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

  • Thread starter Deleted member 55906
  • Start date

livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
27,359
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.
Let’s just be clear - the correct English word for someone who is not transgender or non-binary, like you or John Boyne, is cisgender.

I’m prepared to use a clunkier synonym for you out of courtesy. Random public figures who are not in this discussion are a whole other matter.
 


Emily Davison

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
34,070
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.
Why do women’s shelters ban teenage boys who arrive with there mother do you think.
 

Emily Davison

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
34,070
my charge of hypocrisy most definitely still stands. How many pages did Emily have to fight with you and Merc to accept her preference? I’m not sure Merc still does.
Livi only changed his stance when Cookie intervened.
 

livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
27,359
Livi only changed his stance when Cookie intervened.
I didn’t change my stance.

You had demanded that you be referred to only as a ‘woman’, with no adjective to denote that you were cisgender even where relevant.

That was and remains an unreasonable request which I’ve no intention of humouring.
 

Emily Davison

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
34,070
Emily’s original demand (that she only ever be referred to as a woman with no adjective at all to indicate she is cisgender even when relevant to the discussion) remains unreasonable.

The revised demand (that she accepts some other adjective synonymous with cisgender) only came in the last day or so. She spent very little time arguing for that demand because I have not indicated I would not respect that demand.
It wasn’t a demand it was a request. I hate the word cis. So I’m more than happy with non trans woman. With or without spaces or hyphens if that helps as that too seems to be a problem. Also I’m not happy with ze or whatever else people are dreaming up instead of she because I can’t keep up with it.
 

Emily Davison

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
34,070
If you supported forcing them into in a situation where they were at risk (like leaving a teenage boy with his violent father while the mother and sisters received shelter), you would feel no blame if the father and son killed each other.

Okay.
Generally taking the woman out of harms way defuses the situation. What you seem to be suggesting is that a mother should stay in the house and likely get killed which is what is most likely to happen to the women who run fir their lives to the shelters.
 

cobhguy

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2010
Messages
2,672
I’ve never said I’d an issue with unisex toilets. Is there a particular reason your nieces needed you in the toilets.
Yes, I understand that in the real world women can be pederators as well hence I didn't like sending my young nieces into a room where I didnt know who was in it and that I couldn't check.
 

Emily Davison

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
34,070
Yes, I understand that in the real world women can be pederators as well hence I didn't like sending my young nieces into a room where I didnt know who was in it and that I couldn't check.
What ages are they. Is this unisex toilet in Cork, where is it?
 

cobhguy

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2010
Messages
2,672
What ages are they. Is this unisex toilet in Cork, where is it?
No it was in cobh in a toilet in the park, which has multiply stalls, so there could be people in there, drinking drug use or just tennagers messing about, who know, my nieces are 6 and 10.
 

cobhguy

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2010
Messages
2,672
That’s the opposite to what I asked, can you address that please.
I was making a point, some don't allow them and some do. Just because some don't doesn't mean, its because they are afraid that other user will be upset or triggered by having them there.

Normally it means that they don't have the space to give a teenager their own room and also some people are still of the belief that a male teenager is not in danger at the family home as they are male and grown up and can take care of themselves, Hence they don't want to waste space housing them.
 

Emily Davison

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
34,070
No it was in cobh in a toilet in the park, which has multiply stalls, so there could be people in there, drinking drug use or just tennagers messing about, who know, my nieces are 6 and 10.
Well I’d never dream of using such a toilet in the first place. Because they are generally filthy places with undesirables. But it has zero to do with your female predators in ladies toilets targeting 10 year olds who are perfectly capable of looking after their six year old sister without you in a normal toilet setting.
(I went to see a white witch in Cobh once, down near the water. )
 

cobhguy

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2010
Messages
2,672
(I went to see a white witch in Cobh once, down near the water. )
No matter where I go in the Country people ask me about the White Witch. To me she is just a normal lady I always see shopping. Yet the amount of times I get stop in the town by even non nationals looking for her place is amazing.
 

livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
27,359
Generally taking the woman out of harms way defuses the situation. What you seem to be suggesting is that a mother should stay in the house and likely get killed which is what is most likely to happen to the women who run fir their lives to the shelters.
...or shelters could not force women to choose between safety and their children.
 

petaljam

Moderator
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
33,928
...or shelters could not force women to choose between safety and their children.
Very possibly.

Which is probably one reason why most DV shelters either have no particular policy on whether males can stay in them or they allow it.

Which of course means that the very few DV shelters that do choose to remain strictly single sex are providing a limited service to the most vulnerable women who need time in a single sex setting to recover from extreme trauma, such as women who have been victimised by almost all the men in their lives.

So why are trans activists so determined to ensure that this healing space no longer exists for these deeply traumatised women?

One such place exists in the whole of Canada - and getting that closed down is what they really want to spend their funds on?
 

Watcher2

Well-known member
Joined
May 2, 2010
Messages
36,583
Excluding trans women who are victims of domestic violence from from domestic violence shelters because they are trans is transphobic.


They are being excluded because they are trans women - that’s transphobic.





Indeed the law can by not discriminating against trans women. Nobody loses rights in that situation.


Desperately grasping at the usual tactics of transphobic women now - trying to paint those who stand up for trans women as being misogynists.


Which is of little use to a trans woman subject to abuse who is excluded from accessing shelter from that abuse.


Yes, because only a little bit of racism is ok. Only a little bit of homophobia is ok. Only a little bit of transphobia is ok too.
Oh, no, wait, it’s not ok.
By your logic, no one should be excluded from these places. Non transgender men who suffer abuse should be given access to the services because otherwise, that would be homophobic and misandrist.
 

Watcher2

Well-known member
Joined
May 2, 2010
Messages
36,583
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.
This thread must really be a difficult one for you. You like to show your caring for oppressed groups credentials but yet here you are arguing FOR oppression against a very oppressed group.

i hope you feel good about yourself.
 

Watcher2

Well-known member
Joined
May 2, 2010
Messages
36,583
Let’s just be clear - the correct English word for someone who is not transgender or non-binary, like you or John Boyne, is cisgender.

I’m prepared to use a clunkier synonym for you out of courtesy. Random public figures who are not in this discussion are a whole other matter.
lol, “correct English”. The “correct English” we are told for a woman who identifies as a man who is also pregnant is to refer to them as a pregnant man.

correct English indeed.

snigger
 

petaljam

Moderator
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
33,928
By your logic, no one should be excluded from these places. Non transgender men who suffer abuse should be given access to the services because otherwise, that would be homophobic and misandrist.
Yes, it's basically the MRA argument: that having female spaces at all is segregationist (because a male-only golf club is totally the same as a woman-only domestic violence refuge :rolleyes: )

But of course it's technically true that it's a form of segregation by sex - except that it's done at the request of a vulnerable group, not at their expense. Unlike the all-male golf club.

The way around that is to mirror these women's vulnerability with false equivalences like "women are rapists too, they just get away with it more easily". That way they can portray access to DV shelters as just a way in which women refuse help to these poor vulnerable men.

And this is exactly the same logic. It's not about needing spaces in a DV shelter, it's about ensuring that women shut up and do what the men tell them. Because they know best.
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom