bobilius said:

“I deserved to be hit.”

 

🤣 away yi go. 

 

I'm just pretty relaxed about it all as I'd never been under the illusion Holyrood was Westminster's equal. 

[Francis Albert]

9 minutes ago, Bobilius said:

You’re avoiding your own question…

It was my question. I kind of expected an answer from someone other than myself. 

But to repeat the s35 notice may or may not be valid and the Supreme Court is the route to resolve that question. 

But Sturgeon is more interested in portraying Scotland as a victim of colonial repression. 

[Bobilius]

Just now, BlueRiver said:

 

🤣 away yi go. 

 

I'm just pretty relaxed about it all as I'd never been under the illusion Holyrood was Westminster's equal. 

😂Sorry I’m just having a laugh with the analogy. 👍🏽

[Sub4TiddlerMurray]

3 minutes ago, Ked said:

Read on.

 

Yep, I've re-read it and it still only points to how the GRA would technically affect UK legislation. 

 

Please do quote a passage where it states that the EqA would be weakened or removes any person's rights.

 

 

[Bobilius]

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

It was my question. I kind of expected an answer from someone other than myself. 

But to repeat the s35 notice may or may not be valid and the Supreme Court is the route to resolve that question. 

But Sturgeon is more interested in portraying Scotland as a victim of colonial repression. 

Yes, s35 issue will be resolved in Supreme Court.

 

Getting back to your question, should someone with a GRC (be it 3 month, 2 year, Irish or Vanuatan) be able to act as a woman in Carlisle? 

[Sub4TiddlerMurray]

5 minutes ago, BlueRiver said:

 

"[I]ntroduction of a Self-ID system is not incompatible with anti-discrimination rights of biological women, but it could frustrate the equality of opportunity criterion by offering over-inclusive and insufficiently targeted support without the possibility of any alternatives, given the current legal framework. In particular, changing the legal mechanism for acquiring or altering one’s sex such that it becomes easier to do so makes it easier to gain the protection of two separate protected characteristics: sex and gender reassignment. This change can fairly be described as a modification of the law relating to the operation of the Equality Act in Scotland and so regulates a reserved matter. This is so, even if there has been no modification of the provisions of the Equality Act. It is a separate issue whether this would also modify the law in the rest of the UK as that depends upon whether Scottish Gender Recognition Certificates will be recognised outside of Scotland."

 

https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2022/12/21/michael-foran-sex-gender-and-the-scotland-act/

 

It would vary the application of the Equality Act in Scotland indirectly therefore whilst a devolved matter, could logically be argued as modifying a reserved piece of legislation. 

 

 

In other words, the conflicts are solely to do with where each piece of legislation sits in relation to the UK/devolved countries.

 

My point is that many people claim that the GRA would remove some rights from women. Which is not true.

 

 

 

 

[BlueRiver]

1 minute ago, Bobilius said:

Yes, s35 issue will be resolved in Supreme Court.

 

Getting back to your question, should someone with a GRC (be it 3 month, 2 year, Irish or Vanuatan) be able to act as a woman in Carlisle? 

 

I asked the same question a few weeks back. I got a good response regarding the Irish ones but mainly as regards tourists or short stays as I remember it. I'm still no further forward on recognition long term for this type of thing. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, Bobilius said:

Yes, s35 issue will be resolved in Supreme Court.

 

Getting back to your question, should someone with a GRC (be it 3 month, 2 year, Irish or Vanuatan) be able to act as a woman in Carlisle? 

Why would they need to

 “ act as a woman “ if they self id as one ? And how do “ you act like a woman “ ? Are “ they “ all the same ? 

[JudyJudyJudy]

2 minutes ago, Sub4TiddlerMurray said:

 

 

In other words, the conflicts are solely to do with where each piece of legislation sits in relation to the UK/devolved countries.

 

My point is that many people claim that the GRA would remove some rights from women. Which is not true.

 

 

 

 

Yes it does . It removes the right of women to privacy , dignity and respect in female safe spaces . 

Edited January 17, 2023 by JudyJudyJudy

[BlueRiver]

1 minute ago, Sub4TiddlerMurray said:

 

 

In other words, the conflicts are solely to do with where each piece of legislation sits in relation to the UK/devolved countries.

 

My point is that many people claim that the GRA would remove some rights from women. Which is not true.

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry if I've misinterpreted your arguments. I just saw the part about people in law commenting so thought I'd quote the above article and post the link. 

 

 

[Bobilius]

1 minute ago, BlueRiver said:

 

I asked the same question a few weeks back. I got a good response regarding the Irish ones but mainly as regards tourists or short stays as I remember it. I'm still no further forward on recognition long term for this type of thing. 

👍🏽

[Francis Albert]

4 minutes ago, Bobilius said:

Yes, s35 issue will be resolved in Supreme Court.

 

Getting back to your question, should someone with a GRC (be it 3 month, 2 year, Irish or Vanuatan) be able to act as a woman in Carlisle? 

You will have to remind me what my question was and the answers if any to it. Another question does not count.

[JudyJudyJudy]

good article 

 

 

https://unherd.com/thepost/why-scotlands-gender-reform-bill-affects-the-whole-uk/?fbclid=IwAR1ZWePTIoeA0ObdIo7QZhtJYMZ3HVLYyxF3acCNveIQgPUY_hEp3f2CELQ
 

 

 

[Bobilius]

2 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

Why would they need to

 “ act as a woman “ if they self id as one ? And how do “ you act like a woman “ ? Are “ they “ all the same ? 

I guess I mean access anything that requires a valid GRR (no idea what that might be in practice iih). The original question was about whether a GRC would be valid south of the border. I’m assuming it would be if current 2 year GRCs and GRCs from other countries are valid.

 

Anyway I don’t want to get bogged down too much in terms of the specifics of the GR bill. I don’t like the extent of the changes to the process and nothing is going to change my mind on that. Should have been left at 18yo minimum age and reduced from 2 years to 1 year.

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, Bobilius said:

I guess I mean access anything that requires a valid GRR (no idea what that might be in practice iih). The original question was about whether a GRC would be valid south of the border. I’m assuming it would be if current 2 year GRCs and GRCs from other countries are valid.

 

Anyway I don’t want to get bogged down too much in terms of the specifics of the GR bill. I don’t like the extent of the changes to the process and nothing is going to change my mind on that. Should have been left at 18yo minimum age and reduced from 2 years to 1 year.

👍

[Bobilius]

7 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

You will have to remind me what my question was and the answers if any to it. Another question does not count.

 

1 hour ago, Francis Albert said:

Will men who have self identified as women be legally or defacto women when they cross the border? 

If so the legislation affects the UK and s35 comes into play however strong the Holyrood vote.

 

 

 

[Bobilius]

2 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

👍

I should add that there was public support for easing the GR process (about 60% I think). Easing it too far has turned a lot of the public against it. I genuinely think 18yo and 1 year would have been welcomed by most. The big question though is would the Westminster govt have still intervened? Would it still have potentially impacted the EA?

[Sub4TiddlerMurray]

Just now, JudyJudyJudy said:

Yes it does . It removes the right to privacy , dignity and respect in female safe spaces . 

 

It doesn't remove any of those rights.

 

Again, it's a theoretical alarmist fear.

 

At the moment, people identifying as women who were assigned male at birth are transferred from male prisons to female ones. Every person is assessed for their risk to others and accommodated accordingly.

 

In public toilets, no one is going to be waving a certificate around to get access. Bad *******s will assault others and put them in fear because they are bad *******s. And they don't need a certificate to give themselves permission. 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

Just now, Bobilius said:

I should add that there was public support for easing the GR process (about 60% I think). Easing it too far has turned a lot of the public against it. I genuinely think 18yo and 1 year would have been welcomed by most. The big question though is would the Westminster govt have still intervened? Would it still have potentially impacted the EA?

Maybe . However I still feel that the general public are not that familiar of the consequences of self ID and the intrusion into women and girls safe spaces . 

[Sub4TiddlerMurray]

9 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

good article 

 

 

https://unherd.com/thepost/why-scotlands-gender-reform-bill-affects-the-whole-uk/?fbclid=IwAR1ZWePTIoeA0ObdIo7QZhtJYMZ3HVLYyxF3acCNveIQgPUY_hEp3f2CELQ
 

 

 

 

Again, it's a legal technicality relating to the UK/devolved governments. Nothing to do with the essential purpose of the Bill in any way removing anyone's rights.

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, Sub4TiddlerMurray said:

 

It doesn't remove any of those rights.

 

Again, it's a theoretical alarmist fear.

 

At the moment, people identifying as women who were assigned male at birth are transferred from male prisons to female ones. Every person is assessed for their risk to others and accommodated accordingly.

 

In public toilets, no one is going to be waving a certificate around to get access. Bad *******s will assault others and put them in fear because they are bad *******s. And they don't need a certificate to give themselves permission. 

 

Then why make is easier for some to utilise the legislation for their own sexual needs ? And it will . For “ some “ I should add . Plus more importantly it’s women’s views first and foremost about this issue which need to be paramount and listened to. The SG only did this lip service . If women feel , the word” feel” is important here , there is a threat then they need listened to

.

 

[The Mighty Thor]

7 hours ago, Bobilius said:

“He’s only hit me once in 25 years. Sure it won’t happen again.”

This. 

 

 

[hughesie27]

9 hours ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

Then why make is easier for some to utilise the legislation for their own sexual needs ? And it will . For “ some “ I should add . Plus more importantly it’s women’s views first and foremost about this issue which need to be paramount and listened to. The SG only did this lip service . If women feel , the word” feel” is important here , there is a threat then they need listened to

.

 

Could well be wrong here but I thought I read on here before that currently if you personally identify as a different gender then you are able to use whichever toilets/changing rooms you align with? Thus this GRA doesn't change anything.

 

 

[Sub4TiddlerMurray]

10 hours ago, BlueRiver said:

 

Sorry if I've misinterpreted your arguments. I just saw the part about people in law commenting so thought I'd quote the above article and post the link. 

 

 

no worries at all 

 

It’s a very tricky issue to discuss because so much misinformation and misdirection has been circulating for so long about it. Not helped by celebs like JKR deciding to wade in and making it personal about Sturgeon (when it was the Greens that called for it as far as I can tell).

 

The legislation has upset a lot of people who consider themselves feminists because, having fought so hard for many years for women’s rights, this looks to them like ‘men appropriating women’s rights’. 
 

The culture warriors, who love a rammy online, have snapped onto an imaginary threat about abusive men who they say will pretend to be women for 3 months to get their hands on a bit of paper as if it was a free passport to assault women in toilets.
 

None of them want to stop for 5 seconds to realise that this whole thing is mostly about vulnerable young and older people who experience so much abuse wanting to  take some control over their lives instead of being treated as outcasts. 
 

Kier Starmer has also pounced on the age issue. As if young people making a decision for themselves was somehow a dangerous threat. My gawd, what will the world come to if young people change their identity?

 

Well most young people do that very thing several times until they settle on who they are. What’s the big deal? No one has ever said they can’t change back again. Jesus H Starmer, grow up!

 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

10 minutes ago, Sub4TiddlerMurray said:

no worries at all 

 

It’s a very tricky issue to discuss because so much misinformation and misdirection has been circulating for so long about it. Not helped by celebs like JKR deciding to wade in and making it personal about Sturgeon (when it was the Greens that called for it as far as I can tell).

 

The legislation has upset a lot of people who consider themselves feminists because, having fought so hard for many years for women’s rights, this looks to them like ‘men appropriating women’s rights’. 
 

The culture warriors, who love a rammy online, have snapped onto an imaginary threat about abusive men who they say will pretend to be women for 3 months to get their hands on a bit of paper as if it was a free passport to assault women in toilets.
 

None of them want to stop for 5 seconds to realise that this whole thing is mostly about vulnerable young and older people who experience so much abuse wanting to  take some control over their lives instead of being treated as outcasts. 
 

Kier Starmer has also pounced on the age issue. As if young people making a decision for themselves was somehow a dangerous threat. My gawd, what will the world come to if young people change their identity?

 

Well most young people do that very thing several times until they settle on who they are. What’s the big deal? No one has ever said they can’t change back again. Jesus H Starmer, grow up!

 

 

It’s a “ big deal “ if those “ young people” take puberty blockers and have breast removal surgery . It’s not just a change of name . You can’t change your sex . Gender is a social constrict usually derived from out dated stereotypes about males and females .  There have been issues about women and girls being assaulted by self id men . Try not to be so flippant about women’s feelings regarding safe spaces. They are entirely valid . 

[JudyJudyJudy]

21 minutes ago, hughesie27 said:

Could well be wrong here but I thought I read on here before that currently if you personally identify as a different gender then you are able to use whichever toilets/changing rooms you align with? Thus this GRA doesn't change anything.

 

 

No . They can now access ALL womens only spaces if they have a GRC . They couldn’t before . However it would be illegal for a person to challenge a self id fir trying to access those places . Those who do would be up on  a charge . Incredibly . 

[Sub4TiddlerMurray]

10 hours ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

Then why make is easier for some to utilise the legislation for their own sexual needs ? And it will . For “ some “ I should add . Plus more importantly it’s women’s views first and foremost about this issue which need to be paramount and listened to. The SG only did this lip service . If women feel , the word” feel” is important here , there is a threat then they need listened to

.

 

The legislation does not do that. And it’s honesty and truth that should come first. 
 

Of course women must be listened to. The risks and threats must be addressed to allow women to feel safe. 

 

The threat of abusive men pretending to live as a woman for 3 months just to get a certificate is, however, so marginal, so unlikely, that it is clouding this whole issue and knocking it way out of proportion.
 

Of course we have violent individuals who will abuse any system - like David Carrick, a Police elite firearms officer who used his position to commit multiple rapes and other awful offences. Now that threat is very real and the Met are also investigating 800 current sexual offences by serving officers, but no one is calling for the shutdown of the Met. 
 

But the intention behind GRA is to recognise and support vulnerable young and older people who also feel threatened and marginalised every day.
 

This will help them to feel like they belong in a society that cares. To feel they are normal.

 

They don’t need to feel like they are being labelled as sex offenders just because we can’t agree on the exact wording of an Act.
 

 

[Bobilius]

6 minutes ago, Sub4TiddlerMurray said:

The legislation does not do that. And it’s honesty and truth that should come first. 
 

Of course women must be listened to. The risks and threats must be addressed to allow women to feel safe. 

 

The threat of abusive men pretending to live as a woman for 3 months just to get a certificate is, however, so marginal, so unlikely, that it is clouding this whole issue and knocking it way out of proportion.
 

Of course we have violent individuals who will abuse any system - like David Carrick, a Police elite firearms officer who used his position to commit multiple rapes and other awful offences. Now that threat is very real and the Met are also investigating 800 current sexual offences by serving officers, but no one is calling for the shutdown of the Met. 
 

But the intention behind GRA is to recognise and support vulnerable young and older people who also feel threatened and marginalised every day.
 

This will help them to feel like they belong in a society that cares. To feel they are normal.

 

They don’t need to feel like they are being labelled as sex offenders just because we can’t agree on the exact wording of an Act.
 

 

If you’re the sort of deviant who wants to harm women, 3 months isn’t all that long to sacrifice in order to get to your end game. That’s why I wanted it to be a year. Saying that, if you’re evil enough to spend 3 months planning an attack you’re probably evil enough to just go and find a way of doing it without a GRC anyway. 

