****The All In One LGBTQ+ & Related Issues Mega Thread****

[Tazio]

3 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

Oh I missed this  vile incident 

 

 

 

If they’d attempted to spit on me they’d have a sore face. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

5 minutes ago, Tazio said:

If they’d attempted to spit on me they’d have a sore face. 

You know I could have got passed them

quite easily . I would have but decided against it . It’s not worth it really . He’s lucky he didn’t get a sore pus really , with his confrontational, aggressive behaviours . He was clearly goading us . 

[Ulysses]

14 hours ago, FWJ said:

I’m pretty neutral about the subject (mostly because I don’t know much about it) but it seems Scotland isn’t an outlier here - loads of other countries (eg Argentina, France, Belgium, Ireland) allow self-ID.  Has there been much of a problem / outcry there?

I’m pretty sure I read about an Irish feminist group objecting to a U.K. one ‘interfering’ in Ireland’s policy gender ID in Ireland.

A lot of the narrative, too, makes me uneasy and reminds me of the anti-gay stuff (unnatural, mental illness) in the 70s & 80s.

I certainly don’t think children / teenagers should be drugs or surgery though.

 

(Should change the thread title to “Gender Self-ID” because that’s really what it’s all about)

 

I have no idea what changes to the law there have been in other countries, but Ireland introduced "gender self-ID" legislation in 2015.  In most respects the legislation is almost identical in effect to the proposed Scottish legislation.  

 

Despite attempts by some people to portray the Irish legislation as having caused issues that would make Irish society regret the legislation, an objective assessment would have to say that it has not.  It has been possible to change one's gender identity in Ireland for 7 years now, by applying for a certificate from the relevant government Department.  In that time, something like 1,000 people have applied for and been granted a cert - that's about 1 person in every 5,000.  The reality is that most of those people have probably gone from living lives of quiet desperation to living lives that are just quiet. 

 

Most Irish people are aware of the existence of the legislation, but would have no strong views about it or against it.  To the extent that there is opposition, it tends to come from the same groups who are less in favour of marriage equality and abortion provision, and perhaps also those who are uncomfortable with inward migration.  Most Irish people have never met anyone who has a gender recognition certificate.  I've never met anybody who has ever encountered the kind of issues that people have quoted here as reasons for Scotland not to pass the Gender Recognition Bill.  I've read lots of people here expressing their fears about things happening, and I've read similar stuff occasionally in Ireland.  But I have never met a real person who knows anyone to whom a real incident has happened.

 

In short, the 2015 Act seems to have made life better for 1,000 people, and seems not to have made life worse for others.  Some people got a bit pissed off about it, but the fact that someone is pissed off is not a reason to make policy.  If I'm honest, my view on this has changed over the years.  I might feel differently if we in Ireland didn't have that 7 years behind us, but we do, and so far it's been alright.  And here's the thing: A good place to start is to assume that the Scots aren't fundamentally all that different to the Irish.  Therefore, if the same legislation gets passed in Scotland, a good working assumption is that over 7 years you should see similar outcomes.  Maybe not identical, but broadly similar.  If you're saying they'd be worse, are you really saying that Scots, or Scottish transgender people, or Scottish men, are somehow weaker, less morally reliable and more dangerous than the Irish?  I'd find that hard to believe.

 

Irish feminists in general, and young women in particular, are not happy with British activist groups getting involved, and why not?  Irish feminists wouldn't be welcome if they tried to tell the English or the Scots how to manage their social policy issues.

 

I'm a middle-aged fella, so I couldn't be more different to the young feminist activists who are out there.  But I do know this: If I was trying to make the law and government better for Irish women, repealing our Gender Recognition Act wouldn't be within 100 miles of my priority list - nor the priority list of just about everyone I know.  There are far more pressing worries for women, there really are.

 

The narrative is creepily like the anti-gay stuff in the past, and it reflects really badly on the people promoting it, IMO.  There are other aspects to the whole "trans debate" that genuinely bother me, but they have little or nothing to do with Scotland's Gender Recognition Bill.

 

And yes, the thread title is misleading and ought to be changed.

[John Gentleman]

1 hour ago, Sydney Devine said:

A very interesting debate in what is a very complex area.  The issues raised over Gender recognition certificates is a bit of a red herring in my opinion.  Currently, in employers premises, a person is legally able to use whatever toilet (male or female) for the sex that they identify with.  They don't need a certificate and they dont have to be fully transitioned.  They can be thinking of transitioning or about to transition and can use the bathroom of their choosing.  

 

I completely understand why this makes females really uncomfortable but the law is really clear and employees need to be very careful in making complaints that a male is using the female toilets and could see themselves on the receiving end of a grievance or discrimination claim.  

 

What is currently happening in your workplaces and what is being communicated around this subject?    Be interested to hear about how employers are dealing with this.  

 

 Like I say very complex and fast moving area currently in employment law.  

