Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees
So to take you back to this comment.
'I speak English; I refer to individuals as ‘he’ or ‘she’. This is based on a prima facie determination of an individual’s biological sex. That is normal and has been so for millennia.'
A male has gender reassignment surgery and identifies as she/her - to you is that person male or female? Based on your statement I believe that privately you would refer to them as male. However, I suspect publicly in a situation where your career (or something else that could have negative financial or social impact) was potentially at risk you would refer to them as female.
No evidence for the above, and placing no judgement on the above either.
regarding the latter I'm not sure it holds the same relevance, As i understand it you're talking about deception in an attempt to obtain something ?
There have been as I'm sure you're aware legal cases regarding similar scenarios.
|
If my career was at risk for refusing to affirm a personally selected gender, my employer would be hearing from a human rights lawyer. Compelled speech is illegal.
. To my knowledge, to date, all British cases of dismissal, whether direct or constructive, have been lost by employers if not at tribunal then on appeal, on that very point.
If someone has transitioned and obtained legal recognition, then there’s nothing inconsistent in using legally assigned terms to refer to them, whilst also questioning philosophically whether a legal statement is necessarily a true statement. All of us believe what we believe about the world, but most of us are polite enough to pick and choose when we attempt to articulate those beliefs.
Is an ‘intact male’ (to use Pierre’s term), self-affirming as female and not in a position of a gender recognition certificate, obtaining something by deception if they gain access to a female-only space or service?