Calls for Graham Linehan to be removed from Prime Debate on transgender issues!

SoupMonster

HandsomeBob wrote: »

Have you ever heard of what you described actually happening? Can't say that I have other than in the world of very cheap fiction.

Most people are decent when in comes down to it and that would include people who happen to be transgender.

This is not cheap fiction.
It's very clear from this case that the guy lost it when he discovered Laude was not really female.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Jennifer_Laude

AndrewJRenko

SoupMonster wrote: »

HandsomeBob wrote: »

Have you ever heard of what you described actually happening? Can't say that I have other than in the world of very cheap fiction.

Most people are decent when in comes down to it and that would include people who happen to be transgender.

This is not cheap fiction.
It's very clear from this case that the guy lost it when he discovered Laude was not really female.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Jennifer_Laude

It's also not Ireland. It is a very long way from Ireland, physically and culturally.

It's just amazing how people can pull up rare events from far away countries as something we really need to be worrying about here.

And simultaneously, they cheerfully and willfully ignore the very real and current dangers to women from other sources.

It's the bogeyman again, people.

SoupMonster

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Not inviting a comedy writer to go on Prime Time to speak about something that he no experience or expertise in doesn't quite qualify as 'censorship'. It's not about silencing him, regardless of how many people are keen to play the victim.

Who do you think should have appeared on PrimeTime in place of Graham?

Annasopra

Calhoun wrote: »

I am not sure how we would tackle that one, where do 16 year olds get the money to go abroad.

I am sure it will get through without any issues though and next they will lower it to 12 like other jurisdictions.

What are you on about. This nothing to do with going abroad.

Annasopra

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Actually he wasn’t. He was reported by the trans activist and the police showed up but nothing happened. The police basically act as a private police force for some groups.

No. That isnt true. He was given a verbal warning by the police.

Billy86

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Billy86 wrote: »

By that logic, shouldn't RTE should have 4.8mn people on the panel so we can get all of the views on it?

Otherwise, whether he were pro or anti trans, Linehane being on the panel makes about as much sense as having Jamie Redknapp on news shows discussing the impact of Brexit in the financial sector.

Liam cunningham has appeared on the late late show several times discussing refugees.

Is cunningham an expert on international migration?

No, and I have absolutely no idea what the clowns in charge of that show want him in it for. Do you?

Also since I don't watch the LLS, was he on to promote a show etc and wound up talking about refugees at some point, or was he specifically on for no other reason than a long and detailed discussion over refugees?

Sir Oxman

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It’s not true to say no trans person would let it get that far when we’re aware of trans advocates who are attempting to gaslight women into having sex with them and having those women labelled transphobic when those women refuse to have sex with them. In terms of people who are transgender who would wish to have sex with men, the reason they avoid it is because they are more concerned for their own safety as the risk of them being assaulted or murdered by another man is much greater than it would be if they were to try and have sex with a woman. In no way do I condone men committing assault on another person, and I would hope that they face the full rigours of the law too, but that doesn’t mean giving people who are transgender a free pass when they are fully aware that they have not attempted to ensure that consent is present. They may be legally recognised as their preferred gender, but they are still held to the same standards as everyone else in society, regardless of their gender.

Not even refuse to have sex with them.
Expressing that they have no interest in them is enough for the gaslightee to be slandered, doxxed and hounded out of any org they belong to.


THIS is the problem, legitimising the twaw/tmam diatribe.

Billy86

The Squad wrote: »

Why do transsexuals get so irrationally angry when people critise their lifestyle choice?

Probably has something to do with them being treated so badly for so long that something like 40% self harm and 20% attempt suicide... before they turn 18.

mcmoustache

The Squad wrote: »

Why do transsexuals get so irrationally angry when people critise their lifestyle choice?

How many accounts have you gone through now?

Sir Oxman

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

No. That isnt true. He was given a verbal warning by the police.

For what?
Do you realise he has a case pending vs the police and the utter arsehole who wasted police time?

SoupMonster

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

No. That isnt true. He was given a verbal warning by the police.

He was reported to police by (Stephanie) Hayden because he called Hayden "he" and he used Hayden's former name. I also believe he posted a photograph of Hayden.

These are "hate incidents" in the UK. As one police force helpfully clarified, these are classified as "non-crime crimes" and the police are expected to record them for analysis.

Some mean women playfully refer to Hayden as "the trans solicitor" or similar because Hayden claims to be a lawyer but has no qualifications. Hayden is quite litigious.

Hayden is handy with a golf club and has a string of convictions for "dishonesty".
Caution: The link below contains Hayden's former name and a photograph.
https://www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/exclusive-transgender-lawyer-suing-graham-linehan-was-convicted-threatening-man-golf

Another interesting police investigation into thought crime (liking a poem).
Is it now a crime to like a poem about transgenderism?

SoupMonster

The Squad wrote: »

Knife crime, acid attacks and rape are out of control in the UK but good to see the police are taking on the thought criminals.

@TitaniaMcGrath says it best
Harry The Owl is a cis male complaining because the police investigated him for a “non-criminal hate incident”.
This kind of police action is long overdue. For too long, people have been not breaking the law and getting away with it.

AndrewJRenko

SoupMonster wrote: »

Who do you think should have appeared on PrimeTime in place of Graham?

Pretty much anybody with expertise or experience. The other participants on the show all had either professional expertise or personal experience. Glinner had neither, though his typing speed appeared to hit record levels.

SoundsRight

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Pretty much anybody with expertise or experience. The other participants on the show all had either professional expertise or personal experience. Glinner had neither, though his typing speed appeared to hit record levels.

I think every living person has experience of gender. You don't need to have a PhD to know there's something not quite right about the direction this trans thing is heading.

SoupMonster

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Pretty much anybody with expertise or experience. The other participants on the show all had either professional expertise or personal experience. Glinner had neither, though his typing speed appeared to hit record levels.

"This house believes trans rights are in direct conflict with women's rights'.

Can you suggest someone more qualified than Glinner who not only believes the statement to be true but is also clear, articulate and persuasive?

Franz Von Peppercorn

Billy86 wrote: »

Probably has something to do with them being treated so badly for so long that something like 40% self harm and 20% attempt suicide... before they turn 18.

Sucidal tendencies could just be a co morbidity of the syndrome.

AndrewJRenko

SoundsRight wrote: »

I think every living person has experience of gender. You don't need to have a PhD to know there's something not quite right about the direction this trans thing is heading.

Gender is not transgender. You don't need to have a PhD to have an opinion. We all have opinions, me included. But the flagship current affairs show on a public broadcaster really should require something more than opinion.

SoupMonster wrote: »

"This house believes trans rights are in direct conflict with women's rights'.

Can you suggest someone more qualified than Glinner who not only believes the statement to be true but is also clear, articulate and persuasive?

This isn't a college debating club. This is the flagship current affairs show on a public broadcaster. It really doesn't matter what he believes or how articulate and persuasive he is. He has no expertise or experience.

SoupMonster

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Gender is not transgender. You don't need to have a PhD to have an opinion. We all have opinions, me included. But the flagship current affairs show on a public broadcaster really should require something more than opinion.



This isn't a college debating club. This is the flagship current affairs show on a public broadcaster. It really doesn't matter what he believes or how articulate and persuasive he is. He has no expertise or experience.

That question SHOULD be debated on the flagship current affairs show.
Since you object to Glinner as just a comedy writer, who would you propose to support the motion?

ceadaoin.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Gender is not transgender. You don't need to have a PhD to have an opinion. We all have opinions, me included. But the flagship current affairs show on a public broadcaster really should require something more than opinion.



This isn't a college debating club. This is the flagship current affairs show on a public broadcaster. It really doesn't matter what he believes or how articulate and persuasive he is. He has no expertise or experience.

Well the latest thing being thrown at him by activists is that he is a clear case of a self hating trans woman in denial. So maybe he does have experience lol

Anyway, it's over and done with now. He was on the show, the world didn't end, he didn't come across as a raging transphobe, lots of people agree with him. What do you want? An official apology from rte? It's time to move on.

AndrewJRenko

SoupMonster wrote: »

That question SHOULD be debated on the flagship current affairs show.
Since you object to Glinner as just a comedy writer, who would you propose to support the motion?

'The motion'? Really, 'the motion'? As I said above, this isn't a chance for immature lads to have a night out shouting at each other and then go for a few points. This is a life-or-death issue for many people, an issue with a track record of high rates of suicide and self-harm. And you think we need a 'debate'?


I suppose the first question is why focus on this topic at all? And no, this isn't censorship. I'm not saying that the issue shouldn't be discussed, but why did Prime Time try to discuss this. Have any issues arisen in two years of self-identification? No. Is there any serious risks to anyone arising from the proposed changes in the new bill? Not really - one of the doctors mentioned that young people 'could' use their gender cert to go for operations abroad, but didn't give any details to back this up, or to show that it actually has been happening. And if there are clinics abroad that will do these operations on 16 year olds, do you really think that an Irish cert is going to be the major issue for them?


So what's really going on here? Prime Time have tried to import a bit of a 'scandal' from the UK to try to get viewers. They have taken a very sensitive issue, and treated it (in part at least) as an imminent danger, without any real explanation of how the danger might arise.

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Anyway, it's over and done with now. He was on the show, the world didn't end, he didn't come across as a raging transphobe, lots of people agree with him. What do you want? An official apology from rte? It's time to move on.

Not so sure that he didn't come across as 'raging' - he must go through a keyboard every couple of weeks if he types as furiously as he appeared on camera.


So what do I want? I want future current affairs shows to rely on experience or expertise, not sh1t-stirring ability.

Will I Am Not

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

'The motion'? Really, 'the motion'? As I said above, this isn't a chance for immature lads to have a night out shouting at each other and then go for a few points. This is a life-or-death issue for many people, an issue with a track record of high rates of suicide and self-harm. And you think we need a 'debate'?


I suppose the first question is why focus on this topic at all? And no, this isn't censorship. I'm not saying that the issue shouldn't be discussed, but why did Prime Time try to discuss this. Have any issues arisen in two years of self-identification? No. Is there any serious risks to anyone arising from the proposed changes in the new bill? Not really - one of the doctors mentioned that young people 'could' use their gender cert to go for operations abroad, but didn't give any details to back this up, or to show that it actually has been happening. And if there are clinics abroad that will do these operations on 16 year olds, do you really think that an Irish cert is going to be the major issue for them?


So what's really going on here? Prime Time have tried to import a bit of a 'scandal' from the UK to try to get viewers. They have taken a very sensitive issue, and treated it (in part at least) as an imminent danger, without any real explanation of how the danger might arise.



Not so sure that he didn't come across as 'raging' - he must go through a keyboard every couple of weeks if he types as furiously as he appeared on camera.


So what do I want? I want future current affairs shows to rely on experience or expertise, not sh1t-stirring ability.

So there was so little to whinge about you have to remark on the way he types? Without even knowing what he was typing about :pac:

ceadaoin.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

'The motion'? Really, 'the motion'? As I said above, this isn't a chance for immature lads to have a night out shouting at each other and then go for a few points. This is a life-or-death issue for many people, an issue with a track record of high rates of suicide and self-harm. And you think we need a 'debate'?


I suppose the first question is why focus on this topic at all? And no, this isn't censorship. I'm not saying that the issue shouldn't be discussed, but why did Prime Time try to discuss this. Have any issues arisen in two years of self-identification? No. Is there any serious risks to anyone arising from the proposed changes in the new bill? Not really - one of the doctors mentioned that young people 'could' use their gender cert to go for operations abroad, but didn't give any details to back this up, or to show that it actually has been happening. And if there are clinics abroad that will do these operations on 16 year olds, do you really think that an Irish cert is going to be the major issue for them?


So what's really going on here? Prime Time have tried to import a bit of a 'scandal' from the UK to try to get viewers. They have taken a very sensitive issue, and treated it (in part at least) as an imminent danger, without any real explanation of how the danger might arise.



Not so sure that he didn't come across as 'raging' - he must go through a keyboard every couple of weeks if he types as furiously as he appeared on camera.


So what do I want? I want future current affairs shows to rely on experience or expertise, not sh1t-stirring ability.

Ok so you don't approve of his typing but but did he say anything transphobic?

davidk1394

This would sort out the genuine people who want to change sex from the bullshíters.

https://www.france24.com/en/20190124-japan-court-upholds-sterilisation-rule-gender-change

sophiexyz

I sure you are well aware of the Man Identifying As Woman who Sued Female beauticians For Refusing To Give Him A Lady’s Genital Wax, on his fully intact dick & balls, how can anyone in their right mind support this?
This JY chancer is involved in many more controversy, a google will show you how depraved this man is, periods,tampons, young girls, absolutely disgusting individual who is getting support from the SJW mob.
Japan has the right idea.

AndrewJRenko

davidk1394 wrote: »

This would sort out the genuine people who want to change sex from the bullshíters.

https://www.france24.com/en/20190124-japan-court-upholds-sterilisation-rule-gender-change

I don't suppose you've done much research on transgender issues, or spoken to any people in this situation, to inform your view on 'bull****ters'?

sophiexyz wrote: »

I sure you are well aware of the Man Identifying As Woman who Sued Female beauticians For Refusing To Give Him A Lady’s Genital Wax, on his fully intact dick & balls, how can anyone in their right mind support this?
This JY chancer is involved in many more controversy, a google will show you how depraved this man is, periods,tampons, young girls, absolutely disgusting individual who is getting support from the SJW mob.
Japan has the right idea.

Do the Title Case capitals make this one very unusual case from a completely different society and legal environment any more relevant to Ireland?

Will I Am Not wrote: »

So there was so little to whinge about you have to remark on the way he types? Without even knowing what he was typing about

I think we all know what he was typing about, don't we?

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Ok so you don't approve of his typing but but did he say anything transphobic?

He did, as expected, continue his tactic of blowing up a tiny number of very unusual situations in other jurisdictions as being somehow relevant for Ireland, while ignoring the fact that zero issues have arisen in two years of self-identification here, and also ignoring the very real issues that do cause serious harm to women here every day. Here's just one real example from Twitter today, but no, let's obsess about the issues that aren't happening here instead:
https://twitter.com/sjanemurf/status/1089086652092420096

sophiexyz

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Do the Title Case capitals make this one very unusual case from a completely different society and legal environment any more relevant to Ireland?

If it can happen over there it can happen here!
Common law is currently in practice in Ireland, most of the United Kingdom (England and Wales and Northern Ireland), Australia, New Zealand, Bangladesh, India (excluding Goa), Pakistan, South Africa, Canada (excluding Quebec), Hong Kong, the United States (on a state level excluding Louisiana), and many other places.

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Here's just one real example from Twitter today, but no, let's obsess about the issues that aren't happening here instead:
https://twitter.com/sjanemurf/status/1089086652092420096

If that man had been in the ladies dressed in a skirt Sarah-Jane would have been pounced on as a terf and a transphobe for a comment like that. :pac:

The Twitterers gang up brutally on any women that object to trans-women in women's spaces. It's like the fast show sketch from years ago. Very very "Women, know your limits"

AndrewJRenko

sophiexyz wrote: »

If it can happen over there it can happen here!

Ifs, ifs, ifs - do you think that maybe we should be focusing on the real issues that actually ARE happening here instead of making up bogeymen to scare people?

