Next step in overriding female rights!

Galaxy

Politics Nerd it is not 2016 anymore - your approach just doesnt work anymore. Strangely enough we dont need your permission to discuss this - MN made their position on gender critical debate very clear years ago. Gender critical belief is protected in law - so yes I can freely say men cant become women and you cant change sex.

I don't think I said either that you needed my permission, or that you can't say what you want to say.

On the other hand you do seem to need to criticise me for not wanting to be part of what I perceive to be discrimination and hate speech.

Just one point. Those expressing philosophical beliefs are protected by law. However, those on the receiving end of those freely expressing their beliefs are also protected by various laws that limit how the can be delivered. Even Gransnet is not above the law.

I am not criticising for you not wanting to be part of the discussion, it wont have any impact on me either way. If you think I have broken the law by stating people cant change sex please report my posts.
It is not possible to change sex, men have no place in womens spaces, etc, etc.

Must say I find it astonishing that a doctor calls biological sex a ‘nebulous’ concept!

From politicians* it’s one thing, but I’d never have thought a doctor would need a crash course in basic biology!

PoliticsNerd are you threatening us?

Although, as I said, I think there are interesting counter arguments to be made, I am not interested in this type of discussion.

Speaking for myself only, of course, if I am not interested in a particular discussion I tend to ignore that thread or threads.

It is not hate speech to state that a human person cannot change sex, PoliticsNerd.
People can use their preferred gender, of course, but sex is immutable.

The question is whether those who do change gender should bully others and why. Why do men who have committed rape with their penis then decide they wish to live as a woman?
Could it be that they are trying to avoid justice ?
Likewise men who fail at sport then decide to compete as women. Why?

Surely if they want to live as a woman they surely like and respect women and I would think most do. But some do not, they continue with their male entitlement which is unfortunate for the majority who want to fit in.

What exactly do you feel constitutes discrimination or hate speech on this thread, PoliticsNerd? Most of us who have commented have merely cited examples of what has been given in evidence during the tribunal.

Witzend

Must say I find it astonishing that a doctor calls biological sex a ‘nebulous’ concept!

From politicians* it’s one thing, but I’d never have thought a doctor would need a crash course in basic biology!

A GCSE in Human Biology might be sufficient to learn the difference.

PN

On the other hand you do seem to need to criticise me for not wanting to be part of what I perceive to be discrimination and hate speech.
I don’t need to criticise you for either of those things PN.

The discrimination against females by this doctor is plain for all to see. If you don’t accept that, that isn’t my problem.

His inability to acknowledge biological fact is a matter of great concern in a doctor.

If you’re not interested in any discussion on GN there is no obligation to contribute.

Hate speech?

Galaxy

I am not criticising for you not wanting to be part of the discussion, it wont have any impact on me either way. If you think I have broken the law by stating people cant change sex please report my posts.
It is not possible to change sex, men have no place in womens spaces, etc, etc.

I didn't say you had broken the law Galaxy. You said "Gender critical belief is protected in law". I agreed but explained the law doesn't stop there. It wasn't personal nor did I word it as if it was: it was just a law we should all be aware of - legally (an area you introduced) how we speak is as important as what we say.

Aveline

PoliticsNerd are you threatening us?

Don't be silly. I'm not doing anything of the sort.

PoliticsNerd

Aveline

PoliticsNerd are you threatening us?

Don't be silly. I'm not doing anything of the sort.

Just a warning then?

However, those on the receiving end of those freely expressing their beliefs are also protected by various laws that limit how the can be delivered. Even Gransnet is not above the law.
🤔

ViceVersa

What exactly do you feel constitutes discrimination or hate speech on this thread, PoliticsNerd? Most of us who have commented have merely cited examples of what has been given in evidence during the tribunal.

I have already answered this question.

Allira

PoliticsNerd

Aveline

PoliticsNerd are you threatening us?

Don't be silly. I'm not doing anything of the sort.

Just a warning then?

However, those on the receiving end of those freely expressing their beliefs are also protected by various laws that limit how the can be delivered. Even Gransnet is not above the law.
🤔

You really don't have anything to actually discuss, do you?

PoliticsNerd

ViceVersa

What exactly do you feel constitutes discrimination or hate speech on this thread, PoliticsNerd? Most of us who have commented have merely cited examples of what has been given in evidence during the tribunal.

I have already answered this question.

If you say so. I don't think you have.

Allira

Witzend

Must say I find it astonishing that a doctor calls biological sex a ‘nebulous’ concept!

From politicians* it’s one thing, but I’d never have thought a doctor would need a crash course in basic biology!

A GCSE in Human Biology might be sufficient to learn the difference.

You may or may not be right about 100% determination of sex but GCSE is a poor example of exactitude. After GCSE you go on to higher levels only to be told you have to build on the "basics".

The old information is often just incomplete or simplified for introductory purposes. As you learn more, you (hope to) gain a deeper and more nuanced perspective on the subject.

Perhaps that's what doctors do too.

ViceVersa

PoliticsNerd

ViceVersa

What exactly do you feel constitutes discrimination or hate speech on this thread, PoliticsNerd? Most of us who have commented have merely cited examples of what has been given in evidence during the tribunal.

I have already answered this question.

If you say so. I don't think you have.

And? What has happened to your topic while you worry about me?

PoliticsNerd has carefully avoided retracting the accusation that I introduced "age, sexual orientation, place of residence etc" when I didn't. Beth Upton introduced those areas in a reply contributing to an allegation of him being verbose. I merely questioned if he'd ever been asked about any of them.

There are two sexes, so determined by the gametes they are organised to produce (even if a failure in the body means they don't) There is no third or more gamete therefore no third or more sex. No mammal has ever changed from being organised to produce a large gamete to produce a small gamete or vice versa.

The old information is often just incomplete or simplified for introductory purposes. As you learn more, you (hope to) gain a deeper and more nuanced perspective on the subject.

Perhaps that's what doctors do too.
Maybe Professor Robert Winston, a world leading expert needs to consult with Beth Upton to gain a more nuanced perspective and deeper understanding of biology?

PoliticsNerd

ViceVersa

PoliticsNerd

ViceVersa

What exactly do you feel constitutes discrimination or hate speech on this thread, PoliticsNerd? Most of us who have commented have merely cited examples of what has been given in evidence during the tribunal.

I have already answered this question.

If you say so. I don't think you have.

And? What has happened to your topic while you worry about me?

My topic? Not sure what you mean by that, and I can assure you I'm not worrying about you in the slightest. I'm far more concerned with the real issues here.

I'm far more concerned with the real issues here.

Of course you are ViceVersa.

I would be surprised if she is worried, it is something we have seen a thousand times before, I could have written the script. I am just surprised there has been no mention of clown fish.

The only time I have ever even vaguely worried in this debate was when my children were brought in to it, that was on this site but GN dealt with it promptly.
Justine (owner of MN) deserves lots more credit than she ever gets in terms of women who helped to further womens rights in relation to this debate.

Aveline

PoliticsNerd are you threatening us?

... so I wasn't the only one to detect a warning then...

Cynicism about the doctor's argument does not constitute hate-speech anymore than the doctor's own views do - which appear equally cynical.

A few thoughts.....

Why did Beth Upton need permission to use the women's changing room? Had any of the other women using it asked for permission? What made Beth different to them? Why did Beth feel the need to get official permission when Beth is 'a biological female'? I have the tiniest suspicion that maybe Beth knows more about the immutability of sex than he's admitting.

Like PN I’m more interested in the real issues here.
È.g. Whether this doctor understands that his words and actions are contributing to the concerns of those TIM who do not insist on being in female spaces or who understand perfectly that sex is immutable.

The actions of TIM cheats and their insistence on being accepted as the women they can never be damages those trans who just want to live without causing problems.