Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Jessica Yaniv refused service at gynaecologist's office

Options
1…2223252728…31

Comments

  • Options
    #722
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,895 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Gynoid wrote: »
    Are you not aware of that? I thought you knew a lot about all this. It is quite prominent.

    I never claimed to know a lot about anything.

    Apart from solid state physics.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #723
    Gynoid
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,524 ✭✭✭Gynoid


    Brian? wrote: »
    I never claimed to know a lot about anything.

    Apart from solid state physics.

    Well I love looking at and thinking about precious and semi precious stones...why do they exist, such crazy brilliance hidden, etc.. so...I guess there is something in the world we could vaguely converse / agree on. :)


  • Options
    #724
    MEGA BRO WOLF 5000
    Registered Users Posts: 17,435 ✭✭✭✭MEGA BRO WOLF 5000


    Moredoch wrote: »
    Feminists v transexuals v the LGBT mob?

    As a conservative white man it feels pretty damn good to kick back with a scotch and watch Clownworld destroy itself.

    When you hear that phrase "the left are eating themselves"... This is what it looks like.


  • Options
    #725
    ceadaoin.
    Registered Users Posts: 8,117 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    Brian? wrote: »
    They're labelling lesbians bigots for not being attracted to trans women? Can you link something to that effect? If it's true I'll be directing my ire at them.

    Well here is a statement from stonewall, calling a group of lesbians who dont feel the organisation supports them any longer and want to form their own organisation a "transphobic group"

    https://www.stonewall.org.uk/node/82236

    Here are the stated reasons from the group themselves about their reasoning. Do you think its transphobic? Transphobic as in showing actual hatred towards trans people?

    We believe that lesbian rights are under attack by the trans movement and we encourage lesbians everywhere to leave the LGBT and form their own independent movement, as well as to be vocal and take action against the proposed changes to the GRA.

    Get the L Out believes trans politics (with uncritical support from the LGBT movement) does the following:

    Promotes the social transition of lesbians, encouraging them to present as straight men thus favouring the pretence of heterosexuality over lesbianism – this is nothing more than a form of conversion therapy.
    Promotes the medical transition of lesbians and pushes harmful drugs (untested hormone blockers, Lupron etc.) as well as unnecessary medical practices on perfectly healthy bodies – these are a form of misogynist medical abuse against lesbians.
    Promotes the rights of heterosexual males who “identify” as women and lesbians (despite most of them still retaining their male genitals) over the rights of lesbians to choose their sexual partners. This new ‘queer’ LGBT politics thus coerces lesbians to accept the penis as a female organ and promotes heterosexual intercourse between male and female as a form of lesbian sex. This is simply a new facet to rape culture and compulsory heterosexuality."

    Oh and here is a co founder of Stonewall acknowledging that women are being let down by the organisation. He is a bigot too apparently

    https://www.holyrood.com/inside-politics/view,cofounder-of-stonewall-calls-for-calm_14648.htm
    How we have got to a position whereby a gay man who was a pioneer in helping to co-found Stonewall back in the late 1980s, and who has spent his whole adult life campaigning on issues of equality, now finds himself labelled a bigot, tells something of the whole nasty nature of the current binary (ironically) debate that has grown up behind proposed changes to the GRA.

    “I’m absolutely heartbroken,” says Fanshawe.

    "So many lesbians who were involved in Stonewall from the beginning are asking me in real distress, ‘What on earth is going on?’ They are saying that they came into Stonewall to support men on the age of consent, which was essentially a boys’ issue and not their fight, but they recognised the bigger principle and they joined with us to campaign, but now they are being swept aside.


  • Options
    #726
    Sir Oxman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,492 ✭✭✭Sir Oxman


    Gynoid wrote: »
    "Discretion had been essential because when homosexual people declare themselves to be attracted to the same sex, as opposed to the same gender, they risk being attacked and shamed as transphobic bigots"
    Debbie Hayton, transwoman, reporting on the first meeting of the LGB Alliance which she attended as a guest speaker.

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/10/in-defence-of-the-lgb-alliance/


    And that lovely, honest, polite sincere transexual is this very day having her job threatened because she dares speak up and have an opinion.

    This is a mere taste of what is happening in the real world and online space.

    *Trans activists want no debate, no sunlight*


    https://twitter.com/DebbieHayton/status/1203929668400885760?s=20


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #727
    Gynoid
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,524 ✭✭✭Gynoid


    Sir Oxman wrote: »
    And that lovely, honest, polite sincere transexual is this very day having her job threatened because she dares speak up and have an opinion.

    This is a mere taste of what is happening in the real world and online space.

    *Trans activists want no debate, no sunlight*


    https://twitter.com/DebbieHayton/status/1203929668400885760?s=20

    Poor Debbie. Lovely person. It is savage what is going on.


  • Options
    #728
    statesaver
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,084 ✭✭✭statesaver


    Sir Oxman wrote: »
    And that lovely, honest, polite sincere transexual is this very day having her job threatened because she dares speak up and have an opinion.

    This is a mere taste of what is happening in the real world and online space.

    *Trans activists want no debate, no sunlight*


    https://twitter.com/DebbieHayton/status/1203929668400885760?s=20

    In the forthcoming ' hate speech ' laws that Charlie Flanagan and Fine Gael want to bring in, would what she said be classed as ' hate speech ' ?

    If yes, it's gonna be scary times ahead.


  • Options
    #729
    CinemaGuy45
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,181 ✭✭✭CinemaGuy45


    StinkyMunkey wrote: »
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but a gynaecologist is trained in dealing with a woman's vagina....!

    A trans person who was a male and now identifies as female doesn't have a vagina! They essentially have a penis turned inside out.

    By all means go see a specialist who knows what they are doing and is trained in dealing with a trans persons body modifications.

    But go **** right off strolling into a gynaecologist and demanding to be seen, you don't have a vagina and never will you twat.

    What a small minded and hateful comment.:mad::mad::mad:

    How dare you assault my feelings with your facts.

    tenor.gif


  • Options
    #730
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,895 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Gynoid wrote: »
    Well I love looking at and thinking about precious and semi precious stones...why do they exist, such crazy brilliance hidden, etc.. so...I guess there is something in the world we could vaguely converse / agree on. :)

    I think there’s a lot more that we can converse about and agree on if we both stay polite and reasonable.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #731
    Sir Oxman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,492 ✭✭✭Sir Oxman


    statesaver wrote: »
    In the forthcoming ' hate speech ' laws that Charlie Flanagan and Fine Gael want to bring in, would what she said be classed as ' hate speech ' ?

    If yes, it's gonna be scary times ahead.


    If it follows the gist of what I think it will mean (as always, following the UK) - probably.
    Allowing someone to report someone for the perception of offence is a pretty sh1tty way to go. And yes, activists do report people in the UK to the actual police for saying such horrific things as men are not women.

    And to double down, allowing someone to report someone on behalf of someone else for the perception of offence.

    No-one has the right not to be offended but clownworld is upon us.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #732
    Sir Oxman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,492 ✭✭✭Sir Oxman


    Gynoid wrote: »
    Poor Debbie. Lovely person. It is savage what is going on.


    Only one of many.
    It is so Orwellian.


  • Options
    #733
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Sir Oxman wrote: »
    No-one has the right not to be offended but clownworld is upon us.
    Sir Oxman wrote: »
    Only one of many.
    It is so Orwellian.


    Conversely - nobody has the right to cause offence. but clown world is indeed upon us when you can’t see the hypocrisy in your own invoking Orwell to deny other people their human rights.

    All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others

    I’m guessing that’s not the Orwellian classic you had in mind though.


  • Options
    #734
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    to deny other people their human rights.


    I've not read the whole thread, what human rights are some posters denying?


  • Options
    #735
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    I've not read the whole thread, what human rights are some posters denying?


    The thread pretty much centres around the idea of opposition to the gender recognition act which gives everyone the right to identify as their preferred gender. Gender identity is one of the protected grounds of discrimination, and a failure by the State to recognise the gender identity of people who are transgender is a violation of their human rights to be protected from discrimination.

