Another sensible ruling:

The UK Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that the term 'woman' refers to a 'biological' woman only.

Hi ttbn

Again, I think the UK court ruling is more nuanced than you portray. The ruling does not apply a universal definition of women in every circumstance, nor does it mandate that only biological females are women. It finds that, for the purposes of the Equality Act,“sex” is the sex recorded on a person’s original birth certificate, not the one recorded on a gender recognition certificate.

As I understand it, the finding will give legal protection to, for example, sports codes that do not allow trans women to compete as women, or DV shelters that exclude males. Trans people will still have many other legal protections against discrimination.

One of the judges said “we counsel against reading this judgment as a triumph for one or more groups in our society at the expense of another – it is not”. I hope that’s right, and that it will lead to a sensible balance of the rights of all people – in particular, that spaces and activities reserved for women on the basis of female biology and vulnerabilities remain protected, while under most circumstances most of the time trans people are treated as being of the gender they identify as.

Thanks again ttbn for the information.

The lure of power has allowed toxic feminism to destroy the very concept of families, sad that women haven't been smart enough to realise that the Marxist propagandist's were the enemy, not their men. The problem of many that seek power is not to realise it's limits- sadly something that many women don't appear to understand.

Socrates believed he was wisest, because at least he knew, "he didn't know". Whereas many said they knew, but didn't.

Socrates also said "those that seek power are generally not the ones that should have power".

Male animals usually serve as hunter warriors. Female animals usually serve as gatherer nurturers. There are distinct characteristics of sex both physically genetically and psychologically that influence in often unexpected ways. Some want to use doubt and FUD to drive a wedge into the structure of the community- why is that? Often they dress themselves up as "the good"- but are they really? What is "good"? What principles are "good"? Should we look to the stable communities of the past for the answers? All societies have incompatible differences with other societies. Societies have different answers to similar problems.

Fallen for the lie of Post Modern Deconstructivism that everything is conflict rather than cooperation. We don't admire Marie Curie because she was a women but because she was "good"- in spite of her, beside the point, womanly attributes- she recognised her limitations, and did something about them. The woman Ayn Rand considered being ascribed manly status as a compliment.

Men and Women are different and it has been proven by history that these different roles gives people identity and meaning and purpose. Everyone has an identity crisis at times of stress. Nihilist's, in their power dreams, want to break these roles to re-engineer society- because they don't trust the people to make their own. Nihilist's use people in crisis as a lever. They redefine totalitarianism as freedom and peace and equality.

Marxist's seem to advocate totalitarianism to destroy tyranny, but maybe the point is just to get total power, once they get it, you can't take it away.

Following this sensible ruling, sexual dysphoria should be treated like any other mental illness, and the psychiatrists aiding and abetting the lie of being able to choose what sex you want to be should be struck off.

ttbn,

It’s remarkable - after being patiently corrected multiple times - that you’re still pretending the ruling said what you wanted it to say, not what it actually said.

Your latest comment doesn't just misrepresent gender dysphoria - it shows a complete disregard for truth in favour of ideological point-scoring.

Gender dysphoria is not a "lie," nor is it some new invention of activists. It is a clinically recognised condition, documented in every major psychiatric manual for decades, including the DSM-5 - the core diagnostic guide used by psychiatrists worldwide. It's not about “choosing” anything. It’s the real psychological distress that happens when someone’s body and identity don’t line up - and it can wreck people’s lives if it’s ignored.

Every serious medical body - from the American Psychiatric Association to the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists - recognises this. They don't treat it like some political fad. They treat it like what it is: a serious issue that demands real, careful help. This isn’t controversial among serious experts; it’s basic medical consensus.

Justice Strum’s ruling, like the recommendations of the Cass Review (UK, 2024), rightly emphasised the need for even more caution - precisely because these are complex, deeply personal issues. The point was to avoid irreversible decisions without thorough psychological evaluation, not to deny the reality of gender dysphoria, and certainly not to indulge the culture-war fantasies you’re pushing.

You’re not exposing a lie - you’re slandering people who spend their lives helping kids survive. Meanwhile, you sit here twisting reality into whatever shape fits your politics.

Gender dysphoria is real. The suffering it causes is real. And pretending otherwise - in the face of decades of clinical evidence - is not just ignorant. It’s a betrayal of the very children you claim to care about.

You are not defending children. You are using them as pawns in a political crusade.