Leading barrister warns that the kit – used to support gender-questioning children – is likely to be in breach of equality laws and could violate pupils’ rights
Archived version: https://archive.ph/jT7GK
Leading barrister warns that the kit – used to support gender-questioning children – is likely to be in breach of equality laws and could violate pupils’ rights
Archived version: https://archive.ph/jT7GK
Yeah, I have trouble explaining falsehoods, too.
Me? I tend to avoid the difficulty by not spreading lies, but you do whatever works for you, darlin’.
the M or F on one’s birth certificate is not an immutable doctrine, it’s a jumping off point. it’s a starting place so you can see if you like one side before switching to the other. more importantly, it’s a starting point that works for 99% of the population, and the remaining 1% are hindered by it less and less as social progress is made. once we as a society reach the point where there is exactly zero stigma attached to deciding you like the other side, or the middle, or some other fantastical place better than the side your penis, vagina, or lack thereof put you on, thus rendering that decision by your dad’s sperm cell irrelevant to anything besides how you are referred to the first handful of years of your life until you’re old enough to understand the difference and make your own decision, then I don’t see the point in going further than that.
you might as well call giving an infant a name a system of oppression, since trans/enby people invariably change theirs.
also, whether you believe doctors are cops or not, you do not get to call people meth heads based on the fact that you don’t like them.
Why are we forcing people into “sides” if we know for a fact they can be erroneous?
That creates a privileged class for who their assignment is congruent with their conception of self (cisgender people)
alongside a disprivileged out group forced to navigate transitioning out of an assignment they never should have gotten (transgender people)
I do.
Why do programs have default settings if they’re not the ideal settings for everyone?
As I said in my previous comment, why shouldn’t the objective be to reach a point where transitioning is completely painless?
I don’t think you can really compare screen resolution with the establishment of a disprivileged class that didn’t exist
Why should a person need to transition? Why do cis people need or deserve the privileged status there being a default they adhere to grants them?
I beg to differ. Screen readers aren’t enabled by default, and disabled people who need to access them often need the assistance of someone who can see the screen in order to enable them. Mainstream platforms such as Android are better about this (turning on the screen reader by holding both volume buttons down for 5 seconds), but even then people are required to know about the shortcut. I don’t think anyone would argue we should remedy this by turning the screen reader on by default, no? You could ask whether to turn on the screen reader during first time device setup, I suppose, but this analogy falls apart somewhat when applied to newborn babies.
You have to call children something before they’re old enough to understand what gender is. Pose the question to them at age five and whatever they tell you is their gender from there on out, but there needs to be something before then. Five years is a long time for someone to not have a name.
Are you describing ableism as an argument against the existence of privileged classes??
No???
Of course privileged classes exist. I just described one and described a way to lessen the impact of its existence, since eliminating it entirely is completely impossible.
So too is the case with infants having names and genders.
You mean like not assigning people to classes we know can be incorrect they then would have to change?