Gender again. Sorry!

[Bromptonaut]

The end result of all this transphobic bollox is that REAL harm is done to girls and women because of it, rather than the imaginary harms done to women and girls by trans women.

That. Exactly.

 

[newfhouse]

I'm sure you appreciate that there are men who get off on being in women's spaces, and exposing their genitals.

I do. You haven’t persuaded me that they are people that have started down the road of gaining a GRC, whether in three months, six months or two years.

There are also people who seek to normalise this stuff around kids.

Just for clarity, what is “this stuff” and who are these people? Do you mean deliberate exposure intended to cause distress or simply tolerance and understanding that trans folk exist?

Transactivists don't want this.

Are all trans activists (whatever that means) of a single mind any more than, say, cyclists?

We've seen the reception the idea of an Open category in sports gets on here.

Are you talking about Monkers’ tale of her friend? If I understood the story correctly she‘s a female that wasn’t allowed to compete in the female category without also describing herself as a woman. Is that about the size of it? If so, how much does that illuminate the wider conflict in sports where you argue that it’s only biology that matters?

 

[AuroraSaab]

I do. You haven’t persuaded me that they are people that have started down the road of gaining a GRC, whether in three months, six months or two years.

There's no checking of GRC's for the entry of transwomen to women's single sex spaces and services. I think you are naive if you imagine it will be possible to limit admission to those who you consider are genuinely transgender. Though obviously whether they are genuine or not they are still males in females spaces, which might be distressing enough to some.

Do you value the feelings of transwomen over women's feelings in such situations?

Just for clarity, what is “this stuff” and who are these people? Do you mean deliberate exposure intended to cause distress or simply tolerance and understanding that trans folk exist?

Being in women's spaces. They don't need to do anything, it's enough to be there.

Are all trans activists (whatever that means) of a single mind any more than, say, cyclists?

No, there are many transwomen on social media who don't seek access to single sex spaces and services. They haven't had any trouble using male facilities for years.

Are you talking about Monkers’ tale of her friend? If I understood the story correctly she‘s a female that wasn’t allowed to compete in the female category without also describing herself as a woman. Is that about the size of it? If so, how much does that illuminate the wider conflict in sports where you argue that it’s only biology that matters?

It doesn't. It's about validation. It's not up to anybody to validate your identity.

 

[monkers]

Being in women's spaces. They don't need to do anything, it's enough to be there.

Learn the law, 'intent' is far from insignificant. Getting changed in a changing room is not intend to cause alarm or distress. We've already covered this with reference to the black text of the law. 'Being there' is not an offence. You were surprised to learn that no law is broken if a chap decides to take a naked walk in the park.

 

[newfhouse]

Do you value the feelings of transwomen over women's feelings in such situations?

Hard to say without specifics, but yes, it’s possible that I would in some circumstances.

 

[classic33]

I could put a dozen news reports up of how gender identity over riding sex has harmed women and girls, and title it 'A price worth paying?'. Your response would be 'Yes, but this hardly ever happens... this case is an outlier..... it doesn't really matter anyway.... it's just a few ....'

'A price worth paying?' Not a price likely to be paid by any of you lot anyway.

View attachment 4058

She, Shakira Reed, twenty years for murdering her "partner". Kitchen knife into the groin, severing the femoral ayery. Refused an early release, she wanted despite an appeal, due in part to attacking/assaulting another female prisoner. But her behavior whilst inside Edna Mahon Correction Facility.

Three wrongs don't make one right, but she's no angel herself.

Worth bearing in mind that the facility is privately owned. A business in it to make a profit.

 

[classic33]

Just done a bit more googling about Aurora's so-called 'Shakira Reid' story.Another outlet "Voz media" carrying same alleged story. Nobody else.

Sounds really legit doesn't it.

No wonder Aurora holds the views she does. Again, the parallels with literally every other fake-conspiracy cult are stark. Fake media output by outlets you've never heard of. Lapped up by the gullible because they are already captured.

It appears in a number of places, but all refer back to the same exclusive interview with reduxx. No other source available, even official sources.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Hard to say without specifics, but yes, it’s possible that I would in some circumstances.

Which ones? Prisons? Rape crisis centres? Someone who wants a same sex carer for intimate care? Sports?

I think you might find that if you think sex matters in any of those situations, and the exemptions of the Equality Act should therefore be used when necessary, you will be considered transphobic.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Learn the law, 'intent' is far from insignificant. Getting changed in a changing room is not intend to cause alarm or distress. We've already covered this with reference to the black text of the law. 'Being there' is not an offence. You were surprised to learn that no law is broken if a chap decides to take a naked walk in the park.

It doesn't matter what the intent is if it causes distress. Are you seriously saying we should only take someone's distress into account if the person causing the distress could be proved to have the intention of doing so? This is exactly the kind of thing the exclusions of the Equality Act were intended for. A sauna set up for men don't have to prove that each individual woman was causing distress in the sauna. They can exclude all women from the outset if they wish.

Huge difference between a naked walk in a public park and being in a space or service set up exclusively for single sex purposes.

 

[classic33]

Which ones? Prisons? Rape crisis centres? Someone who wants a same sex carer for intimate care? Sports?

I think you might find that if you think sex matters in any of those situations, and the exemptions of the Equality Act should therefore be used when necessary, you will be considered transphobic.

You've made it quite clear that you don't agree with what the Equalities Act says. You have your own interpretation of it and expect everyone else to agree with you.

Given the amount of misinformation you're posting, is it any wonder that people aren't taking either your view or links you're posting seriously?

Still waiting on your answer on how you win a race tha isn't a race. Despite you're view on it.

 

[classic33]

It doesn't matter what the intent is if it causes distress. Are you seriously saying we should only take someone's distress into account if the person causing the distress could be proved to have the intention of doing so? This is exactly the kind of thing the exclusions of the Equality Act were intended for. A sauna set up for men don't have to prove that each individual woman was causing distress in the sauna. They can exclude all women from the outset if they wish.

Huge difference between a naked walk in a public park and being in a space or service set up exclusively for single sex purposes.

We'd a "woman only morning" at the local baths, every Thursday. Then one of those who attended on a regular basis, mentioned there was no similar "men only morning" which meant they were breaking the law.

Shortly after the "women only morning" was cancelled. Lesson there, don't point out the obvious, thinking how clever you've been and expect to get away scot free.

 

[AuroraSaab]

You've made it quite clear that you don't agree with what the Equalities Act says. You have your own interpretation of it and expect everyone else to agree with you.

The Equality Act allows the providers of services to exclude people for all sorts of reasons. It's been well publicised and clarified. Just because you and others on here don't accept that doesn't make it so.

Given the amount of misinformation you're posting, is it any wonder that people aren't taking either your view or links you're posting seriously?

I really don't give a toss what you think, Classic. Sorry to be rude about it.

Still waiting on your answer on how you win a race tha isn't a race. Despite you're view on it.

They have a leader board and categories marked 'Men' and 'Women'. If it's not a race (albeit not a conventional race) why have a leader board and listing of times within categories? Why bother recording times if there isn't an element of competition and prestige in doing well involved? In fact, why bother organising it at all? You could just do the route on your own and time yourself.

 

[theclaud]

Happens every day. Can't move for vestigial penises on the loose in women's changes rooms.

My wife says she has to run the gauntlet of them everything she goes for a swim.

She's gotta get her kicks somehow, to be fair.

 

[theclaud]

We'd a "woman only morning" at the local baths, every Thursday. Then one of those who attended on a regular basis, mentioned there was no similar "men only morning" which meant they were breaking the law.

Shortly after the "women only morning" was cancelled. Lesson there, don't point out the obvious, thinking how clever you've been and expect to get away scot free.

The lesson is actually that if you are a massive misogynist creep you can manipulate the law or influence providers to your own advantage.

 

[monkers]

It doesn't matter what the intent is if it causes distress.

Mens Rea --- look it up unless you want to keep on looking such a farking idiot.