Calls for Graham Linehan to be removed from Prime Debate on transgender issues!

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Eh? I didn’t say that. Don’t be putting words in my mouth now at all. I said that the review process was obviously biased when the Chair of the review board is also the executive director of an organisation that has an interest in seeing the proposals they came up with being written into the legislation! Given their position, and their obvious bias, they simply ignored any submissions which they didn’t agree with already.

Perhaps you weren’t aware that I was already familiar with the process long before you brought it to anyone’s attention in this thread.

You said:

One eyed Jack wrote:

It wouldn’t have mattered because there was an obvious bias in the review process -

Moninne Griffith is chairwoman of the review group of the Gender Recognition Act and executive director of BeLonG To Youth Services.

Because one person of about 10 was involved in the review process, this person you stated had a bias.
You pointedly ignored the countless positive submissions from children's organisations on the gender recognition matter because they disagreed with yours and Zorya's view.

LLMMLL

One eyed Jack wrote: »

LLMMLL wrote: »

You didn't say someone CLAIMED to be a victim of sexual assault. You said "if a victim of rape or sexual assault....". So it absolutely is the question whether that person is actually a victim of rape or sexual assault based on the belief they were having sex with a cis person.

You can pretend that the only relevant matter in law is what a jury might decide as you have before but you are completely wrong. There is a whole.process involved in deciding whether a case is taken. You seem to think the only thing that matters in legal cases is whether a jury would convict. It's not.

Until you can show a precedent of a trans person in Ireland being successfully convicted under that law then your fringe interpretation is just plain wrong. It is not rape it sexual assault.to not tell a sexual partner you are trans. Just as it's not rape or sexual assault to tell your partner your name is Bob when it's really Mike.

You can play around with language as much as you like LM, but as I pointed out, it’s not an exhaustive list regarding what constitutes consent, and whether a person is charged with rape or assault will be dependent upon what the DPP recommends the person be charged with if they decide to proceed with a prosecution. One of the factors in deciding whether or not to proceed with a prosecution is whether or not the DPP is confident that they can secure a conviction.

At all times I said that a person who is transgender who does not disclose the fact could find themselves facing charges of either sexual assault or rape, and that would have happened because their victim makes a complaint to the Gardaí that they were either raped or sexually assaulted, and their complaint that they have been sexually assaulted or raped will be taken seriously, regardless of their gender, and regardless of the gender of the person who they are claiming raped or sexually assaulted them.

I'm not playing around with language. You described the person presenting at a Garda station as being a victim of sexual assault. They are not a victim of sexual assault until their sexual partner is convicted.

You then presented whether they were convicted of sexual assault as being based on a potential jury verdict alone. I pointed out the error there.

Now you're implying that the prosecution decision to prosecute is based on where they think they can get a conviction. But there are other reasons why the prosecution may not prosecute. They may believe themselves that there has been no breach of the law even if they believe they could get a conviction by jury.

There is no word play here. Just the realities of the legal process.

Muckka

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Have you any idea how review boards work? You know that there is more than one person involved?

Though just to put these things in context, having had a few decades of transgender people in Ireland and a couple of years of self-identification, these issues have never arisen here.

Brilliant I love it.

Best ever, nothing like a good response.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Eh? I didn’t say that. Don’t be putting words in my mouth now at all. I said that the review process was obviously biased when the Chair of the review board is also the executive director of an organisation that has an interest in seeing the proposals they came up with being written into the legislation! Given their position, and their obvious bias, they simply ignored any submissions which they didn’t agree with already.

Perhaps you weren’t aware that I was already familiar with the process long before you brought it to anyone’s attention in this thread.

Have you any idea how review boards work? You know that there is more than one person involved?

One eyed Jack wrote: »

At all times I said that a person who is transgender who does not disclose the fact could find themselves facing charges of either sexual assault or rape, and that would have happened because their victim makes a complaint to the Gardaí that they were either raped or sexually assaulted, and their complaint that they have been sexually assaulted or raped will be taken seriously, regardless of their gender, and regardless of the gender of the person who they are claiming raped or sexually assaulted them.

