Perfectly legal views
The Labour shadow justice secretary has said she agrees with JK Rowling that “biological sex is real and is immutable”. Shabana Mahmood, the shadow justice secretary, expressed support for women who express gender critical views, saying that they should not be “stigmatised” for saying them.
The Labour shadow justice secretary – not the Eating People’s Faces shadow justice secretary.
It comes after Wes Streeting earlier this month admitted that he had been wrong to say that “trans women are women” in the wake of the Cass review into NHS gender care.
If trans women are women then what does the “trans” in “trans women” mean? It’s double dipping, that’s what it is. They don’t get to be women twice. They have to pick one. Trans women or women; not both.
Ms Mahmood added: “I think that actually in this era of social media, that’s been a real challenge for people to hold onto what we would consider are normal legal norms.
“That which is allowed within the law you shouldn’t be stigmatised for, or prevented from saying, and you certainly shouldn’t feel that you might lose your job for holding perfectly legal views.”
Legal and accurate and obvious.
How long before Labour admits the other two? The “legality” admission reads as if it’s begrudging at best. I’m sure that some of Mahmood’s colleagues are ready to burn her at the stake. How long before Starmer undermines this sensible statement by blurting out something stupid and punishing in some desperate attempt to placate all the Women Who Have Penises and their allies? He can’t have it both ways. Trying not to piss off either side is like trying to ride two trains going in opposite directions at the same time. He’s going to have to decide; the longer he avoids this the weaker he seems.
I must disagree here. Just as there are various kinds of women: black women, white women, brown women, etc, all equipped with appropriate female genitalia, there are ALSO women with penises plus 0-2 testicles (as a rule) though some quite possibly have one or two extra. (Google could tell us what the world record is.)
The women of the world can be justifiably proud of the huge population inside of their philosophical category, which is growing all the time thanks to the vast number of urgers, bludgers, charlatans, mountebanks and phonies demanding right of admission. And not only into the philosophical category, but also into change rooms, toilets, clubs etc, etc, etc as well..
Omar, I get the sarcasm firstly, and it’s irritating.
For philosophical purposes there is a basic, simplified, scientific definition of this category we can use:
Woman = Adult Human Female
Rhys McKinnon (and others) call themselves “philosophers” based on the same kind of false premises as TWAW, and the conclusions are just as faulty. By definition, men are not women, and idiots are not philosophers.
Perhaps; does she agree that all transwomen are biologically male?
@ #3: ?
@ #4: ?
(NB: These have to be the two shortest replies to comments I have ever left, on any site, and anywhere, in my entire personal history on the www.)
@ #5: Shabana Mahmood, the shadow justice secretary, agrees that biological sex is real and immutable. However, that alone doesn’t preclude her from believing that (some) transwomen are biologically female – so unless she explictly agrees that all transwomen are biologically male, the hope is dimmer than it could be.
What’s the question about #3 Omar? As for #4, I don’t know what or who DT is talking about either.
Ah, thank you for clarifying DT, I presumed your reply wasn’t specifically aimed at me.
twilighter @ #3, #7: I will attempt to provide you with some Humean understanding.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. First you are irritated, then you turn pedantic. ‘Philosophy’ literally means ‘love of wisdom’ and thus includes all human knowledge, including all of science, and all studies of the arts. So, it’s a pretty broad category in its own right.
The Greek word for ‘ignorance’ is ‘ágnoia,’ from which I assume we get the word ‘agnostic,’ which around here back of Gulargambone, NSW, Australia, would roughly translate as ‘I dunno if God exists, or if any religion’s right, or not.’ And as all people I know, or know of, who are outside of the theist category generally seem quite happy with that as their level of understanding, the opposite of ‘philosophy’ (ie its Hegelian antithesis) would have to be ‘philagnoia;’ arguably ‘love of ignorance.’
And that’s just one reason why I have been coming here to this B&W site for so many years, and dropping cash into its Patreon tin on the way through. It’s so thought-provoking. And for the record, my paternal grandmother was a suffragette, and I am a feminist sympathiser. ;-)
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/9662/9662-h/9662-h.htm
Thanks Omar, just to be clear, my irritation is not at your sarcasm, but what your sarcasm is pointed at. :)
Noted.