Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

Apparently he's now in a women's prison. I'm not quite sure why, unless it's because his victim was male, so according to the logic he isn't a danger to women.
 
Authorities in Britain are simply carrying on as if the Supreme Court didn't even exist. It's bizarre how captured these institutions are. They caved in to the demands of the genderwoo without a struggle, implementing self-ID as policy through the back door with no consultation, then when the court rules that this was wrong they just ignore it.
 
smartcooky said:
We can expect this one to soon be added to the Hall of Infamy....


...a gallery of poor, delicate, harmless flowers who only want to pee!
Click to expand...

I don't know at what point it will be recognised that we're not looking at "a few isolated bad apples" here, but at a fundamental characteristic of the trans perversion. Violence, aggression and a determination to get what they want regardless of anyone or anything that might be standing in their way.
 
Rolfe said:
I don't know at what point it will be recognised that we're not looking at "a few isolated bad apples" here, but at a fundamental characteristic of the trans perversion. Violence, aggression and a determination to get what they want regardless of anyone or anything that might be standing in their way.
Click to expand...
I'm afraid some people will have to be dragged kicking and screaming to this realization.

Rolfe said:
Authorities in Britain are simply carrying on as if the Supreme Court didn't even exist. It's bizarre how captured these institutions are. They caved in to the demands of the genderwoo without a struggle, implementing self-ID as policy through the back door with no consultation, then when the court rules that this was wrong they just ignore it.
Click to expand...
The time must be fast approaching for some Judicial reviews to force compliance with the Supreme Court ruling, and consequences for those who make decisions that flout the law. Application for Judicial Reviews are much cheaper than lawsuits.
 
Last edited:
p0lka said:
Oh wow. They are using sex terms as a label instead of gender terms? wow.

EDIT: It's weird then, on the insistence that male female labels in spaces would never work?
Click to expand...
You are confused. Sex labels will not fix the problem. Sex terms will not end the debate. That doesn't mean sex terms are wrong to use. Nobody on my side ever made that claim.

And Thermal's post rather demonstrates why they won't end the debate. He thinks that factually correct sex terms are slurs. Did you not notice that?
 
Thermal said:
I included the link to a Google search for the term long ago. There is no usage of it except on anti-trans sites, and it's only found definition indicates that it is a derogatory term.
Click to expand...
It's considered a derogatory term by the same people who think transwomen are women, and for the same reason: it doesn't deny reality.

Boo hoo. Get the ◊◊◊◊ over it.
Thermal said:
Sure. That's probably why the professional and medical communities embrace it. Oh, wait...
Click to expand...
The same ideologically captured professions and communities which falsely claimed puberty blockers were reversible?
 
Ziggurat said:
The same ideologically captured professions and communities which falsely claimed puberty blockers were reversible?
Click to expand...
And the same ideologically captured professions and communities which falsely claimed that genital mutilation of teenagers would fix their gender euphoria and reduce their risk of suicide.
 
Those who would put 100% faith in the judgement and opinions of the medical profession would do well to keep the following cases in mind.....

The Tuskegee Syphilis study which killed 168 patients:
en.wikipedia.org

Tuskegee Syphilis Study - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

The Thalidomide scandal in which the medical profession assured the drug was safe:
en.wikipedia.org

Thalidomide scandal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

The Unfortunate Experiment Scandal at NZs National Women's Hospital which resulted in preventable deaths of several women :

Cartwright Inquiry - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

The Bristol Heart Surgery Scandal in which over 200 children died:

Bristol heart scandal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Anyone who thinks the medical profession is infallible, is a fool!
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
Correct


Only in the minds of TRAs, their sycophants, and the ideologically captured.
For the rest of the people in the world (the sane ones) it is clinically accurate nomenclature


There is only one side in this debate that is desperate to sow confusion, and it ain't the gender critical side.

Which is more confusing?
Calling a male (and who is therefore a man, not a woman) who identifies as transgender, a "transgender identified man"?
Calling a male (and who is therefore a man, not a woman) who identifies as transgender, a transwoman ?

Take all the time you need with this one
Click to expand...
If clinically accurate nomenclature is your standard, then why the disagreement with labeling all sports or private spaces etc as male or female according to your standard?
 
smartcooky said:
This is just about as stupid an argument I have seen in this thread.

Maybe you missed the little sketches on Sesame Street when you were growing up... the ones that went....

oneofthesethings.png
Click to expand...
What you quoted was not an argument, but simply an observation.
 
Rolfe said:
Another picture of Theo Upton has emerged.

View attachment 62736

I do not care whether he grows his hair, has a close shave and puts on earrings and a dress, he's a man.
Click to expand...
They are male, both before and after they do their thing. It's the gender labels that are the causing a loophole for a minority of people to take advantage of, yet you're still using them?
 
Last edited:
p0lka said:
If clinically accurate nomenclature is your standard, then why the disagreement with labeling all sports or private spaces etc as male or female according to your standard?
Click to expand...

Nobody disagrees with doing that. They disagree that it will make a blind bit of different to the way the troons behave.
 
p0lka said:
If clinically accurate nomenclature is your standard, then why the disagreement with labeling all sports or private spaces etc as male or female according to your standard?
Click to expand...
The problem with your position has never been that labelling things male/female is bad. It's this delusion you have that doing so would fix anything. It would not fix anything. And the reason it would not is not because Rolfe or I have a problem with male/female labels. This has been explained to you multiple times. Why do you continue to act like we're objecting to the labels themselves, rather than your delusion about what they will accomplish?
 
p0lka said:
They are male, both before and after they do their thing. It's the gender labels that are the causing a loophole for a minority of people to take advantage of, yet you're still using them?
Click to expand...
No. The label has nothing to do with it. Nobody thinks it's OK for males to pee next to females so long as the label on the door is "woman", but not OK if the label is "female". Everyone who thinks it's OK for males to pee next to females thinks it's OK whether the label is "woman" or "female", and everyone who thinks it's not OK thinks it's not OK whether the label is "woman" or "female". Nobody's opinion about this is shaped by the label on the door. It's a delusion to believe it is.
 
You might as well save your typing fingers. This has been explained to him a hundred times, and he doesn't pay any attention. (Would that keeping these men out of women's spaces were as simple as just changing the label on the door!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom