Lady can't have her hairy balls waxed [mod notes/warnings in post #1]

Glass fused light

Calhoun wrote: »

Indeed why should it matter ? Unless we are arguing for special privilege due to their sexual orientation.

Trans is not a sexual orientation.

Although people are researching for a "gay" brain and a "boy/girl" brain they have not found it yet. Nor has any research that I can find proved that body dysmorphia is not distributed across the 'normal' variation of sexual orientation.

Historically with a wait and see policy 80% of people referred for 
assessment are homosexual and reconcile to this by their early 20's

Calhoun wrote: »

You are just wrong, you don't like this paragon of all that is trans challenging your gender norm views. They just wanted to help those little kids out :P :P :P.

What is next will we actually start saying those who identify as minor attracted people (MAP) are just confused about their sexual orientation. 

Being serious if anyone regardless of race, sexuality or creed shows any predatory behavior against anyone but more importantly children who are our most vulnerable we must condemn it.

MAP is not a sexual orientation it's just a "age thing".
And yes there was adult males in the London pride who's kink is age play, it is dressing up as babies and sh*t in adult nappies etc. in public.

There also are "puppy" groups, some who have adult and "junior" members.
To be fair to one of the puppy groups reps, they made of very clear that as far as they were concerned their Pride is an adult only event which celebrates the sex in sexual orientation. So kids should not be involved. Either as participants or spectators.

Calhoun wrote: »

All stuff like this does is build opposition, if the MAP crowd get recognized as part of the LGBT+ which i think they wont then its game over.

For now though the issue at hand is how extra rights/privileges can be abused by minorities who now have some power. Definitely an US v Them scenario and  is just a question of how long its allowed to continue for.

The MAP kink is already visible in the UK



There is also a question  linked to the slogan "love is love" where children are being taught that age is not a barrier to love.

And the NSPCC moving the sexual contact with a minor to being something that makes the child feel uncomfortable. The child has to draw a line.
They should be taught that all sexual contact is wrong and the responsible person for any act is the adult

And I'm off to check a tweet that said an elected Labour member wants schools to teach girls that sex work is a career option.

Glass fused light

bluewolf wrote: »

oh, not at all - it's just something i didn't expect to happen in ireland so it was a little on a tangent.

I think it's on topic as its grounded in when we accept a persons self gender identity. And when can we reject it because we don't approve of the behaviour of the person.

When this behaviour has the potential to cause harm (emotional to physical) to another, how do we balance both rights to do the least harm to society.

Here with no GRC an trans woman inmate is male/a man and is being housed in the women's prison. Karen White of the UK was housed in the women's prison and sexually assaulted 2 inmates. These Irish inmates had no opportunity to avoid  or remove themselves from the proximity of the other inmate.

The State now has to look at the greater good.
Or judge this in isolation.

Glass fused light

Dante7 wrote: »

I know you are being sarcastic, but I am kinda with you on this. Part of me does wish that Yaniv wins the case so that it will really highlight the absurdity of the self-id laws. However, if Yaniv wins then costs and penalties will be awarded against the migrant women who are being sued. 
Yaniv is a despicable racist with obvious paedophile tendencies. So on balance, I really hope Yaniv loses and has massive costs awarded against zer.

This case is only in" level one" like an employment tribunal so it would go to the high court and supreme court and the the EU over here 

From memory the equity commissioner in the UK wanted to appeal to the EU but the gov basically said cop-on.

Glass fused light

MrFresh wrote: »

You can always find an extreme story to hype opposition to any cause. It's a pretty messed up world out there. It's usually the more nuanced case that result in changes to law and public perception though.

 well the nuance in this case would have been easy to spot if the ladies had just applied the wax.

This case will prove or disprove the objective question of whether or not an uncle can become an aunt.

Or if the uncle will be a penis and the aunt the rest of her body.

It's already changed public perception and not for the betterment of the trans movement. 

Glass fused light

klaaaz wrote: »

Which country? The thread is about Canada, then you jumped into American civil law and you're asking that question on an Irish forum. Each country as you know has different laws, so which country you referring to in your incoherent ramblings?

Well knock me down with a feather and color me surprised.
It's happening all over!

klaaaz wrote: »

All these "trans" stories are from USA/Canada where their laws are not the same as here.
What you're saying there does not apply under Irish law, establishments here have exemptions under the Equal Status Act whereby they have a right not to render a service to a person(s). If that Canadian tried that stunt here, no solicitor would take it up as they'd immediately fail despite our super compo culture in other cases.

 
EQUITY ACT 2000
5.—(1) A person shall not discriminate in disposing of goods to the public generally or a section of the public or in providing a service, whether the disposal or provision is for consideration or otherwise and whether the service provided can be availed of only by a section of the public.
5.2.(c) differences in the treatment of persons on the gender ground in relation to services of an aesthetic, cosmetic or similar nature, where the services require physical contact between the service provider and the recipient,

I was reading this as a female could refuse a trans woman on gender grounds due to the physical contact.
However the person looking for a hair cut succeeded even thought there was physical contact and arguably the hair cut falls within "similar nature"


She is taking the case herself and the ladies were the ones with the problem getting a solicitor to take them

klaaaz wrote: »

You need to get onto the barbers legal reps as to why they didn't enable the exemption. Hint, they hadn't a strand of hair to stand on over hair on a person's head. And that case involved a trans man, not a trans woman which is irrelevant to the barber case.

Ireland
Trans man looking for a man to provide a service which required physical contact 

Canada
Trans woman looking for a woman to provide a service which required physical contact 

klaaaz wrote: »

It's not the same. As I stated in Ireland, there are exemptions under the Equal Status Act for an establishment to refuse service even to gender recognition holders. It's done on a case by case basis, if there is no agreement between the customer and the service provider, the service provider can invoke the said exemptions legally. Self ID has been here for 4 years, places like salons and gyms have negotiated in mutual agreements between themselves and customers(trans obviously) and all being happy outcomes so far!.
As for that Canadian type case here, they haven't a leg to stand on using the law, no solicitor would entertain such a case. Each country is different in it's laws!

What part of the law covers a gym?

A person has succeeded in case against a barber.

If there was mutual agreement these cases in Canada would not be happening.
She found 2 establishments which provided the service.
She decided to file against the other 16.

No solicitor is required to take legal action on ones own behalf.
One is likely to have a better outcome with a solicitor but one can proceed to litigate without one.

klaaaz wrote: »

Why was it brought up then in a discussion about the rights of a service provider to refuse service?

By the way, any male bodied(with intact male genitalia) person convicted of sexual assault should not be in a womens prison. There is a massive difference between those who change sex who are decent law abiding people who bother no-one and those who go around with intact male genitalia sexually assaulting people, the latter are still s*um. That's the word from a transgender ally.

Are we to accept that both are trans women?

klaaaz wrote: »

Quoting a religious conservative website makes a mockery of your stance. However they quote Yanev yet again the super troll in the story. Roll on the right wing zealots to bash trans people from the actions of one loo-la.

She is a trans woman
She claims her activism is for the betterment of the trans community as a whole.

Que  the name calling for some one pointing out that this person is a loo-la.
Que the call out of literal violence against trans people.

Non trans people have been pointing out that this person's behaviour is a problem.  In fact one, Meghan Murphy sued Twitter over being banned for discussing her.

klaaaz wrote: »

Quoting a religious conservative website makes a mockery of your stance. However they quote Yanev yet again the super troll in the story. Roll on the right wing zealots to bash trans people from the actions of one loo-la.

Dante7 wrote: »

 As Glinner said, we tried to warn you about Yaniv, but you called us bigots.

klaaaz wrote: »

It's relevant when posters quote religious conservative websites to bash trans people.

To echo this try not attack the messenger just because you don't agree with the message

klaaaz wrote: »

Oh Eric, the defender of the American right in the likes of the antifa thread, we meet again.

There is scant details on the Irish case, in fact it was a Sunday World story ya know a red top tabloid. There is an active body of right wing posters here trying to label all trans people as like that lunatic Yanev and/or as sex offenders.

Desmond is not trans, he's a young drag performer many miles from here or maybe in your neighbourhood in New York?

Seriously you would see nothing wrong with a tween girl dancing for money in a club?

klaaaz wrote: »

Drag is not trans and despite your wishing, the vast vast majority of transgender people are not sex offenders. If one person claiming to be trans is a sex offender, throw the book at them just like any other non-trans person.

klaaaz wrote: »

What you mean by end game? Are you talking about trans women as it's not clear. Crossdressing males like transvestites, fetishists and drag artists are not transgender, transsexuals with gender dysphoria are definitely transgender.

