O'Gorman says children under 16 should be able to change their gender

  • Thread starter Deleted member 55906
  • Start date

Strawberry

Moderator
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
18,334
Trans women are trans women. And I’m not your cookie. Quite trying to be patronising.


Yes, indeed I should ceed to your transphobia. As black people should ceed to racism and gay people to homophobia. That’s a perfectly logical argument... 🙄


The only person gaslighting here is you. You have literally nothing of substance to defend your own transphobia other than to pathetically try to make out those who challenge you are misogynistic.



Once again, you, not I, have far more in common with the fervent conservatives you’re desperately trying to make me out to be. You are both equally intolerant, equally illogical in defending their intolerance, and equally as nasty about it too.
You are misogynistic, Cookie Monster. Anyone who has been told about the situation in Canada and still defends the spiteful vendetta against Vancouver Rape Relief refuge is a woman hater, plain and simple. There's no other reason to take the one and only women's refuge left in the entire country away from them other than hatred of women.

I guess your generally left wing politics don't allow you to see yourself in the same light as right wing misogynists who use conservative ideology to bully women, but your basic ideology is the same. Women cannot possibly be allowed to choose for themselves because who knows what evil we would do?

In the 15th century you would have been burning witches.
 


EU Insider

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2020
Messages
443
You are misogynistic, Cookie Monster.
I’m not. I’m calling you out on your blatant transphobia, examples of which are littered throughout this thread.
You can’t defend it so your deflecting by accusing me of misogyny.

Also, again, I’m not your cookie.


Anyone who has been told about the situation in Canada and still defends the spiteful vendetta against Vancouver Rape Relief refuge is a woman hater, plain and simple.
And you accuse me of gaslighting!
Challenging transphobia where transphobia exists is not wrong or vindictive.
Using your logic black Americans before the ERA should have accepted “separate but equal”.


There's no other reason to take the one and only women's refuge left in the entire country away from them other than hatred of women.
No other reason than to challenge their obvious transphobia, that is.

guess your generally left wing politics don't allow you to see yourself in the same light as right wing misogynists who use conservative ideology to bully women, but your basic ideology is the same. Women cannot possibly be allowed to choose for themselves because who knows what evil we would do?
The sad irony of this nonsense coming from someone who holds the exact same views on trans people as the ones you’re so desperately trying to liken me to. You have backed yourself into a ridiculous situation.

In the 15th century you would have been burning witches.
FFS you’ve lost the plot.
 

Strawberry

Moderator
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
18,334
I’m not. I’m calling you out on your blatant transphobia, examples of which are littered throughout this thread.
You can’t defend it so your deflecting by accusing me of misogyny.

Also, again, I’m not your cookie.



And you accuse me of gaslighting!
Challenging transphobia where transphobia exists is not wrong or vindictive.
Using your logic black Americans before the ERA should have accepted “separate but equal”.



No other reason than to challenge their obvious transphobia, that is.


The sad irony of this nonsense coming from someone who holds the exact same views on trans people as the ones you’re so desperately trying to liken me to. You have backed yourself into a ridiculous situation.


FFS you’ve lost the plot.
A near perfect example of both the delusional and the misogynistic aspects of trans ideology. Likening women who run domestic violence shelters to Jim Crow era racists, and transwomen to black women.

The reality, of course, to anyone who hasn't bought into Cookie Monster's delusion, is that the majority of domestic violence shelters would accept transwomen, if you gave women the freedom to choose. The minority who didn't would be used by the most vulnerable of an already vulnerable group, ie women who are too traumatized to be in a shelter with males.

You already know this, Cookie, because you've already been shown the example of Canada, where only one shelter is left in the entire country which offers female only accommodation. And your response? To side with the spiteful misogynists trying to close them down.

Yeah, you'd be right there with the witch burning.
 

EU Insider

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2020
Messages
443
A near perfect example of both the delusional and the misogynistic aspects of trans ideology. Likening women who run domestic violence shelters to Jim Crow era racists, and transwomen to black women.
Not at all. It’s the logical conclusion of your reasoning that in the same way that segregated black people were provided with the same services as white people, separate but equal, they shouldn’t have fought for the end of segregation. That’s your ridiculous argument that trans people and those who support them shouldn’t challenge instances of transphobia because there are other places which don’t have those policies.
It’s also the same argument that Conservative catholics used against Marriage equality too. The same rights and protections where available through civil partnerships so the gays should be happy with that and marriage was for straight people.
Yet again, you have far more in common with the people with whom you are trying to diminish me by pathetically trying to associate me with.

The reality, of course, to anyone who hasn't bought into Cookie Monster's delusion, is that the majority of domestic violence shelters would accept transwomen, if you gave women the freedom to choose. The minority who didn't would be used by the most vulnerable of an already vulnerable group, ie women who are too traumatized to be in a shelter with males.
Be in a shelter with trans women, not men.

You already know this, Cookie, because you've already been shown the example of Canada, where only one shelter is left in the entire country which offers female only accommodation. And your response? To side with the spiteful misogynists trying to close them down.
I’ve asked you twice now to stop calling me your cookie. It’s weird.
It is not spiteful to challenge discrimination.

Yeah, you'd be right there with the witch burning.
🙄
 

Mercurial

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
94,075
You are misogynistic, Cookie Monster. Anyone who has been told about the situation in Canada and still defends the spiteful vendetta against Vancouver Rape Relief refuge is a woman hater, plain and simple. There's no other reason to take the one and only women's refuge left in the entire country away from them other than hatred of women.

I guess your generally left wing politics don't allow you to see yourself in the same light as right wing misogynists who use conservative ideology to bully women, but your basic ideology is the same. Women cannot possibly be allowed to choose for themselves because who knows what evil we would do?

In the 15th century you would have been burning witches.
Opposing public funding of a shelter that discriminates against particularly vulnerable women is the opposite of misogynistic.

Your position only really makes sense if you assume that everyone on this thread who disagrees with you is also lying about what we really believe.
 

StarryPlough01

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2010
Messages
16,108
Yes but that their main goal, is a safe place Away from their abuser. Nearly all the other services that they offer, are also offered in the community by them. So it not about keeping them away from males.

Women never get over years of walking on eggs around an abusive partner. In time, some might be able to move on, but never forget - they have flashbacks, there are triggers. JK Rowling spoke to this. It is a sanctuary to have some time to heal and feel safe - they are not alone and have support if their partner tracks them down.
 

StarryPlough01

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2010
Messages
16,108
Anti-discrimination law in both Ireland and the UK only permits exceptions to discrimination on the protected grounds provided that doing so can be shown to be proportionate and necessary to serve a legitimate function of the service in question.
Under UK law at present, if an operator of a shelter can show that a blanket ban on trans women is a proportionate and necessary measure to deliver their services, that would be entirely legal.
The reason why this is apparently insufficient in the eyes of some anti-trans activists (most of whom are not involved in running shelters at all) is ***they know that that's a test that such policies would fail to meet.***


^^^ UTTER BULLSHYTE MERC.

BTW, I read on Twitter that nia got their exemption.


nia ~

'The importance of women only spaces and services for women and girls who’ve been subjected to men’s violence'


Speech to Scottish Parliament – January 14th 2020

January 20, 2020 by Karen Ingala Smith

The importance of women only spaces and services for women and girls who’ve been subjected to men’s violence
 

StarryPlough01

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2010
Messages
16,108
@Strawbs
Not at all. It’s the logical conclusion of your reasoning that in the same way that segregated black people were provided with the same services as white people, separate but equal, they shouldn’t have fought for the end of segregation. That’s your ridiculous argument that trans people and those who support them shouldn’t challenge instances of transphobia because there are other places which don’t have those policies.
It’s also the same argument that Conservative catholics used against Marriage equality too. The same rights and protections where available through civil partnerships so the gays should be happy with that and marriage was for straight people. Yet again, you have far more in common with the people with whom you are trying to diminish me by pathetically trying to associate me with.
Be in a shelter with trans women, not men.


I’ve asked you twice now to stop calling me your cookie. It’s weird.
It is not spiteful to challenge discrimination.


🙄

Not trans women who are indistinguishable from the ordinary man in the street.
 

StarryPlough01

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2010
Messages
16,108
A cookie can be sweet.

I looked in at another site (early April maybe) where Cookie was being a bully on a thread and not allowing dissenting opinions to his. Not exactly a positive PR campaign for new members to join their site.
 

Golah veNekhar

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 16, 2018
Messages
3,657
I’m “exploring the principle of whether anyone is ever responsible for the violence committed by someone else.” Infamously, Charles Manson never actually killed anyone himself - he simply talked his followers into it.
Only he did not. The whole trial was nonsense when you actually look at it. I saw him as a Scotch Irish hilly billy jailed unjustly by the Anglo-Jewish establishment for being too Celtic. Even if you disagree with that there is no way he should have been imprisoned. I looked into the whole case at 16 and was absolutely disgusted by the injustice. I have a lot of sympathy for ATWA.
 

Golah veNekhar

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 16, 2018
Messages
3,657
Once again, you, not I, have far more in common with the fervent conservatives you’re desperately trying to make me out to be. You are both equally intolerant, equally illogical in defending their intolerance, and equally as nasty about it too.
You are not exactly over flowing with Liberality yourself.
 

Emily Davison

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
34,070
No she was right just as I was last week when I took my nieces shopping. Having unisex toilets or changing rooms solves that. It is a benefit.
I’ve never said I’d an issue with unisex toilets. Is there a particular reason your nieces needed you in the toilets.
 

Emily Davison

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
34,070
Can you expand on this Golah because some feminists here constantly keep hyping potential dangers when we know it's just bs. They haven't produced a logical argument that backs up their red herring. There's obviously something else at play.

My guess is that they're really not afraid of big burly hairy males in their changing rooms at all, but the sight of girly girls so to speak which many of these trans women are. It's what I think you're suggesting in your ontological reference? It's not their masculinity they fear but their femininity.
I don’t actually understand this post. Firstly what do you mean by girly girls? And why would a woman be afraid of feminity?
 

Emily Davison

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
34,070
It's you who isn't "getting it".

I brought them into the ladies room to keep an eye on them, the Sean Fortunes of this world hung about in the men's room, if he had pretended to be a Trans woman just to oogle or "jollies" (as you say) at my little chaps then I would have been there to look after them.

I had other reasons to bring my small boys into the ladies (and I wasn't the only mother who did this).

Our boys were busy, larking about as two little brothers do, they were curious and liked to explore, they were also overly friendly and helpful (I was like that as a small child myself), they were capable of getting into trouble in a blink unless they were supervised.
Your boys are now men, would you change in a single space with them now in a pool changing rooms.

I never understood why you quickly changed and went home to shower and change. Was there a reason you made that point.
 

Emily Davison

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
34,070
Demanding that people use language in a debate that renders them incapable of making a comprehensible argument because there is no linguistic means of distinguishing trans women from cis women is not a reasonable demand.

In the same way it would not be reasonable if we were discussing a trans woman and I insisted that you refer to her only as a woman.

Not only unreasonable because it is to demand that you concede the argument before it even happens in the language I demand you use, but unreasonable because it robs you of the ability to make points about the distinction of trans women and cis women. It would not be a reasonable demand.

Now if Emily were in fact not a cisgender woman and I was imposing her gender identity on her that would be a different matter.

Or if Emily was not demanding that we not use and distinguishing language that distinguished her from trans women but merely that we not use the word cisgender to do so that’s also another matter. As it turns out Emily has now confirmed that she is not demanding to be referred to only as a woman but is content to be referred to as a non-trans woman where relevant. That is a more reasonable demand and one I have no problem is trying to respect.
Thank you. That’s fine with me.

Though I don’t see why since according to you trans women are women, why would you use the word trans at all. Surely you using distinguishing language in the first place is discriminatory to trans women.
 

Emily Davison

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
34,070
It's not the case that anyone who isn't gay is necessarily straight. But in any case, if you're going to define one person by his sexuality but not the other, then you should certainly reexamine your use of language.

That you think my refusal to accede to your wishes not to be referred to as "cisgender" is somehow hypocritical given my criticism of others' use of transphobic language suggest that you don't understand why I'm refusing to accede to your wishes or you don't understand my objection to the other posters'.
No I just think you are downright rude not to refer to me the way I wish to be referred.

John Boyne does not wish to be referred to as cis either. Why is that not ok in your view.
 
Last edited:

Emily Davison

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
34,070
This is utter nonsense. It’s like saying that Kathy Sinnott shouldn’t have brought he case seeking education for her son because the money spent on the case could have been used to fun private education for him.

It shows a wilful ignorance of why people take legal challenges which are relevant far beyond one shelter or one city.
Sinnott didn’t have to pay her legal costs though.
 

Emily Davison

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
34,070
If you'd been a young girl at that party and your boyfriend had "jumped on" after you'd said no, you would have almost certainly been raped. And the chances of anybody believing you after you'd consented to oral sex are slim to none.
The reason cobhguy could throw her off is because he was male. And now we’re to understand that the army and navy is full of predatory women and army boys aren’t able to deal with that quite easily.
 

livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
27,359
Thank you. That’s fine with me.

Though I don’t see why since according to you trans women are women, why would you use the word trans at all. Surely you using distinguishing language in the first place is discriminatory to trans women.
No it’s not.

We use distinguishing language about people all the time when it’s relevant. It doesn’t discriminate to do so.
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom