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

13 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Hanging about it websites with cunts like you. 
 

I mean you could defend the position or agree that it’s bollocks. Which is it?  Is a lesbian saying she doesn’t like dick the same  as a woman saying she doesn’t like black women?  You will not answer, it’s as plain as the massive nose on my face you won’t answer. 

 

Attraction is unique and subjective, for it to be used in an argument like that is absurd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

I've woke up next to a few ladies that can certainly be described in that way. 

 

I was on the overground a while back and a person got on the train, to this day I have no idea if they were male, female or something of their own choosing but they were the most attractive creature I've seen since my wedding day, and you could tell most of the carriage agreed as they couldn't take their eyes of 'them'.

 

Now, if it was a woman I would have been right, if it was man I would have been wrong, if it was a trans woman I would have been Schrodinger's hard on.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bruce Spanner said:

 

I was on the overground a while back and a person got on the trian, to this day I have no idea if they were male, female or something of their own choosing but they were the most attractive creature I've seen since my wedding day.

 

Now, if it was a woman I would have been right, if it was man I would have been wrong, if it was a trans woman I would have been Schrodinger's hard on.

It was Robbie Savage mate 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

 

Attraction is unique and subjective, for it to be used in an argument like that is absurd.

It is.  If someone who is a lesbian saying  they didn’t like dick are they transphobic?  
 

This isn’t a difficult question. 
 

Your wobble on a train has nothing to do with the fucking question.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rico1304 said:

It is.  If someone who is a lesbian saying  they didn’t like dick are they transphobic?  
 

This isn’t a difficult question. 
 

Your wobble on a train has nothing to do with the fucking question.  

 

Oh, Rico.

 

I was agreeing with you, sillybilly.

 

It's a stupid argument and does nobody any favours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

 

Oh, Rico.

 

I was agreeing with you, sillybilly.

 

It's a stupid argument and does nobody any favours.

Sex based attraction is a silly argument ladies and gentlemen.  That’s the kicker.  
 

Fucking absolute nonsense and you know it.
 

Now, regular readers will remember the assertion that ‘no one is trying to erase sex’.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rico1304 said:

Sex based attraction is a silly argument ladies and gentlemen.  That’s the kicker.  
 

Fucking absolute nonsense and you know it.
 

Now, regular readers will remember the assertion that ‘no one is trying to erase sex’.  

 

God, this is tedious.

 

I was agreeing with you, attraction is attraction and anybody trying to shoehorn in is distorting the arguments and that is part of the wider problem.

 

Fucking hell, Rico, take a break.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

 

God, this is tedious.

 

I was agreeing with you, attraction is attraction and anybody trying to shoehorn in is distorting the arguments and that is part of the wider problem.

 

Fucking hell, Rico, take a break.

So, to be clear, in a single word. Is the comparison between a lesbian refusing dick and racism completely ridiculous?  It’s shouldn’t be a difficult question. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Rico1304 said:

So, to be clear, in a single word. Is the comparison between a lesbian refusing dick and racism completely ridiculous?  It’s shouldn’t be a difficult question. 


In a word ‘yes’ it’s a stupid argument and being used to pollute discourse.

 

But that’s not the argument of substance, attraction is, which is completely on the individual and has forever been thus.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bruce Spanner said:


In a word ‘yes’ it’s a stupid argument and being used to pollute discourse.

 

But that’s not the argument of substance, attraction is, which is completely on the individual and has forever been thus.

Still bollocks. It’s just incredible. But par for the course. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have started listening to the Nolan Investigates podcast on Stonewall.

 

The first two episodes were a tad basic but it is aimed at a mass audience who may know nothing of the trans debate.

 

Episode 4 confirmed much of my fears. As I recall it is Owen Hurcum who is non-binary explaining all micro categories and demanding that all be legally recognised on the basis of self ID. This is an individual who kept confusing issues of sex and gender. He clearly seemed to believe that gender had some objective reality in the same way that sex does and should be recognised as such. Nope all those dozens of gender identities are the way those individuals see themselves and as a way to make them feel special. We cannot eradicate sex as an important defining characteristic on the basis of such nonsense

 

Episode 4 also confirmed many of my fears. David Bell who was a consultant at Tavistock. He was critical of their practice. He felt that ideology and pressure groups like Stonewall got in the way of science and medicine. That clinical staff did not examine and assess children sufficiently for fear of being labelled transphobes and that there was a rush to a medical approach. Also there is a lack of follow up and collection of evidence and data on outcomes which is utterly shocking. The general approach of Bell is that we should avoid confirmation bias (or foreclosure as he called it) and be critical about any child who claims to be trans and to keep questioning and looking for answers (and allowing the child to mature, reflect and develop) before coming to a medical conclusion which will change the rest of their lives. In addition he stated that sex is a biological reality. He also stated that we should be more gender fluid. We should not have rigid and regressive categories which indicate male and female gendered behaviour. Thus is a boy plays games or has interest which we traditionally associate with girls then do not immediate assume there is a disconnect between sex and gender and that the child is trans.  All sounds rather sensible. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 01/09/2021 at 10:29, Rico1304 said:

Marion Millar was first charged under malicious communications but yesterday the actual law she is meant to have broken was changed to Criminal Justice and Licensing s38(1) and an incident that occurred after and because of the original police contact is included

https://twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1453645453107638273?s=21

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
1 hour ago, TD_LFC said:

I enjoyed the two week break we had where the BBC platforming an Anti-Trans Lesbian accused of multiple sexual assaults who wanted trans people murdered made it inconvenient to post.

 

 

She’s an absolute nutcase and was rightly removed from the piece.  Removing her from the piece made absolutely no difference to it.  
 

Although the rape and death threats continue for everyone else on the other side of the debate.  No comment on that?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rico1304 said:

The IOC’s new rules have been unveiled. No requirement to reduce testosterone in order to compete as a woman and up to individual sports to decide on their rules. Bye bye womens elite sport.  

 

On the plus side, I always wanted the chance to compete at an Olympics.

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...