Rolfe
Adult human female
Another thing that has been pointed out repeatedly.
Talk about ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊. The distinction between gender and sex is central to this thread. The term “sex change” as used by Thermal is wrong and displays ignorance.Man, could we do without this kind of ◊◊◊◊◊◊ post as well.
Pretty sure that Thermal doesn’t mean the person has literally changed sex. He’s made it clear often enough in the thread that he doesn’t believe that can happen.
What he is obviously referencing is what those of us older than 45 called the operation when you had your bits cut off. These days the in-vogue terminology is gender-reassignment surgery, but k will bet any money that you, lionking, that Rofle, smartcooky and others will have used the term “sex change operation” in the past. Maybe as recently as when the Atheist started this thread.
In fact, I’ll warrant that plenty of people have moved all over the shop on this issue. So knock off the gate-keeping, son!
There are quite a few women I know who have expressed dismay on Facebook about the recent Supreme Court ruling, with ages from 24 and up. They're mostly involved in the arts in some way (but that's not necessarily significant, as that's how I came to know them).Well the women telling me this are pretty much every woman I know - the four women I work with (26, 44, 45 and 61 yrs), the several women in my quiz/games group ranging in ages from 36 to 72 (and including one transwoman), my ex-partner, both of my daughters (in their early 40's both of whom have been confronted by verbally nasty and aggressive transwomen in women's safe spaces) all three of my granddaughters (14, 16 and 18). Every one of them rejects the idea of men in their safe spaces. I have never met a woman who would.
I guess you'll think all my friends are tranny bashing bigots.
Of course, I know OF women who hold Thermal's viewpoint, but I don't know any personally. Not a single person, male or female, not even the transwoman in my quiz/games group (who uses the mens), supports the idea that biological males ought to be allowed into female safe spaces. Not one!There are quite a few women I know who have expressed dismay on Facebook about the recent Supreme Court ruling, with ages from 24 and up. They're mostly involved in the arts in some way (but that's not necessarily significant, as that's how I came to know them).
Those who have trained themselves to say “trans woman” and “she” of men who say they are women really do seem to have disengaged their own ability to understand that such men are still — well, men.

The folks that are manning the desks at a rear logistics hub can still be deployable to the desks at forward-deployed logistics hubs in combat zones, even if they are not anticipated to participate in combat themselves. In the military, you are supposed to be deployable even if you aren't in a combat role. The military could let celiac soldiers who work in, say, Washington DC provide their own gluten-free meals. But that's not enough, because they wouldn't be able to if deployed to a combat zone.I can see treating downrange combat duty as a special case, but not the folks manning desks at the logistics hub tryna get war materiel to the right place at the right time
The military has long been recognized by the courts as being able to discriminate in ways that other employers cannot. Call it hypocritical if you like, but it's not new, and it's not peculiar to this issue.Many folks here have said that they are just fine with laws or policies preventing employment discrimination against transgender people, but as soon as actual policies came up forcibly separating trans folk from active duty service (e.g. here in the U.S.) they either went mum or else switched sides and started arguing for employment discrimination against transgender employees under those specific circumstances.
Right. Zig told me what "women were telling me", and I pointed out that the vast majority of women (who tell me stuff) were telling me something quite different.Not supported by the data; see Table 13A
https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/crosstabs_Transgender_Issues_Issues_20240216.pdf
Allow transgender people to use bathrooms which match their gender identity rather than their sex:
Female: Support 33%, Oppose 48%
The issue in the US is this is very politicised - see the difference between Democrats (52% support) and Independents (30% support). Consider which bubble you live in.
That is literally the reason why I use the older term. The gender crew wanted a sex change operation called 'gender reassignment surgery', then they realized that didn't work either, so they now push 'gender affirmation surgery'.Talk about ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊. The distinction between gender and sex is central to this thread.
No, there is no one on the planet with an IQ higher than his shoe size who believes that a cosmetic sex change operation literally changes your biological sex. Maybe you could google the term and see how common it is before saying something nnonsensical?The term “sex change” as used by Thermal is wrong and displays ignorance.
You've been asked repeatedly to provide evidence for your AGP claims, that you said you had. I'm just reminding you that you seem to keep forgetting to provide it, before you change the subject. It's important, because it shows that you were not only lying (which we both knew), but that you knew you were lying, and you are still aware of it, and lack the integrity to admit it. I'll drop it now, since I've asked you a half dozen times and you still weasel. It's not a mistake or oversight. You knew you were lying about it, and won't be honest. Done and done.Dodge noted. My question had nothing at all to do with AGP. You've never answered that question because you can't.
Were any of them telling you that they were OK with Bryson being in their bathroom?Right. Zig told me what "women were telling me", and I pointed out that the vast majority of women (who tell me stuff) were telling me something quite different.
I remember people saying this about keeping the gays out; it wasn't particularly persuasive at the time.The military has long been recognized by the courts as being able to discriminate in ways that other employers cannot.
Not everyone needs to be deployable at all times; it's okay for female soldiers to become pregnant, for example. That aside, if the only accommodation an individual requires is a bottle of pills, that's entirely commonplace and will not disqualify them from serving in most roles. It is very special pleading to pretend gender dysphoria is as debilitating as a serious autoimmune disorder, all the more so since no one is citing to any studies about whether the Biden-era policy actually caused any problems in the uniformed services.In the military, you are supposed to be deployable even if you aren't in a combat role. The military could let celiac soldiers who work in, say, Washington DC provide their own gluten-free meals. But that's not enough, because they wouldn't be able to if deployed to a combat zone.
No, because the one in a million freakshows are not high on their radar and I doubt they know who he is, and anyone who was aware of him probably wouldn't believe he is a transwoman, as the prison even said. He's not some murky enigma.Were any of them telling you that they were OK with Bryson being in their bathroom?
I have asked my closer fam about that specifically, and they all say 'whatever'. One of my whelps claims to be on the nonbinary spectrum (but has strictly hetero long term monogomous relationships so i don't quite get it), and she says some people transition and some don't, either just being ok with their born bodies or due to financial constraints. Doesn't bother her one way or the other, and yes, transpeople frequent the night spots she hangs in.Hell, were any of them telling you that they were OK with males who have not had genital surgery or hormone therapy but merely identify as women being in their bathroom? Or was it just "transwomen"? Because we know the answers are frequently different to those questions.
The same argument can be wrong in one case and right in another. So that's not a persuasive counter-argument either.I remember people saying this about keeping the gays out; it wasn't particularly persuasive at the time.
If someone is never deployable, that's a problem. Hence, no celiacs.Not everyone needs to be deployable at all times
Generally speaking, it's not.That aside, if the only accommodation an individual requires is a bottle of pills
There is nothing at all debilitating about celiac disease so long as one doesn't eat gluten. Which nobody actually needs to eat.It is very special pleading to pretend gender dysphoria is as debilitating as a serious autoimmune disorder
You say he's not a transwoman, but again, what exactly is the standard here? If you appeal to Potter Stewart again, I will take that as an admission that you don't actually have a standard. And without a standard, saying that Bryson isn't trans is merely special pleading.No, because the one in a million freakshows are not high on their radar and I doubt they know who he is, and anyone who was aware of him probably wouldn't believe he is a transwoman, as the prison even said. He's not some murky enigma.
Ah. Now so much of this makes sense. Now I get where your hostility to the pushback against trans activism comes from.I have asked my closer fam about that specifically, and they all say 'whatever'. One of my whelps claims to be on the nonbinary spectrum