I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
Nothing you have just said is anything other than opinion though. The changing room story has no credible source. As I said I don't think that trans women should compete against biological females in many sports but the fact that Lia Thomas got further in competitions as a trans woman than as a man doesn't demonstrate any malign intent on her part. I'm sorry but your scepticism does sound a lot like prejudice to me.
It’s always the same short list of examples too. Cyclefree adds a little soupçon of unsourced innuendo of sexual assault or deviance to season the story, because that’s part & parcel of the GC approach to this entire debate: to always paint trans people as sexual deviants & a danger to women so they can be shut out of society.
As far as I can find, there is /no/ report out there of Lia Thomas exposing female athletes to an erect penis ever: It simply didn’t happen. Were their fellow athletes uncomfortable, or unhappy with having to change in the same locker room as Lia & did Lia get changed in front of them? Yes, absolutely & I’m not going to minimise that, but the thing Cyclefree claims here didn’t happen.
If Cyclefree can provide a link to back up her claim then I will of course retract.
Thursday - from some on here (you know who you are):
"How dare Cyclefree think that there's a risk from men who identify as a woman? The silly woman has had her head turned by PR."
Saturday: London - "Men who identify as women turn up in a London square for a mass protest in which they indecently expose themselves (a criminal offence) and commit a public order offence by pissing in the street."
Well done, lads. Well done. Keep it up.
Cyclefree, you know as well as I do that plenty of women support the rights of trans women and pretending otherwise doesn’t reflect well on you.
As do I as I have said multiple times. They have exactly the same rights as everyone else and the SC has confirmed that they have not lost any rights at all.
But you agreed upthread with someone who did not know what the boundaries are . Well, I'll tell you what they are: when a woman says no, it means no. No is a complete sentence. If you can't or won't understand that, then frankly you are so far out of bounds that it is hard to know what to say. It reflects appallingly on you.
When a man breaches a woman's boundary, he is a predator. When others say that it is all right for him to breach a woman's boundary, to force himself where he isn't wanted, then they are justifying and enabling predatory behaviour. The placards at the demo in London talk about shooting women and shitting on their heads. There have been other demos with placards advocating the beheading of women. This is not about rights for dysphoric people.
This is about a class of men who simply do not see women as fully human or as deserving rights to dignity, privacy or safety - and I use those words advisedly because they come from the Goodwin case in the ECHR which led to the GRA, they derive from the European Convention, they are referenced in the SC judgment and they apply to all of us - women included. And when some men say that they will force themselves into our spaces regardless of our wishes, when they publicly make violent threats, when they refuse to grant or countenance for women what they demand for themselves, then it is not those objecting to this who should be attacked or criticised.
Once again (and as my header described - so I am enjoying the irony) this forum is obsessed with what men want, with men's feelings and does not give a toss about women, their concerns and needs.
The misogyny on here is palpable and disappointing. But it shows how widespread it is. I've had enough of it.
Despite his undoubted intelligence, Hawking was modest about his gifts. When asked in a 2004 interview with The New York Times what his IQ is, Hawking gave a curt reply: "I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers."
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
Nothing you have just said is anything other than opinion though. The changing room story has no credible source. As I said I don't think that trans women should compete against biological females in many sports but the fact that Lia Thomas got further in competitions as a trans woman than as a man doesn't demonstrate any malign intent on her part. I'm sorry but your scepticism does sound a lot like prejudice to me.
It’s always the same short list of examples too. Cyclefree adds a little soupçon of unsourced innuendo of sexual assault or deviance to season the story, because that’s part & parcel of the GC approach to this entire debate: to always paint trans people as sexual deviants & a danger to women so they can be shut out of society.
As far as I can find, there is /no/ report out there of Lia Thomas exposing female athletes to an erect penis ever: It simply didn’t happen. Were their fellow athletes uncomfortable, or unhappy with having to change in the same locker room as Lia & did Lia get changed in front of them? Yes, absolutely & I’m not going to minimise that, but the thing Cyclefree claims here didn’t happen.
If Cyclefree can provide a link to back up her claim then I will of course retract.
Thursday - from some on here (you know who you are):
"How dare Cyclefree think that there's a risk from men who identify as a woman? The silly woman has had her head turned by PR."
Saturday: London - "Men who identify as women turn up in a London square for a mass protest in which they indecently expose themselves (a criminal offence) and commit a public order offence by pissing in the street."
Well done, lads. Well done. Keep it up.
To go back to my previous analogy, do you think that homosexuals teaching in boy's schools is a risk sufficient to ban them from doing so? Or do gay officers pose too much of a risk to make soldiers? I remember many people saying both of those things and indeed some homosexual teachers are also paedophiles. Now I think it's widely accepted that it's unfair to tar all gay people with that brush.
I think the difference is that there would be no benefit in a straight man pretending to be gay in order to benefit somehow in the examples you give, whereas plenty of pretend transwomen have been able to game the system. Prisons for one, sport another
What proportion/% of "pretend transwomen" do you think are doing it purely for the purposes of "gaming the system"?
100%ish
Why would anyone pretend to be a transwoman if it wasn't to game the system?
Sorry - I'll try to rephrase the question. What proportion of transwomen do you think are just pretending for the purposes of gaming the system?
I wouldn't know... I don't see why it really matters.
Seems to me it's reasonably important to the discussion.
I think there's a big distinction between saying "sorry transwomen, we realise for the most part you're doing this for your own personal reasons/identity and you just want to be treated with dignity and respect, but we need to calibrate these rules based on a small handful of bad apples amongst you" versus "nah soz you're all just taking the piss".
In the same way ideally I don't want rules being set for all men on the basis of (in relative terms) a handful of bad apples, even if that might somewhere stop some potential number of reprehensible actions.
Despite his undoubted intelligence, Hawking was modest about his gifts. When asked in a 2004 interview with The New York Times what his IQ is, Hawking gave a curt reply: "I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers."
Despite his undoubted intelligence, Hawking was modest about his gifts. When asked in a 2004 interview with The New York Times what his IQ is, Hawking gave a curt reply: "I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers."
Thursday - from some on here (you know who you are):
"How dare Cyclefree think that there's a risk from men who identify as a woman? The silly woman has had her head turned by PR."
Saturday: London - "Men who identify as women turn up in a London square for a mass protest in which they indecently expose themselves (a criminal offence) and commit a public order offence by pissing in the street."
Well done, lads. Well done. Keep it up.
Cyclefree, you know as well as I do that plenty of women support the rights of trans women and pretending otherwise doesn’t reflect well on you.
As do I as I have said multiple times. They have exactly the same rights as everyone else and the SC has confirmed that they have not lost any rights at all.
But you agreed upthread with someone who did not know what the boundaries are . Well, I'll tell you what they are: when a woman says no, it means no. No is a complete sentence. If you can't or won't understand that, then frankly you are so far out of bounds that it is hard to know what to say. It reflects appallingly on you.
When a man breaches a woman's boundary, he is a predator. When others say that it is all right for him to breach a woman's boundary, to force himself where he isn't wanted, then they are justifying and enabling predatory behaviour. The placards at the demo in London talk about shooting women and shitting on their heads. There have been other demos with placards advocating the beheading of women. This is not about rights for dysphoric people.
This is about a class of men who simply do not see women as fully human or as deserving rights to dignity, privacy or safety - and I use those words advisedly because they come from the Goodwin case in the ECHR which led to the GRA, they derive from the European Convention, they are referenced in the SC judgment and they apply to all of us - women included. And when some men say that they will force themselves into our spaces regardless of our wishes, when they publicly make violent threats, when they refuse to grant or countenance for women what they demand for themselves, then it is not those objecting to this who should be attacked or criticised.
Once again (and as my header described - so I am enjoying the irony) this forum is obsessed with what men want, with men's feelings and does not give a toss about women, their concerns and needs.
The misogyny on here is palpable and disappointing. But it shows how widespread it is. I've had enough of it.
There’s a strong whiff here of ‘women, know your place, men are speaking’.
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
In other sport, for all interested, it is the first night of the WWE’s Wrestlemania tonight. Underwhelming card.
WWE isnt a sport its theatre
No one is claiming WWE is a sport. 😂😂😂😂 WWE is an organisation that promotes professional wrestling. One of many.
I prefer AEW personally.
I was referencing professional wrestling which, in spite of what WWE marks think, is not just the WWE and the theatre side of it is great.
In other sport for all interested ....was the quote I responded too....wwe is excellent entertainment for those that enjoy it. Merely its not competitive as they know pretty much is winning before they get in the ring its scripted
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
Thanks for providing sources. They say Thomas’s penis could sometimes be seen when changing. I found those too. None of them say Thomas wandered around with penis out. None of them say the penis was erect.
I think I would be uncomfortable were I a woman in a changing room with Thomas and I saw penis. However, a claim was made of something beyond that. I don’t see a source for the claim made.
Thursday - from some on here (you know who you are):
"How dare Cyclefree think that there's a risk from men who identify as a woman? The silly woman has had her head turned by PR."
Saturday: London - "Men who identify as women turn up in a London square for a mass protest in which they indecently expose themselves (a criminal offence) and commit a public order offence by pissing in the street."
Well done, lads. Well done. Keep it up.
To go back to my previous analogy, do you think that homosexuals teaching in boy's schools is a risk sufficient to ban them from doing so? Or do gay officers pose too much of a risk to make soldiers? I remember many people saying both of those things and indeed some homosexual teachers are also paedophiles. Now I think it's widely accepted that it's unfair to tar all gay people with that brush.
I think the difference is that there would be no benefit in a straight man pretending to be gay in order to benefit somehow in the examples you give, whereas plenty of pretend transwomen have been able to game the system. Prisons for one, sport another
Yes that's a fair point but the argument I wanted to make was that we used to live in a climate where every gay person was widely seen as a potential risk to children based on fear and a few highly unpleasant individuals. That resulted in misery for thousands of innocent people who just wanted to get on with their lives. I just worry that people are starting to look at trans women with the same level of fear and to see them only as a risk
I am not sure that the drawing of parallels between homosexuality and transgender is correct; apart from not being what was considered normal 50 years ago, I don't think they are branches of the same tree particularly.
In other sport, for all interested, it is the first night of the WWE’s Wrestlemania tonight. Underwhelming card.
WWE isnt a sport its theatre
No one is claiming WWE is a sport. 😂😂😂😂 WWE is an organisation that promotes professional wrestling. One of many.
I prefer AEW personally.
I was referencing professional wrestling which, in spite of what WWE marks think, is not just the WWE and the theatre side of it is great.
In other sport for all interested ....was the quote I responded too....wwe is excellent entertainment for those that enjoy it. Merely its not competitive as they know pretty much is winning before they get in the ring its scripted
You said ‘WWE isn’t a sport, it’s theatre’
You should have said professional wrestling, not the WWE.
WWE is a promoter of professional wrestling. One among many.
Oh, and it is not all scripted. Results may be pre determined but matches are not always scripted but called in the ring and WWE has also promoted proper contests like BFA.
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
They all though describe an exposed penis......guy jumps out of the bushes and opens his coat and is naked...he gets arrested as a flasher....why is it different in your view if a trans female flashes her girl dick around?
Thursday - from some on here (you know who you are):
"How dare Cyclefree think that there's a risk from men who identify as a woman? The silly woman has had her head turned by PR."
Saturday: London - "Men who identify as women turn up in a London square for a mass protest in which they indecently expose themselves (a criminal offence) and commit a public order offence by pissing in the street."
Well done, lads. Well done. Keep it up.
To go back to my previous analogy, do you think that homosexuals teaching in boy's schools is a risk sufficient to ban them from doing so? Or do gay officers pose too much of a risk to make soldiers? I remember many people saying both of those things and indeed some homosexual teachers are also paedophiles. Now I think it's widely accepted that it's unfair to tar all gay people with that brush.
I think the difference is that there would be no benefit in a straight man pretending to be gay in order to benefit somehow in the examples you give, whereas plenty of pretend transwomen have been able to game the system. Prisons for one, sport another
What proportion/% of "pretend transwomen" do you think are doing it purely for the purposes of "gaming the system"?
100%ish
Why would anyone pretend to be a transwoman if it wasn't to game the system?
Sorry - I'll try to rephrase the question. What proportion of transwomen do you think are just pretending for the purposes of gaming the system?
I wouldn't know... I don't see why it really matters.
Seems to me it's reasonably important to the discussion.
I think there's a big distinction between saying "sorry transwomen, we realise for the most part you're doing this for your own personal reasons/identity and you just want to be treated with dignity and respect, but we need to calibrate these rules based on a small handful of bad apples amongst you" versus "nah soz you're all just taking the piss".
In the same way ideally I don't want rules being set for all men on the basis of (in relative terms) a handful of bad apples, even if that might somewhere stop some potential number of reprehensible actions.
But rules are set for men on the basis of a handful of bad apples, more so now than ever. yet at the same time people are campaigning for the opposite in the case of transwomen
Nearly 10% of all London properties are worth at least £1 million. I am a London millionaire. So "30,000 millionaires fleeing the capital in ten years" is not a lot. And were they all fleeing? It seems a small number to me.
This doesn’t sound like it’s just millionaire homeowners.
According to research by the Adam Smith Institute, each of the millionaires who left the capital over the last decade would have paid at least £393,957 in income tax per year.
So not millionaires but people earning over a million each year.
So have the number of London jobs paying over a million each year increased or decreased in that time period ?
If its increased then those 'fleeing' are being replaced by others.
I have tried to post about this many times on PB but usually just get abuse. I deal with a good number of these people leaving the UK and solving certain issues for them.
When I point out how many are leaving it’s not out of joy and counting my money that I make as a result - I genuinely love the UK and want it to be a success but the country is full of people who wilfully refuse to understand that these people are not just people working in a bank on a fat salary but entrepreneurs who employ many people, contribute to the tax base in many ways through personal taxation, spending and corporate taxes, on top of employment taxes and the subsequent income tax those employees make.
In the last couple of weeks I have met three people leaving the uk and their combined wealth is well over £4 billion.
This is wealth that will no longer be taxed in the UK. These are people who are moving businesses out and will not be employing in the UK anymore.
Just think about it - if you gave them some special tax rates you would get what is still a large tax take and benefit from the businesses they would continue to operate in the UK.
I know I will get the usual attack on parasites, the “don’t let the door hit their arses on the way out” ignorant bullshit but I don’t care now - I write about it because it’s happening on a large scale - tax money leaving that you will never get back until the UK makes not only the tax regime attractive but drops the envy about wealth.
It’s truly frustrating that I am unable to tell you more about these people because it would highlight what you are losing - not just tax but their businesses and all the future spin offs from them.
Maybe we should introduce the US tax system whereby you have to file a UK tax return to report your worldwide income regardless of where you live and work. The only way to avoid submitting a UK tax return would be to renounce your UK citizenship and take up some other citizenship.
I find it odd that some wealthy people are so sensitive to reducing their very large incomes by paying extra tax that they are willing to give up all that London offers them, including their friends. But that's just me. I wouldn't do it. I don't value huge amounts of income that much. I'm happy as I am.
The US worldwide tax system is not only wrong (because people like Boris Johnson who were born in the US but left as a toddler and have never used US public services are liable to US taxes) but also stupid because it's a big incentive on the most talented to renounce their citizenship if they spend a few years out of the country.
It also wouldn't work here, because America can get tax data from foreign banks because it just about has the muscle necessary to bully them into handing it over. We don't. So people would just ignore it.
You may not understand why the wealthy are fleeing London in droves but they like their money and want more of it - that's why they're wealthy in the first place. And they are not only taking their tax revenue, but they are also taking their consumer spending, so the whole country suffers.
We need to be rolling out the red carpet for the world's most successful and talented, not driving them away to other, wiser countries.
But how do you measure this. If it is simply wealth, do you want the Kleptocrats, Oligarchs, Dictators that have robbed their country of its natural wealth. What measure do you use or does it not matter as long as it's cash.
Despite his undoubted intelligence, Hawking was modest about his gifts. When asked in a 2004 interview with The New York Times what his IQ is, Hawking gave a curt reply: "I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers."
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
Nothing you have just said is anything other than opinion though. The changing room story has no credible source. As I said I don't think that trans women should compete against biological females in many sports but the fact that Lia Thomas got further in competitions as a trans woman than as a man doesn't demonstrate any malign intent on her part. I'm sorry but your scepticism does sound a lot like prejudice to me.
It’s always the same short list of examples too. Cyclefree adds a little soupçon of unsourced innuendo of sexual assault or deviance to season the story, because that’s part & parcel of the GC approach to this entire debate: to always paint trans people as sexual deviants & a danger to women so they can be shut out of society.
As far as I can find, there is /no/ report out there of Lia Thomas exposing female athletes to an erect penis ever: It simply didn’t happen. Were their fellow athletes uncomfortable, or unhappy with having to change in the same locker room as Lia & did Lia get changed in front of them? Yes, absolutely & I’m not going to minimise that, but the thing Cyclefree claims here didn’t happen.
If Cyclefree can provide a link to back up her claim then I will of course retract.
I posted 4 links
None of which, as I already pointed out, describes the erect penis that Cyclefree complains of. She appears to have made that part up.
Thursday - from some on here (you know who you are):
"How dare Cyclefree think that there's a risk from men who identify as a woman? The silly woman has had her head turned by PR."
Saturday: London - "Men who identify as women turn up in a London square for a mass protest in which they indecently expose themselves (a criminal offence) and commit a public order offence by pissing in the street."
Well done, lads. Well done. Keep it up.
Cyclefree, you know as well as I do that plenty of women support the rights of trans women and pretending otherwise doesn’t reflect well on you.
As do I as I have said multiple times. They have exactly the same rights as everyone else and the SC has confirmed that they have not lost any rights at all.
But you agreed upthread with someone who did not know what the boundaries are . Well, I'll tell you what they are: when a woman says no, it means no. No is a complete sentence. If you can't or won't understand that, then frankly you are so far out of bounds that it is hard to know what to say. It reflects appallingly on you.
When a man breaches a woman's boundary, he is a predator. When others say that it is all right for him to breach a woman's boundary, to force himself where he isn't wanted, then they are justifying and enabling predatory behaviour. The placards at the demo in London talk about shooting women and shitting on their heads. There have been other demos with placards advocating the beheading of women. This is not about rights for dysphoric people.
This is about a class of men who simply do not see women as fully human or as deserving rights to dignity, privacy or safety - and I use those words advisedly because they come from the Goodwin case in the ECHR which led to the GRA, they derive from the European Convention, they are referenced in the SC judgment and they apply to all of us - women included. And when some men say that they will force themselves into our spaces regardless of our wishes, when they publicly make violent threats, when they refuse to grant or countenance for women what they demand for themselves, then it is not those objecting to this who should be attacked or criticised.
Once again (and as my header described - so I am enjoying the irony) this forum is obsessed with what men want, with men's feelings and does not give a toss about women, their concerns and needs.
The misogyny on here is palpable and disappointing. But it shows how widespread it is. I've had enough of it.
I hope this doesn’t mean you will disappear. Sometimes I feel that only Roger gets where I’m coming from and agreeing with me but I carry on regardless.
But seriously your views are very much appreciated, I appreciate those who disagree with you, largely disagree with them which isn’t a problem, and we must keep all views here. I agree with you 99% of the time on this subject, a subject I try and stay out of posting on but I do think it serves the world more having debates and arguments here.
We all have our areas of life we feel particularly strongly about here, mine is you idiots scaring off wealthy taxpayers, for others it’s trains or trans, for some it’s worrying about whether the rouble they are being paid in will cover their internet bill.
Keep going. See you in Cell Block H anyway if it all goes wrong.
Despite his undoubted intelligence, Hawking was modest about his gifts. When asked in a 2004 interview with The New York Times what his IQ is, Hawking gave a curt reply: "I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers."
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
PB has become tragically dim. Too many smart people have left. It’s like Britain driving away milllionaires
I personally am keeping the average IQ over 90 with my IQ of 237. When I go this place will be like a fucking kindergarten of tardigrades
I guess on the plus side we tardigrades will survive any impending nuclear holocaust. 😉
Oh dear leon has gone full on "I did 18 holes in ones on my first game of golf" Kim il jong style....if he scored 237 on the iq scale its merely suggesting the iq scale is a worthless measure
He can have the prize for being the most widely travelled ignoramus on the planet. It’s the only award relating to brain power that he’s ever going to win.
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
Nothing you have just said is anything other than opinion though. The changing room story has no credible source. As I said I don't think that trans women should compete against biological females in many sports but the fact that Lia Thomas got further in competitions as a trans woman than as a man doesn't demonstrate any malign intent on her part. I'm sorry but your scepticism does sound a lot like prejudice to me.
It’s always the same short list of examples too. Cyclefree adds a little soupçon of unsourced innuendo of sexual assault or deviance to season the story, because that’s part & parcel of the GC approach to this entire debate: to always paint trans people as sexual deviants & a danger to women so they can be shut out of society.
As far as I can find, there is /no/ report out there of Lia Thomas exposing female athletes to an erect penis ever: It simply didn’t happen. Were their fellow athletes uncomfortable, or unhappy with having to change in the same locker room as Lia & did Lia get changed in front of them? Yes, absolutely & I’m not going to minimise that, but the thing Cyclefree claims here didn’t happen.
If Cyclefree can provide a link to back up her claim then I will of course retract.
I posted 4 links
None of which, as I already pointed out, describes the erect penis that Cyclefree complains of. She appears to have made that part up.
Which as I have pointed out would be arrestable offences for a male doing them
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
Thanks for providing sources. They say Thomas’s penis could sometimes be seen when changing. I found those too. None of them say Thomas wandered around with penis out. None of them say the penis was erect.
Please tell me Ringo Starr wasn't involved with this episode.
Despite his undoubted intelligence, Hawking was modest about his gifts. When asked in a 2004 interview with The New York Times what his IQ is, Hawking gave a curt reply: "I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers."
Despite his undoubted intelligence, Hawking was modest about his gifts. When asked in a 2004 interview with The New York Times what his IQ is, Hawking gave a curt reply: "I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers."
Despite his undoubted intelligence, Hawking was modest about his gifts. When asked in a 2004 interview with The New York Times what his IQ is, Hawking gave a curt reply: "I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers."
Despite his undoubted intelligence, Hawking was modest about his gifts. When asked in a 2004 interview with The New York Times what his IQ is, Hawking gave a curt reply: "I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers."
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
They all though describe an exposed penis......guy jumps out of the bushes and opens his coat and is naked...he gets arrested as a flasher....why is it different in your view if a trans female flashes her girl dick around?
Intent, obviously.
Also, there’s absolutely no evidence anywhere that Lia did any more than simply get changed in the same room as the rest of the competitors, at competitions where there were no other places to get changed. There is (as far as can be told from the contemporaneous reports of the women involved) no sexual deviance here & the fact that you & Cyclefree apparently cannot get your minds out of that particular gutter when it comes to transwomen says more about the two of you than it does anyone who was actually involved at the time, who (of course) have the absolute right to their own feelings & personal responses to competing with a transwoman.
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
They all though describe an exposed penis......guy jumps out of the bushes and opens his coat and is naked...he gets arrested as a flasher....why is it different in your view if a trans female flashes her girl dick around?
Intent, obviously.
Also, there’s absolutely no evidence anywhere that Lia did any more than simply get changed in the same room as the rest of the competitors, at competitions where there were no other places to get changed. There is (as far as can be told from the contemporaneous reports of the women involved) no sexual deviance here & the fact that you & Cyclefree apparently cannot get your minds out of that particular gutter when it comes to transwomen says more about the two of you than it does anyone who was actually involved at the time, who (of course) have the absolute right to their own feelings & personal responses to competing with a transwoman.
I apologise for my attempt at a joke earlier in which I suggested that Sir Isaac Newton, who died in 1727, played himself in an episode of a television show aired in 1993. It clearly was not the correct forum.
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
Thanks for providing sources. They say Thomas’s penis could sometimes be seen when changing. I found those too. None of them say Thomas wandered around with penis out. None of them say the penis was erect.
Please tell me Ringo Starr wasn't involved with this episode.
I apologise for my attempt at a joke earlier in which I suggested that Sir Isaac Newton, who died in 1727, played himself in an episode of a television show aired in 1993. It clearly was not the correct forum.
I apologise for my attempt at a joke earlier in which I suggested that Sir Isaac Newton, who died in 1727, played himself in an episode of a television show aired in 1993. It clearly was not the correct forum.
Yours repentantly,
Doug Seal
We did realise as mr Newton isnt coming back till 2035
I apologise for my attempt at a joke earlier in which I suggested that Sir Isaac Newton, who died in 1727, played himself in an episode of a television show aired in 1993. It clearly was not the correct forum.
Yours repentantly,
Doug Seal
It's okay, I'll give you lessons on subtlety in the next few days.
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
Thanks for providing sources. They say Thomas’s penis could sometimes be seen when changing. I found those too. None of them say Thomas wandered around with penis out. None of them say the penis was erect.
Please tell me Ringo Starr wasn't involved with this episode.
The "Gotcha" question about transmen ie women who identify as men has been dealt with in the judgment - paragraph 221.
In practice, my "butch" looking female friends rarely get challenged because women are well able to distinguish between men and women and, on the rare occasions, they are, it all gets easily sorted in a minute or two. They have never got offended at being challenged because, as women, they understand precisely why it is done.
Paragraph 221 says biological sex trumps gender self-id, the overarching principle of the Supreme Court judgment – except when it doesn't in the case of trans men. Is that the Justices recognising practical constraints and compromises, or revealing that they started from their own prejudices and worked backwards?
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
I apologise for my attempt at a joke earlier in which I suggested that Sir Isaac Newton, who died in 1727, played himself in an episode of a television show aired in 1993. It clearly was not the correct forum.
Yours repentantly,
Doug Seal
Apologies. My jokedar is on the fritz today. The world has become such that it's gotten hard to tell what's real and what's a joke...
Thursday - from some on here (you know who you are):
"How dare Cyclefree think that there's a risk from men who identify as a woman? The silly woman has had her head turned by PR."
Saturday: London - "Men who identify as women turn up in a London square for a mass protest in which they indecently expose themselves (a criminal offence) and commit a public order offence by pissing in the street."
Well done, lads. Well done. Keep it up.
Cyclefree, you know as well as I do that plenty of women support the rights of trans women and pretending otherwise doesn’t reflect well on you.
So what makes someone a transwoman, entitled (in your opinion) to the same rights as biological women?
It’s not for me to say. It’s a debate for women to have among themselves in my opinion. However, it is clear that plenty of women think that trans women should have a lot of, if not all of, the same rights as biological women.
I, as a man, feel obligated to call out transphobia (which is not the same as disagreeing that trans women should have the same rights as biological women) where I see it.
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
They all though describe an exposed penis......guy jumps out of the bushes and opens his coat and is naked...he gets arrested as a flasher....why is it different in your view if a trans female flashes her girl dick around?
Intent, obviously.
Also, there’s absolutely no evidence anywhere that Lia did any more than simply get changed in the same room as the rest of the competitors, at competitions where there were no other places to get changed. There is (as far as can be told from the contemporaneous reports of the women involved) no sexual deviance here & the fact that you & Cyclefree apparently cannot get your minds out of that particular gutter when it comes to transwomen says more about the two of you than it does anyone who was actually involved at the time, who (of course) have the absolute right to their own feelings & personal responses to competing with a transwoman.
See my post above and answer it
It’s a really obvious moving of the goalposts & trolley problems are not usually a good way to decide legal questions but sure: the answer to your question is that courts are in fact pretty good at considering questions of intent & intent matters.
A UK court would, I suspect take a very skeptical view of a defendant claiming that they had suddenly decided five minutes before entering a female changing space that they were trans & that therefore this made it ok.
On the flip side, someone who had transitioned in their actual life, was taking hormones etc would likely be treated differently.
Also, it is worth remembering that currently there is absolutely no UK law that stops anyone walking into any changing rooms, regardless of sex or gender presentation: You walking into a female changing room, getting changed & going straight into the pool doesn’t break any laws in and of itself. The pool owner may take a view on this behaviour & if anyone complains then you may risk a prosecution for indecent exposure but the act itself breaks no laws, as far as I know.
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
Thanks for providing sources. They say Thomas’s penis could sometimes be seen when changing. I found those too. None of them say Thomas wandered around with penis out. None of them say the penis was erect.
Please tell me Ringo Starr wasn't involved with this episode.
I apologise for my attempt at a joke earlier in which I suggested that Sir Isaac Newton, who died in 1727, played himself in an episode of a television show aired in 1993. It clearly was not the correct forum.
Yours repentantly,
Doug Seal
Apologies. My jokedar is on the fritz today. The world has become such that it's gotten hard to tell what's real and what's a joke...
Don't worry. Let's be honest, I'm not likely to give up the day job for comedy.
I apologise for my attempt at a joke earlier in which I suggested that Sir Isaac Newton, who died in 1727, played himself in an episode of a television show aired in 1993. It clearly was not the correct forum.
Yours repentantly,
Doug Seal
Apologies. My jokedar is on the fritz today. The world has become such that it's gotten hard to tell what's real and what's a joke...
Don't worry. Let's be honest, I'm not likely to give up the day job for comedy.
Oh so you’re the guy who writes “Have I got News for you.”
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
They all though describe an exposed penis......guy jumps out of the bushes and opens his coat and is naked...he gets arrested as a flasher....why is it different in your view if a trans female flashes her girl dick around?
Intent, obviously.
Also, there’s absolutely no evidence anywhere that Lia did any more than simply get changed in the same room as the rest of the competitors, at competitions where there were no other places to get changed. There is (as far as can be told from the contemporaneous reports of the women involved) no sexual deviance here & the fact that you & Cyclefree apparently cannot get your minds out of that particular gutter when it comes to transwomen says more about the two of you than it does anyone who was actually involved at the time, who (of course) have the absolute right to their own feelings & personal responses to competing with a transwoman.
See my post above and answer it
It’s a really obvious moving of the goalposts & trolley problems are not usually a good way to decide legal questions but sure: the answer to your question is that courts are in fact pretty good at considering questions of intent & intent matters.
A UK court would, I suspect take a very skeptical view of a defendant claiming that they had suddenly decided five minutes before entering a female changing space that they were trans & that therefore this made it ok.
On the flip side, someone who had transitioned in their actual life, was taking hormones etc would likely be treated differently.
Also, it is worth remembering that currently there is absolutely no UK law that stops anyone walking into any changing rooms, regardless of sex or gender presentation: You walking into a female changing room, getting changed & going straight into the pool doesn’t break any laws in and of itself. The pool owner may take a view on this behaviour & if anyone complains then you may risk a prosecution for indecent exposure but the act itself breaks no laws, as far as I know.
I didn't say 5 minutes before walking in though don't put words in my mouth. A man who gets off on flashing to females will declare himself female then be able to do it with impunity in you view....they will probably do it a couple of months before for credibility
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
Thanks for providing sources. They say Thomas’s penis could sometimes be seen when changing. I found those too. None of them say Thomas wandered around with penis out. None of them say the penis was erect.
Please tell me Ringo Starr wasn't involved with this episode.
He’s just been sacked from The Who
That was his son, Zak Starky. Bit of a knob.
Why didn't he call himself Zak Starr, out of interest?
I apologise for my attempt at a joke earlier in which I suggested that Sir Isaac Newton, who died in 1727, played himself in an episode of a television show aired in 1993. It clearly was not the correct forum.
Yours repentantly,
Doug Seal
Apologies. My jokedar is on the fritz today. The world has become such that it's gotten hard to tell what's real and what's a joke...
Don't worry. Let's be honest, I'm not likely to give up the day job for comedy.
You were responsible one of PB's truly comedic moments when you predicted a Liz Truss comeback somebody decided to lecture you about how The Oxford Union despite themself never being a member of The Oxford Union.
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
Thanks for providing sources. They say Thomas’s penis could sometimes be seen when changing. I found those too. None of them say Thomas wandered around with penis out. None of them say the penis was erect.
Please tell me Ringo Starr wasn't involved with this episode.
He’s just been sacked from The Who
That was his son, Zak Starky. Bit of a knob.
Why didn't he call himself Zak Starr, out of interest?
He’s really anti-nepotism. Wanted a career in music off his own talents.
Despite his undoubted intelligence, Hawking was modest about his gifts. When asked in a 2004 interview with The New York Times what his IQ is, Hawking gave a curt reply: "I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers."
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
They all though describe an exposed penis......guy jumps out of the bushes and opens his coat and is naked...he gets arrested as a flasher....why is it different in your view if a trans female flashes her girl dick around?
Intent, obviously.
Also, there’s absolutely no evidence anywhere that Lia did any more than simply get changed in the same room as the rest of the competitors, at competitions where there were no other places to get changed. There is (as far as can be told from the contemporaneous reports of the women involved) no sexual deviance here & the fact that you & Cyclefree apparently cannot get your minds out of that particular gutter when it comes to transwomen says more about the two of you than it does anyone who was actually involved at the time, who (of course) have the absolute right to their own feelings & personal responses to competing with a transwoman.
See my post above and answer it
It’s a really obvious moving of the goalposts & trolley problems are not usually a good way to decide legal questions but sure: the answer to your question is that courts are in fact pretty good at considering questions of intent & intent matters.
A UK court would, I suspect take a very skeptical view of a defendant claiming that they had suddenly decided five minutes before entering a female changing space that they were trans & that therefore this made it ok.
On the flip side, someone who had transitioned in their actual life, was taking hormones etc would likely be treated differently.
Also, it is worth remembering that currently there is absolutely no UK law that stops anyone walking into any changing rooms, regardless of sex or gender presentation: You walking into a female changing room, getting changed & going straight into the pool doesn’t break any laws in and of itself. The pool owner may take a view on this behaviour & if anyone complains then you may risk a prosecution for indecent exposure but the act itself breaks no laws, as far as I know.
I didn't say 5 minutes before walking in though don't put words in my mouth. A man who gets off on flashing to females will declare himself female then be able to do it with impunity in you view....they will probably do it a couple of months before for credibility
The problem here is not the genuine ones, just it opens a charter for perverts as well
I apologise for my attempt at a joke earlier in which I suggested that Sir Isaac Newton, who died in 1727, played himself in an episode of a television show aired in 1993. It clearly was not the correct forum.
Yours repentantly,
Doug Seal
Apologies. My jokedar is on the fritz today. The world has become such that it's gotten hard to tell what's real and what's a joke...
Don't worry. Let's be honest, I'm not likely to give up the day job for comedy.
You were responsible one of PB's truly comedic moments when you predicted a Liz Truss comeback somebody decided to lecture you about how The Oxford Union despite themself never being a member of The Oxford Union.
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
They all though describe an exposed penis......guy jumps out of the bushes and opens his coat and is naked...he gets arrested as a flasher....why is it different in your view if a trans female flashes her girl dick around?
Intent, obviously.
Also, there’s absolutely no evidence anywhere that Lia did any more than simply get changed in the same room as the rest of the competitors, at competitions where there were no other places to get changed. There is (as far as can be told from the contemporaneous reports of the women involved) no sexual deviance here & the fact that you & Cyclefree apparently cannot get your minds out of that particular gutter when it comes to transwomen says more about the two of you than it does anyone who was actually involved at the time, who (of course) have the absolute right to their own feelings & personal responses to competing with a transwoman.
See my post above and answer it
It’s a really obvious moving of the goalposts & trolley problems are not usually a good way to decide legal questions but sure: the answer to your question is that courts are in fact pretty good at considering questions of intent & intent matters.
A UK court would, I suspect take a very skeptical view of a defendant claiming that they had suddenly decided five minutes before entering a female changing space that they were trans & that therefore this made it ok.
On the flip side, someone who had transitioned in their actual life, was taking hormones etc would likely be treated differently.
Also, it is worth remembering that currently there is absolutely no UK law that stops anyone walking into any changing rooms, regardless of sex or gender presentation: You walking into a female changing room, getting changed & going straight into the pool doesn’t break any laws in and of itself. The pool owner may take a view on this behaviour & if anyone complains then you may risk a prosecution for indecent exposure but the act itself breaks no laws, as far as I know.
I didn't say 5 minutes before walking in though don't put words in my mouth. A man who gets off on flashing to females will declare himself female then be able to do it with impunity in you view....they will probably do it a couple of months before for credibility
The problem here is not the genuine ones, just it opens a charter for perverts as well
So tell us how many women will you sacrifice on the altar of your inclusivity because it will be many more than 1
I apologise for my attempt at a joke earlier in which I suggested that Sir Isaac Newton, who died in 1727, played himself in an episode of a television show aired in 1993. It clearly was not the correct forum.
Yours repentantly,
Doug Seal
Apologies. My jokedar is on the fritz today. The world has become such that it's gotten hard to tell what's real and what's a joke...
Don't worry. Let's be honest, I'm not likely to give up the day job for comedy.
You were responsible one of PB's truly comedic moments when you predicted a Liz Truss comeback somebody decided to lecture you about how The Oxford Union despite themself never being a member of The Oxford Union.
TBF it's his world, we just live in it.
I liked the time I was told that Asian heritage parents have a fanatical obsession with the education of their children.
...Once again (and as my header described - so I am enjoying the irony) this forum is obsessed with what men want, with men's feelings and does not give a toss about women, their concerns and needs.
The misogyny on here is palpable and disappointing. But it shows how widespread it is. I've had enough of it.
I resent the implications of that. FWIW.
I've greatly appreciated your contributions over the years, and would hope that whenever I've disagreed with you I've done so respectfully. But you must make your own choices.
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
They all though describe an exposed penis......guy jumps out of the bushes and opens his coat and is naked...he gets arrested as a flasher....why is it different in your view if a trans female flashes her girl dick around?
Intent, obviously.
Also, there’s absolutely no evidence anywhere that Lia did any more than simply get changed in the same room as the rest of the competitors, at competitions where there were no other places to get changed. There is (as far as can be told from the contemporaneous reports of the women involved) no sexual deviance here & the fact that you & Cyclefree apparently cannot get your minds out of that particular gutter when it comes to transwomen says more about the two of you than it does anyone who was actually involved at the time, who (of course) have the absolute right to their own feelings & personal responses to competing with a transwoman.
See my post above and answer it
It’s a really obvious moving of the goalposts & trolley problems are not usually a good way to decide legal questions but sure: the answer to your question is that courts are in fact pretty good at considering questions of intent & intent matters.
A UK court would, I suspect take a very skeptical view of a defendant claiming that they had suddenly decided five minutes before entering a female changing space that they were trans & that therefore this made it ok.
On the flip side, someone who had transitioned in their actual life, was taking hormones etc would likely be treated differently.
Also, it is worth remembering that currently there is absolutely no UK law that stops anyone walking into any changing rooms, regardless of sex or gender presentation: You walking into a female changing room, getting changed & going straight into the pool doesn’t break any laws in and of itself. The pool owner may take a view on this behaviour & if anyone complains then you may risk a prosecution for indecent exposure but the act itself breaks no laws, as far as I know.
I didn't say 5 minutes before walking in though don't put words in my mouth. A man who gets off on flashing to females will declare himself female then be able to do it with impunity in you view....they will probably do it a couple of months before for credibility
(Yet more goalpost moving.)
I think that women are perfectly capable of telling the difference between someone who is getting off on exposing themselves & someone who is just getting on with whatever they need to do without bothering anyone else. In the former case their complaints should be acted upon, regardless of the state of the law on trans issues.
Whether the latter case is permissible is a question on which people can disagree & on which society will make a collective, democratic agreement (which itself may change over time).
More like that Apple's walled garden model is two product failures away from justified obliteration. The Android open model will overcome the Betamax and it may come sooner than you think.
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
They all though describe an exposed penis......guy jumps out of the bushes and opens his coat and is naked...he gets arrested as a flasher....why is it different in your view if a trans female flashes her girl dick around?
Intent, obviously.
Also, there’s absolutely no evidence anywhere that Lia did any more than simply get changed in the same room as the rest of the competitors, at competitions where there were no other places to get changed. There is (as far as can be told from the contemporaneous reports of the women involved) no sexual deviance here & the fact that you & Cyclefree apparently cannot get your minds out of that particular gutter when it comes to transwomen says more about the two of you than it does anyone who was actually involved at the time, who (of course) have the absolute right to their own feelings & personal responses to competing with a transwoman.
See my post above and answer it
It’s a really obvious moving of the goalposts & trolley problems are not usually a good way to decide legal questions but sure: the answer to your question is that courts are in fact pretty good at considering questions of intent & intent matters.
A UK court would, I suspect take a very skeptical view of a defendant claiming that they had suddenly decided five minutes before entering a female changing space that they were trans & that therefore this made it ok.
On the flip side, someone who had transitioned in their actual life, was taking hormones etc would likely be treated differently.
Also, it is worth remembering that currently there is absolutely no UK law that stops anyone walking into any changing rooms, regardless of sex or gender presentation: You walking into a female changing room, getting changed & going straight into the pool doesn’t break any laws in and of itself. The pool owner may take a view on this behaviour & if anyone complains then you may risk a prosecution for indecent exposure but the act itself breaks no laws, as far as I know.
I didn't say 5 minutes before walking in though don't put words in my mouth. A man who gets off on flashing to females will declare himself female then be able to do it with impunity in you view....they will probably do it a couple of months before for credibility
No, that isn't the case.
If the exposure is with intent to frighten or distress it is illegal, whether in park or changing room.
Thursday - from some on here (you know who you are):
"How dare Cyclefree think that there's a risk from men who identify as a woman? The silly woman has had her head turned by PR."
Saturday: London - "Men who identify as women turn up in a London square for a mass protest in which they indecently expose themselves (a criminal offence) and commit a public order offence by pissing in the street."
Well done, lads. Well done. Keep it up.
Cyclefree, you know as well as I do that plenty of women support the rights of trans women and pretending otherwise doesn’t reflect well on you.
As do I as I have said multiple times. They have exactly the same rights as everyone else and the SC has confirmed that they have not lost any rights at all.
But you agreed upthread with someone who did not know what the boundaries are . Well, I'll tell you what they are: when a woman says no, it means no. No is a complete sentence. If you can't or won't understand that, then frankly you are so far out of bounds that it is hard to know what to say. It reflects appallingly on you.
When a man breaches a woman's boundary, he is a predator. When others say that it is all right for him to breach a woman's boundary, to force himself where he isn't wanted, then they are justifying and enabling predatory behaviour. The placards at the demo in London talk about shooting women and shitting on their heads. There have been other demos with placards advocating the beheading of women. This is not about rights for dysphoric people.
This is about a class of men who simply do not see women as fully human or as deserving rights to dignity, privacy or safety - and I use those words advisedly because they come from the Goodwin case in the ECHR which led to the GRA, they derive from the European Convention, they are referenced in the SC judgment and they apply to all of us - women included. And when some men say that they will force themselves into our spaces regardless of our wishes, when they publicly make violent threats, when they refuse to grant or countenance for women what they demand for themselves, then it is not those objecting to this who should be attacked or criticised.
Once again (and as my header described - so I am enjoying the irony) this forum is obsessed with what men want, with men's feelings and does not give a toss about women, their concerns and needs.
The misogyny on here is palpable and disappointing. But it shows how widespread it is. I've had enough of it.
No Cyclefree. It isn’t misogyny to point out that you don’t speak for all women, because you don’t. Neither is it for you (or for anyone else) to do so.
You trying to frame this as misogyny takes away the agency from other women - I know this because my girlfriend is one of them, so are my friends.
Also it is one thing to have an opinion on women’s spaces in various guises but it is another to disparage trans women by calling them “men in frocks” and other such insults. That is transphobia plain and simple and it is appropriate for men (including myself) to call that out because silence is acceptance.
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
They all though describe an exposed penis......guy jumps out of the bushes and opens his coat and is naked...he gets arrested as a flasher....why is it different in your view if a trans female flashes her girl dick around?
Intent, obviously.
Also, there’s absolutely no evidence anywhere that Lia did any more than simply get changed in the same room as the rest of the competitors, at competitions where there were no other places to get changed. There is (as far as can be told from the contemporaneous reports of the women involved) no sexual deviance here & the fact that you & Cyclefree apparently cannot get your minds out of that particular gutter when it comes to transwomen says more about the two of you than it does anyone who was actually involved at the time, who (of course) have the absolute right to their own feelings & personal responses to competing with a transwoman.
See my post above and answer it
It’s a really obvious moving of the goalposts & trolley problems are not usually a good way to decide legal questions but sure: the answer to your question is that courts are in fact pretty good at considering questions of intent & intent matters.
A UK court would, I suspect take a very skeptical view of a defendant claiming that they had suddenly decided five minutes before entering a female changing space that they were trans & that therefore this made it ok.
On the flip side, someone who had transitioned in their actual life, was taking hormones etc would likely be treated differently.
Also, it is worth remembering that currently there is absolutely no UK law that stops anyone walking into any changing rooms, regardless of sex or gender presentation: You walking into a female changing room, getting changed & going straight into the pool doesn’t break any laws in and of itself. The pool owner may take a view on this behaviour & if anyone complains then you may risk a prosecution for indecent exposure but the act itself breaks no laws, as far as I know.
I didn't say 5 minutes before walking in though don't put words in my mouth. A man who gets off on flashing to females will declare himself female then be able to do it with impunity in you view....they will probably do it a couple of months before for credibility
The problem here is not the genuine ones, just it opens a charter for perverts as well
“I think you're some kind of deviated prevert. I think General Ripper found out about your preversion, and that you were organizing some kind of mutiny of preverts.”
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
They all though describe an exposed penis......guy jumps out of the bushes and opens his coat and is naked...he gets arrested as a flasher....why is it different in your view if a trans female flashes her girl dick around?
Intent, obviously.
Also, there’s absolutely no evidence anywhere that Lia did any more than simply get changed in the same room as the rest of the competitors, at competitions where there were no other places to get changed. There is (as far as can be told from the contemporaneous reports of the women involved) no sexual deviance here & the fact that you & Cyclefree apparently cannot get your minds out of that particular gutter when it comes to transwomen says more about the two of you than it does anyone who was actually involved at the time, who (of course) have the absolute right to their own feelings & personal responses to competing with a transwoman.
See my post above and answer it
It’s a really obvious moving of the goalposts & trolley problems are not usually a good way to decide legal questions but sure: the answer to your question is that courts are in fact pretty good at considering questions of intent & intent matters.
A UK court would, I suspect take a very skeptical view of a defendant claiming that they had suddenly decided five minutes before entering a female changing space that they were trans & that therefore this made it ok.
On the flip side, someone who had transitioned in their actual life, was taking hormones etc would likely be treated differently.
Also, it is worth remembering that currently there is absolutely no UK law that stops anyone walking into any changing rooms, regardless of sex or gender presentation: You walking into a female changing room, getting changed & going straight into the pool doesn’t break any laws in and of itself. The pool owner may take a view on this behaviour & if anyone complains then you may risk a prosecution for indecent exposure but the act itself breaks no laws, as far as I know.
I didn't say 5 minutes before walking in though don't put words in my mouth. A man who gets off on flashing to females will declare himself female then be able to do it with impunity in you view....they will probably do it a couple of months before for credibility
(Yet more goalpost moving.)
I think that women are perfectly capable of telling the difference between someone who is getting off on exposing themselves & someone who is just getting on with whatever they need to do without bothering anyone else. In the former case their complaints should be acted upon, regardless of the state of the law on trans issues.
Whether the latter case is permissible is a question on which people can disagree & on which society will make a collective, democratic agreement (which itself may change over time).
Ah I see so in your view they can complain after the fact rather than we stop the act, Well such a dick sorry what other way to say it.........you are happy for them to be exposed to it on the grounds they can always lodge a complaint.......tell you what I will come sodomize you and you should let me as you can always complain later
Thursday - from some on here (you know who you are):
"How dare Cyclefree think that there's a risk from men who identify as a woman? The silly woman has had her head turned by PR."
Saturday: London - "Men who identify as women turn up in a London square for a mass protest in which they indecently expose themselves (a criminal offence) and commit a public order offence by pissing in the street."
Well done, lads. Well done. Keep it up.
Cyclefree, you know as well as I do that plenty of women support the rights of trans women and pretending otherwise doesn’t reflect well on you.
As do I as I have said multiple times. They have exactly the same rights as everyone else and the SC has confirmed that they have not lost any rights at all.
But you agreed upthread with someone who did not know what the boundaries are . Well, I'll tell you what they are: when a woman says no, it means no. No is a complete sentence. If you can't or won't understand that, then frankly you are so far out of bounds that it is hard to know what to say. It reflects appallingly on you.
When a man breaches a woman's boundary, he is a predator. When others say that it is all right for him to breach a woman's boundary, to force himself where he isn't wanted, then they are justifying and enabling predatory behaviour. The placards at the demo in London talk about shooting women and shitting on their heads. There have been other demos with placards advocating the beheading of women. This is not about rights for dysphoric people.
This is about a class of men who simply do not see women as fully human or as deserving rights to dignity, privacy or safety - and I use those words advisedly because they come from the Goodwin case in the ECHR which led to the GRA, they derive from the European Convention, they are referenced in the SC judgment and they apply to all of us - women included. And when some men say that they will force themselves into our spaces regardless of our wishes, when they publicly make violent threats, when they refuse to grant or countenance for women what they demand for themselves, then it is not those objecting to this who should be attacked or criticised.
Once again (and as my header described - so I am enjoying the irony) this forum is obsessed with what men want, with men's feelings and does not give a toss about women, their concerns and needs.
The misogyny on here is palpable and disappointing. But it shows how widespread it is. I've had enough of it.
No Cyclefree. It isn’t misogyny to point out that you don’t speak for all women, because you don’t. Neither is it for you (or for anyone else) to do so.
You trying to frame this as misogyny takes away the agency from other women - I know this because my girlfriend is one of them, so are my friends.
Also it is one thing to have an opinion on women’s spaces in various guises but it is another to disparage trans women by calling them “men in frocks” and other such insults. That is transphobia plain and simple.
I have both Fox jr and Foxjr2 with us for the weekend both with their partners, and both cis-women. Neither are bothered by having Trans-women using shared spaces such as bathrooms. Neither is Mrs Foxy.
Clearly some women feel differently, but in polling Trans rights tends to get more support from women than men.
It's not a male vs female issue, it divides both sexes, and also doesn't cleanly divide by politics or age.
There is plenty of misandry as well as misogyny in this life
All that matters is that men and women do the same thing in different ways and they can both be magnificent in their own way - like Richard Harris’s version of MacArthur Park and Donna Summer’s. Something for everyone who likes or hates men/women.
But ultimately they both agree that someone left the cake out in the rain. Bear that in mind in the gender wars.
Standing up to a bully seems to work very well. Starmer take note.
This doesn’t sounds like caving
“It was malpractice on the side of Harvard’s lawyers not to pick up the phone and call the members of the antisemitism task force who they had been talking to for weeks,” said May Mailman, the White House senior policy strategist. “Instead, Harvard went on a victimhood campaign.” Still, Ms. Mailman said, there is a potential pathway to resume discussions if the university, among other measures, follows through on what Mr. Trump wants and apologizes to its students for fostering a campus where there was antisemitism.
They have just set out a maximalist position to create space for Harvard to agree to what is merely egregious rather than unconscionable
More like that Apple's walled garden model is two product failures away from justified obliteration. The Android open model will overcome the Betamax and it may come sooner than you think.
Android has a much larger market share. It is already dominant.
Also mostly used by people who would buy and iPhone if they could afford one. So there is that.
I apologise for my attempt at a joke earlier in which I suggested that Sir Isaac Newton, who died in 1727, played himself in an episode of a television show aired in 1993. It clearly was not the correct forum.
Yours repentantly,
Doug Seal
Apologies. My jokedar is on the fritz today. The world has become such that it's gotten hard to tell what's real and what's a joke...
Don't worry. Let's be honest, I'm not likely to give up the day job for comedy.
You were responsible one of PB's truly comedic moments when you predicted a Liz Truss comeback somebody decided to lecture you about how The Oxford Union despite themself never being a member of The Oxford Union.
TBF it's his world, we just live in it.
I liked the time I was told that Asian heritage parents have a fanatical obsession with the education of their children.
Until that moment I had no idea.
Our chief weapon is modesty and humbleness…. Our *two* chief weapons are modesty, humbleness and quiet shoes….
More like that Apple's walled garden model is two product failures away from justified obliteration. The Android open model will overcome the Betamax and it may come sooner than you think.
Android has a much larger market share. It is already dominant.
Also mostly used by people who would buy and iPhone if they could afford one. So there is that.
Also used by anyone and there is a lot of us that wouldn't touch and apple device with your cock let alone our fingers
In other sport, for all interested, it is the first night of the WWE’s Wrestlemania tonight. Underwhelming card.
WWE isnt a sport its theatre
No one is claiming WWE is a sport. 😂😂😂😂 WWE is an organisation that promotes professional wrestling. One of many.
I prefer AEW personally.
I was referencing professional wrestling which, in spite of what WWE marks think, is not just the WWE and the theatre side of it is great.
Working class ballet. Love it.
Yup, it’s ace. Been a fan of wrestling since the late eighties, early nineties. One of the reasons I got satellite TV was for the German channels that used to show WCW PPV’s in the early nineties.
I see several things happening in Ukraine right now:
1: Ukraine has pivoted to a drone based defense. Most of the gains you see Russia making right now are coming as a result of one of two things. A: Inferior Ukrainian drone units or B: Overwhelming Numerical Superiority... https://x.com/AndrewPerpetua/status/1913293007488458837
More like that Apple's walled garden model is two product failures away from justified obliteration. The Android open model will overcome the Betamax and it may come sooner than you think.
Android has a much larger market share. It is already dominant.
Also mostly used by people who would buy and iPhone if they could afford one. So there is that.
Also used by anyone and there is a lot of us that wouldn't touch and apple device with your cock let alone our fingers
Your cock is less discriminating than your fingers?
More like that Apple's walled garden model is two product failures away from justified obliteration. The Android open model will overcome the Betamax and it may come sooner than you think.
Android has a much larger market share. It is already dominant.
Also mostly used by people who would buy and iPhone if they could afford one. So there is that.
Also used by anyone and there is a lot of us that wouldn't touch and apple device with your cock let alone our fingers
Can you operate your iPhone with your cock? Great news if so, the amount of times my hands are busy and I could just whack my cock onto the “answer call” button and then hit the speaker phone option. I thought it was just finger skin that worked but you have opened a whole new world to me.
I used to always keep my phone at arms length but now I can leave it further away.
In other sport, for all interested, it is the first night of the WWE’s Wrestlemania tonight. Underwhelming card.
WWE isnt a sport its theatre
No one is claiming WWE is a sport. 😂😂😂😂 WWE is an organisation that promotes professional wrestling. One of many.
I prefer AEW personally.
I was referencing professional wrestling which, in spite of what WWE marks think, is not just the WWE and the theatre side of it is great.
Working class ballet. Love it.
Yup, it’s ace. Been a fan of wrestling since the late eighties, early nineties. One of the reasons I got satellite TV was for the German channels that used to show WCW PPV’s in the early nineties.
Sorry, it's not proper wrestling if it doesn't have Big Daddy and Giant Haystacks in it.
More like that Apple's walled garden model is two product failures away from justified obliteration. The Android open model will overcome the Betamax and it may come sooner than you think.
Android has a much larger market share. It is already dominant.
Also mostly used by people who would buy and iPhone if they could afford one. So there is that.
Also used by anyone and there is a lot of us that wouldn't touch and apple device with your cock let alone our fingers
You seem a bit obsessed with male genitalia today.
More like that Apple's walled garden model is two product failures away from justified obliteration. The Android open model will overcome the Betamax and it may come sooner than you think.
Android has a much larger market share. It is already dominant.
Also mostly used by people who would buy and iPhone if they could afford one. So there is that.
The market share has always been true.
As has been the fact that Apple take most of the *profit* from the phone, tablet and laptop markets.
No idea. But that 40,000 would watch women's football would be unthinkable a few years ago, and that women might play football likewise in decades past.
So what's your point? That the men's game dominates? Has anyone doubted that?
More like that Apple's walled garden model is two product failures away from justified obliteration. The Android open model will overcome the Betamax and it may come sooner than you think.
Android has a much larger market share. It is already dominant.
Also mostly used by people who would buy and iPhone if they could afford one. So there is that.
Also used by anyone and there is a lot of us that wouldn't touch and apple device with your cock let alone our fingers
Can you operate your iPhone with your cock? Great news if so, the amount of times my hands are busy and I could just whack my cock onto the “answer call” button and then hit the speaker phone option. I thought it was just finger skin that worked but you have opened a whole new world to me.
I used to always keep my phone at arms length but now I can leave it further away.
I wonder if face ID can be trained on it? I mean, only one eye but still...
More like that Apple's walled garden model is two product failures away from justified obliteration. The Android open model will overcome the Betamax and it may come sooner than you think.
Why do you say that ?
We are Apple people here and I’m hoping my new iPad Air and my iPhone will last me pretty much the next decade and then after that I am coasting in to my death within the next 10 years.
More like that Apple's walled garden model is two product failures away from justified obliteration. The Android open model will overcome the Betamax and it may come sooner than you think.
Why do you say that ?
We are Apple people here and I’m hoping my new iPad Air and my iPhone will last me pretty much the next decade and then after that I am coasting in to my death within the next 10 years.
In other sport, for all interested, it is the first night of the WWE’s Wrestlemania tonight. Underwhelming card.
WWE isnt a sport its theatre
No one is claiming WWE is a sport. 😂😂😂😂 WWE is an organisation that promotes professional wrestling. One of many.
I prefer AEW personally.
I was referencing professional wrestling which, in spite of what WWE marks think, is not just the WWE and the theatre side of it is great.
Working class ballet. Love it.
Yup, it’s ace. Been a fan of wrestling since the late eighties, early nineties. One of the reasons I got satellite TV was for the German channels that used to show WCW PPV’s in the early nineties.
Sorry, it's not proper wrestling if it doesn't have Big Daddy and Giant Haystacks in it.
I doubt if there is any sport where men's physiology does not give them an advantage.
And if there is such a sport then there is no need to have women's and men's categories at all. Just one competition where all participate. So the question of excluding groups would not arise.
But - forgive the cynicism - what we have instead is second or third rate sportsmen who can't win in the male category declare themselves women and proceed to cheat women out of places, prizes, opportunities and money/sponsorship opportunities.
This was my problem with your otherwise excellent previous thread. I agree that trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete with biological women in most sports but what evidence do you have other than prejudice that people are deliberately declaring themselves a trans women to gain an advantage in professional sport?
Let's see: Lia Thomas, swimmer. As a man, got nowhere in competitions. As a woman won loads, upset female competitors by wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis (according to reports) and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a woman planning to start a family.
It's not prejudice. It's scepticism about the motives of men who appear to want to have their cake and eat it and have been enabled by sporting authorities with little regard for fairness in sport or the interests of female athletes.
I can’t see any reports of Thomas “wandering round the changing rooms naked with an erect penis”. Do you have a source for that?
They all though describe an exposed penis......guy jumps out of the bushes and opens his coat and is naked...he gets arrested as a flasher....why is it different in your view if a trans female flashes her girl dick around?
Intent, obviously.
Also, there’s absolutely no evidence anywhere that Lia did any more than simply get changed in the same room as the rest of the competitors, at competitions where there were no other places to get changed. There is (as far as can be told from the contemporaneous reports of the women involved) no sexual deviance here & the fact that you & Cyclefree apparently cannot get your minds out of that particular gutter when it comes to transwomen says more about the two of you than it does anyone who was actually involved at the time, who (of course) have the absolute right to their own feelings & personal responses to competing with a transwoman.
See my post above and answer it
It’s a really obvious moving of the goalposts & trolley problems are not usually a good way to decide legal questions but sure: the answer to your question is that courts are in fact pretty good at considering questions of intent & intent matters.
A UK court would, I suspect take a very skeptical view of a defendant claiming that they had suddenly decided five minutes before entering a female changing space that they were trans & that therefore this made it ok.
On the flip side, someone who had transitioned in their actual life, was taking hormones etc would likely be treated differently.
Also, it is worth remembering that currently there is absolutely no UK law that stops anyone walking into any changing rooms, regardless of sex or gender presentation: You walking into a female changing room, getting changed & going straight into the pool doesn’t break any laws in and of itself. The pool owner may take a view on this behaviour & if anyone complains then you may risk a prosecution for indecent exposure but the act itself breaks no laws, as far as I know.
I didn't say 5 minutes before walking in though don't put words in my mouth. A man who gets off on flashing to females will declare himself female then be able to do it with impunity in you view....they will probably do it a couple of months before for credibility
What is stopping you from walking to the local pool and doing the same? Those with the inclination to can already.
Thursday - from some on here (you know who you are):
"How dare Cyclefree think that there's a risk from men who identify as a woman? The silly woman has had her head turned by PR."
Saturday: London - "Men who identify as women turn up in a London square for a mass protest in which they indecently expose themselves (a criminal offence) and commit a public order offence by pissing in the street."
Well done, lads. Well done. Keep it up.
Cyclefree, you know as well as I do that plenty of women support the rights of trans women and pretending otherwise doesn’t reflect well on you.
As do I as I have said multiple times. They have exactly the same rights as everyone else and the SC has confirmed that they have not lost any rights at all.
But you agreed upthread with someone who did not know what the boundaries are . Well, I'll tell you what they are: when a woman says no, it means no. No is a complete sentence. If you can't or won't understand that, then frankly you are so far out of bounds that it is hard to know what to say. It reflects appallingly on you.
When a man breaches a woman's boundary, he is a predator. When others say that it is all right for him to breach a woman's boundary, to force himself where he isn't wanted, then they are justifying and enabling predatory behaviour. The placards at the demo in London talk about shooting women and shitting on their heads. There have been other demos with placards advocating the beheading of women. This is not about rights for dysphoric people.
This is about a class of men who simply do not see women as fully human or as deserving rights to dignity, privacy or safety - and I use those words advisedly because they come from the Goodwin case in the ECHR which led to the GRA, they derive from the European Convention, they are referenced in the SC judgment and they apply to all of us - women included. And when some men say that they will force themselves into our spaces regardless of our wishes, when they publicly make violent threats, when they refuse to grant or countenance for women what they demand for themselves, then it is not those objecting to this who should be attacked or criticised.
Once again (and as my header described - so I am enjoying the irony) this forum is obsessed with what men want, with men's feelings and does not give a toss about women, their concerns and needs.
The misogyny on here is palpable and disappointing. But it shows how widespread it is. I've had enough of it.
No Cyclefree. It isn’t misogyny to point out that you don’t speak for all women, because you don’t. Neither is it for you (or for anyone else) to do so.
You trying to frame this as misogyny takes away the agency from other women - I know this because my girlfriend is one of them, so are my friends.
Also it is one thing to have an opinion on women’s spaces in various guises but it is another to disparage trans women by calling them “men in frocks” and other such insults. That is transphobia plain and simple and it is appropriate for men (including myself) to call that out because silence is acceptance.
My wife is also somewhat pissed off, not by ruling itself (it is what it is) but by the permission transphobes now feel to bring out their inner bigotry.
I’ve steered clear of this topic for a long time, seeing it as something for women to work out between them, and for men - generally much more anti trans than women - to butt out of. but the blatant othering and dehumanising language on show, including in a PB header, has really got my goat. It does seem there’s a significant subset of public opinion, boosted no doubt by MAGA algorithms, that sees all trans people as pretending. Fantasists. Perverts.
In other sport, for all interested, it is the first night of the WWE’s Wrestlemania tonight. Underwhelming card.
WWE isnt a sport its theatre
No one is claiming WWE is a sport. 😂😂😂😂 WWE is an organisation that promotes professional wrestling. One of many.
I prefer AEW personally.
I was referencing professional wrestling which, in spite of what WWE marks think, is not just the WWE and the theatre side of it is great.
Working class ballet. Love it.
Yup, it’s ace. Been a fan of wrestling since the late eighties, early nineties. One of the reasons I got satellite TV was for the German channels that used to show WCW PPV’s in the early nineties.
Sorry, it's not proper wrestling if it doesn't have Big Daddy and Giant Haystacks in it.
I used to have the pleasure of spending the odd time with Mick McManus, a 70’s/80’s wrestling god. One of the nicest men in the world and his wife Barbara was possibly my favourite woman in the world. He would come round for lunch with Ian St John, Jimmy Greaves, emlyn Hughes, and various other sporting drunks, for reasons I won’t go into and they would all get pissed and have a giggle, was like having Grandstand live at home as a child.
More like that Apple's walled garden model is two product failures away from justified obliteration. The Android open model will overcome the Betamax and it may come sooner than you think.
Why do you say that ?
We are Apple people here and I’m hoping my new iPad Air and my iPhone will last me pretty much the next decade and then after that I am coasting in to my death within the next 10 years.
Comments
https://bsky.app/profile/goldengateblond.bsky.social/post/3ln4y5izkj22k
Standing up to a bully seems to work very well. Starmer take note.
As far as I can find, there is /no/ report out there of Lia Thomas exposing female athletes to an erect penis ever: It simply didn’t happen. Were their fellow athletes uncomfortable, or unhappy with having to change in the same locker room as Lia & did Lia get changed in front of them? Yes, absolutely & I’m not going to minimise that, but the thing Cyclefree claims here didn’t happen.
If Cyclefree can provide a link to back up her claim then I will of course retract.
But you agreed upthread with someone who did not know what the boundaries are . Well, I'll tell you what they are: when a woman says no, it means no. No is a complete sentence. If you can't or won't understand that, then frankly you are so far out of bounds that it is hard to know what to say. It reflects appallingly on you.
When a man breaches a woman's boundary, he is a predator. When others say that it is all right for him to breach a woman's boundary, to force himself where he isn't wanted, then they are justifying and enabling predatory behaviour. The placards at the demo in London talk about shooting women and shitting on their heads. There have been other demos with placards advocating the beheading of women. This is not about rights for dysphoric people.
This is about a class of men who simply do not see women as fully human or as deserving rights to dignity, privacy or safety - and I use those words advisedly because they come from the Goodwin case in the ECHR which led to the GRA, they derive from the European Convention, they are referenced in the SC judgment and they apply to all of us - women included. And when some men say that they will force themselves into our spaces regardless of our wishes, when they publicly make violent threats, when they refuse to grant or countenance for women what they demand for themselves, then it is not those objecting to this who should be attacked or criticised.
Once again (and as my header described - so I am enjoying the irony) this forum is obsessed with what men want, with men's feelings and does not give a toss about women, their concerns and needs.
The misogyny on here is palpable and disappointing. But it shows how widespread it is. I've had enough of it.
I prefer AEW personally.
I was referencing professional wrestling which, in spite of what WWE marks think, is not just the WWE and the theatre side of it is great.
I think there's a big distinction between saying "sorry transwomen, we realise for the most part you're doing this for your own personal reasons/identity and you just want to be treated with dignity and respect, but we need to calibrate these rules based on a small handful of bad apples amongst you" versus "nah soz you're all just taking the piss".
In the same way ideally I don't want rules being set for all men on the basis of (in relative terms) a handful of bad apples, even if that might somewhere stop some potential number of reprehensible actions.
I think I would be uncomfortable were I a woman in a changing room with Thomas and I saw penis. However, a claim was made of something beyond that. I don’t see a source for the claim made.
You should have said professional wrestling, not the WWE.
WWE is a promoter of professional wrestling. One among many.
Oh, and it is not all scripted. Results may be pre determined but matches are not always scripted but called in the ring and WWE has also promoted proper contests like BFA.
Fun fact, Hawking was the only person in the history of Star Trek: The Next Generation to play himself.
But seriously your views are very much appreciated, I appreciate those who disagree with you, largely disagree with them which isn’t a problem, and we must keep all views here. I agree with you 99% of the time on this subject, a subject I try and stay out of posting on but I do think it serves the world more having debates and arguments here.
We all have our areas of life we feel particularly strongly about here, mine is you idiots scaring off wealthy taxpayers, for others it’s trains or trans, for some it’s worrying about whether the rouble they are being paid in will cover their internet bill.
Keep going. See you in Cell Block H anyway if it all goes wrong.
That was one hell of a poker game.
In the Trumpwazzockracy can't we charge American's an additional tax? To recoup the world's losses?
I identify as male and have somewhat of a beard
I walk into a womans changing room and get naked....should I be arrested
I decide I am actually a female in a male body, the beard remains
I walk into a womans changing room and get naked.....should I be arrested?
The acts are the same, the only difference is I decided I was female before entering
Also, there’s absolutely no evidence anywhere that Lia did any more than simply get changed in the same room as the rest of the competitors, at competitions where there were no other places to get changed. There is (as far as can be told from the contemporaneous reports of the women involved) no sexual deviance here & the fact that you & Cyclefree apparently cannot get your minds out of that particular gutter when it comes to transwomen says more about the two of you than it does anyone who was actually involved at the time, who (of course) have the absolute right to their own feelings & personal responses to competing with a transwoman.
I apologise for my attempt at a joke earlier in which I suggested that Sir Isaac Newton, who died in 1727, played himself in an episode of a television show aired in 1993. It clearly was not the correct forum.
Yours repentantly,
Doug Seal
Why even Donald Trump bows to the power of the iPhone
The US president’s exemption of smartphones from his tariff crusade is a sign that Apple’s monument to globalisation is an unlikely force for peace
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/technology-uk/article/why-even-donald-trump-bows-to-the-power-of-the-iphone-rxlfdwp87
1) The apple that Adam and Eve ate
2) The apple that Sir Isaac Newton saw fall to the ground
3) The company Steve Jobs founded
Has anyone ever wondered what Adam was trying to do that led to God deciding to remove one of Adam's ribs and create a woman?
A UK court would, I suspect take a very skeptical view of a defendant claiming that they had suddenly decided five minutes before entering a female changing space that they were trans & that therefore this made it ok.
On the flip side, someone who had transitioned in their actual life, was taking hormones etc would likely be treated differently.
Also, it is worth remembering that currently there is absolutely no UK law that stops anyone walking into any changing rooms, regardless of sex or gender presentation: You walking into a female changing room, getting changed & going straight into the pool doesn’t break any laws in and of itself. The pool owner may take a view on this behaviour & if anyone complains then you may risk a prosecution for indecent exposure but the act itself breaks no laws, as far as I know.
Sorry!, couldn’t resist.
Love it.
you predicted a Liz Truss comebacksomebody decided to lecture you about how The Oxford Union despite themself never being a member of The Oxford Union.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well-Manicured_Man
Until that moment I had no idea.
I've greatly appreciated your contributions over the years, and would hope that whenever I've disagreed with you I've done so respectfully.
But you must make your own choices.
I think that women are perfectly capable of telling the difference between someone who is getting off on exposing themselves & someone who is just getting on with whatever they need to do without bothering anyone else. In the former case their complaints should be acted upon, regardless of the state of the law on trans issues.
Whether the latter case is permissible is a question on which people can disagree & on which society will make a collective, democratic agreement (which itself may change over time).
The Android open model will overcome the Betamax and it may come sooner than you think.
If the exposure is with intent to frighten or distress it is illegal, whether in park or changing room.
https://www.met.police.uk/ro/report/rsa/alpha-v1/advice/rape-sexual-assault-and-other-sexual-offences/indecent-exposure-flashing-offending-public-decency/#:~:text=Indecent exposure (legally called just,in public or in private.
You trying to frame this as misogyny takes away the agency from other women - I know this because my girlfriend is one of them, so are my friends.
Also it is one thing to have an opinion on women’s spaces in various guises but it is another to disparage trans women by calling them “men in frocks” and other such insults. That is transphobia plain and simple and it is appropriate for men (including myself) to call that out because silence is acceptance.
Clearly some women feel differently, but in polling Trans rights tends to get more support from women than men.
It's not a male vs female issue, it divides both sexes, and also doesn't cleanly divide by politics or age.
But ultimately they both agree that someone left the cake out in the rain. Bear that in mind in the gender wars.
“It was malpractice on the side of Harvard’s lawyers not to pick up the phone and call the members of the antisemitism task force who they had been talking to for weeks,” said May Mailman, the White House senior policy strategist. “Instead, Harvard went on a victimhood campaign.”
Still, Ms. Mailman said, there is a potential pathway to resume discussions if the university, among other measures, follows through on what Mr. Trump wants and apologizes to its students for fostering a campus where there was antisemitism.
They have just set out a maximalist position to create space for Harvard to agree to what is merely egregious rather than unconscionable
Also mostly used by people who would buy and iPhone if they could afford one. So there is that.
1: Ukraine has pivoted to a drone based defense. Most of the gains you see Russia making right now are coming as a result of one of two things. A: Inferior Ukrainian drone units or B: Overwhelming Numerical Superiority...
https://x.com/AndrewPerpetua/status/1913293007488458837
Fascinating thread.
I used to always keep my phone at arms length but now I can leave it further away.
As has been the fact that Apple take most of the *profit* from the phone, tablet and laptop
markets.
So what's your point? That the men's game dominates? Has anyone doubted that?
We are Apple people here and I’m hoping my new iPad Air and my iPhone will last me pretty much the next decade and then after that I am coasting in to my death within the next 10 years.
Do I need to plan for something else ?
Android fanboys are so sad.
I’ve steered clear of this topic for a long time, seeing it as something for women to work out between them, and for men - generally much more anti trans than women - to butt out of. but the blatant othering and dehumanising language on show, including in a PB header, has really got my goat. It does seem there’s a significant subset of public opinion, boosted no doubt by MAGA algorithms, that sees all trans people as pretending. Fantasists. Perverts.
We also hide it incredibly well.
Indeed, we hide it even from ourselves.