The Precision Trap

It’s basically this diagram isn’t it? But with added characteristics such as build and .gait

Brilliant stuff MJ

This reminds me what a good job Mary-Ann Stephenson of the @EHRC did this week with really specious questioning from the likes of Nadia Whittome. Thank you!

The SC clarified that "womens" means female sex for the purposes of the EA2010. Sex denialism isn't going to wash anymore.

It also comes down to IT'S THE LAW FOR MEN TO STAY OUT OF THE WOMEN'S!!! It's sad for the bloke with the lady feels but tough...

Nadia, has never had a proper job, plays student politics in an adult world When MAS responds with facts you can see her confused face, she refuses to not shill for dangerous transvestic men

Whilst she doesn't use the phrase explicitly (though others do!) Whittome's tactic here can be summarised as 'Toilet Police' If they invoke that, simply point out that the only ppl raising the idea of TP is them; & they were never thought necessary before, so why now suddenly?

Brilliant summary of what was an extremely “enraging” interaction for most sane people , the bad faith politicians should be made to watch this and cringe at their pathetic attempts to manipulate !

The amount of human bandwidth that's spent on this is a sign of civilisational collapse. This, and knife/machete/sword wielding maniacs running around everywhere.

The thing is, those MPs think what they're doing is in the interests of women & trans ppl, that - "it's progress" - but their facile line of questioning debases the trans political movement & left politics as a whole. Not to mention womens rights. It's tragic actually.

@Jebadoo2 Said it before: it’s a bit ironic that Ms Whittome is baulking at people making decisions on ‘presentation’ when - at the same time - the whole trans schtick is based on “passing” to give them the golden ticket to women’s spaces.

If men can just say they are women when they aren’t, & be accepted as such, why do women have to present a detailed approved checklist to identify men? Why is a man’s statement accepted & a woman’s isn’t? Oh yeah. It’s bc men are always believed & women aren’t isnt it.

The rejection of common sense means that reality can no longer be directly reached by observation, but only through controlled structures of interpretation. This shifted philosophy from an epistemology of discovery to an epistemology of controlled access

Shocking that all these dingbats are women. Where did they find them? Mental institution??

It's like they're training everyone to think like a computer, with no ability to sense or reason. As if, ideally, we should all run on the same lines of code.

Please come to Substack! We need you!

This is defeated by trans themselves. Just look at all the feminizing procedures that make them look female. All based on visual sex-based dimorphism.

@lesbianresist

Nadia is rather pathetic.

FACT~ no one in the UK including the chief of the @EHRC can define 'biological', let alone define a woman. The high court couldn't/wouldn't as the science is to way way to complex and nuanced and would have completely undermined the gender critical position... Culture & sport have mostly presumed there to be clear & verifiable demarcations between the sexes, the research from genetics, physiology, & other disciplines shows that nature is much more imprecise, rich (& to some degree impenetrable) from its diversity, multiplicity & variability. It is wrong to believe that medical tests can simply verify sex categorisation. No single marker exists to conclusively naturally determine a person’s sex or gender. Over the last century, the @iocmedia has tried to verify the sex of women athletes using physical exams, chromosome checks, DNA tests, and testosterone thresholds. Each version of sex testing ultimately collapsed under scientific and ethical scrutiny. But rather than learn from its past mistakes the @iocmedia new sex testing policy repeats them. Geneticist & anatomist Murray Barr, of the eponymous Barr body, requested sport officials stop using the technique. “Buccal smear testing in the area of athletics is totally inappropriate,” he wrote. “Its use in this way has been an embarrassment to me.” Even Andrew Sinclair, the deputy director of the Murdoch Children's Research Institute in Melbourne who is the scientist who discovered the SRY gene says the IOC should not use the SRY test to determine gender of women's athletes. Professor Sinclair discovered the SRY gene in 1990 and has continued to work on gonad development for the past 30-plus years. The IOC considers that the presence of the SRY gene is fixed throughout life and represents highly accurate evidence that an athlete has experienced male sex development." But Professor Sinclair said that assertion was wrong. "The SRY gene alone should not determine who can compete in women's sport," he said. "This policy is based on the overly simplistic idea that the presence of the SRY gene alone is equivalent to being male. "Male sex is much more complex, involving multiple genes other than SRY in developmental pathways as well as hormones. "The presence or absence of the SRY gene does not determine the range of human sex characteristics. "Individuals with differences of sex development may carry the SRY gene but develop either complete or partial female bodies while others develop male bodies but lack SRY." The IOC said exceptions could be made for "athletes with a diagnosis of complete androgen insensitivity syndrome (CAIS) or other rare differences/disorders in sex development (DSDs)", adding a somewhat subjective qualifier that those athletes would only be allowed if they "do not benefit from the anabolic and/or performance-enhancing effects of testosterone". Professor Sinclair said the SRY test could only determine whether or not the gene was present. "It does not tell you how SRY is functioning, whether a testis has formed, whether testosterone is produced and, if so, whether it can be used by the body," he said. "The SRY gene alone should not determine who can compete in women's sport." Writing in the @ConversationEDU Professor Sinclair said changes or variants in the many genes that regulated the development of a testis or ovary could result in sex reversal or a non-functioning testis or ovary. "If there is a change in the SRY gene so it does not function as usual, then a person can fail to develop testes and be biologically female," he wrote. "Yet they carry XY chromosomes and under the World Athletics tests [and now IOC rules] they would be excluded from competition. "Other XY individuals may have a functioning SRY gene but are female — with breasts and female genitalia, for example — but have internal testes."

This is excellent, we are forced into the precision trap x

So good !

Suggestion: turn off autogenerated captions if you already have captions in your video. Currently you have two sets of captions obscuring each other. Choose one or the other for a better/effective user experience. 🙂

I’m confused, isn’t the distinguishing fact a penis regardless of the cultural/feminine garnishing?