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

If that man had been in the ladies dressed in a skirt Sarah-Jane would have been pounced on as a terf and a transphobe for a comment like that. :pac:

Ifs, ifs, ifs - do you think that maybe we should be focusing on the real issues that actually ARE happening here instead of making up bogeymen to scare people?

sophiexyz

Friend works in a busy pub, a transgender m-f was drinking there , about twice a month for 3 months, the owner was getting told that if he did not bar the transgender from using the womens toilets, that "we won't be drinking here, as long as he is here" every complaint was from women, regular customers, who's numbers where many, and so spent much more in the pub than the transgender.
The owner was left with no choice but to bar the transgender.
Now before you jump to conclusions, it was a purely commercial decision, there where many complaints, and my friend said not one was from a man, in fact the men fought it was funny, it was the female customers who blew a fuse.
(a busy, very nice pub)

AndrewJRenko

sophiexyz wrote: »

Friend works in a busy pub, a transgender m-f was drinking there , about twice a month for 3 months, the owner was getting told that if he did not bar the transgender from using the womens toilets, that "we won't be drinking here, as long as he is here" every complaint was from women, regular customers, who's numbers where many, and so spent much more in the pub than the transgender.
The owner was left with no choice but to bar the transgender.
Now before you jump to conclusions, it was a purely commercial decision, there where many complaints, and my friend said not one was from a man, in fact the men fought it was funny, it was the female customers who blew a fuse.
(a busy, very nice pub)

So a minor issue arose, and it was sorted out locally without any major drama. Very enlightening.

sophiexyz

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So a minor issue arose, and it was sorted out locally without any major drama. Very enlightening.

It's a real world example of transgender issues, something which a lot of posters here have not a clue about.
Women are the most aggrieved, men just laugh at the transgender m-f

AndrewJRenko

sophiexyz wrote: »

It's a real world example of transgender issues, something which a lot of posters here have not a clue about.
Women are the most aggrieved, men just laugh at the transgender m-f

Honestly, I'm not so sure that it is 'real world', but if it is, then it looks like it was sorted fairly quickly and easily. Didn't quite need a Prime Time focus to sort it.

klaaaz

sophiexyz wrote: »

The owner was left with no choice but to bar the transgender.
Now before you jump to conclusions, it was a purely commercial decision, there where many complaints, and my friend said not one was from a man, in fact the men fought it was funny, it was the female customers who blew a fuse.
(a busy, very nice pub)

Which country was this allegedly in? It's illegal to bar trans from the toilet in any establishment, something about discrimination. Don't blame me for saying that, blame the lawmakers if you feel aggrieved.

AndrewJRenko

Maduro wrote: »

He's entitled to his opinion, same as you and me. They had balance as they are required to.

He's absolutely entitled to his opinion, same as you and me. And he's absolutely entitled to voice his opinion on Twitter or other outlets. I'd actually have no objection to him being invited on an 'opinion' show, like Cutting Edge or whatever.



But you and me didn't get invited on Prime Time, presumably because neither of us have relevant expertise or experience. The comedy writer did, simply because Prime Time were trying to stir up controversy by importing a manufactured crisis from the UK.



Didn't work for them this time, fortunately.

Franz Von Peppercorn

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Ok so you don't approve of his typing but but did he say anything transphobic?

A funny argument indeed. Andrew types very well himself, but doesn’t argue very well.

The Bishop Basher

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

But you and me didn't get invited on Prime Time, presumably because neither of us have relevant expertise or experience. The comedy writer did, simply because Prime Time were trying to stir up controversy by importing a manufactured crisis from the UK.

The program has aired, the world didn’t end, let it go..

Franz Von Peppercorn

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Ifs, ifs, ifs - do you think that maybe we should be focusing on the real issues that actually ARE happening here instead of making up bogeymen to scare people?

Ifs, ifs, ifs - do you think that maybe we should be focusing on the real issues that actually ARE happening here instead of making up bogeymen to scare people?

You always seem to skirt around the legal issues that self identification will cause. Legally a trans woman is a woman (bit odd then that there are also calls for recognition of multiple genders but I digress).

A legal woman clearly has the same rights as any other legal woman. Unless the law is an ass. Therefore a biological man who self identified as a woman under said law can enter a woman’s toilet under the law. Unless the law is an ass.

ceadaoin.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

But you and me didn't get invited on Prime Time, presumably because neither of us have relevant expertise or experience. The comedy writer did, simply because Prime Time were trying to stir up controversy by importing a manufactured crisis from the UK.

