Yet another MP, ignorant about biology.

Lathyrus

I’m looking forward to the day when males don’t try all sorts of tricks and deception to gain access to vunerable females.

Until that day best we have some protections in place, don’t you think?

Sorry are you saying all females are vulnerable? Or only some?
Sounds to me very similar to some cultures that make women stay in separate spaces, where the men in their family can protect them from other predatory males.

And I've posted about the safeguards and what a joy they will be!

There were a great many clips of Kirsty Blackman’s speech on Twitter last night. This is the funniest one I saw - imaginary microphones pick up what Joanna Cherry and Neale Hanvey might have been saying to each other.
The facial expressions of both of them and Rosie Duffield were just wonderful throughout KB’s speech.

twitter.com/theindyninja1/status/1668345399831150592?s=61&t=qph6ruaz5B5GPjDn7jnZBw

Why would you look forward to that Glorianny? Although it is a step forward from your usual suggestion of looking down pants.
Do you think when that happens, people will stop announcing their sex to you?
They never do it to me, I don’t move in that sort of milieu.

Experience shows, Rosie51, that MPs are often quite prepared to pontificate regardless of their knowledge status. It seems to go with the job.

Lathyrus

There could be a genetic or a developmental reason for gender dyphoria but that would have to start from the premise that a gender is assigned by sex.

If there is no identified sex, then gender cannot differ from it and there can be no dysphoria.

I had really thought we were getting somewhere with the reduction of stereotypes (gender rôles) associated with sex.
Now here they are crashing back again throughout society, starting with the very first books for babies & toddlers.

Well, speaking of pontificating, and I don't know if this is quite relevant to this thread, so forgive me if you think it is changing the emphasis. But, apparently Sadiq Khan has asked/requested(?) in his new inclusivity guide (your guess is as good as mine), that his staff are now to use the phrase
'people with period poverty (as not all people have periods)'
I suppose that I could be in that category, along with my husband, or a trans man, or a trans woman.
Confusing or what?!
I thought the whole point of language was to convey a meaning succinctly!
Oh, and of course the taxpayer for this foolishness is footing the bill.

MartinC1967

I’m somewhat perturbed that someone who’s so throughly ignorant was ever thought to be suitable to be an MP.

It’s obvious she’d be incapable of ever holding down a proper job that had tricky stuff - like adding up and spelling - involved.

SNP, when it had its huge surge in support after the 2014 referendum, was very lax about whom it accepted as candidates.
The voters didn't always expect much from them, either, except lots of enthusiasm for independence.

starting with the very first books for babies and toddlers

This aspect in particular frightens me.

Glorianny

Lathyrus

I’m looking forward to the day when males don’t try all sorts of tricks and deception to gain access to vunerable females.

Until that day best we have some protections in place, don’t you think?

Sorry are you saying all females are vulnerable? Or only some?
Sounds to me very similar to some cultures that make women stay in separate spaces, where the men in their family can protect them from other predatory males.

Well that’s the dilemma isn’t it?

Do males attack and molest females. Yes, plenty of proof of that.

Should our society try to prevent it?

That is where we differ.

At the most benign you seem to be saying females must just take their chances. Liberty of both male and female is paramount.

At its worst your view seem to contain that old adage of the only females that are attacked are those who have done something to deserve it

I would be really interested in a description of how you think your ideas of Liberty for all would actually work in practice.

Added to that, all women are vulnerable at certain times, whether or not they see themselves as such most of the time.

Anyone is vulnerable when undressed, ill or confined, and there are circumstances where all three of those states coincide (eg in a hospital ward). It is in places like that where many women feel that men (or the male-bodied) are not welcome. That has nothing to do with cultural assumptions about female attractiveness being a temptation, which you seem to be suggesting, Glorianny - but about the reality that a sick woman in a nightdress or hospital gown who may be connected to equipment is vulnerable by any definition of the word.

Places such as changing rooms and public conveniences have always been risky - we were warned against 'dirty old men', flashers and rapists as children, and as I have said on here before, as a student a friend of mine was sexually assaulted in a Ladies' in a bar, and that was all when a man going into these places would stand out (which is how things didn't go worse for my friend). Now that they can say they are women and lurk much more easily, what once were 'safe spaces' have become less so, and this is why there should be firm boundaries about who is allowed access.

Glorianny
Sorry are you saying all females are vulnerable? Or only some?
Sounds to me very similar to some cultures that make women stay in separate spaces, where the men in their family can protect them from other predatory males.

Superb piece of twisting there! Well done!

No one has said either of those things you twirled around, but good try.

In the same way that no one has said you have to know about chromosomes.
I just said that KB ought to know what she was talking about if she used the word when addressing a public meeting.

Lathyrus
Do males attack and molest females. Yes, plenty of proof of that.

Glorianny please don’t jump in and say females attack females too. That has nothing to do with whether or not males attack females.
Like Lathyrus,
I would be really interested in a description of how you think your ideas of Liberty for all would actually work in practice.

Mollygo

Why would you look forward to that Glorianny? Although it is a step forward from your usual suggestion of looking down pants.
Do you think when that happens, people will stop announcing their sex to you?
They never do it to me, I don’t move in that sort of milieu.

I think I have said many times Mollygo (one does wonder if it is deliberate inability to appreciate, or just desperation to keep telling me what I think or have said, which is a feature of your posts) that I have never asked for or seen evidence of the sex of most of the people I meet. So quite how anyone is announcing their sex I'm not sure.

Oh for the days when there were strong women who were going to change the world and make it less confrontational and aggressive. Now apparently we are supposed to cower in corners specially reserved for us.

If no one is going to check my chromosomes why does anyone need to know about them?

As for the aggression in public places the biggest number of victims of violence in those places are young men.under 25.
Women get beaten up and raped more in their own homes by men they know.
Still why question reality when the fantasy is so much easier to relate?

Are those young men beaten up by women or are they beaten up by you know men?
Are you saying there should be no sex segregation whatsoever. To be fair I think that's a slightly more honest position than there should be sex segregation but these special men dont have to abide by it.

This is like listening to a stuck record.

Why does it matter if someone is going to 'check' anything? People are expected to obey the law without costing surveillance.

Nobody is 'fantasising' about any of this, except, perhaps, some of the men who enjoy having power over women. The insistence that women who don't want men in safe spaces are 'cowering' is anti-feminist and insulting.

Someone half naked, unable to run and maybe partially conscious is vulnerable - are you denying that? A 12 year old girl in a changing room deserves not to be ogled by a man when she takes off her swimming costume - do you deny that? Women who belong to religions that do not allow men to see women other than their wives naked have a right to use the same facilities as other women - or do you think they should be denied access to swimming baths and communal changing rooms?

None of these people need to 'cower' to feel that they have a right to privacy and dignity.

Galaxy

Are those young men beaten up by women or are they beaten up by you know men?
Are you saying there should be no sex segregation whatsoever. To be fair I think that's a slightly more honest position than there should be sex segregation but these special men dont have to abide by it.

Well logically speaking if we are basing protection for vulnerable people on risk, then young men are more in need than women in public places.
It's nonsense of course and impossible to implement, but no more so than saying it's possible to adequately protect women (natal or trans) in public facilities. I've tried desperately to explain that if transwomen are made to use men' facilities then transmen will use women's, which means a man doesn't even need to dress up to get in. But it doesn't fit the narrative so it is ignored.

I think the law adequately protects single sex spaces when they are necessary.

I think you address violence by highlighting the situations where violence happens and building the ability to avoid, de-escalate and leave when necessary. Alongside a few lessons in self-defence.

Glorianny asked,
If no one is going to check my chromosomes why does anyone need to know about them?

They don’t. Where has that been said? Or is that another of your twists?

I said that if Kirsty Blackman is going to use chromosomes in a public speech she ought to know what she’s talking about even if it’s only that XX=female and XY=male.

Surely you don’t think that it’s OK for MPs to make public speeches on things they don’t even know the basics about?

Glorianny, you said,
I'm so looking forward to the day when my chromosomes will have to be tested to allow me to gain access to places.

You’re probably alone in that, but who knows?

Glorianny
I think the law adequately protects single sex spaces when they are necessary.

I think you address violence by highlighting the situations where violence happens and building the ability to avoid, de-escalate and leave when necessary. Alongside a few lessons in self-defence.

In other words you place the responsibility for protecting females firmly on the females.
You absolve any responsibility from the the deceitful males who wish to be in female safe spaces for whatever purpose.

No change from your usual line, and still misogynistic.

Oh my God
Those stupid women and children who didnt know how to de escalate or avoid. What were they thinking.
Glad we have established that we are happy with single sex spaces though when about 30 seconds ago they were for women cowering in a corner.

I've tried desperately to explain that if transwomen are made to use men' facilities then transmen will use women's, which means a man doesn't even need to dress up to get in. But it doesn't fit the narrative so it is ignored.

It is ignored because it is untrue. Transmen using the ladies does not mean that a man doesn't need to dress up to get in - it means that a woman who is dressing up as a man is using the facilities designed for her sex.

I think you address violence by highlighting the situations where violence happens and building the ability to avoid, de-escalate and leave when necessary. Alongside a few lessons in self-defence.

Riiiight. So my 87 year old mother, my 98 year old MIL and my 4 year old niece should take a few lessons in self-defence in case they find themselves unable to de-escalate a situation?

They are just collateral damage doodle, and I would add to that pretty much any women faced by a man intent on rape or violence.

Galaxy

Oh my God
Those stupid women and children who didnt know how to de escalate or avoid. What were they thinking.
Glad we have established that we are happy with single sex spaces though when about 30 seconds ago they were for women cowering in a corner.

It isn't women and children it's mostly young men. As an example someone I know around 19, first time drinking in city centre pubs, big rugby player with bright future sees a fight break out, doesn't leave as would any city wise kid, thinks it is a spectator sport. Gets badly beaten up and his jaw broken. End of rugby for him.
3 simple rules would have protected him

I've always believed in single sex spaces and have posted many times about them, pretending I haven't is ridiculous.

I don't consider public toilets necessarily safe spaces and the degree of risk varies in where exactly they are. Which is where the three rules come in again.
This idea that because you create a space, pass a law to protect it and then stand back makes you somehow more caring or concerned about women is ridiculous. Practicality is more use when looking after them.

Galaxy

They are just collateral damage doodle, and I would add to that pretty much any women faced by a man intent on rape or violence.

Yes, and we can't just have men doing the avoiding, by refraining from entering women's spaces, can we? They have to be allowed to do as they please, and women can just shut up and move over.