At the biological level, it's not complex. About 1 in 2000 live births across dimorphic species (of which we're one) can be be categorised as indeterminate sex. That number remains consistent, most likely because a-sexuals can't procreate.

At the cultural level, western societies have decided to make it complex, hence all the issues we're now dealing with. Ancient societies kept it simple, while retaining a welcome space for their "third genders".

[JimBett365]

5 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

I have no idea what changes to the law there have been in other countries, but Ireland introduced "gender self-ID" legislation in 2015.  In most respects the legislation is almost identical in effect to the proposed Scottish legislation.  

 

Despite attempts by some people to portray the Irish legislation as having caused issues that would make Irish society regret the legislation, an objective assessment would have to say that it has not.  It has been possible to change one's gender identity in Ireland for 7 years now, by applying for a certificate from the relevant government Department.  In that time, something like 1,000 people have applied for and been granted a cert - that's about 1 person in every 5,000.  The reality is that most of those people have probably gone from living lives of quiet desperation to living lives that are just quiet. 

 

Most Irish people are aware of the existence of the legislation, but would have no strong views about it or against it.  To the extent that there is opposition, it tends to come from the same groups who are less in favour of marriage equality and abortion provision, and perhaps also those who are uncomfortable with inward migration.  Most Irish people have never met anyone who has a gender recognition certificate.  I've never met anybody who has ever encountered the kind of issues that people have quoted here as reasons for Scotland not to pass the Gender Recognition Bill.  I've read lots of people here expressing their fears about things happening, and I've read similar stuff occasionally in Ireland.  But I have never met a real person who knows anyone to whom a real incident has happened.

 

In short, the 2015 Act seems to have made life better for 1,000 people, and seems not to have made life worse for others.  Some people got a bit pissed off about it, but the fact that someone is pissed off is not a reason to make policy.  If I'm honest, my view on this has changed over the years.  I might feel differently if we in Ireland didn't have that 7 years behind us, but we do, and so far it's been alright.  And here's the thing: A good place to start is to assume that the Scots aren't fundamentally all that different to the Irish.  Therefore, if the same legislation gets passed in Scotland, a good working assumption is that over 7 years you should see similar outcomes.  Maybe not identical, but broadly similar.  If you're saying they'd be worse, are you really saying that Scots, or Scottish transgender people, or Scottish men, are somehow weaker, less morally reliable and more dangerous than the Irish?  I'd find that hard to believe.

 

Irish feminists in general, and young women in particular, are not happy with British activist groups getting involved, and why not?  Irish feminists wouldn't be welcome if they tried to tell the English or the Scots how to manage their social policy issues.

 

I'm a middle-aged fella, so I couldn't be more different to the young feminist activists who are out there.  But I do know this: If I was trying to make the law and government better for Irish women, repealing our Gender Recognition Act wouldn't be within 100 miles of my priority list - nor the priority list of just about everyone I know.  There are far more pressing worries for women, there really are.

 

The narrative is creepily like the anti-gay stuff in the past, and it reflects really badly on the people promoting it, IMO.  There are other aspects to the whole "trans debate" that genuinely bother me, but they have little or nothing to do with Scotland's Gender Recognition Bill.

 

And yes, the thread title is misleading and ought to be changed.

Really interesting, factual evidence. I know it won’t impact you directly as you’re male but has the safe spaces impact been an issue for any of your female friends and relatives? I’m assuming from the theme of your post that there isn’t an issue in general?

[JimBett365]

5 hours ago, John Gentleman said:

At the biological level, it's not complex. About 1 in 2000 live births across dimorphic species (of which we're one) can be be categorised as indeterminate sex. That number remains consistent, most likely because a-sexuals can't procreate.

At the cultural level, western societies have decided to make it complex, hence all the issues we're now dealing with. Ancient societies kept it simple, while retaining a welcome space for their "third genders".

Third gender or third sex?

[doctor jambo]

7 hours ago, Tazio said:

If they’d attempted to spit on me they’d have a sore face. 

You’d hit a woman?!

[FWJ]

6 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

I have no idea what changes to the law there have been in other countries, but Ireland introduced "gender self-ID" legislation in 2015.  In most respects the legislation is almost identical in effect to the proposed Scottish legislation.  

 

Despite attempts by some people to portray the Irish legislation as having caused issues that would make Irish society regret the legislation, an objective assessment would have to say that it has not.  It has been possible to change one's gender identity in Ireland for 7 years now, by applying for a certificate from the relevant government Department.  In that time, something like 1,000 people have applied for and been granted a cert - that's about 1 person in every 5,000.  The reality is that most of those people have probably gone from living lives of quiet desperation to living lives that are just quiet. 

 

Most Irish people are aware of the existence of the legislation, but would have no strong views about it or against it.  To the extent that there is opposition, it tends to come from the same groups who are less in favour of marriage equality and abortion provision, and perhaps also those who are uncomfortable with inward migration.  Most Irish people have never met anyone who has a gender recognition certificate.  I've never met anybody who has ever encountered the kind of issues that people have quoted here as reasons for Scotland not to pass the Gender Recognition Bill.  I've read lots of people here expressing their fears about things happening, and I've read similar stuff occasionally in Ireland.  But I have never met a real person who knows anyone to whom a real incident has happened.

 

In short, the 2015 Act seems to have made life better for 1,000 people, and seems not to have made life worse for others.  Some people got a bit pissed off about it, but the fact that someone is pissed off is not a reason to make policy.  If I'm honest, my view on this has changed over the years.  I might feel differently if we in Ireland didn't have that 7 years behind us, but we do, and so far it's been alright.  And here's the thing: A good place to start is to assume that the Scots aren't fundamentally all that different to the Irish.  Therefore, if the same legislation gets passed in Scotland, a good working assumption is that over 7 years you should see similar outcomes.  Maybe not identical, but broadly similar.  If you're saying they'd be worse, are you really saying that Scots, or Scottish transgender people, or Scottish men, are somehow weaker, less morally reliable and more dangerous than the Irish?  I'd find that hard to believe.

 

Irish feminists in general, and young women in particular, are not happy with British activist groups getting involved, and why not?  Irish feminists wouldn't be welcome if they tried to tell the English or the Scots how to manage their social policy issues.

 

I'm a middle-aged fella, so I couldn't be more different to the young feminist activists who are out there.  But I do know this: If I was trying to make the law and government better for Irish women, repealing our Gender Recognition Act wouldn't be within 100 miles of my priority list - nor the priority list of just about everyone I know.  There are far more pressing worries for women, there really are.

 

The narrative is creepily like the anti-gay stuff in the past, and it reflects really badly on the people promoting it, IMO.  There are other aspects to the whole "trans debate" that genuinely bother me, but they have little or nothing to do with Scotland's Gender Recognition Bill.

 

And yes, the thread title is misleading and ought to be changed.

A very interesting, thoughtful and informative post.  And refreshingly free of hyperbole.  
Thank you.

[FWJ]

11 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

Possibly.

The difficulty is can you remove the hard wiring of your genes ?

The trans comedian who whipped off her dress and started playing piano with her penis - I don’t know any woman who would do that - plenty men.

Dave Chapelle describing his trans friends suicide - where she leapt from a roof- again such a “man” way to do it .

Can you overcome your coding ?

Reduce your sex to hormones ?

So after menopause women are less female ?

After prostate cancer chemo when they wipe out your ur testosterone are you now longer such a man because your parameters in a test tube are different?

I would suggest not

I’ve just noticed this.  You’re using the suicide of a trans individual to mock and criticise them?  Their suicide ?

 

[XB52]

7 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

I have no idea what changes to the law there have been in other countries, but Ireland introduced "gender self-ID" legislation in 2015.  In most respects the legislation is almost identical in effect to the proposed Scottish legislation.  

 

Despite attempts by some people to portray the Irish legislation as having caused issues that would make Irish society regret the legislation, an objective assessment would have to say that it has not.  It has been possible to change one's gender identity in Ireland for 7 years now, by applying for a certificate from the relevant government Department.  In that time, something like 1,000 people have applied for and been granted a cert - that's about 1 person in every 5,000.  The reality is that most of those people have probably gone from living lives of quiet desperation to living lives that are just quiet. 

 

Most Irish people are aware of the existence of the legislation, but would have no strong views about it or against it.  To the extent that there is opposition, it tends to come from the same groups who are less in favour of marriage equality and abortion provision, and perhaps also those who are uncomfortable with inward migration.  Most Irish people have never met anyone who has a gender recognition certificate.  I've never met anybody who has ever encountered the kind of issues that people have quoted here as reasons for Scotland not to pass the Gender Recognition Bill.  I've read lots of people here expressing their fears about things happening, and I've read similar stuff occasionally in Ireland.  But I have never met a real person who knows anyone to whom a real incident has happened.

 

In short, the 2015 Act seems to have made life better for 1,000 people, and seems not to have made life worse for others.  Some people got a bit pissed off about it, but the fact that someone is pissed off is not a reason to make policy.  If I'm honest, my view on this has changed over the years.  I might feel differently if we in Ireland didn't have that 7 years behind us, but we do, and so far it's been alright.  And here's the thing: A good place to start is to assume that the Scots aren't fundamentally all that different to the Irish.  Therefore, if the same legislation gets passed in Scotland, a good working assumption is that over 7 years you should see similar outcomes.  Maybe not identical, but broadly similar.  If you're saying they'd be worse, are you really saying that Scots, or Scottish transgender people, or Scottish men, are somehow weaker, less morally reliable and more dangerous than the Irish?  I'd find that hard to believe.

 

Irish feminists in general, and young women in particular, are not happy with British activist groups getting involved, and why not?  Irish feminists wouldn't be welcome if they tried to tell the English or the Scots how to manage their social policy issues.

 

I'm a middle-aged fella, so I couldn't be more different to the young feminist activists who are out there.  But I do know this: If I was trying to make the law and government better for Irish women, repealing our Gender Recognition Act wouldn't be within 100 miles of my priority list - nor the priority list of just about everyone I know.  There are far more pressing worries for women, there really are.

 

The narrative is creepily like the anti-gay stuff in the past, and it reflects really badly on the people promoting it, IMO.  There are other aspects to the whole "trans debate" that genuinely bother me, but they have little or nothing to do with Scotland's Gender Recognition Bill.

 

And yes, the thread title is misleading and ought to be changed.

What a great post, especially the 2nd last paragraph. Some posters will refuse to believe it though.

[Taffin]

7 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

I have no idea what changes to the law there have been in other countries, but Ireland introduced "gender self-ID" legislation in 2015.  In most respects the legislation is almost identical in effect to the proposed Scottish legislation.  

 

Despite attempts by some people to portray the Irish legislation as having caused issues that would make Irish society regret the legislation, an objective assessment would have to say that it has not.  It has been possible to change one's gender identity in Ireland for 7 years now, by applying for a certificate from the relevant government Department.  In that time, something like 1,000 people have applied for and been granted a cert - that's about 1 person in every 5,000.  The reality is that most of those people have probably gone from living lives of quiet desperation to living lives that are just quiet. 

 

Most Irish people are aware of the existence of the legislation, but would have no strong views about it or against it.  To the extent that there is opposition, it tends to come from the same groups who are less in favour of marriage equality and abortion provision, and perhaps also those who are uncomfortable with inward migration.  Most Irish people have never met anyone who has a gender recognition certificate.  I've never met anybody who has ever encountered the kind of issues that people have quoted here as reasons for Scotland not to pass the Gender Recognition Bill.  I've read lots of people here expressing their fears about things happening, and I've read similar stuff occasionally in Ireland.  But I have never met a real person who knows anyone to whom a real incident has happened.

 

In short, the 2015 Act seems to have made life better for 1,000 people, and seems not to have made life worse for others.  Some people got a bit pissed off about it, but the fact that someone is pissed off is not a reason to make policy.  If I'm honest, my view on this has changed over the years.  I might feel differently if we in Ireland didn't have that 7 years behind us, but we do, and so far it's been alright.  And here's the thing: A good place to start is to assume that the Scots aren't fundamentally all that different to the Irish.  Therefore, if the same legislation gets passed in Scotland, a good working assumption is that over 7 years you should see similar outcomes.  Maybe not identical, but broadly similar.  If you're saying they'd be worse, are you really saying that Scots, or Scottish transgender people, or Scottish men, are somehow weaker, less morally reliable and more dangerous than the Irish?  I'd find that hard to believe.

 

Irish feminists in general, and young women in particular, are not happy with British activist groups getting involved, and why not?  Irish feminists wouldn't be welcome if they tried to tell the English or the Scots how to manage their social policy issues.

 

I'm a middle-aged fella, so I couldn't be more different to the young feminist activists who are out there.  But I do know this: If I was trying to make the law and government better for Irish women, repealing our Gender Recognition Act wouldn't be within 100 miles of my priority list - nor the priority list of just about everyone I know.  There are far more pressing worries for women, there really are.

 

The narrative is creepily like the anti-gay stuff in the past, and it reflects really badly on the people promoting it, IMO.  There are other aspects to the whole "trans debate" that genuinely bother me, but they have little or nothing to do with Scotland's Gender Recognition Bill.

 

And yes, the thread title is misleading and ought to be changed.

 

I can't see why anyone would ever have an issue with gender self id. They don't even have defined characteristics. Sex though which seems to be the main discussion on this thread, is a totally different kettle of fish and I can see why it makes some very nervous.

[doctor jambo]

34 minutes ago, FWJ said:

I’ve just noticed this.  You’re using the suicide of a trans individual to mock and criticise them?  Their suicide ?

 

There is no mockery there, nor any criticism of any kind.

I have nothing but the utmost sympathy for the trans community and their struggles.

though it needs siad that the written word lacks nuance. 
I have no objections to gender recognition certificates- much as I see them as entirely separate from biological sex.

If it makes people feel better then fine, have one.

What that certificate should not mean however is that you are treated as a biological female and get cervical screening, access to certain things etc, as you are transgender - quite distinct from intersex, and that is fine - they are different and that too is good! Vive La difference.

Be yourself .

A guiding principle is “do no harm”

and I’m not convinced , yet, that we are doing no harm to vulnerable children

[FJT]

8 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

I have no idea what changes to the law there have been in other countries, but Ireland introduced "gender self-ID" legislation in 2015.  In most respects the legislation is almost identical in effect to the proposed Scottish legislation.  

 

Despite attempts by some people to portray the Irish legislation as having caused issues that would make Irish society regret the legislation, an objective assessment would have to say that it has not.  It has been possible to change one's gender identity in Ireland for 7 years now, by applying for a certificate from the relevant government Department.  In that time, something like 1,000 people have applied for and been granted a cert - that's about 1 person in every 5,000.  The reality is that most of those people have probably gone from living lives of quiet desperation to living lives that are just quiet. 

 

Most Irish people are aware of the existence of the legislation, but would have no strong views about it or against it.  To the extent that there is opposition, it tends to come from the same groups who are less in favour of marriage equality and abortion provision, and perhaps also those who are uncomfortable with inward migration.  Most Irish people have never met anyone who has a gender recognition certificate.  I've never met anybody who has ever encountered the kind of issues that people have quoted here as reasons for Scotland not to pass the Gender Recognition Bill.  I've read lots of people here expressing their fears about things happening, and I've read similar stuff occasionally in Ireland.  But I have never met a real person who knows anyone to whom a real incident has happened.

 

In short, the 2015 Act seems to have made life better for 1,000 people, and seems not to have made life worse for others.  Some people got a bit pissed off about it, but the fact that someone is pissed off is not a reason to make policy.  If I'm honest, my view on this has changed over the years.  I might feel differently if we in Ireland didn't have that 7 years behind us, but we do, and so far it's been alright.  And here's the thing: A good place to start is to assume that the Scots aren't fundamentally all that different to the Irish.  Therefore, if the same legislation gets passed in Scotland, a good working assumption is that over 7 years you should see similar outcomes.  Maybe not identical, but broadly similar.  If you're saying they'd be worse, are you really saying that Scots, or Scottish transgender people, or Scottish men, are somehow weaker, less morally reliable and more dangerous than the Irish?  I'd find that hard to believe.

 

Irish feminists in general, and young women in particular, are not happy with British activist groups getting involved, and why not?  Irish feminists wouldn't be welcome if they tried to tell the English or the Scots how to manage their social policy issues.

 

I'm a middle-aged fella, so I couldn't be more different to the young feminist activists who are out there.  But I do know this: If I was trying to make the law and government better for Irish women, repealing our Gender Recognition Act wouldn't be within 100 miles of my priority list - nor the priority list of just about everyone I know.  There are far more pressing worries for women, there really are.

 

The narrative is creepily like the anti-gay stuff in the past, and it reflects really badly on the people promoting it, IMO.  There are other aspects to the whole "trans debate" that genuinely bother me, but they have little or nothing to do with Scotland's Gender Recognition Bill.

 

And yes, the thread title is misleading and ought to be changed.

👍 a reasoned and interesting post. And your last paragraph is spot on - this thread should be re-titled

[Francis Albert]

7 hours ago, John Gentleman said:

At the biological level, it's not complex. About 1 in 2000 live births across dimorphic species (of which we're one) can be be categorised as indeterminate sex. That number remains consistent, most likely because a-sexuals can't procreate.

At the cultural level, western societies have decided to make it complex, hence all the issues we're now dealing with. Ancient societies kept it simple, while retaining a welcome space for their "third genders".

As I understand it the dictionary definition of asexual is someone (of whatever sex) who is not sexually attracted to anyone or anything. This is the A in LGBTQIA....The I is intersex ie people of indeterminate sex having a mixture of biological sexual  characteristics ... organs, chromosomes etc. Lumping together that long string of letters is not very helpful for anything.

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

Incredible that some  posters on this seem to have no issues with what happened last night. A bunch of trans and non trans “activists “ stopped a large group of peaceful people from watching a film and Also having a discussion afterwards about it . 

 

Talk about the elephant in the room . 
 

like most of my fellow activists we are Against the issue of “ self id “ Which allows biological men without any form of surgery simply to declare they are a woman and it gives them the legal entitlement to enter womens only places . Those men can join “ womens survivors of abuse “ groups , be in female only prisons , share same clothing changing room spaces as women , play in womens sports , the list is endless . It changes the legal concept of what a woman is . 

 

as for the issue regarding the thread well @The Mighty Thor( sorry for bringing you into it 😂) created this thread because I had made numerous postings about the issue on several other threads . At the beginning of the thread I rightly anticipated it would be top heavy with trans issues as the T has taken over most LGB issues in the real world . I tried to set up a new thread for “ LGB” so this thread or indeed another Thread could be started regarding trans or self id but the mods merged by “ Lgb” thread with this after several days .
 

its no Surprise that on a football forum which is mainly men there is zero to little understanding or empathy  of this issue and it’s impact fir women . I’m just happy that there is a large group of mainly women activists out in the real world fighting the  good fight . 
 

I am involved in this issue as a gay man as the T has completely hikacked the LGB . LGB people still have our own particular needs and supports . LGB people still face oppression , discrimination , abuse , Issues around mental health , HIV etc however you wouldn’t think that judging by how much the T have taken over LGBT . 

