I have previously expressed surprise at how impervious so many are to any challenge to their views about the legality of enforcing 'gender identity'. Is it time to get very worried indeed?
Fabulous article Sarah, and I agree that it's very concerning that an eminent legal journal would publish this. Although it's especially bad timing after Rachel Meade's remedies ruling which I hope might cause at least some reflection by all involved.
Sarah - my teeth itched so much reading this that they practically burst into flames. Aggressively and deviously manipulating words, ideas and facts is the only way they can defend an ideology that simply doesn't stack up to scrutiny. Again, thank you for all you do. I often cut/paste some of your crystallised points to give to people who still don't get that this isn't about being kind and inclusive, and still can't see what's at stake.
Sarah, I feel your irritation. The reversal of reality, the denial and the linguistic trickery. I have no issue with people identifying as they wish, but I refuse to indulge in their identifying or be compelled to believe in their identifying.
The problem to me is they either believe or have been led to believe that sex is a belief or an ideological position. I'm guessing this is postmodernist BS.
If the conflating of sex/gender was clarified surely the linguistic trickery will die.
Whatever, I think that there is a degree deliberate dishonesty in their stance and that they know it and they know we know it. What do they expect to achieve by this?
It baffles me. That paragraph where he uses a lesbian as an example of the evils of denying gender identity is particularly head scratching when we can all see what has been done to lesbians in the name of gender identity - including Allison Bailey!
As public discussion continues, it becomes clearer and clearer that DARVO is all they have. I have found myself wondering if they are even conscious that they’re doing it, or if it’s so automatic it’s spilling out of them unexamined.
I think he's doing exactly what he appears to be doing: reassuring himself and his like-minded friends there is nothing in the recent cases that should cause them to reconsider.
I don't think you can see it as rational reasoning, even cynical but rational reasoning. I think the whole article is an example of what Orwell called 'Crimestop', an exercise in self-protective stupidity to avoid heresy, in his own mind above all.
Remember, he's probably told himself he is a great guy of superior virtue and insight for believing this nonsense. Better than us lot in the reality based community. He's probably invested a lot of his self-worth in that. If he started to doubt, all that might be at risk. Plus he might get a punishment beating from other believers for apostasy and his own career put at risk.
People are very good at lying to themselves when they need to. Self-deception is the name of the game.
Fortunately I am retired and out of the front line of this war but if I were still in business and a member of staff came to advise me that he was “trans” and from next week would be “presenting” as a woman (as happened to a colleague one Friday) my response would be to ask why are you telling me this? Are you a Catholic? Or a philatelist? It is of no interest to me. You are employed to do a job and that is all I care about. Nothing changes.
It feels like there is some much needed light shining brightly on this issue emanating from the UK but I fear the courts not being captured is not the case in all jurisdictions. Canada’s Supreme Court recently ruled it would be against the plaintiffs human rights if they were not afforded highly experimental gender reassignment surgery that left their penis intact while also installing a ‘pseudo’ vagina to align with the complainants non-binary identity. At substantial cost, this surgery is being carried out in the USA being funded by Ontario’s taxpayers.
I have no pleasure at all in predicting that the next decade will prove me right to doubt that playing pick 'n' mix with your genitals improves mental health one jot.
The field of psychology does not have a great track record when in comes to dubious medical treatments for the mentally ill, but the way gender ideology has co-opted the field to prey on young, vulnerable people is particularly egregious.
It’s always a breathtaking read to see the depths of idiocy plumbed by the subjects of your articles. I can only hope for his clients’ sakes that this particular barrister never advocates on the Equality and discrimination topics about which we’ve been reading and learning for the past five years, thanks to you and the various ‘legal feminist’ bloggers.
Did he miss the fact that his bigoted Chambers LOST the case against Alison Bailey? This is a disgraceful piece by a man that should know better, his bias is not only on full show here, his hatred of and disdain for women and children is blatantly obvious. Really fitness to practice should be investigated. It surely is not his job to judge just to represent to the best of his ability without fear or favour? No one looking for representation should ever have anything to do with a chambeds so blatantly mysoginistic.
I understand the grinding of teeth here, my own were too.
Thanks for putting yourself through this to summarise it, Sarah.
These people are not going to change. The big question is how we move forward with this. Especially with Labour coming in. I think this will be a very long fight.
I'm just sorry for all the time wasted in having to assert reality to those who either choose for reasons of their own to ignore it or who are too mentally impaired to exercise judgment.
Just came across this post...late. "non binary people will never be other than mildly irritating" Bravo....God I've been wanting to say that for years (especially on Pride Days - or is it weeks?) but have been wary of doing so for fear of being cast into the Pit of 'Phobics' or branded as some kind of proto-Fascist.
This is the 99th time at least you have made your point and the 99th time I will simply say; I don't agree with you. Sex is real and immutable. You repeating to me that this is wrong has has much impact as does my dog whining when I won't share my meal with him. It is irritating but the food stays firmly on my plate.
You are consistently rude, aggressive and frankly insulting. My sex is female, regardless of the functioning of my gonads. I am going to block you now, as life - and my patience - is too short.