Though just to put these things in context, having had a few decades of transgender people in Ireland and a couple of years of self-identification, these issues have never arisen here.

Muckka wrote: »

Instead of bringing us all together, they're creating division.

Men cannot be men and talk about pussy, getting a Shag, hunting, being lads anymore.

Muckka wrote: »

I know, it's a certain direction in politics which tries to hijack almost everything.

.

I agree with your general opinion, Muckka...though I am suspicious of you with your spare time willow sculpturing.

klaaaz wrote: »

So all the children's organisations who submitted their view on the review of the Gender Recognition Act were biased, gotcha! :rolleyes:

Eh? I didn’t say that. Don’t be putting words in my mouth now at all. I said that the review process was obviously biased when the Chair of the review board is also the executive director of an organisation that has an interest in seeing the proposals they came up with being written into the legislation! Given their position, and their obvious bias, they simply ignored any submissions which they didn’t agree with already.

Perhaps you weren’t aware that I was already familiar with the process long before you brought it to anyone’s attention in this thread.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’ve read them, my point still stands.

So all the children's organisations who submitted their view on the review of the Gender Recognition Act were biased, gotcha! :rolleyes:

Muckka

Zorya wrote: »

There are intersex people too, as well as male and female, but plenty of intersex people are very loud about being fed up to the back teeth of having been hijacked by trans ideologues to ''prove'' that any person's sex can be ambiguous.

I know, it's a certain direction in politics which tries to hijack almost everything.

They blatantly say they want us all to be equal.

But yet they've created so much lables, supposedly I'm a cis male now.
No longer a man in these people's eyes.

Any one who's supporting labeling society, gender's, beliefs or lack of thereof, are creating divisions left right and centre.

And it's about time the left stop hijacking sexuality, gender's, ethnic groups, and other strand's of society.

Instead of bringing us all together, they're creating division.

Men cannot be men and talk about pussy, getting a Shag, hunting, being lads anymore.
Because it's offensive.

A good psycho therapist could sort out a lot of people, they would accept life on life's terms and not be offended or triggered 1023 times a day.

It's all in the head this nonsense.

LLMMLL wrote: »

You didn't say someone CLAIMED to be a victim of sexual assault. You said "if a victim of rape or sexual assault....". So it absolutely is the question whether that person is actually a victim of rape or sexual assault based on the belief they were having sex with a cis person.

You can pretend that the only relevant matter in law is what a jury might decide as you have before but you are completely wrong. There is a whole.process involved in deciding whether a case is taken. You seem to think the only thing that matters in legal cases is whether a jury would convict. It's not.

Until you can show a precedent of a trans person in Ireland being successfully convicted under that law then your fringe interpretation is just plain wrong. It is not rape it sexual assault.to not tell a sexual partner you are trans. Just as it's not rape or sexual assault to tell your partner your name is Bob when it's really Mike.

You can play around with language as much as you like LM, but as I pointed out, it’s not an exhaustive list regarding what constitutes consent, and whether a person is charged with rape or assault will be dependent upon what the DPP recommends the person be charged with if they decide to proceed with a prosecution. One of the factors in deciding whether or not to proceed with a prosecution is whether or not the DPP is confident that they can secure a conviction.

At all times I said that a person who is transgender who does not disclose the fact could find themselves facing charges of either sexual assault or rape, and that would have happened because their victim makes a complaint to the Gardaí that they were either raped or sexually assaulted, and their complaint that they have been sexually assaulted or raped will be taken seriously, regardless of their gender, and regardless of the gender of the person who they are claiming raped or sexually assaulted them.

klaaaz wrote: »

Read the submissions, especially from children's organisations.

I’ve read them, my point still stands.

LLMMLL

One eyed Jack wrote: »

LLMMLL wrote: »

The question is whether that person was actually a victim of rape.or.sexual assault.

Your interpretation of the clauses that involve being mislead about "identity" and "the nature" of the sexual act do not hold up in relation to sex with trans people.

No that’s not the question. If someone walks into a Garda station and claims to have been the victim of rape or sexual assault, their claims are taken seriously, regardless of their gender, and regardless of the gender of the perpetrator.

They do hold up btw, because while a person who is transgender is recognised as their preferred gender in law, that’s completely irrelevant as to whether or not they could be found guilty of having committed either sexual assault or rape.

Their only defence in those circumstances is whether or not they had a genuine belief that they had consent, and it’s a question for the jury to determine whether or not that belief was reasonable. If you imagine that a jury would deem it reasonable that heterosexual males would generally consent to have sex with a person who is transgender, then you could feel free to argue that in defence of the person who could find themselves on trial for sexual assault or rape.

You didn't say someone CLAIMED to be a victim of sexual assault. You said "if a victim of rape or sexual assault....". So it absolutely is the question whether that person is actually a victim of rape or sexual assault based on the belief they were having sex with a cis person.

You can pretend that the only relevant matter in law is what a jury might decide as you have before but you are completely wrong. There is a whole.process involved in deciding whether a case is taken. You seem to think the only thing that matters in legal cases is whether a jury would convict. It's not.

Until you can show a precedent of a trans person in Ireland being successfully convicted under that law then your fringe interpretation is just plain wrong. It is not rape it sexual assault.to not tell a sexual partner you are trans. Just as it's not rape or sexual assault to tell your partner your name is Bob when it's really Mike.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It wouldn’t have mattered because there was an obvious bias in the review process -

Read the submissions, especially from children's organisations.

klaaaz wrote: »

Well Zorya, you have been the most vocal voice here concerning children. I see you have no answer to this:

It wouldn’t have mattered because there was an obvious bias in the review process -

Moninne Griffith is chairwoman of the review group of the Gender Recognition Act and executive director of BeLonG To Youth Services.

Rennaws wrote: »

It’s still democracy.

And people are still free to vote as they see fit.

It’s still a democracy.

If you don't see the inherent contradiction in 'best democracy money can buy', you really need to go read some history books.

Zorya wrote: »

..

Lived reality is just that - lived reality. The lived experience of other people is their experience. You can choose to bury your head in the sand if you wish and pretend it doesn't happen, but that technique hasn't worked too well for the past century or two in making these things go away.

So that's a No then - these attacks, just like Glinner's stirrings, haven't happened in Ireland. It's a deliberate attempt to import a controversy from abroad, just because some people can't live and let live.

My guy or gal won't ever have the money the election result. You are handing power over to the wealthiest in society. Do you think they're going to use that power to look after you?

The Bishop Basher

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's the best democracy money can buy.

It’s still democracy.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The problem isn't about people having the vote. The problem is about votes being bought and sold using Facebook and other technologies.

And people are still free to vote as they see fit.

It’s still a democracy.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

My point is that these 'concern for women and children' issues aren't really about concern for women and children. They're really about people who just have a problem with transgender people, and refuse to accept the lived reality of many people, because of some petty, narrow-minded fear of contagion perhaps.

''Lived reality'' is a bullsh!t subjective term from gender theory that attempts to contradict biological science. Live your reality, it does not affect me - but do not attempt to force ideological theory down my throat or into education curricula.

If you're not watching matters with Facebook and others very closely, you will find your democracy is stolen from under your nose.

You are a conspiracy theorist too? Will it be different next time when your guy or gal wins?

This is a direct contradiction. In fact, even your language betrays the contradiction - 'suffering dysphoria'. The 'suffering' arises specifically from the attitude you display and your refusal to be silent, not from the condition itself.

