Gender again. Sorry!

[AuroraSaab]

Well it's a subjective appraisal so it doesn't concern me much, especially when it's one only certain people make. Carry on being you and calling people c*nts if you like. It's not illegal and doesn't contravene NACA posting rules.

 

[monkers]

Well it's a subjective appraisal so it doesn't concern me much, especially when it's one only certain people make. Carry on being you and calling people c*nts if you like. It's not illegal and doesn't contravene NACA posting rules.

You really are thick. I didn't call anyone a c*nt. You seem to want to defend people like Rowling saying they committed no crime. Free speech is not without consequences. If people like Rowling want to behave that way, they are not immune from people thinking and saying they are contemptible c*nts. You can't expect to abuse people and then expect immunity from return abuse.

Just the same way as I call you 'fruitloops'. If you return something similar in return, I'll not complain. Are we clear now fruitloops?

 

[monkers]

 

[AuroraSaab]

You really are thick. I didn't call anyone a c*nt. You seem to want to defend people like Rowling saying they committed no crime. Free speech is not without consequences.

What crime has been committed?

If people like Rowling want to behave that way, they are not immune from people thinking and saying they are contemptible c*nts. You can't expect to abuse people and then expect immunity from return abuse.

People can think or say what they like. The more people like you call such women c*nts the more other people are alerted to the nature of transactivism and your demands. I'm all for letting transwomen speak.

Just the same way as I call you 'fruitloops'. If you return something similar in return, I'll not complain. Are we clear now fruitloops?

Why would I lower myself to your level? I think arguments should stand on their own merit. Falling back on abuse illustrates paucity of argument and is often more indicative of the mental state of the poster than anything else.

 

[monkers]

 

[monkers]

What crime has been committed?

Did I say or suggest that a crime has been committed?

People can think or say what they like. The more people like you call such women c*nts the more other people are alerted to the nature of transactivism and your demands. I'm all for letting transwomen speak.

The pile- on Twitter and other places was calling Rowling a cu*t. I wasn't one of them. It didn't surprise me to see you playing the victim in this convo though. I added the word 'contemptuous', and that does sum up my attitude to those who abuse people, and then taunt, 'but what crime as been committed'. This is not simply 'not being prepared to be kind', it is contemptuous.

Why would I lower myself to your level? I think arguments should stand on their own merit. Falling back on abuse illustrates paucity of argument and is often more indicative of the mental state of the poster than anything else.

You what fruitloops?

 

[AuroraSaab]

Did I say or suggest that a crime has been committed?

Yes, you suggested exactly that earlier:

You really are thick. I didn't call anyone a c*nt. You seem to want to defend people like Rowling saying they committed no crime. Free speech is not without consequences.

Bertrand Russell was a big fan of both the scientific method and rationality. I doubt he would approve of a single argument you have made in this thread. He would find them all illogical and incoherent.

 

[monkers]

Yes, you suggested exactly that earlier:


Bertrand Russell was a big fan of both the scientific method and rationality. I doubt he would approve of a single argument you have made in this thread. He would find them all illogical and incoherent.

So you might think, but I am aware already of the quality of your 'thinking' fruitloops.

 

[classic33]

Yes, you suggested exactly that earlier:


Bertrand Russell was a big fan of both the scientific method and rationality. I doubt he would approve of a single argument you have made in this thread. He would find them all illogical and incoherent.

You only speak for yourself, but know exactly how others would speak?

 

[multitool]

Remember, everyone!

It's trans women that are the real problem

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...st-women-in-the-uk?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

 

[CXRAndy]

Remember, everyone!

It's trans women that are the real problem

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...st-women-in-the-uk?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Remember, everyone!

Trans Woman, AKA a man.

No difference in the aggression, err, because they're are male

Just like the rest of the murdering men.

 

[multitool]

Remember, everyone!

Trans Woman, AKA a man.

No difference in the aggression, err, because they're are male

Just like the rest of the murdering men.

AndyCRX is telling us that because he's a man there is no difference between him and the murdering men.

 

[CXRAndy]

AndyCRX is telling us that because he's a man there is no difference between him and the murdering men.

I can group you in this category then

 

[multitool]

I can group you in this category then

Indeed. And this is why it becomes pointless as a grouping. Especially when being trans confers no advantage on a person WRT committing a murder, because if it did there would be an epidemic of men transitioning in order to murder. This isn't happening, and is not needed in order for men to commit crimes.

It's a total red herring used by bigots to justify their bigotry, and yes that's you Andy.

 

[CXRAndy]

It offers no disadvantage either.

It's a total red herring used by bigots to justify their bigotry, and yes that's you Andy