• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: Trans women are not women (IX)

Status
Not open for further replies.
theprestige said:
You're missing my point: public restrooms exist. These are restrooms built and maintained by the government at taxpayer expense.
Click to expand...
Some restrooms are "built and maintained by the government at taxpayer expense" such as the ones at my local Air Force Base and (oddly enough) my local farmer's market. Obviously those aren't the ones I was talking about when I said private businesses should get to have their own policies and/or customs with respect to what people (even more oddly enough) call "public restrooms" in their facilities.
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
I think "or to other people" needs to be in there. Most serial killers aren't really distressed by the people with psychopathy. ;) I'm willing to bet that people with NPD aren't really all that distressed either... but everyone who has to deal with them is!
Click to expand...

Psychopathy and NPD are personality disorders, not mental illnesses.
 
Matthew Best said:
Please quote her - I don't believe that she wrote this.
Click to expand...

I have been looking and haven’t found those quotes. I have, however, seen some very good quotes from her like:

“Yes, it is lawful for a school to refuse a biologically and legally male child who identifies as a trans-girl from participating in girls’ single sex sporting activities.”

And:

“Yes, it is lawful for a mixed school to refuse to allow a biologically and legally male child, who identifies as a trans-girl, from using the girls’ toilets”
 
lionking said:
I have been looking and haven’t found those quotes. I have, however, seen some very good quotes from her like:

“Yes, it is lawful for a school to refuse a biologically and legally male child who identifies as a trans-girl from participating in girls’ single sex sporting activities.”

And:

“Yes, it is lawful for a mixed school to refuse to allow a biologically and legally male child, who identifies as a trans-girl, from using the girls’ toilets”
Click to expand...

Noting that there are boys schools and girls schools is hardly a scientific explanation as to why she believes there are immutably two sexes but hey, it is Suellen Braverman who is not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer. After all she belongs to a weird cult in which the cult guru was accused of perviness towards its female members.
 
Vixen said:
Noting that there are boys schools and girls schools is hardly a scientific explanation as to why she believes there are immutably two sexes but hey, it is Suellen Braverman who is not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer. After all she belongs to a weird cult in which the cult guru was accused of perviness towards its female members.
Click to expand...

Where is the ******* quote?
 
Elaedith said:
Here is a paper with more citations that you might be interested in:

What Many Transgender Activists Don't Want You to Know: and why you should know it anyway

I don't have any strong opinion myself about whether all transwomen fall into these categories or how many are in each because I haven't looked into the research in detail. It definitely appears to me that those who would be likely be classed as AGP (males who are gynephilic, and tend to transition later in life) are over-represented amongst the most aggressive activists (compared to transmen and transwomen who are androphilic) and that they have a strong motivation to push the narrative that there is only one cause of transgender identity and gender dysphoria.

My impression is that these concepts need more research to refine them, but given what happened to Bailey researchers tend to avoid the area.
Click to expand...


That's a good paper. The problem is of course that AGP men who are LARPing womanface to satisfy their fetishistic craving do not want others to realise that's what they're doing. I'm perfectly prepared to believe that some of them don't realise that's what they're doing themselves. They are seriously invested in the "My soul was issued with the wrong-spec body at birth" narrative and they're going to stick with it.

It's also an easier narrative for the uninvolved to understand - at least until you get down to asking, what soul, and how can you know what it feels like to be a woman when you aren't one. Explaining the sheer ickiness of AGP behaviour isn't really a lot of fun, and tends to evoke responses from "you're making this up" to "how dare you accuse these poor marginalised trans ladies of being fetishists."

On the other hand, there's the Lumberjack Song.
 
Vixen said:
Claim you.
Click to expand...

No, I’m not going to let you get away with this. You made the claim that Braverman stated that the existence of boys schools and girls schools proves there are only males and females.

