J. K. Rowling is cancelled because she is a T.E.R.F [ADMIN WARNING IN POST #1]

One eyed Jack

Gruffalox wrote: »

You do not seem to want to acknowledge the rational and criminologically ascertained distinction between Most males are not violent and Most violent offenders are male. I will help you. Most women do not have Munchausens Syndrome by Proxy and Most people who have Muchausen's Syndrome by proxy are women. Hey here's another - most women are not anxious but most people with anxiety disorder are women. Etc. Based on actual biological reasons in these cases.

I don’t think a study in criminology is necessary to state the blatantly obvious, but your example doesn’t help much tbh. You’re still trying to assert guilt by association as though by virtue of their biology, males are predisposed to violent behaviour. There are no biological reasons to support the assertion that males are predisposed to violent behaviour.

I said nothing about women, but there are no biological reasons to assume any predisposition to violence or not solely by virtue of their biology either.

In this particular case we simply can’t know either way what influenced the child to have a predisposition to violence, and while the study of criminology might offer some insights on a wider scale, it doesn’t attempt to offer any explanations or predictions about individual behaviour in relation to their predisposition to violence or criminal behaviour.

That’s why I acknowledged earlier that while it’s a fact that nobody could argue with that rape is committed mostly by men, it doesn’t follow that men are predisposed to commit rape.

jaxxx

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don’t think a study in criminology is necessary to state the blatantly obvious, but your example doesn’t help much tbh. You’re still trying to assert guilt by association as though by virtue of their biology, males are predisposed to violent behaviour. There are no biological reasons to support the assertion that males are predisposed to violent behaviour.

I said nothing about women, but there are no biological reasons to assume any predisposition to violence or not solely by virtue of their biology either.

In this particular case we simply can’t know either way what influenced the child to have a predisposition to violence, and while the study of criminology might offer some insights on a wider scale, it doesn’t attempt to offer any explanations or predictions about individual behaviour in relation to their predisposition to violence or criminal behaviour.

That’s why I acknowledged earlier that while it’s a fact that nobody could argue with that rape is committed mostly by men,it doesn’t follow that men are predisposed to commit rape.

Gruffalox wrote: »

You do not seem to want to acknowledge the rational and criminologically ascertained distinction between Most males are not violent and Most violent offenders are male. I will help you. Most women do not have Munchausens Syndrome by Proxy and Most people who have Muchausen's Syndrome by proxy are women. Hey here's another - most women are not anxious but most people with anxiety disorder are women. Etc. Based on actual biological reasons in these cases.

:rolleyes:

One eyed Jack

jaxxx wrote: »

:rolleyes:

What’s your point? I already acknowledged what Gruffalox is saying I didn’t appear to be capable of acknowledging. That’s why I suggested it was stating the blatantly obvious.

What’s not so obvious is the idea of assuming that because most people who commit rape are male, that males are more likely to commit rape and therefore some form of sanctions should be imposed upon males liberties and freedoms to ensure that they don’t have an opportunity to commit rape.

Good luck with that.

ceadaoin.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

What’s your point? I already acknowledged what Gruffalox is saying I didn’t appear to be capable of acknowledging. That’s why I suggested it was stating the blatantly obvious.

What’s not so obvious is the idea of assuming that because most people who commit rape are male, that males are more likely to commit rape and therefore some form of sanctions should be imposed upon males liberties and freedoms to ensure that they don’t have an opportunity to commit rape.

Good luck with that.

Who said any of that though? All people are saying is that a male who has a homicidal hatred of women, who has committed assaults and sexual assaults against women, and has detailed a plan to rape and murder their own mother (who is now living in fear) maybe shouldn't be released to commit more of those acts and shouldn't be able to claim that he is female in order to gain access to victims. And at the very least, the fact that this is actually a male person should be included in the public safety warnings being distributed.

Just that one particular male, not all of them.

Neyite

seenitall wrote: »

I am, however, iffy on a partner having to SIGN for another adult’s medical treatment. I do think it is a hangover from the authoritarianism of the state. You may argue it’s just a formality, but I find it grating.

Oh I get that - and I'd be the first to complain, if that were the case. It's a long time ago but as far as I can recall it was more that he was signing that he was aware I may be prescribed fertility drugs to stimulate ovaries or something(?) and giving his permission for his sperm to be used, rather than signing for me to be allowed to go on meds.

There was also a part where we signed about embryos but I can't remember that bit - possibly about storage and legalities surrounding that. We never got further than me taking meds but I imagine that had we had to implant an embryo, there would be new forms to sign on the day agreeing we both consented to the genetic material of both of us being used.

Parsnips

fooking rediculous .
Poor Poor JK Rowling. She is dead right what she said.
thread unfollowed

Dyr

So it turns out that Homicidal Teen Girl thats a menace to all and sundry and is in danger of being released is actually a biological male who swapped teams a few years ago

Did I completely miss that or did our media just fail to report it.

ceadaoin.

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Who said any of that though? All people are saying is that a male who has a homicidal hatred of women, who has committed assaults and sexual assaults against women, and has detailed a plan to rape and murder their own mother (who is now living in fear) maybe shouldn't be released to commit more of those acts and shouldn't be able to claim that he is female in order to gain access to victims. And at the very least, the fact that this is actually a male person should be included in the public safety warnings being distributed.

Just that one particular male, not all of them.

Well, you could replace male with "an individual"... that would go a long way to help. You made the earlier point about violent abuse in connection with rape, which slews the attention somewhat. Placing a comment at the end of one post that it's one particular male doesn't do much to clarify that for the previous posts.

Lillyfae

Bambi wrote: »

So it turns out that Homicidal Teen Girl thats a menace to all and sundry and is in danger of being released is actually a biological male who swapped teams a few years ago

Did I completely miss that or did our media just fail to report it.

Apparently the media are being prevented from reporting it. There was a thread on it here earlier but it was removed.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Deleted User wrote: »

Well, you could replace male with "an individual"... that would go a long way to help. You made the earlier point about violent abuse in connection with rape, which slews the attention somewhat. Placing a comment at the end of one post that it's one particular male doesn't do much to clarify that for the previous posts.

No, because it's important to highlight that this particular person is male. We hear people say that "nothing has happened" since self-ID laws have been brought in in Ireland so we need to underline that that isn't the case. How this has been reported is worrying. So to say she could have said 'individual' is missing the point.

seenitall

Neyite wrote: »

Oh I get that - and I'd be the first to complain, if that were the case. It's a long time ago but as far as I can recall it was more that he was signing that he was aware I may be prescribed fertility drugs to stimulate ovaries or something(?) and giving his permission for his sperm to be used, rather than signing for me to be allowed to go on meds.

There was also a part where we signed about embryos but I can't remember that bit - possibly about storage and legalities surrounding that. We never got further than me taking meds but I imagine that had we had to implant an embryo, there would be new forms to sign on the day agreeing we both consented to the genetic material of both of us being used.

Ok, again, I didn’t realise he was giving permission for his sperm to be used. That’s as it should be. But I don’t accept that it is right that you couldn’t have a treatment to stimulate your follicles without his signature. They are your follicles. He should be signing for his sperm, but you are the only one who should be signing for your follicles. Do you see my point? If there are any questions on his part about your follicles, the procedure can be explained to him at your and your doctor’s leisure. Just as it would be with any other part of your body. No need for signing any documents, just as there would be no need for it on his part if YOU were having surgery on YOUR oesophagus.

I’ve read on here a while ago, that a man couldn’t have a vasectomy without his wife’s signature (I don’t know if that is still the case), which I feel is wrong, but what you are talking about here is even more clear cut than that. No one else but you has any business giving consent to/being asked to sign for any procedures being undergone by you.

One eyed Jack

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Who said any of that though? All people are saying is that a male who has a homicidal hatred of women, who has committed assaults and sexual assaults against women, and has detailed a plan to rape and murder their own mother (who is now living in fear) maybe shouldn't be released to commit more of those acts and shouldn't be able to claim that he is female in order to gain access to victims. And at the very least, the fact that this is actually a male person should be included in the public safety warnings being distributed.

Just that one particular male, not all of them.

My point was really simple. volchista claimed that the existence of self identification laws in Ireland had led to this case. My point was that this case had nothing to do with self identification laws and the sex of the individual involved was neither here nor there. It was the fact that they are a clearly disturbed and violent individual that was the most pertinent fact in this particular case. They don’t need to claim in any case that they are female in order to have access to other females (the majority of people working in social care are female anyway).

There weren’t any public safety warnings either. From the link provided by mowhawk it’s obvious that the identity of the individual in question would not be disclosed to the public, but would be released to Gardai -


Gardaí have issued a nationwide bulletin about a homicidal teenager who is due to be released into the community today.

The 18-year-old, who cannot be identified, suffers from a personality disorder and has repeatedly expressed a wish to rape and murder.

However, she is being released from a secure unit for children after the High Court ruled earlier this week that there was no legal basis to continue her detention.

Gardaí have been aware of the likelihood of her release for some time. Tusla alerted the Garda public protection unit about the teenager as far back as November of last year.


There was no legal basis to continue to detain the individual against their will under the Mental Health Act when they reached 18.

Gruffalux

One eyed Jack wrote: »

My point was really simple. volchista claimed that the existence of self identification laws in Ireland had led to this case. My point was that this case had nothing to do with self identification laws and the sex of the individual involved was neither here nor there. It was the fact that they are a clearly disturbed and violent individual that was the most pertinent fact in this particular case. They don’t need to claim in any case that they are female in order to have access to other females (the majority of people working in social care are female anyway).

There weren’t any public safety warnings either. From the link provided by mowhawk it’s obvious that the identity of the individual in question would not be disclosed to the public, but would be released to Gardai -


Gardaí have issued a nationwide bulletin about a homicidal teenager who is due to be released into the community today.

The 18-year-old, who cannot be identified, suffers from a personality disorder and has repeatedly expressed a wish to rape and murder.

However, she is being released from a secure unit for children after the High Court ruled earlier this week that there was no legal basis to continue her detention.

Gardaí have been aware of the likelihood of her release for some time. Tusla alerted the Garda public protection unit about the teenager as far back as November of last year.


There was no legal basis to continue to detain the individual against their will under the Mental Health Act when they reached 18.

Do you think it in anyway relevant that when the Gardai issue a public alert warning about an extremely violent homicidal person being released who has expressed wishes to rape and murder (specifically women) that they said the released person is female and not a trans identifying male?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

No, because it's important to highlight that this particular person is male. We hear people say that "nothing has happened" since self-ID laws have been brought in in Ireland so we need to underline that that isn't the case. How this has been reported is worrying. So to say she could have said 'individual' is missing the point.

If we were only talking about this case, then yes, i would agree with you.

However, the case 'One eyed Jack' was referring to was the connection between males and rape being performed, which is why i posted the previous comment.

Associate like with like.

One eyed Jack

Gruffalox wrote: »

Do you think it in anyway relevant that when the Gardai issue a public alert warning about an extremely violent homicidal person being released who has expressed wishes to rape and murder (specifically women) that they said the released person is female and not a trans identifying male?

Not really, no, it’s not as though the victim of any criminal asks the person to hold up for a minute while they check if they’re being attacked by a man or a woman because it’s important when they make a complaint to Gardai that their attacker was male or female and they know because they checked the undercarriage first before they let their attacker proceed.

When Gardai issue a Garda bulletin, the identity of the person is known to Gardai by name and address and not just their sex or their their appearance on any given day. That’s the kind of statistical information that would only concern someone studying criminology.

Bonniedog

Lillyfae wrote: »

Apparently the media are being prevented from reporting it. There was a thread on it here earlier but it was removed.

He wasn't identified. The other media did report it, but reported it misleadingly.

chopperbyrne

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Not really, no, it’s not as though the victim of any criminal asks the person to hold up for a minute while they check if they’re being attacked by a man or a woman because it’s important when they make a complaint to Gardai that their attacker was male or female and they know because they checked the undercarriage first before they let their attacker proceed.

When Gardai issue a Garda bulletin, the identity of the person is known to Gardai by name and address and not just their sex or their their appearance on any given day. That’s the kind of statistical information that would only concern someone studying criminology.

Absolutely moronic. This is going to be an adult male (possibly cross dressing) who has a history of violence towards women, and has made it clear that they still want to attack and rape women.

Official Gardaí reports not giving clear facts, and descriptions is endangering public safety.

Gruffalux

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Not really, no, it’s not as though the victim of any criminal asks the person to hold up for a minute while they check if they’re being attacked by a man or a woman because it’s important when they make a complaint to Gardai that their attacker was male or female and they know because they checked the undercarriage first before they let their attacker proceed.

When Gardai issue a Garda bulletin, the identity of the person is known to Gardai by name and address and not just their sex or their their appearance on any given day. That’s the kind of statistical information that would only concern someone studying criminology.

The fact that the homicidal person intent upon raping and murdering is a male and not a female means that they have the means to commit the crime readily available to them and the greater body strength amenable to the commission of said crime. A female has 40% less upper body strength and 33% less lower body strength than a male. Therefore the disparity in ability between the person being released and their intended victims is considerable, and it makes a difference to the people being warned to factually know that the noted danger (by authorities) is in reality greater than if they incorrectly think the person being released is a ''girl''.

BattleCorp

Lillyfae wrote: »

Apparently the media are being prevented from reporting it. There was a thread on it here earlier but it was removed.

Given that the teen is actually 18 and legally an adult, why would the media be prevented from reporting the fact that the woman is actually a trans woman?

