The law as it stands on sex, Part 2

Doodledog asks
What, then, is a man who dresses up as a transwoman in order to commit a crime?
trisher says
He's a criminal

Indeed, and his crime is likely to be recorded as being committed by a female, and he is likely to be housed along with female prisoners if he chooses to say he's a woman.

All fine with you trisher?

Galaxy

Yes as I have said talking about male violence makes people uncomfortable. There are many reasons gor that.

I'm quite willing to talk about male violence especially if we begin with a few facts. The people most at danger of violence from strangers are other men. Women are most at danger of violence from a partner or relative.
Most rapes are committed by someone a woman knows
More men than women are murdered.
More women are murdered by someone close to them.
Women are subjected to violence by police officers. From 2016-2021 over 800 instances of violence by police officers were reported by women. Only 43 cases were prosecuted.
All of these are true
So lets talk about male violence accurately.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-56365412

Doodledog that is terrible.
I certainly didn't mean that lesbians are immune from sexual assault.
I meant that no lesbian has to feel that she should include transwomen as possible partners.

trisher

A man in a dress is a transvestite. Some see transvestites as being a stage on the way to a transwoman. Some just like to dress up. Some women like it.

?
Whatever 'stage' they are at, they are still male.

FarNorth

^E.g. proud that TW can insist that lesbians, who have fought their own battles for peaceful existence, must have sex with them because TW are women?^

No-one has to have sex with anyone they don't want to.
Lesbians are getting a lot of harassment for not considering male people as potential partners, though.

A good friend of mine was assaulted (think attempted rape) when she met what she thought was going to be a woman and declined his offer. She would have had to have sex if she hadn't managed to fight him off.

It's honestly as though we were typing in a different language, isn't it?

On these threads I do my best to be as unambiguous as possible, even though I am aware that for 'some people' words such as 'man' and 'woman' have taken on different meanings, but somehow I still manage to be misunderstood. It's odd, as that virtually never happens anywhere else.

E.g. proud that TW can insist that lesbians, who have fought their own battles for peaceful existence, must have sex with them because TW are women?

No-one has to have sex with anyone they don't want to.
Lesbians are getting a lot of harassment for not considering male people as potential partners, though.

Imagine if you posted about a black crime and linked all black people to it, wold (sic) that be acceptable

Nope. But point me to one single post, on any of the threads, that have ever said that all trans people have malevolent intent. Just one will do.

Yes as I have said talking about male violence makes people uncomfortable. There are many reasons gor that.

You are welcome to post links however stating things like You know quite well that your comparison with black, gay, old, young, poor, disabled women doesn't hold water because those people are indisputably women, but transwomen, by dint of having a penis and male gametes, are not. However you dress it up, magic words won't change biology

That was me, not Chewbacca, and it is a statement of fact. I didn't mention harmful behaviour. I mentioned the gametes because I had a feeling that instead of addressing the point you would look for something with which to find fault. What's the percentage of transpeople who surgically transition? I'm sure you have posted it before, although I have no idea how accurate something like that can be, as we don't know how many people 'identify' outside of their sex class. Either way, accurate figures or not, we know that those transwomen who have a penis outnumber those who don't. In any case - can you please explain how my statement propagates negative stereotypes? Penis or no penis, transwomen are not the same as the groups you brought into the discussion, as they are male-bodied.

So. According to you a man in a dress is a transvestite, and if he wears the dress for nefarious reasons he is a criminal? Can we have a definition of a woman and a transwoman, for purposes of comparison, please?

Chewbacca

^Can I just remind you of the UN Free&Equal advice about transgender issues^
No 3 of the Media advice
Do not propagate negative and harmful stereotypes about trans people.
Which is actually all these threads are.

What is it about TRAs, and their allies, that they feel the need to issue thinly veiled threats? Any discussion, or doubts about the trans movement and it's negative impact on women, releases "warnings" of dire consequences to silence and cancel any discourse; I've seen it happen on here several times now and even more so in the public arena. For the avoidance of doubt; every url, copy and pasted post that has been uploaded onto these forums has been obtained from within the public domain and is accessible by anyone. I don't take kindly to being threatened and warned by posters as to what is propagation of stereotypes and will instead be guided by GNHQ as to whether the media news and links that I share here are in breach of their guidelines or not. Until I'm asked not to share them, I will continue.

Cancelling, silencing and shutting down women's voices is what this whole issue is about - make women nervous, hesitant and afraid to say anything and eventually they'll give up, move over and accept that men can subsume their spaces, their identity and their rights to have any voice whatsoever. You have had no sucess whatsoever in silencing JK Rowling, Maya Forstater, Kathleen Stock and many others; quite the opposite. And you'll have no success in silencing me either.

You are welcome to post links however stating things like You know quite well that your comparison with black, gay, old, young, poor, disabled women doesn't hold water because those people are indisputably women, but transwomen, by dint of having a penis and male gametes, are not. However you dress it up, magic words won't change biology
Is propagating negative stereotypes because some transwomen have a penis and some don't.
And if you are linking harmful behaviour to all transpeople you are doing the same.
Imagine if you posted about a black crime and linked all black people to it, wold that be acceptable?

Doodledog

trisher

A man in a dress is a transvestite. Some see transvestites as being a stage on the way to a transwoman. Some just like to dress up. Some women like it.

We are out of synch .

Ok, that is one definition of a man in a dress. What, then, is a man who dresses up as a transwoman in order to commit a crime? How does he differ from a transwoman and/or a transvestite?

I don't think that transvestism is a stage on the way to becoming a transwoman, but that's another story, and probably best left for now.

He's a criminal

I suspect that they're on some kind of self aggrandising moralistic power trip; appointing themselves the arbiter of "inclusionary correctness" and gain some kind of satisfaction in trying to impose that on other people. Possibly due to a lack of influence or social impact elsewhere. But whatever the reason; the warnings and thinly veiled threats are having the opposite effect; it confirms that the majority of women who are fighting this nonsense are having impact and the effects of their efforts are being sorely felt.

Very well said, Chewbacca.

Defining any attempt to say that some trans issues are detrimental to women as 'transphobic' is an attempt to silence people.

The saccharine 'be kind' mantra is a way to shut women up.

The report button on here has been used to stop debate.

The repeated use of 'some posters' is used to make vague threats that can be denied, and make it difficult for individual posters to defend themselves.

As you say, this all seems like small beer compared to the cancellations of people like JKR, the wrecking of the careers of people like Kathleen Stock, the threats on Twitter and attacks on women who protest against their erasure; but anyone reading these threads will have seen it in action. The refusal to answer direct questions with direct answers is frustrating, and may be an attempt to discourage people from bothering to ask (it may just be rudeness, but it's wearisome nevertheless), but it's not going to work.

Trans people must be able to understand when their rights are infringed, and to be able to take appropriate action.

So using your language trisher, can you now give an unequivocal answer yonthe following?

And when these trans rights conflict with or override the rights of ciswomen, trisher, your position is . . . ?

I await your next obfuscation-or simply non answer.

Can I just remind you of the UN Free&Equal advice about transgender issues
No 3 of the Media advice
Do not propagate negative and harmful stereotypes about trans people.
Which is actually all these threads are.

What is it about TRAs, and their allies, that they feel the need to issue thinly veiled threats? Any discussion, or doubts about the trans movement and it's negative impact on women, releases "warnings" of dire consequences to silence and cancel any discourse; I've seen it happen on here several times now and even more so in the public arena. For the avoidance of doubt; every url, copy and pasted post that has been uploaded onto these forums has been obtained from within the public domain and is accessible by anyone. I don't take kindly to being threatened and warned by posters as to what is propagation of stereotypes and will instead be guided by GNHQ as to whether the media news and links that I share here are in breach of their guidelines or not. Until I'm asked not to share them, I will continue.

Cancelling, silencing and shutting down women's voices is what this whole issue is about - make women nervous, hesitant and afraid to say anything and eventually they'll give up, move over and accept that men can subsume their spaces, their identity and their rights to have any voice whatsoever. You have had no sucess whatsoever in silencing JK Rowling, Maya Forstater, Kathleen Stock and many others; quite the opposite. And you'll have no success in silencing me either.

trisher

A man in a dress is a transvestite. Some see transvestites as being a stage on the way to a transwoman. Some just like to dress up. Some women like it.

We are out of synch .

Ok, that is one definition of a man in a dress. What, then, is a man who dresses up as a transwoman in order to commit a crime? How does he differ from a transwoman and/or a transvestite?

I don't think that transvestism is a stage on the way to becoming a transwoman, but that's another story, and probably best left for now.

My post was referencing your 'answer' to me, but in your answer to Molly you still haven't answered.

Nobody is denying human rights to transpeople. There is a list of human rights upthread, and if you can point to one that is being denied to transpeople I will be very surprised.

I would, however, still like an answer to the woman/transwomen/man in dress question.

A man in a dress is a transvestite. Some see transvestites as being a stage on the way to a transwoman. Some just like to dress up. Some women like it.

The UN announcement on Human Rights Day www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMOQysqo-qE&t=102s

Again, that is not answering the question. The law (any law) does not rely on your knowledge of anything - it exists in its own right. Whether you know if someone is a woman doesn't alter whether they are or not.

Aside from that, the question was asking what you see as the differences between women, transwomen and men in dresses, but you have again refused to answer.

Mollygo

Do you know,
I wrote down what your answer would be, that you would pretend natal females means the same as women -and I was not disappointed.
???
Another example of a politician answer, why are you answer the question you wanted to see, not the one that was asked.

Do you mean ciswomen Mollygo? Well I do know the difference between a ciswoman and a transwoman. I also know that human rights are just that HUMAN rights. They are not changed by sex, gender, ethnicity, class, or any other division the patriarchy have chosen to inflict on people. They remain human rights and they are the rights of everyone. No one can claim them for themselves.

Doodledog

I am absolutely certain that this is why you won't answer the question about the differences between women, transwomen and men in dresses, trisher.

You know quite well that your comparison with black, gay, old, young, poor, disabled women doesn't hold water because those people are indisputably women, but transwomen, by dint of having a penis and male gametes, are not. However you dress it up, magic words won't change biology.

If you have a way of explaining the differences that acknowledges that vital fact but still makes transwomen women, I may change my mind, but as long as TWAW is the basis of an argument that works by putting your hands over your eyes so you don't see the biology as relevant, it won't be happening, and I am very far from alone in thinking as I do.

Doodledog I don't how if the person next to me has a penis or indeed what their gametes are. If you can explain to me how I can know then I perhaps could engage but you can't. So I accept the person who says she is a woman. She may be trans I don't know. And if I don't know how could anyone else so how can there be a conflict between her rights and mine? If someone removes her rights they also remove mine.

I am absolutely certain that this is why you won't answer the question about the differences between women, transwomen and men in dresses, trisher.

You know quite well that your comparison with black, gay, old, young, poor, disabled women doesn't hold water because those people are indisputably women, but transwomen, by dint of having a penis and male gametes, are not. However you dress it up, magic words won't change biology.

If you have a way of explaining the differences that acknowledges that vital fact but still makes transwomen women, I may change my mind, but as long as TWAW is the basis of an argument that works by putting your hands over your eyes so you don't see the biology as relevant, it won't be happening, and I am very far from alone in thinking as I do.

Do you know,
I wrote down what your answer would be, that you would pretend natal females means the same as women -and I was not disappointed.
???
Another example of a politician answer, why are you answer the question you wanted to see, not the one that was asked.