Jessica Yaniv refused service at gynaecologist's office

Ironicname

AndrewJRenko wrote:

It's a fairly standard technique in these discussions. Anyone with any particular concern for basic human respect will get labelled a perv or a paedo. We've already had porn-shaming on this thread.

Haha.. I'm sorry? What is porn shaming?

Ironicname

Brian? wrote:

I’m happy to debate whether that should be legal if you want, but you can’t just deny the truth of it.

I was assuming that's what we had been doing? We all know self ID is legal, but the conversation has been about whether biological men should be allowed into biological female spaces and whether we should be labeled a bigot for acknowledging reality.

The very fact that I need to put biological in front of the names just proves what a ****ing ridiculous law it is.

Ironicname

AndrewJRenko wrote:

It may come as a surprise to you, but life, and indeed nature, isn't quite so black and white. You may not have direct personal experience of gender dysphoria, but it does happen.

Yes. Gender dysphoria happens.

So does biopolar disorder.

So does schizophrenia.

So does anorexia.

So does Alzheimer's.

So does body dysmorphia.

None of which changes the fact that someone born with male chromosomes are men and people born with female chromosomes are women.

Regardless of how you "feel" or what you believe.

AndrewJRenko

Ironicname wrote: »

Haha.. I'm sorry? What is porn shaming?

Go back over the thread and you'll find it.

Ironicname wrote: »

I was assuming that's what we had been doing? We all know self ID is legal, but the conversation has been about whether biological men should be allowed into biological female spaces and whether we should be labeled a bigot for acknowledging reality.

The very fact that I need to put biological in front of the names just proves what a ****ing ridiculous law it is.

Actually, we hadn't really been talking about female spaces here. What most people have been talking about is


Using a tiny number of extreme edge cases cherry picked from around the world to pretend that transgender people constitute a significant threat to the safety of women, despite the overwhelming evidence that the real danger to women is cis men.

Ironicname

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Go back over the thread and you'll find it.

I have had a look and can't find it. Can you please enlighten me as to what was said?

AndrewJRenko

Ironicname wrote: »

Yes. Gender dysphoria happens.

So does biopolar disorder.

So does schizophrenia.

So does anorexia.

So does Alzheimer's.

So does body dysmorphia.

None of which changes the fact that someone born with male chromosomes are men and people born with female chromosomes are women.

Regardless of how you "feel" or what you believe.

It's nothing to do with my feelings or my belief. It is a couple of generations of medical knowledge, social development and legislation.


You can stick your hand up to tell the tide to stop coming in, but it's really not going to work. It might work on boards.ie, but it doesn't work in the real world.

AndrewJRenko

Ironicname wrote: »

I have had a look and can't find it. Can you please enlighten me as to what was said?

Look harder. The search function is your friend.

Ironicname

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Actually, we hadn't really been talking about female spaces here. What most people have been talking about is using a tiny number of extreme edge cases cherry picked from around the world to pretend that transgender people constitute a significant threat to the safety of women, despite the overwhelming evidence that the real danger to women is cis men.

Absolutely not true. For a large part we have been talking about whether or not a woman should be compelled to share female-only spaces with men.

How do you identify Andrew? You are insisting to push the "cis men" are the real danger to society line at every given opportunity. Are you a danger to women?

Some people are. It's terrible. It has nothing to do with this topic.

Ironicname

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Look harder. The search function is your friend.

I honestly can't find it. I'm not joking. Can you please point it out?

AndrewJRenko

Ironicname wrote: »

I honestly can't find it. I'm not joking. Can you please point it out?

My usual rate for doing research for people is €100 per hour or portion thereof, but I'm happy to do an introductory rate of €50 for yourself. If you make the payment to TENI on my behalf and send me the receipt, I'll be happy to point it out for you.

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It sounds like you're fairly well disconnected from what is happening in schools in Ireland.

Why? because I'm not in Ireland now? That's rather slim objection. In any case, I'm a teacher, three out of four others in my immediate family are teachers, and I speak to my nephews/nieces about their lives.

Most schools in Ireland still have religious services for students. The idea that 'gender change propaganda' (whatever that is) would be publicised in Irish schools would be fairly wide of the mark.

Funny. Yes, I'm aware of the religious aspects within many schools. Gender change information has been available to children/teens because they have access to the internet, and teachers within the schools, can/do discuss such topics, voicing their own opinions on the subject. That's pretty standard. However, the degree that schools themselves decide to be "open" or "traditional" comes down to the schools themselves and their management, along with the attitude of those supplying the funding.

My concern is not about right now. My concern is about what comes later, and It's just a concern..

