The Ukrainian staff of the temporarily occupied Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant refuses to comply with the order of the occupation "management of the plant" to transfer power unit No. 4 from a "cold shutdown" to a "hot shutdown" state, the press service of @energoatom_ua reports https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1682049624339619840
Great!
*checks weather and wind forecast for southeast Poland*
One of the statements by Nigel Farage that Coutts took exception to was when he called the then Prince Charles "stupid" for accepting €1m in cash in a suitcase from a Qatari sheikh.
One of the statements by Nigel Farage that Coutts took exception to was when he called the then Prince Charles "stupid" for accepting €1m in cash in a suitcase from a Qatari sheikh.
Damn, that's me in trouble as well then, should I ever get enough to theoretically bank with them. His Majesty was so keen to taste that sweet lucre.
Genuine question, do England (or any Test team) employ a professional weather forecaster?
Why? You can get the Met Office forecast for free.
Is is sufficiently detailed and localised? It might be, but I suspect not.
Well, it will cover about a square mile. And it will tell you rain, cloud cover, wind speed and direction, pollen count, humidity and temperature. What more would they want?
The Ukrainian staff of the temporarily occupied Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant refuses to comply with the order of the occupation "management of the plant" to transfer power unit No. 4 from a "cold shutdown" to a "hot shutdown" state, the press service of @energoatom_ua reports https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1682049624339619840
Genuine question, do England (or any Test team) employ a professional weather forecaster?
Why? You can get the Met Office forecast for free.
Piers Corbyn is available I believe, though I don't know if his other views bleed into it, so he thinks jews and vaccines are behind storms or something.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
An interesting post. More light than heat which makes quite a change on here.
Really? It reads a bit oddly to me. I can't think why one's sexual orientation would dictate one's friendship circle to that extent. Who knows "lots of cis and trans lesbians" without seeking them out, and what for?
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
All too complex for me, I was brought up in simpler times.
Glad the existence of my, my friends, my community and the hate crimes aimed at us are just a complexity for you.
Now you really are talking bollox you halfwit , who the F**k said anything about hate crimes you creepy good for nothing f*cknugget of an arse.
Good to see you in such a good mood today Malc.
Just back from Dentist Cicero , temporary crown fitted and shocked at it being over 800 quid for a crown. Vets and Dentists seem to be where to be for making the money.
It's almost as if you have to be earning more than the average salary to go on strike these days.
Yes. It's the revolt of the Guardianistas - the state paid professionals - who are realising that four factors are coalescing to give them the leftish equalisation they talk about and are now objecting to:
Fiscal drag Minimum wage and its increases Benefits system (despite the caps) The cost of being professional middle class - mortgage, car, commuting, IT and NI, pension provision, cost of private education, child care, running the bank of mum and dad, and having kids at universities.
Ending up with having the same disposable 'fun' income as coffee shop waiters and benefits junkies.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
All too complex for me, I was brought up in simpler times.
Glad the existence of my, my friends, my community and the hate crimes aimed at us are just a complexity for you.
Now you really are talking bollox you halfwit , who the F**k said anything about hate crimes you creepy good for nothing f*cknugget of an arse.
Good to see you in such a good mood today Malc.
Just back from Dentist Cicero , temporary crown fitted and shocked at it being over 800 quid for a crown. Vets and Dentists seem to be where to be for making the money.
It's to save on the anaesthetic Malc, as @Dura_Ace explained previously:
Dentists don't administer general anesthetic in the practice these days. If Mrs DA wants to render a patient unconscious she tells them what their bill is going to be.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
All too complex for me, I was brought up in simpler times.
Glad the existence of my, my friends, my community and the hate crimes aimed at us are just a complexity for you.
Now you really are talking bollox you halfwit , who the F**k said anything about hate crimes you creepy good for nothing f*cknugget of an arse.
Good to see you in such a good mood today Malc.
Just back from Dentist Cicero , temporary crown fitted and shocked at it being over 800 quid for a crown. Vets and Dentists seem to be where to be for making the money.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
All too complex for me, I was brought up in simpler times.
Glad the existence of my, my friends, my community and the hate crimes aimed at us are just a complexity for you.
Now you really are talking bollox you halfwit , who the F**k said anything about hate crimes you creepy good for nothing f*cknugget of an arse.