    Human Rights and Gender Identity


  • Options
    #736
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    The thread pretty much centres around the idea of opposition to the gender recognition act which gives everyone the right to identify as their preferred gender. Gender identity is one of the protected grounds of discrimination, and a failure by the State to recognise the gender identity of people who are transgender is a violation of their human rights to be protected from discrimination.

    Human Rights and Gender Identity


    Thanks for that.


    I have sympathy for - apologies if ye have already covered this ground - people with gender dysphoria. But, I would expect that to be a very rare condition.


    I do worry there's a fashion that may be adopted by those with general mental health issues.



    None of this takes away from allowing people to self identify per say, but the problem, as has been highlighted in this thread already is legislating for those that abuse this (see thread title) - which is the greater human right to be allowed to self identify or not to be subject to those that purport to identify as female for deviant sexual gratification.



    So, in principle it's fine, but how do we ensure that bringing it in doesn't facilitate abuse of others.


  • Options
    #737
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Thanks for that.

    I have sympathy for - apologies if ye have already covered this ground - people with gender dysphoria. But, I would expect that to be a very rare condition.

    I do worry there's a fashion that may be adopted by those with general mental health issues.

    None of this takes away from allowing people to self identify per say, but the problem, as has been highlighted in this thread already is legislating for those that abuse this (see thread title) - which is the greater human right to be allowed to self identify or not to be subject to those that purport to identify as female for deviant sexual gratification.

    So, in principle it's fine, but how do we ensure that bringing it in doesn't facilitate abuse of others.


    Existing laws already prohibit the abuse of others. Preventing abuse before it happens is an impossibility unfortunately as anyone who is of a mind to commit abuse will do so either regardless of what the law says, or in the case of Yanniv will try and use existing laws to abuse others. There are ways which already exist in law too to stop the likes of Yanniv in their tracks from bringing vexatious lawsuits and wasting the Courts time.

    The Courts will balance the interests of society against the rights of the individual, and in Yanniv’s cases they would have lost a case for discrimination against any gynaecologist simply because physicians have the right to refuse to take Yanniv on as a patient -

    Neither the BC Human Rights Code nor the CMA Code of Ethics and Professionalism removes the physician’s right to refuse to accept a patient for legitimate reasons, as determined in law.


  • Options
    #738
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,478 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    ingalway wrote: »
    Originally Posted by Obvious Desperate Breakfasts View Post
    Did you read about the Guardian blind date recently where it was two lesbians, one was formerly a man. The situation isn’t that objectionable...

    My version of that is:
    Did you read about the Guardian blind date recently where it was a young lesbian and a man who self ID's as a woman and as a lesbian. The situation is completely objectionable to many lesbians

    It actually disgusts me that this happened. A young lesbian is set up on a date with a biological male dressed as a woman as some kind of social experiment - it's entrapment and devious.
    It just keeps the insidious idea going that we have to see past sex and it's only the gender that matters - gay people are same SEX attracted, gender and how you want to express it has NOTHING to do with it.
    I think most people here have already agreed that nobody can change their sex, they can declare their gender different. It should not be controversial then that it's highly unlikely that a lesbian would want a sexual relationship with a trans woman. There should be no guilt or shame and no transphobe/terf namecalling to those who are honest about this.
    As much as the young lesbian said she had a great time on the date, she cancelled the second date.
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    And was almost comically non-committal in her answers. Basically, she had to play nice to avoid hassle. Not a nice thing to do to her.


    This might be a good time to remind ourselves of what the lady in question said and her view on the 'abhorrent' attitudes being displayed on many posts on this thread.

    It pisses me off that I have been, without my consent, used to advocate for an ideology I find absolutely abhorrent and to attack someone who I shared a lovely evening with.


  • Options
    #739
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    This might be a good time to remind ourselves of what the lady in question said and her view on the 'abhorrent' attitudes being displayed on many posts on this thread.


    I'm not sure what abhorrent views on this thread never mind many, but in my opinion ODB is most likely right, imo, and that she's trying to head off the worst of the trolls that are out there and quite willing and able to target her. I'd not like to be in her position, nor would many of us I suspect, hence not using our own names.


  • Options
    #740
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,478 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I'm not sure what abhorrent views on this thread never mind many, but in my opinion ODB is most likely right, imo, and that she's trying to head off the worst of the trolls that are out there and quite willing and able to target her. I'd not like to be in her position, nor would many of us I suspect, hence not using our own names.


    You only said that to head off the worst of the trolls on here that are quite willing and able to target you. Is that how this works, yeah?


    It's great to see those who sing the importance of listening to the voices of women who won't actually listen to the voices of women.


  • Options
    #741
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    You only said that to head off the worst of the trolls on here that are quite willing and able to target you. Is that how this works, yeah?


    It's great to see those who sing the importance of listening to the voices of women who won't actually listen to the voices of women.


    Yeah, because internet trolls don't exist and make people's life a misery, but that doesn't fit your narrative.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #742
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,478 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Yeah, because internet trolls don't exist and make people's life a misery, but that doesn't fit your narrative.
    Most of the posts on this thread are absolute confirmation that internet trolls exist and make people's lives a misery.


  • Options
    #743
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Most of the posts on this thread are absolute confirmation that internet trolls exist and make people's lives a misery.


    There you go, now imagine you're featured in the media and have people able to post messages to your online ccount, it's very understandable to try and placate them.


  • Options
    #744
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,478 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Deleted User wrote: »
    There you go, now imagine you're featured in the media and have people able to post messages to your online ccount, it's very understandable to try and placate them.
    You're only saying that to placate the trolls on here. It's OK, it's very understandable. I don't blame you really.


  • Options
    #745
    ingalway
    Registered Users Posts: 652 ✭✭✭ingalway


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    You only said that to head off the worst of the trolls on here that are quite willing and able to target you. Is that how this works, yeah?

    It's great to see those who sing the importance of listening to the voices of women who won't actually listen to the voices of women.
    Do you believe it is OK to send a lesbian on a blind date with a biological male who self ID's as a woman and as a lesbian without first disclosing that fact? Should the lesbian not have been told this was a trans person so that she can either consent to go on that date knowing this up front or that she can decline the date based on her sexual orientation?


  • Options
    #746
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    You're only saying that to placate the trolls on here. It's OK, it's very understandable. I don't blame you really.


    So, we've reached peak, "I know you are, what am I" level of debate. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #747
    ingalway
    Registered Users Posts: 652 ✭✭✭ingalway


    How can a woman, the leader of a policital party, talk such nonsense? https://twitter.com/bbc5live/status/1203973870056660992


  • Options
    #748
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,478 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Deleted User wrote: »
    So, we've reached peak, "I know you are, what am I" level of debate. :rolleyes:
    Sorry, maybe I missed the memo. Is it only certain groups or certain people that we can use that technique against when we don't like what they're saying?


  • Options
    #749
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,478 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    ingalway wrote: »
    Do you believe it is OK to send a lesbian on a blind date with a biological male who self ID's as a woman and as a lesbian without first disclosing that fact? Should the lesbian not have been told this was a trans person so that she can either consent to go on that date knowing this up front or that she can decline the date based on her sexual orientation?
    Have you considered listening to the lady herself who went on the date?


  • Options
    #750
    ingalway
    Registered Users Posts: 652 ✭✭✭ingalway


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Have you considered listening to the lady herself who went on the date?
    Yes.
    What is your answer?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #751
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    This might be a good time to remind ourselves of what the lady in question said and her view on the 'abhorrent' attitudes being displayed on many posts on this thread.

    The views being expressed in relation to her being set up with a biological male without being informed aren’t abhorrent though. It’s nice that she had no problem with it but other gay women wouldn’t have felt the same about not being informed beforehand. Nothing abhorrent about that at all. It’s odd that she had no problem with her date questioning why she cancelled the second date.


Advertisement