Under the new rules anyone can apply 

She got an award for being a business women

Glass fused light

wiggle16 wrote: »

Why is it that when one solo d*ckhead acts like a d*ckhead they become representative of all trans-people? We are not this single-minded about any other group. Not anymore at least.

Yes, this person is abusing laws that were meant for another purpose. We can all see that. But this person is not representative, by any measure, of the majority of trans-people.
You are willfully conflating the fact that gender identity laws exist with the idea that the people they were enacted to protect want to abuse them to gain access to children and vulnerable women. Not just a few. All of them (the "trans community"). If you were talking about any other group you would not have such a ridiculous and hysterical outlook on things. It's an outrageous accusation to make against an entire group of people.

And no, I don't think that women should be forced to wax or otherwise interact in any way with balls they don't want to interact with, under any circumstances.

When the self appointed leaders or elected leaders who have access to the halls of power start pushing an agenda that people are not in agreement with we have the right to object.

A whole lot of women had pointed out that the self ID was going to be abused.
Not by the old fashioned Trans people but by the acceptance without exception lot.

Gender critic : Hey look sexual predators will self ID
Trans ally: It will not happen
Gender critic : Hey look this sexual predator is self IDing
Trans ally: Stop being a transphobe accept the transition as valid
Gender critic : here is evidence 
Trans ally: It there is no criminal conviction so there is no problem. Stop being a transphobe accept the transition as valid
 Gender critic : Hey look a conviction
Trans ally: A criminal conviction they were never trans to begin with
Gender critic : hate to say we told you so, but we did
Trans ally: Stop being a transphobe attacking us over a single predator
Gender critic : ok message received, that transphobia label is part of the problem so fcuk you and the horse you rode in on.


On the waxing Morgane Oger still supports the case even though she issued this statement about the litigent

https://morganeoger.ca/2019/04/19/preying-on-children-makes-you-a-predator-regardless-of-who-you-are/

wiggle16 wrote: »

As an aside, I am of the opinion that the current climate around the trans debate, especially in the LGBTQ community, is such that people are made to feel that it's unwise to question the "conventional wisdom" around trans issues as outlined by the trans rights movement - in other words, that anything but full support for everything trans is transphobic and that debate or dissent is indicative of bigotry. And I don't agree with that.
The movement can be very reactionary and in that way I don't think it has the best interests of most trans-people at heart.

We should be able to talk and have a proper conversation about this subject in the public sphere - but because of the current climate I feel the conversation is being left to the bigots and the trans rights movement is being allowed to exist in a bubble, and that may one day pop.

Hi welcome fellow "TERF" let's talk 

suicide_circus

i suffer from hayfever. is the solution to make everyone else sneeze?

Of course jy and that prisoner don't represent trans people as a whole. What they represent is an issue with self id and with unquestioning acceptance, lest you be called a terf and shut down. And with using the efforts of genuine people to hop on board and harass immigrants, in one case

Eric Cartman

bluewolf wrote: »

Of course jy and that prisoner don't represent trans people as a whole. What they represent is an issue with self id and with unquestioning acceptance, lest you be called a terf and shut down. And with using the efforts of genuine people to hop on board and harass immigrants, in one case

And by the same token because there has been a handful of cases of people self id’ing after being caught for abuse , many trans people and allies claim thats what happening when a before the fact trans person commits abusive acts to dostance themselves from the community.

There are some in the trans community completely deffending JY
There are some in the trans community who are saying JY is t really trans and just exploiting self id
There are some in the trans community who can accept JY is a legit gender dysphoria suffering trans woman who has some sick interests in kids and making women touch their penis who would rather turn a blind eye to JY to still push for access for trans women into female spaces

These views are all equally dangerous and disturbing .

There are also members of the trans community who accept thet JY is really trans and also a predator and that their ‘rights’ do not trump those of women and children , its these voices that should be promoted

For me it comes down to this:

A trans person can live their life however they see fit. However, they are not entitled to be mandatorily recognised as the gender that they prefer. There is no issue with body modification and doing everything within your own power to be comfortable in your own skin. That is your choice.

