Gender again. Sorry!

[monkers]

It was a joke, Aurora, FFS, not an argument for the existence of a third sex.

My memory may serve me incorrectly, but I think your rhetoric towards Semenya has hardened, hasn't it? It's one thing to argue that she should should be ineligible to compete in existing female categories on account of her DSD or testosterone levels or whatever, it's quite another that you think she shouldn't be able to have a piss in an adjacent cubicle.

It's monstrous.

 

[mudsticks]

The data shows that men predate mostly on people who live in their household, or otherwise are violent to other men on the street. Who knew right?

The data also shows that women are more violent than men, men are expected to just suck it up.

Example; this should be in your reach Andy. A woman slaps a man around the face for saying something she doesn't like. The man should stand there and take it.

A woman pours a man's drink over his head in the pub, or pushes his dinner into his lap in a restaurant ... and people cheer. A person puts a tomato food product into the hair of a woman on the other side of the world for saying something they don't like, and the world goes nuts.

Got it yet, the deck is loaded, and you are making it worse.

The solution is for people, that's men and women, cis and trans, hetty and queer to stop hurting each other.

Try advocating peace, instead of violence against a marginalised and maligned group.

Seriously are you suggesting women are more violent than men??

Because 'throwing food'??


Where are they hiding all the bodies of the men murdered by their intimate partners or exes??

Coming up with bs like this somewhat invalidates any of your other arguments.

I agree statistically that predatory men predate more on people in their own sphere, than on strangers

But that's not exactly cheering news given the fact that they do also predate on strangers.

 

[monkers]

21 leading experts from 8 countries have written to the Wall Street Journal expressing disagreement with the new head of the Endocrine Society and their stance on childhood transition. It's paywalled but the gist is that the evidence of benefit is weak and a more cautious approach is warranted:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trans-...-transition-hormone-surgery-evidence-c1961e27

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1679603669010989057.html

Experts in what?

According to you Kathleen Stock is an expert. . So expert that 600 of her colleagues signed an open letter of disagreement with her views. So expert that she can't process data. So expert that the lead author of the work she cherry-picked data from and abused publicly rebuked her.

 

[AuroraSaab]

It was a joke, Aurora, FFS, not an argument for the existence of a third sex.

My memory may serve me incorrectly, but I think your rhetoric towards Semenya has hardened, hasn't it? It's one thing to argue that she should should be ineligible to compete in existing female categories on account of her DSD or testosterone levels or whatever, it's quite another that you think she shouldn't be able to have a piss in an adjacent cubicle.

It has I suppose because their case has been used as a way of pushing for the inclusion of transwomen in the female category. Dsd's are medical conditions, some have serious health implications, but to Monkers et al they are simply a way of trying to disprove the sex binary, which in turn they imagine means Lia Thomas can swim with the girls.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Experts in what?

"Among the international experts is Dr. Riita Kaltiala, chief psychiatrist at Tampere University gender clinic, author of numerous peer-reviewed articles on trans medicine, and Finland's top authority on pediatric gender care".

Actual experts with integrity, not US docs who make a lucrative living from gender medicine and removing teenagers breasts and genitalia.

 

[winjim]

I can't quite believe I'm wading back in to post this, partly because I find the toilet thing utterly ridiculous which I pointed out several thousand posts ago when I first introduced the subject as a joke, and partly because it's so blindingly obvious anyway, but...

If we accept that cis men are a threat, and if we say trans women must use either the gents toilet or one open to all, then we are forcing trans women to share a space with cis men where they will presumably be at risk. The proposed solution to the stated problem is one for cis women only, it puts trans people at greater risk.

 

[monkers]

Seriously are you suggesting women are more violent than men??

Because 'throwing food'??


Where are they hiding all the bodies of the men murdered by their intimate partners or exes??

Coming up with bs like this somewhat invalidates any of your other arguments.

I agree statistically that predatory men predate more on people in their own sphere, than on strangers

But that's not exactly cheering news given the fact that they do also predate on strangers.

Another one who can't process. And this is the problem.

The Home Office data that I posted here clearly shows that in the UK 55% of arrests for violence are female. It also shows that societal conditioning means that they don't face consequences for it, but men do, and black men more so, and queer people more so, and trans people more than that. Juries are ordinary citizens, or what Andy calls 'normal' people; they have biases.

The food product comment was concerned with the societal conditioning that accepts these acts committed by women against men as acceptable, but not acceptable when commit the same act against women.

I've never poured a drink over anyone, slapped the face of anyone, or pushed their dinner into their lap.

Here you are not objecting to men being treated this way, just women. Why?

 

[monkers]

"Among the international experts is Dr. Riita Kaltiala, chief psychiatrist at Tampere University gender clinic, author of numerous peer-reviewed articles on trans medicine, and Finland's top authority on pediatric gender care".

Actual experts with integrity, not US docs who make a lucrative living from gender medicine and removing teenagers breasts and genitalia.

Well that's fine and dandy. That's two, what of the others, and what do they say?

 

[Deleted member 159]

The data shows that men predate mostly on people who live in their household, or otherwise are violent to other men on the street. Who knew right?

The data also shows that women are more violent than men, men are expected to just suck it up.

Example; this should be in your reach Andy. A woman slaps a man around the face for saying something she doesn't like. The man should stand there and take it.

A woman pours a man's drink over his head in the pub, or pushes his dinner into his lap in a restaurant ... and people cheer. A person puts a tomato food product into the hair of a woman on the other side of the world for saying something they don't like, and the world goes nuts.

Got it yet, the deck is loaded, and you are making it worse.

The solution is for people, that's men and women, cis and trans, hetty and queer to stop hurting each other.

Try advocating peace, instead of violence against a marginalised and maligned group.

I'm not advocating violence against anyone, the ones advocating this are men who think they are female. Punch a woman is cheered from nut jobs at open air meetings.

When men who are questioned about being a female, they get aggressive, this is typical male behaviour, not that of women

 

[Deleted member 159]

The Home Office data that I posted here clearly shows that in the UK 55% of arrests for violence are female

Police record violence of a particular sex, so when questioned and a male says they are female, the data records female violence

 

[theclaud]

Another one who can't process. And this is the problem.

The Home Office data that I posted here clearly shows that in the UK 55% of arrests for violence are female. It also shows that societal conditioning means that they don't face consequences for it, but men do, and black men more so, and queer people more so, and trans people more than that. Juries are ordinary citizens, or what Andy calls 'normal' people; they have biases.

The food product comment was concerned with the societal conditioning that accepts these acts committed by women against men as acceptable, but not acceptable when commit the same act against women.

I've never poured a drink over anyone, slapped the face of anyone, or pushed their dinner into their lap.

Here you are not objecting to men being treated this way, just women. Why?

Mudsticks' point about seriousness is important tho. I wouldn't really consider throwing a drink over someone to be 'violence', unless it included throwing the glass or was part of a sustained assault. Family annihilation is a bit of a different kettle of fish...

 

[monkers]

I'm not advocating violence against anyone, the ones advocating this are men who think they are female. Punch a woman is cheered from nut jobs at open air meetings.

This was already explained.

It was a response to the other side since one of them who boxes was advocating something about punching the bastards in the face. It was a taunt and that was applauded. Nobody actually then got up and punched anybody else, because they understood what you can not - that there was context and nuance.

 

[Deleted member 159]

I can't quite believe I'm wading back in to post this, partly because I find the toilet thing utterly ridiculous which I pointed out several thousand posts ago when I first introduced the subject as a joke, and partly because it's so blindingly obvious anyway, but...

If we accept that cis men are a threat, and if we say trans women men who think they are women must use either the gents toilet or one open to all, then we are forcing trans women to share a space with cis men where they will presumably be at risk. The proposed solution to the stated problem is one for cis women only, it puts trans people at greater risk.

Use the proper words

 

[Deleted member 159]

This was already explained.

It was a response to the other side since one of them who boxes was advocating something about punching the bastards in the face. It was a taunt and that was applauded. Nobody actually then got up and punched anybody else, because they understood what you can not - that there was context and nuance.

No it was inciting violence on women mainly.

 

[monkers]

Mudsticks' point about seriousness is important tho. I wouldn't really consider throwing a drink over someone to be 'violence', unless it included throwing the glass or was part of a sustained assault. Family annihilation is a bit of a different kettle of fish...

The difference is Claud, that the data shows that more women are arrested than men for violence. Those arrests do not include face-slapping, drink overhead pouring, dinner pushing incidents, because as you say, people don't call that violence.

The higher arrest rate is for actual violence, but women are refusing to acknowledge that data. Aurora's processing of the data is a thing to behold.