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

drunkmonkey

MrFresh wrote: »

I think it's a bit useless in most cases as a person isn't required to declare they are transgender. So unless they are very noticeably so or are pre-op and looking for a service involving their genitals it won't really be of consequence.

So that's a yes?

Hobosan

Amalgam wrote: »

The Barbershop case from Dublin, that was unique because not only did the barber assume gender.

Oh god no, my brain is wired so that I assume gender automatically. What should I do?

klaaaz

Sir Oxman wrote: »

I can't let that go but I won't reply further as this is not a free and open debate on this thread.

I said transitioning (intact, male)
I have zero problems with transsexuals access

There was no evidence that the Canadian was actually transitioning, was there? As said by the other posters here, it was a case of self ID.

Yes, transsexuals have transitioned obviously as they have no male genitalia amongst the other changes.

Amalgam

Hobosan wrote: »

Oh god no, my brain is wired so that I assume gender automatically. What should I do?

The barber could have cut the customer's hair without issue, but he chose not to and made a situation out of it.

I've sat beside a lesbian couple getting their hair cut in a 'male' barber's, no one gave a jot or batted an eyelid. The trimmer doesn't care what hair it's cutting, neither should the person holding it..

Hobosan

Amalgam wrote: »

The barber could have cut the customer's hair without issue, but he chose not to and made a situation out of it.

I've sat beside a lesbian couple getting their hair cut in a 'male' barber's, no one gave a jot or batted an eyelid. The trimmer doesn't care what hair it's cutting, neither should the person holding it..

No argument there, but you took issue with him assuming someone's gender, which for most people is an automatic response which cannot be helped.

I'm worried I'll need to have my eyes and ears removed at the very least. Perhaps gloves should be mandatory also, as soft hands will make me assume gender also.

Amalgam

Hobosan wrote: »

No argument there, but you took issue with him assuming someone's gender, which for most people is an automatic response which cannot be helped.

I'm worried I'll need to have my eyes and ears removed at the very least. Perhaps gloves should be mandatory also, as soft hands will make me assume gender also.

I get where you're coming from, but the barber wasn't eh.. discreet, the exchange wasn't just the F2M customer, he assumed, after being told, from umm.. well, I'll be blunt, he noticed breasts, as far as I can recall. That lead to verbal carry on, allegedly, with one or more customers on the premises.

The damages were well deserved. There was a, 'sorry not sorry' statement from the business afterwards.

MrFresh

drunkmonkey wrote: »

So that's a yes?

i think it's a bit redundant but I have no issue with it being there.

Hobosan wrote: »

No argument there, but you took issue with him assuming someone's gender, which for most people is an automatic response which cannot be helped.

I'm worried I'll need to have my eyes and ears removed at the very least. Perhaps gloves should be mandatory also, as soft hands will make me assume gender also.

Almost everyone assumes gender when they see someone. The problem is when you discriminate based on that assumption.

drunkmonkey

MrFresh wrote: »

i think it's a bit redundant but I have no issue with it being there.

It was a simple question, yes it should be removed or no you think it should stay, why can't you answer a simple question in a straight forward manner.

Will I Am Not

Everything I’ve seen online about this Yaniv individual leads me to believe that they are not an actual transgender person. IMHO they are either (a) A male sexual predator using the transgender tag to get access to naked females and have females be obliged to touch his genitals. (b) A male opportunist out to make money off the transgender tag through litigation (c) A male troll, trying to make a farce of the whole transgender movement.

I have no issue referring to anyone by their chosen pronouns within reason, you can get up the yard with your ze and zer, I just don’t believe that this is a genuine transgender person... but I will be carded or banned for calling them he or him? Absolutely mental :rolleyes:

drunkmonkey

Will I Am Not wrote: »

I just don’t believe that this is a genuine transgender person...

I'm not seeing the difference between her and your run of the mill one's looking to do story times with kids in library's here. There's something a little wrong with it all. Maybe i'm just not a woke parent.

jam_mac_jam

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'm not seeing the difference between her and your run of the mill one's looking to do story times with kids in library's here. There's something a little wrong with it all. Maybe i'm just not a woke parent.

Is pantomime ok?

Amalgam

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'm not seeing the difference between her and your run of the mill one's looking to do story times with kids in library's here. There's something a little wrong with it all. Maybe i'm just not a woke parent.

In any case, the parents get tarred and feathered for having issues with it.

Deansgrange Library, South County Dublin.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/drag-storytelling-event-for-children-cancelled-due-to-degrading-comments-1.3861377

drunkmonkey

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Is pantomime ok?

Of course, but not comfortable with groups like glitter hole here.

drunkmonkey

Amalgam wrote: »

In any case, the parents get tarred and feathered for having issues with it.

Says it all really...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7R0msh75WgM

CroatoanCat

I have found this thread really heartening. When it comes to extremist genderist ideology, sunlight was always going to be the best disinfectant.

Yaniv's shenanigans are entirely consistent with the "logic" of the new transgender ideology. As a previous poster shrewdly observed, these issues are a feature, not a bug. It is not possible to buy into some aspects of the ideology and reject the (grossly unpalatable) ones; one must swear full allegiance or be condemned as a heretic. People are starting to see the authoritarianism and the coercive, manipulative tactics driving this movement, and they are rejecting it.

As I said, this thread has been heartening. Even six months ago, there would have been fewer people willing or able to articulate their unease with what they are being instructed to think, say and accept.

The women, mainly in the UK, who have fought bravely, often at significant personal cost, to bring these issues to public attention are heroes. Their concern always has been, and continues to be, to protect women's sex-based rights and safeguard vulnerable children. Theirs is the feminism I admire and respect greatly, not the insipid, nonsensical "feminism" that has bought into this cultish nonsense wholesale.

I am very grateful to the men on this thread who are willing to stand with the women resisting this appropriation of our ability to define ourselves in language and in law, and to maintain the boundaries we have established to protect us in certain situations where we are vulnerable. Thank you. Online discussions can often be toxic and people can assume entrenched positions, the so-called "war between the sexes" being a case in point. In real life, men and women mostly get on great and interact happily together in most areas of human endeavour.

In the few areas where biological sex matters - in sports, in prisons, in health care provision, and in settings where women and girls are physically vulnerable - we are entitled to a language to articulate the reality of our sexed bodies and to the right to advocate for sex-based protections without being condemned as bigots, ostracised, doxxed or threatened with violence.

major bill

Will I Am Not wrote: »

Everything I’ve seen online about this Yaniv individual leads me to believe that they are not an actual transgender person. IMHO they are either (a) A male sexual predator using the transgender tag to get access to naked females and have females be obliged to touch his genitals. (b) A male opportunist out to make money off the transgender tag through litigation (c) A male troll, trying to make a farce of the whole transgender movement.

I have no issue referring to anyone by their chosen pronouns within reason, you can get up the yard with your ze and zer, I just don’t believe that this is a genuine transgender person... but I will be carded or banned for calling them he or him? Absolutely mental :rolleyes:

Reading some of the tweets by JY I woulda said Option C BUT some of the conversations he had with underage girls and his apparent weird fetishes the persons is a ****ed up option A

drunkmonkey

CroatoanCat wrote: »

I have found this thread really heartening. When it comes to extremist genderist ideology, sunlight was always going to be the best disinfectant.

Yaniv's shenanigans are entirely consistent with the "logic" of the new transgender ideology. As a previous poster shrewdly observed, these issues are a feature, not a bug. It is not possible to buy into some aspects of the ideology and reject the (grossly unpalatable) ones; one must swear full allegiance or be condemned as a heretic. People are starting to see the authoritarianism and the coercive, manipulative tactics driving this movement, and they are rejecting it.

As I said, this thread has been heartening. Even six months ago, there would have been fewer people willing or able to articulate their unease with what they are being instructed to think, say and accept.

The women, mainly in the UK, who have fought bravely, often at significant personal cost, to bring these issues to public attention are heroes. Their concern always has been, and continues to be, to protect women's sex-based rights and safeguard vulnerable children. Theirs is the feminism I admire and respect greatly, not the insipid, nonsensical "feminism" that has bought into this cultish nonsense wholesale.

I am very grateful to the men on this thread who are willing to stand with the women resisting this appropriation of our ability to define ourselves in language and in law, and to maintain the boundaries we have established to protect us in certain situations where we are vulnerable. Thank you. Online discussions can often be toxic and people can assume entrenched positions, the so-called "war between the sexes" being a case in point. In real life, men and women mostly get on great and interact happily together in most areas of human endeavour.

In the few areas where biological sex matters - in sports, in prisons, in health care provision, and in settings where women and girls are physically vulnerable - we are entitled to a language to articulate the reality of our sexed bodies and to the right to advocate for sex-based protections without being condemned as bigots, ostracised, doxxed or threatened with violence.

Thank you, a lot of the guys here were will be very happy to read that. We've got your back have no fear and we'll fight to the death to protect Women and Children like we've done for millinea.

klaaaz

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'm not seeing the difference between her and your run of the mill one's looking to do story times with kids in library's here. There's something a little wrong with it all. Maybe i'm just not a woke parent.

Quoting the religious website lifesitenews, surprise! That's drag which is not transgender, it's up to the parents if they consent to such events. Not you.

MrFresh

CroatoanCat wrote: »

As a previous poster shrewdly observed, these issues are a feature, not a bug. It is not possible to buy into some aspects of the ideology and reject the (grossly unpalatable) ones;

Yes it is.

