Perverted man claims to be a woman - may be housed in a women's prison

I don't have time for other discussion forums. Facebook I look through but again is very tailored to my interests and the circles of people I know.

A lot of what I see are what my children show me and talk to me about or what younger people I'm connected to share on their Facebook feeds. I do not in real life know anyone who holds the views expressed here, at least they haven't mentioned it to me if they do.

Or it has come from my training on working with children and young people and how acceptance is promoted in education settings.

I thought I could learn something here and it just wasn't what I thought it would be.

Have not discussed with those who believe that trans women are not women anywhere previous to gransnet for them to explain their personal opinions on the matter to me.
So you have watched a number of people transition, heard them speak and seen them find their true selves, but never spoken to anyone who takes the view that sex and gender are separate things? You have heard the stories of transpeople, but not the views of those who accept them as individuals but object to being forced to declare pronouns, called 'cis' and compelled to have anyone calling themselves female in what were once single-sex spaces?

I'm not a member of any other discussion forum on any other name if that is an acceptable truth. Why wouldn't it be acceptable? Or true? I am on several, and only use this name on this one. The name I sometimes use was taken when I signed up. Maybe if you join more forums and broaden the scope of your conversations you will become more comfortable talking about the subject? You might also find that exposure to more forums will help you not to see things said generally as directed at you personally.

I think it is a real shame the behaviour that is happening, do you really think anyone will hear what isn't said kindly?
I have read this several times. I understand all the words, but not in this order. It reads like something in a fortune cookie.

What behaviour is happening? Who will hear, and what isn't said kindly?

Germanshepherdsmum

Hmmm Iam64. Well put together.
We seem to have drifted a long way away from the issue of that poor dog Ilovecheese. Which for me as a dog lover is the crux of the whole thing, rather than how this sad specimen may identify.

It's all lumped together though.

He raped the dog, and has been sentenced to prison. The issue is whether such people should go to a men's or women's jail if they are men who say they are women.

Iam64

Today at 12.28 - VioletSky:
Trans people are valid,……….
I’ve seen too much proof, read too many stories, listened to too many trans people speak, watched them transition, watched them find their real authentic selves”.
Today at 16.04
Also it’s a topic I hadn’t previously discussed anywhere which means I had a lot to learn about the why’s of it all and how best to put my views”

‘

Have not discussed with those who believe that trans women are not women anywhere previous to gransnet for them to explain their personal opinions on the matter to me.

I'm not a member of any other discussion forum on any other name if that is an acceptable truth

I think it is a real shame the behaviour that is happening, do you really think anyone will hear what isn't said kindly?

Your post @ 18.17 Iam put me in mind of transliteration. A type of conversation, like a text from one script to another that involves swapping letters.

Of course more than letters were swapped but it fits if you see what I mean.

Ooh I've just seen a bit of a pun .... trans literation.

I’m a bit late on this one. TW are valid as what?

I think that understanding has been reached Doodledog, don't lose heart, now when are we going to have that "tentative group hug" you mentioned earlier?

Hmmm Iam64. Well put together.
We seem to have drifted a long way away from the issue of that poor dog Ilovecheese. Which for me as a dog lover is the crux of the whole thing, rather than how this sad specimen may identify.

And yes, Iam. I was trying to ignore that glaring contradiction in the interests of peace, love and understanding.

Football in a trench, anyone?

VioletSky

"Sometimes you can't fight what people need you to be to feel better about themselves"

~My son

I'm sure that's very wise; but have no idea what it has to do with this thread.

Who needs whom to be what in order to feel better about themselves?

There are times when discussing a straightforward state of affairs that has been known to be true for centuries (that sex is immutable, so far at least) requires advanced mental gymnastics.

I thought we had reached an understanding that (as some have said all along) transpeople are not the issue, but the legislation that allows men with nefarious intent to pose as trans, whether we refer to them as 'fake', 'not valid', 'so-called 'cis' men' or just blokes in dresses. I'm not sure where the problem lies now.

My post of 15:51 was not all about you, VS. In fact others are mentioned by name.

Today at 12.28 - VioletSky:
Trans people are valid,……….
I’ve seen too much proof, read too many stories, listened to too many trans people speak, watched them transition, watched them find their real authentic selves”.
Today at 16.04
Also it’s a topic I hadn’t previously discussed anywhere which means I had a lot to learn about the why’s of it all and how best to put my views”

‘

I thought for a couple of minutes that there might be some sort of consensus on the issue of the dog rapist, but then apparently not. I admit I don't always understand what some of VioletSky's posts are saying.

Mmm - quite, Molly.

It’s OK GSM Nowhere else Other than on Gransnet. This is Gransnet. Anywhere else VS might be a different name so we wouldn’t know.

"Sometimes you can't fight what people need you to be to feel better about themselves"

~My son

Germanshepherdsmum

I’m confused VS. A topic you hadn’t discussed anywhere else? Have my eyes been deceiving me when reading numerous threads when you’ve discussed trans issues?

Other than gransnet

I don’t always know whether humour, irony, sarcasm or whatever is in action.

I’m confused VS. A topic you hadn’t discussed anywhere else? Have my eyes been deceiving me when reading numerous threads when you’ve discussed trans issues?

doodledog it wasn't meant negatively

Oh well. I tried. ?

Haven't vilified anyone doodledog this is an emotive topic.

Also it's a topic that I hadn't previously discussed anywhere which means I had a lot to learn about the whys of it all and how to best put my views.

I think you and I almost saw each other when I explained something that happened on another thread but then you were convinced otherwise.

If people are saying I'm rude or passive aggressive etc, it's probably very easy to look at my words in a different tone.

Also I don't like assumptions and haven't learned how to best respond other than directly

Apart from that I don't dislike anyone based purely on their views because society is a mess and full of issues that don't always originate from the obvious answer

?

VioletSky

doodledog

I was asked to explain what I meant and I have. I'm not saying anyone is of the opposite view.

I use the word a lot, particularly to express that people genuinely feel the way they feel.

There will always be a minority of people who use real world situations or to some advantage or for attention which generally mucks things up for all of us and that is not valid

Ok, so transpeople are 'valid', and those who 'muck things up' are not valid.

This sounds similar to GagaJo's assertion that transwomen who use a penis to rape are not 'real' transpeople, but so-called 'cis' men.

Which sounds eerily similar to what many of us have been saying all along - that we have no issue with transpeople, but with a state of affairs that allows some of these men to use the cover of trans as a means of victimising women, which is, if you like, 'invalid', and needs to be stopped.

I'm not sure why we have been so vilified for saying what now seems to be a consensus, but it looks as though we just need to sort out the rest of the linguistic mangling to be in full agreement.

Tentative group hug?

GagaJo

Fair enough. The bloke we're talking about is lower than an animal. Raping children & animals? Let's just call it a slug.

Let’s not call it a slug. Slugs have a purpose and use in the right places. This article serves no purpose on this earth at all.

doodledog

I was asked to explain what I meant and I have. I'm not saying anyone is of the opposite view.

I use the word a lot, particularly to express that people genuinely feel the way they feel.

There will always be a minority of people who use real world situations or to some advantage or for attention which generally mucks things up for all of us and that is not valid