Gender again. Sorry!

[AuroraSaab]

Why introduce it then, if you now feel that way?

The Irish Examiner link is from August 2021. The number in that piece is less than the number you gave earlier.
Barbie Kardashian is in isolation due to her attacking a male prison worker, nothing to do with her GRC, issued before he reached the legal age required to apply himself. The "inside information", if from anyone within the prison service would cost them their jobs. Which leaves hearsay, not official "evidence" as the source.

Why did you include the disabled, gay men and mentally vulnerable in your list of those likely to want to move to a women's prison.

You swap and change your points to choose what you want to try and portray is the problem.

There's something that frightens you, and that is driving the hatred you are posting.

Honestly, I don't know how many times I can politely explain it to you. 'Inside information' could be current or former prisoners btw, not just prison staff. You are doing all sorts of gymnastics to get past the basic fact that males are being housed in female prisons. I know your opinion on this issue comes from a place of compassion for people you see as outsiders, but I wish you'd extend that compassion to the women jailed with them and think about their feelings.

 

[AuroraSaab]

In itself, no it doesn't imply hatred.

But it is entirely possible that the actual motivation for it comes from a darker place, and there are thoughts that cannot be said openly. The clues come when the mask slips and more denigrating language and attitudes towards trans women emerges.

This is just the usual tactics of throwing mud and hoping it sticks. You can cry fascist, right wing, and transphobe all you like. It's just an attempt to shut down the debate.

By denigrating language I assume you mean calling transwomen men, or trans identified males. I could be equally insulted by language you have used about people on this thread.

I am happy for people to read both our contributions to this thread and decide who wins the prize for denigrating language, attitude, and mask slipping.

 

[jowwy]

Yes, you are wrong. It's been there all along.

Its ok to be wrong once, than all the time like you claud….thick as fark and your defender multitool, good name for him really. Tool by name, tool by nature

 

[jowwy]

I must confess that on occasion your théâtre de l'absurde living art installation goes over my head, but this time I've understood what you are doing. You are fashioning a reply to a given person's post, but choosing to post it quoting a random person's post (in this instance, me) thus provoking both chaos and unintended and undirected introspection.

It's genius.

A kind of post post-modern commentary on meaning(lessness), whilst also touching on both the ephemeral and socially disconnected nature of modern communication and the fragilité of human relationships. Would I be correct in thinking that it is perhaps also a coquettish nod to the Sisyphean nature of this thread, hmmmm?

I have literally no idea of where you plan to take us on this anarchic journey, but I must tell you I am excited. This is the best thing to happen on cycling fora for some time!

You certainly like talking shoot thats for sure. Tool by name, tool by nature….

 

[theclaud]

Its ok to be wrong once, than all the time like you claud….thick as fark and your defender multitool, good name for him really. Tool by name, tool by nature

0/10. I'm not wasting my time with this shit. I demand a better class of wind-up artist.

 

[mudsticks]

0/10. I'm not wasting my time with this shit. I demand a better class of wind-up artist.

Even Shep has occasional glimmers of wit, and self awareness.

I guess it's nice for him to have someone to feel a bit superior to 😇

 

[qigong chimp]

0/10. I'm not wasting my time with this shit. I demand a better class of wind-up artist.

Is that the chimp signal I see in the sky above Gotham?

 

[mudsticks]

Is that the chimp signal I see in the sky above Gotham?

Nah, just a funny shaped cloud 🙄

 

[classic33]

Accusations of hatred are common in discussions of this sort. It is a very strong word to use and implies you know the motivation of a poster.

It seems to me arguing even vociferously for women's private sphere to be protected does not automatically imply hatred of anyone else, in this instance transwomen.

I mentioned earlier that I've a neighbour who's afraid of my disability. He doesn't want to be anywhere near me, in case he catches it. Every time there's something negative in the news about someone with a disability, it reinforces his view. He's managed to pass his fear onto his kids.

He's quite vocal on what he feels is the best solution for my "sort". That's away from everybody else, so as to not infect them, and best of all, up against a wall and shot.

I went through school with parents demanding that I be removed from classes their kids were in. Because I was a danger to their kids, and everyone else. I've gone through life with similar attitudes appearing along the way. In work, people "asking" that they be moved away from me if they've seen me having a fit/seizure/episode/call it what you want. And it's nearly always safety reasons that were used, their safety.
Here the subject matter has changed, but the base arguments being used are that close I believe an argument could be had on the two different matters with each agreeing with the other, and each convinced that the other person was aware of what they were actually talking about.

I've been told that I want to be compassionate, because I've been on the receiving end of some vocal opinions whilst being treated in hospital, and due to the disability* preventing proper treatment/treatment not up to the standard expected.
In a sporting sense, I was told that because I've suffered exclusion, I want inclusion for all. With the hint being given that this was somewhat misguided.

*Cancer isn't the disability, its a disease that can be treated. Epilepsy is the disability, one which saw me back in the local A&E, wasting their time, on Friday night. Not within my abilities at the time to refuse at the time.

 

[multitool]

0/10. I'm not wasting my time with this shoot. I demand a better class of wind-up artist.

You've got to work out to whom he was replying. Could be someone on a different forum.

 

[multitool]

You certainly like talking shoot thats for sure. Tool by name, tool by nature….

I wonder if I could change my username to something deliberately self-satirising, instead?

 

[classic33]

Honestly, I don't know how many times I can politely explain it to you. 'Inside information' could be current or former prisoners btw, not just prison staff. You are doing all sorts of gymnastics to get past the basic fact that males are being housed in female prisons. I know your opinion on this issue comes from a place of compassion for people you see as outsiders, but I wish you'd extend that compassion to the women jailed with them and think about their feelings.

The point is you've never tried explaining it. I'm doing no gymnastics trying to explain anything. You latched onto one case, and then went from there for those in the Irish prison service. The number in that now old piece you linked to is fewer than the number you said were in that prison. Can you explain the difference in the figures? The same piece said the two in Limerick prison were in their cells 23 hours a day. Hardly what you can call being in the general prison population.

Those in Irish prisons, like it or not, are legally women. As such they are in the correct place, as decided by the courts.

 

[classic33]

Sorry Bromtonaut, this is a question I'm unable to answer due to lack of knowledge. If I had to guess, I'd suppose that the mechanism of this atrophy is similar to the atrophy of say leg muscles after a plaster cast is removed or maybe astronauts returning from a tour in space. I'll have a look around the literature though.

Is there a doctor in the house?

Back to the cancer for this answer.

In '99, I was told that if one or both were removed due to the cancer, then the testosterone levels would decrease as a natural result of their removal. Other side effects may include the breasts increasing in size.

I'm one step short of having to use a bag, having been left with only the waterworks. They went in '99, with the last sighting of one being in a specimen jar on the day of the eclipse.

 

[multitool]

Accusations of hatred are common in discussions of this sort. It is a very strong word to use and implies you know the motivation of a poster.

It seems to me arguing even vociferously for women's private sphere to be protected does not automatically imply hatred of anyone else, in this instance transwomen.

But if it was hate, what would the argument look like? What would it look like given the legal constraints placed on speech around protected characteristics and the desire not to reveal oneself unequivocally as a transphobe?

It might be an attempt to present trans women as a valid threat, in a tangible sense. Perhaps as potential sexual abusers.

How would one go about this? Well, one might only talk about trans women in discussions about rapists and abusers in the hope that some may start to form an association, even if subconsciously. One might do this by constantly posting right-wing tabloid articles concerning rapists and abusers who are also trans.

It's hardly subtle.

 

[AuroraSaab]

We've discussed many aspects of this debate from sports to language and everything in between. The emphasis of late has been prisons because the Scottish cases have coincided with the self-ID legislation.

Again, your continued inference that discussion of these issues is transphobic, bigoted, and now apparently borders on illegal hate speech, is simply you again trying to throw mud and shut down any debate. I think your strategy has been fairly obvious throughout this thread.

Men in women's spaces are the issue regardless of how they identify. It's not hate speech to discuss how that impacts women.