Woman and Sex, means biological sex.

[Highway Man]

So the law is wrong? Hull Uni (and all the other Unis) is wrong? All of medical science is wrong?
But a few of the contributors on a DIY forum, including you, are right?

What a guy.

Hull Uni or any other Uni are not saying that there is a third sex? Only you are suggesting that. There are two biological sexes. Male and female and that is that. The Uni is simply saying that they make all welcome and feel safe if they want to be gender free. It is simply a policy and not a law.

 

[Highway Man]

All of medical science is wrong?

?? You are sayng some really strange things, you did say yourself that you do not have enough knowledge on this. That is evident and you are confusing inclusion now with medical science. Two sexes end of.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

Hull Uni or any other Uni are not saying that there is a third sex? Only you are suggesting that. There are two biological sexes. Male and female and that is that. The Uni is simply saying that they make all welcome and feel safe if they want to be gender free. It is simply a policy and not a law.

Despite you studying me, you have misunderstood my argument.
I said that there is a spectrum of sexual development. With your Uni degree I assume you understand the concept of a spectrum.
There are two workable solutions to the dichotomy of assigning a sex to a baby too soon after birth, when there is doubt.
One solution is to allow a category of intersex. The other option is to leave the sex assigned until later in the child's life until it becomes more obviou what gender is more suitable.

But due to your intransient attitude to the issue, and your blatant refusal to peruse the medical articles, you prefer to persist with your discrimination against transgender people, despite your learning at Uni.

There's clearly no point in continuing this discussion with you because you refuse to consider any alternative to your view.

 

[Highway Man]

Despite you studying me, you have misunderstood my argument.
I said that there is a spectrum of sexual development. With your Uni degree I assume you understand the concept of a spectrum.
There are two workable solutions to the dichotomy of assigning a sex to a baby too soon after birth, when there is doubt.
One solution is to allow a category of intersex. The other option is to leave the sex assigned until later in the child's life until it becomes more obviou what gender is more suitable.

But due to your intransient attitude to the issue, and your blatant refusal to peruse the medical articles, you prefer to persist with your discrimination against transgender people, despite your learning at Uni.

There's clearly no point in continuing this discussion with you because you refuse to consider any alternative to your view.

I studied computer science software engineering not biological studies. I have enough knowledge to know that there are only two sexes and that you are confused with regards to the sexes. Even in the cases that you mention there can only be the same outcome. It isn't a choice that. the parents have with regards to which sex would they like their child to be. It certainly isn't the childs decision either, it is down to medical science that will decide the outcome based upon medical and scientific investigation.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

?? You are sayng some really strange things, you did say yourself that you do not have enough knowledge on this. That is evident and you are confusing inclusion now with medical science. Two sexes end of.

You have proven yet again that you have failed to read and understand the discussion and my contributions
I said I was not well versed on the aspects and influences of the Sex Birth Ratio (SBR).

I don't claim to be well versed in this issue.
But I would tend to agree with your suspicions. But it's another area for discussion.
I've never thought of climate change affecting the Sex Birth Ratio (SBR)

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/24749508.2019.1700670

In future I suggest you concentrate on the discussion and not on me.
It might help you to write coherent sentences also:

That is evident and you are confusing inclusion now with medical science.

You are talking gibberish.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

I studied computer science software engineering not biological studies. I have enough knowledge to know that there are only two sexes and that you are confused with regards to the sexes. Even in the cases that you mention there can only be the same outcome. It isn't a choice that. the parents have with regards to which sex would they like their child to be. It certainly isn't the childs decision either, it is down to medical science that will decide the outcome based upon medical and scientific investigation.

I'm not going over the same old ground with you because you failed to understand it the first time or you refused to read the numerous medical studies that I have presented.
If you're too slow, or too stubborn, I'm content to leave you in that state.

 

[Highway Man]

You have proven yet again that you have failed to read and understand the discussion and my contributions
I said I was not well versed on the aspects and influences of the Sex Birth Ratio (SBR).


In future I suggest you concentrate on the discussion and not on me.
It might help you to write coherent sentences also:

You are talking gibberish.

You are not the brightest person I have encountered, just another nutjob trying to act clever, but that is all it is, an act and nothing more. I suggest that you try giving some credible evidence or some sort of argument to back you up in the future. Hopefully you will have learned something tonight, for example, do not link to some HR policy of inclusion and expect to prove a point. I will wish you a good night as I have work in the morning and no doubt you have a bus to catch.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

You are not the brightest person I have encountered, just another nutjob trying to act clever, but that is all it is, an act and nothing more. I suggest that you try giving some credible evidence or some sort of argument to back you up in the future. Hopefully you will have learned something tonight, for example, do not link to some HR policy of inclusion and expect to prove a point. I will wish you a good night as I have work in the morning and no doubt you have a bus to catch.

Reread the last 58 pages for the medical science articles. Then come back with your criticisms of those articles.

I have learned something tonight, not to debate with idiots, they drag you down to their level and beat you with their experience.

 

[Highway Man]

Reread the last 58 pages for the medical science articles. Then come back with your criticisms of those articles.

I have learned something tonight, not to debate with idiots, they drag you down to their level and beat you with their experience.

I feel the same. I have wasted far too much time educating you to no avail. You still just don't get it.

 

[Highway Man]

Reread the last 58 pages for the medical science articles. Then come back with your criticisms of those articles.

I would rather not if it is ok with you. I think I am done with you now.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

I feel the same. I have wasted far too much time educating you to no avail. You still just don't get it.

Prejudice is not a lesson I want to learn.
But it is taught effectively to young children.
I'm sure you're an excellent teacher of bigotry and discrimination.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

I would rather not if it is ok with you. I think I am done with you now.

I understand why you would rather not, It might cause you to think hard and question your belief.

 

[Highway Man]

Prejudice is not a lesson I want to learn.
But it is taught effectively to young children.
I'm sure your an excellent teacher of bigotry and discrimination.

I am merely quoting the law, you pointed to an equality act of 2010. It is now 2025 and the law states that a trans woman is not legaly a female. It's just how it is whatever you seem to think. Look it up

 

[Deleted member 323070]

I am merely quoting the law, you pointed to an equality act of 2010. It is now 2025 and the law states that a trans woman is not legaly a female. It's just how it is whatever you seem to think. Look it up

That has never been a subject of discussion between us.
If you think that we have been discussing that, you're deluding yourself.

 

[morqthana]

That's right, my knowledge is basically knowing that there are. really only two sexes. Male and female. You may think it is ignorant or fear based, I prefer to think it as scientific proof rather than what you are saying.

But of course it's not scientific proof.

Parliament could pass a law declaring that π=3.2, and the Supreme Court could rule that that was what Parliament intended, but it wouldn't actually make π=3.2.

The Supreme Court is in the business of deciding what a law means, how it is to be interpreted, not whether it makes any sense at all.

No matter what any law, or any court decision may say, neither have the power to change scientific facts.