Scarf in Suffragette colours not allowed in Scottish Parliament.

Glorianny

I very rarely reported in the past and made a decision to never do so again a while ago.

I think sometimes people need the opportunity to show themselves and should get it.

I've had a couple of situations where I've been accused of reporting and vilified for it and the person who actually did offered to own up by message.

I've said absolutely no way.

1, I don't think anyone would be able to back down on their own words to me so I would just be accused of not being the only reporter

2. Most people would view a deleted comment as having broken guidelines and blaming the person reporting for the consequence of their own behaviour just shows up that behaviour even more so.

3. I didn't want them to lose out on any support or welcome they might not then receive (we were at different ends of opinion or situation)

Anyone can read any trans thread and see what is described about them honestly.

Glorianny

Doodledog

The thing is, if none of us can see what's supposed to be happening, it might just be that you are wrong?

Lets put it like this Doodledog have I ever said you are misogynistic? or you don't care about women? or that you wish harm to women?
Because that is often said to me. With of course no evidence whatsoever.
As I said you'd believe I was assaulted by a man but not what is in plain evidence on this thread and others.

As you are avoiding making a direct accusation, I can't tell if you are aiming that at me, which, as Latyrus points out avoids having to take responsibility for what you post. But I'll assume so, as you mentioned my name.

I have said that many of the things you have posted are misogynistic, as I believe that they are. Similarly, your posts often come across as uncaring about women. I don't believe that I have ever said that you wish harm to women, although there are times when I have thought that you'd see such harm as collateral damage in the fight to have men recognised as women at will.

Posting things that sweep aside the concerns of women when they conflict with those of men, suggesting that it is ok for men to be in women's spaces as it is rare for them to be up to no good, saying that women who object to men in their spaces have a victim mentality are a few examples of what I mean, although there are more. None of those attitudes suggest that they belong to someone who cares about women and who likes them as a sex enough to believe that they have a right to even exist as a sex, do they?

The difference is that I say that at the time of the posts, allow a right of reply, and respond to your replies, so the evidence is there. I don't post and run, insinuate, make vague and generalised comments about 'some posters', ignore posts asking difficult questions or cry 'bully'.

VioletSky
Having stated that you believe there is bullying and vile behaviour on GN puts a completely different perspective on your other posts.

Oh wow. I’ve just been told I’m like a rapist.

MerylStreep

VioletSky
Having stated that you believe there is bullying and vile behaviour on GN puts a completely different perspective on your other posts.

Sorry, I'm not sure what this means?

Ilovecheese

What is concerning to me about the Conservatives being seen as the party which is on the side of women is that it will mean they get more votes.
I don't see where the pay gap fits in here.

Of course it doesn't. It is a classic attempt at diverting from a conversation that is getting too difficult to defend.

I agree that it is disconcerting that the Tories and the Mail are on the side of women in this, and that Labour and the Guardian are making a complete mess of it and coming over as anti-feminist, as are all the opposition parties, with the SNP and Greens the worst offenders. That sits badly with me, too.

It's a guess, but I don't think the Tories are actually a feminist party, so much as they don't care much about the rights of transpeople so don't care if they say the wrong thing. The opposition parties do care about the rights of minorities, so are scared of being portrayed as transphobic if they dare to say anything that can be made to sound bad. We've all seen that sort of thing in action.

It's a mess. I am still going to vote Labour, but I do have reservations. I know women who won't, but as the Greens would have been their fallback they will spoil their ballot paper. Similarly with the SNP for my Scottish friends and family. I can't say I agree with that as a course of action, but I can understand it.

I also don't think that the Mail and the Conservatives are really supporting women, they just see it as a way to win women's votes.
I am not sure yet about my voting intentions at the next general election but my vote will not be influenced by this issue. (I'm not in Scotland)

Glorianny

Lathyrus

Glorianny

Doodledog

The thing is, if none of us can see what's supposed to be happening, it might just be that you are wrong?

Lets put it like this Doodledog have I ever said you are misogynistic? or you don't care about women? or that you wish harm to women?
Because that is often said to me. With of course no evidence whatsoever.
As I said you'd believe I was assaulted by a man but not what is in plain evidence on this thread and others.

Well, actually the accuser don’t seem to be able to come up with one bit of evidence.

If you can't be bothered to look for yourself and don't accept someones's belief aren't you a bit like those men who claim it wasn't rape because I thought she really wanted me to?
The evidence is there you choose not to see it.

Well let’s ignore the fact that you’ve compared me to a rapist🙄

I can’t see the evidence you say is so apparent and since you can’t point it out either, it’s obvious it doesn’t exist.

Just false accusations and nastiness.A bit like saying someone’s the same as a rapist.

I’m waiting for the vioketsky to protest about this, It must be one of the vilest posts she has ever seen.

Just checked back and I did say The Observer today

violetsky at 19.25 today you said

I very rarely reported in the past and made a decision to never do so again a while ago.

I think sometimes people need the opportunity to show themselves and should get it.

I've had a couple of situations where I've been accused of reporting and vilified for it and the person who actually did offered to own up by message.

I've said absolutely no way.

But on the 16th November at 23.47 you said
I am not going back but from now on I will be reporting personal comments in future for 2 reasons

1. You think it's me anyway so might as well

2. It takes a lot to wind me up to the point I reciprocate and I'm not letting that happen again

So you can't really complain when your thought of as a serial reporter when you've admitted that that's what you do.

G, you say, I have the ability to discuss women's issues from many angles

I’ve yet to see that ability though, as you always seem to post in support of males on trans threads.
So maybe you could give some clarification on Women’s issues-
The issue not to have cheating males compete unfairly in female sport.
Is your angle in support of females or males in this issue?
*The issue of females having to cope with males-whether harmful or not in female safe spaces?
Is your angle in support of females or males on this issue? Actually, you already answered that one.

The issue of females having the right to be treated by a female if that is what is requested-and at least not be palmed off with a TW?

Is your angle in support of females or TW on this issue?

The issue of TW in female mental health wards, where some patients have already been traumatised by males?

How is your angle in support of females in this issue?

The attacks of JKR and any others who state the truth that you cannot change sex.

How is your ability to discuss female issues like that.

Doodledog

Glorianny

Doodledog

The thing is, if none of us can see what's supposed to be happening, it might just be that you are wrong?

Lets put it like this Doodledog have I ever said you are misogynistic? or you don't care about women? or that you wish harm to women?
Because that is often said to me. With of course no evidence whatsoever.
As I said you'd believe I was assaulted by a man but not what is in plain evidence on this thread and others.

As you are avoiding making a direct accusation, I can't tell if you are aiming that at me, which, as Latyrus points out avoids having to take responsibility for what you post. But I'll assume so, as you mentioned my name.

I have said that many of the things you have posted are misogynistic, as I believe that they are. Similarly, your posts often come across as uncaring about women. I don't believe that I have ever said that you wish harm to women, although there are times when I have thought that you'd see such harm as collateral damage in the fight to have men recognised as women at will.

Posting things that sweep aside the concerns of women when they conflict with those of men, suggesting that it is ok for men to be in women's spaces as it is rare for them to be up to no good, saying that women who object to men in their spaces have a victim mentality are a few examples of what I mean, although there are more. None of those attitudes suggest that they belong to someone who cares about women and who likes them as a sex enough to believe that they have a right to even exist as a sex, do they?

The difference is that I say that at the time of the posts, allow a right of reply, and respond to your replies, so the evidence is there. I don't post and run, insinuate, make vague and generalised comments about 'some posters', ignore posts asking difficult questions or cry 'bully'.

You see there is the twisting. Because what you describe as men I believe are women. They are I suppose transwomen. Which leads me to wonder why you can't refer to them as transwomen, even if you consider they are men. I suppose it is because it makes me sound so much worse.