MrFresh

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Thank you, a lot of the guys here were will be very happy to read that. We've got your back have no fear and we'll fight to the death to protect Women and Children like we've done for millinea.

Talk about a hero complex.

MrFresh

MrFresh wrote: »

Talk about a hero complex.

He’s right.

Another truth you’d prefer to ignore?

MrFresh

JayZeus wrote: »

He’s right.

Another truth you’d prefer to ignore?

I didn't think keyboard warriors went back millenia.

drunkmonkey

MrFresh wrote: »

Talk about a hero complex.

I'll take that, better than being an anti women pedo rights supporter anyday of the week.

You couldn't even come out and say you think trans people shouldn't have the right to have there private parts shaved by unwilling women here. Shame on you.

This is the last of your posts I'll be engaging with and I hope others do the same.

MrFresh

MrFresh wrote: »

I didn't think keyboard warriors went back millenia.

No, they don’t.

Men, women and the things that make them so, do.

MrFresh

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'll take that, better than being an anti women pedo rights supporter anyday of the week.

You couldn't even come out and say you think trans people shouldn't have the right to have there private parts shaved by unwilling women here. Shame on you.

This is the last of your posts I'll be engaging with and I hope others do the same.

Not only do you not know the difference between trans and drag but you are now comparing trans rights to pedo rights. There's a lot of hatred in you.

JayZeus wrote: »

No, they don’t.

Men, women and the things that make them so, do.

So did slavery and the subjugation of women. They aren't so popular these days.

gmisk

JY is a nutjob and shouldnt be entertained IMO, she (I have to use she seemingly) does a huge disservice to actual transgender people.
Actual transgender people around the world in general have a tough enough time as it is without this absolute tit rabbiting on, it is clearly being done for attention and unfortunately it is working.
I know that this person does not represent the majority of people in the T of LGBT.
I come under the G btw not that it really matters in this instance.

The business owners in this case should in no way shape or form be forced to wax anyone balls if they are not trained to do so (I dont care if the person identifies as a female it should be irrelevant).
I also dont think pre-op transexuals should be allowed into female bathrooms, changing rooms etc (other persons here have put points forward and they have been kind of eye opening so I appreciate that).
If someone has fully transitioned from M to F and vice versa there should be no issue whatsoever with them using female bathrooms and changing rooms.

MrFresh

gmisk wrote: »

JY is a nutjob and shouldnt be entertained IMO, she (I have to use she) does a huge disservice to actual transgender people.
Actual transgender people around the world in general have a tough enough time as it is without this absolute tit rabbiting on, it is clearly being done for attention and unfortunately it is working.
I know that this person does not represent the majority of people in the T of LGBT.

The business owners in this case should in no way shape or form be forced to wax anyone balls if they are not trained to do so (I dont care if the person identifies as a female it should be irrelevant).

No disagreement there. Tell me, do you feel your argument was in any way lessened by using "she" instead of "he"?

gmisk wrote: »

I also dont think pre-op transexuals should be allowed into female bathrooms, changing rooms etc (other persons here have put points forward and they have been kind of eye opening so I appreciate that).
If someone has fully transitioned from M to F and vice versa there should be no issue whatsoever with them using female bathrooms and changing rooms.

How do you enforce it?

MrFresh

MrFresh wrote: »

No disagreement there. Tell me, do you feel your argument was in any way lessened by using "she" instead of "he"?

How do you enforce it?

No, the argument was not lessened, but policy was brought to bear against someone in order to force them to mis-state what they otherwise would. That might be okay for some but given the choice, a valid pronoun would likely have been used. For shame.

gmisk

MrFresh wrote: »

No disagreement there. Tell me, do you feel your argument was in any way lessened by using "she" instead of "he"?

How do you enforce it?

I have no issue with referring to someone as she or he personally at all.
This particular person is an attention seeking tool so I would almost not want to give them the satisfaction of referring to them as she.


I have encountered a person who wanted to be referred to as they - I have no problem with that at all, as long as you politely correct me I will continue to call anyone by whatever pronoun they wish. It makes no odds to me, why should it.



When it comes to enforcing it, I have no idea if I am being honest, but I dont think someone of the opposite gender should be using changing rooms etc.
So if someone say reported a man (or someone with male genitalia) in the womans changing rooms they should be removed.
It is entirely different if someone has transitioned.



I also understand the need for female only spaces.
I can give a random example, I am a gay man I went out for a night with a group of lesbian friends, we ended up at a lesbian night in Dublin.
I was refused entry, did I kick up a fuss, nope not at all I understand the need for those kind of spaces for people.
JY would have been dragging a case through the courts no doubt in the same situation!

gmisk

MrFresh wrote: »

How do you enforce it?

When it comes to bathrooms, I think more places should just have individual enclosed cubicles that can be used by anyone.
I dont mind a bit of privacy myself when I am trying to go to the loo!