Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Matthew Best]

Yesterday's news:

Woman's life 'destroyed' by Newcastle childhood molester

Natalie Wolf, who was then called Ryan Haley, is jailed for sexually abusing a 13-year-old girl.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[smartcooky]

What I don't get is why catsmate thinks this is a win worth celebrating.

When your cause is rapidly on the wane, anything that looks like it might help to "fight the good fight" will be clung onto in desperation.

It's not a piece of trans privilege legislation being passed. It's not a trans privilege court decision. It's not a major standards body upholding a standard of trans privilege. It's not even a social cancellation event. It's certainly not the medical community producing science in support of trans affirming medicine.

No, it's just some people who share his opinions putting on a fundraiser for people who share his opinions. Catsmate isn't even celebrating the work accomplished with the the funds raised, because the fundraiser hasn't even happened yet (or maybe it's only just happened by now).

Like-minded morons raising money for other like-minded morons, while even more like minded morons watch and celebrate.

The rest of us just point and laugh.

 

[smartcooky]

Yesterday's news:

Woman's life 'destroyed' by Newcastle childhood molester

Natalie Wolf, who was then called Ryan Haley, is jailed for sexually abusing a 13-year-old girl.

www.bbc.co.uk

Bbbbut this never happens. Just ask any of our local TRAs!


One a side note...

"Newcastle Crown Court heard the woman was 13 when she was groped and feared she was going to be raped by Ryan Haley, a biological male who now identifies as a woman called Natalie Wolf, in the Washington area."​

Amazing what some public pressure on the BBC trans-cult (and its exposure to the light of day) can result in. They are acknowledging this transgender identified male criminal is an fact a biological male, and studiously avoiding any wording in the article that might result in using Haley's pronouns. This is not what they did until recently, where they always referring to transgender identified males as "women" and called them by their female pronouns.

There is, however, still important work to be done in the courts...

​

Then aged under 30, Wolf, who was referred to by female pronouns in court and has been held on remand at a men's prison, groped the girl's chest and tried to touch her groin, prosecutor Nicoleta Alistari said.​

The courts need to knock this crap off and start referring to these criminal freaks by who they really are.... he/him

 

[Matthew Best]

More news from yesterday:

Woman jailed for harassing Rachel Reeves’s MP sister

Tracey Smith sent the government minister and MP Ellie Reeves 22 emails and 10 voicemails

www.theguardian.com

 

[smartcooky]

More news from yesterday:

Woman jailed for harassing Rachel Reeves’s MP sister

Tracey Smith sent the government minister and MP Ellie Reeves 22 emails and 10 voicemails

www.theguardian.com

And predictably, accompanied by the typical trans activist threats of violence...

Smith, who is a trans woman, used phrases including “a person is dangerous when they have nothing to lose” and “bullets will be flying around”.​

​

Between July and October 2024, Smith sent emails and left voicemails accusing Reeves of “legalising sexual abuse”, “abusing the law” and being a “fascist”, the court heard.​

​

Reeves told the trial that Smith left her a “slightly menacing” voicemail telling her “time is running out” for her to respond.​

Rarely, if ever, do you see violence or threats of this nature coming from the Gender Critical side of this issue. Violence and threats of violence are almost exclusively in the realm of the trans activist.

 

[Rolfe]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1994917132023599111

 

[Thermal]

Bbbbut this never happens. Just ask any of our local TRAs!

This is the famous "thing that never happens"? Some 20 years ago, a possibly mentally ill twenty-something cis guy fondled the breasts of a 13 yr old girl. Decades later, he comes out as trans and has not been accused or even suspected of anything else.

So what is "the thing that never happens" here? Guy molests a child, many years later comes out as trans, and the victim, who took no previous action, wants to press charges because she can't bear to see the guy trying to get his life together a generation later (she actually says this)?

This is "the thing that never happens"?

The courts need to knock this crap off and start referring to these criminal freaks by who they really are.... he/him

Not getting this, either. If someone is mentally ill, it's important to make an anti-trans stance against them?

 

[Thermal]

You... don't actually understand female sexuality, do you? Women are not aroused by naked bodies the way that men are.

The 1940s sexual stereotyping is strong in this one.

You have been given data time and time again.

The same two data points which have nothing to do with the subject at hand, yes. Both basically infer that them.trannies are disproportionately convicted of sexual offenses, without controlling for other variables like being poor or poorly represented.

You ignore that data if it's not in the form of statistics that you want, but it's still data.

Yeah, wanting relevant data is totally unreasonable on my part. Ya got me there.

And yet, you remain unpersuaded. Funny, that.

Both extremes, and the larger group in between them, have very persuasive points. For some reason, you only acknowledge points which fit your preconceived conclusion. Funny, that too.

 

[Ziggurat]

The 1940s sexual stereotyping is strong in this one.

Humans aren't different now than 80 years ago. Some stereotypes exist because they are true.

Both extremes, and the larger group in between them, have very persuasive points. For some reason, you only acknowledge points which fit your preconceived conclusion. Funny, that too.

I wonder what TRA point you find persuasive, and what exactly it persuades you to do.

 

[Thermal]

Humans aren't different now than 80 years ago. Some stereotypes exist because they are true.

And some have been wrong all along. Try checking out the 21st century dating scene, or reading social media. Many women get turned on by bodies, man. 'Strue. It was true in the freaking 80s, and long before, and in contemporary LA, I didn't think it would even be a question anymore.

I wonder what TRA point you find persuasive, and what exactly it persuades you to do.

That whole "how about we treat trans people with some dignity" is a pretty persuasive one for yours truly.

Eta: I'm sorry, I forgot to answer exactly why I found that persuasive. Shall I go on with a detailed dissertation assuming you couldn't answer that bad boy solo?

 

[Pixel42]

I wonder what TRA point you find persuasive, and what exactly it persuades you to do.

I'm just as curious to know what gender critical point he finds persuasive, and what exactly it persuades him to do.

 

[Thermal]

I'm just as curious to know what gender critical point he finds persuasive, and what exactly it persuades him to do.

Asking Ziggurat is probably one of the less effective strategies to satisfying that curiosity.

 

[Pixel42]

Asking Ziggurat is probably one of the less effective strategies to satisfying that curiosity.

Which is why I didn't ask Ziggurat.

 

[Thermal]

Which is why I didn't ask Ziggurat.

Commenting on your curiosity to Ziggurat, then. Still not making the Top Ten in problem solving techniques. I guess it should be assumed that you seek not a resolution to that alleged curiosity? Leave it as a tantalizing unknown? Or you could consult the previous year of postings, where it was answered repeatedly.

 

[Ziggurat]

And some have been wrong all along.

The fact that women are less sexually aroused by nakedness than men isn't wrong. It's something humans have known about and understood since time immemorial, because it isn't subtle and it isn't hidden. Which is why peeping Toms is a thing, but peeping Sallys not so much.

Try checking out the 21st century dating scene, or reading social media. Many women get turned on by bodies, man.

Let me quote exactly what I said.

"Women are not aroused by naked bodies the way that men are."​

First, you dropped "naked", but that's a key component to my claim. Second, I didn't say that women aren't aroused at all, I said they aren't aroused the same way. They aren't, and you'd be a fool to think otherwise. And 21st century dating doesn't contradict that, much as some might like to pretend otherwise. If you actually think about this for more than a moment, you'll be able to find lots and lots of current examples which illustrate this fact. But in case you still can't clue in, pornographic pictures and videos are primarily consumed by men. Porngraphic writing, on the other hand, is primarily consumed by women. There are exceptions, but the rule holds.

That whole "how about we treat trans people with some dignity" is a pretty persuasive one for yours truly.

What counts as "dignity"? The TRA thinks not letting obviously male people who claim to be trans use women's bathrooms is an affront to their dignity. They think not letting biological males compete against females is an affront to their dignity. They think housing biological male prisoners with other biological male prisoners is an affront to their dignity. Do you?

Treating people with dignity isn't an actual position, it's a platitude. I have no problem treating most people with dignity, including most trans people*. The problem is what the TRAs (and possibly you) think that dignity consists of. So don't talk about platitudes, talk about actual positions. What actual positions from the TRAs do you find persuasive?

* I won't treat people like that man dressed as a little girl prancing the streets with dignity because he's not treating himself with dignity.

 

[Thermal]

Let me quote exactly what I said.

And let me first quote what you were pointlessly arguing with:

. Do you think that some women might object to...

There are exceptions, but the rule holds.

Now circle back to that "some" qualifier and weigh out your quixotic side quest.

What counts as "dignity"?

We could start with not treating trans people like they are all represented by the worst actors you guys trawl the internet and history for cherry picked examples of. Would that be a fair start?

The TRA thinks not letting obviously male people who claim to be trans use women's bathrooms is an affront to their dignity. They think not letting biological males compete against females is an affront to their dignity. They think housing biological male prisoners with other biological male prisoners is an affront to their dignity. Do you?

You know I don't. Or you should, considering how many times you have been told directly and repeatedly. Then again, I suppose you will say "but you also deny it", and then produce exactly zero instances of me denying it, peppered with "everyone on my side on this thread (aka That Thread) thinks the same thing, also with dead zero examples". And round the mulberry bush we go.

Treating people with dignity isn't an actual position, it's a platitude. I have no problem treating most people with dignity, including most trans people*. The problem is what the TRAs (and possibly you) think that dignity consists of. So don't talk about platitudes, talk about actual positions. What actual positions from the TRAs do you find persuasive?

See above reply to what counts as 'dignity'. That ain't a mere platitude, Jackson. It's the very loud subtext of half the posters arguing your side.

* I won't treat people like that man dressed as a little girl prancing the streets with dignity because he's not treating himself with dignity.

What don't you think is dignified about someone who marches to the beat of a different drummer? Seriously. You don't have to be bosom buddies with him. Just leave him be, if he is hurting no one else. That's what treating people with dignity is all about. You just want to treat people with dignity whose lifestyles you approve of.

 

[smartcooky]

That whole "how about we treat trans people with some dignity" is a pretty persuasive one for yours truly ..

While treating women with some dignity clearly is not persuasive for you, as evidenced by your repeated dismissive attitude to women who wish to be accorded the dignity of having safe spaces free of males, and your labelling of them as 'tranny bashing bigots' for not making an exception for transgender identified males.

 

[Thermal]

While treating women with some dignity clearly is not persuasive for you, as evidenced by your repeated dismissive attitude to women who wish to be accorded the dignity of having safe spaces free of males, and your labelling of them as 'tranny bashing bigots' for not making an exception for transgender identified males.

You seem to have misunderstood the question. The question was "is this the thing that keeps happening?"

If so, you appear to be disoriented. If not, you appear dishonest in saying it was.

Eta: to answer to this post directly, you are lying again. I've consistently acknowledged that simple modesty is a very persuasive argument. Even EC's argument that the women's restroom at a bar is a kind of social safe haven is a good point. But for public restrooms in general, a gender neutral open area and some single occupant privacy areas might be more consistent with meeting our declared non-discriminatory ideals.

As I've said, I don't think women generally should be made to share facilities with males against their will (you are yet again lying to say I do). A single occupant stall with its own sink could be made available in areas large enough for multi occupant restrooms. That would, AFAICT, serve everyone's physical needs, except the bar room retreat lounge idea. I'm not sure if that outweighs the other concerns, or is more an opportunistic convenience that can be done without.

 

[smartcooky]

You seem to have misunderstood the question. The question was "is this the thing that keeps happening?"
If so, you appear to be disoriented. If not, you appear dishonest in saying it was.

No misunderstanding at all on my part. I was replying to your response to this post by @Ziggurat ...

I wonder what TRA point you find persuasive, and what exactly it persuades you to do.

You seem to be claiming that you hold some highly nuanced gender critical-like position, one that the rest of us mere mortals are too unsophisticated and ignorant to understand. The reality is you're nothing more that a common, run of the mill trans activist with a typical-for-the-type callous disregard for women and their needs. It is clearly evidenced by your body of work in this thread, that you have ZERO respect for women, and care not a single jot about their dignity or their comfort...

 

[Thermal]

No misunderstanding at all on my part. I was replying to your response to this post by @Ziggurat ...



You seem to be claiming that you hold some highly nuanced gender critical-like position, one that the rest of us mere mortals are too unsophisticated and ignorant to understand. The reality is you're nothing more that a common, run of the mill trans activist with a typical-for-the-type callous disregard for women and their needs. It is clearly evidenced by your body of work in this thread, that you have ZERO respect for women, and care not a single jot about their dignity or their comfort...

Bald rule 12ing,, no evidence. Ya boring.