2 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:

 

They could try sticking to the topic, which isn't about science.

 

 

Perhaps there will be more Court Cases, perhaps there will not be.

 

Until then, and they start presenting their case, the facts of this thread is that the UK Supreme Court has made a ruling, as a result of that ruling, Single sex spaces in the UK refer to Biological Sex.

That’s fine, biological sex is not binary.

As you yourself admit.

 

 

10 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

No. It's much simpler than you try to portray (assuming you are actually being serious of course. Which I have my doubts). 

 

One has a penis.

 

One has a vagina.

 

Biological reality. 

The problem is, not all people have only a penis or a vagina, and even those who do may have non-corresponding internal organs, the wrong DNA, and/or incompatible hormone levels. 

There is no "biological reality." There are only "biological standards."

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

That’s fine, biological sex is not binary.

 

It is according to the UK Supreme Court. 

 

Single sex spaces are for the use of either Biological Males or Biological Females.

 

No other binaries mentioned by the SC.

 

Instead of posting garbage, crack on with your crowdfunding, to challenge the ruling of the UK Supreme Court.

7 minutes ago, Mike_Hunt said:

Progressives are like a plague of locust destroying everything in their path. 

I wish that were so, but there are, unfortunately, a lot of right-wing conservatives out there, and they are supported and encouraged by false or non-DEI information..

1 minute ago, The Cyclist said:

 

It is according to the UK Supreme Court. 

 

Single sex spaces are for the use of either Biological Males or Biological Females.

 

No other binaries mentioned by the SC.

 

Instead of posting garbage, crack on with your crowdfunding, to challenge the ruling of the UK Supreme Court.

Link to the actual ruling please. 
 

 

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Link to the actual ruling please. 
 

 

 

Put 10 bob in your google meter.

 

So you are admitting that you are arguing about things that you haven't even read.

 

Makes you a bit of a Chopper, rather than a Chomper.

2 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:

 

Put 10 bob in your google meter.

 

So you are admitting that you are arguing about things that you haven't even read.

 

Makes you a bit of a Chopper, rather than a Chomper.

I only ask because I know what the ruling was.

 

You clearly do not.

 

……

 

“Makes you a bit of a Chopper, rather than a Chomper.“

 

I’ve come to believe you don’t actually have an argument hence your playground level taunts,

 

 

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I only ask because I know what the ruling was.

 

You clearly do not.

 

That might be why I have posted it twice on the thread.

 

You never read it, didn't understand it or you would not be asking for a link to it.

 

The word " Sex " in the Equality Act 2010, refers to Biological Sex.

 

Single sex spaces applies to Biological sex.

 

 

 

7 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:

 

That might be why I have posted it twice on the thread.

 

You never read it, didn't understand it or you would not be asking for a link to it.

 

The word " Sex " in the Equality Act 2010, refers to Biological Sex.

 

Single sex spaces applies to Biological sex.

 

 

 

Now let’s take that and demonstrate your failure to engage In joined up thinking.

 

You’ve already admitted there are genders outside of the binary male/female.

 

You’ve also stated, rather crudely;

 

”

In really simple terms, that anybody can / should understand 

Born with meat and 2 veg = Use the gents

Born with an axe wound = Use the ladies.”

 

The fact is, there l are many more biological sexes than male/female.

 

It really is a lot more complex you assert.

 

 

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

You’ve already admitted there are genders outside of the binary male/female.

 

Did I ?
 

You are making things up again.

 

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It really is a lot more complex you assert.

 

I really hate to point this out, I am not asserting anything. I am pointing out what the ruling of the uk's Supreme Court was.

 

Now if you wish to challenge that ruling. You know what to do. Set up a crowdfunder and off you pop the the Supreme Court.

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You’ve also stated, rather crudely;

 

”

In really simple terms, that anybody can / should understand 

Born with meat and 2 veg = Use the gents

Born with an axe wound = Use the ladies.”

 

Yes, that in very basic and crude terms is what the SC ruling said.

 

I also said that if you had underwent male - female surgery, and still looked like Hulk Hogan,, do not be surprised if you get arrested for trying to use female only spaces, in the UK.

 

Oddly, you seem to have missed that part.

1 hour ago, The Cyclist said:

 

They could try sticking to the topic, which isn't about science.

 

 

Perhaps there will be more Court Cases, perhaps there will not be.

 

Until then, and they start presenting their case, the facts of this thread is that the UK Supreme Court has made a ruling, as a result of that ruling, Single sex spaces in the UK refer to Biological Sex.

That wasn't the topic of the comment I originally replied to on this open forum.

3 hours ago, WDSmart said:

The problem is, not all people have only a penis or a vagina, and even those who do may have non-corresponding internal organs, the wrong DNA, and/or incompatible hormone levels. 

There is no "biological reality." There are only "biological standards."

 

Or in your case clinical insanity.

 

LSD is one hell of a drug. 

 

2 hours ago, The Cyclist said:

 

Did I ?
 

You are making things up again.

 

 

I really hate to point this out, I am not asserting anything. I am pointing out what the ruling of the uk's Supreme Court was.

 

Now if you wish to challenge that ruling. You know what to do. Set up a crowdfunder and off you pop the the Supreme Court.

 

Yes, that in very basic and crude terms is what the SC ruling said.

 

I also said that if you had underwent male - female surgery, and still looked like Hulk Hogan,, do not be surprised if you get arrested for trying to use female only spaces, in the UK.

 

Oddly, you seem to have missed that part.

“Did I ?”

 

Yes you did.

 

In those serious medical papers you wish us to rely on.

 

8 hours ago, The Cyclist said:

 

And it is time that " You lefties " woke up to reality.

 

Produce a serious medical paper ( A Tinder Chart doesn't count ) That espouses anything beyond Males, Females and an small sprinkling of Hermaphrodities.

 

11 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

No, because your statement is incorrect.

go on then put me right,  What other genders can be affirmed with surgery?  

12 hours ago, WDSmart said:

Rubbish! 😁

If such a conversation were to take place, I'd advise the doctor to do a removal of any external sex organs (penis/scrotum or vagina). Then, later, if and when the person did finally identify with a specific gender, another surgery could be done to either restore or replace these organs.

 

bit keen to get the knife out aren't you?   what's wrong with leaving it all alone until they come to their senses? or even offering psychiatric help as opposed to surgery?    

16 hours ago, WDSmart said:

After I posted this, I later decided it was not appropriate.

Too late.   You’ve tipped your cards.  

11 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

“Did I ?”

 

Yes you did.

 

In those serious medical papers you wish us to rely on.

 

 

 

Poor, poor Chopper

 

Cannot identify sarcasm in any shape or form. 

 

Quote

And it is time that " You lefties " woke up to reality.

 

Produce a serious medical paper ( A Tinder Chart doesn't count ) That espouses anything beyond Males, Females and an small sprinkling of Hermaphrodities.

 

My comment was extracting the urine, about the use " A Tinder Chart "

 

In case you don't know, or are simply confused

 

Quote

Sex is typically assigned at birth based on an infant's external genitalia and reproductive organs, and this assignment is usually recorded on the birth certificate

 

For most of the Worlds population, this will be recorded as " Male " or " Female " 

 

True Hermaphrodites are normally recorded as " Indeterminate " or " Intersex " 

 

Try getting a life, instead of being an absolute Chopper.

20 hours ago, WDSmart said:

Rubbish! 😁

If such a conversation were to take place, I'd advise the doctor to do a removal of any external sex organs (penis/scrotum or vagina). Then, later, if and when the person did finally identify with a specific gender, another surgery could be done to either restore or replace these organs.

 

 

   They need to get attachable screw on knobs , so unsure people can wake up each morning and decide whether they want to be male of female that day .

12 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Or in your case clinical insanity.

 

LSD is one hell of a drug. 

 

LSD is one hell of a drug. I took it several times when I was in my 20s. That was over 50 years ago, before it was made illegal. I still believe my experience on LSD altered my life entirely, one aspect of which is that it "woke" me up... 

8 hours ago, Bday Prang said:

bit keen to get the knife out aren't you?   what's wrong with leaving it all alone until they come to their senses? or even offering psychiatric help as opposed to surgery?    

I agree and have posted a similar comment here later.

9 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

I still believe my experience on LSD altered my life entirely, one aspect of which is that it "woke" me up... 

 

I agree entirely.

 

It seems to have had a "profound" effect on your ability (or lack thereof) to think logically. I think there is probably a very strong correlation between taking potent mind altering drugs like LSD and contracting the Woke mind virus. 

20 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

I agree entirely.

 

It seems to have had a "profound" effect on your ability (or lack thereof) to think logically. I think there is probably a very strong correlation between taking potent mind altering drugs like LSD and contracting the Woke mind virus. 

Thinking logically is not all that it's cracked up to be. Thinking logically restricts your thinking to logic, so it restricts you from thinking more freely. This is exactly the same thing as thinking there are only two biological sexes. Thinking logically about this (either/or) removes any possibility that you could accept the premise that there are more than just these two.

Another more current example is the difference between "digital" (binary) computing and what is now called "quantum" computing. In the past, the predecessor was called "analog" computing. It allows AI to come up with an answer that is not just either/or, yes or no, but somewhere in between. Forty years ago, when my professional title was "Head of AI and Predictive Analysis" at Teradata Corp, I proposed using analog computing in AI, but I never tried to develop this myself. However, in my own personal life, I have often used this type of reasoning. Today, that's called being "woke." 

In some of my SciFi books where an AI is one of the characters, I always indicate it is on an analog computer, or at least an analog front end. In fact, one of the AI's in my book is called "Ana" for that very reason. 

1 hour ago, WDSmart said:

Thinking logically is not all that it's cracked up to be. Thinking logically restricts your thinking to logic, so it restricts you from thinking more freely. This is exactly the same thing as thinking there are only two biological sexes. Thinking logically about this (either/or) removes any possibility that you could accept the premise that there are more than just these two.

Another more current example is the difference between "digital" (binary) computing and what is now called "quantum" computing. In the past, the predecessor was called "analog" computing. It allows AI to come up with an answer that is not just either/or, yes or no, but somewhere in between. Forty years ago, when my professional title was "Head of AI and Predictive Analysis" at Teradata Corp, I proposed using analog computing in AI, but I never tried to develop this myself. However, in my own personal life, I have often used this type of reasoning. Today, that's called being "woke." 

In some of my SciFi books where an AI is one of the characters, I always indicate it is on an analog computer, or at least an analog front end. In fact, one of the AI's in my book is called "Ana" for that very reason. 

'Thinking logically restricts you.'
No — logic isn't a cage, it's a filter.

If an idea can't survive scrutiny, the idea is weak.

That's the scientific method: propose, test, disprove.
 

Equating logic with 'two sexes only' is a category error.

Biology = classification.

Gender = identity.

Saying logic fails is like saying gravity is 'too restrictive' because someone identifies as being lighter.

Analog ≠ creative.

Quantum ≠ free thinking. Both still run on math.
Even Schrödinger’s cat can’t escape logic — it lives and dies by it.
'I was Head of AI 40 years ago' ≠ proof.
And a sci-fi AI named 'Ana' isn't evidence.

 

Bottom line: logic keeps thought honest. Without it, you're just dressing feelings up as fact.

55 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

'Thinking logically restricts you.'
No — logic isn't a cage, it's a filter.

If an idea can't survive scrutiny, the idea is weak.

That's the scientific method: propose, test, disprove.
 

Equating logic with 'two sexes only' is a category error.

Biology = classification.

Gender = identity.

Saying logic fails is like saying gravity is 'too restrictive' because someone identifies as being lighter.

Analog ≠ creative.

Quantum ≠ free thinking. Both still run on math.
Even Schrödinger’s cat can’t escape logic — it lives and dies by it.
'I was Head of AI 40 years ago' ≠ proof.
And a sci-fi AI named 'Ana' isn't evidence.

 

Bottom line: logic keeps thought honest. Without it, you're just dressing feelings up as fact.

Yes, thinking logically restricts you.
A filter is a restriction.
An idea that can't survive scrutiny could be thought of as weak, but that doesn't mean it's not true. It could just be ahead of its time.
The scientific method is a method based on logic and the belief in cause-and-effect, both of which are invalid when describing reality. You yourself know that many theories/rules based on the scientific method were "proven" wrong at a later date.
 

Equating logic with the notion that there are only two sexes is indeed a categorical error. Logic is what creates categories, either/or, and filters out anything in between.
Biology (as in biological sex) is a classification.
Gender, yes, is an identity.
Saying logic cannot fail has been proven wrong over and over again. Saying gravity is constant and "too restrictive" is not true if measuring your weight at sea level and on top of Mt. Everest.
Analog has no restrictions of either/or or male/female. Analog is a curve between the two extremes.
 

Quantum computing does run on bits just like a digital computer. Unlike the bits in a digital computer, which can only be in one of two states (binary, like either/or, male/female), quantum bits (qubits) also have two basic states (like either/or and male/female), but can exist in a superposition of those two states, which is somewhere in-between. Because quantum computers do still have bits, I would prefer creating AIs on an analog computer, which has no bits.  
Schrödinger's Cat is indeed an example of the filtering and characterization of logic. It's like assuming the cat has to be male or female, when those either/or's are not the only choice.
My prior experience in AI does not prove I'm correct on everything, but it does indicate I've thought a lot about these topics before.
"Ana" is a computer with an analog frontend and a digital backend. The digital backend is used for solving scientific/logical/mathematical problems, and the analog frontend is used to communicate with humans.

The bottom line is logic restricts thought, but keeps it comfortable to deal with. Using it, you're just trying to believe you understand things that are not understandable.

2 hours ago, WDSmart said:

Yes, thinking logically restricts you.
A filter is a restriction.
An idea that can't survive scrutiny could be thought of as weak, but that doesn't mean it's not true. It could just be ahead of its time.
The scientific method is a method based on logic and the belief in cause-and-effect, both of which are invalid when describing reality. You yourself know that many theories/rules based on the scientific method were "proven" wrong at a later date.
 

Equating logic with the notion that there are only two sexes is indeed a categorical error. Logic is what creates categories, either/or, and filters out anything in between.
Biology (as in biological sex) is a classification.
Gender, yes, is an identity.
Saying logic cannot fail has been proven wrong over and over again. Saying gravity is constant and "too restrictive" is not true if measuring your weight at sea level and on top of Mt. Everest.
Analog has no restrictions of either/or or male/female. Analog is a curve between the two extremes.
 

Quantum computing does run on bits just like a digital computer. Unlike the bits in a digital computer, which can only be in one of two states (binary, like either/or, male/female), quantum bits (qubits) also have two basic states (like either/or and male/female), but can exist in a superposition of those two states, which is somewhere in-between. Because quantum computers do still have bits, I would prefer creating AIs on an analog computer, which has no bits.  
Schrödinger's Cat is indeed an example of the filtering and characterization of logic. It's like assuming the cat has to be male or female, when those either/or's are not the only choice.
My prior experience in AI does not prove I'm correct on everything, but it does indicate I've thought a lot about these topics before.
"Ana" is a computer with an analog frontend and a digital backend. The digital backend is used for solving scientific/logical/mathematical problems, and the analog frontend is used to communicate with humans.

The bottom line is logic restricts thought, but keeps it comfortable to deal with. Using it, you're just trying to believe you understand things that are not understandable.

You call logic “restrictive”? Let’s clear this up.
 

• Logic isn’t a prison — it’s the filter that stops nonsense from dressing up as truth. Calling it restrictive is like Trump on COVID: “We test more, that’s why we have more cases.” Technically true — but logic shows it’s BS.
 

• The scientific method isn’t a stone tablet — it’s a flexible process. It survives by updating. Newton’s laws weren’t “wrong” when Einstein refined them — they were incomplete. Apples didn’t stop falling.
 

• Logic doesn’t create categories — it organizes them. Biology defines sex; logic just keeps the lines straight. Saying logic invents categories is like blaming a ruler for making things longer or shorter.
 

• Quantum bits (qubits) aren’t on/off light switches. They can exist in superposition — both states at once — until measured. That’s not analog, but it already breaks the strict binary you’re railing against. If logic were really “restrictive,” quantum mechanics wouldn’t exist — yet it does, built entirely on math.
 

• Most modern computing is a hybrid: analog front-ends feeding digital systems. Your “all analog” nostalgia belongs in history books, not in present-day AI.
 

• If you have to boast about experience from 50 years ago, you’ve lost the argument. High schoolers today have had more exposure to AI than anyone fiddling with analog circuits .
 

Without logic, critical thinking goes out the window — and that’s how we end up with the Cult of Trump.

Maybe skipping LSD limits my access to alternate realities — but I’ll stick with reality-reality, thanks.

 

 

28 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Maybe skipping LSD limits my access to alternate realities — but I’ll stick with reality-reality, thanks.

I'll skip responding line-by-line to your post this time. We obviously have completely different beliefs about this. I'll only respond to the one above.

Reality is not logical. Logic is a concept of the human intellect that we project out onto reality in an attempt to understand it so we can control it. The best examples of this are the geometric math we use to describe the universe. In reality, there are no straight lines, right angles, circles, or rectangles. All is chaos, and that also goes for logic. It's a delusion our intellect creates and projects out onto reality. 

So what? I guess ya all wear panties if you get get them in a twist over this.

4 hours ago, WDSmart said:

I'll skip responding line-by-line to your post this time. We obviously have completely different beliefs about this. I'll only respond to the one above.

Reality is not logical. Logic is a concept of the human intellect that we project out onto reality in an attempt to understand it so we can control it. The best examples of this are the geometric math we use to describe the universe. In reality, there are no straight lines, right angles, circles, or rectangles. All is chaos, and that also goes for logic. It's a delusion our intellect creates and projects out onto reality. 

That’s a textbook strawman — confusing models of reality with reality itself.
 

Reality, depending on your philosophy, may not be logical. Logic is a construct of the human intellect, projected onto reality so we can measure and understand it — not control it.
 

And if, in your IT career, you ever dabbled in data structures — stacks, queues, linked lists — you’ll know those constructs aren’t reality either. They’re models. But they work. And that’s the point.
 

If all is chaos, then logic is chaos too — which means your very statement has no order, no meaning, and no claim to truth. Calling logic a “delusion” still relies on… logic.

It’s like standing on a ladder to declare ladders don’t exist.

19 hours ago, LosLobo said:

That’s a textbook strawman — confusing models of reality with reality itself.
 

Reality, depending on your philosophy, may not be logical. Logic is a construct of the human intellect, projected onto reality so we can measure and understand it — not control it.
 

And if, in your IT career, you ever dabbled in data structures — stacks, queues, linked lists — you’ll know those constructs aren’t reality either. They’re models. But they work. And that’s the point.
 

If all is chaos, then logic is chaos too — which means your very statement has no order, no meaning, and no claim to truth. Calling logic a “delusion” still relies on… logic.

It’s like standing on a ladder to declare ladders don’t exist.

Logic is a construct of the human intellect, projected out onto reality in an attempt to understand it so it can be predicted and even controlled.

Most of my IT career was spent creating data structures. And yes, they aren't reality; they are only models. Some of these models do "work," for the most part, just as the models logic creates work fairly well for everyday uses. Logic creates a model of reality, but this model is not a true depiction of reality itself.

Reality is chaos. Logic is a structured model of reality, a delusion created by the human intellect and projected out onto reality. And, yes, I, being a human and having an intellect, use logic too. I use it to present models to others, but I know all the logical models I create are not a true depiction of reality. 
The only way to share reality is through experience, and by "experience," I mean what we later refer to as "sensual experience." Thinking will never reveal reality.

An example would be if you asked me to explain reality and I slapped you in the face. The sensual experience you would have then would be reality.
 

4 hours ago, WDSmart said:

Logic is a construct of the human intellect, projected out onto reality in an attempt to understand it so it can be predicted and even controlled.

Most of my IT career was spent creating data structures. And yes, they aren't reality; they are only models. Some of these models do "work," for the most part, just as the models logic creates work fairly well for everyday uses. Logic creates a model of reality, but this model is not a true depiction of reality itself.

Reality is chaos. Logic is a structured model of reality, a delusion created by the human intellect and projected out onto reality. And, yes, I, being a human and having an intellect, use logic too. I use it to present models to others, but I know all the logical models I create are not a true depiction of reality. 
The only way to share reality is through experience, and by "experience," I mean what we later refer to as "sensual experience." Thinking will never reveal reality.

An example would be if you asked me to explain reality and I slapped you in the face. The sensual experience you would have then would be reality.
 

Wash, rinse, repeat.
How dull — you seem incapable of any free thought.
 

Like a novice, chanting a mantra
instead of thinking for himself.
 

When the cult of chaos chants,
who is the master —
and who is just the echo?
 

And if logic is a delusion,
doesn’t that make your claim
that logic is a delusion…
a delusion?