 

“ Get  the T out “ 

 

 

 

Edited December 15, 2022 by JudyJudyJudy

[JudyJudyJudy]

20 minutes ago, FJT said:

👍 a reasoned and interesting post. And your last paragraph is spot on - this thread should be re-titled

It really isn’t 

[JudyJudyJudy]

12 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

As I understand it the dictionary definition of asexual is someone (of whatever sex) who is not sexually attracted to anyone or anything. This is the A in LGBTQIA....The I is intersex ie people of indeterminate sex having a mixture of biological sexual  characteristics ... organs, chromosomes etc. Lumping together that long string of letters is not very helpful for anything.

 

It’s a load of rubbish . Anybody snd everyone is now identified as “ queer” ! It insults the real gay and lesbians 

[Francis Albert]

Has the University of Edinburgh said anything get about what happened last night? Or will it be too frightened of offending the trans "community"?

[FJT]

18 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

It really isn’t 

In your opinion.
It’s allowed for us to have different opinions 

[JudyJudyJudy]

5 minutes ago, FJT said:

In your opinion.
It’s allowed for us to have different opinions 

Yes that’s why it’s a forum . 

[JudyJudyJudy]

17 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Has the University of Edinburgh said anything get about what happened last night? Or will it be too frightened of offending the trans "community"?

Not checked yet . At least they attempted to allow the showing but

” security “ should have managed it better . Instead those “ activists “ screamed “ assault “ every time they went near . We do wonder if some of the teaching staff facilitated the “ protest “ 

[JudyJudyJudy]

39 minutes ago, jonesy said:

In light of the above…

 

…is it/will it be an offence to state that you don’t believe gender can be changed and is, instead, aligned to your sex (i.e. your bits)?

I think so 

[JudyJudyJudy]

Hear hear . My experience was the same as Danny 

 

 

Edited December 15, 2022 by JudyJudyJudy

[JudyJudyJudy]

And this is Dylan 

 

 

 

[John Gentleman]

There seems to be a whole lot of gender/sexuality conflation going on here. I thought this core debate was all about gender 'assignment'?

[Kenbo]

If you have a Pee Pee you're a bloke if you have a Foo Foo you're a bird. That's it for me.... I find it quite troubling that a man can identify as female, still have a knob and use female changing rooms.  

[FJT]

Reluctant to pit one oppressed group against another and I’m wary of those who seem to denigrate a whole group because of incidents seemingly related to a very small number. 
if people commit crimes against women and children (or anyone for that matter) then they should feel the full force of the law. Painting all trans people as a threat seems very unhelpful and I suspect is generally wide of the mark. 
plus, Perhaps the legislation might actually help a few people who are really struggling. 
it’s a shame the debate seems so acrimonious and polarised from both ends of the spectrum - and I expect unfortunately, that my point of view will be ripped to shreds by a vocal minority on here. But it’s valid to hold different opinions as has been noted! 

[John Gentleman]

3 minutes ago, Kenbo said:

If you have a Pee Pee you're a bloke if you have a Foo Foo you're a bird. That's it for me.... I find it quite troubling that a man can identify as female, still have a knob and use female changing rooms.  

Think of it in reverse. Imagine a biological female identifying as a male, at your place of work. S/he asserts that s/he uses the male toilet.
I haven't got a problem with a trans using a urinal, but I'll bet you s/he does! 

[Kenbo]

Just now, John Gentleman said:

Think of it in reverse. Imagine a biological female identifying as a male, at your place of work. S/he asserts that s/he uses the male toilet.
I haven't got a problem with a trans using a urinal, but I'll bet you s/he does! 

I have exactly the same issue as it can leave both parties open to potential issues/accusations. I agree there should be a safe space for transitioning people to use. But I do not think it should be their chosen sex toilet or changing room until the process is complete - for protection of the individual and others.

[John Gentleman]

3 minutes ago, Kenbo said:

I have exactly the same issue as it can leave both parties open to potential issues/accusations. I agree there should be a safe space for transitioning people to use. But I do not think it should be their chosen sex toilet or changing room until the process is complete - for protection of the individual and others.

Ah, the ubiquitous 'Unisex' toilet? Maybe all toilets should be 'unisex'? Some discomforts of mind to contend with for a wee while, but nothing we can't overcome with a bit of education......after all, we share the same lavvies at home.

[JudyJudyJudy]

8 minutes ago, Kenbo said:

I have exactly the same issue as it can leave both parties open to potential issues/accusations. I agree there should be a safe space for transitioning people to use. But I do not think it should be their chosen sex toilet or changing room until the process is complete - for protection of the individual and others.

The problem is in regards to self id.  A massively high percentage of trans will and do just identify as women.  with their bits intact.  Their  " bits" are weapons of sexual assault hence women being frightened and alarmed about them entering womens only spaces 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, John Gentleman said:

after all, we share the same lavvies at home.

yes with people we know and trust.

[JudyJudyJudy]

23 minutes ago, Kenbo said:

If you have a Pee Pee you're a bloke if you have a Foo Foo you're a bird. That's it for me.... I find it quite troubling that a man can identify as female, still have a knob and use female changing rooms.  

Well said Kenbo. 

[Kenbo]

3 minutes ago, John Gentleman said:

Ah, the ubiquitous 'Unisex' toilet? Maybe all toilets should be 'unisex'? Some discomforts of mind to contend with for a wee while, but nothing we can't overcome with a bit of education......after all, we share the same lavvies at home.

Maybe we should mate - would save a lot of issues I think. 

[Kenbo]

1 minute ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

Well said Kenbo. 

 - my approach may be a bit simplistic. But I am a simple (very simple) person! haha

[JudyJudyJudy]

3 minutes ago, Kenbo said:

 - my approach may be a bit simplistic. But I am a simple (very simple) person! haha

Your approach is bang on factual.  ALL of the worlds biologists would agree with you . Top Marks  

[Taffin]

41 minutes ago, FJT said:

Reluctant to pit one oppressed group against another and I’m wary of those who seem to denigrate a whole group because of incidents seemingly related to a very small number. 
if people commit crimes against women and children (or anyone for that matter) then they should feel the full force of the law. Painting all trans people as a threat seems very unhelpful and I suspect is generally wide of the mark. 
plus, Perhaps the legislation might actually help a few people who are really struggling. 
it’s a shame the debate seems so acrimonious and polarised from both ends of the spectrum - and I expect unfortunately, that my point of view will be ripped to shreds by a vocal minority on here. But it’s valid to hold different opinions as has been noted! 

 

I like the sentiment of your post, but I'm curious in your view as to which groups are being oppressed, what does that oppression look like and who's doing the oppression?

[FJT]

3 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

I like the sentiment of your post, but I'm curious in your view as to which groups are being oppressed, what does that oppression look like and who's doing the oppression?

🤣 now there’s another huge set of questions!

perhaps I should have used the term minority?! As to whether they’re oppressed or not I guess is open to debate…!
my main point is it seems troubling to me, if some members of one group that has faced crap, stoop to denigrating another in such a generalised way. 
though it seems fair to argue, say, that you think lgb shouldn’t be automatically lumped together with t for example, as it’s feasible to argue t may have their own distinct issues, I just don’t think that should degenerate into denigrating the ‘other’ as ultimately dehumanising anyone does everyone a disservice, unsure if that gets the point across any better i’m afraid 😄 but I know what I’m on about at least even if it doesn’t make sense to anyone else 🤪

[JudyJudyJudy]

 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

6 minutes ago, FJT said:

🤣 now there’s another huge set of questions!

perhaps I should have used the term minority?! As to whether they’re oppressed or not I guess is open to debate…!
my main point is it seems troubling to me, if some members of one group that has faced crap, stoop to denigrating another in such a generalised way. 
though it seems fair to argue, say, that you think lgb shouldn’t be automatically lumped together with t for example, as it’s feasible to argue t may have their own distinct issues, I just don’t think that should degenerate into denigrating the ‘other’ as ultimately dehumanising anyone does everyone a disservice, unsure if that gets the point across any better i’m afraid 😄 but I know what I’m on about at least even if it doesn’t make sense to anyone else 🤪

I would recommend you watch " Adult human female"  It will answer your question on how the " T" became part of LGBT.  It was basically a business move by " Stonewall" who had campaigned ( admittedly ) successfully for equal LGB rights etc until they had nothing left to " fight" for.  They should have disbanded. But its a business enterprise now with over 100 employees so decided to tag the " T" into the LGBT. It wasn't done with altruistic motives as such. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

Anyway I watched " Adult human female " last night and it was very educational and thought provoking.  It asked serious questions about mainly " Self ID".  I did not interpret any of it as " transphobic. I do wonder if any of that crowd have actually watched it? Probably not. It was a well balanced overview of sex and gender. 

 

Some nuggets from it :

 

-  disproportionally high levels of trans " women " in prison are sex offenders  ( Guess why? ) 

 

- the insidious use of "compelled speech" such as forcing people to use pro nouns of people who are of a different sex 

 

- the view that there is no " debate" as trans activists will not debate as they know that if they debate they will be tied in Knotts regarding their views or logic Also not debating silences any difference of opinion

 

- how the " T " became part of LGBT ( noted in a previous comment of mine) 

 

- the negative consequences of the " T" becoming part of LGBT on LGB needs and supports 

 

- the massive marketing job of " stonewall " within the public sector and their accreditation for business,. 

 

- the use of " word salad" to embarrass and exclude  anyone who doesn't speak the " correct speak"  ie " transwomen are women" 

 

-  trans identity  its mainly a middle class white phenomena 

 

- murders of trans women exceptionally rare..  whereas murders of women 2/3 per week ( can anyone take a guess how many self identify trans people in the UK have been murdered since 2009 ?? The myth pedalled that trans are more at risk due to other groups just isn't true.  Its not a competition either. 

 

- Keir Starmer and the left have left the the building on this issue. 

 

-  a lovely Muslim black lesbian was on the film and spoke of being the " usual labour " voter.  Not any more 

 

- Pharmaceuticals making a fortune from it 

 

-  the deliberate  conflation of sex and gender

 

-  and very sadly the immense pressure that young gay and lesbians have about coming out as there is now the added pressure of them being told they may be  " trans ".  Ie the slow erasure of gay and lesbian identity.

 

- and a great statement from one of the contributors who noted that originally trans identified people " just wanted to live their lives and get on with it"  however have now DEMANDED changes in the very definition of a woman as well as access to female only spaces etc.  There has never been a group which is demanding rights for themselves by also taking the rights away from another group.  

 

- 

 

 

 

 

 

- 

 

- 

 

[Taffin]

57 minutes ago, FJT said:

🤣 now there’s another huge set of questions!

perhaps I should have used the term minority?! As to whether they’re oppressed or not I guess is open to debate…!
my main point is it seems troubling to me, if some members of one group that has faced crap, stoop to denigrating another in such a generalised way. 
though it seems fair to argue, say, that you think lgb shouldn’t be automatically lumped together with t for example, as it’s feasible to argue t may have their own distinct issues, I just don’t think that should degenerate into denigrating the ‘other’ as ultimately dehumanising anyone does everyone a disservice, unsure if that gets the point across any better i’m afraid 😄 but I know what I’m on about at least even if it doesn’t make sense to anyone else 🤪

 

Makes sense to me 👍

 

Appreciate my 3 questions were large, I'm just not completely sure anyone is being oppressed here, yet anyway, or how and by whom. I'm not suggesting they aren't, or are, I'm genuinely unsure.

 

I totally agree with your post though. I can sympathise, albeit not empathise, with the frustrations of those within the LGB community who do not appreciate T being part of the movement as for me, it's not really got anything to do with it. Due to not having walked that path I find it harder to know how I'd react to feeling a cause close to my heart was being hijacked by others. I guess the term other, is in itself the issue here and probably why I'm opposed to gender boxing at all. Why seek to differentiate and divide? I've said it before but I don't believe our interests, chosen appearance and values align with our sex. That's not to say there aren't differences, there are, but they're biological imo, the rest is 'choice'. Why do we condition females to be 'feminine' and males to be 'masculine'? (Not a direct question to you)

Edited December 15, 2022 by Taffin

[JudyJudyJudy]

3 minutes ago, Taffin said:

Due to not having walked that path I finder it harder to know how I'd react to feeling a cause close to my heart was being hijacked by others.

At last someone gets it from where I come from in this issue. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

and he's got access to a gun.  Hiding in plain site

 

 

Dearie me

 

 

 

 

 

[Tazio]

Well you can’t hide nowadays with social media. I don’t for a minute agree with the protestors in the photos as they were an anti abortion group but the reaction is OTT against a bunch of pensioners. 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

13 minutes ago, Tazio said:

bunch of pensioners. 

who are women . Clearly hes a rent  a gob / thug . He was vile last night Screaming and shouting like  a madman.  He was the one causing most of the commotion.  The others were his disciples.    . I was about 2 foot from him for some of that time. He looked away from me most of the time.  I wonder why? ( its ok ill answer IM a man) 

Edited December 15, 2022 by JudyJudyJudy

[JudyJudyJudy]

15 minutes ago, jonesy said:

Wouldn’t worry about it. He probably lopped off the barrel and made his gun identify as a trans-doorstop. 

I'm not worried . I'm a man i wont be in his firing line Jonesy. However ......amusing posting from you as always.  

[doctor jambo]

I note that a Norwegian lesbian film maker is facing three years in prison for a social media post saying that lesbians cannot have a penis.

Hate speech seemingly- 1 year in jail if message is sent privately , 3 years if publically . 😳☠️
3 years in prison …..

[JimBett365]

6 hours ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

It really isn’t 

Care to elaborate on why Ulysses’ post wasn’t interesting or thought-provoking?

 

Personally I found it both as it gave a real life example of the impact of a similar self-recognition and what has happened over the past seven years. Was also interesting to note only 1000 people had used it.

 

.

Edited December 15, 2022 by JimBett365

[Dawnrazor]

34 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

I note that a Norwegian lesbian film maker is facing three years in prison for a social media post saying that lesbians cannot have a penis.

Hate speech seemingly- 1 year in jail if message is sent privately , 3 years if publically . 😳☠️
3 years in prison …..

3 years in jail for saying a woman can't have a penis?...........really?