New Zealand

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

On this prison caper

the law is an ass the judge is an an Ass and his legal judgement is a joke devoid of any common sense

woman’s rights are being trampled
On by chancers and fruit cakes

supported by a vocal minority of chancers and fruit cakes

And in your view Iran and other nations should be bombed by carpet bombing or nuclear weapons.
And in your view, all foreigners are scoundrels.
And in your view medical experiments on prisoners in a prisoner of war camp was amusing.
And in your view anarchy is preferable to democracy.

I think we can safely consider your views as being not worthy of consideration.
If you want your views to be seriously considered, you need realise that your views need to be considered seriously, before expressing them.

 

[transam]

Precisely my point

chancers and fruitcakes

to what ever he said

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Precisely my point

chancers and fruitcakes

to what ever he said

I prefer to see those who promote racism, genocide, anarchy and chaos as the chancers and fruitcakes. I suspect most rational intelligent people will agree with me.
But granted, there may be a few plumbers, chancers and fruitcakes who will rush to your defence, and find your hate-filled ramblings amusing.

 

[JohnD]

If you refuse to accept that transgender women are women

Since the term is used to describe men including those who are biologically, genetically and anatomically male; who have made no change to their dress or behaviour; who have had no surgical or hormonal alterations; and who have carried out no "transition"; and even a few who are rapists

but have only uttered the magic words "I am a woman."

Then I refuse to accept that every person who calls themself a TW is a "woman"

if you assert otherwise you are flying in the fact of reality.





You are also insulting people who are women.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Since the term is used to describe men including those who are biologically, genetically and anatomically male; who have made no change to their dress or behaviour; who have had no surgical or hormonal alterations; and who have carried out no "transition"; and even a few who are rapists
but have only uttered the magic words "I am a woman."
Then I refuse to accept that every person who calls themself a TW is a "woman"

You are entitled to your opinion.
Occasionally you may be right in not accepting every person that calls themselves a woman is genuinely a woman. We have already considered the devious actions of violent sex offenders to manipulate themselves into positions of being able to re-offend. That is what violent sex offenders tend to do.
But in the main, most people who declare themselves, or have transitioned, or are in the process of transitioning, consider themselves as a genuine woman.

if you assert otherwise you are flying in the fact of reality.
You are also insulting people who are women.

In scenarios where it doesn't matter if a little guy called himself a 6'5" Chinese woman, then I'm content to address her as she wishes. It doesn't matter, and I'm insulting no-one.

In situations where it does matter, such as in prisons, in sports, etc. then I'm content to leave the discretion to the officially recognised experts, so long as they, in the main, appear to be making acceptable decisions.
If they fail to make the appropriate decisions, hopefully, I am sufficiently well informed to differentiate between the system being wrong, and the individual decisions of officials being wrong.
In the case of the system being wrong, I can use what influence I have to improve the system.
I consider that to be an intelligent and unbiased approach.

 

[JohnD]

Occasionally you may be right in not accepting every person that calls themselves a woman is genuinely a woman.

your use of the words "Occasionally" and "may" is incorrect.

Since not every person who calls themselves a woman, is a woman, I cannot accept the assertion that TWAW.

It is simply not true.

This is not an opinion.

It is a fact.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

your use of the words "Occasionally" and "may" is incorrect.

Since not every person who calls themselves a woman, is a woman, I cannot accept the assertion that TWAW.

It is simply not true.

This is not an opinion.

It is a fact.

It depends wholly on your definition of woman. Therefore it based on your opinion, which differs from the medical and legal professions.
If your definition is so strictly based on biological anatomy, any woman who has had such surgery as a mastectomy, or a hysterectomy, etc would not qualify.

And, in your opinion, any man that has transitioned from being a woman, will always remain a woman.

 

[JohnD]

If your definition is so strictly based on biological anatomy, any woman who has had such surgery as a mastectomy, or a hysterectomy, etc would not qualify.

I'm sure I explained earlier that a man with low testosterone is still a man; a man with one leg is still a man, a man with testicular cancer is still a man, even if they are removed.

A spider does not become an insect if you cut off two of its legs.

A woman is still a woman after a hysterectomy.

 

[JohnD]

Since the term is used to describe men including those who are biologically, genetically and anatomically male; who have made no change to their dress or behaviour; who have had no surgical or hormonal alterations; and who have carried out no "transition"; and even a few who are rapists

but have only uttered the magic words "I am a woman."

and are you content with that TRA definition?

 

[JohnD]

biological anatomy

i gather you're not happy with the idea that the presence of a cock and balls is ever relevant.

Do you disagree with the judge who said:



"Many people may think it incongruous and inappropriate that a prisoner of masculine physique and with male genitalia should be accommodated in a female prison in any circumstances. More importantly for the Claimant's case, I readily accept that a substantial proportion of women prisoners have been the victims of sexual assaults and/or domestic violence.

I also readily accept the proposition ... that some, and perhaps many, women prisoners may suffer fear and acute anxiety if required to share prison accommodation and facilities with a transgender women who has male genitalia, and that their fear and anxiety may be increased if that transgender woman has been convicted of sexual or violent offences against women."

 

[Captain Nemesis]

On this prison caper

the law is an ass the judge is an an Ass and his legal judgement is a joke devoid of any common sense

woman’s rights are being trampled
On by chancers and fruit cakes

supported by a vocal minority of chancers and fruit cakes

Your expertise in law and jurisprudence is what, exactly?

 

[Captain Nemesis]

Do you disagree with the judge who said:



"Many people may think it incongruous and inappropriate that a prisoner of masculine physique and with male genitalia should be accommodated in a female prison in any circumstances. "

He could equally have truthfully said

"Many people may think it incongruous and inappropriate that a black woman should marry into the Royal Family in any circumstances."

A judge recognising what many people may think is not conferring any legitimacy on their opinion.

 

[JohnD]

But you don't think it incongruous and inappropriate that a prisoner of masculine physique and with male genitalia should be accommodated in a female prison in any circumstances.

Do you.

You avoided the other statement.

You don't "readily accept the proposition ... that some, and perhaps many, women prisoners may suffer fear and acute anxiety if required to share prison accommodation and facilities with a transgender women who has male genitalia, and that their fear and anxiety may be increased if that transgender woman has been convicted of sexual or violent offences against women."

in the same way you have no objection to a man competing in women's sports.

Or sharing a women's communal changing room or shower.

 

[Captain Nemesis]

But you don't think it incongruous and inappropriate that a prisoner of masculine physique and with male genitalia should be accommodated in a female prison in any circumstances.

Do you.

You avoided the other statement.

You don't "readily accept the proposition ... that some, and perhaps many, women prisoners may suffer fear and acute anxiety if required to share prison accommodation and facilities with a transgender women who has male genitalia, and that their fear and anxiety may be increased if that transgender woman has been convicted of sexual or violent offences against women."

I accept that there are genuine concerns which need to be addressed, genuine problems which must be solved, but most of the solution is what should be in place anyway to minimise prisoner: prisoner and prisoner:staff violence. But no, thats not the entire solution. Maybe there should be a process, where a transitioning prisoner goes into a dedicated transitioning section ("wing"?) in the male prison system, then at the right stage, which should probably include progress in some offender behaviour therapy, move to an equivalent section in the female system, then eventually full integration into womens prisons.

The trouble is that you are approaching all of this from the point of view of an an ignorant and bigoted denial of scientific facts which you happen not to like.

Over and over again you demonstrate an unwavering dedication to denying any non-binary state.

This, for example,

in the same way you have no objection to a man competing in women's sports.

predicated on the belief that everyone is either a "man" or a "woman".

To the issue of genuine problems which do need dealing with you have hitched your wagon of fundamentalist denial. Im not saying your concerns are not genuine, but your motive in expressing them, the way in which you express them and the only terms in which you will discuss them are all about you preaching your Doctrine of Binary.

Whatever problems there are which require solutions, no good solutions will come out of your absolutist position.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

I'm sure I explained earlier that a man with low testosterone is still a man; a man with one leg is still a man, a man with testicular cancer is still a man, even if they are removed.

A spider does not become an insect if you cut off two of its legs.

A woman is still a woman after a hysterectomy.

As I said, JohnD, you are entitled to your opinion, even though it flies in the face of legal and medical opinion.
We've already proven that sex and gender is ambiguous, if you refuse to accept it, then that's your bigotry refusing to accept the blindingly obvious.
Just , as with race, there once was, long ago, a concept that humanity consisted of several different races. Science has now disproved that old-fashioned, Victorian, out-of-date notion, and proven that humanity consists of just one race, the human race. That old fashioned belief was based on pure bigotry.
Biological sex is at the same state in time. Once there was a Victorian, old-fashioned, out-of-date notion that sex and gender is binary. That notion has now been disproved by science, and modern day scholars recognise that sex and gender is not binary. If you wish to cling to that out-of-date notion, like a comfort blanket, you're entitled to do so, but that behaviour is bigoted.

If your child decides that meat is not for them, would you insist that he/she conforms to your rules, and you refuse to provide or allow vegan meals?
If your dinner guests believe that pork, or meat in general should not be eaten, do you refuse to cater for their beliefs?
If a Christian/Muslim/Jew/Buddhist, etc refuse to bow to your demands due to their faith, do you insist your beliefs take priority in their lives?

There are loads of examples where peoples' rights are legally protected. Just because your personal opinion refuses to accept it, does not make it so.
When your personal beliefs refuse to accept reality, it suggests that your belief is no better than any other bigoted person.

If I choose to believe that I am French, and I am entitled to French citizenship, despite being born in UK to UK citizens, the rights of a French citizen are conferred upon me by France despite the accident of my birth, and no-one's personal opinion can deny me that right.