Gruffalox wrote: I have never expressed a wish to rub anyones face in the physical horror that has become popularised by this insane identity politics. I think anyone can express themselves in whatever way they want, sexually, genderly, knock themselves out. I have repeated a million times that people should for the love of God ! hold onto their lovely penises and vaginas and their whole body in working order so that they can have happy sex and good health and be painfree. The very idea of the suffering people who are dysphoric have been encouraged to put themselves through, while being sold a type of transhumanist delusion, makes me literally cringe in empathy. So you know where you can keep safe your nasty fnarr fnarr remark .
One eyed Jack wrote: » I’m just not going to rub their faces in it or use their unfortunate circumstances to say “I told you so” or “it’ll all come out in the wash” trite and meaningless soundbites to stroke my own ego like “I was right, fnarr fnarr”. That’s just spiteful and has never achieved anything for anyone.
hatrickpatrick wrote: » That's the difference. That's why this issue is such an intense clusterf*ck of hostility. Our side didn't start that, yours did.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Burying your head in the sand and pretending that you don't have a problem is fairly risky alright.
hatrickpatrick wrote: » Absolutely. The issue of gender and sex either being distinct entities or being synonymous is contested. I've never had an issue with that although I'd be firmly in the latter camp myself. The issue is that so many in the former camp are (a) insistent that their opinion is unquestionable and non-negotiable fact, and (b), that many of those same people are utterly vitriolic and militant about forcing this gigantic change on everybody and socially crucifying anyone who doesn't comply. What people with views like yourself fail to admit is that this is a very new way of seeing the world which completely and totally upends very basic facts of life in many peoples' eyes. You cannot expect or demand that everyone will just agree to change these fundamental descriptions of life without question, and you certainly can't go about trying to completely f*ck up the life of anyone who does, or deny them their right to their own views. Let me put this another way: I've yet to see an example of those who don't believe in the "gender as distinct from sex" paradigm organising boycotts and harassment campaigns to try and get somebody fired merely for disagreeing with them. But this is done routinely by the ironically-named "liberals" (in name only!) who see the whole issue as a zero sum game in which you either comply with getting on board and accepting newspeak, or you get "cancelled". That's the problem. This issue wouldn't be anywhere near as contentious as it is if so many people on your own side of the fence didn't behave this way. EDIT: To summarise this in another way: You just stated that trans women are the same as women. I would state that this is not the case. Of the two of us, you are not going to get banned from any mainstream social media platforms or have your head or firing called for by the mob, but if I stated it under my real name, they would hunt down every aspect of my life they could get access to and try their absolute best to utterly destroy me. That's the difference. That's why this issue is such an intense clusterf*ck of hostility. Our side didn't start that, yours did.
Gruffalox wrote: » Right. Removing a healthy penis is risky alright. Removing healthy breasts from a teenager is risky alright. Shrivelling up a womb with testosterone is risky alright. Retarding the maturation of childhood frontal lobes is risky alright. But ...give a tsk tsk handwave handwave morally relativistic screed....
LLMMLL wrote: » So you're saying that people who say that trans women are not women are only expressing an opinion? I'm actually totally fine with that. They're entitled to their opinion.
Gruffalox wrote: » I hear the reddit/detrans is being swamped with horrible posts. Basically trans activists are trying to force it shut like gender crit by filling it with terrible junk.
One eyed Jack wrote: » When was it ever the case that medical professionals could guarantee outcomes and 100% patient satisfaction? In anything there are risks involved, and the idea is to try and reduce those risks. That’s why the woman operating a private clinic that I posted about earlier had her license to practice in the UK revoked, so she moved her clinic to Spain and carried on. There are many more people on waiting lists in the UK to avail of treatment under the NHS, and many of them aren’t willing to wait, and will avail of the services advertised by that woman. The issues involved aren’t as clear cut or black and white as you’re making out at all. Do you imagine anyone will be able to take legal action against that woman in Spanish jurisdiction if they are unsatisfied with the results of her treatment?
hatrickpatrick wrote: » In your opinion. In other peoples' opinions, it isn't true. What about this is so hard to understand?
Gruffalox wrote: » I hear the reddit/detrans is being swamped with horrible posts. Basically trans activists are trying to force it shut like gender crit by filling it with terrible junk. I sometimes read a few posts there, all ordinary people really struggling with the after effects of hormones or surgery that have left them very unhappy and disfigured. Thousands of them. A place where people were giving each other encouragement and advice because their hair was thinning or they had had mastectomies and regretted it, or their periods were screwed up, or they were having terrible trouble after genitals removed or just a deep voice that will never revert. And now bullies will probably silence those people so they will have less support and no one to turn to. It will all come out in the wash though. Eventually.
LLMMLL wrote: » I know that saying it doesn't make it true. But it is true.
Joeytheparrot wrote: » No. I didnt ignore that. I am observing the differences here and that in Ireland the number of terfs/people who consider themselves gender critical is really tiny and miniscule when compared to the UK. Theres a very big cultural difference.
Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: » I know, those transgender women are so inconvenient. Almost as inconvenient as detransitioners.
Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: » Did you ignore the part where I said people fear for their livelihoods and even safety? Not inconsiderable things. Somebody like Rowling is well insulated. Most people are not so lucky. I’m only being so outspoken because I have little to lose at this stage.
Sir Oxman wrote: » Are you deliberately miscontruing what I posted? If it is unclear, as you have been previously (we're all human), please let me know.
KiKi III wrote: » You can say that as many times as you want, it doesn’t make it true.
Joeytheparrot wrote: » I dont think everyone is happy with the situation no. But the vast majority of Irish women and Irish feminists and Irish womens organisations appear to be either trans inclusive/supportive or not bothered. It is a very difrerent situation here from the UK. If self ID is as problematic as many complain how come there hasnt been massive uproar?
One eyed Jack wrote: » It didn’t occur to you at all that Linehan was lying through his teeth? Of course not. There was no “sneaking self-ID through the back door”, it had been on the cards since 1997 when Lydia Foy lost their first legal challenge, but the Judge in the case called on the Irish Government to urgently review the matter. Lydia Foy made a second legal challenge, and in 2007 Ireland were found to be in breach of Human Rights Law, a Convention Ireland had signed up to in 2003. Government challenged the ruling and only dropped their case in 2010, announcing in 2011 that they would introduce gender recognition legislation. Still no sign of any movement in 2013 so Foy took a THIRD legal challenge to force Government to fulfil its obligations under European Human Rights Law and the judgement in the 2007 case. It was only two years later that Government finally fulfilled their obligations under International Human Rights Law. There was a public consultation, but you can’t claim you didn’t hear about it because you weren’t paying any attention to it in the first place. There was no sneaking anything in the back door, nor was it tied to the marriage equality referendum or any of that other nonsense about drawing as little media attention to it as possible. In reality, the media weren’t interested either and hadn’t been interested in the previous eight years it took to have the Irish Government get the finger out and fulfill their international Human Rights obligations. They sure as hell didn’t do it willingly, which is why you didn’t hear much fanfare about it.
Joeytheparrot wrote: » Funding? I doubt its all because of funding. I think its much more thsn that. I think for many reasons Irish feminism is mostly trans inclusive.
LLMMLL wrote: » Nope just pointing out the manipulation of language. In the post OBD replied to the poster said "transwomen are women" which OBD changed to "trans women are equal to women". Nobody said that because it's obviously nonsense. Transwomen are a subgroup of women just as cis women are.
Sir Oxman wrote: » Anything to fit an outcome.:D
Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: » Yes, people are foolish to bring up the consultation because that will highlight the, as you say, lauded underhand tactics that were used there.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
