Gender again. Sorry!
- Thread starter theclaud
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
AuroraSaab
Shaman
Yes, once women don't feel unsafe, vulnerable, or that their privacy is compromised by having men present then everything can be unisex.
Do that first. Until then we need single sex spaces.
monkers
Squire
That depends on the opinions being expressed. You've stated your fundamental position relates to men, women, girls, kids. These are fundamental Christian moral positions. However in this country, the Christianity thing is on the wane. Not because of immigration, but because more of the indigenous population are rejecting it.
You've picked an argument with trans people for not following your Christian traditions. However the British tradition is not founded on religious fervour. We have a necessary separation between church and state, of monarch and state, and of legislature and judiciary. These are essential features of a functioning democracy.
Convention rights are the rights of all people to live without facing the prejudices and discrimination of others.
There is a valid work in the vocabulary who refuse to accept the validity of the lives of others. That word is 'bigot'.
This was never about the protection of women and girls, it was about the assumption that your moral code is superior and that your position of being a white man was superior. That isn't helpful to women and girls.
monkers
Squire
Then do that first. The problems are manifold. You picked on a vulnerable minority rather than tackle the root of the problem. The narrative of male violence has been abused to launch a campaign against a minority group not proven to be the problem.
We have the evidence. We know who the perpetrators are. We know who the victims are. We know where most of the violence and sexual assaults take place. We know they are getting away with it. We know who is propagating misogyny and violence. We know we need to spend a great deal of resources to tackle it.
You have a clearly expressed distaste of trans women, but you've produced no evidence that they are a significant part of the problem.
So while you do this, women and girls continue to be harmed, only now since April women have been made less comfortable and less safe.
View: https://youtu.be/yso51SExoWM
CXRAndy
Guru
I've said it before but will repeat it for you
Live your life as you so wish,
But
Don't interfere with others.
Women don't want males in the spaces. This directly impacts the females in my sphere of life and I will defend that position, because it's what I think is fair, right and proper.
I can't be a bigot the supreme court has made a decision which pretty much agrees with my stance. The general public agree with my stance.
Live your life as you so wish,
But
Don't interfere with others.
Women don't want males in the spaces. This directly impacts the females in my sphere of life and I will defend that position, because it's what I think is fair, right and proper.
I can't be a bigot the supreme court has made a decision which pretty much agrees with my stance. The general public agree with my stance.
monkers
Squire
Of course you can be a bigot. Not only does the state protect bigotry as a philosophical belief now, we have senior political figures also tainted by the God bug, like Wes Streeting for example.
AuroraSaab
Shaman
I've never said that. Women of any appearance are welcome to use women's single sex spaces. Men, of any appearance, aren't.
monkers
Squire
You are correct, you didn't say that, Randy did. I apologise to you for the wrong attribution. I goofed at a failure to multi-task.
CXRAndy
Guru
monkers
Squire
A further example of what makes you a moron. Bigoty protects no one. In the real world it just escalates unrest until it becomes violent.
AuroraSaab
Shaman
Given that it would take years - a century even - to eradicate male behaviour that makes women feel unsafe and uncomfortable, excluding men from women's spaces until that happens is a reasonable way of dealing with the current issues. That includes all men because it's not just about safety and all men are equally men.
This is like saying 'We need to eradicate prejudice against the disabled before we make any practical accommodations for them. We can't do both'.
Last edited:
CXRAndy
Guru
You're flailing around with outrage
Things have changed over the last year or so. People, government, experts have been silenced over woke nonsense.
Women have fought back, experts have been listened to, resulting in the closure of Tavistock, puberty blockers banned, surgery halted.
Judiciary at the highest level announcing clear unambiguous law protecting females
All the while still offering the same basic protection for everyone. Whether male female or the plethora of TiM and Tif
This is happening all over the world
monkers
Squire
Nice little rant there Randy!
Tavistock Centre? Puberty blockers? Surgery?
Nothing there related to the Supreme Court ruling. But everything there to do with bigotry. You are demanding the right to control people and deny their bodily autonomy, because you always think you know best.
So nothing to do with protecting your wife and daughter from harm from men in women's toilets.
Just bigotry on show. Yup you're right bigotry is all over the world. Wherever there are those with religious indoctrination there is bigoty. True story.
monkers
Squire
Oh. Is this also you?
Blimey that's an impressive U turn that even Starmer would be proud of.
monkers
Squire
What utter nonsense. The loos for disabled people is because their needs are different. They can't get a wheelchair in a standard loo. They can't even always get through the outer door. And there's no alarm if they fall.
