• 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

That is so far removed from reality as to be in another space-time dimension.




And none of these is actually the article I went looking for.
I'm with you on that: it's removed from reality. First off, EC and I were talking about the American POV. Second, your first two articles are the same. Did that make you feel.like you were giving a lot of information to repeat the same article twice? Third, the first two articles were about unisex changing rooms for swimming, which we are all in agreement on is lunacy (sounds like you guys really have it together over there), so utterly irrelevant. The last is a story about one boy that commited multiple sexual assaults, some in and some out of gender neutral toilets, which ITT we all are also in agreement is crazy for schoolchildren.

So yet again, the question is: did you not understand what you were posting, or were you being dishonest again?
 
It might be very unlikely, but their neighbor could actually have a DSD.
I don't find that plausible. Severe DSDs tend to interfere with fertility.
It's also possible that they're a perfectly normal female, with the very common condition of PCOS, but acbytesla doesn't think they fit the mold of what they consider an acceptable level of femininity, and thus perceives them as being masculine due to their own biases and stereotypes.
PCOS tends to be more severe in obese women, which she isn't, and it can also interfere with fertility, which this didn't. As described, this seems unlikely to be PCOS. But you might be right that this person does not actually pass as male to anyone more observant than acbytesla. That's quite plausible. Then again, we only have his word for it that she even exists, so no point in trying to analyze her in too much depth.
 
That is so far removed from reality as to be in another space-time dimension.




And none of these is actually the article I went looking for.
Yeah but facts won't matter. The response will be something like...

- the source is suspect
- the report has been discredited
- The stats are fake, flawed, biased
- But 'Murica!!
- Its a tiny number of assaults, indistinguishable from ZERO
- something something
- all of the above
- some of the above

This will be followed up with pretending the fact don't mean what they clearly do, or arent relevant. Then comes transwomen something something bigots something something tranny-bashers something something but they only want to pee.

ETA: If there is even a response at all. When confronted by clear evidence such as this, TRAs and their cis-stooge bootlickers usually ignore it.
 
Last edited:
I'm with you on that: it's removed from reality. First off, EC and I were talking about the American POV.
Cos "Murica"

Second, your first two articles are the same.
So what? Second sourcing is best practice

Third, the first two articles were about unisex changing rooms for swimming, which we are all in agreement on is lunacy (sounds like you guys really have it together over there), so utterly irrelevant.
Seriously, you do understand that it doesn't matter that this was in swimming pools, right? I mean, is there something about unisex swimming pool changing rooms that makes them a hotbed for sexual attacks, but somehow that wouldn't apply to unisex restrooms at a spa, or a gym or in other public spaces?

You do understand, don't you that allowing biological males to use women's single sex facilities makes those facilities ipso facto unisex, right?

The last is a story about one boy that commited multiple sexual assaults, some in and some out of gender neutral toilets, which ITT we all are also in agreement is crazy for schoolchildren.
Did you actually read the whole article?

If you had, you would have known it is NOT just about "one boy that committed multiple sexual assaults"

"Campaigners for safety in schools have long warned that forcing girls to share toilets with male pupils exposes them to unnecessary risks. Girls want and need privacy, especially when their periods start and they have to use lavatories to change sanitary protection. But anyone who has ever met a teenage boy knows that some of them tease and humiliate girls, and it is absolute folly to allow them into what used to be an all-female space"
Parents are already reporting that their daughters are trying to get through the school day without using the toilet. Two years ago, a senior police officer claimed that sexual abuse is widespread in schools. I have heard reports of girls in London wearing shorts under their uniform skirts to protect themselves from assaults by male pupils.
 
Pretty sure isn't certainty. Some women produce more testosterone than others. I dated a girl in high school during the 1970s who was quite muscular. I assure you she wasn't taking testosterone or steroids.
You should look up testosterone levels in men and women. Not only is there no overlap, there's actually a significant gap. A woman simply cannot even get close to male levels naturally.

