It is now illegal to say that a biological man is not a woman

It is now illegal to say that a biological man is not a woman, by Holly Lawford-Smith.

The belief that people can’t change their sex is “absolutist” and “incompatible with human dignity and fundamental rights of others”.

That is the ruling just made by a UK employment tribunal judge in the case of a woman [Maya Forstater] denied work over “offensive” tweets. The judge also declared “not worthy of respect in a democratic society” the belief that a person born male is not (and cannot become) a woman.

Across several countries, a war over words is raging: what is a woman? … Victorian legislation proposing to make “wom­an” a category anyone can identify into, by making legal sex a matter of mere statutory declaration… passed and comes into effect by May next year. In Victoria, a woman will be anyone who declares themselves one.

Similar legislation has been proposed in New Zealand and the UK, leading to vociferous debate over the meanings of female and woman and the concepts of sex and/or gender they refer to.

Women are fighting not only against legislation that fundamentally changes what it means to be a woman (from a biological fact to an identity category) but against surreal attempts at policing their political and philosophical beliefs about womanhood and feminism.

Women expressing what have come to be known as “gender-critical” beliefs — chief among them the belief that a woman is an adult human female — are now routinely subject to social media pile-ons, letters of complaint to employers, the posting online of private details to expose them to more harassment, and worse. For “misgendering” (using sexed pronouns for a trans person), “deadnaming” (referring to a trans person by their former name), and using allegedly offensive terms, women in the UK have been subject to police interview or investigation. Twitter bans the accounts of women who use the wrong pronouns for trans people. But the gender wars had yet to be fought in a courtroom. This changed with the crowd-funded Forstater case. …

The implications of this case in the UK are that women may be fired for expressing gender-critical beliefs.The judge found against her, which means there is now a precedent for this kind of discrimination.

Were judges in Victoria or Tasmania to follow suit, the implications could be totalitarian indeed, given that legal change of sex in those states is possible on the basis of declaration alone.

Do we really want to live in a society in which women can be fired from their jobs for denying that a 6 foot 2 inch bearded male is a woman?

Let’s face it. Reality is offensive to most of our ruling class now. So what do you expect? Of course you will be increasingly legally sanctioned for saying things that are true but not PC.