Unfortunately it is a method used by people who want to eliminate or denigrate a group of people they don't like or care about. Refuse to use their proper name, call them something which misrepresents them or belittles them.

If only you could at least use their proper name. But I suppose saying I think transwomen should be in women's spaces doesn't have quite the same effect does it? And isn't actually misogynistic.

So I think my case is proven.
It's OK to castigate a woman who disagrees with you.
It's OK to label her misogynistic
It's OK to twist and misrepresent her views to prove your point.
It's OK not to acknowledge or even recognise that she has real concerns about the way in which women are already being targeted because they don't conform to gender stereotypes.

Ilovecheese

I also don't think that the Mail and the Conservatives are really supporting women, they just see it as a way to win women's votes.
I am not sure yet about my voting intentions at the next general election but my vote will not be influenced by this issue. (I'm not in Scotland)

No, I don't think the Mail or the Tories are feminist either - far from it. I'm not even sure that they see this as a way to get female voted. I think it's more that they are less concerned about minority rights than the opposition parties.

It is a dilemma - despite the lies told on here, I am in favour of minority rights, too, and feel sad for the transpeople who are suffering because of the actions of Stonewall and its supporters. I also know what it's like to have your words twisted in an attempt to make you look bigoted, so I understand why the opposition parties fight shy. It's just that it seems such a betrayal of women.

Chaucer

violetsky at 19.25 today you said

I very rarely reported in the past and made a decision to never do so again a while ago.

I think sometimes people need the opportunity to show themselves and should get it.

I've had a couple of situations where I've been accused of reporting and vilified for it and the person who actually did offered to own up by message.

I've said absolutely no way.

But on the 16th November at 23.47 you said
I am not going back but from now on I will be reporting personal comments in future for 2 reasons

1. You think it's me anyway so might as well

2. It takes a lot to wind me up to the point I reciprocate and I'm not letting that happen again

So you can't really complain when your thought of as a serial reporter when you've admitted that that's what you do.

1ol rarely

rarely

Oh dear

Another

Doodledog

Ilovecheese

What is concerning to me about the Conservatives being seen as the party which is on the side of women is that it will mean they get more votes.
I don't see where the pay gap fits in here.

Of course it doesn't. It is a classic attempt at diverting from a conversation that is getting too difficult to defend.

I agree that it is disconcerting that the Tories and the Mail are on the side of women in this, and that Labour and the Guardian are making a complete mess of it and coming over as anti-feminist, as are all the opposition parties, with the SNP and Greens the worst offenders. That sits badly with me, too.

It's a guess, but I don't think the Tories are actually a feminist party, so much as they don't care much about the rights of transpeople so don't care if they say the wrong thing. The opposition parties do care about the rights of minorities, so are scared of being portrayed as transphobic if they dare to say anything that can be made to sound bad. We've all seen that sort of thing in action.

It's a mess. I am still going to vote Labour, but I do have reservations. I know women who won't, but as the Greens would have been their fallback they will spoil their ballot paper. Similarly with the SNP for my Scottish friends and family. I can't say I agree with that as a course of action, but I can understand it.

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
That’s what I think too.

We wont say the magic words. Actually the reason I wont is because saying women want to be in womens prisons is not the truth, men want to be in womens prisons. It makes it much more cuddly and lovely to use the word women. It's part of the problem.

Galaxy, where have you been? did the dog eat you and we have had to wait for him to pass you out?

Is it ok to say a woman is like a rapist glorianna

Do you wish you hadn’t made that statement about me or do you feel fully justified in making that accusation.

Or maybe I got it the wrong way round.

Perhaps you meant that being a rapist is just a matter of disagreement really.

Lathyrus

Glorianny

Lathyrus

Glorianny

Doodledog

The thing is, if none of us can see what's supposed to be happening, it might just be that you are wrong?

Lets put it like this Doodledog have I ever said you are misogynistic? or you don't care about women? or that you wish harm to women?
Because that is often said to me. With of course no evidence whatsoever.
As I said you'd believe I was assaulted by a man but not what is in plain evidence on this thread and others.

