Can I just question the premise of that?
Professor Alice Sullivan tells us why we would want to know.
And in conclusion:
10/Team #nodebate have lost, and the poverty of their arguments is exposed for all to see. I hope for a changing of the guard at the Women and Equalities Committee. We deserve better.
I saw a tweet from Kathleen Stock below that thread:
I see that Caroline Nokes is a Tory MP. I find this curious, for even as the Tories try to mount a crusade against ‘woke-ism’, some of them at least are obviously supporting the extreme trans-activists and are either so deluded or so stupid that they ask questions like ‘Why on earth would we want to (know someone’s birth sex)’?), and as Professor Sullivan says, ‘don’t understand that sex matters’ & accept ‘the view that discussion and debate on issues of sex and gender identity are harmful.’
Why is it that, uniquely, ‘trans-identity’ activists insist that no-one must ever discuss anything even tangentially related to sex or gender? Members of no other demographic say that. Other people might insist that no-one should consider policy or law which might affect them without consulting them, but they don’t insist that they mustn’t be discussed by anyone.
I have a tentative answer to that question. It’s because members of all other demographics are considering the effect on their lives in reality. Women are concerned about our sex-based rights. Disabled people are concerned about the effect of policy changes on our ability to access buildings and public transport, education and employment, and health for example. Members of ethnic minorities are concerned about things like the right not to be discriminated against in pretty much the same areas as people with disabilities. But ‘trans-identity’ activists are worried that discussion of reality will expose their claims as being based entirely in fantasy – and that the whole house of cards that they’ve carefully built by going behind the backs of the public will collapse.
Gooood point.
Tigger, really good point. other activists want discussion because it’s publicity that can generally only make their cause look good, either directly supporting them, or indirectly by looking like an arse opposing them. Not so much with TRA’s.