Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

acbytesla said:
I'm sick of this conversation. It's all about people's hate and lack of tolerance for others that are different.
Click to expand...
Firstly there is no animosity towards transgender people per se. But when selfish mainly transwomen insist on access to women’s change rooms, refuges, sports etc etc where people like me draw the line. Women’s safety and wellbeing are being threatened.

And guess what? The world is slowly but surely acting against this selfishness. World sporting organisations have taken action to prevent biological men from competing in women’s sports. The UK Supreme Court has taken action. The tide is turning.
 
theprestige said:
Just once I'd like to see a trans ally take a good look at that, and say, "that's evil and I want no part of it."
Click to expand...
WaitSkeletonComputer.jpg


Hey, Mr theprestige? Is that you?
 
Ziggurat said:
How is it hateful to recognize that sex is more important than gender?
Click to expand...
Sex is definitely more important to me.

But treating human beings with kindness, tolerance and dignity is also important. It would be easier to allow bigotry and hatred to win as it seems to be doing. As it certainly is in this thread. Allow these human beings to be treated horribly by society. It is probably the practical choice. To sacrifice these human beings to abuse. As opposed to allowing hate to spread to others as it is certainly doing these days.
 
acbytesla said:
I'm sick of this conversation. It's all about people's hate and lack of tolerance for others that are different.
Click to expand...
There's plenty of tolerance here for people who are different. Most of the posters here including me) believe that Transgender identified people should be afforded THE SAME protections against discrimination as ANY other group of people with regards to housing, employment, insurance, freedom of speech and personal safety. Further, they should be allowed to dress however they like, call themselves whatever they wish, and have relationships with any consenting adult who wishes to reciprocate.

But, like ANY other group there are limits. It is not discrimination to forbid adults competing in children's sports because it puts the children at risk of physical harm. We don't allow members of the general public to enter restricted places such as military camps or government buildings because they have no business being there... and we should not allow males to enter female only spaces such as women's rape crisis centres, domestic violence shelters, prison cells, hospital wards, changing rooms and public bathrooms...again, because they have no business being there.

Any man, including any pretending or claiming they are not a man (even if they truly believe they are not a man) who violates any boundary of any woman or girl in any place at any time against her consent, is a predator and needs to be treated as such. Those who would support such a man in the violation of that boundary are misogynists, and also need to be treated as such. The good men stay out so that the bad men stand out.
 
Last edited:
There are no limits to my kindness and tolerance. At least I don't want there to be. Hatred and xenophobia have always been an easy sell. Anyone that is different. Whether it be another religion, another race, another sex, another sexual preference etc. This is a step too far. But it is no difference. This is just another form of hatred and tribalism.
 
acbytesla said:
I can walk into a woman's bathroom and assault a woman. I don't need to identify as one to do it. There are opportunities all the time, everywhere.
Click to expand...

Point one: As usual you assume only the worst case scenario. There are plenty of others. Like, for example, a flasher. Currently the presence of any male is unacceptable and women can expect support if they object to it. The risk is entirely the flasher's. When the presence of some males is acceptable, getting that support when the flasher comes in (and quickly puts his dick away if the women raise the alarm) is more problematic as it's just their word against his. The women now face the risk of being labelled evil transphobes guilty of a hate crime if they raise the alarm.

Point 2: You seem to be assuming that it's possible to have different rules for one current case of sex segregation whilst retaining all the others. When the TRA position is that transwomen are women and must be treated as such 24/7, I really don't think it is.

Point 3: As for the argument that the women's toilets have stalls: so does the men's. If women can reasonably be expected to share their toilet facilities with males then so can transwomen, in which case what's the problem with the latter using the men's? If the problem is that they're not safe in the mere presence of other males then (a) isn't that equally the case for females and (b) why is that women's problem to solve?
 
acbytesla said:
Sex is definitely more important to me.

But treating human beings with kindness, tolerance and dignity is also important. It would be easier to allow bigotry and hatred to win as it seems to be doing. As it certainly is in this thread. Allow these human beings to be treated horribly by society. It is probably the practical choice. To sacrifice these human beings to abuse.
Click to expand...
What exact abuse are you talking about? Requiring them to go to the bathroom that matches their sex? Not allowing them in women's prisons? Not letting them destroy women's records in sports?

The "who's the victim and who's the oppressor" template has been quite successful in focusing progressive energy on issues from civil to women's rights to gay rights and so it can be hard to see that it only works when rights are not really in conflict. Giving Blacks civil rights in the USA did not impinge on the rights of White people. Ditto giving women rights did not really impinge on the rights of men, not did gay rights impinge on the rights of heterosexuals, despite many claims to the contrary by opponents.

With the issues that have arisen around transwomen, some women have been adamant that their rights are being trampled on. Maybe the bathroom issue or the prison issue doesn't impress you, but I would think the women's sports issue would, because it is such an obviously unfair situation that even Democrats have begun tip-toeing away from it.

As for the supposed "bigotry and hatred" in this thread, that's a cop-out to avoid debating the real issues. I keep coming back to the transmen, because they reveal how silly that claim is. Nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what bathroom they are in, nobody worries they are going to men's prisons (probably because they don't go to prison, duh), nobody thinks they're going to destroy men's records. This is very much an asymmetrical situation.
 
acbytesla said:
There are no limits to my kindness and tolerance. At least I don't want there to be. Hatred and xenophobia have always been an easy sell. Anyone that is different. Whether it be another religion, another race, another sex, another sexual preference etc. This is a step too far. But it is no difference. This is just another form of hatred and tribalism.
Click to expand...
Ok, so you are tolerant of murderers, child molesters, rapists & burglars, because "there are no limits" to your "kindness and tolerance".

Clears that up then!
 
Brainster said:
As for the supposed "bigotry and hatred" in this thread, that's a cop-out to avoid debating the real issues. I keep coming back to the transmen, because they reveal how silly that claim is. Nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what bathroom they are in, nobody worries they are going to men's prisons (probably because they don't go to prison, duh), nobody thinks they're going to destroy men's records.
This is very much an asymmetrical situation.
Click to expand...

BOOM! 100%
 
Last edited:
Time to explode another myth about transgenderism... the one that claims there is a "Transgender Genocide" going on and that transgender people are the most at risk of being murdered or attacked than any other group...

Ken LaCorte - Elephants in the room, destroys this myth, and shows that the opposite is true, that transgender people are at far a lesser risk of being a victim that most other groups.

 
Women's refuges should be able to prevent access to any member of the public they reasonably believe is a threat to the safety of women or staff in the refuge. This would include biological men, transsexual men, transsexual women and biological women. The obvious case would be the ex-partner of a woman in the refuge.

Who disagrees with this proposal?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom