Alex Massie writes a think piece about whatisawoman without much apparent thinking.

Few people, after all, hold a GRC. Nevertheless the theory also matters, not least because expanding the definition of woman, and indeed, that of man, creates a cascade of further questions. The distinction between people who have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria and hence qualify for a GRC and those we might dub “lifestyle” trans people is both important and, I would add, a means of protecting GRC-holders themselves.

What is legal, after all, is not the same as what is decent. The social reality of trans people and their rights to dignity and respect, including being addressed and, typically, treated as they would wish to be, is not altered by the court’s ruling one way or the other. There are worse things than indulging a material fiction and most of the time, in most circumstances, little if any harm can come from doing so.

Notice anything missing?

What about the social reality of women? What about women’s rights to dignity and respect? Since when is it a “right” for people to be “addressed as they would wish to be” in the sense of “addressed as something they are not/the opposite of what they are”? Since when is it a “right” for men to be addressed as women?

That’s not a genuine right. It’s a pseudo-right, a neo-right, an invented right, a right too many. There is no “right” to lie about yourself; in many official contexts it’s a crime. Playful fictions that don’t make any difference to anything are one thing, and men insisting with menaces that women have to pretend the men are women are very much another.

I’m tired of men being flippant about this issue that doesn’t do them any harm.