I’ve been thinking, even though TRAs want the removal of sex based rights, that’s not what they actually say or ask for, so why aren’t more people rebelling by following their wording?
What I mean;
TRAs say it’s wrong to discriminate based on “gender identity”. I think the reason they aren’t facing more backlash is because people assume “gender identity” is just another way of saying “sex”. If TRAs just flat out said “we believe biological males should be allowed to play on women’s sports teams and use their bathrooms if they declare themselves to be women” to the general public, there would have been an outcry and it would have been shut down long ago. I think they use “gender identity” as a term for this purpose. The only people paying attention are either woke and on side, or... us few.
But, even if we followed the “rules” as they’ve stated them, that there should be no discrimination based on “gender identity”, we could still keep the status quo.
A male is eligible to play on the men’s team —> male identifies as woman —> male is therefore dismissed from the men’s team, that would be discrimination based on gender identity. That would be a violation of rights based on gender identity.
A male is not eligible to play on the women’s team. —> male identifies as a man—> male is not eligible to play on the women’s team.
A male is not eligible to play on the women’s team —> male identifies as a woman —> male is still not eligible to play on the women’s team.
It didn’t matter how the male identified, he was not eligible to join the women’s team.
Because a woman is an adult human female. TRAs have tried to muddy the definition, and used circular logic, but they’ve never actually declared what a woman really is, so we’re perfectly free to use its actual definition.
If a male who identified as a woman was allowed on the women’s team, but the male who identified as a man was not, that would actually be discrimination based on “gender identity” wouldn’t it?
So discrimination based on sex =/= discrimination based on gender identity.
For all the crap Stonewall tried to tell people, even if they did manage to squeeze in “gender identity” into discrimination laws, we should still be able to refuse males entrance for female spaces or resources or organizations based on their sex and be in accordance with the demands.. no?
If more organizations and institutions did this, it would for TRAs to be more specific in their demands. Once their actual desires come out, it will be clear to people how unreasonable they are.
Just a thought.