Well, actually the accuser don’t seem to be able to come up with one bit of evidence.

If you can't be bothered to look for yourself and don't accept someones's belief aren't you a bit like those men who claim it wasn't rape because I thought she really wanted me to?
The evidence is there you choose not to see it.

Well let’s ignore the fact that you’ve compared me to a rapist🙄

I can’t see the evidence you say is so apparent and since you can’t point it out either, it’s obvious it doesn’t exist.

Just false accusations and nastiness.A bit like saying someone’s the same as a rapist.

I’m waiting for the vioketsky to protest about this, It must be one of the vilest posts she has ever seen.

Try Doodledog"s last post- men= transwomen.
I think transwomen are in women's spaces.
I think transwomen have been in women's spaces for a long time
I think the law is clear and protects women's spaces if women do not want transwomen in that space.
I think the concept that women must always be victims is not good for them and they should refuse to be labelled as just victims.
I think judging women by their appearance is already leading to women who look a little different being targeted and subjected to abuse.
I think the way transmen are ignored because they present too much of a problem to the gender critical is evidence of how their views are really not concerned with women, but with castigating transwomen.

JaneJudge

Galaxy, where have you been? did the dog eat you and we have had to wait for him to pass you out?

Doodledog

Ilovecheese

I also don't think that the Mail and the Conservatives are really supporting women, they just see it as a way to win women's votes.
I am not sure yet about my voting intentions at the next general election but my vote will not be influenced by this issue. (I'm not in Scotland)

No, I don't think the Mail or the Tories are feminist either - far from it. I'm not even sure that they see this as a way to get female voted. I think it's more that they are less concerned about minority rights than the opposition parties.

It is a dilemma - despite the lies told on here, I am in favour of minority rights, too, and feel sad for the transpeople who are suffering because of the actions of Stonewall and its supporters. I also know what it's like to have your words twisted in an attempt to make you look bigoted, so I understand why the opposition parties fight shy. It's just that it seems such a betrayal of women.

Well here’s doodledogs last post.

I can’t see anything vile in it.

Nothing that compares with “you are the same as a rapist”.

I was putting up the tree Jane judge, under the dogs supervision 🐕🌲.
As I have said about seventy five thousand times now, the gender critical under no circumstances ignore transmen. We have been highlighting the rise in women transitioning for a very long time. It seems the guardian have finally caught up with us as even they are talking about it now.

And there you go again G.

Unfortunately it is a method used by people who want to eliminate or denigrate a group of people they don't like or care about. Refuse to use their proper name, call them something which misrepresents them.

Which presumably is why you refer to the corrupted word ‘women’ rather than using the word female so that you can misrepresent TW as having changed sex.

It's OK to twist and misrepresent her views to prove your point.

I bow to your expertise in that skill G.

Unlike you, most posters on here as you very well know don’t have a problem with TW per se, only with the behaviour that damages, or harms females or deprived females of things that are rightfully theirs.

They do say that you can’t change sex-and many TW have never claimed to do that.

There was no need until the start of poor behaviour choices by some TW, with the accompanying publicity, sought out by some to prove that males have the right to do what they want.
Sadly this behaviour was and is supported by TRA and any who condone that behaviour just because the males say they are TW, including you if that’s what you do.

And once again I’m pointing out that you do what you accuse others of doing-but your, what did you call it? Oh yes, closed mind, won’t let you see it.
^ It’s OK not to acknowledge or even recognise that she has real concerns about the way in which women are already being targeted because they don't conform to gender stereotypes.^
And I see your views as saying,
It's OK not to acknowledge or even recognise that I have real concerns about the way in which females are already being targeted because they don't accept biological untruths that hide behind gender stereotypes.

I'm still laughing about how mad people get when they are reported

When I've done it I've been honest about it

We joined a forum with guidelines

Don't break the guidelines an you can't be reported

Simples