Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Transgender stuff - what's going on?


Gym Beglin
 Share

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

I don't use Twitter,I just read this thread occasionally. And thank god I am not on the dating scene anymore. The old adage of 'any port in a storm' is now a minefield.

All I see on Twitter is artwork, stuff about historic motorsport and engineering stuff.

 

It's almost as if there is a world beyond taking the most extreme view on there and painting it as "the <insert group you disagree with> all believe this" and lots of "Jordan Petersen destroys this lefty" "Jon Stewart destroys this right wing idiot" bullshit while completely ignoring any nuance to any discussion. 

 

On a side note, I presume Rico uses incognito browsing at home, but if he didn't you just know his internet history is littered with Trans porn as he wrestles with his inner demons. I know mine is. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chairman Meow said:

All I see on Twitter is artwork, stuff about historic motorsport and engineering stuff.

 

It's almost as if there is a world beyond taking the most extreme view on there and painting it as "the <insert group you disagree with> all believe this" and lots of "Jordan Petersen destroys this lefty" "Jon Stewart destroys this right wing idiot" bullshit while completely ignoring any nuance to any discussion. 

 

On a side note, I presume Rico uses incognito browsing at home, but if he didn't you just know his internet history is littered with Trans porn as he wrestles with his inner demons. I know mine is. 

Wrestling trans midgets.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Of course it doesn’t mean "letting men be women".  Trans women are NOT men. They're women.

 

You keep banging on about people's right to disagree about something fundamental to other people's identity.  It's a dangerous, dehumanising line of argument.  Try saying "Some people think Jews should be allowed to own property, but I disagree" and see how reasonable that sounds.

 

Like I say, it's about letting people be themselves. 

 

 

But is it that simple? The problems seem to arise when letting people be themselves places some requirements on others, like in sport or changing rooms, safe houses etc. Or not saying you would not date somebody who isn't biologically a man or a woman, as if who you date is a human rights issue.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SasaS said:

 

But is it that simple? The problems seem to arise when letting people be themselves places some requirements on others, like in sport or changing rooms, safe houses etc. Or not saying you would not date somebody who isn't biologically a man or a woman, as if who you date is a human rights issue.  

It pretty much is that simple. 

 

In sport, changing rooms, safe houses, etc,  you'd have to find very strong reasons to exclude trans-women. (Personally, I wouldn't get hung up on someone expressing a preference about who they'd date: racists do it all the time and it's not the worst thing they do.) The overriding concern has to be the welfare of trans people who face terrible mental health problems and bigotry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

That's just bullshit.  Really, really stupid bullshit.

 

What podcast did you get that from?

Tony’s ma’s. 
 

but that’s what you’re saying.  Men who feel they are women are women.  In every measurable way they are men.  It’s fucking bonkers.  Luckily it looks like the government won’t be changing anything.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

It pretty much is that simple. 

 

In sport, changing rooms, safe houses, etc,  you'd have to find very strong reasons to exclude trans-women. (Personally, I wouldn't get hung up on someone expressing a preference about who they'd date: racists do it all the time and it's not the worst thing they do.) The overriding concern has to be the welfare of trans people who face terrible mental health problems and bigotry.


That is somewhat different from letting people be themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

It pretty much is that simple. 

 

In sport, changing rooms, safe houses, etc,  you'd have to find very strong reasons to exclude trans-women. (Personally, I wouldn't get hung up on someone expressing a preference about who they'd date: racists do it all the time and it's not the worst thing they do.) The overriding concern has to be the welfare of trans people who face terrible mental health problems and bigotry.

A legitimate concern of course, but should it be placed above concerns for the welfare/mental health of biological women in safe houses, rape crisis centres etc? 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've tried to understand this but must admit i'm struggling. If tomorrow I decide I am a woman and want to be referred to as such, I am therefore a woman and can use their bogs and changing rooms? If thats right and some bloke wont have sex with me due to my deep voice, stubbly chin and dick, he is therefore a bigot?

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

 

but that’s what you’re saying.  Men who feel they are women are women.  In every measurable way they are men.

No. That's what you are saying.

 

You are sticking to the rigid, traditional notion of two boxes - one marked "Men" and one marked "Women" - as though that were a correct and comprehensive way to define all humans. Any deviation from those two boxes must just be an aberration based on "feelings".  These men just need to pull themselves together, wear some trousers and forget all about this nonsense!

 

That view isn’t supported by science. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, A Red said:

I've tried to understand this but must admit i'm struggling. If tomorrow I decide I am a woman and want to be referred to as such, I am therefore a woman and can use their bogs and changing rooms? If thats right and some bloke wont have sex with me due to my deep voice, stubbly chin and dick, he is therefore a bigot?

Yes, sweetheart. They are. Now come 'ere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Moo said:

A legitimate concern of course, but should it be placed above concerns for the welfare/mental health of biological women in safe houses, rape crisis centres etc? 

Are women in safe houses or rape crisis centres more at risk from trans women than from (what Rico would call) "real" women?

I doubt it. 

 

Rates of suicide, self-harm, depression, etc. amongst trans people are much higher than average.

 

It's not about prioritising one individual's welfare over another's.  It's about having a legal and social environment that minimises the risk of harm for all.  Allowing trans people to be themselves is the best way to do that.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

No. That's what you are saying.

 

You are sticking to the rigid, traditional notion of two boxes - one marked "Men" and one marked "Women" - as though that were a correct and comprehensive way to define all humans. Any deviation from those two boxes must just be an aberration based on "feelings".  These men just need to pull themselves together, wear some trousers and forget all about this nonsense!

 

That view isn’t supported by science. 

 

If I am not mistaken, trans women don't have a problem with "rigid" notion of two boxes, they just want to swap one for the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Are women in safe houses or rape crisis centres more at risk from trans women than from (what Rico would call) "real" women?

I doubt it. 

 

 

 

Not necessarily more at risk (though I've no idea about the research if it exists) but it's not just about that.  These are safe spaces, safe havens, traditionally for biological women amongst other biological women. I don't know if these vulnerable women should be forced overnight to accept what they might perceive as a risk and be expected to brush off their fears, otherwise it ceases to be a safe haven and you are putting the needs of another "group" above theirs. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

No. That's what you are saying.

 

You are sticking to the rigid, traditional notion of two boxes - one marked "Men" and one marked "Women" - as though that were a correct and comprehensive way to define all humans. Any deviation from those two boxes must just be an aberration based on "feelings".  These men just need to pull themselves together, wear some trousers and forget all about this nonsense!

 

That view isn’t supported by science. 

Oh man. So show me your science that sex in humans isn’t dimorphic. This could win you a noble prize.  I’m particularly looking forward to the human who’s enough man and woman to make themselves pregnant.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, A Red said:

I've tried to understand this but must admit i'm struggling. If tomorrow I decide I am a woman and want to be referred to as such, I am therefore a woman and can use their bogs and changing rooms? If thats right and some bloke wont have sex with me due to my deep voice, stubbly chin and dick, he is therefore a bigot?


I demand that you tell us if you’d suck a female dick or not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Captain Turdseye said:


I demand that you tell us if you’d suck a female dick or not. 

Well there’s the fella who’s a man some of the week and a woman the rest.  Think he won a woman in business award  - now on the day the award was made and he was a man does that count? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rico1304 said:

Well there’s the fella who’s a man some of the week and a woman the rest.  Think he won a woman in business award  - now on the day the award was made and he was a man does that count? 


You’re misgendering her straight off the bat which portrays a total lack of respect and human decency. Do the right thing and admit that you’re happy to suck her off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Captain Turdseye said:


You’re misgendering her straight off the bat which portrays a total lack of respect and human decency. Do the right thing and admit that you’re happy to suck her off. 

I’d suck him  and her off.  In fact, at midnight I could do both.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...