No, the dysphoria arises from subjective discomfort within the person who feels ill at ease in their own body. Time and research may find many reasons - there may be endocrine disruption, there may be parental issues as childhood difficulty is apparent in up to 70% of transgender cases of children, there may be the commorbidity with autism, anxiety, depression (again 75%+), there may be psychic contagion issue and social media influence, there are many possibilities. You saying that I must be silent in order to prevent the subjective discomfort of other people, which cannot be attributed to me, is an incredibly authoritarian statement and symptomatic of the bullying tactics employed in this area. But then again, the trans ideologues do begin to ressemble authoritarian apparatchiks.

Have any of this 'vicious attacks' happened in Ireland?

As I have said before ireland is too small a demographic to be representative. We can look to other populations to study what happens, such as the UK, a method that is often used in research when a larger demographic base is used. Particularly in medical/sociological research.

Well Zorya, you have been the most vocal voice here concerning children. I see you have no answer to this:

You've been ranting about "think of the children" quite a bit as well, where was your submission to the review of the Gender Recognition Act which specifically affects children under 18? https://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/Revi...-Act-2015.aspx
I do see alot of supportive submissions from children's organisations, none seem to be supportive of your view.

klaaaz wrote: »

You don't show much compassion in your posts. Regarding adults, the medical community who know more about science than you disagree on your ramblings.

Regarding adults (as you appear to have chosen to ignore Zorya’s argument in relation to children), there is no consensus among the medical and scientific community who know more about the medical and scientific aspects of transgenderism and transsexualism than you appear to know. There are also the social and political aspects to transsexualism and transgenderism which are not in any way related to the medical and scientific aspects of either condition, and even among those people who are transsexual or transgender, there is no consensus as to who does and does not qualify as transgender or transsexual.

Are you familiar with the term “truscum”? It’s a term invented by trans activists.

Zorya wrote: »

Sorry, your point has gone right over my head. But at least I am glad to see we agree that no one can be born in the wrong body. Fabulous!

My point is that these 'concern for women and children' issues aren't really about concern for women and children. They're really about people who just have a problem with transgender people, and refuse to accept the lived reality of many people, because of some petty, narrow-minded fear of contagion perhaps.

Zorya wrote: »

Yes, yes, good be with the halcyon days when democracy worked perfectly and everyone, right down to the last chimney sweep, voted using their fully informed and dispassionate reason.

If you're not watching matters with Facebook and others very closely, you will find your democracy is stolen from under your nose.

Zorya wrote: »

I have not a single sentiment of ill will towards anyone who expresses their gender in whatever way they wish and anyone suffering dysphoria has my sincere compassion. Adults are free to do what they wish, as long as it harms nobody else.

What I will not do however is stand back and be silent while allowing scientific fact be thrown out the window to accommodate transgender ideology, or children being miseducated as to the reality of biological sex.

This is a direct contradiction. In fact, even your language betrays the contradiction - 'suffering dysphoria'. The 'suffering' arises specifically from the attitude you display and your refusal to be silent, not from the condition itself.

Zorya wrote: »

I may come over strongly because I am thoroughly pissed off at the trans ideology that is trying to force its lies about biological sex onto society. Trans activists are often a vicious bunch who are terribly disrespectful to women in particular. The medical community are being harrassed if they speak out against trans ideologues - doxxed, death threats, rape threats, job insecurity.

Have any of this 'vicious attacks' happened in Ireland?

klaaaz wrote: »

You do contradict yourself quite a bit. Firstly you said "No one can change their sex. Never. Not ever. Ever. No one" and then afterwards you say "anyone suffering dysphoria has my sincere compassion" , that is the opposite of compassion denying a person with gender dysphoria their very existence. God help that person if they are your friend or a member of your family.
.

There is nothing contradictory there. Do you think that in order to feel compassion for someone experiencing dysphoria that I would have to jettison my rational understanding of proven biological science?

Could I not feel compassion for a person with anorexia without colluding in their dietary malpractice?

But this essentially illustrates the trans ideologues constant attempts at blackmail - if you do not believe what I feel about biological sex then you are a transphobic monster who hates me. Or I might commit suicide etc. This is false and neurotic manipulation.

