The Equality Act

[Crockerland]

Homosexuality is not a mental disorder.

Homophobia might be, though.

[Scomagia]

Homosexuality is not a mental disorder.

Homophobia might be, though.

An actual phobic level of fear might be. Just not liking or agreeing with gays isn't. It's pretty scummy to pathologize opposing viewpoints.

[Pope Joan]

Is there some objective verifiable way to prove your self-identification?

If not, that aspect could be too easily abused, and so should be avoided.

Most of those other categories can be proven scientifically, so they are easier to observe and protect.

We need statutory protection for transgendered persons, but I think making it a classification for civil rights is problematic.

[Costa Fierro]

I agree with WoLF position, the so-called "equality" act is part of a wider war on women.

You mean a war on men.

[Scomagia]

Is there some objective verifiable way to prove your self-identification?

If not, that aspect could be too easily abused, and so should be avoided.

Most of those other categories can be proven scientifically, so they are easier to observe and protect.

We need statutory protection for transgendered persons, but I think making it a classification for civil rights is problematic.

I believe the prevailing school of thought among the "wokest" is that you do not, in fact, have to do a thing to prove that you identify a certain way. In fact, I believe it's supposed to be "bigotry" to even ask someone to do so. Merely stating your supposed identification is supposed to be sufficient.

[Des-Bal]

I agree with WoLF position, the so-called "equality" act is part of a wider war on women.

You mean a war on men.

This is a metaphor for the conflict between feminists and MRAs. One says something insane and the other one flips it without making it less insane.

[Ifreann]

Is there some objective verifiable way to prove your self-identification?

If not, that aspect could be too easily abused, and so should be avoided.

Most of those other categories can be proven scientifically, so they are easier to observe and protect.

We need statutory protection for transgendered persons, but I think making it a classification for civil rights is problematic.

Is there an objective, verifiable way to prove your religion?

[Costa Fierro]

You mean a war on men.

This is a metaphor for the conflict between feminists and MRAs. One says something insane and the other one flips it without making it less insane.

It is not insane.

[Chessmistress]

But why should women have sex-based rights? Shouldn't rights be equal to everyone?

Because everybody have sex-based rights.
The most basic example is in sports: women have ("should have", given some recent events) the right to compete with other women. Just like men have the right to compete with other men.

However, let's suppose that everybody should compete with everyone else.
Can you explain this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weight_cl ... eur_boxing

If everybody should compete with everyone else, why are there in place such things as "weight classes"?

Another very basic example is pregnancy: I'm a great supporter of paternity leave, fully paid by the state.
But paternity leave cannot be the same as maternity leave, due the pregnancy affects women in a physically very demanding way.
Let's make an example: in Spain maternity leave is 16 weeks, while paternity leave is 2 weeks. Such difference is too much, in my opinion, particularly the paternity leave is too short. On the other hands it shouldn't be 16 weeks for both, a balanced thing would be 16 weeks maternity leave and 8 weeks paternity leave.

This is the pdf of Women's declaration:
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/618571_4 ... c2a64e.pdf
And those are the signatories
https://www.womensdeclaration.com/signatories-pasted

List of organizations that have signed the declaration:
Australian Radical Feminists, Australia
Birmingham ReSisters, England
Critical Sisters, United Kingdom
End the War on Women Collective, Canada
Feminist Salon, USA
FIST (Feminists In Struggle), United States
FOVAS (Female Only Violence and Abuse Survivors), UK
Freedom Programme, United Kingdom
Gender Park International
Get the L out, United Kingdom
InkdubProject, South Korea
Kerry Women’s Resource Centre, Ireland
KORADFEM, South Korea
Korean Radical Feminists, South Korea
Laika Publishing Company, USA
Leeds Spinners, United Kingdom
Lesbian Rights Alliance, United Kingdom
Lisbon Feminist Assembly, Portugal
M.womad.life, Republic of Korea
Mayday4Women, United Kingdom
OBJECT, United Kingdom
OBSERVATÓRIO DA CLÍNICA, Brasil
Shakti Moon Foundation, USA
Sookmyung Woman's university, South Korea
South London & Kent ReSisters, United Kingdom
Temple of Diana, Inc. United States
WoLF (Women's Liberation Front), USA
Women's Health In Women's Hands, United States
Women's Liberation Radio News, International
Women's Voices Matter, UK
World of Wellbeing, UK

Highlighted example being:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sookmyung ... University
Among the top universities in both South Korea and the whole Asia.

[USS Monitor]

Sounds like much ado about nothing. You can still kick someone out of a locker room if they're harassing people, and an occasional trans person using the space as intended is not a huge deal.

If there is a real privacy issue, people can just change the way they build bathrooms, locker rooms, etc. Kind of like old colleges had to change things around to have women's bathrooms when they went co-ed.

[Chessmistress]

Sounds like much ado about nothing. You can still kick someone out of a locker room if they're harassing people, and an occasional trans person using the space as intended is not a huge deal.

If there is a real privacy issue, people can just change the way they build bathrooms, locker rooms, etc. Kind of like old colleges had to change things around to have women's bathrooms when they went co-ed.

It's much more than just that, from the declaration:

Many women’s rights are related to our biologically female bodies e.g. the right to abortion, and maternal rights. Other women’s rights are aimed at eliminating discrimination against women in public life e.g. women’s rights to education, political representation, work, equal pay. Further women’s rights are to protect us against violence or harmful practices e.g. rape, and FGM.

A key way women and girls are denied rights is by gender or sex role stereotyping (e.g. girls should help at home while boys go to school). The UN recognises this is harmful and works for “the elimination of prejudices and customary and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women.”[2] The Declaration raises concern that the term “gender identity” reinforces sex role stereotyping because it is only possible to have a “gender identity” by choosing between sex role stereotypes for men and women.

[Neanderthaland]

Sounds like much ado about nothing. You can still kick someone out of a locker room if they're harassing people, and an occasional trans person using the space as intended is not a huge deal.

If there is a real privacy issue, people can just change the way they build bathrooms, locker rooms, etc. Kind of like old colleges had to change things around to have women's bathrooms when they went co-ed.

My college had co-ed bathrooms.

The world did not explode.

[USS Monitor]

Sounds like much ado about nothing. You can still kick someone out of a locker room if they're harassing people, and an occasional trans person using the space as intended is not a huge deal.

If there is a real privacy issue, people can just change the way they build bathrooms, locker rooms, etc. Kind of like old colleges had to change things around to have women's bathrooms when they went co-ed.

It's much more than just that, from the declaration:

Many women’s rights are related to our biologically female bodies e.g. the right to abortion, and maternal rights. Other women’s rights are aimed at eliminating discrimination against women in public life e.g. women’s rights to education, political representation, work, equal pay. Further women’s rights are to protect us against violence or harmful practices e.g. rape, and FGM.

A key way women and girls are denied rights is by gender or sex role stereotyping (e.g. girls should help at home while boys go to school). The UN recognises this is harmful and works for “the elimination of prejudices and customary and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women.”[2] The Declaration raises concern that the term “gender identity” reinforces sex role stereotyping because it is only possible to have a “gender identity” by choosing between sex role stereotypes for men and women.

If you can't get an abortion because you're not pregnant, that's not a gender issue and this law would have no effect on that. If you're a transman and you ARE pregnant, despite identifying as male, then you should probably have access to abortion.

Laws against rape or FGM would presumably stay on the books. If that gives some ammo to the anti-circumcision crowd who want to ban male circumcision, such is life. The anti-circumcision movement is harmless.

[Pope Joan]

Is there some objective verifiable way to prove your self-identification?

If not, that aspect could be too easily abused, and so should be avoided.

Most of those other categories can be proven scientifically, so they are easier to observe and protect.

We need statutory protection for transgendered persons, but I think making it a classification for civil rights is problematic.

Is there an objective, verifiable way to prove your religion?

https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi ... ontext=clr
This is an excellent law school article from Cornell U. that summarizes and compares Supreme Court rulings on that question. It does show that at least the issue has been litigated. It turns up when people claim conscientious objector status, for instance, and when there are issues of the free exercise of religion, such as when it is taxed, and the establishment clause, such as when schools teach such subjects as transcendental meditation. The author proposes a unitary definition, which would be that religion is a comprehensive belief system that addresses issues of basic concern to humans, such as the meaning of life and death, one's place in the universe, right and wrong, and conscience.

[The Black Forrest]

Sounds like much ado about nothing. You can still kick someone out of a locker room if they're harassing people, and an occasional trans person using the space as intended is not a huge deal.

If there is a real privacy issue, people can just change the way they build bathrooms, locker rooms, etc. Kind of like old colleges had to change things around to have women's bathrooms when they went co-ed.

My college had co-ed bathrooms.

The world did not explode.

Big bathrooms or the single with the gender free signs?

[Neanderthaland]

My college had co-ed bathrooms.

The world did not explode.

Big bathrooms or the single with the gender free signs?

Big bathrooms. With showers even.

[West Leas Oros 2]

It's much more than just that, from the declaration:

If you can't get an abortion because you're not pregnant, that's not a gender issue and this law would have no effect on that. If you're a transman and you ARE pregnant, despite identifying as male, then you should probably have access to abortion.

Laws against rape or FGM would presumably stay on the books. If that gives some ammo to the anti-circumcision crowd who want to ban male circumcision, such is life. The anti-circumcision movement is harmless.

I can't see why anyone would actually support circumcision, honestly.

[Ifreann]

But why should women have sex-based rights? Shouldn't rights be equal to everyone?

Because everybody have sex-based rights.
The most basic example is in sports: women have ("should have", given some recent events) the right to compete with other women. Just like men have the right to compete with other men.

[Caster Semenya looms ominously]

...
Kerry Women’s Resource Centre, Ireland
...

Being from Ireland, allow me to say: Fucking lol. There is no such thing. There's a Tralee Women's Resource Centre, or rather, there was. It shut down.

---

Is there an objective, verifiable way to prove your religion?

https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi ... ontext=clr
This is an excellent law school article from Cornell U. that summarizes and compares Supreme Court rulings on that question. It does show that at least the issue has been litigated. It turns up when people claim conscientious objector status, for instance, and when there are issues of the free exercise of religion, such as when it is taxed, and the establishment clause, such as when schools teach such subjects as transcendental meditation. The author proposes a unitary definition, which would be that religion is a comprehensive belief system that addresses issues of basic concern to humans, such as the meaning of life and death, one's place in the universe, right and wrong, and conscience.

I didn't ask whether there's an objective way to establish whether a set of beliefs constitute a religion, I asked if there's an objective, verifiable way to prove your religion.

You're a Christian. If you want to be protected from discrimination on those grounds, prove that you are a Christian, objectively and verifiably. Simply saying that you're a Christian isn't good enough, that's just self-identification and you've already ruled that out. You could show records of being inducted into your particular sect, but I received the Catholic sacraments of Baptism, Confession, Communion, and Confirmation, and I'm not a Christian, so that doesn't count.

[Galloism]

But why should women have sex-based rights? Shouldn't rights be equal to everyone?

Because everybody have sex-based rights.
The most basic example is in sports: women have ("should have", given some recent events) the right to compete with other women. Just like men have the right to compete with other men.

I will admit sports is hard (I did so in the OP). Iffy also provided some interesting context here.

However, let's suppose that everybody should compete with everyone else.
Can you explain this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weight_cl ... eur_boxing

If everybody should compete with everyone else, why are there in place such things as "weight classes"?

Usually because we recognize bigger boxers as superior to lighter ones - although lighter boxers sometimes compete against heavier ones. It even created an expression - punching above your weight class, which means going above what everyone expected you would be able to do.

Another very basic example is pregnancy: I'm a great supporter of paternity leave, fully paid by the state.
But paternity leave cannot be the same as maternity leave, due the pregnancy affects women in a physically very demanding way.
Let's make an example: in Spain maternity leave is 16 weeks, while paternity leave is 2 weeks. Such difference is too much, in my opinion, particularly the paternity leave is too short. On the other hands it shouldn't be 16 weeks for both, a balanced thing would be 16 weeks maternity leave and 8 weeks paternity leave.

So, since women live longer, does that mean men should get to retire earlier than women? It would help offset the imbalance in parental leave.

This is the pdf of Women's declaration:
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/618571_4 ... c2a64e.pdf
And those are the signatories
https://www.womensdeclaration.com/signatories-pasted

Well, that seems pretty sexist at least right at the outset. Why shouldn't everyone have physical and reproductive integrity?

[Ifreann]

Because everybody have sex-based rights.
The most basic example is in sports: women have ("should have", given some recent events) the right to compete with other women. Just like men have the right to compete with other men.

I will admit sports is hard (I did so in the OP). Iffy also provided some interesting context here.

Curious how the TERF commitment to women's right to compete against women wavers in the face of a woman who doesn't match their image of a female athlete.

[Scomagia]

If you can't get an abortion because you're not pregnant, that's not a gender issue and this law would have no effect on that. If you're a transman and you ARE pregnant, despite identifying as male, then you should probably have access to abortion.

Laws against rape or FGM would presumably stay on the books. If that gives some ammo to the anti-circumcision crowd who want to ban male circumcision, such is life. The anti-circumcision movement is harmless.

I can't see why anyone would actually support circumcision, honestly.

Religion and cultural tradition or buying too much into the claimed medical benefits.

[West Leas Oros 2]

I can't see why anyone would actually support circumcision, honestly.

Religion and cultural tradition or buying too much into the claimed medical benefits.

Still, doesn't seem like a valid reason to fuck up your son's dick without his consent.

[Rio Cana]

Some are complaining about parts of the equality act that has passed and which has made things unequal. This explain it. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIlq85dL0C4his e

[Scomagia]

Religion and cultural tradition or buying too much into the claimed medical benefits.

Still, doesn't seem like a valid reason to fuck up your son's dick without his consent.

For a lot of people, the supposed medical benefits are a big motivator. That one is understandable, though the purported medical benefits are slim, if they exist at all.

[The Grims]

I can't see why anyone would actually support circumcision, honestly.

Religion and cultural tradition or buying too much into the claimed medical benefits.

Why do Catholics do it then? Catholicism deems it incredibly sinful.