Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Rolfe]

I am so glad the adults finally took control here. It's depressing to realise how far sunk in gender gufferywoo is much of the rest of the western world, but it is to be hoped that the ripples and the shockwaves from the sudden eruption of common sense round here will spread in due course round the rest of the world.


There was something in A Very Peculiar Practice about this. Things building up and nothing seems to change, then all of a sudden the plates shift. Well, they've shifted. A bit like people suddenly realising that paying enormous sums of money for tulip bulbs probably wasn't such a good idea after all.

 

[Thermal]

Not necessarily a bad idea. I was actually noodling around a similar idea late yesterday. I need to figure out if my sig line can include a link to a post.

I just noticed that the post you replied to referred to people "not hip to the lingerie", when I meant "lingo". One of these days I'll stop relying on autocorrect and bring my damned readers to work.

 

[acbytesla]

Just because you say the words, doesn't make them mean anything.

Those are your words, That we must preserve dignity, modesty and propriety. Which is essentially saying it's not proper. We must preserve what is proper. Guess what? I don't care what is proper. I don't care if you are virginal or if you enjoy the occasional gang bang. It's not my business. I don't care if you have tattoos despite my distaste for them.

I also don't care if a man dressed as a woman walks into a ladies public bathroom and goes into a stall and does his business.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I just noticed that the post you replied to referred to people "not hip to the lingerie", when I meant "lingo". One of these days I'll stop relying on autocorrect and bring my damned readers to work.

I saw it, and I giggled. If it were earlier in the week I would've tried to come up with a joke... something something hip huggers?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Those are your words, That we must preserve dignity, modesty and propriety. Which is essentially saying it's not proper. We must preserve what is proper. Guess what? I don't care what is proper. I don't care if you are virginal or if you enjoy the occasional gang bang. It's not my business. I don't care if you have tattoos despite my distaste for them.

Do you care about females having the right to enforce sexual boundaries? Do you care about voyeurism or exhibitionism?

I also don't care if a man dressed as a woman walks into a ladies public bathroom and goes into a stall and does his business.

Oh whoopdeedoo... you don't care if females are made uncomfortable by the presence of males in intimate spaces. You only care if males are made uncomfortable by the presence of males in intimate spaces. Quelle surprise.

 

[smartcooky]

Only if they insist that their discomfort should allow them to override sex-based boundaries, or that their feelings mean that they're in-effect the opposite sex and that everyone should treat them as such in all situations.

None of us cares how people think about themselves, how they feel inside their heads, or even how they dress*. It's their prerogative, and we literally don't actually care. It's when they assert that how they feel somehow makes them the opposite sex, and that their subjective feelings place an onus on the rest of us that we care.


*Caveat on clothing and presentation: I support anyone's right to dress however they wish, but that doesn't mean I'm not going to silently judge and mock extraordinary bad taste. And it doesn't mean I won't feel offended by presentations that are outright caricatures of females, or that I view as representing a pornified and objectified sentiment of womanhood. Drag queens are, in my opinion, engaging in performative and offensive womanface. A lot (not all) transgender identified males are also cosplaying or LARPing as their porn-based view of women. I still support their right to dress how they want. That doesn't mean I approve and it certainly doesn't mean I'm not going to call out derogatory portrayals when I see them.

Yep, because when we encounter a paranoid schizophrenic, we all know and should acknowledge that the whole world really is out to get them, and when we encounter a person with bipolar disorder, we should acknowledge that is perfectly normal for some people to have wild, destructive mood swings, and pretend they're just living as a manic-depressive and being their authentic self.

 

[smartcooky]

@Mycroft I understand that you want everyone to be nice and friendly and supportive. Do you have any comments on the tone and sentiments catalogued in this site?

TERF is a slur

Documenting the abuse, harassment and misogyny of transgender identity politics

terfisaslur.com

All the TERFs I know wear that badge proudly!

 

[smartcooky]

Give me a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ break. A transitioned transwoman is an all you can eat buffet in a male prison.

Not if they are accommodated accordingly, with their own wing, and where the GPP have no access to them.

Prison bosses buy a £10,000 games wall - and inmates don't even use it

The specialist unit at Downview women's jail in Sutton, Surrey was opened in 2019 after Karen White sexually assaulted two female inmates at HMP New Hall.

www.dailymail.co.uk

I make no guarantee about how they will treat each other though.

 

[Thermal]

Not if they are accommodated accordingly, with their own wing, and where the GPP have no access to them.

Prison bosses buy a £10,000 games wall - and inmates don't even use it

The specialist unit at Downview women's jail in Sutton, Surrey was opened in 2019 after Karen White sexually assaulted two female inmates at HMP New Hall.

www.dailymail.co.uk

I make no guarantee about how they will treat each other though.

