Transgender stuff - what's going on?

[Captain Howdy]

50 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

You don’t think this one judge has decided to be sympathetic? 

I think he isn’t doing his job properly 

[Rico1304]

10 minutes ago, Captain Howdy said:

I think he isn’t doing his job properly 

I agree. But he doesn’t set the rules. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

19 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

I mean why wouldn’t you at least try this mitigation? You’ve literally nothing to lose.  
 

 

Has anyone actually read the local paper's report of this case? The sentencing report concludes that the person isn't a danger to the community and that they're getting treatment; it doesn't recommend a custodial sentence. The judge commented that, in this instance, the damage caused by imprisonment would be greater than the impact it might have on some other people. Taking these two things together, the judge concluded that a custodial sentence wasn't appropriate. 

 

Suspended sentences are not uncommon. All you can do is hope that people who have seen all the evidence and understand the law are better-placed to decide on the sentence than an ill-informed obsessed weirdo like Rico.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

The "you can get out of jail if you put a frock on" line that Rico's trying to push is as accurate and honest as Theresa May's cat story.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15171980.amp

[AngryOfTuebrook]

15 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

I agree. But he doesn’t set the rules. 

She has a range of sentencing options, including prison. She made a decision based on evidence, rather than taking the word of some anti-trans Twitter account.

[Rico1304]

2 hours ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

The "you can get out of jail if you put a frock on" line that Rico's trying to push is as accurate and honest as Theresa May's cat story.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15171980.amp

That’s not what I said, I said why wouldn’t you try it? It’s been taken into account here, with who knows what weighing.  
 

If you were picked up for noncing why WOULDNT you try it? It made part of the sentencing here, it could be the thing that keeps you out of prison. It’s not hard to read you know.  

[Rico1304]

We must remember that the one thing we mustn’t do is upset her feelings.  I mean it was only a few thousand Cat A photos.  I’ll let you Google what Cat A means.  Don’t eat beforehand though. 

Theres one of two things happening, TW are over represented in sex offending or sex offenders are claiming TW status.  

[Bjornebye]

To be fair if the dirty fucker has avoided jail because of that reason then it’s absolutely ridiculous. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

21 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

That’s not what I said, I said why wouldn’t you try it? It’s been taken into account here, with who knows what weighing.  
 

If you were picked up for noncing why WOULDNT you try it? It made part of the sentencing here, it could be the thing that keeps you out of prison. It’s not hard to read you know.  

You wouldn't try it because any false attempt would be absolutely transparent and there's no evidence (at least none that you've provided) of it being the thing that keeps anyone out of prison.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

17 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

To be fair if the dirty fucker has avoided jail because of that reason then it’s absolutely ridiculous. 

They haven't.

 

Rico's imaginary world is indeed an absolutely ridiculous place.

[Rico1304]

Well apart from it being mentioned in the judgement.  Is there anything else mentioned  that was irrelevant, like his favourite colour, animal or number?  

[johnsusername]

Maybe cut his bollocks off - that way he's punished AND he can identify as a woman. 

 

Win win. 

[Bjornebye]

11 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Well apart from it being mentioned in the judgement.  Is there anything else mentioned  that was irrelevant, like his favourite colour, animal or number?  

 

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

32 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Well apart from it being mentioned in the judgement.  Is there anything else mentioned  that was irrelevant, like his favourite colour, animal or number?  

It's hilarious/bizarre the way you lose all faculties for reasoning on this thread; you turn into the thing you accuse others (Gnasher on the EU, TK on Alt 'Rona) of being.

 

The sentencing report concluded that a custodial sentence wasn't appropriate, for reasons unrelated to the person's gender identity. Yes, the judge mentioned it, but you're in Theresa-May's-cat territory if you try to convince yourself or anyone else that gender identity was the deciding factor. It takes minutes to get to these facts.

[Rico1304]

24 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

It's hilarious/bizarre the way you lose all faculties for reasoning on this thread; you turn into the thing you accuse others (Gnasher on the EU, TK on Alt 'Rona) of being.

 

The sentencing report concluded that a custodial sentence wasn't appropriate, for reasons unrelated to the person's gender identity. Yes, the judge mentioned it, but you're in Theresa-May's-cat territory if you try to convince yourself or anyone else that gender identity was the deciding factor. It takes minutes to get to these facts.

 Now my friend, it’s a bit rich to say I lose all reason when a simple scroll will reveal your errant nonsense in this thread.  
 

The simple way to refute it all would be to answer these simple questions;

 

1) What is a woman?

2) Can humans change sex? 
3) If they can change sex what is the process?

4) Where someone who claims to be a man part of the week, and a woman the rest of the week what are the changes that take place during the change?

5) Do you believe in self iD?  Do you foresee any issues with it

6) How do you tell the difference between someone who believes they are a woman and someone claiming to be a woman for their own advantage. 
7) Do you believe the current legislation carving out exemptions to those with a GRC is fair? For example, not allowing them all the right of a woman.  
 

Easy. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

34 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

5) Do you believe in self iD?  Do you foresee any issues with it

Objection, compound. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

31 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

 Now my friend, it’s a bit rich to say I lose all reason when a simple scroll will reveal your errant nonsense in this thread.  
 

The simple way to refute it all would be to answer these simple questions;

 

1) What is a woman?

2) Can humans change sex? 
3) If they can change sex what is the process?

4) Where someone who claims to be a man part of the week, and a woman the rest of the week what are the changes that take place during the change?

5) Do you believe in self iD?  Do you foresee any issues with it

6) How do you tell the difference between someone who believes they are a woman and someone claiming to be a woman for their own advantage. 
7) Do you believe the current legislation carving out exemptions to those with a GRC is fair? For example, not allowing them all the right of a woman.  
 

Easy. 

Nope.

 

You're a fundamentalist about Q.1, so it's not worth trying to engage with you on anything to do with the subject of trans rights. I've long since learned that; it's why I don't come into this thread very often. But the last couple of times I've been here, it's clear that you're becoming increasingly unhinged - even to the point of throwing snide allegations of child sexual abuse at some celebrity drag queen and pretending that paedos are putting frocks on to avoid prison.

[Rico1304]

24 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Nope.

 

You're a fundamentalist about Q.1, so it's not worth trying to engage with you on anything to do with the subject of trans rights. I've long since learned that; it's why I don't come into this thread very often. But the last couple of times I've been here, it's clear that you're becoming increasingly unhinged - even to the point of throwing snide allegations of child sexual abuse at some celebrity drag queen and pretending that paedos are putting frocks on to avoid prison.

There you have it kids, a fundamentalist about the definition of a woman. It’s fucking mental.  

 

AoT and his ladydicks. 
 

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

7 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

There you have it kids, a fundamentalist about the definition of a woman. It’s fucking mental.  

 

AoT and his ladydicks. 
 

 

You are a "dick = man/fanny = woman" fundamentalist. Science says it's more complicated than that, but - like any fundamentalist - you choose to ignore scientific evidence.

 

I think I'll give this thread a miss for a while. If I check back in in a few weeks, I expect you will have moved on to blaming trans women for global warming or the Holocaust or the shrinking of Wagon Wheels or something. 

[Skidfingers McGonical]

16 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

You are a "dick = man/fanny = woman" fundamentalist. Science says it's more complicated than that, but - like any fundamentalist - you choose to ignore scientific evidence.

 

I think I'll give this thread a miss for a while. If I check back in in a few weeks, I expect you will have moved on to blaming trans women for global warming or the Holocaust or the shrinking of Wagon Wheels or something. 

Evidence like this? (simple one, taken from Wikipedia)

 

[Rico1304]

1 hour ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

You are a "dick = man/fanny = woman" fundamentalist. Science says it's more complicated than that, but - like any fundamentalist - you choose to ignore scientific evidence.

 

I think I'll give this thread a miss for a while. If I check back in in a few weeks, I expect you will have moved on to blaming trans women for global warming or the Holocaust or the shrinking of Wagon Wheels or something. 

Science hasn’t moved on. There are 2 sexes. It’s a fundamental and to frame me as taking other than the scientific position is fucking mental. You can talk woo woo and quote an op ed from Scientific American but it’s a fucking basic. Robert Winston - what does he know?  You’ve been captured old bean. 

[Rico1304]

1 hour ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

You are a "dick = man/fanny = woman" fundamentalist. Science says it's more complicated than that, but - like any fundamentalist - you choose to ignore scientific evidence.

 

I think I'll give this thread a miss for a while. If I check back in in a few weeks, I expect you will have moved on to blaming trans women for global warming or the Holocaust or the shrinking of Wagon Wheels or something. 

DARVO. 

[Rico1304]

Here’s one judges comments from 12th April. 
 

District Judge Joanna Dickens said: "This is a really
serious offence. It is thought, quite rightly, that you
present a danger to children. The danger is, you
will ruin people's lives.
"It's [the SHPO] not been made to punish you,
really it's been made to protect other people.
"If you add devices to your router and don't declare
them, people are going to think you're going to use
them to groom children.
"Clearly, things have happened to you, which are
very sad and you've had difficulties.
"I'm not going to send you to prison today, and the
reason for that is because you have very very
complicated issues. You're currently undergoing
gender reassignment... I would be very concerned
about your safety.
"You are very very very vulnerable. That's the only
reason I am not sending you to prison. If you were
not vunrable, I would probably send you to prison.
"Other people are made vulnerable by you. You
have got to stop this offencing. You need to know if
you commit and more offences, you will go to
prison.
"If I am in this court again, and you commit further
offences, I won't want to, but I will send you to
prison."

 

Get out of jail free. 

[Rico1304]

In a hilarious turn of events Owen Jones is now the target of TRAs. When things get so mental he has to say ‘hang on a minute’ and then gets monstered by the nutters it’s time to take stock. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

TRAs? I like being out of this Twitter loop.