• 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

Emily's Cat said:
Yes, they originate in the brain.

Would you agree that those conditions do not alter reality?
Click to expand...

Do schizophrenia or bi-polar disorder alter reality?

For the person who has these conditions I'd say it alters their reality a lot.
 
Thermal said:
Dude... that's so much worse. You seriously don't see that someone taking the piss and putting on "transface" for you to mock, and you chiming right in, is exponentially worse???

You guys have been hiding in this thread too long. You don't even see what you are doing anymore.
Click to expand...
Mate, if I saw a woman dressed like that, I would mock them. Seriously, a grown arse woman dressing like a grade-schooler?

ETA: Actually, having gone back and looked more closely at the photo I will revise the earlier statement and made a few pages ago. It doesn't just deserve mockery... it deserves a public warning.

A grown man wearing kiddie clothes, complete with a pink "Hello Kitty" heart-purse clearly has issues. The Creep Factor with this guy is off the charts.
 
Last edited:
Mycroft said:
The good explanation would be trans-athletes perform differently from cis-athletes.
Click to expand...
No they don’t.

Male athletes whose testosterone is suppressed perform worse than male athletes whose testosterone is not suppressed. But you can suppress testosterone in non-trans male athletes, and not every trans identifying male athlete suppresses his testosterone. It’s the act of suppressing testosterone that changes performance, not their trans identification.

And that’s leaving aside the fact that the performance gap between males and females still doesn’t close even with testosterone suppression.
 
Mycroft said:
Do schizophrenia or bi-polar disorder alter reality?

For the person who has these conditions I'd say it alters their reality a lot.
Click to expand...
Because it alters the mentally ill person's reality we all have to play along? Nah.
 
Mycroft said:
Previously when I brought up clothing I was told by more than one person that men's/women's clothing didn't exist.
Click to expand...

You were reminded that, in free countries, anyone is free to wear whatever they want, regardless of whether they are the items of clothing traditionally associated with their particular sex.

You still seem to be assuming that, before any male can transgress female boundaries claiming to identify as a woman, they are going to have to put on a skirt and a frilly pink blouse. This is nonsense. Under self ID any male can enter any female sex segregated space dressed in a pair of jeans and a tee shirt and still claim to identify as a woman because a pair of jeans and a tee shirt is what millions of women routinely wear.

Got it now?
 
Mycroft said:
...because the reality is nobody is so certain a masculine woman isn't a cis-woman they would dare to try to evict them.
Click to expand...

If she's being read as a woman there's no issue and nobody wants to exclude her. If she's so marinated in synthetic testosterone that she reads male, it's entirely lawful to exclude her, so there's nothing daring about it.

Why do you trans advocates always assume that trans people are going to ignore the law and do whatever they want regardless? Doesn't that just underline the point that many of them are antisocial creeps?
 
theprestige said:
Sure, but what's the difference? A masculine woman is a masculine woman. It's never been a problem before.
Click to expand...
I suggest you google trans men. There may be few trans women who "pass", but there are certainly some trans men who do, especially if they have a full beard, which even the most "masculine woman" is not going to have.
 
zooterkin said:
Daily Fail, tenuous headlines are us...
Click to expand...

They've buried the lede.
Sir Keir became 'close' to Ms Sikand after she took a pupillage at his Doughty Street chambers in 1998.

'It was an open secret that Maya was having a relationship with him.
Click to expand...

Bar Council guidance
A sexual relationship between a pupil and pupil supervisor, or between a pupil and any member of chambers or clerk who could be perceived to have any influence over that pupil’s professional future, is strongly discouraged.
Click to expand...

And as to the complexity of relationships among human rights lawyers, here's Alison Bailey on Keir Starmer

https://twitter.com/x/status/1808257761341219313
 
zooterkin said:
We spell it 'lead' in the UK.
Click to expand...
Actually, it can be either. The lede is specifically "the introductory section in journalism and thus to bury the lede refers to hiding the most important and relevant pieces of a story within other distracting information."

I have seen UK publications use "bury the lede"
 
zooterkin said:
Says the guy in New Zealand.
Click to expand...
Tanks a look in the OXFORD English dictionary sometime... and yes, we use both "lede" and "lead" here - I remember we used "lede" when I worked at The Nelson Evening Mail in my youth.

https://proofed.co.uk/writing-tips/idiom-tips-bury-the-lede-or-bury-the-lead/
(Note the url county code)
​
Summary: Bury the Lede or Bury the Lead?​
​
The idiom bury the lede means to fail to emphasise the most important part of a story in an article (or vital information more generally).​
​
Both bury the lede and bury the lead are correct, with ‘lede’ simply being an alternative journalistic spelling invented between the 1950s and 1970s.​
​
Whether to use ‘lead’ or ‘lede’ in this context is largely a matter of preference and both are common. However, if there could be ambiguity about whether you’re referring to an opening paragraph or the metal traditionally used in printing presses, it may be better to stick to the journalistic spelling, ‘lede’! ​
 
I understood it in the archaic spelling. It's quite true that that's an accepted spelling in that context.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom