50

15 comments

The judge needs told that cis woman is not a legal term. And the comparator for assessing discrimination against a TiM is another man, not a woman.

(Didn’t SB cover that?)

And EHRC hurry the fuck up, you’ve only had years and years and years.

I hate it when judges us the trans cult lingo in their decisions, it says that they’ve been chugging the trans Kool-aid, the very thing that they are not supposed to do, and it’s ruining our legal system. It’s unbelievable that judges act as if the others who have a stake in these cases for privacy rights don’t even exist.

[–] nopenottoday 9 points Edited

Exactly. How is it legal for this judge to redefine woman to mean anything other than an adult human female?

Also how do we know that every woman in that changing room identifies as cis? Aren't they potentially misgendering every woman that uses the changing room? The logical sex strikes again

Especially given the Scottish high court judgement of woman meaning the factual one, relates to all the uk, given its an judgement on the definition in the UK equality act.

And the EHRC updated guidance was clear that sex in the equality act is factual meaning. So GRC or not single sex exemptions apply.

As does the working regulations act on workplace toilets and changing rooms requiring single sex provisions.

Gender ideology has not just shown up how many predators there are, how many institutions support and enable them, but also how insanely stupid people are. A judge not knowing legal terms I’d like a geography teacher believing the world is flat.

This is the problem with Stonewall being so ingrained in all our institutions for so long. Basing policy on illegal legal advice means policy becomes illegal. And now we have a whole generation that’s been comfortable with deliberately erroneous and harmful interpretations of the law. And they have become all too comfortable with acting above the law.

And the comparator for assessing discrimination against a TiM is another man, not a woman.

This, this, this is what bugs me the most.

Absolutely.

Because if a TiF was made to go to a male prison or a TiM in school excluded from boys sex ed class, that would be discrimination based on gender reassignment.

[–] Cogent 8 points Edited

Men have always fantasized about exhibitionist role reversal. Now they are getting what they want, to be paid for getting naked in front of women.

Now all the legal system needs to do is to force women to want men to do it.

the Conservative MP for Penistone.

He hehe he Penistone how apt.

when will sex actually be a protected characteristic in law? as in you can't claim to be the sex you are not, what does it being a protected characteristic even mean if it isnt.

Can someone post a text only version?

It’s a share token, so anyone should be able to view it. Is it not working?

ooops. There was a pop-up about cookies. I thought it was trying to make me subscribe. Yes I can see it