Gender again. Sorry!

[AuroraSaab]

As you couldn't be arsed to do your own googling, here's an explanation of the Equality Act and how it is legal to exclude men - including transwomen - from certain women's services as long as it is a 'fair and proportionate means' of maintaining single sex provision.

https://fairplayforwomen.com/equality-act-2010_womens-rights/

 

[multitool]

You are all over the place with this. The essence is this: If Self ID poses a real threat to women's safety then it would be observable in countries with Self IID. I've asked you for evidence of this, and I'm still waiting. Everything else is just noise.

Its the old story of equality legislation that makes next to no difference to the general public, but a huge difference to those who are discriminated against.

 

[multitool]

As you couldn't be arsed to do your own googling, here's an explanation of the Equality Act and how it is legal to exclude men - including transwomen - from certain women's services as long as it is a 'fair and proportionate means' of maintaining single sex provision.

You shouldn't have bothered. I took the time to read the complete study linked to by theclaud at the beginning of this thread and I then listened to the author's discussion podcasts over several hours.

 

[AuroraSaab]

You want me to list examples of how men identifying as women harms women?

Brazil - in the last few months

1. Transwoman assaults woman and baby. Crime will be recorded on the Women's stats and they will go to a women's prison if convicted. Watch the video.

https://g1.globo.com/ce/ceara/notic...r-com-bebe-no-colo-de-moto-em-movimento.ghtml

2. Female student assaulted when they asked a man to leave the women's toilets.
https://reduxx.info/brazil-female-s...washroom-access-says-she-was-afraid-of-dying/

Watch the video here.


View: https://mobile.twitter.com/ReduxxMag/status/1604352785876766721?s=20&t=63u2hy-hKIWTdrQ1hLadoQ



3. Brazilian feminist facing jail for calling a transwoman a man. Self ID compells us to lie.

https://reduxx.info/exclusive-brazi...-prison-after-calling-trans-politician-a-man/

I don't work to your schedule mate but I'll do some more tomorrow when I have time.

The Canada one will feature this guy though amongst many others. It impinges on everyone's right to speak about reality when they have to call this teacher 'Miss'. That's legal self ID for you though isn't it? It demands we all lie to validate someone's identity.

 

[multitool]

This isnt what Ive asked you for.

I've asked you to provide concrete examples where Self ID enshrined in law has resulted in an increase in sex offences. Because this is what you are saying will happen. What you are doing is posting examples of trans offenders you've had to scrape together from the entire globe, ignoring completely whether their ability to offend was provided by laws around Self ID.

You don't seem to understand the specificity of the discussion we are having.

 

[AuroraSaab]

No, you didn't. I have said self-ID harms women. And it does, it harms them in all sorts of ways. One of which is opening up all single sex services. Another of which is compelling people to ignore the evidence of their eyes, and compelling them to lie to validate a feeling in someone else's head.

It's you that is obsessed with making it all about toilets and who wants to ignore all the other ways self ID is bad for women.

If it wasn't for self-ID the men in those links wouldn't be in women's prisons. But they will and that harms women. If it wasn't for self-ID those crimes wouldn't be recorded on the Women's stats. But they will be, and that harms women.

I'll post some more links tomorrow. I'll find some photos too, though you probably won't like them because they might be of the

all it would take is a shave, a wig, a dress and some lippy.

type of thing. But being a woman is just a costume to you so I guess that's fine.

Lots of sports self-ID photos and links so might take a while to collate, but don't worry I won't forget.

Again though, I think it really says something about you if you think that women have to be sexually assaulted in a toilet before their welfare is worth getting worked up about. Anything less doesn't really matter does it?

 

[multitool]

So, you aren't going to produce evidence from countries with Self ID that the change in the law has brought about the increase in sex offences you say will definitely happen here? Okay. As I suspected. We both know why.

 

[Unkraut]

He's [Jesus] his own father isn't he?

There are answers to this old chestnut alleging incoherance. But that is for another day, if at all.

The incoherance that bothers me can be readily seen in a discussion on transgenderism on Dr Phil in the States. In it in the clip I saw two non-binaries managed the following:

a) Transwomen are women

When asked to define what a woman was shortly after they

b) declined/were not able to do so.

That sort of incoherance is all too common with this issue. You wouldn't expect it from secularists who pride themselves on reason.

You want me to list examples of how men identifying as women harms women?

You haven't managed this so far and I don't think you ever will. As transwomen are women, by defintion there can never be any male abuse in women's refuges or loos.

A thought experiment: if a biological woman claims to have been assaulted by a transwoman but this is denied, if you have to 'believe women' then which of the two do you believe? I have a suspicion as to what the answer might actually be!

I admire your stamina in standing up to what in my mind is insanity (at least as far as self-ID goes), but the problem it seems to me is that transgender ideologues have got this idea of transitioning into their heads, have this confirmed on the social media bubble they live in, and the rest of the world outside of their heads has to accept that this is reality. They insist on the right to have the freedom to live their lives exactly as they choose, but the suppression of dissent on this issue indicates their commitment to freedom as far as others go is somewhat restricted.

Now I could be wrong (!), but your altercation with Multitool seems to revolve around a defence of the idea of self-ID over against the real possibility of actual abuse in the real world. A real risk to women doesn't seem to feature very prominently.

There really is a very simple solution to the whole problem. It starts with the word truth.

 

[AuroraSaab]

So, you aren't going to produce evidence from countries with Self ID that the change in the law has brought about the increase in sex offences you say will definitely happen here? Okay. As I suspected. We both know why.

At this stage I'm starting to question your cognitive abilities because once again I have to explain that:

Men who identify as women, who comit crimes in countries that have self-ID, are recorded in the Women's statistics. How can we possibly know that men are using self-ID to comit opportunistic crimes? We can't because they are recorded as women. You are asking for stats on something that the law which allows self-ID stops you from collecting.
Why you think that not being able to provide stats when one of the harms of self-ID is not being able to provide stats is a huge gotcha, God only knows.

Sex crimes in self-ID ing Canada went up 18% between 2020 and 2021 though if that helps at all.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/beta.ctvnews.ca/national/canada/2022/8/2/1_6010840.amp.html

Unisex areas put women at risk. Self-ID makes everywhere a unisex area:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.in...oms-sunday-times-women-risk-a8519086.html?amp

But again women's feelings don't count for anything to you. Unless they're being raped in a toilet it's all just small potatoes.

 

[multitool]

In amongst the ranting, the diversions, the irrelevancies, and the personal attack is the admission by you that you don't have any data to back up your claim.

 

[Unkraut]

Men who identify as women, who comit crimes in countries that have self-ID, are recorded in the Women's statistics.

I wasn't aware of this when I commented on your post above which might have seemed a bit facetious, which was not the intention.

In amongst the ranting, the diversions, the irrelevancies, and the personal attack is the admission by you that you don't have any data to back up your claim.

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

 

[winjim]

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

See what? AS's posting style is to not engage with the points being made, drag the conversation off sideways and then, when people make efforts to not allow her to set the agenda, argue that they aren't answering specific questions. Now somebody has asked her a specific question for a specific purpose and is simply declining to be pulled off course. I have tried on this thread and others to do the same, but with possibly less success and a bit more snark.


I wonder if anything could have happened in 2020 which would result in fewer people using public lavatories?

 

[AuroraSaab]

That's my point though, Winjim. Multitool wants to narrow 'harm' to such a specific thing that no statistics could show it because the stats for most countries don't differentiate between where offences took place and most infringements aren't even recorded.

Most women don't report stuff to the police, they just self-exclude. And the ones who do make the news will be ones that feature transwomen.

It's you guys who want to make it all about offences in toilets. And it just speaks volumes that unless it comes down to official stats on public bathrooms you really don't think it matters.

Last year Tasmania ruled that lesbians cannot exclude men from meetings because they have self-ID laws. Lesbian women literally cannot meet now knowing that the meeting will be all same sex attracted women. It's not rape in a toilet, it's not filming under cubicles even, but it's a harmful effect of self-ID and it matters.

And Multitool doesn't even want to say how much of an increase in recorded sex crimes would be too many. He wants to see the stats before he can decide if it's a price it's worth making women pay.

 

[mudsticks]

So, you aren't going to produce evidence from countries with Self ID that the change in the law has brought about the increase in sex offences you say will definitely happen here? Okay. As I suspected. We both know why.

AS has stated quite clearly that this increase in sex offences (whether or not they occur) couldn't be recorded post self IDing becoming accepted for crime stats, because crimes committed by transwomen would be recorded as having been committed by women.

I don't agree with everything that AS says about the trans issue, I'm generally supportive of the trans community, and I'm no fan of culture wars 'moral panic' which is usually just the establishment pushing back against progress they don't understand.

However it's definitely the case that many women have very good reasons for wanting their own safe spaces.

And those reasons and even the feelings surrounding those issues. shouldn't be dismissed as irrelevant, nor shouted down with 'show me the stats'.

Women are and have been oppressed by male on female violence for centuries.
There are plenty of 'stats' for that, and they're only the tip of the iceberg of what actually happens.

That hasn't gone away, so how about having some consideration for that very real fact, and the very real fears and concerns that women, particularly vulnerable women have around this issue.

 

[winjim]

It's you guys who want to make it all about offences in toilets. And it just speaks volumes that unless it comes down to official stats on public bathrooms you really don't think it matters.

Oh fark off.