Why is this board so obsessed with restrooms?

[Saint Frankenstein]

I've heard estimates that it's about 75% women victims. I'm okay with plus or minus.

I think it's VERY SAFE to say that the majority of DV victims are women. You agree with that?

I suppose.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I've heard estimates that it's about 75% women victims. I'm okay with plus or minus.

I think it's VERY SAFE to say that the majority of DV victims are women. You agree with that?

We don't really know, though. Men very rarely let it leave the house when it's happening to them while lots of women don't report it. Women probably are the majority, but I'm unsure as to by how much.

 

[icehorse]

The sad (amd pathetic) thing is you have to chop my posts down to a little snippet to try to twist me words around to make it seem like you could reasonable reach your statement as a conclusion.

Yeah, definitely hurts your case and makes you look terrible dishonest to have those first two sentences reinserted. How you replied doesn't even relate to that.

I think you ought to reread your posts before you submit them.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I think you ought to reread your posts before you submit them.

No, as per the norm with you you need ti quit putting words in my mouth.

 

[icehorse]

No, as per the norm with you you need ti quit putting words in my mouth.

pot, meet kettle.

Listen, I don't want to do this name calling stuff with you. catch on the next thread.

 

[anna.]

fwiw, that's never been what I'm concerned about. (sorry for butting in)

I thought that's exactly what you were worried about.

 

[anna.]

Not sure why it's relevant? But these were women attending a conference on horses, fwiw?

Just curious about the sampling demographics.

 

[anna.]

Different people, some supporters here on RF, that push the ideas I listed in post #131. For example, anyone who argues that JK Rowling ought to be canceled.

From your post #131

- claiming that a trans woman is a woman.
- claiming that a person like JK Rowling is a "TERF" (which is meant to mean horrible)
- attempting to hijack fundamental and crucial-to-society terms like "woman"
- claiming that sex is malleable


So... accepting someone as a trans woman makes me a trans activist with an agenda? Seriously?

What do you mean by "sex is malleable?"

Where did you get this list? Did you create it?

 

[icehorse]

So... accepting someone as a trans woman makes me a trans activist with an agenda? Seriously?

Are you discussing this in good faith? Because for the life of me, I cannot imagine how you came up with that??

For what, the 20th time?, this is not about accepting individual people. This is about whether the trans-activist agenda should be criticized.

Where did you get this list? Did you create it?

If these claims seem new to you, then you ought to go do some research. (And no, I did not create it, yikes!)

 

[Shadow Wolf]

pot, meet kettle.

Listen, I don't want to do this name calling stuff with you. catch on the next thread.

I've not put any words in your mouth. But you are calling a lot of people a misogynist.

 

[Yerda]

Not support trans people, but trans activism.

What do you believe the distinction is?

Hmmm. Those do not seem like parallel claims to me. The first is in relationship to an agenda, the second is in relationship to a class of people.

BEING TRANS is NOT EQUAL to supporting the trans-activist agenda. Some do, some do not.

If "a trans woman is a woman" is a misogynistic position that is "erasing safe spaces for women" why is it that most women, when polled, agree with this statement?

I note that you conveniently erase trans men from the conversation again. Which is typical of the transphobe agenda.

You are the one who supports an agenda while the people you are calling activists and misogynists are the ones who support people here.

 

[icehorse]

What do you believe the distinction is?

Ummm... forgive me if I'm misunderstanding your question but:

trans gender people are people,
trans activism is a set of ideas.

If "a trans woman is a woman" is a misogynistic position that is "erasing safe spaces for women" why is it that most women, when polled, agree with this statement?

I haven't seen that poll? But for the sake of discussion, let's say that's true. How do they poll on the question of allowing men into their safe spaces?

I note that you conveniently erase trans men from the conversation again. Which is typical of the transphobe agenda.

Why would that be convenient for me? If anything, that introduces a whole new set of problems that the activists haven't thought through.

You are the one who supports an agenda while the people you are calling activists and misogynists are the ones who support people here.

All I'm doing is criticizing an idea. If you think I have an agenda, that's on you. As for my opponents supporting people, what I'm seeing is that they're virtue signalling their support for trans people and mostly dodging questions when it come to safety for women.

 

[Yerda]

Ummm... forgive me if I'm misunderstanding your question but:

trans gender people are people,
trans activism is a set of ideas.

Let me reword. What is the difference between someone who supports trans people but not trans activism and someone who doesn't support trans people?

I haven't seen that poll? But for the sake of discussion, let's say that's true. How do they poll on the question of allowing men into their safe spaces?

No one is asking for men to be allowed into "safe spaces". People are asking for trans people to use the toilets designated for their gender. Why are you turning this into a weird language game?

Why would that be convenient for me? If anything, that introduces a whole new set of problems that the activists haven't thought through.

Don't you see how trans men being forced into women's "safe spaces" undermines your argument that men shouldn't be in women's "safe spaces"?

If you think I have an agenda, that's on you. As for my opponents supporting people, what I'm seeing is that they're virtue signalling their support for trans people and mostly dodging questions when it come to safety for women.

Ah, so we're all just virtue signalling.

 

[icehorse]

Let me reword. What is the difference between someone who supports trans people but not trans activism and someone who doesn't support trans people?

That's a long list, but here's an example: I would say I'm with JK Rowling in being in the former category. There are people who say things like "there is no such thing as trans" or who would be bigoted against trans people who are in the 2nd category.

No one is asking for men to be allowed into "safe spaces". People are asking for trans people to use the toilets designated for their gender. Why are you turning this into a weird language game?

I think President Obama had a great policy. He said "I prefer to understand a person before I disagree with them." So before you accuse me of weird language games, wouldn't it be better to try to understand my point?

But your response is par for the course. It's clear here on RF that any criticism of anything trans makes a person fair game for all manner of abuse.

Here's the issue. There are now trans women who make no effort at all to look like women. Some of these trans women even sport full beards. There is a name for these people, but I can't say it here. But their intention is to mess with everyone's head.

So if we let these male-looking-trans-women use women's safe spaces, how on earth will we be able to keep criminal men from taking advantage of that?

Don't you see how trans men being forced into women's "safe spaces" undermines your argument that men shouldn't be in women's "safe spaces"?

I have not proposed any solutions for trans men.

Ah, so we're all just virtue signalling.

Not all, but it sure is common. I say this because over the course of many debates on this topic, I find people avoid the uncomfortable questions. It appears that many of my critics know the talking points, but do not want to think past them.

 

[Yerda]

That's a long list, but here's an example: I would say I'm with JK Rowling in being in the former category. There are people who say things like "there is no such thing as trans" or who would be bigoted against trans people who are in the 2nd category.

That doesn't really clear it up for me.

I think President Obama had a great policy. He said "I prefer to understand a person before I disagree with them." So before you accuse me of weird language games, wouldn't it be better to try to understand my point?

But your response is par for the course. It's clear here on RF that any criticism of anything trans makes a person fair game for all manner of abuse.

Here's the issue. There are now trans women who make no effort at all to look like women. Some of these trans women even sport full beards. There is a name for these people, but I can't say it here. But their intention is to mess with everyone's head.

So if we let these male-looking-trans-women use women's safe spaces, how on earth will we be able to keep criminal men from taking advantage of that?

By "women's safe spaces" are we talking about toilets?

What about male-looking cis women? If we let them into the toilets how will we keep criminal men from taking advantage of that?

I have not proposed any solutions for trans men.

Where do they pee?

Not all, but it sure is common. I say this because over the course of many debates on this topic, I find people avoid the uncomfortable questions. It appears that many of my critics know the talking points, but do not want to think past them.

I think President Obama had a great policy. He said "I prefer to understand a person before I disagree with them."

 

[metis]

By "women's safe spaces" are we talking about toilets?

Oh absolutely, because in a nuclear war they could hide under the urinals in men's room as it hasn't been hit yet.

I think President Obama had a great policy. He said "I prefer to understand a person before I disagree with them."

Interesting quote.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Ummm... forgive me if I'm misunderstanding your question but:

trans gender people are people,
trans activism is a set of ideas.



I haven't seen that poll? But for the sake of discussion, let's say that's true. How do they poll on the question of allowing men into their safe spaces?



Why would that be convenient for me? If anything, that introduces a whole new set of problems that the activists haven't thought through.



All I'm doing is criticizing an idea. If you think I have an agenda, that's on you. As for my opponents supporting people, what I'm seeing is that they're virtue signalling their support for trans people and mostly dodging questions when it come to safety for women.

For the purposes of clarity, can you define what 'trans activism' comprises of exactly?

 

[icehorse]

By "women's safe spaces" are we talking about toilets?

yes; restrooms, locker rooms, women's shelters, safe houses, women only gatherings...

What about male-looking cis women? If we let them into the toilets how will we keep criminal men from taking advantage of that?

Indeed, that's also a concern and a problem to be solved!

 

[icehorse]

For the purposes of clarity, can you define what 'trans activism' comprises of exactly?

Nope, that would require a book. But I would say people who are likely to cry "you're a transphobe" are probably TRAs.

Here are some more TRA talking points:

- there is no such thing as biological sex, sex is a social construct
- a transwoman is a woman
- some women have penises
- some men have vaginas
- we should call women things like "womb owners" or "lactators"

Any of these claims ring a bell?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Nope, that would require a book. But I would say people who are likely to cry "you're a transphobe" are probably TRAs.

Here are some more TRA talking points:

- there is no such thing as biological sex, sex is a social construct
- a transwoman is a woman
- some women have penises
- some men have vaginas
- we should call women things like "womb owners" or "lactators"

Any of these claims ring a bell?

Well, on a course I was on recently there were two people who identified as women who were undergoing a transition process and who admitted they were still classified as male until it was complete. One was quite jokey about it and said they'd had flak. Neither were interested in talking about sex or gender as a social construct or the like and both were affable people.

I'm live and let live and have had no qualms or identity crises where it comes to my gender or sexuality. Male and straight. Not entirely into political correctness either but I do acknowledge that others struggle with identity issues that don't equate to activism. Same arguments been tried about 'gay agendas' and stuff.