B1044 – Gender Recognition Bill 2016

Announcements
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    I do apologise for that. Is there any questions you have which answers to might convince you otherwise?
    Nope, I'm afraid not. I've long held these beliefs and I'm not a fan of the way things are going when it comes to gender so will always resist any attempts to reform the current system.

    (Original post by Mactotaur)
    Where do intersex fit, then, considering they have parts of both sexes?
    You either allow them to identify as male or female or simply have a third sex in this instance, and this instance alone.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Don't really see why this needs to be a thing tbh, 'male/female/neither' should be enough.
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cBay)
    Can you give me a brief summary of this research?

    My understanding is sex is the bits between your legs. Gender is about girls wearing pink stuff and crap like that. In that regard, it is of course a social construct in that it is drilled into us from the day we're born and so most just fall in line and follow the rules. However, there must be something going on in the heads of ancestors to cause the genders to diverge and construct that social construct in the first place, so I do feel there innate inclinations built into our brains that correlate with our sex but are not restricted to our sex.. So what I'm saying is it's both a social construct and it's not, if that makes sense? :P
    The colour part is true but the other parts that are claimed such as girls only like dolls because of social pressure is incorrect.
    In general girls are attracted to toys with faces and boys are attracted to trucks and balls before they have been socialised. I believe there have been studies into this using monkeys and a few using children weeks old but I do not have any links to them, it is supposedly to do with hormones before birth, which raises a question to the social construct theory, should we stop encouraging children to do things they are more likely to enjoy in the hope of equality or should we encourage them to do what they like?
    http://www.livescience.com/22677-gir...oy-trucks.html

    I want to say I don't have a problem who say they are these things I just don't think that this is a issue that we should be concerned about as where does it end, do we have to let the man who identifies as a young girl go to school with children?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cBay)
    Can you give me a brief summary of this research?

    My understanding is sex is the bits between your legs. Gender is about girls wearing pink stuff and crap like that. In that regard, it is of course a social construct in that it is drilled into us from the day we're born and so most just fall in line and follow the rules. However, there must be something going on in the heads of ancestors to cause the genders to diverge and construct that social construct in the first place, so I do feel there innate inclinations built into our brains that correlate with our sex but are not restricted to our sex.. So what I'm saying is it's both a social construct and it's not, if that makes sense? :P
    Yeah, in that sense it is a social construct, but no one should pay any attention to it because it lacks biological validity. These preferences and personality traits have been shown to be innate—in general, boys choose trucks and tend to be more analytical, and girls choose dolls and tend to be more caring and emotional, regardless of their social environment.

    As for the research, I highly recommend this Swedish documentary which provides an excellent overview and also shows how silly all those ‘gender studies experts‘ are. The part in which Baron-Cohen presents his own findings starts at about 22:00.

    https://youtu.be/p5LRdW8xw70
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    Yeah, in that sense it is a social construct, but no one should pay any attention to it because it lacks biological validity. These preferences and personality traits have been shown to be innate—in general, boys choose trucks and tend to be more analytical, and girls choose dolls and tend to be more caring and emotional, regardless of their social environment.

    As for the research, I highly recommend this Swedish documentary which provides an excellent overview and also shows how silly all those ‘gender studies experts‘ are. The part in which Baron-Cohen presents his own findings starts at about 22:00.

    https://youtu.be/p5LRdW8xw70
    It's amazing how the social scientists just disregard what the biological scientists have found and one even admits they disregard it because it doesn't fit in with their hypothesis and they accuse the biologists as not being impartial.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Jammy, this Conservative enough for you...

    NO.

    And who the **** is someone that is genderfluid... people need to stop being so picky and sensitive, grow up, and get on with their lives. ****ing hell!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by toronto353)
    I'll be voting no on this. While I accept that people identify as different genders, I'm very much of the opinion that a person's sex is what should be recognised. On this issue, I'm very much a social conservative and I cannot support this Bill.
    And me. Sex is more important, and gender identity discrimination is banned anyway.

    Nay
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    No. I am concerned that there will be the unintended consequence that men will try to self identify as a woman to gain access to women's changing rooms or women only activities. I would prefer a law that says that asking sex or gender should not be required unless absolutely necessary, and that just your name be used in these cases.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    1) why are the honourifics being legally recognised when I don't believe that Mr, Mrs are legal and why do I have to declare my gender to everyone?