Where the **** did she say that? You can’t prove this and you know it. A bit of honesty from you would be welcome, but not expected.
 
lionking said:
No, I’m not going to let you get away with this. You made the claim that Braverman stated that the existence of boys schools and girls schools proves there are only males and females.

Where the **** did she say that? You can’t prove this and you know it. A bit of honesty from you would be welcome, but not expected.
Click to expand...

Sorry, are you admitting you jumped into an exchange of conversation between Emily's Cat and myself and you made no effort at all to click back to see what we were talking about?

You have shown yourself to be an unreliable witness because you resorted to poisoning the well (logical fallacy #103) and throwing around gratuitous insults (logical fallacy #104) instead of concentrating on the topic.

Now click back and discover the Braverman quote we were referring to.
 
Vixen said:
Sorry, are you admitting you jumped into an exchange of conversation between Emily's Cat and myself and you made no effort at all to click back to see what we were talking about?

You have shown yourself to be an unreliable witness because you resorted to poisoning the well (logical fallacy #103) and throwing around gratuitous insults (logical fallacy #104) instead of concentrating on the topic.

Now click back and discover the Braverman quote we were referring to.
Click to expand...

No, I’m asking for you to prove your claim that Braverman said what you claimed she said. If you can’t (and you can’t) you are a liar.
 
I trawled through all the posts in this thread that mention Braverman and I did find a link provided by Rolfe. It's here. In it The Attorney General clarifies the law on single-sex services including a substantial section of schools (single sex and mixed).

However, at no point does it even suggest that the mere existence of single-sex schools has any inherent significance when it comes to definitions of sex. It would seem we're still looking for the quote in question.
 
Last edited:
Hypothetical question for all concerned, but mostly for the TWAW folks.

Suppose a private women's club (e.g. www.verity.ca) decided that they wanted certain areas like the spa or fitness center to be for females only, no one with penises allowed. Should they be allowed to maintain a policy like that, or should the government intervene to prevent this androphobic/transphobic policy from being implemented?
 
Last edited:
In Britain this is allowed by law but Stonewall have been "educating" companies that it is illegal - "education" these companies pay Stonewall a lot of money to provide.

Any company which does provide such facilities is likely to become the target of a mob calling them transphobic and haters, so companies are understandably reluctant to go there.
 
GlennB said:
I trawled through all the posts in this thread that mention Braverman and I did find a link provided by Rolfe. It's here. In it The Attorney General clarifies the law on single-sex services including a substantial section of schools (single sex and mixed).

However, at no point does it even suggest that the mere existence of single-sex schools has any inherent significance when it comes to definitions of sex. It would seem we're still looking for the quote in question.
Click to expand...

Thank you. No surprise at all.
 
lionking said:
No, I’m asking for you to prove your claim that Braverman said what you claimed she said. If you can’t (and you can’t) you are a liar.
Click to expand...

Three things:

  • I note you don't have the decency to apologise for falsely accusing me of lying when I said there was a quote if you 'click back.
  • I note you cling onto ad hominem logical fallacy and even staunchly support the views of a proudly far right anti-human rights politician (Braverman) which suggests your views are predicated on blind prejudice.
  • So entrenched are you in your stance, you are unable to spot the deep flaws and defects in Braverman's position; the logical fallacy of petitio principii leaps out except you erroneously believe anyone who shares your view cannot possibly be wrong in the slightest iota.
 
Vixen said:
I note you cling onto ad hominem logical fallacy and even staunchly support the views of a proudly far right anti-human rights politician (Braverman) which suggests your views are predicated on blind prejudice.
Click to expand...
I think that is precisely what you do. I'm not the only one to think this. Your hatred for Braverman is such that you are vehemently opposed to anything she says regardless of what it is. Rather like a Trump supporter would behave

There are a few of us who have little love for the Tories in general but we nonetheless agree with her if she talks sense on some issues around trans rights such as what Rolfe linked before. Because of what she says, not because of who she is. You seem unable to do that sort of thing。
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom