UK Politics

3649 readers

138 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

tom@feddit.uk

GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk

flamingos@feddit.uk

frankPodmore@slrpnk.net

101

First police force changes search guidelines for trans women in wake of Supreme Court gender ruling (www.lbc.co.uk)

submitted 5 days ago by flamingos@feddit.uk to c/uk_politics@feddit.uk

118 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A British Transport Police spokesperson said: “Under previous policy, we had advised that someone with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) may be searched in accordance with their acquired sex, however as an interim position while we digest yesterday’s judgement, we have advised our officers that any same sex searches in custody are to be undertaken in accordance with the biological birth sex of the detainee.

“We are in the process of reviewing the implications of the ruling and will consider any necessary updates to our policies and practices in line with the law and national guidance.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] knightly@pawb.social 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

By your logic, if our society didn't have a rape problem then there would be no need to segregate by sex.

Seems to me, then, that focusing on the segregation isn't the same thing as focusing on the problem.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

The thing is, you need to fix the problem before virtue signalling. And by our fallen nature, throughout history, men have always subjugated women. If somewhere claims to not have rape happening, then there are big coverups happening

[–] knightly@pawb.social 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

You probably want to revisit your history, matriarchical societies aren't exactly uncommon.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Source?

[–] knightly@pawb.social 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Matriarchy

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 0 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

There are around only 65~ listings there.

Very few appear to be actual countries or kingdoms and are instead obscure religions, folklore, books, or pages about philosophers.

And even then, a lot of the few societies listed aren't even matriarchies, they just have different laws in terms of inheritance that favoured women. So saying "matriarchies aren't uncommon" isn't true at all, you've just demonstrated that they are extremely uncommon.

Most anthropologists hold that there are no known societies that are unambiguously matriarchal, at least no matriarchal society that have completely excluded the opposite gender from roles of authority.

[–] knightly@pawb.social 2 points 5 days ago

Thank you for proving my point by admitting that there are exceptions to your "women are always subjugated by men" claim.