Is JK Rowling pushing the boundaries too far?

Again - who has said that? No one. The point being made is this male sex offender deliberately made sure his lady dick was clearly visible

I will repeat, dont care if transwomen are lovely or not. In the same way dont care if men are lovely or not, no to men in womens spaces.

So here's a link to 49 trans celebrities who could have featured if anyone had wanted a positive image.
www.seventeen.com/celebrity/g37104862/transgender-celebrities/
Some you might know like Laverne Cox
There are transmen and transwomen.
No one is wearing pink leggings.

Iam64

No one is suggesting anything of the kind. As well you know

Of course they were. They will deny it now of course. People with bias always do when confronted. They won't look at why their thoughts when transwomen are being discussed immediately go to sex offenders. But it is obvious.

Oh dear, you sound as if you're losing non-existent arguments, Glorianny 😁

No one has ever said that all trans women wear pink leggings Glorianny, apart from you when you said it had been, and no one that I can see is suggesting that there aren't positive images of trans women. I don't need to be shown positive images because I know two trans women.

It cannot be denied though that this particular trans woman with convictions for sexual offences against women, ensuring his male genitalia is visible is in no way a positive image. The colour of the leggings is incidental.

Iam64

No one is suggesting anything of the kind. As well you know

You are not seeing, or choosing not to see this, Glorianny.

I know not why.

For some reason, you choose to lump all posters together, as saying things that most are not.

Callistemon21

Oh dear, you sound as if you're losing non-existent arguments, Glorianny 😁

Am I losing? Well prejudice and discriminatory ideas are hard to shift. And at least I never have to resort to personal remarks to make a point. My arguments are too well founded.

I am talking about your KP post.

A few posters have said they are biased or prejudiced or whatever.

But it seems to me, you do much the same thing but in reverse? [as in lump posters together?]

Two simple questions to ask yourself.
Why when transwomen are mentioned do my thoughts go to a sex offender in pink tights instead of to a transwoman like Laverne Cox?
And
Why when the discussion is about how easily identifiable transwomen are do I choose to use pink tights as an example, when there is a photograph of one person wearing them, and hundreds of other photographs of transwomen?

fancythat

But it seems to me, you do much the same thing but in reverse? [as in lump posters together?]

Only the posters who approved of the pink tights remarks.

Two simple questions to ask yourself.

Why when perfectly reasonable and well articulated concerns regarding trans women are presented, do you always make accusations of prejudice?

Why are you obsessed with pink leggings when no one else is?

They're not actually pink imo ......
More a dark red

I'll fetch me coat.

Glorianny

Two simple questions to ask yourself.
Why when transwomen are mentioned do my thoughts go to a sex offender in pink tights instead of to a transwoman like Laverne Cox?
And
Why when the discussion is about how easily identifiable transwomen are do I choose to use pink tights as an example, when there is a photograph of one person wearing them, and hundreds of other photographs of transwomen?

I can post literally 100’s of males identifying as females particularly when participating in sports where their genitalia is visible, along with their wide shoulders, extra height, large hands/feet a male with boob implants

There is no point though as you will construct an excuse for every single one.

Do you ever have any thought or empathy for the young women who have trained for years seven days a week only to see their scholarships, places on sports teams along with their rankings plummet due to men deciding that they cannot hack it in the men’s sports arena so swop to the women’s?

As I posted upthread, I have absolutely no problem with men identifying as women and living their lives below the radar, not imposing their wants and needs on the majority. I do have a problem with men pretending to be women and boasting about their girl dick…

Callistemon21

Oh dear, you sound as if you're losing non-existent arguments, Glorianny 😁

This is exactly what's happening, and what usually does. It is like a dance, with the same steps choreographed every time.

Someone starts a thread about a news item concerning transpeople - not a generalised 'we don't like transpeople' thread, but a response to something that has happened.

All goes well for a while, with the matter being discussed. Ultimately, however, it usually comes down to the fact that with the best will in the world, any sort of compulsion or coercion of the population to pretend that men can become women is (a) flawed (b) totalitarian (c) dangerous (d) anti-feminist and (e) cruel to children who are also being encouraged to believe in 'wrong bodies' and 'gender' stereotypes. This is pointed out.

Then the accusations start. We are transphobic, racist, pathetic, amusing, in favour of genital checks at the entrance to venues - and if we don't agree that TWAW there is nothing to be done for us, as we are beyond hope.

We push back, and the deviations start. What about African athletes? That one is usually 'backed up' by racist suggestions that all black women think and speak as one, whether they are accountants in London, dirt farmers in Alabama, mothers (sorry, birth givers) in Sierra Leone or any of the countless other possibilities. If they are black, we are told, they think alike, and Glorianny can speak for all of them.

What about butch women? Won't they be molested in toilets if people think they are men? This is never evidenced, but we are supposed to accept that it happens.

We are told that the law says that women's spaces are protected (just rather feebly). And so the dance goes on, interspersed with insults and insinuations.

When that stops, we are told that we think x, y or z, which is another deviation from the OP topic, but often involves Suffragettes, Intersectional Feminism and more suggestions that we are prejudiced, discriminatory and unkind. In this case it is that we think we can tell men from women, which is apparently impossible if they have declared themselves to be female. The dance wanders off into a different direction and we are told we've said things that we haven't (eg that all transwomen wear pink leggings or something equally idiotic). Eventually, either the thread reaches 1000 posts (sometimes assisted by a few one line additions to filibuster it out of existence) or there are flounces and all goes quiet till the next time.

The basic questions of what 'living as a woman' means, how anyone can know that they 'belong in another 'gender'' without having experienced life in the opposite sex, what the difference is between a man in a dress, a drag artist and a transwoman, why it is ok to ban men who say they are men from women's spaces, but not men who say they are women, and how we are supposed to tell the difference (ie where is the threshold of 'presenting as a woman'?) and so on are ignored in favour of manufactured arguments about things like pink leggings. The next stage will be about who 'brought pink leggings into it', which is entirely irrelevant to the fact that an argument has been manufactured around them.

They shoot horses, don't they?

Glorianny

Two simple questions to ask yourself.
Why when transwomen are mentioned do my thoughts go to a sex offender in pink tights instead of to a transwoman like Laverne Cox?
And
Why when the discussion is about how easily identifiable transwomen are do I choose to use pink tights as an example, when there is a photograph of one person wearing them, and hundreds of other photographs of transwomen?

Because
I started this thread after reading JK Rowlings “Tweet” and this was one of the sex offending trans women she referred to .
Laverne Cox is not a convicted double rapist nor has she ever
been sent to a womens prison in Scotland after conviction of the sexual assault of 10-year-old in a women’s public toilet , like 6’5” Katie Dolatowski.
Nor has she like Samantha Norris ever exposed her penis to 2 11 year old girls or ever been convicted for possession of 16,000 images of children being raped and sexually assaulted.
Nor is she like Scottish woman and butcher Amy George who abducted an 11-year-old girl while dressed in female clothing. No idea why this was mentioned in court – of course she was wearing women’s clothing, she’s a woman! Amy took the girl home and sexually abused her over a 27-hour period.
Under this new law they enjoy protected status- criticise them at your peril.
The examples were chosen because they highlighted the travesty which is the new legislation in Scotland, the weaknesses, the inconsistencies, the sheer nonsense of framing a law which would render perfectly reasonable observations and comments “illegal”.
You chose to widen the issue, I believe you even chose to introduce a racial element - you created a scenario to justify your own prejudices which seem to be against women-only safe spaces, against fair treatment of women - and I am beginning to wonder, perhaps against women themselves.
Tight leggings over obvious male genitalia were and remain a blatant challenge and two fingers to decent society.

Doodledog you have the patience of a saint!!

Excellent post. And you did it without exalting yourself above every other poster

RosiesMaw

Glorianny

Two simple questions to ask yourself.
Why when transwomen are mentioned do my thoughts go to a sex offender in pink tights instead of to a transwoman like Laverne Cox?
And
Why when the discussion is about how easily identifiable transwomen are do I choose to use pink tights as an example, when there is a photograph of one person wearing them, and hundreds of other photographs of transwomen?

Because
I started this thread after reading JK Rowlings “Tweet” and this was one of the sex offending trans women she referred to .
Laverne Cox is not a convicted double rapist nor has she ever
been sent to a womens prison in Scotland after conviction of the sexual assault of 10-year-old in a women’s public toilet , like 6’5” Katie Dolatowski.
Nor has she like Samantha Norris ever exposed her penis to 2 11 year old girls or ever been convicted for possession of 16,000 images of children being raped and sexually assaulted.
Nor is she like Scottish woman and butcher Amy George who abducted an 11-year-old girl while dressed in female clothing. No idea why this was mentioned in court – of course she was wearing women’s clothing, she’s a woman! Amy took the girl home and sexually abused her over a 27-hour period.
Under this new law they enjoy protected status- criticise them at your peril.
The examples were chosen because they highlighted the travesty which is the new legislation in Scotland, the weaknesses, the inconsistencies, the sheer nonsense of framing a law which would render perfectly reasonable observations and comments “illegal”.
You chose to widen the issue, I believe you even chose to introduce a racial element - you created a scenario to justify your own prejudices which seem to be against women-only safe spaces, against fair treatment of women - and I am beginning to wonder, perhaps against women themselves.
Tight leggings over obvious male genitalia were and remain a blatant challenge and two fingers to decent society.