Good to see you in such a good mood today Malc.
Just back from Dentist Cicero , temporary crown fitted and shocked at it being over 800 quid for a crown. Vets and Dentists seem to be where to be for making the money.
omg, is that NHS?
No , what chance getting an NHS dentist nowadays. However cheap compared to my wife's bridge at £2.4K.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
All too complex for me, I was brought up in simpler times.
Glad the existence of my, my friends, my community and the hate crimes aimed at us are just a complexity for you.
Now you really are talking bollox you halfwit , who the F**k said anything about hate crimes you creepy good for nothing f*cknugget of an arse.
Good to see you in such a good mood today Malc.
Just back from Dentist Cicero , temporary crown fitted and shocked at it being over 800 quid for a crown. Vets and Dentists seem to be where to be for making the money.
omg, is that NHS?
No , what chance getting an NHS dentist nowadays. However cheap compared to my wife's bridge at £2.4K.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
All too complex for me, I was brought up in simpler times.
Glad the existence of my, my friends, my community and the hate crimes aimed at us are just a complexity for you.
Now you really are talking bollox you halfwit , who the F**k said anything about hate crimes you creepy good for nothing f*cknugget of an arse.
Good to see you in such a good mood today Malc.
Is the nasty little angry fascist homophobe ever in a good mood? He is probably more angry than usual because his long suffering wife has probably asked him to move his fat lazy prejudiced arse off his second hand flea infested sofa so that she can try and Febreze the smell of his piss stained trousers off it.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
All too complex for me, I was brought up in simpler times.
Glad the existence of my, my friends, my community and the hate crimes aimed at us are just a complexity for you.
Now you really are talking bollox you halfwit , who the F**k said anything about hate crimes you creepy good for nothing f*cknugget of an arse.
Good to see you in such a good mood today Malc.
Just back from Dentist Cicero , temporary crown fitted and shocked at it being over 800 quid for a crown. Vets and Dentists seem to be where to be for making the money.
omg, is that NHS?
No , what chance getting an NHS dentist nowadays. However cheap compared to my wife's bridge at £2.4K.
You will have to put in quite a bit of overtime at Halfords to pay that off I guess.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
All too complex for me, I was brought up in simpler times.
Glad the existence of my, my friends, my community and the hate crimes aimed at us are just a complexity for you.
Now you really are talking bollox you halfwit , who the F**k said anything about hate crimes you creepy good for nothing f*cknugget of an arse.
Good to see you in such a good mood today Malc.
Just back from Dentist Cicero , temporary crown fitted and shocked at it being over 800 quid for a crown. Vets and Dentists seem to be where to be for making the money.
It's to save on the anaesthetic Malc, as @Dura_Ace explained previously:
Dentists don't administer general anesthetic in the practice these days. If Mrs DA wants to render a patient unconscious she tells them what their bill is going to be.
The proportion of students in England awarded first-class degrees has fallen for the first time in over a decade, the university watchdog says. The Office for Students (OfS) says 32.8% achieved top grades in 2021-22, down from 37.4% in 2020-21.
But the percentage remains higher than before the Covid pandemic and concerns remain about the overall increase since 2010-11, when it was 15.5%.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
All too complex for me, I was brought up in simpler times.
Glad the existence of my, my friends, my community and the hate crimes aimed at us are just a complexity for you.
Now you really are talking bollox you halfwit , who the F**k said anything about hate crimes you creepy good for nothing f*cknugget of an arse.
Good to see you in such a good mood today Malc.
Just back from Dentist Cicero , temporary crown fitted and shocked at it being over 800 quid for a crown. Vets and Dentists seem to be where to be for making the money.
omg, is that NHS?
No , what chance getting an NHS dentist nowadays. However cheap compared to my wife's bridge at £2.4K.
Could she maybe try whist instead?
You misunderstand. Someone mocked Mrs g's credulity with that tedious "I have a bridge to sell you" gag. Things escalated from there and she now has a rather questionable title to the Queensferry Crossing.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
All too complex for me, I was brought up in simpler times.
Glad the existence of my, my friends, my community and the hate crimes aimed at us are just a complexity for you.
Now you really are talking bollox you halfwit , who the F**k said anything about hate crimes you creepy good for nothing f*cknugget of an arse.
Good to see you in such a good mood today Malc.
Just back from Dentist Cicero , temporary crown fitted and shocked at it being over 800 quid for a crown. Vets and Dentists seem to be where to be for making the money.
omg, is that NHS?
No , what chance getting an NHS dentist nowadays. However cheap compared to my wife's bridge at £2.4K.
The proportion of students in England awarded first-class degrees has fallen for the first time in over a decade, the university watchdog says. The Office for Students (OfS) says 32.8% achieved top grades in 2021-22, down from 37.4% in 2020-21.
But the percentage remains higher than before the Covid pandemic and concerns remain about the overall increase since 2010-11, when it was 15.5%.
Any news from the by-elections, from people in those areas?
Turnout is probably 'brisk' - thats what we usually hear.....
Not much in the way of pics of dogs at polling stations up. Barkingly low turnout expected. Good people of Middlesex and Yorkshire (and their dogs) should be following the cricket anyway.
In response to the first question - I haven't been on the ground in S&F today, but have received an email from Lib Dem HQ asking whether I can be in Frome at 10.30 tomorrow for a special event with Ed Davey. This suggests to me that there's some confidence of a positive result.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
All too complex for me, I was brought up in simpler times.
Glad the existence of my, my friends, my community and the hate crimes aimed at us are just a complexity for you.
Now you really are talking bollox you halfwit , who the F**k said anything about hate crimes you creepy good for nothing f*cknugget of an arse.
Good to see you in such a good mood today Malc.
Is the nasty little angry fascist homophobe ever in a good mood? He is probably more angry than usual because his long suffering wife has probably asked him to move his fat lazy prejudiced arse off his second hand flea infested sofa so that she can try and Febreze the smell of his piss stained trousers off it.
LOL, the state of that loser. Like a broken record, go learn how to insult people you invertibrate.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
All too complex for me, I was brought up in simpler times.
Glad the existence of my, my friends, my community and the hate crimes aimed at us are just a complexity for you.
Now you really are talking bollox you halfwit , who the F**k said anything about hate crimes you creepy good for nothing f*cknugget of an arse.
Good to see you in such a good mood today Malc.
Just back from Dentist Cicero , temporary crown fitted and shocked at it being over 800 quid for a crown. Vets and Dentists seem to be where to be for making the money.
omg, is that NHS?
No , what chance getting an NHS dentist nowadays. However cheap compared to my wife's bridge at £2.4K.
You will have to put in quite a bit of overtime at Halfords to pay that off I guess.
Tobias Ellwood is getting a lot of stick on social media for some apparent comments he made about the Taliban.
One can see the point he was trying to make, but he was rather clumsy about the way he did it.
He was talking absolute bollox about how great the place is now under the Taliban , must be on drugs.
Ironically I think one of his points was theat they'd gotten rid of the poppies.
Yes that was about the only correct one, to try and say the country was greatly improved when 50% of the population ( women ) have been cancelled was a bit crass. Seems to be the level of politician's nowadays , not too bright.
The Ukrainian staff of the temporarily occupied Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant refuses to comply with the order of the occupation "management of the plant" to transfer power unit No. 4 from a "cold shutdown" to a "hot shutdown" state, the press service of @energoatom_ua reports https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1682049624339619840
Great!
*checks weather and wind forecast for southeast Poland*
If there’s an incident at Zaporizhzhya that releases radioactivity haven’t a lot of Eastern European NATO members been essentially saying Article 5 would be triggered?
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
All too complex for me, I was brought up in simpler times.
Glad the existence of my, my friends, my community and the hate crimes aimed at us are just a complexity for you.
Now you really are talking bollox you halfwit , who the F**k said anything about hate crimes you creepy good for nothing f*cknugget of an arse.
Good to see you in such a good mood today Malc.
Just back from Dentist Cicero , temporary crown fitted and shocked at it being over 800 quid for a crown. Vets and Dentists seem to be where to be for making the money.
omg, is that NHS?
No , what chance getting an NHS dentist nowadays. However cheap compared to my wife's bridge at £2.4K.
Could she maybe try whist instead?
Youre quite the card today, all heart!
But fortunately, always a diamond and never a trump.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
All too complex for me, I was brought up in simpler times.
Glad the existence of my, my friends, my community and the hate crimes aimed at us are just a complexity for you.