[Sub4TiddlerMurray]

1 hour ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

It’s a “ big deal “ if those “ young people” take puberty blockers and have breast removal surgery . It’s not just a change of name . You can’t change your sex . Gender is a social constrict usually derived from out dated stereotypes about males and females .  There have been issues about women and girls being assaulted by self id men . Try not to be so flippant about women’s feelings regarding safe spaces. They are entirely valid . 

 

The GRA certificate isn't a passport to self harm. Young people will make mistakes and, sadly, some will self-harm. That is about mental health. The best way to help young people to avoid damaging decisions is to listen to them. Hear their worries and anxieties. And then give them help and support. The very worst thing you can do is make them feel like there's something wrong with them or treat them as potential sex offenders just because they feel different to their body image.

 

The last thing I would do is be flippant about safe spaces for women. Those feeling are absolutely valid. But the panic about this legislation is exaggerated to the point where very vulnerable young people are being scapegoated because they feel different.

 

What do you think should happen for babies born with Ambiguous Genitals, where they are not clearly male or female? Should they grow up as a man or a woman because a surgeon decided and that's it?

 

What about toddlers that act and behave as the opposite of their physical gender and grow up feeling that they are the wrong gender? Do their feelings count? 

 

They are not sex offenders waiting for a certificate to go into women's safe spaces to cause alarm. They are valid people too and deserve the same protection and chances as everyone else.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 17, 2023 by Sub4TiddlerMurray

[Sub4TiddlerMurray]

1 hour ago, Bobilius said:

If you’re the sort of deviant who wants to harm women, 3 months isn’t all that long to sacrifice in order to get to your end game. That’s why I wanted it to be a year. Saying that, if you’re evil enough to spend 3 months planning an attack you’re probably evil enough to just go and find a way of doing it without a GRC anyway. 

 

Absolutely.

 

 

 

 

[Sub4TiddlerMurray]

p.s. I've just changed my profile pic as I thought the picture of my son who is a wrestler wasn't ideal for this type of discussion. So here is my dog Tyler instead 😁

[JudyJudyJudy]

55 minutes ago, Sub4TiddlerMurray said:

 

The GRA certificate isn't a passport to self harm. Young people will make mistakes and, sadly, some will self-harm. That is about mental health. The best way to help young people to avoid damaging decisions is to listen to them. Hear their worries and anxieties. And then give them help and support. The very worst thing you can do is make them feel like there's something wrong with them or treat them as potential sex offenders just because they feel different to their body image.

 

The last thing I would do is be flippant about safe spaces for women. Those feeling are absolutely valid. But the panic about this legislation is exaggerated to the point where very vulnerable young people are being scapegoated because they feel different.

 

What do you think should happen for babies born with Ambiguous Genitals, where they are not clearly male or female? Should they grow up as a man or a woman because a surgeon decided and that's it?

 

What about toddlers that act and behave as the opposite of their physical gender and grow up feeling that they are the wrong gender? Do their feelings count? 

 

They are not sex offenders waiting for a certificate to go into women's safe spaces to cause alarm. They are valid people too and deserve the same protection and chances as everyone else.

 

 

 

 

 

All those questions have been answered time and again on this thread . I’m not repeating myself . 

[Sub4TiddlerMurray]

4 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

All those questions have been answered time and again on this thread . I’m not repeating myself . 

 

Seriously?

 

You asked me questions and I answered. If you can't take the time to answer now then it's not a debate.

 

It's easy to be a keyboard warrior if you duck the awkward questions.

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

2 minutes ago, Sub4TiddlerMurray said:

 

Seriously?

 

You asked me questions and I answered. If you can't take the time to answer now then it's not a debate.

 

It's easy to be a keyboard warrior if you duck the awkward questions.

 

Look back on the thread . All the answers are there . Do your homework . I’m ducking nowt . Just can’t be assed repeating the same thing again and again . If you have so much interest in this area read the previous comments . 

[Sub4TiddlerMurray]

12 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

Look back on the thread . All the answers are there . Do your homework . I’m ducking nowt . Just can’t be assed repeating the same thing again and again . If you have so much interest in this area read the previous comments . 

 

This thread started in July 2022.

 

You are ducking the questions.

 

What do you think should happen for babies born with Ambiguous Genitals, where they are not clearly male or female? Should they grow up as a man or a woman because a surgeon decided and that's it?

 

What about toddlers that act and behave as the opposite of their physical gender and grow up feeling that they are the wrong gender? Do their feelings count? 

 

[Taffin]

1 minute ago, Sub4TiddlerMurray said:

 

This thread started in July 2022.

 

You are ducking the questions.

 

 

What do you think should happen for babies born with Ambiguous Genitals, where they are not clearly male or female? Should they grow up as a man or a woman because a surgeon decided and that's it?

 

What about toddlers that act and behave as the opposite of their physical gender and grow up feeling that they are the wrong gender? Do their feelings count? 

 

 

What's a wrong gender?

 

How does a female act and behave Vs a male?

 

How should ones sex make them feel? What am I supposed to act and behave like as a male? 

 

The sooner we stop boxing folk in the better. You can be a male or a female and act, behave however you want. If that's what small minded folk generally consider aligned to the opposite sex, that's their problem. It doesn't mean you have to pretend to actually be another sex to justify your interests and actions. Want to bake, stay at home and look after your kids and tidy the house but are male? Cool, no hassle. (And yes, that's a purposefully dated example to highlight the idea that gender is a load of guff anyway).

 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

Just now, Taffin said:

 

What's a wrong gender?

 

How does a female act and behave Vs a male?

 

How should ones sex make them feel? What am I supposed to act and behave like as a male? 

 

The sooner we stop boxing folk in the better. You can be a male or a female and act, behave however you want. If that's what small minded folk generally consider aligned to the opposite sex, that's their problem. It doesn't mean you have to pretend to actually be another sex to justify your interests and actions. Want to bake, stay at home and look after your kids and tidy the house but are male? Cool, no hassle. (And yes, that's a purposefully dated example to highlight the idea that gender is a load of guff anyway).

 

 

Well

said . That’s my whole point really.  “Gender “ is a load of nonsense which has created this situation we are now in. 

[Sub4TiddlerMurray]

19 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

Well

said . That’s my whole point really.  “Gender “ is a load of nonsense which has created this situation we are now in. 

 

Again, that's ducking the questions I asked.

 

And, ignoring "gender" as if it doesn't exist. We have all been brought up in gender defined schools, buildings, and so on. To now say that it doesn't matter is ignoring vulnerable young people who need support.

 

 

21 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

What's a wrong gender?

 

How does a female act and behave Vs a male?

 

How should ones sex make them feel? What am I supposed to act and behave like as a male? 

 

The sooner we stop boxing folk in the better. You can be a male or a female and act, behave however you want. If that's what small minded folk generally consider aligned to the opposite sex, that's their problem. It doesn't mean you have to pretend to actually be another sex to justify your interests and actions. Want to bake, stay at home and look after your kids and tidy the house but are male? Cool, no hassle. (And yes, that's a purposefully dated example to highlight the idea that gender is a load of guff anyway).

 

 

 

Read my response.

 

There is no wrong gender per se and you know that's not what I was saying. 

 

If you want to stop boxing people in, then support the GRA! It is all about unboxing to let people choose what they feel is right for them.

 

 

Edited January 17, 2023 by Sub4TiddlerMurray

[Taffin]

9 minutes ago, Sub4TiddlerMurray said:

 

Again, that's ducking the questions I asked.

 

And, ignoring "gender" as if it doesn't exist. We have all been brought up in gender defined schools, buildings, and so on. To now say that it doesn't matter is ignoring vulnerable young people who need support.

 

 

 

Read my response.

 

There is no wrong gender per se and you know that's not what I was saying. 

 

If you want to stop boxing people in, then support the GRA! It is all about unboxing to let people choose what they feel is right for them.

 

 

 

Explain to me how I'd go about living in an acquired gender of a women for 3 months without boxing me in. What would those 3 months look like, what would I be doing differently from what I do today?

 

 

My day to day like is much the same as my girlfriend. We work in construction, we watch sport and films, we eat the same foods and go to the gym. She looks different to me and is a female. If I wanted to be a women, what would I do differently? Change my appearance? That seems pretty dated and precisely is boxing someone in. Would I need to be attracted to males, after all that's an historically 'male' trait, right?

 

 

Gender is made up. Sex isn't. Your now ducking questions too. What constitutes a male gender Vs a female gender? 

 

If someone doesn't fit into your stereotype does that make them not a real man or woman?

Edited January 17, 2023 by Taffin

[JudyJudyJudy]

12 minutes ago, Sub4TiddlerMurray said:

 

Again, that's ducking the questions I asked.

 

And, ignoring "gender" as if it doesn't exist. We have all been brought up in gender defined schools, buildings, and so on. To now say that it doesn't matter is ignoring vulnerable young people who need support.

 

 

 

Read my response.

 

There is no wrong gender per se and you know that's not what I was saying. 

 

If you want to stop boxing people in, then support the GRA! It is all about unboxing to let people choose what they feel is right for them.

 

 

What ? We have been brought up in “ sex” defined schools . I honestly think you need to read up  on what “ “gender  “ is . 
 

You’re getting in a muddle between them . It’s understandable though as the words have been interchanged deliberately to cause that very confusion . 
 

ps what is a woman ?
 

How does one” prove “ they are another sex ?

 

How do u live as the other sex ?

 

How do you prove this ?

 

how can you be “ born in the wrong body “ ? 
 

Some questions for you to consider . 

Edited January 17, 2023 by JudyJudyJudy

[Sub4TiddlerMurray]

16 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

What ? We have been brought up in “ sex” defined schools . I honestly think you need to read up  on what “ “gender  “ is . 
 

You’re getting in a muddle between them . It’s understandable though as the words have been interchanged deliberately to cause that very confusion . 
 

ps what is a woman ?
 

How does one” prove “ they are another sex ?

 

How do u live as the other sex ?

 

How do you prove this ?

 

how can you be “ born in the wrong body “ ? 
 

Some questions for you to consider . 

 

I will gladly answer each of your questions if you answer 2 of mine:

 

What do you think should happen for babies born with Ambiguous Genitals, where they are not clearly male or female? Should they grow up as a man or a woman because a surgeon decided and that's it?

 

What about toddlers that act and behave as the opposite of their physical gender and grow up feeling that they are the wrong gender? Do their feelings count? 

 

And, by the way, you have used "women" several times to make a valid point about women's safety. If there's no such thing and it's only a construct then what point are you making?

 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

19 minutes ago, Sub4TiddlerMurray said:

 

I will gladly answer each of your questions if you answer 2 of mine:

 

What do you think should happen for babies born with Ambiguous Genitals, where they are not clearly male or female? Should they grow up as a man or a woman because a surgeon decided and that's it?

 

What about toddlers that act and behave as the opposite of their physical gender and grow up feeling that they are the wrong gender? Do their feelings count? 

 

And, by the way, you have used "women" several times to make a valid point about women's safety. If there's no such thing and it's only a construct then what point are you making?

 

 

Woman is “ adult human female “ easier to write “ woman” most people know what a woman is . 

[periodictabledancer]

4 hours ago, Bobilius said:

If you’re the sort of deviant who wants to harm women, 3 months isn’t all that long to sacrifice in order to get to your end game. That’s why I wanted it to be a year. Saying that, if you’re evil enough to spend 3 months planning an attack you’re probably evil enough to just go and find a way of doing it without a GRC anyway. 

If you're a deviant why would you wait at all ?