It's not manufactured though is it? There are several violent male criminals who now identify as women and want to be placed in women's prisons. Ian Huntley has allegedly changed his name to the same as the mother as one of his victims, finding a new way to cause them pain that cannot be questioned. Another has already committed assaults on women in prison. There is a male paedophile in a women's prison that has a mother and baby unit. Yet another has raised complaints from female prison guards who are forced to perform intimate searches on a male who seems to be enjoying it. Crimes committed by males are being recorded as female offenders when they are anything but.

Women who are trying to meet to discuss how proposed changes to the law will affect them are harrassed, threatened and even physically attacked by transactivists to try and stop them. Women meeting to talk, where is the threat in that?

So it's not manufactured and could well happen in Ireland. Maybe it already is, I have read on other sites that people are afraid to speak out because of the pile on that inevitably happens. The only controversy was caused by protestors. I can guarantee a lot less people would have tuned in or even knew anything about the issue if it wasn't for that so well done.

branie2

sophiexyz wrote: »

Friend works in a busy pub, a transgender m-f was drinking there , about twice a month for 3 months, the owner was getting told that if he did not bar the transgender from using the womens toilets, that "we won't be drinking here, as long as he is here" every complaint was from women, regular customers, who's numbers where many, and so spent much more in the pub than the transgender.
The owner was left with no choice but to bar the transgender.
Now before you jump to conclusions, it was a purely commercial decision, there where many complaints, and my friend said not one was from a man, in fact the men fought it was funny, it was the female customers who blew a fuse.
(a busy, very nice pub)

She was there.

If Andrew was around 30 years ago Gaybo would never have been allowed put a condom onto that banana.

LLMMLL

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Bold emphasis my own. A victim of rape or sexual assault would certainly not be laughed at if they were to come forward and make a cOmplaint.

The question is whether that person was actually a victim of rape.or.sexual assault.

Your interpretation of the clauses that involve being mislead about "identity" and "the nature" of the sexual act do not hold up in relation to sex with trans people.

Franz Von Peppercorn

sophiexyz wrote: »

Friend works in a busy pub, a transgender m-f was drinking there , about twice a month for 3 months, the owner was getting told that if he did not bar the transgender from using the womens toilets, that "we won't be drinking here, as long as he is here" every complaint was from women, regular customers, who's numbers where many, and so spent much more in the pub than the transgender.
The owner was left with no choice but to bar the transgender.
Now before you jump to conclusions, it was a purely commercial decision, there where many complaints, and my friend said not one was from a man, in fact the men fought it was funny, it was the female customers who blew a fuse.
(a busy, very nice pub)

That’s illegal if the trans woman has legally changed her gender.

Zorya

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Ifs, ifs, ifs - do you think that maybe we should be focusing on the real issues that actually ARE happening here instead of making up bogeymen to scare people?

Ifs, ifs, ifs - do you think that maybe we should be focusing on the real issues that actually ARE happening here instead of making up bogeymen to scare people?

Here's a real issue for you, not a bogeyman.

During puberty the sex hormones, especially testosterone, which increases in both females and males as they enter puberty, though to different degrees, mature the pre-frontal cortex of the brain.

Prior to this maturation the younger child processes a lot of information via the amygdala, which is a much less rational part of the brain. The limbic system is not rational - it includes responses like fight, flight or fright, for example. It is primitive and instinctual.

As humans mature and become adults, more and more of their thinking gets done by the pre-frontal cortex. They learn to manage their emotional responses using reason.

Though scarily insufficient research is being done on the effects of the use of pubertal blockers on children, it is largely proven now that low levels of adolescent sex hormones leave the developing brain more akin to a childs than an adults. Low levels of sex hormones are caused by pubertal blockers.

Will I Am Not

Zorya wrote: »

Here's a real issue for you, not a bogeyman.

During puberty the sex hormones, especially testosterone, which increases in both females and males as they enter puberty, though to different degrees, mature the pre-frontal cortex of the brain.

Prior to this maturation the younger child processes a lot of information via the amygdala, which is a much less rational part of the brain. The limbic system is not rational - it includes responses like fight, flight or fright, for example. It is primitive and instinctual.

As humans mature and become adults, more and more of their thinking gets done by the pre-frontal cortex. They learn to manage their emotional responses using reason.

Though scarily insufficient research is being done on the effects of the use of pubertal blockers on children, it is largely proven now that low levels of adolescent sex hormones leave the developing brain more akin to a childs than an adults. Low levels of sex hormones are caused by pubertal blockers.

You’ll get the same “this doesn’t happen in Ireland” rebuttal as is being made against Linehan’s points. It doesn’t... yet.
Trans activists will always be looking for the next step. Self identification - lower age for self identification - puberty blockers - lower age for surgery. It will be an issue eventually.

Zorya

Will I Am Not wrote: »

You’ll get the same “this doesn’t happen in Ireland” rebuttal as is being made against Linehan’s points. It doesn’t... yet.
Trans activists will always be looking for the next step. Self identification - lower age for self identification - puberty blockers - lower age for surgery. It will be an issue eventually.

I know.

It's irrelevant if aspects of this are happening here or not. With a tiny population we will not feature statistically at first.

But the BS is spreading - Harvard Medical School is about to embark on a revision of its curriculum to encompass trans ideology which is a mockery of science. It's only a matter of time before PC culture inspires Irish universities to do likewise.

One eyed Jack

LLMMLL wrote: »

The question is whether that person was actually a victim of rape.or.sexual assault.

Your interpretation of the clauses that involve being mislead about "identity" and "the nature" of the sexual act do not hold up in relation to sex with trans people.

No that’s not the question. If someone walks into a Garda station and claims to have been the victim of rape or sexual assault, their claims are taken seriously, regardless of their gender, and regardless of the gender of the perpetrator.

They do hold up btw, because while a person who is transgender is recognised as their preferred gender in law, that’s completely irrelevant as to whether or not they could be found guilty of having committed either sexual assault or rape.

Their only defence in those circumstances is whether or not they had a genuine belief that they had consent, and it’s a question for the jury to determine whether or not that belief was reasonable. If you imagine that a jury would deem it reasonable that heterosexual males would generally consent to have sex with a person who is transgender, then you could feel free to argue that in defence of the person who could find themselves on trial for sexual assault or rape.

AndrewJRenko

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

If Andrew was around 30 years ago Gaybo would never have been allowed put a condom onto that banana.

I've no idea where this comes from. Any suggestion that I'm uncomfortable with adult topics being discussed is utter nonsense.

ceadaoin. wrote: »

It's not manufactured though is it? There are several violent male criminals who now identify as women and want to be placed in women's prisons. Ian Huntley has allegedly changed his name to the same as the mother as one of his victims, finding a new way to cause them pain that cannot be questioned. Another has already committed assaults on women in prison. There is a male paedophile in a women's prison that has a mother and baby unit. Yet another has raised complaints from female prison guards who are forced to perform intimate searches on a male who seems to be enjoying it. Crimes committed by males are being recorded as female offenders when they are anything but.

Women who are trying to meet to discuss how proposed changes to the law will affect them are harrassed, threatened and even physically attacked by transactivists to try and stop them. Women meeting to talk, where is the threat in that?

So it's not manufactured and could well happen in Ireland. Maybe it already is, I have read on other sites that people are afraid to speak out because of the pile on that inevitably happens. The only controversy was caused by protestors. I can guarantee a lot less people would have tuned in or even knew anything about the issue if it wasn't for that so well done.

Yep, it's manufactured. If you look at the Irish Prison Service policy, you'll see how it is manufactured. If you look at the problems that have arising in two years of self-identification here, you'll see it is manufactured.


It's clear from the presence of this thread that people aren't afraid to speak out. They're just afraid that they won't get away with manufacturing a controversy where none exists.

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

You always seem to skirt around the legal issues that self identification will cause. Legally a trans woman is a woman (bit odd then that there are also calls for recognition of multiple genders but I digress).

A legal woman clearly has the same rights as any other legal woman. Unless the law is an ass. Therefore a biological man who self identified as a woman under said law can enter a woman’s toilet under the law. Unless the law is an ass.

'Skirt around'! I see what you did there!


I'm fairly sure there is no actual law blocking anyone from entering any toilet. It's obviously not the done thing, but it does happen. I've been in female toilets occasionally, for odd reasons. I don't think I've broken the law, unless you'd like to clarify what particular law you're referring to?

Rennaws wrote: »

The program has aired, the world didn’t end, let it go..

And you're right, the world didn't end. The storm largely passed by overhead without breaking. Prime Time did get the kind of attention they were desperately trolling for, but just for a short period.



But there is a huge danger in this kind of 'news'. This is exactly the kind of 'news' that brought you Brexit and Trump.

Do we really want to go there?

Will I Am Not wrote: »

You’ll get the same “this doesn’t happen in Ireland” rebuttal as is being made against Linehan’s points. It doesn’t... yet.
Trans activists will always be looking for the next step. Self identification - lower age for self identification - puberty blockers - lower age for surgery. It will be an issue eventually.

The same kind of 'slippery slope' nonsense that we heard from those who opposed equal marriage and repealing the eight.

Zorya wrote: »

I know.

It's irrelevant if aspects of this are happening here or not. With a tiny population we will not feature statistically at first.

But the BS is spreading - Harvard Medical School is about to embark on a revision of its curriculum to encompass trans ideology which is a mockery of science. It's only a matter of time before PC culture inspires Irish universities to do likewise.

Oh Lord, it's global contagion now? Why don't you rush over to Harvard and put them right, while we get on with the kind of normal life without incident that has followed two years of self-identification here.

The Bishop Basher

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

And you're right, the world didn't end. The storm largely passed by overhead without breaking. Prime Time did get the kind of attention they were desperately trolling for, but just for a short period.

Yes with the protesters help as is so often the way :rolleyes:

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

But there is a huge danger in this kind of 'news'. This is exactly the kind of 'news' that brought you Brexit and Trump.

Do we really want to go there?

We live in a democracy, If we get there it will be because the majority want it.

Sounds like you want to try and manipulate and control that. We certainly don't want to go there.

Franz Von Peppercorn

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Yep, it's manufactured. If you look at the Irish Prison Service policy, you'll see how it is manufactured. If you look at the problems that have arising in two years of self-identification here, you'll see it is manufactured.

You seem to have a hard time understanding arguments as to what may happen. Linehan is in the UK anyway, where the laws are more stringent than here but culturally trans activism has already made more societal and organisational inroads. Over there the laws haven’t changed but organisations have adopted self identification and it has had fairly serious effects.

I'm fairly sure there is no actual law blocking anyone from entering any toilet. It's obviously not the done thing, but it does happen. I've been in female toilets occasionally, for odd reasons. I don't think I've broken the law, unless you'd like to clarify what particular law you're referring to?

Ok then female toilets, refuges, short lists, sports teams etc. The Dail in the committee stages of the Gender Recognition bill(s) rejected all such protections and kept returning the bill to kick out any such exemptions. So despite your milequost deflections and throat clearing with regards the effects of self identification it’s clear it will have very strong effect on women’s spaces.

But there is a huge danger in this kind of 'news'. This is exactly the kind of 'news' that brought you Brexit and Trump.

Do we really want to go there?

I’d say Brexit and Trump came from concerns being ignored. From news not being reported.

The same kind of 'slippery slope' nonsense that we heard from those who opposed equal marriage and repealing the eight.

Odd argument from someone who was supporting puberty blockers on this thread a few days ago.

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I've no idea where this comes from. Any suggestion that I'm uncomfortable with adult topics being discussed is utter nonsense.

The tendancy for censorship, the confidence of certain campaign groups that they have the high moral ground and pressuring for what should and should not be shown on TV.

It reminds me of the catholic church.