I got fleeced in the thread that was removed for daring to say the person had a mental illness. Apparently I'm wrong.

Dyr

I thought it was really odd that the nutter was a girl, given how rare it is to see those kinds of extremely violent traits in women, but lo and behold, the nutter is brave and stunning and thus it is verboten to mention the nutter is actually a bloke.

chopperbyrne

chopperbyrne wrote: »

Absolutely moronic. This is going to be an adult male (possibly cross dressing) who has a history of violence towards women, and has made it clear that they still want to attack and rape women.

Official Gardaí reports not giving clear facts, and descriptions is endangering public safety.

I mentioned this earlier but it seemed to be passed over. The only way to affect public safety would be to release a photo of the person.

We don't know what he/she looks like (at least all the links I've checked so far are missing any photos.. are there photos around of this person?). Telling people to be on the look out for "a male", doesn't change anything... since it's quite possible for a male to look female with some skill with hair extensions, makeup, bras, clothes etc. I've been to gay pride parades where crossdressers with certain body types did very well at hiding their genuine sex. (all it took was practice/skill)

So, I'm bemused at this claim of endangering public safety by misleading about the person's biological sex. If the claim is that they should be safeguarding public safety, in spite of releasing the person into the public, shouldn't you be calling for their full identity to be revealed, rather than focusing on their sex?

One eyed Jack

Gruffalox wrote: »

The fact that the homicidal person intent upon raping and murdering is a male and not a female means that they have the means to commit the crime readily available to them and the greater body strength amenable to the commission of said crime. A female has 40% less upper body strength and 33% less lower body strength than a male. Therefore the disparity in ability between the person being released and their intended victims is considerable, and it makes a difference to the people being warned to factually know that the noted danger (by authorities) is in reality greater than if they incorrectly think the person being released is a ''girl''.

Gardai are undoubtedly made aware of the identity of the individual in question and their address, which I would consider more useful information than whether they are male or female or their upper or lower body strength in any case tbh.

Gruffalux

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Gardai are undoubtedly made aware of the identity of the individual in question and their address, which I would consider more useful information than whether they are male or female or their upper or lower body strength in any case tbh.

Oh sorry, I did not realise the person intended to only rape or murder Gardai. The warning to potential victims should only have been circulated among the police in that case.

A picture would have been useful but would likely have contradicted the actually given information that the person was a girl.

chopperbyrne

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So, I'm bemused at this claim of endangering public safety by misleading about the person's biological sex. If the claim is that they should be safeguarding public safety, in spite of releasing the person into the public, shouldn't you be calling for their full identity to be revealed, rather than focusing on their sex?

I said "Official Gardaí reports not giving clear facts, and descriptions is endangering public safety."

Exactly what part of that do you not understand?

One eyed Jack

Gruffalox wrote: »

Oh sorry, I did not realise the person intended to only rape or murder Gardai. The warning to potential victims should only have been circulated among the police in that case.

It was only circulated among Gardai, whose job it is to protect the public at large from vigilante groups that decide to take the law into their own hands on suspicion that someone in their neighbourhood might be up to no good.

Gruffalox wrote: »

A picture would have been useful but would likely have contradicted the actually given information that the person was a girl.

I wouldn’t be so sure about that as you are tbh. I don’t imagine a picture of the individual in question would have been of any use to anyone whatsoever. It would be far more likely to lead to cases of mobs taking the law into their own hands -


Second victim of online mob branded a paedophile

Gatling

Bambi Kardashian was arrested as he was released from secure accommodation today and can be held for 24 hours for making threats against two individuals

ProfessorPlum

Gatling wrote: »

Bambi Kardashian was arrested as he was released from secure accommodation today and can be held for 24 hours for making threats against two individuals

“Ms Finan asked that a “certificate of gender recognition”, belonging to the accused, be submitted to the court.

Ms Kardashian was “very anxious she be detained in a prison facility for females, as she identifies as a female,” Ms Finan told the court.“

Gervais08

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

“Ms Finan asked that a “certificate of gender recognition”, belonging to the accused, be submitted to the court.

Ms Kardashian was “very anxious she be detained in a prison facility for females, as she identifies as a female,” Ms Finan told the court.“

I missed the story but of every female name he could have picked he went Bambi Kardashian???

Gatling

Gervais08 wrote: »

I missed the story but of every female name he could have picked he went Bambi Kardashian???

Maximum attention ,

ProfessorPlum

Gervais08 wrote: »

I missed the story but of every female name he could have picked he went Bambi Kardashian???

Worse. Barbie Kardashian.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/teenager-in-custody-charged-with-threats-to-kill-two-people-39562763.html