Gender again. Sorry!

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

AuroraSaab

Pharaoh
Erin Hoare might be tall but she lacks male body advantage. We have been over this a hundred times. There are lots of very tall women in US basketball. They are not as fast or strong as their male same height equivalents.
Same goes for other sports that rely on explosive physical power.

FGXhNNjXMAIne7z.jpg
 

mickle

Regular
Same response as to AS

I'm not wring tho am i?
 

monkers

Shaman
Erin Hoare might be tall but she lacks male body advantage. We have been over this a hundred times. There are lots of very tall women in US basketball. They are not as fast or strong as their male same height equivalents.
Same goes for other sports that rely on explosive physical power.

View attachment 13216

Your photograph of Mouncy proved nothing other than she is a tall person.

You called it for ''visual learners''. Hoare was taller and apparently faster.

So now you've pivoted to more athletes instead, either of them trans?

Instead here are two women out for the day together. It proves nature produces random outcomes, That is nothing to do with male advantage.

1771310953321.png



Two women equal in dignity and rights.



I'm not playing this silly game any further. You've made your point for anyone to see - you are a bad faith actor.
 
Last edited:

spen666

Über Member
....



I'm not playing this silly game any further. You've made your point for anyone to see - you are a bad faith actor.

Bad faith?

Like making up a tetm like "sovereign status" and repeatedly lying that its a term used at ECtHR....

Bad faith actor....or just a liar?
 

monkers

Shaman
1771313790455.png


Ai assistance for Spen (the lawyer)

In that context, the lawyer is referring to Locus Standi (legal standing). When they speak of an individual’s "sovereign status" via a "restricted code," they are asserting that the person is a sovereign subject of international law, independent of their own government's permission.


If there was a prize for being the most tedious ridiculous troll in the world I'd nominate you Spen, just as Bromptonaut quickly determined the other day when he called you a ''muppet''.

For anybody else, what I wrote is an example of 'code switching'. I used an example of what I called ''office speak'' in a context outside the space of that office.

This was recognised for anyone who cares to look it up by Basil Bernstein who called the formal language of the 'educated classes' a code he called ''elaborated'' code and he compared this with the language that operates within a group. He called this ''restricted code''.

I code switched. I introduced a term from restricted code into a setting where it might be less understood, because the elaborated legal code might be even less well understood - besides which it is wordy. Even if it was not clear to some in the forum, it should have been 'bleeding obvious' to someone who qualified as a solicitor.

But Spen is that annoying wasp that won't leave you alone while you eat your ploughmans in the pub garden, until finally all patience is lost and you swat it.

Spen is the kind of muppet who pretends that he doesn't know what BBC stands for and badgers you constantly to know what that means.

Spen - just fark off.

1771314972052.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • 1771315332167.png
    1771315332167.png
    17.8 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:

AuroraSaab

Pharaoh
This is what makes your postings so ridiculous.

You say you don't argue for men in women's spaces, sports, jails .... then immediately launch into a defence of a male athlete in women's sport. Based on what? 'Women can be tall'.

We all know male body advantage doesn't mean just taller.

101240117-15002293-image-a-9_1755219599928.jpg


Crack on though. I'll leave you to your mask slipping.
 

monkers

Shaman
This is what makes your postings so ridiculous.

You say you don't argue for men in women's spaces, sports, jails .... then immediately launch into a defence of a male athlete in women's sport. Based on what? 'Women can be tall'.

We all know male body advantage doesn't mean just taller.

View attachment 13223

Crack on though. I'll leave you to your mask slipping.

I have advocated no such thing. There is nothing in my post to suggest advocacy. My point is solely that you are not producing evidence of anything that you claim.

Is your argument that you wish for tall or more powerfully built women to be banned from sport? That is the argument that you are producing evidence to support.
 
Last edited:

spen666

Über Member
View attachment 13218

Ai assistance for Spen (the lawyer)




If there was a prize for being the most tedious ridiculous troll in the world I'd nominate you Spen, just as Bromptonaut quickly determined the other day when he called you a ''muppet''.

For anybody else, what I wrote is an example of 'code switching'. I used an example of what I called ''office speak'' in a context outside the space of that office.

This was recognised for anyone who cares to look it up by Basil Bernstein who called the formal language of the 'educated classes' a code he called ''elaborated'' code and he compared this with the language that operates within a group. He called this ''restricted code''.

I code switched. I introduced a term from restricted code into a setting where it might be less understood, because the elaborated legal code might be even less well understood - besides which it is wordy. Even if it was not clear to some in the forum, it should have been 'bleeding obvious' to someone who qualified as a solicitor.

But Spen is that annoying wasp that won't leave you alone while you eat your ploughmans in the pub garden, until finally all patience is lost and you swat it.

Spen is the kind of muppet who pretends that he doesn't know what BBC stands for and badgers you constantly to know what that means.
Hilarious that you complain about asking you to be able to back up your nonsdensical claims. How dare someone actually dare question you. Next you will claim its transphobic not to agree with your posts
Spen - just fark off.

Seems like I've touched a nerve. All I have done is asked you to provide evidence or links to your claims

Oooh look an unsourced quote that actually backs up my point about your nonsense.You claimed it was used at the ECtHR - shame there is no evidence of that in any judgement, pleadings etc.

Also, I note you don't say what question you asked this "AI" to get that result. Thus making it impossible for anyone to check your claim. Seems to be a trend there

It isn't as you well know.
You spout so much nonsense and try to post verbose word salads to hide your fraud. You post about "letting people be", but then spend your time trying to prevent biological females "being" by trying to force your way into their spaces






AI for Monkers ( the fraud and liar
Monkers is a total fraud and liar who makes things up and thinks people can't see through their attempts to rewrite history.
In short Monkers has zero credibility

Its very easy to post unsourced information and claim it as fact
 

monkers

Shaman
Hilarious that you complain about asking you to be able to back up your nonsdensical claims. How dare someone actually dare question you. Next you will claim its transphobic not to agree with your posts


Seems like I've touched a nerve. All I have done is asked you to provide evidence or links to your claims


Oooh look an unsourced quote that actually backs up my point about your nonsense.You claimed it was used at the ECtHR - shame there is no evidence of that in any judgement, pleadings etc.

Also, I note you don't say what question you asked this "AI" to get that result. Thus making it impossible for anyone to check your claim. Seems to be a trend there

It isn't as you well know.
You spout so much nonsense and try to post verbose word salads to hide your fraud. You post about "letting people be", but then spend your time trying to prevent biological females "being" by trying to force your way into their spaces






AI for Monkers ( the fraud and liar


Its very easy to post unsourced information and claim it as fact

My point is further made out. Always the insistence of evidence to support the obvious. It is obvious you are unfamiliar with the language of those who work or have worked in law at the international level.

You even showed that you searched ''English law'' to find the use of a restricted term used in international law offices. The level of stupidity on display here should be obvious to even the most casual of readers.

by trying to force your way into their spaces

Evidence requirement not met.
 
Last edited:

monkers

Shaman
I'm losing track here. Wasn't Spen blocked a few pages back?

I made the mistake of reading the thread without realisation that I was no longer logged in. That is the difficulty with the system. If one takes the option of ignoring a person's opinion, the abuser then goes on to abuse that situation in making unfounded comments. If they had any honour or good faith intent, they would stop replying to the person or posting about the person in the knowledge they are not affording them opportunity to reply. However these characteristics of honour and good faith are not ones can easily associate with Spen.
 
Top Bottom