Transgender people who start hormones as teenagers rather than adults 'have better mental health’

Can you please show where I have silenced people. Again I am going to challenge those posts every time you make them.

I have already listed the ways in which (up to the time of the post) GagJo has twisted posters’ words, accused people of bullying, hostility and bickering, and how she has tried to close off all posts that disagree with her stance with a rather pompously announced ‘statement’ outlining her refusal to engage with what she defines as ‘demands’.

Since then, I have been accused of racism, professional incompetence and an inability to understand the importance of context by trisher. These accusations came after I questioned her attempts to divert the conversation to the usual red herrings of a black athlete with abnormally high levels of testosterone, and of hypothetical ‘butch’ women having to prove that they are female ‘everywhere they go’.

VS’s ‘arguments’ consist of accusations that people are ‘making assumptions’ and suggesting that only she cares about transpeople or children. Oh, and that we haven’t read the research paper that she hasn’t read herself. At the risk of making assumptions, I doubt that either trisher or Gagajo has read it either. Access to academic journals is expensive without access through a university library, and if any of them had read it they would have been able to answer the fairly basic questions about the research process.

After trisher’s latest attack I wasn’t sure whether to return to the thread, so slept on it, and considered the situation this morning. My inclination, in the cold light of day, is to continue what I started to do at the start of the thread, which is to point out the way in which any posts that give a point of view or ask questions that don’t fall in line with the TRA point of view are pushed aside with diversions, insults and accusations.

The thread has descended into an unedifying state, but whilst it might have been easier to walk away, if people point out these DARVO attempts (Divert, Attack, then Reverse the Victim and Offender) it might make the perpetrators less inclined to attempt them in future threads on this important topic. Time will tell.

Cross posted, Galaxy ?

Gagajo and Violetsky thankyou for preserving my belief in supportive and inclusive feminism. Sometimes on these threads I really begin to doubt if there are many of us out there.
It is impossibe to ask for any reasonable level of debate possibly because those who are contesting the argument realise the weakness of their case. So they digress into "are these women" or "we are fighting for refuges".
I could try once more but I don't really expect an answer.
If the gender critical want a society that works on sex differences, how do they see that being implemented in everyday life?
At present most of the people I know will accept or categorise someone according to their appearance and/or what gender they declare if asked. Transwomen therefore are included in women's facilities and transmen in men's. How do you see that changing if you consider transwomen should not be in women's facilities and how would this be managed?
(I don't expect any answer to this really)

One thing I have realised, given the level of aggro aimed at those who are trans-inclusive, I can see why young people who are having thoughts of transitioning would have real problems talking openly about it. Which means that if the most important thing for those young people isn't hormone therapy but a sympathetic and understanding society they are pretty much screwed. (Fortunately this is GN and not real life)

I dont know how you have the nerve to criticise the level of debate when basically you just called someone thick. Its breathtaking.

Doodledog wouldn't it be nice if just for once you could actually post an opinion without trying to belittle, accuse, denigrate of otherwise question other posters. In fact wihout naming any other poster, reproducing their words, attempting to twist their meaning and create straw men arguments, or claiming to be a victim when you are called out about something. Just once.

As I have said before I am continually discussing the interventions offered to children with autism, sometimes I suggest that they are not working, sometimes I say they have worked really well, usually I say I think the idea was good but we didnt implement it well. None of this is demonstrating a hostility to children.

More insults, trisher? Are your posts on this thread approximating the ‘spirit of Gransnet’?

I could try once more but I don't really expect an answer.
If you expect an answer it would be useful if you posed a question.

GalaxyI fully admit sometimes I get carried away but only in the case of absolute provocation. If the level of debate is lowered by false accusations I'm certainly not going to just lie down and take it.

I can also see why so many trans people very quietly try to pass and are not open about their trans status. It is dangerous.

Some people are unable to even talk about the issue theoretically without become unpleasant. I can only imagine the thread someone trans would feel.

Isn't this a question Doodledog
At present most of the people I know will accept or categorise someone according to their appearance and/or what gender they declare if asked. Transwomen therefore are included in women's facilities and transmen in men's. How do you see that changing if you consider transwomen should not be in women's facilities and how would this be managed?

trisher

Doodledog wouldn't it be nice if just for once you could actually post an opinion without trying to belittle, accuse, denigrate of otherwise question other posters. In fact wihout naming any other poster, reproducing their words, attempting to twist their meaning and create straw men arguments, or claiming to be a victim when you are called out about something. Just once.

I have never called a poster racist, questioned their professional competence, implied that they don’t care about other people, or employed any of the numerous that have been used against me. As for twisting words, you can not be serious, surely?

I have given my opinion many times- you just don’t like it, so take no notice.

GagaJo

I can also see why so many trans people very quietly try to pass and are not open about their trans status. It is dangerous.

Some people are unable to even talk about the issue theoretically without become unpleasant. I can only imagine the thread someone trans would feel.