    2) IIRC transsexuals are already protected by the equality act so by protecting gender unless someone is going round shoving it down everyone's throats that they are a different gender how would you ever know?
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    This has nothing to do with small government or large government. I believe in opportunity and freedom, and this gives some people, no matter how small the minority, the opportunity to legally self-identify as they see fit.
    Do you define freedom as having the choice to tick another box on government forms because that's the extent of this bill. There's absolutely nothing stooping me from going around right now and calling myself whatever term i want. Beyond having that extra tick box, what opportunity does this bill provide for said people?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    1) why are the honourifics being legally recognised when I don't believe that Mr, Mrs are legal and why do I have to declare my gender to everyone?

    2) IIRC transsexuals are already protected by the equality act so by protecting gender unless someone is going round shoving it down everyone's throats that they are a different gender how would you ever know?
    Gender and gender reassignment are two very different concepts.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    It's amazing how the social scientists just disregard what the biological scientists have found and one even admits they disregard it because it doesn't fit in with their hypothesis and they accuse the biologists as not being impartial.
    I consider it outright offensive, dangerous, and detrimental to science as a whole because their ‘research’ is allowed to go on even though the methods are clearly invalid and results often faked and non-replicable. There are huge reviews of psychological research (which is still considerably more solid) that suggest more than half of it is total baloney and that significant results are often obtained due to improper use of statistics, errors, unidentified confounding variables, or mere chance. Genders studies and the likes are literally the absolute bottom of bad science.

    The fact that they still get funding shows how incredibly politicised and biased this topic is and I think it's high time we put an end to this nonsense, otherwise young people such as the proposers of this bill will continue to be brainwashed and accept mental disorders as the new norm.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    At risk of being laughed at for even asking this question, who wrote this Bill??
    Spoiler:
    Show
    Assuming it was Saoirse
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Aye. As time goes by, more and more people will hopefully be less prejudice against people with certain genders and this is a step in the right direction for achieving that.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    As for the state, this is abput the state simply moving to recognise that gender isn't binary, and to move to a better system of legally changing one's gender. The state is making it legally recognised, updating the process to a more efficient, progressive system and extending anti-discrimination law, extending essentially what is already happening

    I'll get to everyone else in a moment, my phone is taking issue with the text box on TSR
    The state is not interested in what people call themselves. The state is interested only in what they are. Hence it records sex; it does not record gender.

    You might as well call for the law to register people who identify as non-criminals in an effort to get rid of the stigma and inconveniences of a criminal record; or a register of people who cannot drive but wish to identify themselves as drivers.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Do you define freedom as having the choice to tick another box on government forms because that's the extent of this bill. There's absolutely nothing stooping me from going around right now and calling myself whatever term i want. Beyond having that extra tick box, what opportunity does this bill provide for said people?
    I've changed my mind on this bill, I think. It's probably a lot easier to do it by sex, or just have a Male/Female/Other option if it's done by Gender.

    I'll probably abstain, I'll read as the debate goes on and decide for sure.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    I identify as an attack helicopter will I be protected?
    Dammit you stole my joke.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I don't know why people are so annoyed at this bill, just let people be called what they want ffs.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    I've changed my mind on this bill, I think. It's probably a lot easier to do it by sex, or just have a Male/Female/Other option if it's done by Gender.

    I'll probably abstain, I'll read as the debate goes on and decide for sure.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Problem is… there's no ‘other’ sex. Humans have strictly two combinations of sex chromosomes which determine their sex: if you have XX, you're a woman, if you have XY, congratulations, you're a man. That's all. Case closed. Everything else is strictly within the mind and there's little point in debating the validity of gender identity disorders because the conclusion is obvious and accepted by everyone who isn't deluded, brainwashed, or paid by a lobby group.

    You should all really have a look at some basic psychiatry literature because you seem to think that the mind does not work on a biochemical basis and is somehow untouchable and uncontrollable from the outside, which isn't true (e.g. depression and benzodiazepines). There is no reason to think that gender dysphoria is anything else and special like some people try to suggest because they aren't comfortable with accepting such a major change to what they feel is a rigid part of their identity, but guess what—the truth doesn't care. :dontknow:
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JoeL1994)
    I don't know why people are so annoyed at this bill, just let people be called what they want ffs.
    that isn't my issue just to be clear. It's that afaik Mr, Mrs etc. Aren't legally enforced and that it shouldn't need to be something you declare on government forms and have on your driving license etc. If this was protecting cross-dressers (transsexuals are already protected) I'd support it but as far as I can see unless you go round telling everyone your gender identity no one is going to know so it shouldn't be an issue.
 
 
 
Updated: September 20, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Poll
Which is the best season?
Study resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.