TERFs crash London Pride

Porpoise of Life said:
Sure. But if your response is to deny transgenderism is a thing, and keep linking to sources that call them all either mislabeled butch lesbians and effeminate boys, or fetishistic perverts out to fulfill their sexual desires by harrassing women... don't be offended when people conclude you're prejudiced against trans folks.
Click to expand...


Of course transgenderism is a thing. It has several causes, none of which is a lady brain trapped in a man's body (or the other way around). If this is all about an assertion that trans-identifying men have lady brains, then just, no.

However, we're actually talking about people's behaviour here. Being transgender, for whatever reason, should not be a free pass to aggressively demanding that your every demand be granted and that members of another disadvantaged group should give up their protections to suit your fancy.
 
Last edited:
JoeMorgue said:
But that's not what you are doing. You're both demonizing and denying the existence of an entire demographic because "some of them are bad."

You're doing. You know you are doing this. Stop acting obtuse.
Click to expand...


Where on earth am I denying the existence of an entire demographic, or indeed demonising an entire demographic? (I'm not even sure it's possible to both deny that something exists and demonise it at the same time.) I'm tired of pointing out that the problem is the aggressive, entitled, bullying trans activists, of whom there seem to be rather a lot.
 
And maybe you can explain how the two are in any way comparable. There's nothing inherently impossible in a human being feeling sexual attraction to another human being of the same sex. I'm still waiting to find out how a man can turn into a woman.
 
Rolfe said:
So we agree. Good.

Now perhaps you might consider how women should protest the violent, aggressive, threatening, bullying men in dresses?
Click to expand...

It's easy. The same way if a black person mugs you you protest "Muggers" not "Black muggers"

You can protest "aggressive, threatening, bullying" people without making it about a demographic they happen to be part of.
 
Last edited:
Oh God, not this "denying people's existence" crap again.

It is absolutely relevant that the members of this particular aggressive, violent, bullying group are men who identify as trans. That's the basis of their behaviour. You can't separate that behaviour from the motivation for that behaviour.
 
Rolfe said:
It is absolutely relevant that the members of this particular aggressive, violent, bullying group are men who identify as trans. That's the basis of their behaviour. You can't separate that behaviour from the motivation for that behaviour.
Click to expand...

And if your argument is that being transgender itself is the cause that's just hateful nonsense not worth even arguing with you about.
 
Rolfe said:
Oh God, not this "denying people's existence" crap again.

It is absolutely relevant that the members of this particular aggressive, violent, bullying group
Click to expand...

Which violent, bullying group are you referring to?




are men who identify as trans. That's the basis of their behaviour. You can't separate that behaviour from the motivation for that behaviour.
Click to expand...

I read this as you believing that simply being a trans man makes one 'aggressive, violent and bullying'. Is that what you're trying to say?

It comes across that you don't actually believe there are any trans men who aren't aggressive, bullying and violent.

I suspect I'm misreading something.
 
Please don't let Rolfe turn this thread into another bash-the-tranny thread; this thread is about the trans people who were being attacked during a parade in London.
 
3point14 said:
Which violent, bullying group are you referring to?
Click to expand...


Let's call them trans rights activists.

3point14 said:
I read this as you believing that simply being a trans man makes one 'aggressive, violent and bullying'. Is that what you're trying to say?

It comes across that you don't actually believe there are any trans men who aren't aggressive, bullying and violent.

I suspect I'm misreading something.
Click to expand...


You clearly missed the scores of places where I repeated that the aggressive violent bullies are of course a subset of trans-identifying men. They are however a sizeable group in absolute terms, irrespective of what proportion of all trans-identifying males they make up, and they are a problem.

It seems that every attempt to express concern about the activities of this group is met with furious assertions that not all trans-identifying men are like this. It's a complete red herring, but it's repeated so often and in the teeth of repeated explanations that the concern is for the TRAs, that one begins to suspect it's a deliberate deflection tactic.
 
The Norseman said:
Please don't let Rolfe turn this thread into another bash-the-tranny thread; this thread is about the trans people who were being attacked during a parade in London.
Click to expand...


