People need to understand that so-called "sex based rights" aren't really rights. They're protections based on a belief in women's vulnerability, fragility, and diminished agency. Calling them rights is a red herring.
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @e_urq
1/ No, sorry, you're wrong. In the UK, as a nation covered by the
@coe ECnHR, no discrimination due to inborn characteristics is allowed (also religion), which includes#transsexualism (specifically). That's the opposite of sex-based protections. Via EU law that is enacted as…1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
2/…as barring any discrimination in work or provision of services (including health & schooling) due to variation from or based upon gender stereotypes. In the UK only employers or providers of services (not users) are allowed very limited exemptions if there is no alternative
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
3/ In the UK context TERFs invented the "sex-based rights" lie. Their US right-wing backers would love to revert to pre-WWII law which would also enable racial & religious discrimination, just as they took the UK out of the EU which is designed to make European war impossible
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Yes, agree. What was I wrong about?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Our protections are not, as you said "based on a belief in women's vulnerability…etc."pic.twitter.com/9YkLoiYfbe
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
So-called "sex based rights" aren't about individual rights, they're about protections based on the idea that women/AFABs are too fragile and in need of protection for individual rights to apply.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Thats what the thread was about.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.