RobinRobin 13097 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 On 17/04/2025 at 22:12, ewerk said: Why put that much effort into trying to destroy a minority who haven’t done anything to harm you. I don’t understand it. Expand 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobinRobin 13097 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 On 18/04/2025 at 09:18, RobinRobin said: Expand 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 8054 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 Jim Davidson said Starmer was having a gay affair with Lord Alli and a big chunk of twitter believes him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 53501 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 I assumed Jim Davidson was dead, and this is a pretty rough way to find out he's not. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 24477 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 On 17/04/2025 at 11:43, Monkeys Fist said: I believe the word you’re looking for is Does the female form make you uncomfortable, Mr. Renton? Expand This has been an interesting and illuminating debate. Respect to Craig in particular for opening up and speaking freely about an issue he has been touched by. Respect also to MF for this perfectly-timed post, lowering the tone beautifully, in his signature style, just as it was getting a bit heavy. I don’t really have anything to add other than to say my views are probably most aligned with Gemmill’s. It’s not a debate I feel qualified to join. I know some trans people and they’re all great. People are people and they’re not defined by their gender identity anymore than their race or sexual preference. Good lads/lasses and dickheads come in all shapes and sizes. I have observed the bile that some of the more extreme trans activists have thrown at people that disagree with their worldview on social media but it’s also fair to say it isn’t one-way traffic. There are obnoxious people on both sides of the debate. But it’s a debate I’m staying out of. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeys Fist 46851 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 On 21/04/2025 at 12:05, Dr Gloom said: Respect also to MF for this perfectly-timed post, lowering the tone beautifully, in his signature style, just as it was getting a bit heavy Expand Same. I know a couple of trans folk who are the same lovely people now that they were pre-transition. It’s a very small minority debate that has been amplified through social media and cunts looking for something to hate. I genuinely don’t give a shit what people want to refer to themselves as, or be known as- crack on, it does no harm to anyone. It’s a genuine shame for the people this directly affects that the debate has been taken over by the extremes of both sides-if any issue deserves nuance, this one does. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 8054 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 (edited) Not to stir the pot, but the "safe spaces" argument is bollocks imo. If a male rapist wants to rape a woman, he doesn't have to dress like a woman to get in the ladies toilets. Trans women have been using female spaces for years and if there had been a increase in attacks on CIS women by trans women, you can rest assured the Daily Mail and GB News would have made it front page news for fucking weeks and JK Rowlings head would have exploded. Also, lasses toilets are all cubicals anyway. I don't see a song and dance about trans men wanting to get a peek at loads of cocks at the urinals. Edited April 21 by Kid Dynamite 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 53501 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 I think it's easy for blokes to say that though. We're not the ones who've historically been on the wrong end of male violence. Women are raped and killed and sexually harassed by blokes all the time. If they think this increases the risk of this happening to them, it's not really for me to tell them it doesn't. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 34704 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 Which is why it comes back to the point I made the other day, where’s the evidence? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 4766 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 On 21/04/2025 at 13:34, Kid Dynamite said: Not to stir the pot, but the "safe spaces" argument is bollocks imo. If a male rapist wants to rape a woman, he doesn't have to dress like a woman to get in the ladies toilets. Trans women have been using female spaces for years and if there had been a increase in attacks on CIS women by trans women, you can rest assured the Daily Mail and GB News would have made it front page news for fucking weeks and JK Rowlings head would have exploded. Also, lasses toilets are all cubicals anyway. I don't see a song and dance about trans men wanting to get a peek at loads of cocks at the urinals. Expand I saw a Twitter post from a Rowling fan having a go at Eddie Izzard (sorry ih they aren't using that name any more) where they said "Imagine your daughter being in a toilet and being forced to watch him wash his cock in the sink" and I though what the fuck do you think blokes do in bogs? I've also read a few stories since this became a culture war issue of "butch" cis women being challenged by other women for using female toilets which begs the question as to what's going to happen if they do pass laws to control toilets - who the hell is going to police them and on what vasis? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spongebob toonpants 4598 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 On 21/04/2025 at 14:06, ewerk said: Which is why it comes back to the point I made the other day, where’s the evidence? Expand The evidence that women feel more threatened is women telling you they feel more threatened Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 6613 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 On 21/04/2025 at 14:01, Gemmill said: I think it's easy for blokes to say that though. We're not the ones who've historically been on the wrong end of male violence. Women are raped and killed and sexually harassed by blokes all the time. If they think this increases the risk of this happening to them, it's not really for me to tell them it doesn't. Expand The problem with that sentiment, well meaning as it is, is whose job it becomes to tell them it doesn't. We can't just say 'women feel threatened therefore we have to do this' because if we took that line across all aspects of life then men wouldn't be allowed outside after 9pm (and there's far more evidence which could support that than there is for banning trans women in women's bathrooms). So we naturally say 'well it's the politicians who have to decide it then', except they only see this whole situation as a voter spinner either positively or negatively. They're not incentivised to do the 'right' thing, because they are responding to the noise in the public sphere. If the noise is entirely one sided and people don't speak up for a need for actual evidence before enacting policy, then... I mean I don't know where that leads us honestly, but nowhere good. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzler 12880 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 On 21/04/2025 at 15:55, spongebob toonpants said: The evidence that women feel more threatened is women telling you they feel more threatened Expand The problem I have is feeling threatened is not the same as being under a legitimate increased risk. The feeling (which I completely understand btw) is stoked by the narrative which is only coming from cunts like Rowling and Badenoch. Neither of whom have put forward anything tangible that can be used to justify their stance. The only real bit of evidence was that rapist in Scotland who transitioned whilst awaiting sentence after the fear of sticking said rapist in a women’s prison. As we all know, a rapist is a rapist - they shouldn’t be anywhere near women no matter their gender identity. I get the position of women, who already have to worry about noncey cunts at work, bars, gyms, swimming pools etc - seems like one more place to make them feel uneasy about - and I suppose the risk posed to biological women is the same one for trans men (which is something being massively overlooked IMO). It’s an absolute mess and there doesn’t seem to be an outcome that won’t end up infringing on the rights one or both of women and members of the trans community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzler 12880 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 Also Eddie Izzard still answers to Eddie (as well as Suzie). Said they’d still accept he as a pronoun too, I believe. As far as high profile members of the trans community go they have been pretty much spot on - and probably more representative of the community as a whole than most of the gobshites who’ve equally contributed to the problem. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex 38166 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 On 21/04/2025 at 15:38, NJS said: I saw a Twitter post from a Rowling fan having a go at Eddie Izzard (sorry ih they aren't using that name any more) where they said "Imagine your daughter being in a toilet and being forced to watch him wash his cock in the sink" and I though what the fuck do you think blokes do in bogs? I've also read a few stories since this became a culture war issue of "butch" cis women being challenged by other women for using female toilets which begs the question as to what's going to happen if they do pass laws to control toilets - who the hell is going to police them and on what vasis? Expand I did see a post on Bluesky where a cis woman said she’d been challenged on a few occasions recently and it just made me feel really sad. I don’t really have too much to add but when the Mail and the Express are revelling in what’s happened then you feel at the very least it’s being weaponised for reasons that has little or nothing to do with the safety of women 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 6613 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 On 21/04/2025 at 16:24, Alex said: I did see a post on Bluesky where a cis woman said she’d been challenged on a few occasions recently and it just made me feel really sad. I don’t really have too much to add but when the Mail and the Express are revelling in what’s happened then you feel at the very least it’s being weaponised for reasons that has little or nothing to do with the safety of women Expand This is absolutely my main issue with it. I don't have any issue with the legal clarification, and all the issue with the sorts of people who are celebrating it and what it might enable next. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzler 12880 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 On 21/04/2025 at 16:24, Alex said: I did see a post on Bluesky where a cis woman said she’d been challenged on a few occasions recently and it just made me feel really sad. I don’t really have too much to add but when the Mail and the Express are revelling in what’s happened then you feel at the very least it’s being weaponised for reasons that has little or nothing to do with the safety of women Expand The average Mail reader thinks that a woman belongs at home cooking and cleaning and it’s a man’s right to slap her about a bit if she gets testy. It has absolutely nothing to do with the safety of women. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 34704 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 (edited) On 21/04/2025 at 15:55, spongebob toonpants said: The evidence that women feel more threatened is women telling you they feel more threatened Expand And if people feel more threatened by passing a black man in the street at night should we ban black men from being out at night? Edit: Not to mention that is a tiny vocal minority kicking up this fuss, or being used to make noise. Most of whom I imagine will be generally anti-trans. Edited April 21 by ewerk 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 6613 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 This video is a couple of years old now, following an essay JK Rowling wrote about trans issues - so this is a video response to that, but it covers a lot of the same stuff. These two are super reasonable btw, it's framed calmly and non-hysterically, and also are at pains to stress that they agree that women's rights need to be protected. I've timestamped the video to start at the bit relevant to this discussion (only 5 mins), but the wider video is an hour long and worth a watch if you have serious interest - I showed it to my mother once (socially right wing Christian) and it totally flipped her on the issue. Just leaving it here in case anyone is interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 6613 Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crldey0z00ro Trans women are not women, says Keir Starmer, who is now in disagreement with the 2022 version of himself - this would be why we need to make a fuss on this, we're going backwards in time on these people's rights, and we're doing it with little to no evidence of any need. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 7801 Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 In all honesty did you expect the sitting Prime Minister to do anything but agree with a supreme court ruling - irrespective of what he might have said 3 years ago? We need to be careful not to understate the magnitude of this ruling on both sides - undoubtedly one of the most divisive legal calls in our lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 6613 Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 On 22/04/2025 at 16:53, Craig said: In all honesty did you expect the sitting Prime Minister to do anything but agree with a supreme court ruling - irrespective of what he might have said 3 years ago? We need to be careful not to understate the magnitude of this ruling on both sides - undoubtedly one of the most divisive legal calls in our lifetime. Expand I always expect people to stick to their principles, all the supreme court has done is set the situation out per the law, which is fair but if we change the law tomorrow then they'd update their ruling to reflect that. He can't hide behind them because he actually has the power to change the legals around this. And beyond that, in all honesty did anyone expect me not to attack him over it? He's a flip flopper on basically every single issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 6613 Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 This would be what we might call a slippery slope. A thin end of the wedge. "First they came for the trans people, but I said nothing, for I was not trans.." etc. https://www.advocate.com/politics/us-uk-trade-deal-lgbtq I'm sure it's just coincidence that the Trump administration is calling for hate speech laws against LGBTQ people to be dropped if we want this trade deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 53501 Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 It's a right fucking mess. He looks like an idiot, and it's not like he's going to gain praise from anywhere for this. Trans allies will rightly go at him for it, and the idiots that have agreed with his position all along will ridicule him for being a flip flopper, won't believe that he's changed his position anyway, and will ridicule him for having ever thought anything else in the first place. The truth is that you can't be honest or have a sensible conversation about anything anymore, so he probably sees this (correctly) as the path of least resistance. Go with the version that results in me getting asked repeatedly about my position slightly less. A complete fucking mess. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 7801 Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 On 22/04/2025 at 17:13, Gemmill said: It's a right fucking mess. He looks like an idiot, and it's not like he's going to gain praise from anywhere for this. Trans allies will rightly go at him for it, and the idiots that have agreed with his position all along will ridicule him for being a flip flopper, won't believe that he's changed his position anyway, and will ridicule him for having ever thought anything else in the first place. The truth is that you can't be honest or have a sensible conversation about anything anymore, so he probably sees this (correctly) as the path of least resistance. Go with the version that results in me getting asked repeatedly about my position slightly less. A complete fucking mess. Expand Absolutely spot on! It’s an argument he wouldn’t win either way. As you say, a complete fucking mess. Im not defending him, its just what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now