The issue I have is with self identification comes many problems. I could self identify as a woman, but that doesn't make me one. In much the same way I could identify as a millionaire, Frank Bruno, a cat, 6ft tall etc but that wouldn't make it so.

Accepting that someone who was born a man and identifies as a woman, and treating them as an actual woman (womens prisons, access to women only spaces) is absolutely ludicrous.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

wiggle16 wrote: »

Here you go:





It is impossible to have a conversation about this because some people are more concerned about what this person is than what the person has done and are happy to use it as a stick with which to beat trans-people in general.

You’ve picked on one or two posts which are really about the ideology anyway. As somebody mentioned previously many old school trans activists opposed self definition.

That’s the problem here - an ideology that denies biology and opposes any medical or scientific differences between sexes has leaked from the academic community into real life. It’s argues that there are some people whose “assignment” at birth matches their self gendered identity - these people are cis, and there are others whose self identity doesn’t match their “assigned” gender. These people are trans. Thus the state should allow people to change, without medical tests or medical transitions or any intervention, to their “real” gender.

If all trans was was people transitioning medically and after two years of that getting some rights that biological women (/men) have then I’m sure we’d all be onboard. I was until self id.

However changing a birth cert has many many implications. The trans woman is now a legal female (and this is what the ideology demands when it says that transwomen are women) and thus legally has to be treated like one - which means once female spaces can now be taken over by biological males who don’t have to transition or even wear a wig but merely fill out a form.

Thus this case is not a bug or an outlier but a feature and the new normal. There will be male athletes at Tokyo competing in the female events and that too is not a bug but a feature.

Sir Oxman

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

You’ve picked on one or two posts which are really about the ideology anyway. As somebody mentioned previously many old school trans activists opposed self definition.

That’s the problem here - an ideology that denies biology and opposes any medical or scientific differences between sexes has leaked from the academic community into real life. It’s argues that there are some people whose “assignment” at birth matches their self gendered identity - these people are cis, and there are others whose self identity doesn’t match their “assigned” gender. These people are trans. Thus the state should allow people to change, without medical tests or medical transitions or any intervention, to their “real” gender.

If all trans was was people transitioning medically and after two years of that getting some rights that biological women (/men) have then I’m sure we’d all be onboard. I was until self id.

However changing a birth cert has many many implications. The trans woman is now a legal female (and this is what the ideology demands when it says that transwomen are women) and thus legally has to be treated like one - which means once female spaces can now be taken over by biological males who don’t have to transition or even wear a wig but merely fill out a form.

Thus this case is not a bug or an outlier but a feature and the new normal. There will be male athletes at Tokyo competing in the female events and that too is not a bug but a feature.

*Completely agree.
SelfID is ludicrous and very harmful to women.

* I don't do trans language (ie, "cis")

Glass fused light

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

That’s the problem here - an ideology that denies biology and opposes any medical or scientific differences between sexes has leaked from the academic community into real life.


.

It's also interesting where you see in creeping into fact based biology centres of learning.

The London natural history museums on binary sexual reproduction and intersexed people
https://mobile.twitter.com/soulfoodie/status/1140593467552346113?p=v

Tokyo

doylefe wrote: »

A yoke going around dresses like a woman with fake tits and a big hairy cock and balls?

Sounds like a reasonable phobia to me.

Mod: Red carded, and don't post in this thread again.


This thread has turned into a shïtshow in general, due to a small handful of posters who, rather than actually discuss the topic, are happy to throw around derogatory statements, not to mention some serious unsubstantiated accusations.

Considering the softly-softly approach isn't working, let me be clear. Any further dickish comments or unsubstantiated statements will be met with a card and threadban.

mike_ie

mike_ie wrote: »

Mod: Red carded, and don't post in this thread again.


This thread has turned into a shïtshow in general, due to a small handful of posters who, rather than actually discuss the topic, are happy to throw around derogatory statements, not to mention some serious unsubstantiated accusations.

Considering the softly-softly approach isn't working, let me be clear. Any further dickish comments or unsubstantiated statements will be met with a card and threadban.

I am not questioning moderation in the slightest but I would just like to note the thread title perhaps doesn't do the tone any favours and may be sending out mixed messages. I've been the recipient of a ban already so I am on good behaviour.

Sir Oxman

Deleted User wrote: »

I am not questioning moderation in the slightest but I would just like to note the thread title perhaps doesn't do the tone any favours and may be sending out mixed messages. I've been the recipient of a ban already so I am on good behaviour.

