Current Affairs Gender Nonsence

[wandyr79]

'Bruise pushing mediocre language' Can you explain what that means?

I'm not intentionally provoking anyone, I have an opinion and I'm free to voice it, as are you - only I don't cry like a girl when you do. Instead of blubbering and name-calling, why don't you all prove me wrong with actual facts and statistics? (That's all I've posted, other peoples material). Something isn't true just because you think it is.

I've asked time and time again, yet got nothing from any of you.

One question I have for you is regarding comments that go along the line of 'It is the fetish's that I have a problem with'. This is obviously way off topic, in regards to actual gender identification, safe spaces for all and transsexuality.

Why do the fetish's concern you so much? I ask this because one of the stats you brought up was men who identify as women being attracted to women. Was this a link to a belief that there is a higher possibility that they would attack women, because they are attracted to women?

Saying 'I don't like their fetish's' is a very vague statement and was not really in keeping with the original discussion. I am just wondering where it came from and is it just their fetish's you don't like or do you also believe that all people with a fetish, that you would consider, for want of a better term, 'not in the realms of normality', as a danger to society.

Not sure if I have all your implications correct here but it might be good to know where you stand on just a general view of what kind of fetish's you believe to more dangerous than others.

My view is that it is not the fetish that is the concern but just the general mental state of the person. I find it hard to believe that somebody who is into watersports, for example (as you have previously mentioned this I think it is a decent example of what we are talking about), is more likely to commit a sexual abuse crime than somebody who is just simply into your standard straight sex.

 

[Sean Ashley]

Even though I don't like linking these stories to Trans, based off one of the main points some have raised about using a disguise to perpetrate a crime. I want show why it is flawed. As this guy posed as a paramedic on a dating profile to abuse women.

Based off what some have said in here, men should be banned from using dating apps with women or male paramedics/doctors should not treat or care for female patients.

See the issue here? You can't deny a majority from having rights because a very small abuse a system to commit crimes.

Fake paramedic rapist from Norwich a danger to society - victim

A victim of Jamie Kadolski calls for a law to make it illegal to pose as a medical emergency worker.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Bryan+]

'Bruise pushing mediocre language' Can you explain what that means?

I'm not intentionally provoking anyone, I have an opinion and I'm free to voice it, as are you - only I don't cry like a girl when you do. Instead of blubbering and name-calling, why don't you all prove me wrong with actual facts and statistics? (That's all I've posted, other peoples material). Something isn't true just because you think it is.

I've asked time and time again, yet got nothing from any of you.

“Cry like a girl”.


Me man, me STRONG.

 

[Kever10]

One question I have for you is regarding comments that go along the line of 'It is the fetish's that I have a problem with'. This is obviously way off topic, in regards to actual gender identification, safe spaces for all and transsexuality.

Why do the fetish's concern you so much? I ask this because one of the stats you brought up was men who identify as women being attracted to women. Was this a link to a belief that there is a higher possibility that they would attack women, because they are attracted to women?

Saying 'I don't like their fetish's' is a very vague statement and was not really in keeping with the original discussion. I am just wondering where it came from and is it just their fetish's you don't like or do you also believe that all people with a fetish, that you would consider, for want of a better term, 'not in the realms of normality', as a danger to society.

Not sure if I have all your implications correct here but it might be good to know where you stand on just a general view of what kind of fetish's you believe to more dangerous than others.

My view is that it is not the fetish that is the concern but just the general mental state of the person. I find it hard to believe that somebody who is into watersports, for example (as you have previously mentioned this I think it is a decent example of what we are talking about), is more likely to commit a sexual abuse crime than somebody who is just simply into your standard straight sex.

My interpretation is that you are misunderstanding the basic point he is making. He has repeated several times that people should be free to do what they want in private. The issue comes from people who will take the new loophole in the law to enter womens safe spaces for their own sexual gratification, regardless of whether they attack anyone.

Once again, because this seems to either be ignored or misunderstood by people reading this thread, this is mostly referring to those that are not actually Trans people, but those that simply have a fetish, of which there will be many more than the tiny fraction of the population who are genuine Trans, and who will be allowed to play out their fantasy within the law.

Unless you think its fine for any man to simply walk into a female bathroom conpletely unchecked?

 

[NeilMorepies]

Unless you think its fine for any man to simply walk into a female bathroom completely unchecked?

We aren’t talking about men though, we are talking about trans-women.

 

[Sean Ashley]

My interpretation is that you are misunderstanding the basic point he is making. He has repeated several times that people should be free to do what they want in private. The issue comes from people who will take tbe new loophole in the law to enter womens safe spaces for their own sexual gratification, regardless of whether they attack anyone.

Once again, because this seems to either be ignored or misunderstood by people reading this thread, this is mostly referring to those that are not actually Trans people, but those that simply have a fetish, of which there will be many more than the tiny fraction of the population who are genuine Trans, and who will be allowed to play out their fsntasy within the law.

Unless you think its fine for any man to simply walk intona female bathroom conpletely unchecked?

See my message above.

The thing is you can't do anything about someone using loopholes. Otherwise no one would be able to do anything.

You just have to have laws and punish those who break it. It's that simple really.

 

[Kever10]

Even though I don't like linking these stories to Trans, based off one of the main points some have raised about using a disguise to perpetrate a crime. I want show why it is flawed. As this guy posed as a paramedic on a dating profile to abuse women.

Based off what some have said in here, men should be banned from using dating apps with women or male paramedics/doctors should not treat or care for female patients.

See the issue here? You can't deny a majority from having rights because a very small abuse a system to commit crimes.

Fake paramedic rapist from Norwich a danger to society - victim

A victim of Jamie Kadolski calls for a law to make it illegal to pose as a medical emergency worker.

www.bbc.co.uk

This only further proves the point that you are arguing against and me and @d34noj have been arguing for.

There are genuine, dangerous people out there who will use any means necessary to help them commit the crimes they want to csrry out.

Relaxing rules to allow any man to enter a female toilet or changing room, unchecked, is a recipe for disaster, and will put women, and even other genuine Trans women, in danger.

I don't see what is so controversial about this point.

P. S. I was already responding to the previous message when yours csme through.

 

[Bryan+]

'Bruise pushing mediocre language' Can you explain what that means?

I'm not intentionally provoking anyone, I have an opinion and I'm free to voice it, as are you - only I don't cry like a girl when you do. Instead of blubbering and name-calling, why don't you all prove me wrong with actual facts and statistics? (That's all I've posted, other peoples material). Something isn't true just because you think it is.

I've asked time and time again, yet got nothing from any of you.

This fella. Claims he doesn’t understand why people are questioning his gender based arguments and demeans women in his response to it hahaha, unbelievable lack of self awareness.

You’ve had a nightmare there!

 

[Xizor]

Relaxing rules to allow any man to enter a female toiket or changing room, unchecked, is s recipe for disaster

What rules are there currently that are potentially being relaxed? What shape do these rules take and how are they enforced?

 

[Kever10]

We aren’t talking about men though, we are talking about trans-women.

No, you're not, because the issue is you only have to say you identify as the opposite gender or change your pronouns to "qualify".

We have stated all along that genuine Trans people, who have transitioned, should be fine to do whatever they choose. But they are not the problem.

 

[Sean Ashley]

This only further proves the point that you are arguing against and me and @d34noj have been arguing for.

There are genuine, dangerous people out there who will use any means necessary to help them commit the crimes they want to csrry out.

Relaxing rules to allow any man to enter a female toiket or changing room, unchecked, is s recipe for disaster, and will put women, and even other genuine Trans women, in dsnger.

I don't see what is so controversial about this point.

But it is flawed.

I know I could use many examples. @d34noj has mentioned about stats how about the amount of kids abused by their parents?

According to the NSPCC half a million kids in the UK are abused by their parents every year. Again using the logic used against trans using bathrooms.

The only answer here surely is to ban people having kids right? No you can't deny someone right, all you can do is punish those who abuse that right.

 

[NeilMorepies]

No, you're not, because the issue is you only have to say you identify as the opposite gender or change your pronouns to "qualify".

We have stated all along that genuine Trans people, who have transitioned, should be fine to do whatever they choose. But they are not the problem.

Why don’t we just make rape and sexual assault illegal then? Lock up anyone doing it and you won’t have a problem? Simples.

 

[Kever10]

What rules are there currently that are potentially being relaxed? What shape do these rules take and how are they enforced?

For instance, if someone sees a man entering a female bathroom or changing room currently, they would rightly be questioned, blocked, etc.

Under rules allowing for anyone who identifies as female, or has female pronouns, without any physical change, to just go where they please, potentially dangerous people will take advantage of this, knowing they wont be stopped or questioned and if they are, they simply claim to be trans, end of debate.

It's a huge flaw. I'm genuinely baffled thst so many people are so righteous that they don't think there are people who will gladly take advantage. We teach kids not to trust strangers from a young age, but the new disclaimer is, unless they claim to be Trans, then they are fine.

 

[d34noj]

But it is flawed.

I know I could use many examples. @d34noj has mentioned about stats how about the amount of kids abused by their parents?

According to the NSPCC half a million kids in the UK are abused by their parents every year. Again using the logic against trans using bathrooms.

The only answer here surely is to ban people having kids right? No you can't deny someone right, all you can do is punish those who abuse that right.

No I haven't. What a strange segway into trying to make a point.

This fella. Claims he doesn’t understand why people are questioning his gender based arguments and demeans women in his response to it hahaha, unbelievable lack of self awareness.

You’ve had a nightmare there!

Another amazing stretch right there!

Also note you've assumed my gender without asking my pronouns.


Guess I've not had so much of a nightmare.

 

[wandyr79]

My interpretation is that you are misunderstanding the basic point he is making. He has repeated several times that people should be free to do what they want in private. The issue comes from people who will take tbe new loophole in the law to enter womens safe spaces for their own sexual gratification, regardless of whether they attack anyone.

Once again, because this seems to either be ignored or misunderstood by people reading this thread, this is mostly referring to those that are not actually Trans people, but those that simply have a fetish, of which there will be many more than the tiny fraction of the population who are genuine Trans, and who will be allowed to play out their fsntasy within the law.

Unless you think its fine for any man to simply walk intona female bathroom conpletely unchecked?

They started to talk about pride and fetishm, that is what I am asking about?

The topic of people using loopholes for their own sick depravity is another topic entirely. For me, is that topic not more about straight men pretending to identify as a woman to get into a toilet. Is that not what that worry and fear is about?

The questions I am asking is the reasoning behind mentioning fetishes, and using pride, watching porn, etc. as examples. Putting pictures of a naturist stall up as an example of depravity was another strange one for me. It was a solely for the poster in question to their thought behind what they are posting.