briantrumpet
Well-Known Member
Please stop it. Seriously. Both going on ignore.
Its irrational to think you are replying to me?
when you quote my post and then make references to what I have said, most rational people wouldn't think you are replying to me.
You really can't help contradicting yourself can you?
1. If my posts are as you say pointless, why do you keep replying to them.
This behaviour by you in replying contradicts your claims my posts are pointless or could it be your behaviour is irrational?
2. If you are not replying to me, then why quote my posts in your response. The forum tells me you have replied to my post.
You then also respond to the comments I have made in the post you have quoted.
This seems to undermine your claim you are not responding to me.
Actions and words can combine to paint a picture
Thing is, this is exactly what you've been saying all along. Even saying the laws of other countries were wrong.Thing is, Spen, even the mildest of suggestion that this is the law, like it or not, will bring forth abuse. Some people are still in Stage 1-2 of grief over the Supreme Court, ie denial and anger. You're just on the receiving end of it because it's shooting the messenger. Some people imagine you can control the narrative if you silence others.
In law though, they are women, not men.I've often said laws of foreign countries are wrong. It's wrong that Ireland put men in women's prisons. I think child marriage laws are wrong in Iraq. I think some of our UK laws are wrong - when the assisted dying bill passes we'll have another 'wrong' law. I haven't suggested that they aren't the law though, only that the law is wrong and should be changed.
Are you seriously saying nobody should say they think some laws are wrong? How do you think laws get made or changed in the first place?
Remains the law though whether you like it or not. You just have to get used to the law.And my opinion is that the law that says they are women in law is wrong. Further, sex is biological and no law can make you the other sex because a law does not change material reality. You could pass a law that said the earth was flat. It would not be flat because you passed a law that said it was.
Please stop it. Seriously. Both going on ignore.
Remains the law though whether you like it or not. You just have to get used to the law.
How many is that now? I followed Brian's lead in putting people on ignore. Now I'm releasing them because lies always need challenging.
— Radically Speaking: Feminism Reclaimed D. Bell and R. Klein.“‘phallic drift’: ‘the powerful tendency for public discussion of gender issues to drift, inexorably, back to the male point of view’”
Any compromise that women have suggested in the past, like unisex 3rd spaces (toilets and changing rooms) or specialist transgender provision (prisons, rape crisis), or Open categories in sport, has been dismissed again and again.
Once again though, I can only point out that you see transwoman Heather having to use the Gents as cruel and absurd to Heather, but don't see it as cruel and absurd to the women who have to share with Heather.
— Radically Speaking: Feminism Reclaimed D. Bell and R. Klein.
And unworkable to achieve. @monkers has pointed this out. You can't usually tell what gender someone is just by looking at them. Sometimes you can be 99% sure. But it is possible that the lady who is 6 foot 2, who looks fabulous but has masculine looking features, is actually a woman, just as it is possible that they are a transwoman. So unless you are going to carry out DNA checks at the door, toilets will continue to be self policing. She also pointed out that the current arguments have not helped butch lesbians at all.Whatever we think of the decision it's the law for now. We need to ensure that, particularly for those fully transitioned, we sort the law so they can live their lives normally. The idea of Heather having to pee in the mens or the bloke who does training in my profession going to the ladies is simultaneously cruel and absurd.