The thread title is factual.
This is what is happening in a Western democracy that has drank the koolaid.

Hector Savage

This pervert has had another twitter user banned permanently

https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/1153454681773023232?s=20

I find it disturbing that twitter have decided to side with a ~50 year old man who is obsessed with the menstrual processes of 10-12 year old girls, and wants to ask them for pads (can't imagine what he'd need them for) ...

Annasopra

Deleted User wrote: »

For me it comes down to this:

A trans person can live their life however they see fit. However, they are not entitled to be mandatorily recognised as the gender that they prefer. There is no issue with body modification and doing everything within your own power to be comfortable in your own skin. That is your choice.

The issue I have is with self identification comes many problems. I could self identify as a woman, but that doesn't make me one. In much the same way I could identify as a millionaire, Frank Bruno, a cat, 6ft tall etc but that wouldn't make it so.

Accepting that someone who was born a man and identifies as a woman, and treating them as an actual woman (womens prisons, access to women only spaces) is absolutely ludicrous.

They are entitled to be recognised as the gender they prefer. By law.

ceadaoin.

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

They are mandatorily entitled to be recognised as the gender they prefer.

Should that extend to sexual organs? Is Jessica's penis entitled to be recognised as female when that is biologically impossible? and should these women be compelled to handle it, in your opinion?

According to Jessica, women don't have the right to say no. They said exactly that on the Niall boylan show. Do you agree with that?

Joeytheparrot

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

They are entitled to be recognised as the gender they prefer. By law.

Do you agree with that?

If so, are you ok for self identification?

And if so, is it ok for any person to self identify as a woman and gain access to what would be a woman only space (i.e. changing rooms, prisons, womens refuge centre)?

If not, then you aren’t being consistent with your views.

Annasopra

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you agree with that?

If so, are you ok for self identification?

And if so, is it ok for any person to self identify as a woman and gain access to what would be a woman only space (i.e. changing rooms, prisons, womens refuge centre)?

If not, then you aren’t being consistent with your views.

Yes, yes and yes.

FTA69

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

They are entitled to be recognised as the gender they prefer. By law.

Do you then think that these women in Canada should be obliged to wax their genitals in a female only space?

FTA69

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Yes, yes and yes.

Worked out brilliant over here with Karen White being transferred to a female prison where she then sexually assaulted two women.

Great hurling entirely.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

They are entitled to be recognised as the gender they prefer. By law.

I agree with that, if that is in fact law.

Joeytheparrot

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Yes, yes and yes.

Well then Joey, you and I won't see eye to eye on this matter.

I am of the opinion that you can't "think" yourself into being something you physically aren't. I'm actually very surprised that anyone would be ok with a man self identifying as a woman and be allowed access to, say, a womans refuge.

I respect your opinion and your honesty though.

Still waters

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

They are entitled to be recognised as the gender they prefer. By law.

So are you comfortable with a man like jessica pretending to be trans to gain access to changing rooms in the hope he'll see tampon strings hanging out of 12 year old bare chested girls, the law is all very well until you've a mentally ill scum bag with extreme tastes in paedophilia organising parties for children without having their parents present.

Let people be what they want, they should be protected by law but also shouldn't have the law protecting them when they clearly show pedo tendencies and publicly wish to be left alone with young menstruating girls

uck51js9zml2yt

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Yes, yes and yes.

I can't call you what I think you and your views are ..at least not here.

It's absolute nonsense ....I hereby. Identify as a coffee cup. Do you agree?

ceadaoin.

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Yes, yes and yes.

And how about you answer the questions about whether women should be compelled to handle Jessica's penis, and have no right to say no (in Jessica's words)? Do you agree with that also?

The Specialist

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

They are entitled to be recognised as the gender they prefer. By law.

The law cannot police peoples speech or thoughts. They are entitled to recognise themselves as whatever they want, nobody else can or should be forced to do the same.

Feisar

Eliezer Harsh Cedar wrote: »

I can't call you what I think you and your views are ..at least not here.

It's absolute nonsense ....I hereby. Identify as a coffee cup. Do you agree?

Or, I identify as a racist, so ya gotta accept me.

Such twaddle.

I question whether people are ingesting to much crap from the States or are trolling.