On any of the donation threads where it came up and he replied to it, the most he ever did was some half hearted corporate PR “apology” (ironic)
On any of the donation threads where it came up and he replied to it, the most he ever did was some half hearted corporate PR “apology” (ironic)
You don’t get to call me bad faith after linking a biased source, dude, come on.
But from my understanding:
The ruling focused on whether a trans woman with a gender recognition certificate is protected from discrimination as a woman under Britain’s Equality Act. Activists for Women’s Rights said that including a trans woman as a biological woman under the law could impact single-sex services for women, such as refuges, hospital wards and sports. It’s important to note that some victims of rape or sexual assault have an extreme aversion to male chararistics, such as genitalia or any other male sexual chararistics. And that despite the rapid advancements of surgery and HRT, there still remains male characteristics that may be unfair in sports or other scenarios, our medical technology isn’t there yet – But like all things, it all depends on the individual.
What kickstarted the activism was a law by the Scottish government to place more women in public sector roles. It also said that trans women are the same as biological women, which is unrelated to include in a small bill that no other bill has ever mentioned before. Why is this particular bill vaguely defining what a woman is, but no other bill has yet done so? Activists tried the government in court and failed before going to the Supreme Court.
The court discussed the differences between sex and gender and what that actually means. How do you define sex? Is your sex your identity? When do we look at someone’s sex or gender? They concluded that a biological woman is determined by their biological sex, meaning sexual chararistics.
It also doesn’t exclude trans men or women from the Equality Act, as they still fall under its protection, no one has lost any rights. The change is that there is now a separation and definition of gender and sex and clearer wording for what constitutes as a single-sex space.
Legally, it offers long-term clarity for businesses and organisations that have been left to interpret ambiguous and sometimes contradictory legislation on their own until this point. A case example is that a trans woman, who is pre-op and pre-HRT, can be legally classified as a biological woman despite having no surgery or therapy. That is no longer possible under this new ruling. Another example is maternity leave, where women get more leave than men due to pregnancy. But what of the case when there is a trans woman? There is no pregnancy, no breastfeeding, so do they get extended maternity leave? It’s unclear.
But now it is.