How is it disingenuous? Are you saying the newsparers aren't accurately reporting the court decisions?
You were seeking to minimise the crimes of those transwomen placed on the women's wing of Limerick jail and I provided the links so people can read for themselves.
You've committed to 'transwomen are women' and got yourself in a position where you're compelled to defend this ridiculous policy because if they aren't in a women's jail then it proves they aren't really women. Ditto sports.
What I am saying is clear - it's
your inability to be truthful. I remember seeing this endlessly with Brexit campaigners; example, 'the unelected EU Commission'. While this is true, it's also a big fat lie, because while the Commission are not elected, it's because they don't need to be. In democratic structures, decision makers are elected, civil servants are not. This is a prime example of being disingenuous, and it's a style you've adopted.
What you chose to say, was that there were three trans women convicted of sex offences in a women's prison.
What you chose not to say was that, they were on the women's prison estate but not within the women's prison.
You chose not to say that two of them were convicted for prostitution, which is now decriminalised anyway, and that in itself does not make them a danger to other women.
You chose not to say that they had no access to any other prisoner even in the same wing let alone in the prison estate.
You chose to portray danger, where in fact there was none, at least not to other prisoners, but potential for a great deal of harm to those isolated prisoners.
In other words, you cherry-pick bits of the truth to portray danger where there is none. So I have to ask, what is it that makes a person want to do that? The only answer I have to that, is that you are deliberately being an alarmist; and that is where the similarity is with one aspect of fascism.
