Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Thermal]

Facts don't care about feelings. In my worldview, observable scientific reality trumps feelings... it always will, every time.

Except if you like the transgender person, then you are happy to "she" them, even though you can see they are a male?

Gender ideology rests on two core beliefs.
Firstly, that someone's sex is determined by the thoughts in their head rather than by their biology.
Secondly, that those who do not share that belief can reasonably be expected to sacrifice their sex-segregated spaces in order to accommodate those that do.

Assertion not accepted.

You might want to ask the women on this forum about that.

Oh, I forgot, you already did, and they told you, but you ignored them and called them tranny-bashing bigots for standing up for their rights and for what they believe in

Never happened. If someone presented a bigoted position, I called them on it, yes. Not for instance, Pixel42, Emily's Cat, Agatha, or Edaledith among others though, who argue on entirely different lines.

I think there's only one woman who pushes a blatantly bigoted position, and multiple members have been calling that out for many years, as I've been reading ITT.

 

[Thermal]

I contend that the ambiguity is manufactured, and that nobody is really that confused.

It's not confusion on anyone's part. I'm confident that restrooms were always intended to be sex segregated, and just as confident that not a single state thought it was important enough to codify into law. But the gender idea has precedent now, and for better or worse, we are working with laws as they are. If we mean to sex segregated, or even meant to in the past, it would have been a line item addition, with legal penalties spelled out. Did all 50 states forget? Didn't occur to them that a man in the ladies room might be taken as criminally intended?

I advocate no such thing, except when a man demand access to a women's space, regardless of how women feel about it.

Does your friend make such demands.

(She's the daughter of a long term customer that I am friendly with, not really my friend personally).

She makes no demands at all that i am aware of. Pretty sure that she uses the ladies room in public. If you were to see her, you wouldn't question why at all. I do so swear on multiple holy books that every guy here would likely crane their necks for ye Olde second glance if she walked by.

 

[theprestige]

It's not confusion on anyone's part. I'm confident that restrooms were always intended to be sex segregated, and just as confident that not a single state thought it was important enough to codify into law. But the gender idea has precedent now

No it doesn't. That's the whole point. This idea, that gender has precedent now, is the manufactured confusion I'm talking about.

 

[Thermal]

No it doesn't. That's the whole point. This idea, that gender has precedent now, is the manufactured confusion I'm talking about.

No one is or was confused. The veracity of gender ID was allowed to flourish with presumably the best of intentions while we tried to be cool with transpeople and understand them, and not be dicks to them.

 

[Rolfe]

Arresting some for advocating violence? Why not?

Arresting someone for giving what is commonly regarded as sensible advice to women encountering an intransigent male in a women-only space? Doing it in a jokey manner (he's a comedian) by highlighting the fact that they have balls and that's fairly top of the list of why they should not be there? THAT sort of "advocating violence"?

Do you really want me to dredge up the multiple screenshots of trans activists advocating absolutely sickening violence against women, which are routinely brushed off by the police as "a joke" or "not serious". Twitter is awash with them right now. Most of them are not appropriate to re-post on the forum anyway.

The holder of the "Decapitate Terfs" sign was never pursued by the police. A trans-identifying man ("Sarah Jane Baker", look him up) who was out of prison on licence following on a conviction for serious violent crime was filmed at a pro-trans rally with a megaphone shouting "if you see a terf, punch it in the face." Multiple complaints were made to the police about that, and the decision was that it was mere rhetoric. He should have been returned to prison to serve the rest of his sentence for that, but he wasn't.

All day women have been posting screenshots of sickening threats of violence from trans activists, mostly trans-identifying men, threats of rape and torture and execution. Guillotines, knives and coffins feature prominently. All have been the subject of complaints to the police but none were taken any further.

The (trans-identifying) man who initiated the complaint against Graham Linehan was himself dismissed from the police because of absolutely egregious online harrassment - but only after police bosses had tried to cover up for him by telling him to use a pseudonym to carry out the harrassment. He's been the subject of multiple complaints of harrassment, doxxing and threatening behaviour, but somehow the police can never find him to arrest him. But they're happy to act on his complaints and send five armed officers to arrest an Irish national resident in the USA as he steps off a plane for basically repeating the usual advice to women who are confronted by an importunate man. "If all else fails, punch him in the balls." This is standard "what your mother tells you" as a teenager about to start going out alone.

ETA: I might as well post this link again. People have been beating their heads against a brick wall trying to get the police to take some action over these threats of violence against women, and I have not heard of a single arrest as a consequence. Trans allies - that's you, Catsmate - actually look at the page and read the sort of stuff we get from your darling "dolls". (Dolls. Facsimiles of women, made of plastic, without any functional parts. Good analogy.)

TERF is a slur

Documenting the abuse, harassment and misogyny of transgender identity politics

terfisaslur.com

ETA again: This is more like what I was looking for. There might be some duplication of material with the previous link. I wish, once again, that the trans allies would actually read this stuff, and realise that not only does it go unpunished, the police actively protect the perpetrators.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1962983311992881180

https://twitter.com/x/status/1962849687725027624

 

[smartcooky]

Except if you like the transgender person, then you are happy to "she" them, even though you can see they are a male?

Except when I don't.
I may have been prepared to do that in the past, but the more I have seen of the violent, misogynistic public behaviour of trans activists, both in my own country, and in others, the more hardened my stance has become, and the less deference I am prepared to extend them.

Assertion not accepted.

It's not an assertion, it's a fact.
If you don't think gender ideology rests on people believing they are a sex other than they were born, and that it relies on others playing along with that belief, then what do you believe it rests on

Never happened. If someone presented a bigoted position, I called them on it, yes. Not for instance, Pixel42, Emily's Cat, Agatha, or Edaledith among others though, who argue on entirely different lines.

That's not how I remember your posts.

I think there's only one woman who pushes a blatantly bigoted position, and multiple members have been calling that out for many years, as I've been reading ITT.

We all know who you are talking about. Do you have the cajones to say the quiet part out loud?

 

[Thermal]

Except when I don't.
I may have been prepared to do that in the past, but the more I have seen of the violent, misogynistic public behaviour of trans activists, both in my own country, and in others, the more hardened my stance has become, and the less deference I am prepared to extend them.

You now call your transwoman friends 'men', because of obnoxious activists that they do not support, in retaliation for acts that they did not take part in? OK.

It's not an assertion, it's a fact.

It is not. It is at the absolute most a demand to have imaginary musings taken as unassailable fact, backed by no one within the relevant communities. If it were factual, it could be demonstrated outside of your proclamations. It is not.

That's not how I remember your posts.

Your ailing memory is not reality. Search is back, and the posts stand for anyone to read. Go ahead, it only takes a few seconds. Find me saying any such thing to Ms Pixel or Agatha or the rest.

We all know who you are talking about. Do you have the cajones to say the quiet part out loud?

I have taken my charges up directly to the poster in question in multiple exchanges. 'Talking behind her back' is cowardly, as she may be skimming over or otherwise not be reading my posts. At this time, calling her out by name when she is not involved in this exchange is the kind of behavior only expected of a bratty, spolied child. Know what I mean?

 

[smartcooky]

Arresting some for advocating violence? Why not?

Obvious hypocrisy is obvious!
How about arresting your friends, the "dolls" when they advocate violence such as. "Punch Terfs", "Kill all TERFs", "Kill JK Rowling". Yeah, they get a free pass from you and your ilk don't they? Of course they do, because violent transgender activists are your kind of people... a protected class. Sickening!

 

[smartcooky]

Sandie Peggie's lawyer has made her closing arguments in the case Sandie Peggie v NHS Fife

She did not hold back...

NHS Fife 'told lies' and 'smeared' Sandie Peggie who was victim of 'witch hunt'

Sandie Peggie's counsel Naomi Cunningham made her closing statements on Monday as she blasted the health board for forcing its 'deluded' point of view on its employees.

www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk

Ms Cunningham summarised the case for judge Sandy Kemp and other members of the tribunal by highlighting that the health board embarked on a "witch hunt" against her client for speaking out against its "deluded" application of gender self-identification, and allowing men into female single-sex spaces.​

​

She said that NHS Fife decided that it had a "responsibility" to "educate" Ms Peggie about trans rights by "requiring her to change her clothes in front of one of her male colleagues." She went on: "NHS Fife has undertaken a witch hunt against a nurse of 30 years unblemished service.​

"It has attempted to smear her as a bigot and transphobe, to drive a wedge between her and her lesbian daughter, it has smeared her witnesses, and it has subjected her to a protracted investigation of obviously false allegations of potentially career-ending gravity. It has attacked the integrity of her legal team. It has defied tribunal orders. It has told countless lies. It has attracted censure from the Information Commissioner and the EHRC. This behaviour is repugnant."​

If she doesn't win this hands down in a slam dunk, I will be astonished. But regardless of the outcome, NHS Fife are in deep poodoo!

If by some remote chance, NHS Fife wins, they will likely be prosecuted under the Equality Act.

If what is more likel to happen, NHS Fife loses, Sandie Peggie and her team (with the already pledged support of JK Rowling) will sue them into oblivion.

 

[Rolfe]

This is an interesting thread about the legalities of the charge against Glinner.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1963031847346024745

It is pointed out that he has apparently been charged with "intentionally stirring up hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation". The problem is that he doesn't mention sexual orientation at all, and transgender identity isn't covered by that piece of legislation.

In addition, one of the tweets says no more than "you smell," which may be childish but no more than that. The second is similar. It amounts to no more than "I hate, loathe and detest you."

The third one, which supposedly amounts to incitement to violence, in fact takes the form of advice to women if they find themselves confronted by an intransigent, threatening man. Advice which is commonplace and might even be given by the police themselves!
1. Make a scene.
2. Call the police.
3. IF ALL ELSE FAILS, punch him in the balls.

Note that "call the police" comes before the suggestion that one might have to resort to violence.

That's it. Glinner is not a British citizen and he was in the USA when he posted these tweets as far as I know. No British citizen is named in any of them. Do the Metropolitan Police even have jurisdiction here?

But what is of paramount importance is that parliament repeatedly assured the public that a very high bar was necessary before any offences in the relevant statutes could be invoked. Merely being offensive wouldn't be enough, not even being grossly offensive. These tweets don't get anywhere near this high bar.

What is most disturbing is that the police still treat "trans" as a holy caste who must not be crossed in any way on pain of the full force of the law descending on you. Conversely, when trans people themselves, or their allies, post immeasurably worse threats of death, rape and GBH, these are invariably held not to meet this high bar, nothing to see here folks. Who is authorising this, who is instructing the police to operate in this manner?

For the final irony, we know the identity of the complainant in this case. He is a trans-identifying man who has been permanently banned from Twitter for harassment (and now conducts his campaign on BlueSky). He is a former policeman who was (eventually) sacked for online harassment. There are multiple outstanding complaints against him for threatening behaviour, but somehow the police can never find him to interview him about these. He makes so many complaints about others he really should have been put in his box as a vexatious complainer years ago. Nevertheless the police chose to act on his complaints on this occasion.

These are the facts that the protectors of the garish plastic non-functional facsimiles of women won't even read, let alone respond to.

This thread is also well worth a read.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1963137748543701144

 

[smartcooky]

That's it. Glinner is not a British citizen and he was in the USA when he posted these tweets as far as I know. No British citizen is named in any of them. Do the Metropolitan Police even have jurisdiction here?

But what is of paramount importance is that parliament repeatedly assured the public that a very high bar was necessary before any offences in the relevant statutes could be invoked. Merely being offensive wouldn't be enough, not even being grossly offensive. These tweets don't get anywhere near this high bar.

Indeed they don't.

Gender critical people get hammered for the slightest of slights, while trans-allies get a free pass... Every . Single . Time!

What is most disturbing is that the police still treat "trans" as a holy caste who must not be crossed in any way on pain of the full force of the law descending on you. Conversely, when trans people themselves, or their allies, post immeasurably worse threats or death, rape and GBH, these are invariably held not to meet this high bar, nothing to see here folks. Who is authorising this, who is instructing the police to operate in this manner?

If you listen to Peter Bleksley, he will tell you (correctly) that its all coming from the gender ideology-captured, "shiny-arsed pen-pushers" running the College of Policing, who are indoctrinating police officers to believe that the ordinary citizen is their enemy. Peter is a very experienced former police officer, a former detective at Kensington and Chelsea. He was a founding member of Scotland Yard's SO10 a secretive undercover squad. Since leaving the Police he has become one of the country’s most renowned and successful fugitive hunters.

 

[d4m10n]

...if you like the transgender person, then you are happy to "she" them, even though you can see they are a male?

Are you saying we ought to feel morally obligated to modify our language for everyone who asks that of us, or are you only making that claim with respect to preferred pronouns? I don't generally refrain from calling psychic mediums "grifters" even though I'm well aware that their victims would rather that I used more respectful, deferential, and tolerant language when describing that specific aspect of how they process their unresolved issues. It seems to me that scientific skepticism in general has something of a reputation for putting facts before feelings when it comes to uncomfortable truths about comforting fictions.

If you are not saying that we are morally obligated to use preferred pronouns, then what is your objection to using them when we happen to feel like it's worth it?

 

[d4m10n]

This is absolutely freaking insane.

I just got arrested again

I arrived back in London to discover the UK is still a police state run by trans activists

grahamlinehan.substack.com

"So much for the tolerant left," as they say.

Seriously, though, meeting political speech with armed force in the name of upholding state-approved doctrine is just the sort of thing Orwell warned us about.

Glinner is not a British citizen and he was in the USA when he posted these tweets as far as I know. No British citizen is named in any of them. Do the Metropolitan Police even have jurisdiction here?

Do Americans need to scrub our old Twitter timelines for any slapstick punchlines before visiting the UK on vacay, or is this sort of police abuse going to be restricted to gendercrits / Irishmen?

 

[theprestige]

When they are not living as a male in any way that objectively matters, it's an antisocial dickhead thing to do.

This makes no sense. The only thing that objectively matters about their lifestyle is that they are male.

 

[Thermal]

Are you saying we ought to feel morally obligated to modify our language for everyone who asks that of us, or are you only making that claim with respect to preferred pronouns?

Neither.

If you are not saying that we are morally obligated to use preferred pronouns, then what is your objection to using them when we happen to feel like it's worth it?

Smartcooky said: "Facts don't care about feelings. In my worldview, observable scientific reality trumps feelings... it always will, every time."

So I questioned whether he meant that or was full of ◊◊◊◊ by reminding him that he demonstrated that recently claimed that he supported the opposite position. It really didn't have much to do with 'we', except that 'we' should be intellectually consistent.

 

[Thermal]

This makes no sense. The only thing that objectively matters about their lifestyle is that they are male.

You've said that many times. I've explained my disagreement in depth and detail many times. Are we going to sing a round of "I Got You Babe"?

 

[theprestige]

You've said that many times. I've explained my disagreement in depth and detail many times. Are we going to sing a round of "I Got You Babe"?

At this point, I'm just making sure both perspectives get equal time. You keep pronouncing this stuff, I'll keep rebutting it. Our audience is welcome to make up their own minds about which one of us makes more sense.

 

[d4m10n]

...reminding him that he demonstrated that recently claimed that he supported the opposite position.

It sounds like you are saying that using cross-sex pronouns is an elevation of feelings over facts, but I'm skeptical of the idea that people who want those pronouns used generally take it as a factual concession about sex rather than merely a social concession about personal identity. In the sort of social circles where it is fashionable to say that "a woman is anyone who identifies as a woman," using she/her merely concedes the fact of self-identification, nothing more.

 

[Thermal]

At this point, I'm just making sure both perspectives get equal time. You keep pronouncing this stuff, I'll keep rebutting it. Our audience is welcome to make up their own minds about which one of us makes more sense.

Ok. Your normal argument is that in matters of public policy, the guy's dick is all that matters. Have you extended that now to interpersonal/social interaction, which is what was being discussed?

 

[theprestige]

Except if you like the transgender person, then you are happy to "she" them, even though you can see they are a male?

We live in a society. Not every interaction with a woo-monger needs to be a confrontational dispute about epistemological truth and self-delusion. My cousin is a devout Catholic, who firmly believes in miracles, ghosts, divine intervention, the whole nine yards. Whenever she gets into that stuff, I just smile and nod and wait for a polite opportunity to change the subject. Because I love her dearly and not every interaction with her needs to be confrontational.

That said, if she started pushing to exorcise the demon that caused my nephew's psychotic break, I'd have a Serious Talk with her about her superstitions.