Gender again. Sorry!

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
That awkward moment when the penny finally drops ...

https://bsky.app/profile/owenjones.bsky.social/post/3lnnc4mr6wk2s

I hope you are paying attention @mickle ?

The ruling has a negative affect on everyone including cis women.

Friend put that up on Facebook; it's unbelievable that Clarke has no idea what he's talking about but it's there in plain view.

And he was a Cabinet Minister....
 
Why are rates of sexual assault among male prisoners who identify as women astronomically higher than those of the general male prison population?

In the UK, 50% of trans-identifying male inmates are serving time for sexual assault—compare that to 18% among the general male population. In the U.S., it’s 60%. In Australia, it’s 25.5%, while the general male prison population sits at just 10%. These are not anomalies. These are patterns.

Because the male prisoners who identify as women are sex offenders first and 'women' second.
 

monkers

Squire
In regards to prisons you've said it frequently.
It allows you to dismiss the stats that show that transwomen offend at the same rate as other men, if not worse.

This is where your logic falls apart. Your so-called logical argument is that cats have ears, all dogs have ears; therefore cats are dogs, and dogs are cats. My argument is that this is illogical. Cats and dogs are under the umbrella classification of mammals; it doesn't make them the same.

The normative vocabulary being used is a vocabulary not created by trans people, but by cis people who can't discriminate (in the scientific sense) between a cat and a dog). This is a basic skill something that parents try to teach children from a very early age - ''this is a picture of a cat; this is a picture of a dog'' - a skill you've yet to master.

In this analogy, transgender = mammals. Dogs are men who cosplay as women, vicars are not usually dogs even though they wear frocks and dog collars (but then they might be part time - just not at the weekend), cats are trans women.

Dogs are counted in the prison stats as men because the law says they are not cats. Dogs don't need a certificate to say they are dogs. Cats are cats because the the law of the land says they are cats - we've checked them, they're definitely cats.

Gender critical nutjobs say ''dogs will always be dogs'', all dogs are equally dangerous, I know a dog when I see one''. They also say one exception is in the women's toilets where it then suddenly becomes impossible for them to tell a dog from a cat. Therefore ''we demand that the law is changed - we want XL bullies to be allowed into the women's toilets because that makes us feel safer than seeing a domestic cat''.

And that is the parlous state of your argument one that doesn't a test by any rational human being - and that is Dawn Butler Brent's point.

Oh and Simon Clarke is the toddler who hasn't reached yet reached his first birthday; then when he is suddenly aware, the parents celebrate that breakthrough.

Addendum: also you MUST be Simon Clarke and I claim my five pounds. PS ( I used your logical processing to arrive at that conclusion).
 
Last edited:
In this analogy, transgender = mammals. Dogs are men who cosplay as women, vicars are not usually dogs even though they wear frocks and dog collars (but then they might be part time - just not at the weekend), cats are trans women.

Dogs are counted in the prison stats as men because the law says they are not cats. Dogs don't need a certificate to say they are dogs. Cats are cats because the the law of the land says they are cats - we've checked them, they're definitely cats.

No need for convoluted, disingenuous analogies. Men are men regardless of how they look or what they call themselves.
We all know why single sex services and spaces for women are necessary and 'We're all mammals' just won't wash as a reason why women shouldn't have them.

All men are equally men. In hundreds of posts you have yet to prove why some men should be treated differently from others with regard to women's single sex spaces.
 

monkers

Squire
Yes @mickle - I see you sniggering. Queen Bee has spoken and commissioned you to be her drone.

Even the BBC is now finally laughing at how foolish you all are. The EHRC now seem to be arguing for toilet facilities that Badenoch ruled against in the legislation she introduced - a script that only Jay and Lynn could have written as such absurdity. I have the voice of Sir Humphrey in my ears right now, and Bernard asking ''what are we going to do about dogfish and catfish?''

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyw9qjeq8po
 
Last edited:
Men are men regardless of how they look or what they call themselves.
We all know why single sex services and spaces for women are necessary and 'We're all mammals' just won't wash as a reason why women shouldn't have them.

All men are equally men. In hundreds of posts you have yet to prove why some men should be treated differently from others with regard to women's single sex spaces.

That bit is only true if you've swallowed the TERF Koolaid.

I haven't so I'm seeing a different reality.

The vast majority of Trans people, GRC or not, are genuine in their moving from one gender to the other.

If they're dodgy then the same laws that would have me banged up for inappropriate behaviour are available.
 

Psamathe

Senior Member
The vast majority of Trans people, GRC or not, are genuine in their moving from one gender to the other.
Most trans women will be doing their best to look like women (eg electrolysis) and most won't be bearded.
Most trans men will be doing their best to be men.

So most trans women using women's toilets won't be noticed whereas a trans man using women's toilets will probably be noticed and "what's a man doing in our toilets ...". Vice versa.

Situation pre-judgement was most people going into women's toilet will look like women. Situation after judgement is "you can't tell by appearances" because that man in the women's toilets is likely a trans man. Vice versa.

Ian
 

CXRAndy

Veteran
I could post half a dozen blokes who have done the least possible to be more feminine in looks 😁
 
Because the male prisoners who identify as women are sex offenders first and 'women' second.

Doesn't explain why transwomen have a higher rate of sexual offending than other men.

That bit is only true if you've swallowed the TERF Koolaid. I haven't so I'm seeing a different reality.
The vast majority of Trans people, GRC or not, are genuine in their moving from one gender to the other.
And? Sincerity doesn't change your sex. These men remain men. We don't have single sex spaces based on sincerity. We have them based on sex, because we all know that sex is the relevant factor.

If they're dodgy then the same laws that would have me banged up for inappropriate behaviour are available.

You're setting the bar at what women should tolerate at assault or sexual offending then. Privacy, dignity, feeling uncomfortable with men present in certain situations counts for nothing? In your view a woman who has been raped and asks for a female counsellor should have to accept a transwoman to recount her assault to then because the risk of assault is low?

Given that women are statistically at higher risk in mixed sex facilities, you're telling women they should simply accept that higher risk and let the police sort it out afterwards.

So most trans women using women's toilets won't be noticed whereas a trans man using women's toilets will probably be noticed and "what's a man doing in our toilets ...". Vice versa.

I disagree. You are saying most men can pass as women. I don't believe they do. And of course they remain men, and access to women's single sex spaces isn't based on whether you look the part.

As usual, Cyclechat lads think women's spaces are a reward for men who have made an effort. They aren't.
 

Xipe Totec

Something nasty in the woodshed
I could post half a dozen blokes who have done the least possible to be more feminine in looks 😁

You could - if only you could remember the PW for that hidden folder with its 50gb of 'specialist' images & videos.

But it's OK, we're fine with our 21st century imaginations. ^_^
 
Top Bottom