Gender again. Sorry!

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

multitool

Pharaoh
No, I've said that previously they would either avoid public facilities or a small number would use the Ladies - and women were accommodating of this very small number because they were likely of the view that such men were genuinely dysphoric.

That isn't what you've just said, at all.

I'm not playing your games. In the space of a handful of exchanges you've lied, misrepresented, tried to move goalposts and engaged in whataboutery.
 

CXRAndy

Guru
Reads straight forward to me.

I think multi has comprehension blindness. Probably due to his hatred of certain posters
 

classic33

Senior Member
Would you really? An expectation that comes at no cost to you at all obviously. You just get to feel all nice and progressive.
Why can't transwomen go in the Men's toilet with you, Bromptonaut?



You've said several times that the transwoman you work with uses Women's facilities, so obviously you're not going to see them in the Men's.
Two people in the same cubical, people would start talking. Especially if they were to do it on a regular basis.

Why can't trans men use the women's?
 
'Why can't they go in the Men's toilets with you, Bromptonaut?'


And with that every concern women and girls have is waved away by a man who doesn't give a toss for their dignity, privacy, or safety.

We've been here before. Whether we're talking about a man or a woman is the fundamental contrast between your camp and mine.

Neither of us are going to change the other's mind so we'll just have to agree to differ.

I'm ignoring the man who doesn't give a toss stuff; I'm not rising to bait on this forum.
 
That 'fundamental contrast' costs you absolutely nothing though. That 'agree to disagree' comes at no cost to you whatsoever. You get to imagine you are part of the progressive Be Kind crew because you think your trans identifying work colleague is a woman now so therefore all trans identifying men are women too. The wider implications of saying men can be women simply don't concern you at all. It's unfortunate that women and girls can't afford to be so parochial.
 

classic33

Senior Member
That 'fundamental contrast' costs you absolutely nothing though. That 'agree to disagree' comes at no cost to you whatsoever. You get to imagine you are part of the progressive Be Kind crew because you think your trans identifying work colleague is a woman now so therefore all trans identifying men are women too. The wider implications of saying men can be women simply don't concern you at all. It's unfortunate that women and girls can't afford to be so parochial.
And as you keep reminding us, you don't speak for all women, because you can't.

What you want for yourself however, isn't going to happen.
 

CXRAndy

Guru
And as you keep reminding us, you don't speak for all women, because you can't.

What you want for yourself however, isn't going to happen.

But it's apparent that vast majority of women do not want men of any type in their spaces.

Also a fair chunk of men who have a wife, girlfriend or daughter s would not want men near their women folk too
 
You claimed most women were happy with transwomen using their toilets and changing rooms, disingenuously posting half a survey result as evidence. In fact, positive support was actually only 34% (toilets) in favour and 38% (changing rooms), but drops to 25% and 29% for those without surgery.

Which proves my point that the public still think 'transwoman' means men on hormones who have had surgery. In reality it means 'anybody who says they are a woman'.
 

multitool

Pharaoh
Nope.

You claimed (as does Andy) that "the majority" are against.

Turns out it is a minority that are against.

You then tried to bend numbers.
 
You've routinely claimed that women don't share my views. Turns out that not even in mixed polling do people share yours, nevermind just women.
 
Top Bottom