Transgender stuff - what's going on?

[AngryOfTuebrook]

11 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

So they aren’t women?

That doesn't follow.

 

I wouldn't fuck an octogenarian woman either.

[Strontium]

Can't speak for anyone else, but I would definitely give Joan Collins (89) and Jane Fonda (84) the best 38 seconds of my life.

[Rico1304]

17 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

That doesn't follow.

 

I wouldn't fuck an octogenarian woman either.

What if they identified as 25? 
 

Of course it does.  These aren’t old women. These are young, attractive women who you are only excluding because of their genitals .  You saying you wouldn’t fuck any 83 yr olds isn’t the same as you wouldn’t fuck a fit 25 yr old if she had a dick. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Just now, Rico1304 said:

Of course it does.  These aren’t old women. These are young, attractive women who you are only excluding because of their genitals .  You saying you wouldn’t fuck any 83 yr olds isn’t the same as you wouldn’t fuck a fit 25 yr old if she had a dick. 

I'm saying that acknowledging someone as a woman doesn't mean you want to fuck her.

[Captain Howdy]

20 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

I'm saying that acknowledging someone as a woman doesn't mean you want to fuck her.

If she was 35, fit and had a dick would you? I’m not piling on I’m just curious as to how far you take this. 

[Strontium]

I think there is a definite difference between excluding people as sexual partners based on an acquired or mutable characteristic, like age, and excluding people based on an inherent characteristic, like their genitalia.

[Rico1304]

13 minutes ago, Strontium said:

I think there is a definite difference between excluding people as sexual partners based on an acquired or mutable characteristic, like age, and excluding people based on an inherent characteristic, like their genitalia.

 

41 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

I'm saying that acknowledging someone as a woman doesn't mean you want to fuck her.

But you would have considered the 80 yr old when she was younger, but never considered the TW because you’re a bigot.  

[Strontium]

More to the point, I wonder if Angry's missus knows that she's out on her ear as soon as she hits 80.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

22 minutes ago, Captain Howdy said:

If she was 35, fit and had a dick would you? I’m not piling on I’m just curious as to how far you take this. 

The dick is a deal breaker for me.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

3 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

 

But you would have considered the 80 yr old when she was younger, but never considered the TW because you’re a bigot.  

Like I say, only a prick would call someone a bigot because they're not sexually attracted to cock.

[Numero Veinticinco]

Always comes down to the todger, doesn't it. 

[A Red]

I think we should be polite and respectful if a male identifies as a female. I also think that males that want to identify as females need to be polite and respectful too and not try to use any facility or activity that makes females uncomfortable, at risk or at an unfair disadvantage.

 

Do you agree with this @AngryOfTuebrook ?

 

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

30 minutes ago, A Red said:

I think we should be polite and respectful if a male identifies as a female. I also think that males that want to identify as females need to be polite and respectful too and not try to use any facility or activity that makes females uncomfortable, at risk or at an unfair disadvantage.

 

Do you agree with this @AngryOfTuebrook ?

 

 

Trans women aren't "males who want to identify as females". In general terms, there are no good reasons for denying trans women access to facilities, services or life opportunities that cis women have: that's a basic principle of human rights. 

 

In specific terms, how you ensure trans women don't have their human rights restricted is often a bit more complex. Fortunately, those sort of decisions are generally made by people who are far better informed than a bunch of middle aged farts bickering on a football forum.

[Paulie Dangerously]

This child had clearly been coached to death. 

 

Poor kid is like a vegan cat. It's clear who is making the decisions. 

 

 

[A Red]

5 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Trans women aren't "males who want to identify as females". In general terms, there are no good reasons for denying trans women access to facilities, services or life opportunities that cis women have: that's a basic principle of human rights. 

 

In specific terms, how you ensure trans women don't have their human rights restricted is often a bit more complex. Fortunately, those sort of decisions are generally made by people who are far better informed than a bunch of middle aged farts bickering on a football forum.

You've gone over the cliff and cant go back. You know full well that a man identifying as a woman shouldn't be able to use womens toilets, changing rooms and you also know that if a male commits a crime and identifies as a female they should go to a male prison.

 

You don't need an expert to tell you that men are stronger than women generally and in no way should they be allowed to compete against woman, where male attributes matter, because it would be too dangerous or totally unfair/uncompetitive.

 

I can say "you know" because you've displayed many times that you're not stupid, anyone not stupid would know all this, let alone someone as intelligent as you. 

 

Human rights eh? What about the rights of women to be safe? 

 

You cannot give ground on any of the above because to do so blows your argument out of the water

[easytoslip]

Just last night a lad came in the pub, he used to have digs there, he was wearing a nice frock and make up but didn't have his wig on, bald as a coot so I'm not sure what he identifies as,. an ugly broad perhaps? He's ok and he's a steel fixer, we was talking about various sites etc. 

He's got some guts walking around like that I'll give him that, but still a weirdo. 

[Rico1304]

16 minutes ago, A Red said:

You've gone over the cliff and cant go back. You know full well that a man identifying as a woman shouldn't be able to use womens toilets, changing rooms and you also know that if a male commits a crime and identifies as a female they should go to a male prison.

 

You don't need an expert to tell you that men are stronger than women generally and in no way should they be allowed to compete against woman, where male attributes matter, because it would be too dangerous or totally unfair/uncompetitive.

 

I can say "you know" because you've displayed many times that you're not stupid, anyone not stupid would know all this, let alone someone as intelligent as you. 

 

Human rights eh? What about the rights of women to be safe? 

 

You cannot give ground on any of the above because to do so blows your argument out of the water

If you don’t believe TWAW it all crumbles.  So believe it, you have to lie to yourself and expect everyone else to lie to themselves too. 

The law is clear on protected characteristics, sex and those with a GRC (and even then the rights conveyed are limited).  
 

Women have the right to have single sex spaces, that’s so clear and unequivocal that the only way TRAs can get round it is to change the definition of ‘women’.  Thankfully it seems the courts and organisations like RFU IOC etc are realising that is nonsense.  

[CapeRed]

5 hours ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Did you decide to skip the first sentence?

And the point is that you think a kid should be punished if he sees someone is clearly a boy and refuses to call him her? Fucking crazy.

[CapeRed]

6 hours ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

What a fucking stupid argument. Nobody claims that a skeleton provides a definitive indication of biological sex. 

As the panto dames all say…..Oh yes it does

[Captain Willard]

6 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

All those episodes of Silent Witness are going to have to be rewritten. 

And The Crying Game. That infamous plot twist doesn’t make any sense now. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

3 hours ago, CapeRed said:

And the point is that you think a kid should be punished if he sees someone is clearly a boy and refuses to call him her? Fucking crazy.

The point is that bullying is bad.

 

I know. Fucking crazy!

[AngryOfTuebrook]

3 hours ago, CapeRed said:

As the panto dames all say…..Oh yes it does

As the scientists say - Oh no it doesn't.

[Rico1304]

1 hour ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

The point is that bullying is bad.

 

I know. Fucking crazy!

Bullying is bad. So is telling lies. 

[Geoff Woade]

5 hours ago, Paulie Dangerously said:

This child had clearly been coached to death. 

 

Poor kid is like a vegan cat. It's clear who is making the decisions. 

 

 

Poor kid. Doesn’t stand a chance with that as a parent. Needs to be removed from that situation as soon as possible. Clearly been pushed into it to fit the parent's agenda. It’s child abuse.
Just as an aside, a friend of mine is a teacher at a high school and says the number of kids claiming they’re trans is on the rise. Says it’s definitely the new fad, always the ones who are attention seekers or have parents who are ‘exactly how you’d expect’.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

7 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Bullying is bad. So is telling lies. 

You really have crossed over into bigot territory.