Or, in fact, about lesbians who were trying to highlight their concerns and fears about the males who are demanding to be accepted as "lesbians with penises", and who were attacked as a result.

Nowhere did anyone attack any trans people.
 
Rolfe said:
Let's call them trans rights activists.




You clearly missed the scores of places where I repeated that the aggressive violent bullies are of course a subset of trans-identifying men. They are however a sizeable group in absolute terms,
Click to expand...

How sizable, as a percentage, do you estimate, and from where do you gather the information that leads you to your conclusion? I'd like to see your reasoning, sources and maths.


irrespective of what proportion of all trans-identifying males they make up, and they are a problem.
Click to expand...

I think the proportion is very relevant. If it's all of them, you might have a point. If it's one in a million, you probably don't.

It seems that every attempt to express concern about the activities of this group is met with furious assertions that not all trans-identifying men are like this.
Click to expand...

I don't believe it is all trans identifying men.



It's a complete red herring, but it's repeated so often and in the teeth of repeated explanations that the concern is for the TRAs, that one begins to suspect it's a deliberate deflection tactic.
Click to expand...

Here's the thing though. In every other area of life, we don't punish or restrict all members of a group simply because some (as yet undefined) portion of that group act antisocially. What we actually do is simply prosecute the perpetrators.

Why do you think it is not, in this instance, appropriate to simply punish bad actors?
 
Last edited:
Rolfe said:
And maybe you can explain how the two are in any way comparable. There's nothing inherently impossible in a human being feeling sexual attraction to another human being of the same sex. I'm still waiting to find out how a man can turn into a woman.
Click to expand...

I think you'll find the idea is that they always were women, just as some biological women were always men.

I know transgender people who transitioned decades ago, some of whom I had absolutely no clue about until quite some time after I first met them (so much for the "men in bad wigs" slur). I also know transgender people who have only been able to transition recently, after unhappy decades of knowing what they really were, but not being able to do anything about it. Your attitude that these people are somehow wrong or deluded or - worse - part of some sort of perverse conspiracy is, frankly, utterly offensive.
 
Last edited:
Your position that someone who was born in a boy's body and grew into a man was "always" a woman is not really the sort of thing I would have expected to read in a forum dedicated to scepticism.
 
There might, might be a fair discussion to be had about whether or not the gender roles that transgender people to define how their internal gender identities are meaningfully distinct from traditional cisgender might come into conflict conceptually with the push in society to remove gender roles.

Without having the entire transgender discussion again... that's still where I'm at. I've always been 100% open and honest that without clear difference outside of either base biological difference or vague statistical bellcurving between the genders to fall back on the very base concept of transgenderism is hard for me to find a vein to hit with.

But that idea that any of that requires us to entertain even for a moment the idea that they are essentially a species of undercover perverts (and if Undercover Perverts has been a band name we have failed as a species and should be ashamed of ourselves) has to be entertained.
 
3point14 said:
How sizable, as a percentage, do you estimate, and from where do you gather the information that leads you to your conclusion? I'd like to see your reasoning, sources and maths.

I think the proportion is very relevant. If it's all of them, you might have a point. If it's one in a million, you probably don't.

I don't believe it is all trans identifying men.

Here's the thing though. In every other area of life, we don't punish or restrict all members of a group simply because some (as yet undefined) portion of that group act antisocially. What we actually do is simply prosecute the perpetrators.

Why do you think it is not, in this instance, appropriate to simply punish bad actors?
Click to expand...


I don't know what proportion it is. How could one possibly tell. It seems to be one out of the three trans-identifying men that I know, but that's no guide.

I don't know in what way you think inoffensive trans-identifying men are being "punished" by a group of lesbians trying to express their concerns about the threat to their identity as female homosexuals.
 
Rolfe said:
Your position that someone who was born in a boy's body and grew into a man was "always" a woman is not really the sort of thing I would have expected to read in a forum dedicated to scepticism.
Click to expand...

Yet you accept that someone born in the body of one sex can be attracted to the same sex, even when the majority are not? Why accept that variation in the human condition, but vigorously deny another?

Thanks, but I'll take my personal experience of the people I actually know over denialist dogma.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom