Jessica Yaniv refused service at gynaecologist's office

Brian?

Brian? wrote: »

Legally, that’s the truth. You need to get over it.

Ah here Brian, that's not how it works and you know better than to try to pass that off.

An unjust law does not make these arguments true.

A man cannot be a woman just because the law permits them to 'change their gender'.

A law doesn't trump biology and it will never force me to say that a man is a woman, nor should it, when it's simply not true.

As I've said the last time Yaniv started acting the maggot, people need to speak up and object to this crap being forced down their necks. A person born a man should be free to 'be' who they want and to live their life freely, but the one thing they can never actually be is a woman.

It really is that simple.

Brian?

Dante7 wrote: »

Enter A&E as a trans woman and state that you are legally a female and see if you will receive a blood transfusion from a female.

What has this got to do with whether a trans woman is legally a woman?

Brian?

JayZeus wrote: »

Ah here Brian, that's not how it works and you know better than to try to pass that off.

An unjust law does not make these arguments true.

A man cannot be a woman just because the law permits them to 'change their gender'.

A law doesn't trump biology and it will never force me to say that a man is a woman, nor should it, when it's simply not true.

As I've said the last time Yaniv started acting the maggot, people need to speak up and object to this crap being forced down their necks. A person born a man should be free to 'be' who they want, but the one thing they can never be is a woman.

It really is that simple.

It’s not that simple. Which is the only point I’ve tried to make. It’s incredibly complex.

Legally a trans woman is a woman. That’s a fact. Whether that should be the case is a nightmare of a complex debate.

Brian?

Brian? wrote: »

What has this got to do with whether a trans woman is legally a woman?

Legally.

But not in real life, tangible, biological form.

So not actually a woman.

Gynoid

[Deleted User] wrote: »

. It baffles me the hype that has grown out of these issues, when it relates to such a small number of people out of any population. Even gay rights never received the degree of attention and condemnation that trans issues receive to this day, and in such a relatively, short time.

If you looked closer it would not baffle you. A small but well funded and radically ideological trans activist lobby has sought to radically influence public policy
Eg to

Influence education re teaching biology to children in a completely ascientific manner. Claiming in govt literature that the human sex can be de facto changed for example
Promote gender confirmation procedures from very early ages though the techniques are experimental and cruel and often inflicted on vulnerable children with mental health co-morbidities. Not rarely. Hundeds and hundreds in the UK alone.
Destroy the true meaning of language, like the reality of motherhood, woman, man etc
Assert that sex is merely assigned at birth and has no reality, unlike gender expression which is claimed to be immutable, which is subversion of reason
Claim single sex spaces or sports can no longer exist
Etc
There is ongoing coercion of peoples reason to accept what is patently false and I will not be coerced. I admire some trans people but not the dictators nor their dictats.

One eyed Jack

Dante7 wrote: »

Another clown shoes for the ignore list. I asked you four times to explain your assertion that trans people are denied human rights and you replied with word salad.

If that’s having ones arse handed to them, you’ve done a piss poor job of it so far - “there needs to be a debate! Another clown for ignore”, at the rate you’re going you’ll have your very own echo chamber all to yourself soon enough.

You’re seeking to deny people their human rights which they are entitled to. It’s a debate and discussion that’s already been had and settled. Your position appears to be that those decisions should be reversed, thereby having the effect of violating people’s human rights.

That’s not going to happen.

AndrewJRenko

splinter65 wrote: »

The vast majority of men are perfectly normal. Then theres woke blokes and they’re more to be pitied then anything else. But there’s a hard core of men with an inexplicable but carefully hidden deep seated resentment of women, and they’d like nothing better then to see the hard won safe spaces women enjoy now invaded by men whose right to be treated as women they pretend to champion, but who when they have transitioned, they wouldn’t touch with a barge pole.

That's a curious point about the 'wouldn't touch with a barge pole'. This might be a surprise for you, but it is possible to champion women without having a sexual interest. It is possible to champion women that yes, you wouldn't touch with a barge pole for whatever reason. Some people are motivated by things other than wanting to touch people with a barge pole.

Dante7 wrote: »

He never answers. I put him on ignore because I got bored with him contorting himself in pretzel logic to try and justify his cultish belief that trans women are literally women. Deep down he knows he is wrong, but the cult logic demands that he defend it at any cost.

The day is nigh when him and all the other woke blokes have to admit that there is a serious issue that needs to be debated, and when that day comes watch them all do a complete 180 and attest to how they always believed that there was a problem.

There's absolutely no problem with debate. I've never suggested that there shouldn't be a debate.



Debate is a double-edged sword though. Debate involves hearing two sides of the coin. Debate involves adding context to clarify the scope and extent of the issues under debate.


So debate away....

Deleted User wrote: »

So, you answered a question with a different question. Bully for you. You didn't even come close to answering what I asked of you, or even referring to the content of my post. You deflected completely, and are simply repeating your original post. A total cop out. Answer the question and show me that you're not simply virtue signalling with vague nonsense.

Ironicname wrote: »

Indeed.

It's a lie that a person who was born with a penis is, or can be, a woman.

To argue anything else is by your rationale, uncivilised discussion.

Do you agree?

Thanks for getting to the heart of the issue. It's not really anything to do with safety of women. The issue, as is clear from the tone and content of many of the posts on this thread is actually about trying to roll back some of the very modest liberalisation on rights for transgender people. This is about people who just can't bear not being able to sneer at transgender people with their schoolyard jokes. They can't bear being required to be vaguely respectful of other humans.


So they're jumping on the back of this 'safety of women' nonsense, stirring up a nice big fire with stories trawled from red top tabloids all over the world to pretend that this is an problem that needs solving.


When in fact, it's a solution looking for a problem.

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Who is distracting from that? This thread is about Jessica yaniv. A male who is using the law to abuse women. Yes, women are abused all the time, all around the world. Doesn't mean we can't also discuss this. Why do you want to distract attention from the issue of men exploiting the law to abuse women?

Misogyny is telling women to shut up and move over for males. That our feelings and views dont count. Same old story as the rest of history really.

Also, you do realise that there are residents of countries other than ireland posting on here right?

Oh yeah, there are residents of countries other than Ireland here, posting on boards.ie. The hint is in the name.

Silentcorner wrote: »

I'm with you on the issues you have raised, but this issue has nothing to do with misogyny....this gender mess was fabricated in the same place that has brought us Radical Feminism...it, if it continues to impact public policy as we are seeing it will completely erode all the privileges (like quotas, healthcare, lenient prison sentences, women's groups and networks and spaces etc etc) that women in today's society enjoy...feminists have being invading men's spaces for a few decades now!!!

The Radical Feminists I know have come down solidly on the side of trans rights. They're the ones in the compilation photo on Comerford's profile pic.

https://twitter.com/AidanCTweets

splinter65 wrote: »

It would be very easy for you to offer clarification of your position on the matter, for example something along the lines of “ Your being ridiculous splinter65, of course I agree that women should be allowed to enjoy being naked and vulnerable in a women only space without being forced to accept a naked man being allowed in”. Then I would be apologizing for misinterpreting your posts.
But you won’t clarify so my point stands.

Just to clarify again - you didn't 'misinterpret' anything. You lied in a vain attempt to bolster your case. But it didn't work.

Gynoid

Brian? wrote: »

Why does any of this matter to you? In my opinion it’s completely irrelevant to the debate. Tell me that and I’ll answer.

It is not irrelevant. It is where the rubber meets the road, Brian, and you know it, but like I said earlier, if you do not answer I will understand. No worries.

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

If that’s having ones arse handed to them, you’ve done a piss poor job of it so far - “there needs to be a debate! Another clown for ignore”, at the rate you’re going you’ll have your very own echo chamber all to yourself soon enough.

You’re seeking to deny people their human rights which they are entitled to. It’s a debate and discussion that’s already been had and settled. Your position appears to be that those decisions should be reversed, thereby having the effect of violating people’s human rights.

That’s not going to happen.

Eh, steady on there Jack. The debate has most certainly NOT been had, and is NOT settled.

So any premature 'decision' is absolutely wide open to being reversed, especially in the case where the laws rashly enacted off the back of a 'progressive' intention to be more respectful of the individual have created a situation where a man may occupy a womens facility (be it a changing room or a prison) simply because they say they're a woman.

That's ridiculous. I mean absolutely derisable, and nobody giving this any thought at all should think that situation is acceptable.

Gynoid

Yeeargghhhh. Multi quote battles hurt my speedy scroll finger...

AndrewJRenko

JayZeus wrote: »

Eh, steady on there Jack. The debate has most certainly NOT been had, and is NOT settled.

So any premature 'decision' is absolutely wide open to being reversed, especially in the case where the laws rashly enacted off the back of a 'progressive' intention to be more respectful of the individual have created a situation where a man may occupy a womens facility (be it a changing room or a prison) simply because they say they're a woman.

That's ridiculous. I mean absolutely derisable, and nobody giving this any thought at all should think that situation is acceptable.

Have any particular issues or difficulties arisen in Ireland in years since self-ID was legalised?

ceadaoin.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Oh yeah, there are residents of countries other than Ireland here, posting on boards.ie. The hint is in the name.

And no irish person or former resident of ireland has ever moved to another country. Ever. Fact. If anyone did they must immediately shut down their boards.ie account clearly.

If things that happen outside of Ireland can't be discussed, there wouldn't be much going on around here really would there?

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Have any particular issues or difficulties arisen in Ireland in years since self-ID was legalised?

Straw man much?

A man is a man and a woman is a woman, no matter where you are in the world.

This is a transnational issue, if ever there was one. Biology knows no national borders or legal jurisdictions.

If you have an interest in going down a rabbit hole, fire away. I won't be joining you.

AndrewJRenko

ceadaoin. wrote: »

And no irish person or former resident of ireland has ever moved to another country. Ever. Fact. If anyone did they must immediately shut down their boards.ie account clearly.

If things that happen outside of Ireland can't be discussed, there wouldn't be much going on around here really would there?

Oh yes, things can absolutely be discussed - and their relevance (or lack of relevance) to life in Ireland can be discussed too.

jaxxx

Brian? wrote: »

It’s not that simple. Which is the only point I’ve tried to make. It’s incredibly complex.

Legally a trans woman is a woman. That’s a fact. Whether that should be the case is a nightmare of a complex debate.

Legality is a fiction created by humans, because legality is not a constant, it is a matter of perspective and opinion. The only function legality serves is to maintain law and order in society. You can make all the law changes you want and declare a trans man/woman a true woman/man, but in the eyes of nature a man is a man, a woman a woman and no amount of cosmetic alterations is going to change that. You're given your cards in life when you're born, there is no option for a new hand. You can mutilate your body and take all the synthetic hormones until the sun dies, but no amount of alteration can change what you are, anymore than you can change that you're human.

I sympathise with those who think they're a man/woman stuck in the wrong body, really I do. But you cannot change what you are, anymore than a leopard can change its spots. We do not have the natural ability to change our sex. Life is precious, it is a miracle. Appreciate what you've got, appreciate the fact that you're alive and live with the cards you've been dealt. Someone wants to force me to recognise a trans man/woman as an actual woman/man? They can shove their legalities where the sun don't shine. LGBI is all a part of nature, everything outside of that is a fallacy. And I'm not gonna sit by and keep my mouth shut while the world wants to embrace this insanity.

One eyed Jack

JayZeus wrote: »

Eh, steady on there Jack. The debate has most certainly NOT been had, and is NOT settled.

So any premature 'decision' is absolutely wide open to being reversed, especially in the case where the laws rashly enacted off the back of a 'progressive' intention to be more respectful of the individual have created a situation where a man may occupy a womens facility (be it a changing room or a prison) simply because they say they're a woman.

That's ridiculous. I mean absolutely derisable, and nobody giving this any thought at all should think that situation is acceptable.

What I mean was that what Dante appears to want to debate, has been settled - the gender recognition act exists in Irish law as a result of Lydia Foys numerous legal challenges to have their preferred gender recognised in Irish law, as the Irish States continued failure to do so was a violation of their human rights obligations -

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lydia_Foy

The stuff about changing rooms and prisons are more of a policy decision than being compelled to do so by any human rights legislation. It doesn’t immediately constitute discrimination to take what would be considered reasonable steps to acknowledge and balance the rights of all people concerned, but that would be more a matter for the Courts, to be decided on a case by case basis.

Dante7

Brian? wrote: »

What has this got to do with whether a trans woman is legally a woman?

If you require medical treatment and you rock up to A&E demanding to be treated as a legal female, the doctors will ignore you, because they understand science. A blood transfusion from a previously pregnant woman can kill a biological male. Legal female is nonsense.

One eyed Jack

Gynoid wrote: »

Yeeargghhhh. Multi quote battles hurt my speedy scroll finger...

I’m doing my best to keep them to a minimum, you’ve pulled me up on it before

Gynoid

Dante7 wrote: »

If you require medical treatment and you rock up to A&E demanding to be treated as a legal female, the doctors will ignore you, because they understand science. A blood transfusion from a previously pregnant woman can kill a biological male. Legal female is nonsense.

There is also a growing body of research that shows that medications interact differently in the body depending on sex. Female and male livers process chemicals differently and also quantities affect the sexes differently.

One eyed Jack

Dante7 wrote: »

If you require medical treatment and you rock up to A&E demanding to be treated as a legal female, the doctors will ignore you, because they understand science. A blood transfusion from a previously pregnant woman can kill a biological male. Legal female is nonsense.

They won’t.

And for what it’s worth, a blood transfusion from another male can kill another male too, not sure what your point was with that example.

Dante7

Dante7 wrote: »

Enter A&E as a trans woman and state that you are legally a female and see if you will receive a blood transfusion from a female.

That makes absolutely no sense. Very weird example. Edit. Just saw the explanations... will do some of my own research on this one. Seems more than a little odd though.

Gynoid wrote: »

If you looked closer it would not baffle you. A small but well funded and radically ideological trans activist lobby has sought to radically influence public policy

Nah. Don't buy it. It's gained too much traction too quickly. TBH I suspect it's due to the internet and social media becoming so dominant in most peoples lives. Idle hands make the devils work, and all that. Just can't quite get why it's this issue, and not something far more relevant to most people, as opposed to something related to an extremely small (so far) population .

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Thanks for getting to the heart of the issue.

Huh? You gotta be joking.

It's not really anything to do with safety of women. The issue, as is clear from the tone and content of many of the posts on this thread is actually about trying to roll back some of the very modest liberalisation on rights for transgender people. This is about people who just can't bear not being able to sneer at transgender people with their schoolyard jokes. They can't bear being required to be vaguely respectful of other humans.

Or it's about encouraging victimhood in people who generally didn't claim victimhood? I know people who have undergone trans procedures, and I never heard any complaints about how most people treated them. A minority were crass ignorant muppets, but you get that as any gender. I, as a male, have to deal with hateful feminists. As a bisexual male, I have to deal with hate from both males and females alike. A definite minority. Instead, we have a host of people unrelated to trans people taking up the crusade for trans "rights".

So they're jumping on the back of this 'safety of women' nonsense, stirring up a nice big fire with stories trawled from red top tabloids all over the world to pretend that this is an problem that needs solving.

Err... my original post was about the safety of women. In that Trans people changing to "female" retain the muscle and strength of being male, and therefore cannot be considered as female, because they're, well, not the same. therefore, it's logical to treat them as a third gender, with trans males being a fourth since they'll be weaker than "natural" males.

Care to try throw some dirt my way? :rolleyes:

Oh yeah, there are residents of countries other than Ireland here, posting on boards.ie. The hint is in the name.

Check my location. It's 5.25 AM here now. Chongqing is in China btw... I'm still Irish though. Signed up to boards long before you did.

AndrewJRenko

jaxxx wrote: »

Legality is a fiction created by humans, because legality is not a constant, it is a matter of perspective and opinion. The only function legality serves is to maintain law and order in society. You can make all the law changes you want and declare a trans man/woman a true woman/man, but in the eyes of nature a man is a man, a woman a woman and no amount of cosmetic alterations is going to change that. You're given your cards in life when you're born, there is no option for a new hand. You can mutilate your body and take all the synthetic hormones until the sun dies, but no amount of alteration can change what you are, anymore than you can change that you're human.

I sympathise with those who think they're a man/woman stuck in the wrong body, really I do. But you cannot change what you are, anymore than a leopard can change its spots. We do not have the natural ability to change our sex. Life is precious, it is a miracle. Appreciate what you've got, appreciate the fact that you're alive and live with the cards you've been dealt. Someone wants to force me to recognise a trans man/woman as an actual woman/man? They can shove their legalities where the sun don't shine. LGBI is all a part of nature, everything outside of that is a fallacy. And I'm not gonna sit by and keep my mouth shut while the world wants to embrace this insanity.

You don't get to speak for nature.

Gynoid

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Just can't quite get why it's this issue, and not something far more relevant to most people, as opposed to something related to an extremely small (so far):

So it is not relevant to you to have public policy enacted (policies that have concrete effects outside the tiny cohort you mention) that compels you to accept things that are untrue?
I have not seen it happen before. Outside of tyrannies, that is.

Ironicname

Brian? wrote:

Legally, that’s the truth. You need to get over it.

Should we accept everything because of the law?

Did you have that opinion before homosexuality was legalised? Or before abortion was legalised?

No. I'm discussing an important issue that I disagree with regardless of its legality.

It may be legal, but it's nonsensical

Brian?

Dante7 wrote: »

If you require medical treatment and you rock up to A&E demanding to be treated as a legal female, the doctors will ignore you, because they understand science. A blood transfusion from a previously pregnant woman can kill a biological male. Legal female is nonsense.

It’s not nonsense. It’s legally correct. Why does this fact bother you so much?

It is a fact.

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You don't get to speak for nature.

There's no harm in it. It might help some folks to understand that nature has spoken and the message it clear, despite their reluctance to hear it. Men are not women and women are not men.

Gynoid

Gynoid wrote: »

So it is not relevant to you to have public policy enacted (policies that have concrete effects outside the tiny cohort you mention) that compels you to accept things that are untrue?
I have not seen it happen before. Outside of tyrannies, that is.

TBPH, I'm kinda used to it. The vast majority of legal changes happen without the permission of the general public. Unless you're hooked into the system in some way, most changes happen without anyone noticing. That's not any sense of approval Btw.

Fact is, I'm not discussing the legal aspect because I'm not living in Ireland right now, and I don't expect to be back any time soon. It doesn't affect me. However, the social aspects do possibility affect my family members especially the children who may be exposed to propaganda within schools to promote "gender change". We're already seeing such happening in parts of the US, and I wouldn't be surprised to see something similar happen in Ireland under a more limited campaign.

But I'm not going to get involved in the discussions about the legal aspects here. Not my scene.

Brian?

Ironicname wrote: »

Should we accept everything because of the law?

No. Laws can be changed. Which I have already said many times.

Did you have that opinion before homosexuality was legalised? Or before abortion was legalised?

No. I want the laws changed because they conflicted with strongly held moral beliefs of mine.

No. I'm discussing an important issue that I disagree with regardless of its legality.

It may be legal, but it's nonsensical

It’s many things. But it’s a fact that a trans woman is legally a woman.

Ironicname

Brian? wrote:

It’s not nonsense. It’s legally correct. Why does this fact bother you so much?

Because it is nonsense.

It makes no sense.

The literal definition of nonsense.

Brian? wrote:

It is a fact.

It is a fact that men are not women.

Legality of self id does not change the fact

Dante7

One eyed Jack wrote: »

They won’t.

And for what it’s worth, a blood transfusion from another male can kill another male too, not sure what your point was with that example.

That is an idiotic post which completely misses the issue of why biological sex is important when it comes to blood transfusions. You really don't seem to understand the concept of risk analysis.