What's your definition of 'promoting gender change'? Does simply telling children that gender dysphoria exists come under the heading of 'promoting' in your book?

Nope... teens should be aware that it exists, and understand the real dangers/consequences involved in such a belief, along with the understanding of what making further physical changes might entail. They should be informed. I've no problem with that at all.

My issue is whether it should be introduced as a viable option for minors to avail of. That they would be encouraged to believe themselves to be a female with a male body or vice versa. The numbers of people who naturally experience such an issue are incredibly small, but both modern psychology and changes in society, could easily encourage far more minors towards such a belief, especially if actual physical changes was put forward as an accepted practice. I have no issue with what adults do to themselves. That's their choice.

I'm Bisexual, and have been bisexual all my life. The issues of being a teen and struggling with my sexuality were difficult but if there had been people telling me that I might, in fact, be a female (rather than male), I might have accepted such a notion, especially if there was an official acceptance to it all. That's my concern. Gender dysphoria should not be encouraged in such a manner, because it has far more serious consequences should physical gender change be an option. We're already seeing signs of such in the US, and it's hardly a stretch to see some of it spreading here too. Not right now, but later.

It's also worth noting that I didn't project my concern into the thread looking for attention and discussion. It was a response to one poster, and I didn't repeat it beyond that single response. (And no, I'm not backing away from saying it).

Brian?

Brian? wrote: »

It is a fact. Legally someone who was born a man can change their gender and live as a woman. That is a fact. I’m not sure what you’re struggling with here.

Let's break this down...


"Legally someone who was born a man can change their gender" CORRECT


"live as a woman." Only PARTIALLY Correct. Just because something is legal doesn't mean it's true. ROME declared Julius Caeser a god. Did he have a lot of the trappings of living like a god such as power, deference and obedience etc. Yes, but (spoiler alert) - he wasn't a god.


I'm okay with treating people that wish to be considered women (if born a man) as women out of politeness, but do I really think they're women. No. But, pretty sure that's not illegal yet.

Brian?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Let's break this down...


"Legally someone who was born a man can change their gender" CORRECT


"live as a woman." Only PARTIALLY Correct. Just because something is legal doesn't mean it's true. ROME declared Julius Caeser a god. Did he have a lot of the trappings of living like a god such as power, deference and obedience etc. Yes, but (spoiler alert) - he wasn't a god.


I'm okay with treating people that wish to be considered women (if born a man) as women out of politeness, but do I really think they're women. No. But, pretty sure that's not illegal yet.

That’s pretty reasonable, but I don’t think anyone is talking about inventing thought crime yet.

Brian?

Ironicname wrote: »

I was assuming that's what we had been doing? We all know self ID is legal, but the conversation has been about whether biological men should be allowed into biological female spaces and whether we should be labeled a bigot for acknowledging reality.

The very fact that I need to put biological in front of the names just proves what a ****ing ridiculous law it is.

Nope. I have repeatedly stated the legality of the situation and it’s gotten any number of contradictory responses. Including trying to associate me with pro paedophilic groups.

I just want the actual facts to be the start of the debate.

sydthebeat

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

My usual rate for doing research for people is €100 per hour or portion thereof, but I'm happy to do an introductory rate of €50 for yourself. If you make the payment to TENI on my behalf and send me the receipt, I'll be happy to point it out for you.

i must admit, i got a great chuckle out of this

Sir Oxman

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I

Is this for real? Are you really saying that women are too stupid and need your wisdom or the wisdom of men in general to guide them?



You might want to go back to the 1950s and see if you can find anyone to agree with you.

I repeat, you're some boyo.

Handy cutting there, the work of a disingenuous arsetwitch.



And I see an 'alt-right' thrown in replying to another poster.:rolleyes:




You've already tried deflecting from the debate multiple times, that is your modus operandi.

You've taken the fact that women are at risk from men and tried unsuccessfully to turn it back on women who express legitimate concerns for extremely bad law which puts their single sex spaces at risk.

You've tried the <you're not from|Ireland so shut up, none of this has happened in Ireland so shut up> but silence when a link is given to prove without a doubt the GI push is international including Ireland being a very important case study and an example in how to avoid sunlight on the issue which is currently being deployed in the UK.
The biggest obstacle in the ideologists way was always public debate (not just debate dictated by intersectional feminists and trans activists and captured gay orgs) and public scrutiny.


One day pretty soon, the likes of you won't mention the absurdity of what you support because you will be too ashamed to admit it.

AndrewJRenko

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm Bisexual, and have been bisexual all my life. The issues of being a teen and struggling with my sexuality were difficult but if there had been people telling me that I might, in fact, be a female (rather than male), I might have accepted such a notion, especially if there was an official acceptance to it all.

Do you think that maybe your bisexuality would have been less of a struggle if there was 'official acceptance' of it? If you had access to factual, non-judgemental, age-appropriate information stating something like;
1) Here's bisexuality
2) Some people are bisexual - that doesn't mean you're twisted or indecisive, it just means that you are sexually interested in both males and females


would there have been less or a struggle for you?

Gynoid

Sir Oxman wrote: »

One day pretty soon, the likes of you won't mention the absurdity of what you support because you will be too ashamed to admit it.

Exactly it. I remember the same types - if not the same boyos - defending drag kids in some threads and in others the effective chemical castration of children with mental health co-morbidities in the name of respect for people's rights. Now that the tables are beginning to turn with public investigations of hasty gender affirmation procedures being doled out to vulnerable children, and more doctors and experts speaking up about the travesty that has happened over the past several years with minors rendered sterile and
impotent, one does not hear a peep from them on those issues.

Sir Oxman

Brian? wrote: »

That’s pretty reasonable, but I don’t think anyone is talking about inventing thought crime yet.

Really?
Take a look across the water.
There is a case in the High Court at the moment that disproves that entirely, search for We Are Fair Cop.

Women (mainly women) who dare say they don't believe the mantra are routinely sacked, particularly within the fields of higher education where this all began. And of course, many 'official' govt funded 'womens' orgs frequently deplatform GC women.

Female organised public debate is very, very frequently deplatformed.

In 2019.


The weapon of choice used - 'transphobe', 'bigot', 'alt-right' blah blah
*They do not want any debate whatsoever*



So yeah, thought crime is real with this ideology.
(Look out for new Garda guidelines very soon - Ireland follows UK, UK follows Ireland, see Denton PDF linked earlier in thread)

One eyed Jack

Sir Oxman wrote: »

You've already tried deflecting from the debate multiple times, that is your modus operandi.

You've taken the fact that women are at risk from men and tried unsuccessfully to turn it back on women who express legitimate concerns for extremely bad law which puts their single sex spaces at risk.

I don’t agree that is a fact though. I mean, if you want to argue facts, then what you’re saying doesn’t qualify as a fact, it’s an opinion, and what evidence you have to support your opinion is simply unreasonable given the weight of evidence against it that suggests it is unreasonable to assume that women are at risk from men.

There are no laws putting women’s single sex spaces at risk. That’s the deflection from the debate which is in regards to a law which in your opinion is a bad law, but for the people who can avail of it, it’s a good law as far as they’re concerned, because the Irish State finally acknowledges their human rights. That recognition has all sorts of benefits for people who identify as their preferred gender with with regard to healthcare, education and employment. In contrast to that, the best anyone has been able to come up with so far is the welfare of women in prison (as if they ever gave a shìte about women in prison before now). Suddenly there are a load of “male feminists” crawling out of the woodwork to “protect the womenfolk” whereas in any other circumstances they’d be the same lads would want to throw women and woke blokes under the bus (metaphorically speaking, of course :pac:), and when that “argument” falls flat on it’s arse, well roll out the old “YOU SUPPORT CHILD ABUUUUUUUSE” chestnut, because that’s entirely reasonable and not at all paranoia fuelled nonsense :rolleyes:

Legitimate concerns? I don’t think so.

Sir Oxman wrote: »

One day pretty soon, the likes of you won't mention the absurdity of what you support because you will be too ashamed to admit it.

Sure isn’t that going on already with people declaring on social media that they’re being silenced? Kind odd how they’re able to do that if they were actually being silenced, by anyone. It appears they’re too ashamed to admit that they aren’t being silenced, it’s just that people who disagree with them think their opinions are absurd and hardly worth entertaining.

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Do you think that maybe your bisexuality would have been less of a struggle if there was 'official acceptance' of it? If you had access to factual, non-judgemental, age-appropriate information stating something like;
1) Here's bisexuality
2) Some people are bisexual - that doesn't mean you're twisted or indecisive, it just means that you are sexually interested in both males and females


would there have been less or a struggle for you?

Probably far less, although I graduated from high school over 20 years ago, when the awareness & attitude towards homosexuality was far different from it is today, and still, there are many hangups today about it.

In any case, you're bypassing the point. Gender dysphoria is far more than simply being sexually attracted to the same gender. We're talking about a series of beliefs that, can lead to actual physical change once their belief of gender dysphoria is accepted. Society is changing rapidly with new concepts being encouraged to be allowed into mainstream acceptance, before such changes are fully understood. That is why I have a concern about such things being made accessible to children/teens.

The attitude for many here on this thread is that those who experience gender dysphoria are, in fact, the desired gender. Males thinking they're female, so they are female. Those that make the further step of physically changing themselves, should be accepted as the same as the original genders. i.e. male/female.

They're not. They don't have the experience/memories of being the desired gender except for their expectation of what it entails, and what they hear from others. Instead, their experience/memories are that of their "original" gender. They'll also retain many physical characteristics of their original gender regardless of how much they change their general appearance or sexual organs. Simply, they become something other than male or female. A different classification entirely. And such a change should be properly understood for the effects it has on the person, and the possible consequences of that choice, before people/society encourages general acceptance. hence my concern.

suicide_circus

Die Linke wrote: »

Liberals, it's not happening. And whinging about bigorty and transphobia will not change that.

It is happening. They lobbied and got laws passed. it's an impressive achievement. Impressive and worrying.

Silentcorner

Die Linke wrote: »

A man cannot transform himself into a woman. He can use surgery and hormone treatment to take on the crude appearance of a woman, but he is not, and never will be, a woman.

Men have no right to enter female only spaces. That is not negotiable. If this is imposed on women, then women will respond by boycotting swimming pools and clothes shops etc.

Normal, sane, mentally healthy men will support women in this. As men we know that there are sick depraved men out there who will take advantage of self ID laws.

Liberals, it's not happening. And whinging about bigorty and transphobia will not change that.

It is already happening, Marks and Spencers recently announced gender neutral changing rooms...it is sweeping through society at remarkable speed!

Wait until it really starts to hit the gender qoutas that we are witnessing across the public and private sectors, how do you close the (the albeit debunked) gender pay gap when your gender is can no longer be legally defined in any meaningful manner!!

This is going to be fairy traumatic for young women in particular...they can thank the humanity departments in the Universities across the developed world....what is it called, the law of unintended consequences!

Gynoid

suicide_circus wrote: »

It is happening. They lobbied and got laws passed. it's an impressive achievement. Impressive and worrying.

I think Die Linke is actually saying there will be push back or back lash or the meek will finally rise up and tell radical trans rights activists to fcuk off...something like that

Silentcorner

Die Linke wrote: »

Then men and women will fight back. We will not let a minority of mentally ill men change society.

That is nothing new "hate speech" laws won't stop!

That and a few political speeches about the dangers of the far right!!!

One eyed Jack

Die Linke wrote: »

Then men and women will fight back. We will not let a minority of mentally ill men change society.

Politicians have been doing just that for some time now :pac:


All joking aside, there are numerous, and I mean, numerous examples of people who were considered mentally ill at the time who are responsible for some of the social, technological, medical and scientific advances many people in society take for granted today as though they always existed, much like people who are transgender have always existed in societies and cultures across the world throughout history.

suicide_circus

Silentcorner wrote: »

That is nothing new "hate speech" laws won't stop!

which seem to be based the complainant's perceptions of the incident. wacky times.

suicide_circus

One eyed Jack wrote: »

All joking aside, there are numerous, and I mean, numerous examples of people who were considered mentally ill at the time who are responsible for some of the social, technological, medical and scientific advances many people in society take for granted today as though they always existed, much like people who are transgender have always existed in societies and cultures across the world throughout history.

Equally there have been countless medical treatments throughout history which turned out to useless at best, usually counter productive and often barbaric.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

I’m always startled to read anyone questioning all of this being labelled as alt-right or right-wing in general.

suicide_circus wrote: »

Equally there have been countless medical treatments throughout history which turned out to useless at best, usually counter productive and often barbaric.

And unethical behaviour in medicine is something of which we must always be vigilant.

One eyed Jack

suicide_circus wrote: »

Equally there have been countless medical treatments throughout history which turned out to useless at best, usually counter productive and often barbaric.

Absolutely! And I would go further and say that for every successful medical treatment, there have been countless failures and unethical practices which have been considered part and parcel of conventional medical practices. It’s one of the reasons why I object to hormone and surgery as a means to treat what I consider to be a developmental and psychological condition.

Politicians, scientists and medical professionals are coming round to the idea though as they gain a greater understanding of these conditions that perhaps they may have goofed, and gotten ahead of themselves in promoting hormones and surgeries as treatments for psychological and developmental conditions. Their actions were based upon the knowledge they had at the time, and now that there is greater understanding of people who are transgender, I would advise you to brace yourself for more click bait stories like this one -


Mom celebrates her 20-year-old coming out as transgender with ‘It’s a boy’ photo shoot