18-04-2024, 07:50 AM in response to #41884
Meerkat Wrote: When intent is an issue in court it is generally after a crime has been committed or because you possessed stuff or were doing things that were likely to be used for crime. So not a relevant comparison.
We are getting somewhere, as you have now broken with orthodoxy and accepted that a man can't be a woman just because he says so.
But your idea that a court can decide still faces the big question that you refuse to face - how can 'feeling like a woman' be anything other than a sexist concept? What questions will the court ask, and what definition of a woman are they expecting the accused to meet?
As usual you resort to a point and shout accusation. A woman is not just a vagina (she has tits too...weehhhh), a woman is a person who has a vagina. What kind of person that woman is is pretty much up to them.
The reason we were talking about court decisions is because we were talking about it in relation to criminal offences.
Otherwise a court has no reason to judge if someone genuinely believes they are a certain gender any more than they do to decide if Kev is a window cleaner.
Why does this need to be decided by anyone other than the person involved?