Close Menu
    Irlanda

    Sesso biologico nel Regno Unito che governa un “passo indietro” per i diritti umani, afferma Teni

    Share.
    View 26 Comments

    26 commenti

    3. DaKrimsonBarun on

      I wonder if the two gloating comments posted have any trans friends or family. I wonder have they ever met a trans person.

      Doubt it.

    6. AgentOrange1996 on

      This is great news. Hopefully a slight return to normality.

    7. thats_pure_cat_hai on

      I am sure this will be a delightful and enlightening comment section

    8. RuncibleSpoon74 on

      “We know that trans women face systemic exclusion, marginalisation and violence, and are targeted and demonised by political actors, media and anti-trans activists. This has culminated in efforts to erase trans women from many sectors of society, which this ruling appears to support”

      I am in favour of “systematically excluding” transwomen from women’s single-sex spaces, services, and sports. This is not to marginalise them; it is simply women defining our boundaries, as we have a right to do.

      I do not support violence against transwomen, or demonisation. I do not think these sex-based exclusions are in any way an “erasure” of transwomen. They will continue to exist, and I hope they will be happy, on the male side of these boundaries.

    9. JjigaeBudae on

      Sub rule number 1. What does this have to do with Ireland?

    11. Crossfire_dcr on

      People can give out all they want, but this is a good thing. Women should not be made feel uncomfortable in changing rooms and other spaces because some bloke who’s an opportunist can decide they identify as one of them and invade that space. And same for women’s sport which was becoming a joke with all the unfair advantages that came with that. Correct ruling 

    12. Yuphrum on

      Wow, there are a whole lotta people acting like assholes in thinking that this is a good thing.

    13. Adventurous_Road_200 on

      Even stepping away from trans people for a moment, all the ones applauding this as a victory do know that intersex people exist, right… Right?!

    14. spoons431 on

      It’s interesting to see all the TERF bots that are commenting here straight away after this has been posted – all saying the same nonsense

    15. SuspiciousTomato10 on

      Ya… that’s not good. This is the tip of the spear for rolling back a lot of anti-discrimination legislation.
      Most anti-discrimination legislation comes from rulings on sexism and how it’s illegal to treat someone differently because of their sex. For example homophobia rulings tend to be based on the logic that “this person wouldn’t have been the target of that bigotry if they were the opposite sex and still inclined to their preferred partners”. But now this ruling could be used to say “Ya, but they’re not the opposite sex so it’s different”.

    16. BlondeShoulder on

      Breathe everyone.

      This ruling clarifies the definition of “woman” as set out in 2010 Equality Act as being anyone biologically female. That’s basically it. Trans people are still recognised as a vulnerable minority and protected from unfair discrimination under the same legislation, regardless of whether they have a gender recognition certificate or not.

      Acknowledging that women and girls have unique sex based rights is not the backwards step so many so-called “progressives” would have you believe.

    17. theseanbeag on

      Is it though? The ruling was specifically related to the application of the UK Equality Act and the act has separate and distinct rights for people people based on gender and gender reassignment. Reading the terms “sex” to also include trans people who have changed gender makes a very confusing set of rights.

    19. CT0292 on

      Yes, those big, bad, scary trans people. Let’s find another way to set them back.

      Fuck sake. They aren’t hurting anyone.

    20. HiVisVestNinja on

      This comment section disgusts me.

      Trans women are women.

    22. Dry_Procedure4482 on

      A lot of people probably a few bots too not from Ireland or UK suddenly flooding the comments and have no history of posting in this sub. Mods probably are going to lock it down at this rate.

      Shame on those of you who actually are commenting such horrible things as well. This is not good news in any way.

    23. dinharder on

      Genuine question. Why don’t we have woman and trans woman as legal definitions? Please don’t kill me asking genuinely

    24. vinceswish on

      Just look at the amount of comments – interesting how 1% generates so much attention

    25. Alcol1979 on

      I think this ruling reflects a general shift on this issue in western jurisprudence. It’s a recognition that laws which ignore biological fact just won’t have the support of a majority of the population and inevitably cause more problems for more people than they solve. Human rights can still be proportionately protected without the fiction that a transwoman is the same as a woman. It feels like we are in a different moment now from when JK Rowling was being crucified online and Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson were proclaiming that “trans women are women”. That is not to say that I disagree with the sentiment of that statement. It comes from a place of compassion and kindness. I think trans people should be treated with dignity and respect and lauded for their courage. But at the same time, we have to acknowledge that it’s a slightly different category from biological woman.

    Leave A Reply