Sex and Gender. What is the difference

[jacko555]

Professor Stocks is a signatory to the declaration of the following organisation that want to mandate transwomen out of existence.
https://womensdeclaration.com/en/declaration-womens-sex-based-rights-full-text/

Thank you for confirming the points in my original post.

 

[JohnD]

It's interesting that Angeleyes objects to a document that says:

"Recent changes replacing references to the category of sex, which is biological, with the language of ’gender’, which refers to stereotyped sex roles, in United Nations documents, strategies, and actions, has led to confusion which ultimately risks undermining the protection of women’s human rights."

 

[AngleEyes]

Total nonsense and
absolute rubbish
porkie pies

nonsense.

A well reasoned argument from you both.

Trans people will continue to exist.

Of course they will, but the the Women’s Declaration of Sex-Based Rights (WDSR), circulated by Women’s Human Rights Campaign (WHRC), creates an atmosphere of unsafety for transgenders, and wants to deny any legal recognition of transwomen. Weirdly it is not in the least bit bothered about transmen. Now that is sexist. So a woman's rights group behaves in a sexist manner. You couldn't make it up!

But a man is not a woman.

So you keep saying, and no-one disagrees with you. You might as well keep repeating "the cow jumped over the moon".

But a man can transition into a woman and vice-versa. It's written into law. Are you going to pick and choose which laws to uphold and which to break because they conflict with your religious fervour?

 

[AngleEyes]

Thank you for confirming the points in my original post.

You refer to your points in your original post. Could you present exactly which points you think have been confirmed?

 

[AngleEyes]

It's interesting that Angeleyes objects to a document that says:

"Recent changes replacing references to the category of sex, which is biological, with the language of ’gender’, which refers to stereotyped sex roles, in United Nations documents, strategies, and actions, has led to confusion which ultimately risks undermining the protection of women’s human rights."

You were so interested, you were unable to comment further.

 

[JohnD]

but a man can transition into a woman and vice-versa.

no he can't.

A man can utter the words "I am a woman" just as you can utter the words "I am an Amazonian Pygmy" or "I am a giraffe."

Having the right to say the words does not make it true.

 

[JohnD]

organisation that want to mandate transwomen out of existence.

no it doesn't. That is pure nonsense. Trans people will continue to exist.

 

[AngleEyes]

no he can't.

Who says he can't?
You?

Changing Genders: How It’s Done
https://www.webmd.com/sex/news/20150422/transgender-homomes-surgery​

 

[jacko555]

You refer to your points in your original post. Could you present exactly which points you think have been confirmed?

I said:

Erm, you sure about that? Have you read her book? Sounds like you've been reading a lot of sooshal media backlash

In response to:

Because she wants to mandate some transgender people out of existence. She exploits her professional status to spout her bigotry, against UNI regulations and professional ethics. She is more driven by her desire to mandate transgender women out of existence than she is about UNI regulations and professional ethics.

It looks like you are not familiar with her work, nor have read the book in question, and are only the familiar with the third hand furore surrounding it. The university stand by her. She resigned.

How was her work against UNI regulations? What professional ethics did she violate? Please cite actual examples from credible sources .

How exactly is her being a signatory on the woman's declaration going to mandate trans out of existence? You mentioned it's "sexist" to protect woman's rights and to make a distinction between biological and "trans women". Are biological woman not allowed to define their rights?

Honestly I would like to understand more in these terms. Please provide actual examples and convince me. Am willing to learn.

 

[AngleEyes]

Trans people will continue to exist.

Are you going to continue ignoring my responses and keep repeating the same old garbage.

|
|
|
V​

Of course they will, but the the Women’s Declaration of Sex-Based Rights (WDSR), circulated by Women’s Human Rights Campaign (WHRC), creates an atmosphere of unsafety for transgenders, and wants to deny any legal recognition of transwomen. Weirdly it is not in the least bit bothered about transmen. Now that is sexist. So a woman's rights group behaves in a sexist manner. You couldn't make it up!

 

[jacko555]

Lots of rights:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_rights_in_the_United_Kingdom

Can't biological woman have rights distinct from trans rights?

 

[Deleted member 18243]

Having the right to say the words does not make it true.

You should know all about that!

 

[AngleEyes]

It looks like you are not familiar with her work, nor have read the book in question,

Which of her published work are your referring to?

and are only the familiar with the third hand furore surrounding it. The university stand by her. She resigned.

Her colleagues, 600 of them, denounced her views, her attitude, her opinions and her behaviour.
Which bit of furore are you referring to, the question of her attitudes to free speech, or her attitudes to transgenders?

How was her work against UNI regulations? What professional ethics did she violate? Please cite actual examples from credible sources .

I suggest you peruse the following, for a start:

The UK Media Has Seriously Bungled the Kathleen Stock Story
https://grace.substack.com/p/the-uk-media-has-seriously-bungled​

How exactly is her being a signatory on the woman's declaration going to mandate trans out of existence?

Are you intent on re-hashing all the original discussion?

The WDSR, of which Prof Stocks is a member, wants to outlaw transgender people
Read more: https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/professor-stock.580255/page-5#ixzz7BXD17IGr
​

I suggest you read the original thread, then come back if you have anything new to add.

You mentioned it's "sexist" to protect woman's rights and to make a distinction between biological and "trans women".

No I didn't. I said it's sexist to want to outlaw transgender women, while being content with the transmen.
If you're not going to read my comments and understand them correctly, we have no chance of a sensible discussion.

Are biological woman not allowed to define their rights?

Good God! more re-hashed arguments.
I have said that of course anyone and everyone is entitled to their rights, until there is a conflict of rights. There is no hierarchy of rights.
I suggest you read the original thread, then come back if you have anything new to add.

It is a false allegation to suggest that I am saying that women do not have rights.
Of course women have rights. But occasionally others have rights also, and women's rights do not trump everyone else's rights. Then there is conflict of rights, and sensible management can produce sensible solutions.
But clearly, in this forum, you and others argue that women rights should be respected even if it means trampling over other's rights.
There is no hierarchy of rights. As soon as one argues that there is a hierarchy of rights, the argument is lost because all you are doing is claiming that one group's rights are more important than another's. Then equality is an exploited concept and is similar to the NIMBY approach.
Read more: https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/how-is-this-equality.579941/page-4#ixzz7BXEGBQuh​

Honestly I would like to understand more in these terms. Please provide actual examples and convince me. Am willing to learn.

Do a search on relevant words and read all the old threads.

 

[AngleEyes]

Lots of rights:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_rights_in_the_United_Kingdom

Can't biological woman have rights distinct from trans rights?

Good God! more re-hashed arguments.
I have said that of course anyone and everyone is entitled to their rights, until there is a conflict of rights. There is no hierarchy of rights.
I suggest you read the original thread, then come back if you have anything new to add.

It is a false allegation to suggest that I am saying that women do not have rights.
Of course women have rights. But occasionally others have rights also, and women's rights do not trump everyone else's rights. Then there is conflict of rights, and sensible management can produce sensible solutions.
But clearly, in this forum, you and others argue that women rights should be respected even if it means trampling over other's rights.
There is no hierarchy of rights. As soon as one argues that there is a hierarchy of rights, the argument is lost because all you are doing is claiming that one group's rights are more important than another's. Then equality is an exploited concept and is similar to the NIMBY approach.
Read more: https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/how-is-this-equality.579941/page-4#ixzz7BXEGBQuh​

 

[JohnD]

untrue allegations.

outlaw transgender women

"outlaw?" nonsense.

The TRAs make up these stories so they can pretend they are victims.

Persecution mania

Made up.

she wants to mandate some transgender people out of existence

"Out of existence?" Nonsense.

"Stock defines herself as a gender-critical feminist, meaning she believes that biological sex matters and that being born a woman carries certain rights that should not automatically be extended to anyone who identifies as that gender."