Now you really are talking bollox you halfwit , who the F**k said anything about hate crimes you creepy good for nothing f*cknugget of an arse.
Good to see you in such a good mood today Malc.
Just back from Dentist Cicero , temporary crown fitted and shocked at it being over 800 quid for a crown. Vets and Dentists seem to be where to be for making the money.
omg, is that NHS?
No , what chance getting an NHS dentist nowadays. However cheap compared to my wife's bridge at £2.4K.
Could she maybe try whist instead?
Youre quite the card today, all heart!
But fortunately, always a diamond and never a trump.
The chief executive of the banking group that owns Coutts has apologised to Nigel Farage for "deeply inappropriate" comments about him after his account was closed. Natwest boss Alison Rose said the comments did not reflect its view. Former leader of the UK Independence Party Mr Farage had said that Coutts had targeted him because of his political views. However, the bank had said the account closure was a commercial decision.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
All too complex for me, I was brought up in simpler times.
Glad the existence of my, my friends, my community and the hate crimes aimed at us are just a complexity for you.
Now you really are talking bollox you halfwit , who the F**k said anything about hate crimes you creepy good for nothing f*cknugget of an arse.
Good to see you in such a good mood today Malc.
Just back from Dentist Cicero , temporary crown fitted and shocked at it being over 800 quid for a crown. Vets and Dentists seem to be where to be for making the money.
omg, is that NHS?
No , what chance getting an NHS dentist nowadays. However cheap compared to my wife's bridge at £2.4K.
Could she maybe try whist instead?
Youre quite the card today, all heart!
But fortunately, always a diamond and never a trump.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
All too complex for me, I was brought up in simpler times.
Glad the existence of my, my friends, my community and the hate crimes aimed at us are just a complexity for you.
Now you really are talking bollox you halfwit , who the F**k said anything about hate crimes you creepy good for nothing f*cknugget of an arse.
Good to see you in such a good mood today Malc.
Just back from Dentist Cicero , temporary crown fitted and shocked at it being over 800 quid for a crown. Vets and Dentists seem to be where to be for making the money.
omg, is that NHS?
No , what chance getting an NHS dentist nowadays. However cheap compared to my wife's bridge at £2.4K.
Could she maybe try whist instead?
Youre quite the card today, all heart!
But fortunately, always a diamond and never a trump.
The chief executive of the banking group that owns Coutts has apologised to Nigel Farage for "deeply inappropriate" comments about him after his account was closed. Natwest boss Alison Rose said the comments did not reflect its view. Former leader of the UK Independence Party Mr Farage had said that Coutts had targeted him because of his political views. However, the bank had said the account closure was a commercial decision.
I think they ought to bowl 90 overs each day, no matter how long it takes. Having a cut off at 6:30pm is stopping it from happening atm.
Believe it or not, it is sort of James Anderson's fault.
They used to do that, but in 2003 there were complaints that Channel 4 stopped broadcasting at 6.30 sharp and therefore people missed his maiden Test wicket.
So to appease the broadcasters, the cutoff time was made more rigid.
The umpires used to have bizarrely complex tables telling them how many overs they could make up per day and how long it could take.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
An interesting post. More light than heat which makes quite a change on here.
Really? It reads a bit oddly to me. I can't think why one's sexual orientation would dictate one's friendship circle to that extent. Who knows "lots of cis and trans lesbians" without seeking them out, and what for?
I know lots of gays and lesbians. I would think most youngish people with a wide circle would do so.
I don't know many trans lesbians, but if one were to be active in LGBTQ+ circles campaigning and things then that would entirely naturally and not at all oddly affect who you know, just as if one campaigns for the Lib Dems I expect one would naturally know many Lib Dems and so on for other bizarre minorities.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
An interesting post. More light than heat which makes quite a change on here.
Really? It reads a bit oddly to me. I can't think why one's sexual orientation would dictate one's friendship circle to that extent. Who knows "lots of cis and trans lesbians" without seeking them out, and what for?
Yes, why would a queer person who has had relationships with other queer people know lots of other queer people, even those they wouldn’t be in relationships with?!? Very odd indeed.
The chief executive of the banking group that owns Coutts has apologised to Nigel Farage for "deeply inappropriate" comments about him after his account was closed. Natwest boss Alison Rose said the comments did not reflect its view. Former leader of the UK Independence Party Mr Farage had said that Coutts had targeted him because of his political views. However, the bank had said the account closure was a commercial decision.
Australia right back in this. Only 40 behind, two set batsmen gone, and the tail starts next.
Or get 150 ahead as fast as possible, and attack Australia hard tomorrow and beat the weather. What a fabulous chance for a classic final test of the series.
I think they ought to bowl 90 overs each day, no matter how long it takes. Having a cut off at 6:30pm is stopping it from happening atm.
Believe it or not, it is sort of James Anderson's fault.
They used to do that, but in 2003 there were complaints that Channel 4 stopped broadcasting at 6.30 sharp and therefore people missed his maiden Test wicket.
So to appease the broadcasters, the cutoff time was made more rigid.
The umpires used to have bizarrely complex tables telling them how many overs they could make up per day and how long it could take.
We didn't get extra time added on for the just stop oil nonsense at Lord's, which annoyed me.
Tobias Ellwood is getting a lot of stick on social media for some apparent comments he made about the Taliban.
One can see the point he was trying to make, but he was rather clumsy about the way he did it.
He was talking absolute bollox about how great the place is now under the Taliban , must be on drugs.
Ironically I think one of his points was theat they'd gotten rid of the poppies.
Yes that was about the only correct one, to try and say the country was greatly improved when 50% of the population ( women ) have been cancelled was a bit crass. Seems to be the level of politician's nowadays , not too bright.
Could be worse, we could be talking about the civil servants.
Just got a text from one of the banks I have some of my savings in. They have just put my interest rate up to 688.36%. Suspect they might go bust. How long do you reckon before the correction text?
Just got a text from one of the banks I have some of my savings in. They have just put my interest rate up to 688.36%. Suspect they might go bust. How long do you reckon before the correction text?
That is funny.
I suspect somebody just couldn't see the point of the rate they set...
The chief executive of the banking group that owns Coutts has apologised to Nigel Farage for "deeply inappropriate" comments about him after his account was closed. Natwest boss Alison Rose said the comments did not reflect its view. Former leader of the UK Independence Party Mr Farage had said that Coutts had targeted him because of his political views. However, the bank had said the account closure was a commercial decision.
I think they ought to bowl 90 overs each day, no matter how long it takes. Having a cut off at 6:30pm is stopping it from happening atm.
Believe it or not, it is sort of James Anderson's fault.
They used to do that, but in 2003 there were complaints that Channel 4 stopped broadcasting at 6.30 sharp and therefore people missed his maiden Test wicket.
So to appease the broadcasters, the cutoff time was made more rigid.
The umpires used to have bizarrely complex tables telling them how many overs they could make up per day and how long it could take.
We didn't get extra time added on for the just stop oil nonsense at Lord's, which annoyed me.
There's sod all of any value on SkySportsCricketHD after stumps so no reason for the broadcasters to insist on a hard stop at 1830hrs.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
An interesting post. More light than heat which makes quite a change on here.
Really? It reads a bit oddly to me. I can't think why one's sexual orientation would dictate one's friendship circle to that extent. Who knows "lots of cis and trans lesbians" without seeking them out, and what for?
Yes, why would a queer person who has had relationships with other queer people know lots of other queer people, even those they wouldn’t be in relationships with?!? Very odd indeed.
Most people's friendship groups are dictated by school, university, job, hobbies, all of which are fairly pansexual. But whatever.
I think they ought to bowl 90 overs each day, no matter how long it takes. Having a cut off at 6:30pm is stopping it from happening atm.
Believe it or not, it is sort of James Anderson's fault.
They used to do that, but in 2003 there were complaints that Channel 4 stopped broadcasting at 6.30 sharp and therefore people missed his maiden Test wicket.
So to appease the broadcasters, the cutoff time was made more rigid.
The umpires used to have bizarrely complex tables telling them how many overs they could make up per day and how long it could take.
We didn't get extra time added on for the just stop oil nonsense at Lord's, which annoyed me.
There's sod all of any value on SkySportsCricketHD after stumps so no reason for the broadcasters to insist on a hard stop at 1830hrs.
I think they ought to bowl 90 overs each day, no matter how long it takes. Having a cut off at 6:30pm is stopping it from happening atm.
Believe it or not, it is sort of James Anderson's fault.
They used to do that, but in 2003 there were complaints that Channel 4 stopped broadcasting at 6.30 sharp and therefore people missed his maiden Test wicket.
So to appease the broadcasters, the cutoff time was made more rigid.
The umpires used to have bizarrely complex tables telling them how many overs they could make up per day and how long it could take.
The chief executive of the banking group that owns Coutts has apologised to Nigel Farage for "deeply inappropriate" comments about him after his account was closed. Natwest boss Alison Rose said the comments did not reflect its view. Former leader of the UK Independence Party Mr Farage had said that Coutts had targeted him because of his political views. However, the bank had said the account closure was a commercial decision.
Australia right back in this. Only 40 behind, two set batsmen gone, and the tail starts next.
Bizarrely pessimistic. That dismissal of Root will have caused a deep concern for all the Australian batsmen and the couple that Stokes got bouncing high will have done the same. England need to get 150 ahead and then hope with variable bounce and more favourable overhead conditions Australia can be skittled.
I think they ought to bowl 90 overs each day, no matter how long it takes. Having a cut off at 6:30pm is stopping it from happening atm.
Believe it or not, it is sort of James Anderson's fault.
They used to do that, but in 2003 there were complaints that Channel 4 stopped broadcasting at 6.30 sharp and therefore people missed his maiden Test wicket.
So to appease the broadcasters, the cutoff time was made more rigid.
The umpires used to have bizarrely complex tables telling them how many overs they could make up per day and how long it could take.
We didn't get extra time added on for the just stop oil nonsense at Lord's, which annoyed me.
There's sod all of any value on SkySportsCricketHD after stumps so no reason for the broadcasters to insist on a hard stop at 1830hrs.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
An interesting post. More light than heat which makes quite a change on here.
Really? It reads a bit oddly to me. I can't think why one's sexual orientation would dictate one's friendship circle to that extent. Who knows "lots of cis and trans lesbians" without seeking them out, and what for?
I know lots of gays and lesbians. I would think most youngish people with a wide circle would do so.
I don't know many trans lesbians, but if one were to be active in LGBTQ+ circles campaigning and things then that would entirely naturally and not at all oddly affect who you know, just as if one campaigns for the Lib Dems I expect one would naturally know many Lib Dems and so on for other bizarre minorities.
There's just rather a top trumps flavour to the whole thing. Transsexual lesbians are not that thick on the ground, and it must take real dedication to be recruiting them as friends by the dozen.
Australia right back in this. Only 40 behind, two set batsmen gone, and the tail starts next.
Bizarrely pessimistic. That dismissal of Root will have caused a deep concern for all the Australian batsmen and the couple that Stokes got bouncing high will have done the same. England need to get 150 ahead and then hope with variable bounce and more favourable overhead conditions Australia can be skittled.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
An interesting post. More light than heat which makes quite a change on here.
Really? It reads a bit oddly to me. I can't think why one's sexual orientation would dictate one's friendship circle to that extent. Who knows "lots of cis and trans lesbians" without seeking them out, and what for?
Yes, why would a queer person who has had relationships with other queer people know lots of other queer people, even those they wouldn’t be in relationships with?!? Very odd indeed.
Most people's friendship groups are dictated by school, university, job, hobbies, all of which are fairly pansexual. But whatever.
Australia right back in this. Only 40 behind, two set batsmen gone, and the tail starts next.
Bizarrely pessimistic. That dismissal of Root will have caused a deep concern for all the Australian batsmen and the couple that Stokes got bouncing high will have done the same. England need to get 150 ahead and then hope with variable bounce and more favourable overhead conditions Australia can be skittled.
Your irony detector seems to have an issue.
If they're all out for Jack now (to keep the card metaphors going) despite my efforts I will be seriously pissed with @DavidL
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
An interesting post. More light than heat which makes quite a change on here.
Really? It reads a bit oddly to me. I can't think why one's sexual orientation would dictate one's friendship circle to that extent. Who knows "lots of cis and trans lesbians" without seeking them out, and what for?
Yes, why would a queer person who has had relationships with other queer people know lots of other queer people, even those they wouldn’t be in relationships with?!? Very odd indeed.
Most people's friendship groups are dictated by school, university, job, hobbies, all of which are fairly pansexual. But whatever.
You've never been a Star Trek fan then...
Aren't Trekkies meant to be asexual rather than pansexual?
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
An interesting post. More light than heat which makes quite a change on here.
Really? It reads a bit oddly to me. I can't think why one's sexual orientation would dictate one's friendship circle to that extent. Who knows "lots of cis and trans lesbians" without seeking them out, and what for?
Yes, why would a queer person who has had relationships with other queer people know lots of other queer people, even those they wouldn’t be in relationships with?!? Very odd indeed.
Most people's friendship groups are dictated by school, university, job, hobbies, all of which are fairly pansexual. But whatever.
All the friends I have kept in touch with from uni, bar 1, are LGBTQ+. I wouldn’t call any colleagues friends - I don’t hang out with them outside of work, and those I occasionally do see outside of work are typically for an LGBT+ Staff Network outing. My hobbies include politics, gaming, drinking, theatre etc. This includes lots of queer people.
Also - perhaps unsurprisingly - queer people like to have very queer friendship groups because of the harassment they have experienced from straight society. My secondary school was a pretty homophobic boys’ school, and my experience as a young man dating other young men / queer people in public contained many experiences of public harassment aimed at me or my partner at the time - harassment which has been on the rise in the UK over the last few years.
Absolutely pathetic. We'll end up approx 10 overs shortchanged.
AGAIN.
I was just watching highlights from an Ashes match in 1993 and Australia bowled 96 overs by 6 o'clock, although Shane Warne and another spinner Tim May bowled a lot of the overs.
Australia right back in this. Only 40 behind, two set batsmen gone, and the tail starts next.
Bizarrely pessimistic. That dismissal of Root will have caused a deep concern for all the Australian batsmen and the couple that Stokes got bouncing high will have done the same. England need to get 150 ahead and then hope with variable bounce and more favourable overhead conditions Australia can be skittled.
The chief executive of the banking group that owns Coutts has apologised to Nigel Farage for "deeply inappropriate" comments about him after his account was closed. Natwest boss Alison Rose said the comments did not reflect its view. Former leader of the UK Independence Party Mr Farage had said that Coutts had targeted him because of his political views. However, the bank had said the account closure was a commercial decision.
Australia right back in this. Only 40 behind, two set batsmen gone, and the tail starts next.
Bizarrely pessimistic. That dismissal of Root will have caused a deep concern for all the Australian batsmen and the couple that Stokes got bouncing high will have done the same. England need to get 150 ahead and then hope with variable bounce and more favourable overhead conditions Australia can be skittled.
Your irony detector seems to have an issue.
Indeed. But the more you see of the bounce the more you think this is playing England's way.
Serious respect for Starc though. He has been the star of their bowling attack yet again.
- "There is simply no case to match it in recent years as an example of systematic corporate cruelty and venality." - " the prime minister needs to take personal command of this issue and ensure that convictions are swiftly quashed, compensation swiftly paid and victims’ finances restored to health."
Yes he does. As I said in May. As plenty of others have also said.
FFS! The Tories will almost certainly lose the next election but they could at least use the time until then to do something honourable and this would be one of them. The government has set aside £1 billion for the compensation payments so just bloody well get on with it.
Implementing the IICSA recommendations on child abuse would be another.
The chief executive of the banking group that owns Coutts has apologised to Nigel Farage for "deeply inappropriate" comments about him after his account was closed. Natwest boss Alison Rose said the comments did not reflect its view. Former leader of the UK Independence Party Mr Farage had said that Coutts had targeted him because of his political views. However, the bank had said the account closure was a commercial decision.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
An interesting post. More light than heat which makes quite a change on here.
Really? It reads a bit oddly to me. I can't think why one's sexual orientation would dictate one's friendship circle to that extent. Who knows "lots of cis and trans lesbians" without seeking them out, and what for?
Yes, why would a queer person who has had relationships with other queer people know lots of other queer people, even those they wouldn’t be in relationships with?!? Very odd indeed.
Most people's friendship groups are dictated by school, university, job, hobbies, all of which are fairly pansexual. But whatever.
You've never been a Star Trek fan then...
Aren't Trekkies meant to be asexual rather than pansexual?
I don't think it ever gets as far as assigning a sexual category, tbh. Arguing about what shape the SNW Enterprise pylons should be and whether they are compatible with the TOS Enterprise pylons in canon is not the kind of chat that turns people on, unless they are really weird. It's more the kind of thing that launches wars and fizzing groups of seething self-hatred and depression interspersed with pointless arguments. So a bit like sex but not quite.
- "There is simply no case to match it in recent years as an example of systematic corporate cruelty and venality." - " the prime minister needs to take personal command of this issue and ensure that convictions are swiftly quashed, compensation swiftly paid and victims’ finances restored to health."
Yes he does. As I said in May. As plenty of others have also said.
FFS! The Tories will almost certainly lose the next election but they could at least use the time until then to do something honourable and this would be one of them. The government has set aside £1 billion for the compensation payments so just bloody well get on with it.
Implementing the IICSA recommendations on child abuse would be another.
A like is just totally inadequate to that post. Come on Tories, you have lost. Do the right thing anyway.
Comments
*checks weather and wind forecast for southeast Poland*
BUZZERS!
Schoolboy stuff.
https://archive.is/tQRva
According to Wikipedia, notable clients at Coutts include the British royal family.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coutts
Certainly, betting syndicates in the Far East used to pay good money for their "weather forecasting" skills.
If he could completely eliminate those from his game, he'd make a double hundred every other match.
Could just be tired - it's not as though he has much practice batting for extended periods.
Play on Sunday quite possible.
Fiscal drag
Minimum wage and its increases
Benefits system (despite the caps)
The cost of being professional middle class - mortgage, car, commuting, IT and NI, pension provision, cost of private education, child care, running the bank of mum and dad, and having kids at universities.
Ending up with having the same disposable 'fun' income as coffee shop waiters and benefits junkies.
Dentists don't administer general anesthetic in the practice these days. If Mrs DA wants to render a patient unconscious she tells them what their bill is going to be.
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4350422#Comment_4350422
Though I agree with your other point - averaging below 30 after 69 innings is pretty poor for an opening batsman. Good innings today though.
Our seamers take note!
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-66258137
Paying spectators should get their 90 overs.
Natwest boss Alison Rose said the comments did not reflect its view.
Former leader of the UK Independence Party Mr Farage had said that Coutts had targeted him because of his political views.
However, the bank had said the account closure was a commercial decision.
https://apple.news/AfdU2mbF5T_SnecuI_qkfQQ
Have they promoted Woakes up the order?
They used to do that, but in 2003 there were complaints that Channel 4 stopped broadcasting at 6.30 sharp and therefore people missed his maiden Test wicket.
So to appease the broadcasters, the cutoff time was made more rigid.
The umpires used to have bizarrely complex tables telling them how many overs they could make up per day and how long it could take.
I don't know many trans lesbians, but if one were to be active in LGBTQ+ circles campaigning and things then that would entirely naturally and not at all oddly affect who you know, just as if one campaigns for the Lib Dems I expect one would naturally know many Lib Dems and so on for other bizarre minorities.
I suspect somebody just couldn't see the point of the rate they set...
Hope he is OK.
Yes, I think it's stupid too.
Most surprising is that, before the three sixes that he scored in today's innings, Crawley had only previously scored one six in Tests.
And I think Farage is a plonker of the highest order.
Also - perhaps unsurprisingly - queer people like to have very queer friendship groups because of the harassment they have experienced from straight society. My secondary school was a pretty homophobic boys’ school, and my experience as a young man dating other young men / queer people in public contained many experiences of public harassment aimed at me or my partner at the time - harassment which has been on the rise in the UK over the last few years.
AGAIN.
Good news.
Often these bizarre takes are genuine.
(Possibly not in this case @ydoethur ?)
Impressive.
Serious respect for Starc though. He has been the star of their bowling attack yet again.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-times-view-on-the-post-office-horizon-it-scandal-burning-injustice-lgn6vl2c8
2 short extracts only:
- "There is simply no case to match it in recent years as an example of systematic corporate cruelty and venality."
- " the prime minister needs to take personal command of this issue and ensure that convictions are swiftly quashed, compensation swiftly paid and victims’ finances restored to health."
Yes he does. As I said in May. As plenty of others have also said.
FFS! The Tories will almost certainly lose the next election but they could at least use the time until then to do something honourable and this would be one of them. The government has set aside £1 billion for the compensation payments so just bloody well get on with it.
Implementing the IICSA recommendations on child abuse would be another.