Well, your source (Daily Mail) says it's the first of its kind and isn't really working, designed to hold 16 but actually housing 3-5 at a time.

It does say that physically intact transwomen go to male prisons, per their rules, which make sense except in extreme cases (like a small transwoman with Johnson intact and implants, who would still be especially vulnerable).

 

[Rolfe]

I also don't care if a man dressed as a woman walks into a ladies public bathroom and goes into a stall and does his business.

Of course you wouldn't care, because it doesn't affect you at all. Why won't you accept men dressed as women in the men's space?


Bwahahahaha. The grown-ups are back and they have spoken.

 

[Rolfe]

.... except in extreme cases (like a small transwoman with Johnson intact and implants, who would still be especially vulnerable).

And who should still be housed in the male estate.

VULNERABLE WOMEN PRISONERS ARE NOT HUMAN SHIELDS FOR DISTURBED MEN, NO MATTER HOW VULNERABLE THESE DISTURBED MEN ARE.

 

[acbytesla]

Do you care about females having the right to enforce sexual boundaries? Do you care about voyeurism or exhibitionism?

Sure. I definitely believe there should be laws against unwanted touching and sexual harassment. You can even create laws against voyeurism and exhibitionism.

The rest is overkill.

 

[Thermal]

"Disturbed "

 

[acbytesla]

Of course you wouldn't care, because it doesn't affect you at all. Why won't you accept men dressed as women in the men's space?

View attachment 60390
Bwahahahaha. The grown-ups are back and they have spoken.

Of course it does. There are both transwomen and transmen You think that women that identify as men don't use Men's public restrooms?

 

[Rolfe]

Of course it does. There are both transwomen and transmen You think that women that identify as men don't use Men's public restrooms?

And now just look at what you said, what I was replying to.

I also don't care if a man dressed as a woman walks into a ladies public bathroom and goes into a stall and does his business.

But isn't it great, it's all sorted now.



You damn colonials will catch up eventually.

 

[Rolfe]

Edited by jimbob: 

duplicate post, content deleted at Rolfe's request

 

[smartcooky]

You misunderstand. We're talking about how you distinguish between the obvious male predator in drag and the obvious male sincere dysphoric.

Transwomen's supporters such as those participating in this thread will never get it because they have no motive to do so. The moment they begin to care, or admit to doing so, they lose - all of their arguments go right out out the window.

They will continue to dismiss any and all concerns of biological women as unimportant, no matter how serious those concerns are. They simply do not give a rat's arse about the rights of women.

 

[Darat]

Seems like that very much is the question.

Not in the UK, that’s been settled by the recent SC decision. It would require new legislation to change that. (There will be cases brought about what constitutes discrimination under the gender reassignment class in the EA.)

 

[smartcooky]

Not in the UK, that’s been settled by the recent SC decision. It would require new legislation to change that.

You are the only person I have seen who has this takeway. Here are the facts

"....the context in which the EA 2010 was enacted was that the SDA 1975 definitions of “man” and “woman” referred to biological sex and trans people had the protected characteristic of gender reassignment."​

​

"The Court rejects the suggestion of the Inner House that “woman” and “sex” can refer to biological sex in some sections of the EA 2010, and certificated sex in others. The meaning of “sex” and “woman” must be consistent throughout the EA 2010"​

Therefore ANY TIME the EA uses the word "woman" or "man", it is irrefutably, undeniably referring to the biological sex of the individual concerned.... man ≡ male, women ≡ female. No amount of spin, second-guessing of motives or playing silly word games is going to change anything. NO other interpretation is possible.

There will be cases brought about what constitutes discrimination under the gender reassignment class in the EA.)

I doubt it. This is already settled law in the UK - that part of the EA is not affected by the ruling.

"This interpretation of the EA 2010 does not remove protection from trans people, with or without a GRC. Trans people are protected from discrimination on the ground of gender reassignment. They are also able to invoke the provisions on direct discrimination and​

harassment, and indirect discrimination on the basis of sex. In the light of case law interpreting the relevant provisions, a trans woman can claim sex discrimination because she is perceived to be a woman. A certificated sex reading is not required to give this protection"​

Anyone bringing a such a claim will be told by any decent lawyer that they will lose, because the presiding judge will simply refer back to the EA, and will dismiss the case on those grounds.

 

[Rolfe]

Indeed, the man convicted here is not trans.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1916028501754359888

The point is that mixed-sex facilities with cubicles are frequently touted as the solution to the demands of the trans lobby. Not only is this not what the trans lobby wants - they want separate male and female facilities but for them to be allowed to use the female ones - it puts women at massively increased risk from all male predators.

So please, the next twenty times some eager newbie comes bouncing into the thread to announce that they've just thought of this perfect solution, could we remind them of this?