LoonyLovegood wrote: » Yup, I read it from the guardian here. I'm not saying the woman he harassed was right or wrong, but it is a fact that it happened.
billie1b wrote: » Think you mean man he ‘harassed’
Bluefoam wrote: » Pedestal?
Cartroubles wrote: » He is quoting IT Crowd.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » That was Petal Stool not Pedal Stool.
Cartroubles wrote: » Are there really people attacking posters that said they wouldn't want to have sex with a trans woman? I'm all for live and let live, and that includes allowing people to have their sexual preferences.
DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: » There's even a name for this. The Cotton Ceiling.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotton_ceiling
ceadaoin. wrote: » Probably won't be too long before the terms homosexual and heterosexual are deemed exclusionary by extreme genderists. Seems to be the way that anything referring to biological sex goes In my opinion sex and gender are different things. Actually, not in my opinion, they actually are. I'm all for trans people being treated as their chosen gender, but sex is still relevant sometimes and shouldn't be erased.
ceadaoin. wrote: » I could imagine would be even more humiliating for the trans person and could potentially lead to a violent response from the partner. Is it not best to be upfront as soon as the potential for a sexual relationship becomes apparent? That doesn't mean advertising it to all and sundry but surely a potential sexual partner has the right to fully informed consent?
DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: » This is a very pertinent point. A male in high passion is not to be meddled with. If they feel that they've been tricked into sleeping with somebody who has misrepresented themselves as a biological woman then they could very easily become violent. It's happened in the past. For everyone's well being in cases where it's not outwardly obvious all info should disclosed up front by the TG person
klaaaz wrote: » It's a two way street, the violent male should disclose up front that he is violent. It'll save the lives of trans and non-trans women. In fact, violent males should not be dating at all.
Will I Am Not wrote: » Everyone has the potential to be violent and there is something that will trigger that violence for everyone. It’s a lot easier to avoid the situation occurring.
Gravelly wrote: » Faugheen wrote: » What does Graham Linehan actually know about the subject though? He's not trans. He has no experience of being trans and he hasn't anything in the way of research or study into trans issues. He literally just rants because he doesn't like it. What on Earth does that do for anyone only piss off and add to the stigma that trans people have to endure? If he studied trans issues academically or experienced what trans people go through, and he had something to back up his rants with, then we'd be having a different conversation. Having him on wasn't about providing 'balance', it was about getting a contrarian view in a bid to cause a bit of controversy even though he literally has nothing in the way of experience in the issues they face. I don't have any experience with trans people. I don't know any personally, I don't work with any and I've never studied it. Should I be allowed to be given a platform to rant about why people who rant about it are wrong? As far as I'm aware, Linehan's only knowledge of the subject is that he has been the victim of a campaign of harassment by "trans activists" - but he is as entitled as anyone else to give his opinion on a subject that is a cause of concern to many. I wasn't the one trying to shut down Linehans, the bould Andrew was - with the claim that he shouldn't be allowed to speak on it because he has no experience (a view you seem to share) - that's just a teeny bit hypocritical when the same Andrew was holding forth on what 4 or 5 year olds know or don't know, when it appears he knows as much about them as I do about Northern Hairy-nosed wombats.
Faugheen wrote: » What does Graham Linehan actually know about the subject though? He's not trans. He has no experience of being trans and he hasn't anything in the way of research or study into trans issues. He literally just rants because he doesn't like it. What on Earth does that do for anyone only piss off and add to the stigma that trans people have to endure? If he studied trans issues academically or experienced what trans people go through, and he had something to back up his rants with, then we'd be having a different conversation. Having him on wasn't about providing 'balance', it was about getting a contrarian view in a bid to cause a bit of controversy even though he literally has nothing in the way of experience in the issues they face. I don't have any experience with trans people. I don't know any personally, I don't work with any and I've never studied it. Should I be allowed to be given a platform to rant about why people who rant about it are wrong?
Cartroubles wrote: » ohnonotgmail wrote: » That was Petal Stool not Pedal Stool. No it wasn't. The joke is that she thought pedestal was pedal stool. Petal stool sounds nothing like pedestal.
mazcon wrote: » Women in their twenties and thirties are routinely refused sterilisation because they're too young and might change their minds but we are to accept that children as young as twelve can make decisions about their future fertility and sexual function?
HandsomeBob wrote: » Have you ever heard of what you described actually happening? Can't say that I have other than in the world of very cheap fiction. Most people are decent when in comes down to it and that would include people who happen to be transgender.
Zorya wrote: » I mean, how do you filter your social life to have it include such a statistically significant segment from an unusually small reference group that you can speak with such authority about chips on shoulders?
klaaaz wrote: » Disagree. Most people do not resort to violence even when triggered, they do abide by the law to seek restitution of their grievance.
seamus wrote: » These are slight deviations though. They are people actually pretending to be someone else. There's an intent to deceive. The same intent cannot be said to exist if one person is trans.
Billy86 wrote: » By that logic, shouldn't RTE should have 4.8mn people on the panel so we can get all of the views on it? Otherwise, whether he were pro or anti trans, Linehane being on the panel makes about as much sense as having Jamie Redknapp on news shows discussing the impact of Brexit in the financial sector.
NIMAN wrote: » Donkey Kong?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/43d5d8eb6f74f970975eb821385072d4.svg)
