Gender again. Sorry!

[classic33]

It can't have escaped you that people often advocate against things that are detrimental to them, whether it's what affects them individually or what affects their sex class. It's their right to do so. It's what you do when you argue for men in women's prisons and men in women's sports. You are advocating for the feelings of your sex class (male) to be prioritised over that of females. It's your right to do so. It's my right to object. This can't be news.

You don't like the law of the country though, saying that what you feel/think comes before the law. A trans woman is a women, non of this "you are who you say you are" nonsense you keep repeating. A trans man is woman in your view, despite what the law says. However you have said, you can check your own posts, that they should use the men's facilities. A slightly warped view, but it's become the norm for yourself.

That a women, one of two in a seperate facility*, should be placed in the men's prison is a victory in your book.

It's clear that you don't like laws that stop you doing what you want to do. Have a physical check on all those entering any space you might use. Even if it will never be in the same building.

You are dismissive of the laws of other countries when they are against what you feel should be happening.

*Both women are still in the building, built for women, that has now been transferred to the men's section. The use of the building has been lost for those it were built for. But two women are now no longer in a women's prison.

 

[classic33]

Odd that you think you need to see genitals to know who is male or female. Must have made it difficult when you were dating.

It was, and is yourself who has demanded that such checks be made, before entry is allowed. Or if there is any doubt once the person is in.

Take note of what you have posted previously.

 

[multitool]

Odd that you think you need to see genitals to know who is male or female. Must have made it difficult when you were dating.

Apparently not, considering non-conforming women and butch lesbians are reporting aggression in toilets from people with the same mindset as you

You seem to enjoy it when women face intimidation as you've routinely dismissed the demonstrations against Kathleen Stock and KJK. At least some of your fellow travellers on here can very occasionally bring themselves to condemn some of the worse elements of transactivism.

There you go again telling people what they think, and then railing against it.

I enjoy seeing your fasho hero KJK getting sent packing.

People dont like it when she turns up and then all of a sudden men in black shirts are sieg heiling.

Everybody must be as bored as of this childish back and forth on here as they are of your same tactics on the asylum thread though. It's about 75% of the whole forum these days so I'll let you crack on.

Well that's weird because everytime I log on I come back to a plethora of likes which, whilst not essential, are a nice mark of appreciation. That Pallid Rinder is an ar§ehat is not my fault.

You could always pop me on ignore, but here you are, always responding to my every word, regardless of to whom I'm replying.

 

[Bromptonaut]

The reality is that there are, at least potentially, conflicting interests between natal women and trans women. Society, and the laws which it makes, will need to balance those conflicting rights.

It seemed to be managing OK until GC/TERF views moved to the for.

 

[icowden]

It seemed to be managing OK until GC/TERF views moved to the for.

But isn't that directly the fault of pro-trans activists trying to use the tactics of fascism to silence GC/ TERF views?

Generally speaking, all GC/TERFs have asked for is research, conversation and to ensure fairness to both trans people and non-trans, whether that is in the field of elite sport or somewhere else. JK Rowling hasn't called for anyone to be cancelled or silenced. Graham Linehan hasn't called for performances to be closed down, or protests to be held about them.

There is something very pernicious about the desire to silence discussion rather than to to have discussion, and it seldom comes from a good place.

 

[multitool]

Ah yes.

Just "reasonable concerns".

And then, before you know it...

 

[icowden]

Just "reasonable concerns".
And then, before you know it..

Yes, and that is why "TERFs" are concerned about the Gender Ideology movement. They wish to silence all discourse under a mantra of "these things must not be discussed". That is the behaviour of a cult.

 

[AuroraSaab]

The reality is that there are, at least potentially, conflicting interests between natal women and trans women. Society, and the laws which it makes, will need to balance those conflicting rights.

It seemed to be managing OK until GC/TERF views moved to the for.

Perhaps it wasn't managing ok. Perhaps you just hadn't noticed until it was brought to wider attention.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Ah yes. Just "reasonable concerns".
And then, before you know it...

View attachment 4519

Oh look here's the ipaper having to make an apology for their man Patrick Strudwick making the same allegation you continue to make. Because it was wrong and libellous presumably.

Funny how trans people have their own meetings, demos, and Pride or whatever, and it's very rare for women turn up to disrupt them or assault the participants. But whether it's Julie Bindell, Kathleen Stock, or KJK, when women meet up it's not long before the transactivists and masked lads in black appear.

 

[Ian H]

Oh look here's the ipaper having to make an apology for their man Patrick Strudwick making the same allegation you continue to make. Because it was wrong and libellous presumably.

View attachment 4520

Funny how trans people have their own meetings, demos, and Pride or whatever, and it's very rare for women turn up to disrupt them or assault the participants. But whether it's Julie Bindell, Kathleen Stock, or KJK, when women meet up it's not long before the transactivists and masked lads in black appear.

No-one is not even the DM) denying that the nazi saluters are anti-trans. But, you know, plausible deniability as to whether they are officially there helps.

 

[multitool]

Oh look here's the ipaper having to make an apology for their man Patrick Strudwick making the same allegation you continue to make. Because it was wrong and libellous presumably.

View attachment 4520

Funny how trans people have their own meetings, demos, and Pride or whatever, and it's very rare for women turn up to disrupt them or assault the participants. But whether it's Julie Bindell, Kathleen Stock, or KJK, when women meet up it's not long before the transactivists and masked lads in black appear.

Oh look.

Here you are again. Replying. Even though you weren't mentioned, and you said you'd "leave me to it".

And yet again, your dishonest trick of misrepresentation.

I have never said that Minshull invited the black-shirted sieg-heiling fascists to her rally, and yet...weird isn't it...how they always seem to be there. Whether it be these loons or Minshull posing for photos with Proud Boys.

She doesn't need to invite them. They come anyway.

She's quite comfy with that.

 

[Pale Rider]

so that is where I and pretty much the rest of the people here reserve the right to point it out.

Steady on, a few likes from the same, predictable little squad is one thing, but 'pretty much the rest of the people on here' is quite another.

That is another ludicrous and baseless assertion.

You profess to be the stats whizzo, so you will know that 'pretty much the rest of the people on here' have not expressed a preference.

 

[multitool]

By here, I mean in this thread.

 

[icowden]

I have never said that Minshull invited the black-shirted sieg-heiling fascists to her rally, and yet...weird isn't it...how they always seem to be there. Whether it be these loons or Minshull posing for photos with Proud Boys.

I know. It's almost as if, for example, people who say that there is nothing wrong with eating beef should be conflated with a group of extremists who think that all cows should be barbecued and any non-beef eaters sacrificed to the many tentacled lord.

Both groups support the eating of beef. It doesn't mean that they are on the same side, or share the same core beliefs.

She doesn't need to invite them. They come anyway.
She's quite comfy with that.

In a free country, how do you suppose that she stop them? You seem to be advocating for censorship again.

 

[newfhouse]

I know. It's almost as if, for example, people who say that there is nothing wrong with eating beef should be conflated with a group of extremists who think that all cows should be barbecued and any non-beef eaters sacrificed to the many tentacled lord.

If the loonies turned up in your garden every time you lit the barbecue I’d wonder how hard you were trying to dissuade them.