Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

Myriad said:
"You do know that there's more than one human species, right? Don't obstruct the critical progressive work of figuring out who gets to call themselves which variant species and what special rights each should have. There's no way that could go wrong. Don't be one of the variphobes who disagrees."
Click to expand...
Well, ackshually… there has been more than one human species: Neanderthal, Denisovans, etc…
 
varwoche said:
My take is that it's hugely unfortunate that lefties have fallen down an ideological rabbit hole and ceded reality to Maga scum. Ugh. It practically makes me sick given the election outcome.
Click to expand...
I suspect a good part of what is propping up the trans movement in the US is the Trump admins heavy-handedness on the issue and the lefts hatred of him and MAGAs. Many of us are adept at pointing out the "Hitler was vegetarian" argument when others are doing it, but not so much when it's our side. Stereotypes are useful.
 
I think Trump has been far more positive than negative on this issue. He set a fire-cracker under the transcult, and frankly they don't pay any attention to a light touch anyway. It's way past time to try nicey-nicey.
 
Rolfe said:
I think Trump has been far more positive than negative on this issue. He set a fire-cracker under the transcult, and frankly they don't pay any attention to a light touch anyway. It's way past time to try nicey-nicey.
Click to expand...
Disagree.

The Cass Review was a good piece of work that could at least be evaluated by reasonable people and could allow for various institutional bodies to use as justification for their policies.

This happened before Trump was re-elected.

If the US had followed along with the route that the UK and other European countries had gone down, they could have, possibly, avoided the re-election of Trump. Instead Trump is the beneficiary of the intransigence of the US trans lobby. His executive orders will likely not be accepted by about half of the country and the trans lobby will dig in more.
 
If the Democrats hadn't doubled down on the trans madness? But they did, and they show no sign of learning from the mistake, either.
 
Rolfe said:
If the Democrats hadn't doubled down on the trans madness? But they did, and they show no sign of learning from the mistake, either.
Click to expand...
Indeed, like your party.

Labour, on the other hand, changed course because of the Cass Review. They accepted its findings and then the Supreme Court ruling.


If, on the other hand, Farage had been elected and rushed through some bill called “Restore dignity and kick the trannies out of the army!” I doubt that Labour would go along with it.
 
Louden Wilde said:
I suspect a good part of what is propping up the trans movement in the US is the Trump admins heavy-handedness on the issue and the lefts hatred of him and MAGAs. Many of us are adept at pointing out the "Hitler was vegetarian" argument when others are doing it, but not so much when it's our side. Stereotypes are useful.
Click to expand...
I am always hopeful that when clear and obvious liberals such as myself and others, are firmly in the conservative camp on this one issue, that it will give my pro-trans liberal colleagues, friends and associates, pause to reconsider their positions. I do see that IRL in my circles, but of course, I don't expect that to happen here... the liberals and conservatives here are far too tribally entrenched for that to happen.

Unfortunately in America, if the Democrats don't rapidly distance themselves from the pro-trans position they have gotten themselves into, the MAGA crowd and their sycophants will certainly use that as a cudgel to beat them with, and the Democrats can only look forward to being the minority party for the next 8 to 12 years.
 
Last edited:
The UK response to the Supreme Court finding by trans rights activists is now becoming clearer eg Quakers

https://www.quaker.org.uk/documents...n-provision-of-trans-inclusive-facilities-bym

No trans, non-binary or intersex Quaker, staff member, or service user will be asked to make any disclosure or prove their status in a way that is not asked of cis people.
Click to expand...
It is not possible or desirable to monitor who uses our facilities and therefore cannot guarantee any shared space as exclusive for one group of people. We will not label something as a single-sex space if we cannot truthfully guarantee that it will be single-sex.
Click to expand...
Sufficient accessible facilities will continue to be designated for use only by those who need accessible facilities. They will not normally be made available for general use to resolve issues around sex and gender, as this would further disadvantage people with disabilities.
Click to expand...
We will take robust steps to ensure freedom from harassment or inappropriate behaviour. We have no evidence of any harm having come to women using our facilities from trans women or anybody else. We will investigate inappropriate behaviour (especially sexual or other harassment and hate speech or discrimination) and follow this up, including with the police if we believe a crime has been committed.
Click to expand...

ie heavily focussed on toilets, no single sex facilities as "it's too difficult to monitor", and in practice we will use a definition of harassment that protects transwomen.
 
Last edited:
Aber said:
The UK response to the Supreme Court finding by trans rights activists is now becoming clearer eg Quakers

https://www.quaker.org.uk/documents...n-provision-of-trans-inclusive-facilities-bym






ie heavily focussed on toilets, no single sex facilities as "it's too difficult to monitor", and in practice we will use a definition of harassment that protects transwomen.
Click to expand...

They hope. They may be able to pull it off, but they're opening themselves up to legal action from a now remarkably well-funded women's movement.
 
Aber said:
The UK response to the Supreme Court finding by trans rights activists is now becoming clearer eg Quakers

https://www.quaker.org.uk/documents...n-provision-of-trans-inclusive-facilities-bym

ie heavily focussed on toilets, no single sex facilities as "it's too difficult to monitor", and in practice we will use a definition of harassment that protects transwomen.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't spend too much time worrying about what Quakers think or say. They tend to run around like headless chooks trying not to offend anyone.

Rolfe said:
They hope. They may be able to pull it off, but they're opening themselves up to legal action from a now remarkably well-funded women's movement.
Click to expand...
Yes, they are amazingly well funded. So much so, that they are already talking about suing the NHS and the UK police if those organizations won't comply with the law in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling. Hopefully, those two groups' own legal advisers will make it clear they WILL lose if that happens

If not, those lawsuits ought to be slam dunks - no court in the land is going to find against their own Supreme Court - and if they try, the judge involved will get ripped a new one.
 
On one hand we have Joanne Rowling setting up a fund to support legal action by individuals who have suffered disadvantage due to non-compliance with the law, and on the other hand FWS has just been awarded costs and expenses in relation to the SC action. That action was originally crowdfunded and nobody is going to be asking for their money back, so that's a hell of a fighting fund.
 
Rolfe said:
On one hand we have Joanne Rowling setting up a fund to support legal action by individuals who have suffered disadvantage due to non-compliance with the law, and on the other hand FWS has just been awarded costs and expenses in relation to the SC action. That action was originally crowdfunded and nobody is going to be asking for their money back, so that's a hell of a fighting fund.
Click to expand...

Oh, I didn't know that... so Holyrood will be getting the bill then? FWS raised about £300K, and they will get to keep almost all of it. (y)

It is however, a damning indictment on modern society that they had to go all they way to the Supreme Court to get a judicial ruling that water is wet, and it will be an even bigger indictment on Society if they have to keep hammering intransigent groups until they get it!
 
angrysoba said:
Disagree.

The Cass Review was a good piece of work that could at least be evaluated by reasonable people and could allow for various institutional bodies to use as justification for their policies.

This happened before Trump was re-elected.

If the US had followed along with the route that the UK and other European countries had gone down, they could have, possibly, avoided the re-election of Trump. Instead Trump is the beneficiary of the intransigence of the US trans lobby. His executive orders will likely not be accepted by about half of the country and the trans lobby will dig in more.
Click to expand...
Executive orders apply only to the agencies and departments of the executive branch of the federal government.

There's nothing in an EO for half the country to accept or not accept.
 
Also NHS may move to banning cross-sex hormones for under 18s based on research from Finland and Sweden.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politi...eeting-changed-his-mind-on-cross-sex-hormones

“Cross sex hormone treatment affects each of the cells of the body,” Dahlgren explained. Research showed trans women (“natal males”) have a substantially higher risk of ischemic stroke, venous thromboembolism (VTE) – which includes deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism – and heart attacks. After eight years of oestrogen use, for every 1,000 people 16.7 more trans women would be expected to have VTE than in a group of biological males who had not transitioned; the figure is 13.7 more per 1,000 when compared to biological women. Studies have also suggested that females who take testosterone, have an increased risk of heart attacks.
Click to expand...
 
smartcooky said:
Oh, I didn't know that... so Holyrood will be getting the bill then? FWS raised about £300K, and they will get to keep almost all of it. (y)

It is however, a damning indictment on modern society that they had to go all they way to the Supreme Court to get a judicial ruling that water is wet, and it will be an even bigger indictment on Society if they have to keep hammering intransigent groups until they get it!
Click to expand...

I don't know what the figures will turn out to be, but I think FWS spent over £400,000. These women are competent, fired up and deadly. If (when) they get most of that back, they'll just turn their guns on the next target. And as they seem likely to go on winning, this could turn into rinse and repeat.
 

Reuters: California to allow more girls in track and field finals after Trump pressure to drop transgender athlete ​

WASHINGTON, May 27 (Reuters) - The governing body for California high school sports on Tuesday said it would change its entry rules to allow more female athletes in this week's track and field championships, after demands from President Donald Trump to stop a transgender girl from competing.
Click to expand...
in essence: Actual female athletes who would have gone to State finals, if not for a male trans athlete, are now able to move up to compete as if there was no male. The males who qualified are still competing.

link
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom