Sacked doctor sues former employer for refusing to call trans-woman "she"

DarkJager21

Even glibly dismissing it as a word that can be redefined is a gross overreach of their own self importance. It denigrates “woman” to simply being a superficial describer - oh that guy is dressed like a woman so that must be a woman? Nope. Makes sense in the way trans will only ever be a surface level imitation of the real thing that is biologically impossible to become . And adult female is a woman, an adult male is a man - I’m pretty sure this was taught in Junior Infants but who knows where some people got their schooling from.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118671673#Comment_118671673

It doesn't take anything away from women.

I am a woman, I have always been a woman and I will always be a woman.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118671719#Comment_118671719

Are you a female rights activist? What other things do you do to defend women's rights? Or is it just when it comes to trans issues that you find yourself defending women's rights?

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118671673#Comment_118671673

Harm?

There’s absolutely no harm whatsoever is caused by words becoming obsolete, redundant, irrelevant, redefined, etc.

When’s the last time you read Shakespeare?

It’s choc-a-bloc full of language which would have been in common usage at the time, but has since fallen out of use, double-meanings, double-entendres, innuendo… all sorts of things are implied in the language being that doesn’t directly refer to any one specific thing, or isn’t meant to be interpreted literally, or sometimes the tragedy or comedy comes from the fact that it wasn’t taken literally.

It’s your sort of over-wrought, hand-wringing nonsense leads to this kind of thing -

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-41678937.amp

Dyr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118671774#Comment_118671774

You're going to need to concentrate for this bit and possibly require counselling: if you define what a group is, then you are also define what a group is not. The very act of definition exludes does who do not meet the definition. If any human can be a woman then women no longer exist as a distinct group.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118671794#Comment_118671794

The word woman, if not meaning female, becomes a nonsense word.

If it wasn't meant to mean female adult human, then why would trans people insist on being referred to as such, if not to be recognised as female?

The definition of woman needs to mean something. If it doesn't mean adult human female, which is inarguably a definition that excludes biological males, then what exactly does it mean?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118671789#Comment_118671789

I sense someone who can't argue the point at hand.

What I have and haven't done for women's rights outside of this conversation is completely irrelevant, although let's just say I am the son of an amazing feminist woman, the husband of another and the father of another. I don't think I'd have managed that being some sort of neanderthal.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118671802#Comment_118671802

No counselling required thanks. I am a woman and I will always be a woman, no matter who else is a woman. Very simple.

And, if language changes and another word takes the place of 'woman' then I will be whatever the new word is.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118671871#Comment_118671871

that's rather the point. No word has replaced "woman" as it was previously understood.

It used to be all adult humans who had female biology.

What is the new word for those people? Can they have one?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118671899#Comment_118671899

cis apparently.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118671841#Comment_118671841

I’ve known and referred to people who are transgender years ago however they wanted to be addressed before I was ever aware of any of the politicised nonsense and women referring to themselves as adult human females, trying to popularise the term. It still hasn’t caught on, almost a decade later.

Men and women were referring to men as women before any of the more recent terms were invented, and they were invented only recently. The reason people want to be referred to as women is because they are women. It’s no different than people who want to be referred to as men, because they are men. The language already exists. It’s the qualifying term ‘biological’ which is the recent invention.

Biological anything isn’t even a good way to distinguish anyone because all human life forms are biological, they’re also organic, and if anyone wants to try and distinguish between those people who are artificially augmented, and those who are not, they’ll still struggle to define and distinguish between people in a way that is exclusive or inclusive, because nature simply doesn’t have the capacity to care for whatever social constructs people invent to understand the world around them.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118671899#Comment_118671899

It still is, it can now describe trans women as well, doesn't change the fact that adult females are still women. I know cos I am one

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118671910#Comment_118671910

But it isn't even that.

"cis women" are apparently biological women who identify with the 'woman' gender (whatever the hell that is)

Adult humans with female biology also include trans men, and non-binary people with female biology.

I believe the standard terminology is "assigned female at birth" which is scientific gibberish but I suppose it does a job.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118671931#Comment_118671931

OEJ, I am not advocating for people to not be referred to as they request. But that is just a request and people are, and should be, free to ignore that request, especially when it is factually incorrect. Where is your line in the sand where you will forego politeness in favour of reality?

The reason biological is used as a preface these days, is proving my point. The distinction needs to be made because the word woman has been bastardised to such an extent where people are saying that a man can be a woman. A biological male does not become a woman just because they want to.

Why would anyone want or insist to be referred to as a woman when it means male and female? A trans woman wants to be referred to as a woman as they rightly believe that there are distinct differences between men and women. Women want to be referred to as women. Men aren't women. Males are men, females are women.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118671972#Comment_118671972

Lol. I hate that "assigned" bullshit.

It implies that it was an arbitrary decision made by the doctor and not based on actual reality.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118671931#Comment_118671931

"The reason people want to be referred to as women is because they are women"

How can you so confidently assert that anyone is a woman when you don't know what a woman is?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118672015#Comment_118672015

Precisely, it's part of the same idiotic movement that attempts to pretend that biological sex doesn't exist (see also OEJ's post above)

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118671998#Comment_118671998

You keep using the word reality, but then you claim people should be free to ignore how anyone wishes to be addressed. That’s not reality. It’s wishful thinking. We’re aware that the doctor in the opening post cannot ignore the reality of his professional code of conduct , the reality of his employers policies, and the reality of equality legislation. Nobody is compelling him to refer to anyone in a way he doesn’t want to. They’re also not prepared to accommodate him. That’s reality. When I forego politeness in favour of reality, you’ll be the first to know.

The distinction doesn’t need to be made. You need to make the distinction. A small number of people need to make the distinction. A small number of people need people who are transgender to know that they’re not going to refer to them as they wish, they’re going to hold the line and speak truth and objective reality and all the rest of it. The doctor in question in the opening post wasn’t even dealing with a person who was transgender, they were hoping to avoid dealing with them at all, and then they claim that it’s going to be terrible for the nation that he can’t refer to people however he wants. I’d have foregone politeness at that point and told him to fcuk off out of my sight. His employers though, had to follow procedures in accordance with law in the UK.

The last paragraph I’m fairly certain neither of us will ever have any difficulty with, cos I know I wouldn’t do it, and I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt you’re not a complete knob offline.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118672102#Comment_118672102

Read the sentence you quoted again, and if you still don’t understand it, read it again, and again. Good man.

Here’s a clue - whether or not they’re a woman isn’t dependent upon whether or not I or anyone else knows what a woman is.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118672130#Comment_118672130

You sidestepped the question of where you forego politeness instead of reality and instead deemed my use of the word reality as "wishful thinking".

Would you treat a grown man as a prepubescent if he wished? Would you advocate that he was allowed to use creche facilities or children's hospitals? If not, why not?

Would you allow a 13 year old into a pub because he identified as an adult? If not, why not?

Would you allow a 5ft 5" person into a rollercoaster despite there being a 5ft 8" restriction just because he identified as 6ft? If not, why not?

Would you allow a biological male into a female only prison?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118672150#Comment_118672150

So it's dependent on whether they feel like a woman? That's it?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118672150#Comment_118672150

snip

"I feel like a thing that I can't define and cannot describe, but I know I definitely feel like it, and so I want you to treat me as if I am that thing that I cannot describe or define"

There just aren't enough rolleyes emojis in the world for this scientifically illiterate nonsense

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118672173#Comment_118672173

I don’t have to forego politeness in any of your hypothetical scenarios, even if I were ever to encounter them in reality. You’re expecting guarantees and certainties which nobody can give you and I don’t care to entertain. Are you a grown man, or are you a child? Because I’ll treat you like a child if that’s the way you’re choosing to behave.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118672208#Comment_118672208

I know you don't HAVE to forego politeness. I was asking where your line in the sand is and where you would.

You know answering the questions posed will undermine your point.

You are under no obligation to answer my questions, but your failure to do so highlights the weakness of your argument.

But just as you have chosen not to entertain my questions, I will choose to not entertain your posts, especially when they are as condescending as yours are.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118672208#Comment_118672208

He's not behaving like a child.

He's asking perfectly sensible questions about the inevitable consequences of elevating internal feelings over objective facts.

You are just angry because you can't answer them.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118672233#Comment_118672233

I’ve answered your question every way you’ve asked it a couple of times now. It’s your choice to behave unreasonably and pretend like you’re stupid. You’re expecting anyone should play along with your bullshìt, good luck with that. That’s where I draw the line.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118672273#Comment_118672273

I've asked you to answer a couple of direct questions. You didn't answer ANY of them because the answers are very simple and obvious, but in contradiction to what your answer is to the last question.

So we have an answer:

You draw the line at being polite when you get frustrated and your argument falls apart when held up against the slightest bit of scrutiny.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118672237#Comment_118672237

I’m not angry, I’m confused as to why you or anyone else imagines they operate outside of reality. You’re ignoring so many different aspects of reality to try and make a stupid point that I can’t be angry, I’m just confused as to why you imagine I’d even take you seriously.

You tried to claim earlier that you were empathising with women, so was that feelings over facts or facts over feelings or what was it? Because it sounded like something you were coming up with in your own head, and I’d safely say you couldn’t give a shyte about other women, or science or anything else.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118672319#Comment_118672319

We've reached the content-free ad hominem stage of the argument I see.