Not that it matters. Women mistaking other women for men has never been a significant problem. You're chasing a red herring.
 
I'm with you on that: it's removed from reality. First off, EC and I were talking about the American POV.
So ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ what.

I know that you think the US is the exemplar in, well everything (despite electing the worst leader in modern history). But you are wrong. The US as a world leader is laughable.
 
Maybe I should try again to find the article I was actually looking for, which had fairly detailed stats about rates of sexual assault in unisex facilities versus single-sex ones.

Nah, why bother. Thermal will find some way to dismiss that too. Some very narrow event which is all he's referring to definitely has never happened.
 
Well that rules out all of my gay and lesbian friends from the little town 4 miles down the road from Stroud, where I lived before moving here. In the late 90s/early 20s a whole lot of gays and lesbians moved to that area and transformed a flea-bitten, scruffy little town into a 'destination' town with fabulous shops and award winning restaurants.
I can guarantee that not one of them will be welcome there.

Sorry about X link.
The gist of it is that GC gays and lesbians will be unable to attend Stroud Pride. All my G & L friends from there are very GC.
 
Although I've seen the term bandied about, I don't actually know what's specifically meant by a "Karen". Is there someone called Karen, or a fictional character of that name, whose behaviour is being invoked? If so, who is she and what did she do?
 
Well that rules out all of my gay and lesbian friends from the little town 4 miles down the road from Stroud, where I lived before moving here. In the late 90s/early 20s a whole lot of gays and lesbians moved to that area and transformed a flea-bitten, scruffy little town into a 'destination' town with fabulous shops and award winning restaurants.
I can guarantee that not one of them will be welcome there.

Sorry about X link.
The gist of it is that GC gays and lesbians will be unable to attend Stroud Pride. All my G & L friends from there are very GC.
Can you please explain what this thread has anything to do with gays and lesbians?
 
Last edited:
Stroud Pride has announced that the "LGB" will not be welcome there. It's been completely taken over by the trans. I think it's tangentially relevant.
 
Fair enough. It wasn’t clear.
Its pretty much explained in the link

"Do you want to perform at Pride? We are looking for performers for Stroud Pride.
Please fill out the performer application on our Linktree
Just to note: We will be taking extra care to not allow performers who hold harmful views. Such as LGB views that exclude trans people from pride.

In essence, any Gender Critical Gays and Lesbians who believe T should be separate from LGB will not be permitted to perform. TRAs hate free speech unless its they who are speaking
 
Another cherry, another imposter, nothing to see here, real trans people are nothing like this.


So don't worry that letting anyone who claims to be trans into women's spaces will inevitably let this character in too (don't know in what way he isn't "real trans"), because if he assaults you, it won't be a trans person who has assaulted you. Or something like that.
 
I think my comment is very relevant to this thread. They're saying the quiet part out loud now. I think the more that they show that the LGB bit of LGBTQ+ isn't welcome at Stroud Pride FFS! The more they can distance themselves from the LGB the better. They've hi-jacked the 'Pride' bit of activism.
The more regular people who see that the TQ+ bit is entirely separate may start looking at the subject with different eyes. I don't know any gay people who are on board with the TQ+ appropriation, but that may just be my age. I confess I don't know any gay people under 50.
 
Although I've seen the term bandied about, I don't actually know what's specifically meant by a "Karen". Is there someone called Karen, or a fictional character of that name, whose behaviour is being invoked? If so, who is she and what did she do?
The term is somewhat like "Chad". It is a stand in to represent not any particular person (real or fictional), but a particular sort of person. In the case of Karen, it indicates the sort of person who sticks their nose in where it doesn't belong, feels entitled to special treatment, and demands to speak to the manager.
 
I haven't even heard the term "Chad" other than in relation to voting in the 2008 presidential election.

Sometimes you need to speak to the manager.
 

Back
Top Bottom