We are back to ‘some people’? That is a double edged sword, you know. Readers of this thread, if there are any left, can see who is being unpleasant, insulting and disingenuous.

Basically I think what many on this thread really want is to see transpeople pushed back into the closet so they can once again pretend they aren't there. The harm this does isn't considered.

trisher

Isn't this a question Doodledog
^At present most of the people I know will accept or categorise someone according to their appearance and/or what gender they declare if asked. Transwomen therefore are included in women's facilities and transmen in men's. How do you see that changing if you consider transwomen should not be in women's facilities and how would this be managed?^

‘Most of the people you know’ doesn’t include anyone who believes that sex can’t be changed, though, so it’s hardly representative of society at large.

I have answered this over and over, trisher. It’s like Groundhog Day sometimes.

trisher

Doodledog wouldn't it be nice if just for once you could actually post an opinion without trying to belittle, accuse, denigrate of otherwise question other posters. In fact wihout naming any other poster, reproducing their words, attempting to twist their meaning and create straw men arguments, or claiming to be a victim when you are called out about something. Just once.

Actually trisher, I couldn’t have put your words better, except they would have been more accurately addressed at you rather than Doodledog.
You do all the things you mention in your post and in addition deviate from the subject in question in the same way, e.g. racism every time, (although KKK was a new low even for you), regardless of the initial post.
If I had my computer to hand I would have cut and pasted the post rather than quoting it.

If you post "sympathy" for a black woman athlete because you "don't know" about what is happening , you can have your pick racist or ignorant? Why would anyone, but particularly a woman, campaign vigorously to have transwomen banned from sport without looking at the whole picture? Why isn't a black woman athlete worthy of your support, but only qualifies for "sympathy". Honestly if you can't see the racism in that I completely apologise for calling you racist. But black women athletes are fighting for equality is sympathy enough?

trisher

Basically I think what many on this thread really want is to see transpeople pushed back into the closet so they can once again pretend they aren't there. The harm this does isn't considered.

Quite the reverse actually. I am perfectly happy with transpeople being full members of society in their adopted personae. I do not, however, agree that they should be assumed to be members of their adopted sex. They are transmembers, which, without diminishing their status in any way, is a different thing.

I have replied to three of your posts in a row now. Are you planning to engage with my post of 10.08?

Doodledog

trisher

Isn't this a question Doodledog
^At present most of the people I know will accept or categorise someone according to their appearance and/or what gender they declare if asked. Transwomen therefore are included in women's facilities and transmen in men's. How do you see that changing if you consider transwomen should not be in women's facilities and how would this be managed?^

‘Most of the people you know’ doesn’t include anyone who believes that sex can’t be changed, though, so it’s hardly representative of society at large.

I have answered this over and over, trisher. It’s like Groundhog Day sometimes.

Just pretend I'm as stupid and ignorant as you believe Doodledog and post your answer again please. I must have missed it.

trisher

If you post "sympathy" for a black woman athlete because you "don't know" about what is happening , you can have your pick racist or ignorant? Why would anyone, but particularly a woman, campaign vigorously to have transwomen banned from sport without looking at the whole picture? Why isn't a black woman athlete worthy of your support, but only qualifies for "sympathy". Honestly if you can't see the racism in that I completely apologise for calling you racist. But black women athletes are fighting for equality is sympathy enough?

If that is a sly dig at me, I do not ‘campaign vigorously’ to have transwomen banned from sport.

Would you please explain the basis for this latest slur?

Just pretend I'm as stupid and ignorant as you believe Doodledog and post your answer again please. I must have missed it.
Another attack. This is getting beyond a joke now.

Doodledog

trisher

Basically I think what many on this thread really want is to see transpeople pushed back into the closet so they can once again pretend they aren't there. The harm this does isn't considered.

Quite the reverse actually. I am perfectly happy with transpeople being full members of society in their adopted personae. I do not, however, agree that they should be assumed to be members of their adopted sex. They are transmembers, which, without diminishing their status in any way, is a different thing.

I have replied to three of your posts in a row now. Are you planning to engage with my post of 10.08?

Really this is so theoretical how would it work in practice is what I want to know. How will you identfy who is trans, will you limit their rights? Can someone really "adopt a personae" isn't that a bit like saying I'm a real person but you aren't?

I sympathised with the predicament of someone who has very unusual physiology, which on the one hand gives her the advantage in sport when running against women, but in the other results in the fairness of allowing her to do so coming into question.

Her race is, to my mind, irrelevant. Perhaps you could explain why you drag her race into every post where she is mentioned?

I have replied to three of your posts in a row now. Are you planning to engage with my post of 10.08?
Well "no" because it's the usual straw man argument.

Who is banning transwomen from sport. Sport is or should be segregated by sex. This does not ban people from sport. In the same way not allowing me to play in the under 8s football team does not ban me from sport. The under 8s would all beat me anyway.