• 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.

Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

I'm guessing Mycroft didn't follow the Pelicot case....

I did not, but I did just review the wikipedia page on it.

That scumbag had no problem finding over 70 men living within 30 miles of his rural home who were very happy to accept his invitation to come and rape his unconscious wife whilst he watched and filmed them doing it.

Yeah...that was disgusting.

The celebrity cases also confirm just how many men there are who are keen to pester, harass and even assault women, given only the opportunity and a reasonable chance of getting away with it. Which is exactly what self ID provides them.

Human's are awful. Woman humans are awful too.

Maybe Mycroft should ask his legion of female friends whether they've ever been the subject of unwanted male sexual attention. Tell us that percentage.

Sadly, quite a few of them.

Which is why, if transwomen are no different from men, so few of the women I spoke with have a problem with transwomen using a woman's bathroom. I can only assume it's because they don't all see transwomen as the same as men.

For the record the women I polled were all people who were unknown to me. I wanted to eliminate the bias of people in my bubble.
 
If the point is not that trans-people are bad, then stop bringing up bad trans-people as though they represent all trans-people.
Missing the point.

They are being brought up because they are male and show male behaviour patterns.

The judgement of the UK Supreme Court was not about banning transwomen from female single sex spaces, but all males.
 
Yes indeed!!

(NOTE: Some of the posters in this thread are apparently unable to detect that these are all biological males).

TranswomenThumnails.jpg
The one I recognise is Eddie Izzard, who is, as far as I know, not a rapist, paedofile (sic) or predator.
 
Which is why, if transwomen are no different from men, so few of the women I spoke with have a problem with transwomen using a woman's bathroom. I can only assume it's because they don't all see transwomen as the same as men.

For the umpteenth time: it's not genuine transwoman (i.e. those with gender dysphoria) who are the problem. I don't have a problem with them either. Women have been quietly allowing genuine transwomen they know and trust into their safe spaces for years. It's self ID, with the opportunities and good chance of getting away with it gives all men, that is the problem.
 
For the umpteenth time: it's not genuine transwoman (i.e. those with gender dysphoria) who are the problem. I don't have a problem with them either. Women have been quietly allowing genuine transwomen they know and trust into their safe spaces for years. It's self ID, with the opportunities and good chance of getting away with it gives all men, that is the problem.

I suggest people who walk the walk and talk the talk are sincere. The insincere ones are not waiting for a chance to get you in a bathroom.
 
I disagree it's intellectually dishonest. It seems apt to me.
It's not, for reasons that have already been explained to you. The fact that you just ignored those arguments and barreled on anyways doesn't make them go away.
 
I suggest people who walk the walk and talk the talk are sincere. The insincere ones are not waiting for a chance to get you in a bathroom.
Should Bryson be allowed to use the women's bathroom? It's a simple yes or no question. Why can't you answer?
 
I said public bathroom, not woman's bathroom. I assume you would choose a men's public bathroom.

Nobody checks either way before, during or after. So...?
What are you talking about? People check all the time. We do it instinctively. Noting the sex of other people is automatic.
 
I suggest people who walk the walk and talk the talk are sincere. The insincere ones are not waiting for a chance to get you in a bathroom.
Tell that to someone who didn't spend her childhood being sexually abused by her own father.

Time to take another break from this thread.
 
Dude, can't you see the hate in that? It came from you, can't you feel the hate?

You don't think a refusal to use a private unisex space, instead insisting that you, as a male, must be granted the right to go into the female-only space despite the objections of many of the women there, might be even a tiny bit hateful?
 
The one I recognise is Eddie Izzard, who is, as far as I know, not a rapist, paedofile (sic) or predator.

Hope this helps...

But for clarification, clockwise from top left

1. Anthony Peers: a violent male who identifies as a transgender woman, was convicted in November 2024 at Liverpool Crown Court of two counts of rape, attempted rape, three charges of sexual assault and two offences of inciting a child to engage in sexual activity. The Liverpool Echo noted that Peers’ crimes were so disturbing that the details were too graphic to publish.

3. Jason Hill: a manipulative male who identifies as transgender. Served a 4½ year jail term imposed on being convicted paedophilia charges. He pretended be a teenage girl on Facebook to lure underage boys for an that he could sexually abuse them, and groomed them to send explicit sexual images of themselves.

5. Andrew Fleming: a violent male who identifies as a transgender woman, was convicted at Newcastle Crown Court in March 2024 of harassment putting a person in fear of violence, and of assaulting an emergency worker. Fleming undertook a campaign of harrassment against a neighbour, banging in the door at all hours of the night, cul;n=minating in threats to kill.

6. Sean Smith: a transgender identifying male. Arrested on one count of felony voyeurism when he was caught taking pictures of women in a Target changing room. Convicted and sentenced to three years in prisons and a $3000 fine.

7. Martin Tarling: a male who identifies as a transgender woman. This one's a real charmer - charged with nine offences at South Tyneside Magistrates’ Court in December 2023. Four counts of dumping bags of toxic materials, namely nappies containing human waste, at nurseries on South Tyneside, contrary to the Environmental Protection Act. One count of outraging public decency, by behaving in an indecent manner, namely by being inside a bin containing the waste of children, including with soiled nappies and disclosed garments and interacting with the soiled nappies in sight of the public. One count of criminal damage by smearing excrement on milk bottles intended for consumption by small children’ and on other parts of a nursery building, including the fire escape. One count of intentionally or recklessly causing a public nuisance between October 2022 and November 2023 at South Tyneside, without reasonable excuse, by continuously dumping adult human waste and other materials on the street and at nursery premises and interfering with the contents of clinical waste bins containing faecal matter from children and babies, one count of theft of a roll of clinical waste bags from a local nursery. Two counts of breaching a criminal behaviour order imposed by Nottinghamshire Magistrates’ Court in April this year, by being within 10 metres of a nursery without reasonable excuse, and/or ‘by removing items from a waste receptacle in direct contravention of said order.

8. Christopher Worton: A violent male who identifies as a transwoman. Convicted of five counts of rape against a child aged between 13 and 15. On release, breaching his sexual harm prevention order by visiting a home in the city, while a child was there, and by possessing indecent images of a child.

IMO, 6 out of 8 qualifies as "some".
 
Last edited:
Good heavens, these TRAs really are revealing exactly who they are...


Sarah Vine KC told The Telegraph that the hangman placards "clearly cross the line of criminality" and suggested police would have "no difficulty in making a decision to charge the responsible person" if the situation were reversed.
"If the word 'terf' were to be replaced by any equivalent word - 'trans woman', 'Muslim', 'Tory', 'immigrant' - I would expect the police to have no difficulty in making a decision to charge the responsible person," she said.
 
The police originally told everyone that the photos weren't from last Saturday at all, they were from different protests in the past. So there was no evidence of criminality. An MP passed on that information in good faith after being briefed to that effect. It was only when someone made an effort to get pictures with identifiable bits of Parliament Square in the background (and perhaps there was metadata) that the police were forced to reconsider.

They really are seriously captured, with all their Pride-bedecked police cars and lanyards and LGBT staff groups. If that had been a women's group out there with the word "terfs" replaced by "trannies", people would have had their collars felt on the spot.
 
I was recently told not all trans-people are TRA's. Do they deserve your pejoratives too? Or do they get it just for being "weird"?

I tolerate people being weird. I don't even consider weird to be a pejorative term. Lots of my friends are weird in different ways. I don't look kindly on the people who choose to breach women's boundaries on the back of the TRA mission-creep propaganda though, even if they themselves haven't been pushing it personally.
 
Last edited:
My position only seems hard to define because you struggle to fit it into a box of your own creation. Let go of the box and you will find dialogue much easier.
No, it's hard for me to define because you refuse to answer simple and direct questions. Even now you continue to refuse to do so.
What if they pass and are still rapists?
I'll note that being an actual rapist and passing is a very unusual combination, I don't think I've ever seen any actual examples. But it's perfectly in line with your desire to deal with hypotheticals and never address real world examples. Also noteworthy that you didn't ask what happens if they rape someone, but merely are a rapist. Because the answer is actually obvious in this case: no one would be the wiser. It would be as if it never happened.

But when a transwoman who doesn't pass enters a woman's bathroom and makes the women in there uncomfortable by his presence, even if he does nothing else, it's still very much NOT as if nothing happened. I'm not sure why you struggle with this concept. Perhaps because it's not just a concept, but an actual real-world occurrence.

Once again, I ask you: should Bryson be allowed to use the women's bathroom? This is a very simple question. I'm not assuming your answer. So how about it? What is your answer? What is your position? Or will you once again dodge it?
 
They really are seriously captured, with all their Pride-bedecked police cars and lanyards and LGBT staff groups.
They covered up for actual child rape, what's a little bathroom intrusion and casual death threats to them?
 
In a statement to Los Angeles about this weekend's incident, Wi Spa points to California Civil Code 51 (b), which makes discriminating against trans and other gender non-conforming people in business establishments illegal in the state.​

Mycroft thinks I'm getting emotional when I point out that he's ignorant of this topic, but he keeps proving that this was just a factual statement on my part.
 

Back
Top Bottom