Adult people with adult jobs such as “journalist” now believe (or at least say) that law creates reality.
The sheer stupidity is breathtaking. (I have a feeling I’ve typed that sentence about 80 million times by now.)
There’s no such thing as being something “by law” except when the something is a matter of law.
Laws can change legal realities but they can’t by themselves change physical ones. Pass laws saying bears can fly all you like, but bears will remain obstinately earthbound.
Same with women and men. Men can shout “I am legally a woman!!” all they like but they remain men.
For a working journalist not to understand this childishly obvious fact is pathetic.
Comments
11 responses to “By law”
And it goes to show that these legal sex change laws should never have passed in the first place. They were the thin end of the wedge. Initially sold as harmless sops to a few transsexuals, nothing more than a bit of minor bureaucratic courtesy, they quickly became the basis for taking women’s rights away entirely.
Indeed.
The laws of nature cannot be superceded by the laws of pompous morons.
But Beaver IS a fish. The Pope said, I believe it, and that settles it.
And for those unaware of our early history, Australian indigenous were classified as fauna, and were seen as less worthy than black people kidnapped from various Pacific islands as wage labour for sugar and cotton.
Australians are past masters at legislating against reality.
Ever since 1893, when the Supreme Court of the United States decided Nix v. Hedden, tomatoes have been classified as a vegetable by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency.
Did that ruling change the fundamental botanic nature of the tomato?
I think not, Rivkah.
It didn’t change the amount of sugar in it, either, thereby ensuring it would remain much more limited in a diabetic diet than other vegetables – cis-vegetables, if you will. (What a concept.)
No matter how many dresses and how much lipstick a man wears, he is still a man. Even if he changes his name and sex legally.
A US state once tried to change the value of Pi by legislation. It did not succeed in changing mathematics. Circles stayed the same.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kionasmith/2018/02/05/indianas-state-legislature-once-tried-to-legislate-the-value-of-pi/#:~:text=On%20Feb.,blunt%20force%20of%20legislative%20fiat.
HAhahahahaha
Sorry, Rev, that’s a <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-20/fact-check-flora-and-fauna-1967-referendum/9550650" myth*. There’s even a Wikipedia page about it. Propagating these simplistic “feel-right” stories just gives the racists ammunition. (They’re the ones who thrive on simplistic feel-good stories). “If they will lie about that they will lie about anything” cuts both ways.
The ABC may be captured but that’s no reason to think they might be wrong on this.
Wait a minute though. Is that a BBC article presenting the facts, without leaning as much bodyweight as can be transferred through a thumb onto the pro-trans side of the scale? And written by a “gender and identity correpondent”? I think I need a lie down.
Since no one here has stated the obvious, I suppose its up to me: If Roxanne (Roxy) Tickle isn’t a porn name I don’t know what is.