Fabulous article Sarah, and I agree that it's very concerning that an eminent legal journal would publish this. Although it's especially bad timing after Rachel Meade's remedies ruling which I hope might cause at least some reflection by all involved.
Sarah - my teeth itched so much reading this that they practically burst into flames. Aggressively and deviously manipulating words, ideas and facts is the only way they can defend an ideology that simply doesn't stack up to scrutiny. Again, thank you for all you do. I often cut/paste some of your crystallised points to give to people who still don't get that this isn't about being kind and inclusive, and still can't see what's at stake.
Sarah, I feel your irritation. The reversal of reality, the denial and the linguistic trickery. I have no issue with people identifying as they wish, but I refuse to indulge in their identifying or be compelled to believe in their identifying.
The problem to me is they either believe or have been led to believe that sex is a belief or an ideological position. I'm guessing this is postmodernist BS.
If the conflating of sex/gender was clarified surely the linguistic trickery will die.
Whatever, I think that there is a degree deliberate dishonesty in their stance and that they know it and they know we know it. What do they expect to achieve by this?
It baffles me. That paragraph where he uses a lesbian as an example of the evils of denying gender identity is particularly head scratching when we can all see what has been done to lesbians in the name of gender identity - including Allison Bailey!
As public discussion continues, it becomes clearer and clearer that DARVO is all they have. I have found myself wondering if they are even conscious that they’re doing it, or if it’s so automatic it’s spilling out of them unexamined.
I think he's doing exactly what he appears to be doing: reassuring himself and his like-minded friends there is nothing in the recent cases that should cause them to reconsider.
I don't think you can see it as rational reasoning, even cynical but rational reasoning. I think the whole article is an example of what Orwell called 'Crimestop', an exercise in self-protective stupidity to avoid heresy, in his own mind above all.
Remember, he's probably told himself he is a great guy of superior virtue and insight for believing this nonsense. Better than us lot in the reality based community. He's probably invested a lot of his self-worth in that. If he started to doubt, all that might be at risk. Plus he might get a punishment beating from other believers for apostasy and his own career put at risk.
People are very good at lying to themselves when they need to. Self-deception is the name of the game.
" A new approach is needed urgently to make the UK safer for trans people, says Oscar Davies"
safer = more privileged, more 'platformed', more 'centred', more entitled, more honoured...
Fortunately I am retired and out of the front line of this war but if I were still in business and a member of staff came to advise me that he was “trans” and from next week would be “presenting” as a woman (as happened to a colleague one Friday) my response would be to ask why are you telling me this? Are you a Catholic? Or a philatelist? It is of no interest to me. You are employed to do a job and that is all I care about. Nothing changes.
It feels like there is some much needed light shining brightly on this issue emanating from the UK but I fear the courts not being captured is not the case in all jurisdictions. Canada’s Supreme Court recently ruled it would be against the plaintiffs human rights if they were not afforded highly experimental gender reassignment surgery that left their penis intact while also installing a ‘pseudo’ vagina to align with the complainants non-binary identity. At substantial cost, this surgery is being carried out in the USA being funded by Ontario’s taxpayers.
I have no pleasure at all in predicting that the next decade will prove me right to doubt that playing pick 'n' mix with your genitals improves mental health one jot.
The field of psychology does not have a great track record when in comes to dubious medical treatments for the mentally ill, but the way gender ideology has co-opted the field to prey on young, vulnerable people is particularly egregious.
It’s always a breathtaking read to see the depths of idiocy plumbed by the subjects of your articles. I can only hope for his clients’ sakes that this particular barrister never advocates on the Equality and discrimination topics about which we’ve been reading and learning for the past five years, thanks to you and the various ‘legal feminist’ bloggers.
Brava!
Did he miss the fact that his bigoted Chambers LOST the case against Alison Bailey? This is a disgraceful piece by a man that should know better, his bias is not only on full show here, his hatred of and disdain for women and children is blatantly obvious. Really fitness to practice should be investigated. It surely is not his job to judge just to represent to the best of his ability without fear or favour? No one looking for representation should ever have anything to do with a chambeds so blatantly mysoginistic.
I understand the grinding of teeth here, my own were too.
Thanks Sarah.
He’s just not very bright.
Thanks for putting yourself through this to summarise it, Sarah.
These people are not going to change. The big question is how we move forward with this. Especially with Labour coming in. I think this will be a very long fight.
I'm just sorry for all the time wasted in having to assert reality to those who either choose for reasons of their own to ignore it or who are too mentally impaired to exercise judgment.
Brilliant analysis
Just came across this post...late. "non binary people will never be other than mildly irritating" Bravo....God I've been wanting to say that for years (especially on Pride Days - or is it weeks?) but have been wary of doing so for fear of being cast into the Pit of 'Phobics' or branded as some kind of proto-Fascist.
Brava!!!
This is the 99th time at least you have made your point and the 99th time I will simply say; I don't agree with you. Sex is real and immutable. You repeating to me that this is wrong has has much impact as does my dog whining when I won't share my meal with him. It is irritating but the food stays firmly on my plate.
Either name the third gamete, or buzz off.
You are consistently rude, aggressive and frankly insulting. My sex is female, regardless of the functioning of my gonads. I am going to block you now, as life - and my patience - is too short.