You’ll notice
Without the verbal tricks and cheats and concealments it would crash and burn in seconds.
Like that. In the first tweet it’s “sex” but in the second one it’s “legal sex” – meaning, of course, fake sex, pretend sex, not sex, unreal sex. But the switch is not mentioned, it just happens, as if inevitably. It’s smoke and mirrors, aka lies, and it shows what a cheat the whole thing is.
There again. Of course trans people have human rights, and nobody says they don’t. The issue is that there is no such thing as a right to force everyone to agree you are the sex you are not. Trans people have the human rights that humans have; they don’t have special luxury rights that cancel other people’s genuine human rights.
But who decides what is forwards and what is backwards?
Finn Mackay thinks Finn Mackay does, but I dispute Mackay’s map.
A fair amount of information is recorded on birth certificates–typically, name, date of birth, place of birth, mother’s name, father’s name (if known), weight, length, and, of course, sex. I suppose you could change your name on your certificate with proper court permission, and, say, the name of your father if you’ve got evidence that it was someone else, but I can’t imagine any jurisdiction allowing you to change, say, your place or date of birth just because you feel like a Martian or a 2000 year old. Why is sex treated differently?
The switch from “sex” to “legal sex” is bad enough, but then we go from talking about “legal sex” (which is a thing with on paper) to talking about biological sex (which is a physical fact of bodies). Such dishonesty would be breathtaking if I weren’t numb to Genderist antipathy toward truth.
Truth is and must be the highest virtue.
They allowed me to change my name. Until I was 25, I was listed on my birth-certificate just as “baby girl”, even though my parents had a name for me before I was born. I imagine they’ve let many others…and I think you can change parents with an adoption, too. But…SEX DOES NOT CHANGE. It should not change on the birth certificate, no matter what one “feels like”.
Wear what you like, tilt your head as much as you like, plaster your face with make up, I don’t give a damn. Start messing with official records (other than to correct errors), and there are problems! When I went to the DMV to get a new driver’s license after moving, I was required to bring my birth certificate, and both of my marriage licenses, because I had been known under other names. What if I screamed they were deadnaming me? I doubt it would have made any difference. But someone “trans” can change their name, and no one is allowed to ask them what it used to be. Why? Because…frankly, I don’t know why. I guess because people don’t like being hit with barbed wire covered baseball bats.
I don’t get it (not that that’s a huge surprise).
‘formal recognition of marriage and parenting’ – now that same sex marriage is legal, what ‘formal recognition’ is different for trans identified people?
‘right to travel’ – who is stopping anyone from travelling? presumably this means ‘remove the right to falsify the sex on your passport’
This is all so embarrassing. I still find it difficult to believe that reasonably intelligent adult people are writing, or believing, any of this.
There is also this bit.
Simply untrue. While there are some surgeries to change the external appearance, no man who has transitioned has ovaries, fallopian tubes, cervix, or uterus.
Neither has a transitioned woman testes, vas def, or prostate.
These are all part of what we call genitals. Not just the externally visible items that may be surgically removed or altered to give an opposite-sex appearance.
People with a “legal sex” simply proves one more time that the law can be an Ass.
Dr. Finn forgot to add that we plan to go to their houses confiscating their
BiblesJudith Butlers, and lock them in concentration camps until they deny the existence of Gender Identity. Missed an opportunity there.Because activists have to be careful enough to make this shift, they can’t not know they’re doing it. It’s not an innocent mistake, or an honest one. It’s a deliberate moving of the goalposts in mid-argument, a deliberate lie. Therefore they must know that the “campaigners’ ” position that
is correct. A lawyer would have a field day in court with this sort of thing. It’s an admission of failure, an understanding that they themselves realize that their own claims are false.
If people actually could change biological sex, activists like Mackay wouldn’t have to resort to using this deceptive bait and switch; they wouldn’t need to lie. They could just come out and say it. If changing sex were possible, there would be no argument, it would be a fact of life, like gravity and photosynthesis. If we really were like those species that do change sex, then it would happen without human intervention. Do clownfish take hormones and go under the knife? Nope. There’s a pathway uilt into their genes. No GIDS required. If people could change sex, then opponents of trans rights could legitimately be accused of hatred and bigotry. There would be no grounds for denying people whose sex had actually changed from accessing facilities and opportunities reserved for exclusive use by one sex or the other. Hell, if humans changed sex, then it’s possible that much, if not most, of the bullshit sexism and misogyny we’ve saddled women with would be gone, because how would a man be sure that it might not be his turn as a female next?
But humans are not clownfish. They cannot change sex. Accusations of hatred and bigotry against those pointing out these facts of material reality are thus a baseless smear designed to deflect attention away from the impossibility of genderists’ claims and demands.
Emphasis added.
Exactly. “Neovagina” and “neopenis” are as much misnomers as “transwoman” and “transman.” Using those terms for the surgically constructed results of “gender affirming surgery” dishonestly suggests that they provide a functionality they can never have. You can’t fly in a mock-up of an airplane, or live in an architect’s model of a highrise condo. Nobody expects to. These renderings are not the finished product. However detailed the drawings of the plane or building, the former will never leave the runway, and the latter won’t shelter you from the elements. The surgical tinkering that removes or modifies genitals can only ever provide a model or mock-up, not a set of functioning tissues and organs. They aren’t “neo” anything. They are bits of skin cobbled together to convince the victim that they can be (or, indeed have become) something they can never be.
Mackay’s knows this, and the “Dr.’s” dishonest verbal sleight of hand is the ploy of a quick-talking huckster who knows their product can’t possibly live up to the claims made for it, but who keeps hawking it regardless. If it actually did what it said on the bottle, if it really did work on everything it purported to, it wouldn’t be snake-oil, it would be medecine.
Is there a missing end blockquote in that last quoted passage?
Likely. Sometimes when I’m cutting and pasting bits (both quotes, and my own ideas as I arrange them) I lose track of the HTML niceties.
The last blockquoted section begins and ends with these:
People can & do change ….
…. Not just the externally visible items that may be surgically removed or altered to give an opposite-sex appearance.
How it looks right now in the post is correct. It’s taken from Rev. David Brindley’s #5, but it does include a bit the he blockquoted from Mackay’s X post in the OP. Maybe I should be separating them more obviously?
Ah, I see. Yes, if there’s another layer it should be marked so that we don’t get lost. I’ll tweak it accordingly.