🎶 I-I-I was bor-rn,
Under a wan'drin' spleen 🎵
Jess Shand Smith
Loading...
They wouldn't care if we could change every cell in our bodies. Denying trans existence is the point, "biological sex" is the permission structure.
What Hodge and the supreme court have done is provide a legal basis for that permission structure. This has not only provided cover for full on transphobes, it has provided excuses for politicians and others who blow with the wind of press opinion. (to the general public and to their inner selves).
Jess Shand Smith
Jess Shand Smith
OH MY GOD HE LITERALLY GRABBED HER HAIR IT WASN'T JUST "ASKING FOR A KISS" GO FUCK YOURSELVES, BBC NEWS www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...
Hence the endless iterative changes that have most recently settled on gametogenesis, as it appears to have a much more binary flavour. As science and medicine have progressed and we have been able to alter our hormone profiles, external genitalia, secondary sexual characteristics etc...
The obsession with "biological sex" is about creating a *permission structure* to segregate, exclude and marginalise trans people. The are giving themselves permission to engage in the exclusion that is, of course, the actual goal all along (motte and bailey).
Toilets etc. aren't divided on "biological" categories of man and woman. They are divided on a social categories of man and woman. No one had ever known the precise biological characteristics of toilet users, including themselves.
It doesn't matter that their "biological sex" definitions are paper thin, (especially the supreme court's biological birth certificates), that they don't stand up to scrutiny, they only need to be just enough to create that permission structure to do what they've always wanted to do.
... and we learn that genetic sexual characteristics are much less clearly binary than we previously thought, they have arrived at their clumsy "potential maker of the large gamete" statements.