Zorya wrote: »

I may come over strongly because I am thoroughly pissed off at the trans ideology that is trying to force its lies about biological sex onto society. Trans activists are often a vicious bunch who are terribly disrespectful to women in particular. The medical community are being harrassed if they speak out against trans ideologues - doxxed, death threats, rape threats, job insecurity.

You do contradict yourself quite a bit. Firstly you said "No one can change their sex. Never. Not ever. Ever. No one" and then afterwards you say "anyone suffering dysphoria has my sincere compassion" , that is the opposite of compassion denying a person with gender dysphoria their very existence. God help that person if they are your friend or a member of your family.

You've been ranting about "think of the children" quite a bit as well, where was your submission to the review of the Gender Recognition Act which specifically affects children under 18? https://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/Review-of-the-Gender-Recognition-Act-2015.aspx
I do see alot of supportive submissions from children's organisations, none seem to be supportive of your view.

klaaaz wrote: »

You don't show much compassion in your posts. Regarding adults, the medical community who know more about science than you disagree on your ramblings.

I may come over strongly because I am thoroughly pissed off at the trans ideology that is trying to force its lies about biological sex onto society. Trans activists are often a vicious bunch who are terribly disrespectful to women in particular. The medical community are being harrassed if they speak out against trans ideologues - doxxed, death threats, rape threats, job insecurity.

Muckka wrote: »

That's the problem with the left side of politics.
They're all for lables, delusional fantasy and they cannot understand fact's or live in reality.

There's only two gender's and that's about it.
Science has proven that.

There's a lot of confusion, but reality is reality.

There are intersex people too, as well as male and female, but plenty of intersex people are very loud about being fed up to the back teeth of having been hijacked by trans ideologues to ''prove'' that any person's sex can be ambiguous.

Zorya wrote: »

I have not a single sentiment of ill will towards anyone who expresses their gender in whatever way they wish and anyone suffering dysphoria has my sincere compassion. Adults are free to do what they wish, as long as it harms nobody else.

What I will not do however is stand back and be silent while allowing scientific fact be thrown out the window to accommodate transgender ideology, or children being miseducated as to the reality of biological sex.

You don't show much compassion in your posts. Regarding adults, the medical community who know more about science than you disagree on your ramblings.

Muckka

Zorya wrote: »

I have not a single sentiment of ill will towards anyone who expresses their gender in whatever way they wish and anyone suffering dysphoria has my sincere compassion. Adults are free to do what they wish, as long as it harms nobody else.

What I will not do however is stand back and be silent while allowing scientific fact be thrown out the window to accommodate transgender ideology, or children being miseducated as to the reality of biological sex.

That's the problem with the left side of politics.
They're all for lables, delusional fantasy and they cannot understand fact's or live in reality.

There's only two gender's and that's about it.
Science has proven that.

There's a lot of confusion, but reality is reality.

klaaaz wrote: »

So much hate against a tiny minority

I have not a single sentiment of ill will towards anyone who expresses their gender in whatever way they wish and anyone suffering dysphoria has my sincere compassion. Adults are free to do what they wish, as long as it harms nobody else.

What I will not do however is stand back and be silent while allowing scientific fact be thrown out the window to accommodate transgender ideology, or children being miseducated as to the reality of biological sex.

Ash.J.Williams

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

They're bloody handy if you're a parent bringing child(ren) who are not the same sex/gender as you to a swimming pool.

As a single father of a young girl.... Unisex bathrooms meant I could actually bring her to the bathroom

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Thanks for proving my point beautifully.

Sorry, your point has gone right over my head. But at least I am glad to see we agree that no one can be born in the wrong body. Fabulous!

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The problem isn't about people having the vote. The problem is about votes being bought and sold using Facebook and other technologies.

Yes, yes, good be with the halcyon days when democracy worked perfectly and everyone, right down to the last chimney sweep, voted using their fully informed and dispassionate reason.