Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
The Word ‘ Mother ’ Is No Longer A Gender-Specific Term….
….Government lawyers told the High Court yesterday.
Ben Jaffey QC, acting for the Department of Health, made the claim during a court hearing as a female-to-male parent attempted to be registered as the father of his child, despite giving birth to the baby.
If the legal bid is successful, the child would be the first to have no legally recognised mother.
https:/
What utter tripe! Confusion reigns! Poor kid.
Ben Jaffey QC, acting for the Department of Health, made the claim during a court hearing as a female-to-male parent attempted to be registered as the father of his child, despite giving birth to the baby.
If the legal bid is successful, the child would be the first to have no legally recognised mother.
https:/
What utter tripe! Confusion reigns! Poor kid.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Legally, this person is a man, and he's disputing a matter of legal record. Private opinions on whether or not he's a 'real' man are irrelevant.
This seems to fundamentally come down to whether or not people think other people should be allowed to undergo gender reassignment. If you think other people should be able to do that, it's really difficult to see what is objectionable about this.
I appreciate that the claim made by the opposing QC is silly (and, true to form, has been used by the Mail to sensationalize this whole case) - but it's actually not the position of the unnamed parent and is being used as a rather spurious reason to oppose their case, not support it.
This seems to fundamentally come down to whether or not people think other people should be allowed to undergo gender reassignment. If you think other people should be able to do that, it's really difficult to see what is objectionable about this.
I appreciate that the claim made by the opposing QC is silly (and, true to form, has been used by the Mail to sensationalize this whole case) - but it's actually not the position of the unnamed parent and is being used as a rather spurious reason to oppose their case, not support it.
With respect Krom, it is more than an opinion. One may as well say pork chops become kippers if you cut them to kipper shape and smoke them a bit.
One is allowed to call them kippers, even on a legal document apparently, but it doesn't make them kippers in reality.
Nothing is being enforced, one is simply stating reality, which some others wish to deny, it seems.
One is allowed to call them kippers, even on a legal document apparently, but it doesn't make them kippers in reality.
Nothing is being enforced, one is simply stating reality, which some others wish to deny, it seems.
Just so we're clear, what is it you would like to happen, exactly?
Would you like this person to be refused recognition and therefore legally have the child's male parent registered as his mother? That's what Mr Jaffey is arguing for, so it would mean you effectively support his position.
Would you like the unnamed parent to be allowed recognition and therefore have their legal gender (male) match their parent registration (father)? This would seem to be consistent with the principle that male parents are fathers and female parents are mothers.
Or do you not actually care about the legal case your link is about and instead just want to criticise the general principle that it is possible for transgender people (i.e. people who aren't you) to go through gender reassignment?
Would you like this person to be refused recognition and therefore legally have the child's male parent registered as his mother? That's what Mr Jaffey is arguing for, so it would mean you effectively support his position.
Would you like the unnamed parent to be allowed recognition and therefore have their legal gender (male) match their parent registration (father)? This would seem to be consistent with the principle that male parents are fathers and female parents are mothers.
Or do you not actually care about the legal case your link is about and instead just want to criticise the general principle that it is possible for transgender people (i.e. people who aren't you) to go through gender reassignment?
If you're comfortable with gender reassignment (as I am too), then obviously this inevitably raises the question of how a parent should be registered if they end up transitioning while pregnant.
It's a fairly mundane question really and it seems to me that it doesn't really concern the majority of people who won't ever undergo gender reassignment. Unfortunately a silly comment by the person opposing this has set the Mail off on its usual habits.
It's a fairly mundane question really and it seems to me that it doesn't really concern the majority of people who won't ever undergo gender reassignment. Unfortunately a silly comment by the person opposing this has set the Mail off on its usual habits.
// One may as well say pork chops become kippers if you cut them to kipper shape and smoke them a bit. //
Bit of a stupid analogy really because you can obviously tell the difference between pork that has been cut into kipper shapes and original kippers. Trans people on the other hand are capable of 'becoming' their target gender in just about every meaningful way. If you can't tell which sex someone was born with, what difference does it make?
Bit of a stupid analogy really because you can obviously tell the difference between pork that has been cut into kipper shapes and original kippers. Trans people on the other hand are capable of 'becoming' their target gender in just about every meaningful way. If you can't tell which sex someone was born with, what difference does it make?
Krom, , //Would you like this person to be refused recognition and therefore legally have the child's male parent registered as his mother?//
But this person isn’t the child’s male parent. That would be the child's biological father. This woman is the child's mother. Mothers are female. I find this incredibly selfish. It's all about her and what she wants with not a thought for the child.
But this person isn’t the child’s male parent. That would be the child's biological father. This woman is the child's mother. Mothers are female. I find this incredibly selfish. It's all about her and what she wants with not a thought for the child.
“If you can't tell which sex someone was born with, what difference does it make?”
But most of the time you can tell!
It doesn’t matter how many bits are chopped off, how many are added on, how much of an exaggerated ‘womanly’ pose you adopt, or how much you try to change your voice to something more feminine, a bloke in a frock still looks like a bloke in a frock.
Admittedly it can (sometimes) be slightly harder to spot a woman who claims to be a man, but it’s all fantasy, and I fail to see why everyone else should be expected to pander to someone’s fanciful notion.
But most of the time you can tell!
It doesn’t matter how many bits are chopped off, how many are added on, how much of an exaggerated ‘womanly’ pose you adopt, or how much you try to change your voice to something more feminine, a bloke in a frock still looks like a bloke in a frock.
Admittedly it can (sometimes) be slightly harder to spot a woman who claims to be a man, but it’s all fantasy, and I fail to see why everyone else should be expected to pander to someone’s fanciful notion.
Ben Jaffey was not talking to you - and he agrees with you. He doesn't want the registration changed. The parent of this child also agrees that mothers are female - that is why they want the recognition changed. Your rhetoric about 'pretending' is a personal opinion and the law does not agree with you. Your legal gender will in the vast majority of people match the biological sex you were born into - but in a small number of cases it won't. If you haven't gone through gender reassignment then this case really does not impact your life in any significant way.
Plenty, Kromovaracun?
I doubt that.
I did a quick search for pictures of people who have had the op, and all the men that had ‘become’ women, still looked like men.
I think some men can appear effeminate, but still look like a man, so having the op doesn’t make them look much different.
But a manly looking woman looks more like a man to begin with.
But when all’s said and done, it’s still a fantasy, so to me, you can call yourself what you like, but I’ll call you what you are.
I doubt that.
I did a quick search for pictures of people who have had the op, and all the men that had ‘become’ women, still looked like men.
I think some men can appear effeminate, but still look like a man, so having the op doesn’t make them look much different.
But a manly looking woman looks more like a man to begin with.
But when all’s said and done, it’s still a fantasy, so to me, you can call yourself what you like, but I’ll call you what you are.
Latest Posts
News4 mins ago
Is It Safe To Take Paracetamol
How it Works7 mins ago
ChatterBank8 mins ago
ChatterBank8 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.