ada

Literally no one thinks cis women and trans women are the same, so your compromise doesn't mean anything in and of itself.

I'm asking you what your position means in real world terms. What are the consequences of these differences? Because that's what really matters.

Feigned outrage because I asked you for specifics seems counter to your stated goals of reaching compromise and makes me question your motives.

That didn't answer the question you replied to, and didn't actually say anything. What does that all look like in real world terms in your mind? How does this "compromise" manifest? I'm guessing that it involves putting trans folk in harms way...

Is it federated/does it have social elements?

There will not be any corrective steps anytime soon, because the UK government, who would need to implement those steps, is actively disinclined to make them, because even though it's less transphobic than the previous government, it is still doing transphobia for political reasons.

This is a setback for immediate protections, but my view is that this isn't necessarily bad in the long term, so long as corrective steps are taken to address the root issue.

There will be no corrective steps.

it should spur on actually solving the issues

It won't, because it was brought about to achieve the exact opposite

Why would I care what your uninformed opinion on my response to oppression is?

Judges hear the case that's brought, not the agenda of the groups that bring things.

Uh huh.

If that were true, this wouldn't be an overturning of a previous ruling on appeal. If this were not influenced by political bias, you wouldn't get different results in different courts. Judges wouldn't be "conservative" or "progressive". Judges wouldn't nearly all be straight, elderly and white.

They are though, because the appointment process is shaped by political perspectives, because the acceptable rulings are shaped by political perspectives and the cases that get seen and funded are shaped by political perspectives.

The fact that no trans people were called during the trial is shaped by politics.

The judges chose to read and rule that sex is "biological" and binary, despite the legislation making no mention of it being biological, and despite the biological understanding of sex being that is very much not binary... All of that, you guessed it, shaped by politics...

That's really all I have to say about that part.

Good for you. Trans people don't have that choice.

If this were protecting trans people, it wouldn't have been brought to court by a transphobic group, or the win celebrated by them.

This actively excludes trans folk from vital protections and exposes them to environments that increase their risk of violence.

There's no context that makes this anything other than incredibly damaging to trans folk

Yes, I can hear you Clem Fandango

She was young, still a kid, raised in the country, and going to school in one of the most racist towns in Australia. She had only turned up to go to the pool and go swimming with some friends. She wasn't there for the Freedom Ride or the protest, so it all caught her by surprise. It was stumbling in to the protest, and seeing all of the folk that had turned out for it, pushing back against racism that made her realise that racism doesn't have to be "just the way it is".

Unfortunately, Moree is still a racist, bigoted place, with deeply entrenched inequality. The segregation is still there, it's just social now, instead of legal.

My mum was in Moree to visit the pool on the day the Freedom Ride arrived there. She was 16 at the time, and she's always told me the impact it had on her!

Hey. I'm learning Spanish, I'm a volunteer, and I run and cycle on the regular!

Somehow, that doesn't stop you sounding like a bigot though...