J. K. Rowling is cancelled because she is a T.E.R.F [ADMIN WARNING IN POST #1]

oyvey

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

In think jaxxx had cancer so it may be a sensitive subject for her. I have it too but I’ve had it for five years and so I’m battle-hardened.

Sorry to hear that, best of luck to you.

LLMMLL

jaxxx wrote: »

Oh you're such a hypocrite. Not surprising, most far left/right people are. Cancer is a natural part of life. Treating cancer isn't, but some very benign cancers can be survived. Can someone transition from male to female NATURALLY? Like I said earlier, if you clone John, you get Jane!






You equate something of a comparable nature.. .. .. Cancer and TS is cannot be compared as they are nowhere near similar to one another.. .. ..

Either we are self centered for interfering in nature or we are not. Make up your mind. You can't say "oh we are perfectly entitled to interfere in nature in this case but are completely selfish and entitled for interfering in another case"

Yes some cancers can be survived without intervention. What does that have to do with anything?

One eyed Jack

hetuzozaho wrote: »

Pretty ignorant on all this...

Is there any other law changes that trans people are looking for in Ireland?

Two changes to existing legislation really -


Addressing the lack of gender recognition for young people under the age of 16, remains of great urgency.

The rights of non-binary individuals have been inexplicably delayed and therefore denied.


Gender Recognition Review Report

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

oyvey wrote: »

Sorry to hear that, best of luck to you.

Thanks. Let’s breeze past it, I’m not trying to derail.

jaxxx

mike_ie wrote: »

Mod: rein it in.

Typical response from Boards. Transexuality is in the same light as cancer to you? Something that affects less than 1% of people in the EU compared to something that can affect every human being on the planet? This place really has become a joke. Only allowed to voice your opinion once you comply with status quo eh? Don't worry, I'm done with this thread.

LLMMLL wrote: »

Either we are self centered for interfering in nature or we are not. Make up your mind. You can't say "oh we are perfectly entitled to interfere in nature in this case but are completely selfish and entitled for interfering in another case"

Yes some cancers can be survived without intervention. What does that have to do with anything?

Oh I already have. You're just too blind to see past what it is you want to see.

Goodbye.

One eyed Jack

Gatling wrote: »

Actually if jk Rowling is a terf , what is the male equivalent of a radical feminist ,and if that person was binary would you be confused what to label them as

James Corden, and no confusion whatsoever as to how I’d label him... :pac:

o1s1n

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Addressing the lack of gender recognition for young people under the age of 16, remains of great urgency.

Link in that article is crazy. First it states;

'As outlined in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the rights of the child as set out in Article 42A.1 of Bunreacht na hEireann, the best interests of the child should be of paramount concern. '

...then goes on to state that under 16s should be able to change their gender legally.

Unbelievable lack of self awareness.

hetuzozaho

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Two changes to existing legislation really -


Addressing the lack of gender recognition for young people under the age of 16, remains of great urgency.

The rights of non-binary individuals have been inexplicably delayed and therefore denied.


Gender Recognition Review Report

So the self id is allowing me to change my documentation(passport/birthcert) to the gender I identify with, male or female, but the delay in non-binary means I cannot update it to non-binary is it?

Is the desire to have M, F and another option of non binary or other options?

Gatling

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Well, that’s why TERF is a moronic slur because you don’t have to be feminist to question all this stuff. I have heard TER used - trans exclusionary radical. But that’s also stupid because not everyone who questions the dogma is a radical. To sum up, generalised slurs are stupid.

The reason I asked only I read it on the first page ,but yet the same people attacking jk Rowling as transpobic, but yet they can attack and beconsidered untouchable because they self identify as something there not ,and it you don't support them your a transpobic hater ,

I never understand the whole I don't want to be labeled but I say I'm part of the LGBTQ + I can label and accuse anyone of hatered towards me others with nothing to back it up

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Gatling wrote: »

The reason I asked only I read it on the first page ,but yet the same people attacking jk Rowling as transpobic, but yet they can attack and beconsidered untouchable because they self identify as something there not ,and it you don't support them your a transpobic hater ,

I never understand the whole I don't want to be labeled but I say I'm part of the LGBTQ + I can label and accuse anyone of hatered

Yup, the double standards are astounding.

One eyed Jack

o1s1n wrote: »

Link in that article is crazy. First it states;

'As outlined in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the rights of the child as set out in Article 42A.1 of Bunreacht na hEireann, the best interests of the child should be of paramount concern. '

...then goes on to state that under 16s should be able to change their gender legally.

Unbelievable lack of self awareness.

It’s not really as they’re coming at it from the perspective of it being in the best interests of children to recognise their preferred gender in law, a right that all adults have in Irish law, based upon the idea of affirmation of their preferred gender is in the child’s best interests -


https://effectivechildtherapy.org/concerns-symptoms-disorders/disorders/gender-dysphoria/

One eyed Jack

hetuzozaho wrote: »

So the self id is allowing me to change my documentation(passport/birthcert) to the gender I identify with, male or female, but the delay in non-binary means I cannot update it to non-binary is it?

Is the desire to have M, F and another option of non binary or other options?

That’s it in a nutshell really.

Tokyo

jaxxx wrote: »

Typical response from Boards. Transexuality is in the same light as cancer to you? Something that affects less than 1% of people in the EU compared to something that can affect every human being on the planet? This place really has become a joke. Only allowed to voice your opinion once you comply with status quo eh? Don't worry, I'm done with this thread.

No. Personal abuse is taken in the same light, regardless of the topic. I didn't stifle your opinion in any way - I asked you to make your point with out resorting to calling someone a "disgusting human being". The fact that you took my post to fit your own assumptions is on you and you alone.

Mod: Please don't post in this thread again.

Woodsie1

Obvious pattern emerging across all the contentious threads....warnings for some,threadbans for others.

Madeleine Birchfield

Terf is a slur used by trans rights activists against those who disagree with them, even those who do not self-identify as radical feminists. I've seen some TRAs call conservative Catholics terfs and conservative Catholics aren't radical feminists.

Gruffalux

LLMMLL wrote: »

Ah there are loads of women who are trans allies. I just think boards appeals more to the spinstery TERF demographic.

LLMMLL wrote: »

It is interesting that most terfy types are women of a certain age though. I do wonder what the underlying psychology is.

Dried up old hags, are we LLMMLL?
Of the women posting on this thread and those thanking posts I happen to know that we range in age from 20s to 50s and I happen to guess on good grounds that we are a gorgeous bunch of hot loved up luscious ladies, so your low attempts at snide misogynism are just wasted on us babes. Sorry about that. Try harder

Gruffalux

https://twitter.com/faintlyfalling/status/1270410188714098688?s=19

This chap, who seems like a lovely charming sort just stating the obvious, is getting no hysterical narcisstic rage over on Twitter. And yet he is flat out denying transmen are men. The actual factual biological reality of the male penis and its sexy activities seems to be important to him as a gay man. Mysterious.

SouthWesterly

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Sure, as long as I’m not expected to take you for walkies. You’re still a brick, just not one that I want to have any association with.

And such is the stupidity of the idea. If I don't have all the qualities of a brick, I'm not a brick even if I want to be one.

It's no different to saying I'm Superman. I can't fly, see through walls or jump over tall buildings but hey let's tell SW he's Superman even though the evidence doesn't support it.

carolmon

Gruffalox wrote: »

https://twitter.com/faintlyfalling/status/1270410188714098688?s=19

This chap, who seems like a lovely charming sort just stating the obvious, is getting no hysterical narcisstic rage over on Twitter. And yet he is flat out denying transmen are men. The actual factual biological reality of the male penis and its sexy activities seems to be important to him as a gay man. Mysterious.

And it's no-holds-barred when when they distinguish between biological (cis)men and trans men

"Mastectomised, testosterone-fuelled woman on Grindr: TALK TO ME THIS WAY GRINDR. Grindr: Sorry petal, you've been lied to. I could no more find you sexually attractive than a person whose eyes were on the palm of each hand. 🀪🀪🀣"

https://twitter.com/DaytimePubSmell/status/1270420826026844164?s=20

JoannaJag

carolmon wrote: »

And it's no-holds-barred when when they distinguish between biological (cis)men and trans men

"Mastectomised, testosterone-fuelled woman on Grindr: TALK TO ME THIS WAY GRINDR. Grindr: Sorry petal, you've been lied to. I could no more find you sexually attractive than a person whose eyes were on the palm of each hand. ������"

https://twitter.com/DaytimePubSmell/status/1270420826026844164?s=20

How awful. At least JK gets a decent number of women supporting her when she receives abusive tweets. Trans men have alienated themselves from their sex to get away from the very attitudes with which they now align themselves. It’s so sad.

carolmon

JoannaJag wrote: »

How awful. At least JK gets a decent number of women supporting her when she receives abusive tweets. Trans men have alienated themselves from their sex to get away from the very attitudes with which they now align themselves. It’s so sad.

I agree that level of abuse of anyone is just disgusting

But my point was men seem to be able to get away with calling trans men "mastectomised testosterone fueled women"
without a huge backlash

Can you imagine the outrage if the reverse happened?
If a woman called transwomen "castrated oestrogen fuelled men"

I mean look what happened to JK Rowling just for saying that women menstruate

seamus

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

When it comes to safeguarding, the strictest possible guidelines are the ones that should be in place.

Then communal changing rooms should be removed.

Because women present a risk to other women, sexual and physical violence against women is not the sole preserve of men.

So going by your logic, the "strictest possible guidelines" would ensure that everyone, male or female, child or adult, is provided with a private cubicle in vulnerable spaces such as changing rooms and toilets.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Gruffalox wrote: »

https://twitter.com/faintlyfalling/status/1270410188714098688?s=19

This chap, who seems like a lovely charming sort just stating the obvious, is getting no hysterical narcisstic rage over on Twitter. And yet he is flat out denying transmen are men. The actual factual biological reality of the male penis and its sexy activities seems to be important to him as a gay man. Mysterious.

I find the “OMG, ur obsessed with genitals” type sentiments most odd. Um, yeah, the genitals of the sex you are attracted to are pretty darn important. That’s how it works. Sex and dating are discriminatory by their very nature. That’s also how it works.

All this was uncontroversial not so long ago. And still is uncontroversial for most people in fairness.

Dyr

Gruffalox wrote: »

Dried up old hags, are we LLMMLL?
Of the women posting on this thread and those thanking posts I happen to know that we range in age from 20s to 50s and I happen to guess on good grounds that we are a gorgeous bunch of hot loved up luscious ladies, so your low attempts at snide misogynism are just wasted on us babes. Sorry about that. Try harder

I remember a time when a sniff mysogyny would have certain mods white knighting all over it. Guess the biological ladies are no longer top of the weirdo hierarchy of opression

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

seamus wrote: »

Then communal changing rooms should be removed.

Because women present a risk to other women, sexual and physical violence against women is not the sole preserve of men.

So going by your logic, the "strictest possible guidelines" would ensure that everyone, male or female, child or adult, is provided with a private cubicle in vulnerable spaces such as changing rooms and toilets.

Of course women pose a risk. However, men pose far more of a risk. We know this from male and female patterns of criminality. There is also the physical differences in strength to consider. That’s why women fought for same sex spaces. Note: male and female, something that never changes. From my experience, communal changing facilities - certainly where children will be - DO have self-contained units. And communal changing places are few and far between.

But, no, come at me, Seamus. Let’s see you catch me out. This will be fun. Can’t wait to see the same few handful of users - at best - thank your reply.

CtevenSrowder

LLMMLL wrote: »

It's kind of assuming men can't be feminists.

It is interesting that most terfy types are women of a certain age though. I do wonder what the underlying psychology is.

Oh look, more lazy insults. Par the course really. And stop using the term cis.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Bambi wrote: »

I remember a time when a sniff mysogyny would have certain mods white knighting all over it. Guess the biological ladies are no longer top of the weirdo hierarchy of opression

Ha ha, yes, that has been very interesting to note.

PuddingBreath

Mrcaramelchoc wrote: »

Glad she's cancelled her books are ****e.

i'd imagine they are kids books anyway? judging by the bits of the first couple of films i saw.

it's based around a child wizards school basically ain't it?

seamus

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Of course women pose a risk. However, men pose far more of a risk.

That's fine. I just wanted you to clarify that indeed it's not about "the strictest possible guidelines" at all, it's about keeping men, specifically, away from vulnerable groups.

Do you feel that this segregation should be expanded? Perhaps men shouldn't be permitted in schools with female students? What about residential carers? Or tutors? Or nurses?

Should child protection regulations be different for men and for women?

OscarMIlde

LLMMLL wrote: »

Because transmen can menstruate too.

Because they are biologically female.