• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

A Political Thread pt. 2

Reading around it sounds like the Supreme Court decision is worse than originally stated,



My two concerns on the decision,

1) Single sex spaces always a sore subject but I'd prefer they were trans inclusive by default rather the other way around. I suspect many trans people will break the law rather than have male presenting people enter female toilets.

2) I haven't seen a single refuting this but apprently not a single trans person spoke to the court. Yet many anti trans groups were.

A third one

3) Much like Brexit emboldened racists this will embolden transphobes.

Parliament will have to fix this and it will be mucky because it's being argued in the extremes.
 
ncurd said:
Reading around it sounds like the Supreme Court decision is worse than originally stated,



My two concerns on the decision,

1) Single sex spaces always a sore subject but I'd prefer they were trans inclusive by default rather the other way around. I suspect many trans people will break the law rather than have male presenting people enter female toilets.

2) I haven't seen a single refuting this but apprently not a single trans person spoke to the court. Yet many anti trans groups were.

A third one

3) Much like Brexit emboldened racists this will embolden transphobes.

Parliament will have to fix this and it will be mucky because it's being argued in the extremes.
Click to expand...

Wasn't part of the problem that it created another problem in that trans with a gender recognition certificate would get access to those spaces, and those without wouldn't. Discriminatory based on a certificate.

The Scottish government initially wanted everyone included then dropped down to with a GRC. The Isla Bryson case didn't help.

I was under the belief groups like Amnesty, Stonewall plus others had engaged with the courts.

No sides covered themselves in glory. Support women's rights and your anti-trans, transphobic and a terf. Support trans and your woke, anti-women, and a man wanting to dismiss women's rights

Personally I think the decision was the correct one.
 
A lot of the trans issues focus on male to female trans and the often mentioned case of which toilets they can use. What about the other way? You can have female to male trans and now, if they seem convincingly male, women won't want them in the women's toilets and they are legally barred from the men's.
 
ncurd said:
Reading around it sounds like the Supreme Court decision is worse than originally stated,



My two concerns on the decision,

1) Single sex spaces always a sore subject but I'd prefer they were trans inclusive by default rather the other way around. I suspect many trans people will break the law rather than have male presenting people enter female toilets.

2) I haven't seen a single refuting this but apprently not a single trans person spoke to the court. Yet many anti trans groups were.

A third one

3) Much like Brexit emboldened racists this will embolden transphobes.

Parliament will have to fix this and it will be mucky because it's being argued in the extremes.
Click to expand...


1. Women's spaces, men's spaces are all dut illegal in 2025. Plus noone cares about trans men in men's spaces, there's literally 0 outcry about that, infact the only issue there is trans men invading gay men's dating / sex spaces.
So let's be clear, your concerns are wanting women's only spaces to be trans women inclusionary?

2. By Anti trans groups are you talking about for women scotland. Isn't their MO merely that they didn't want Penis's forced into their eyesight when changing? Tbh I havnt really looked into them much so thisnisnangenuine question.

3. Brexit emboldened... I'm not even getting into this insult to everyone who disagrees with you is a phobe, it's petty.

I mean why do Parliament have to fix that there are 2 sexes, and Women's only spaces are majority for safeguarding reasons?

I'll have a read around this more tonight when I have time
 
Ragey Erasmus said:
A lot of the trans issues focus on male to female trans and the often mentioned case of which toilets they can use. What about the other way? You can have female to male trans and now, if they seem convincingly male, women won't want them in the women's toilets and they are legally barred from the men's.
Click to expand...
So just to be clear, and I don't want to be that guy, but I'd avoid using sex in this discussion, it muddys the waters...

There is no such thing as female to male, its woman to man if that makes sense. Gender and sex are different, that's kind of the point.

I can't believe I'm being that guy, shame on me!!!

But your point is valid, outside of gay men's spaces, noone cares about trans men, except when one who passes uses a womans toilet.

It doesn't help the whole discussion is made a mockery of, by those with bad intentions using to mock it, to then prove the point of the female advocacy groups. There's a lot of young youtubers currently videoing themselves being confronted by women in public using women's toilets, and pretending to identify as a woman in that moment.

Someone said it very well previously, this is a non issue, part of a BS culture war designed to distract us, and turn us on each other. I know a lot of trans people, and they are generally super nice people with absolute common sense, these extremists on both sides don't represent anyone in reality
 
dirty harry said:
So just to be clear, and I don't want to be that guy, but I'd avoid using sex in this discussion, it muddys the waters...

There is no such thing as female to male, its woman to man if that makes sense. Gender and sex are different, that's kind of the point.

I can't believe I'm being that guy, shame on me!!!
Click to expand...
You're that guy

1744966824887.png
 
Saintjay said:
Wasn't part of the problem that it created another problem in that trans with a gender recognition certificate would get access to those spaces, and those without wouldn't. Discriminatory based on a certificate.
Click to expand...
I'm talking about public restrooms and the like rather than more serious situations. Places where GRC would of been required if requested (not worth paper it's printed on anymore).
Saintjay said:
I was under the belief groups like Amnesty, Stonewall plus others had engaged with the courts.
Click to expand...
This is the claim i see repeated.
1000021873.jpg
 
"So was the Equality and Human Rights Commission – also hostile to trans rights in the UK. And Amnesty – which is like the Scottish government, not trans"
QueerAF

So apparently, technically no trans people were heard outright, but to those calling the EHRC and Amnesty hostile lol.

Apparently there were attempts from prominent trans people to be heard that were rejected, a former UK judge who quit and moved to Ireland, and an activist who made a threat. Neither probably helped the cause tbf.
 

Similar threads

Bada-Bing!
Antisocial, societal issues thread
12 13 14
Replies
274
Views
16K
Yulia
Yulia
Bada-Bing!
The Biking thread
3 4 5
Replies
88
Views
7K
Bada-Bing!
Bada-Bing!
Bada-Bing!
The Ukraine War thread
52 53 54
Replies
1K
Views
45K
AlRums
AlRums
Which Tyler
Adverts - those that were, those that are, and some... that have not yet come to pass
Replies
7
Views
292
BrokenWing
B
Bada-Bing!
The technology thread
46 47 48
Replies
946
Views
56K
Amiga500
A

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 36 (members: 0, guests: 36)

Latest posts

Top