P_1 wrote: » Has anybody been following the shambolic situation currently unfolding within the UK Green Party?
One eyed Jack wrote: » Is this what you’re referring to P?Aimee Channelor’s statement on her No Fault Suspension from the Green Party of England and Wales. I’m aware of it alright, wasn’t following it particularly closely though tbh. I don’t see how it’s relevant here though as it has nothing to do with her being transgender and everything to do with her being yet another example of a corrupt politician.
JackTaylorFan wrote: » This might come as a shock to many here, but in the trans discussion groups I am in, I would be seen as quite the moderate.
Yet, people with transphobic agendas will still try hold-up transpeople (and in particular transwomen) as the aggressors merely for defending themselves n these situations.
JackTaylorFan wrote: » I called you out as a TERF sympathizer long before this thread. You are so transparently transphobic, it's ridiculous you are still allowed post in here.
Rennaws wrote: » Of course I have no issue whatsoever with trans people but if not wanting to sleep with them makes me phobic then phobic I am.
One eyed Jack wrote: » You’re doing the same with lesbian women who don’t want to have sex with people who are transgender - trying to shame them and coerce them into submission by referring to them as terfs.
One eyed Jack wrote: » They genuinely care about other people and would have nothing to do with your divisive nonsense about terfs and terf sympathisers and all the rest of it. They see people as people, and they treat people accordingly, with the respect every human being deserves, regardless of their politics.
Woman's Place is an organisation known for holding discussions around the Gender Recognition Act and what it could mean "for biological women" People who’ve attended these events have spoken about how one-sided the discussion is, and have even said that misinformation is being shared to encourage an atmosphere of fear and outright transphobia in these discussions.
JackTaylorFan wrote: » You can back check all my comments on Boards, becuase I have literally, never once, uttered such sentiments. Not once. Just people trying to put words in my mouth.
JackTaylorFan wrote: » It's quite straighforward comparing transwomen to men (abusive or not) is transphobic.
Rennaws wrote: » I said that I have no issue whatsoever with trans people but if not wanting to sleep with them makes me phobic then I must be phobic To which you replied.. Yet a few comments previous you said.. And yet if a trans woman was to make an advance on me I would 100% regard that person as male for the purpose of that interaction and I would reject any advances on that basis alone. So you very much did utter those sentiments as according to you that makes me transphobic.
Joeytheparrot wrote: » Rennaws you are being completely disingenuous in that argument. You are attempting to spin something here that was never claimed in the first place. JTF never argued that if you as a cis man or generally cis men that do not want to have sex with trans women are transphobic. This is just complete disingenuous strawmanning.
Rennaws wrote: » So why not let JTF answer.. Would they consider me transphobic ? If I’m wrong and misunderstood the original post then I’m happy to put my hands up but let’s see how JTF interprets it first..
Rennaws wrote: And yet if a trans woman was to make an advance on me I would 100% regard that person as male for the purpose of that interaction and I would reject any advances on that basis alone.
Goodshape wrote: » But surely there's a countless reasons everyday why you might turn down an advance from any woman. You can't equate "woman" with "person I want to have sex with" exclusively.
Trans or cis, the person is no less of a woman just because you don't want to sleep with them.
P_1 wrote: » So it is Twitter so best taken with a pinch of salt but seemingly there are reports of anti trans stickers being put up in train stations in Manchester with razor blades behind them. For context people have been removed these stickers when they see them. If this is true then the phrase wtf seems woefully inadequate.
Slutmonkey57b wrote: » 1. Arguing that "biology isn't important" or "self-identified gender trumps biology" or "women have penises" is counter-productive. One is a physical, scientific reality and the other is a personal, internal thing. It will only seem, to someone from the outside, that one side of the argument is actively denying reality, whether that's the intention or not. "Because I say so" is not a counter argument to physical reality. 2. Women's concerns about single-sex spaces are not in any way unfounded. There need to be boundaries. Where those boundaries reasonably need to sit is a different question to whether boundaries should exist at all. 3. Unquestioned self-id opens the door for malicious people to leverage it for their own purposes. It's not a matter of "smearing" or "bigotry". Anyone who knows anything about gamergate or the chan boards can see a lot of the same ideas being tacked onto the trans movement. Malicious people have already started to leverage it. Attempting to pretend that won't happen, or hasn't happened, isn't a useful stance to take. 4. A "terf" (which is clearly a slur at this point) gets treated totally differently whether they're a woman or a man. Men get a tut-tut. Women get assaulted, and threatened with rape, stalking, violence and bomb threats. If you can't see this as plain old fashioned misogynistic behaviour then i wonder what you think you're looking at. 5. Dismissing genuine, factually based concerns with "It's not up for debate, get over it" isn't going to be a winning strategy. The Challenor family sued people who questioned them and used trans movements to silence others. Demanding that no dissent is allowed allows others to do the same. That's going to very negatively affect trans people in the short-medium term. None of the above points mean that trans people aren't people or don't have rights, or don't need protection. But I think this "terf" business is going to backfire, and not in the way people who coined the term might assume.
JackTaylorFan wrote: » Well. What do you expect? TERFs are violent thugs. And, yet. you expect trans people to listen to "both sides of the argument". (Note: I have been informed by Mods I am not thread banned)
JackTaylorFan wrote: » 1. You are essentially trying to argue that trans women are not women again. Using a junior cert level of biology to back your points up.
Rennaws wrote: » Why is it that this topic is continuously brought up by JTF and other posters as if it's fact, which it's not, and gets ignored by mods on every occasion, yet if anyone else attempts to debate the concept using scientific FACT backed up by scientific evidence, they get thread banned
LLMMLL wrote: » If “chromosomes” were the defining factor, how come people were capable of making Male/female distinctions for millions of years whereas the knowledge of chromosomes have been around less than 100 years?
LLMMLL wrote: » This pretends of just being a noble scientist armed with facts is pure nonsense.
wexie wrote: » ......I'm sure this isn't the point you're trying to make but it was a lot easier back in the days when assuming someone with an adamsapple and winky was male didn't somehow make you a bigoted a**hole
lgbt forum charter wrote: Saying that transgender is a choice, saying that trans surgeries are cosmetic, or calling trans people "a man/woman who thinks they are a woman/man ", will result in an immediate infraction and/or ban, as these things aren't "opinions", they are falsehoods rooted in transphobia.
EdgeCase wrote: » I think this has to be seen in modern British political context too. There's an alarmingly rapid building of bunkers going on in the UK and everyone being out to get everyone else. It's symptomatic of a society in a bit of a mess at the moment and I don't think the rise of so called 'TERFs' can be seen outside of that context. What I'm noticing in the UK is a general growing inability to put oneself into someone else's shoes. It's something that had been a hallmark of the post Thatcher society that developed into all of the 'cool Britannia' era of tolerance and open-mindedness, that's suddenly gone away and there's an oozing toxicity now getting into lots of aspects of society on both the right and left. The only solution I can see is for trans people to keep talking about their experience and lives and trying to bring people on-board. You'll be very unlikely to ever change the minds of hardliners on any topic, but you can win over the hearts and minds of the general public, as has been clearly demonstrated in both recent Irish referenda, by telling real human stories about real lives in a way that people can relate to them. I guess what I'm trying to say is bunkers cause wars and sometimes, recognising that they're being built is all important to preventing conflicts. I'm not trying to say that there's nothing can be done, I just think it's probably better off not to be sucked into a troll war with extremists and far better to spend energy communicating with people who are open minded enough to listen.
bodice ripper wrote: » Any evidence of these stickers?