Good try RosieMaw but we had moved on to discussing if transwomen are easily identifiable. Because of course they aren't you immediately resorted to a sex offender in an attempt to justify your view that they are.
As I said consider why
So here's another question if I posted a picture of a black man guilty of rape would you find that acceptable if we were discussing racism?
If not why is it only pictures of transgender offenders you choose to post.
How is hatred fueled?

Black men, men with ginger hair, none are welcome in womens spaces. If men with ginger hair were campaigning to use womens spaces I would be discussing the crime stats of men, because ginger haired men are men.

The only people who say TIM aren’t easily identifiable are those who accept the lie that TIM are women (AHF).

No pink leggings

Doodledog

Callistemon21

Oh dear, you sound as if you're losing non-existent arguments, Glorianny 😁

This is exactly what's happening, and what usually does. It is like a dance, with the same steps choreographed every time.

Someone starts a thread about a news item concerning transpeople - not a generalised 'we don't like transpeople' thread, but a response to something that has happened.

All goes well for a while, with the matter being discussed. Ultimately, however, it usually comes down to the fact that with the best will in the world, any sort of compulsion or coercion of the population to pretend that men can become women is (a) flawed (b) totalitarian (c) dangerous (d) anti-feminist and (e) cruel to children who are also being encouraged to believe in 'wrong bodies' and 'gender' stereotypes. This is pointed out.

Then the accusations start. We are transphobic, racist, pathetic, amusing, in favour of genital checks at the entrance to venues - and if we don't agree that TWAW there is nothing to be done for us, as we are beyond hope.

We push back, and the deviations start. What about African athletes? That one is usually 'backed up' by racist suggestions that all black women think and speak as one, whether they are accountants in London, dirt farmers in Alabama, mothers (sorry, birth givers) in Sierra Leone or any of the countless other possibilities. If they are black, we are told, they think alike, and Glorianny can speak for all of them.

What about butch women? Won't they be molested in toilets if people think they are men? This is never evidenced, but we are supposed to accept that it happens.

We are told that the law says that women's spaces are protected (just rather feebly). And so the dance goes on, interspersed with insults and insinuations.

When that stops, we are told that we think x, y or z, which is another deviation from the OP topic, but often involves Suffragettes, Intersectional Feminism and more suggestions that we are prejudiced, discriminatory and unkind. In this case it is that we think we can tell men from women, which is apparently impossible if they have declared themselves to be female. The dance wanders off into a different direction and we are told we've said things that we haven't (eg that all transwomen wear pink leggings or something equally idiotic). Eventually, either the thread reaches 1000 posts (sometimes assisted by a few one line additions to filibuster it out of existence) or there are flounces and all goes quiet till the next time.

The basic questions of what 'living as a woman' means, how anyone can know that they 'belong in another 'gender'' without having experienced life in the opposite sex, what the difference is between a man in a dress, a drag artist and a transwoman, why it is ok to ban men who say they are men from women's spaces, but not men who say they are women, and how we are supposed to tell the difference (ie where is the threshold of 'presenting as a woman'?) and so on are ignored in favour of manufactured arguments about things like pink leggings. The next stage will be about who 'brought pink leggings into it', which is entirely irrelevant to the fact that an argument has been manufactured around them.

They shoot horses, don't they?

If you care to read back Doodledog
You will find that it wasn't me who introduced other things into this discussion. Although I realise it is much more convenient to blame me for broadening any discussion. Particularly when difficult ideas or questions arise.

I didn't introduce sport I simply answered questions. Including things such as sport in the US where people are being made to compete as their birth sex which has proved a problem.

I didn't introduce the strange posts about dress. I simply said you can't always tell a transwoman. This in response to those who evidently believe there is some way of telling your birth sex . What resulted- why back to a sex offender!

If someone brings strange ideas and discriminatory concepts into a discussion do you expect me to ignore them?

If a law is feeble campaign to change it. Don't blame transpeople for it.
I'm currently involved in getting abortion made a health matter not a legal one. If something offends me I act on it.

I haven't accused anyone of being any of the things you claim. I have asked people to ask themselves relevant questions. If you can show where I have said
We are transphobic, racist, pathetic, amusing, in favour of genital checks at the entrance to venues - and if we don't agree that TWAW there is nothing to be done for us, as we are beyond hope.
I invite you to post the quote.
If not I suggest you withdraw what is obviously a personal attack. I think you are quite aware that this is against GN guidelines but also that I never report posts.
Such a pity your only response is the usual attack on me.

It would depend on the context Glorianny. If the implication was that all black men are rapists then yes it would be racist, but no one's suggested that all trans women who wear pink leggings are sexual offenders so what's your point?