Gender Identity in Modern Ireland (Mod warnings and Threadbanned Users in OP)

IAMAMORON

IAMAMORON wrote: »

The typical mantra of the transphobe,

" I don't give a ( add expletive as required ) , you are the one that is ignorant, why don't you explain blah blah, etc etc "

All they are asking for is a little acceptance and to be allowed live the rest of their lives in relative peace and contentment. It is not a lot to ask for.

you could just type "transphobe" into a word doc repeatedly if you didnt want to engage with a thread on the topic, but really, really, really felt the need to keep typing "transphobe"


extremely strange urge imo but follow yr muse, king

Gruffalux

km991148 wrote: »

Before this question goes down a rabbit hole.. maybe this is indicative of something that does need to be defined or explored.

There are a lot of separate but overlapping topics in the air. Self ID, Trans people with problems (i.e. rapists or sex offenders who ALSO identify as trans), institutional barriers to safety (i.e. safety of prisoners and failing of the system - I am sure rape happened in female prisons well before any trans prisoners were put there).

People are coming at these very complex topics with all sorts of assumptions and individual areas of one topic are being used to support or deny themes from other topics.

You fail to grasp that self ID is an over-arching provision that encapsulates everyone from those who have had full surgery, which is a tiny percentage of trans people, to those who cross dress occasionally and feel a bit gender fluid on a weekend. Anyone who has made every or zero adjustments in any respect can now SELF IDENTIFY as the opposite sex and because of gender theory ideology they now ARE the opposite sex. Thus the mantra a transwoman IS a woman, a transman IS a man - there is ZERO else required beyond self identification. Nada.

jam_mac_jam

ingalway wrote: »

Are you saying that unless it happens in Ireland then it doesn't count/matter?

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/oct/11/karen-white-how-manipulative-and-controlling-offender-attacked-again-transgender-prison

Having trans women in female prisons is not safe for the women in them. I also believe it is not safe for trans women in male prisons but I don't believe that yet again women should take on the risk because men cannot control themselves.

What should happen in all cases:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47434730

Some interesting points from the Guardian article. Especially the number who have been convicted of sex offences.

Government survey has counted 125 transgender prisoners in England and Wales, which is likely to be an underestimate. According to MoJ figures released in response to a freedom of information request by the BBC, 60 of them have been convicted of one or more sexual offences.

Frances Crook, the chief executive of the Howard League for Penal Reform, said grave mistakes were made in the White case and the safety of vulnerable women should be paramount.

Crook has previously said: “It is a very toxic debate, but I think prisons have probably been influenced by some of the extreme conversations and have been bullied into making some decisions that have harmed women.

“In my view, any man who has committed a serious sexual or violent offence against women, who then wants to transfer but has not gone through the whole process, still has a penis and still has male hormones, should not be put into a women’s prison. There may be a case for having separate provision; that is a debate to be had.”

IAMAMORON

mohawk wrote: »

Transsexual is no longer the accepted term when referring to transgender people. Your use of such a word would indicate that you haven’t read much about the topic.
I and others on the thread use the words trans or transgender as they are the terms preferred by trans people themselves.

Fling terminology mud all you like, I know what side I am on in this debate.

I can assure you that genuine transsexuals or transgenders have no hang ups on whatever terminology I am using.

ingalway

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I am trying to stay on topic, the thread title is very relevant. I am not being pedantic either, but the fact remains that different cultures and societies have very different rules when it comes to gender identity, this thread refers to Gender identity in modern Ireland.



Trans women are notoriously passive, look it up.

As per usual the transphobes are happy to find one extreme example and publish it print it and wave it around as proof and vindication for their cynical attitude towards gender identity. It gets tiresome.

How about you give us some examples of the studies that show trans women are extremely passive - you constantly want examples so you start showing some?

My understanding is that trans women commit violent and sexual crimes at the same rate as biological males.

Gruffalux

Since this is supposed to be the shiny new grown up debate thread for this subject matter can we please have a ban on certain deliberate slurs such as Transphobe and TERF?

Surely continuous name calling fails the smell test of good debate?

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

mohawk wrote: »

Transsexual is no longer the accepted term when referring to transgender people. Your use of such a word would indicate that you haven’t read much about the topic.
I and others on the thread use the words trans or transgender as they are the terms preferred by trans people themselves.

Give it a year or two and "trans" will be offensive too.

jam_mac_jam

ingalway wrote: »

How about you give us some examples of the studies that show trans women are extremely passive - you constantly want examples so you start showing some?

My understanding is that trans women commit violent and sexual crimes at the same rate as biological males.

No group of people are passive or notoriously passive. Transgender people are like anyone else good ones and bad ones.

mohawk

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Fling terminology mud all you like, I know what side I am on in this debate.

I can assure you that genuine transsexuals or transgenders have no hang ups on whatever terminology I am using.

The use of the word genuine here is interesting, because if taken literally would mean there are also non genuine people.

Look out of common decency I use the term that majority of trans people prefer. We might not see eye to eye on all issues but I will address them the way they wish to be addressed. You obviously can continue to use whatever term you like.

Baggly

Gruffalux wrote: »

Since this is supposed to be the shiny new grown up debate thread for this subject matter can we please have a ban on certain deliberate slurs such as Transphobe and TERF?

Surely continuous name calling fails the smell test of good debate?

Mod

If you have an issue you can PM a mod or report a post. Backseat mod again in this thread and you will lose your posting privileges in it.

IAMAMORON

Gruffalux wrote: »

Since this is supposed to be the shiny new grown up debate thread for this subject matter can we please have a ban on certain deliberate slurs such as Transphobe and TERF?

Surely continuous name calling fails the smell test of good debate?

Yeah, because debates are only worthwhile when no one calls out the elephant swinging from the phucking chandelier?

TomTomTim

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Fling terminology mud all you like, I know what side I am on in this debate.

I can assure you that genuine transsexuals or transgenders have no hang ups on whatever terminology I am using.

Did you not just apologize a few pages back for not using the correct terminology? :pac:

Gruffalux

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

No group of people are passive or notoriously passive. Transgender people are like anyone else good ones and bad ones.

The ''notoriously passive'' projection is an interesting choice of words, though. It is almost a suggestion that the transwoman, all transwomen, is/are the failed feminised emasculated weak male, who now can only function as a submissive passive female. This is revealing. A very old fashioned stereotyped notion - almost ancient Greek style. Whereas trans people are like all people of all sorts, happy, sad, extroverted, introverted, passive, aggressive, strong, weak etc, but as someone else pointed out do offend in law as per the criminological statistics applicable to their natal sex.

jam_mac_jam

Gruffalux wrote: »

The ''notoriously passive'' projection is an interesting choice of words, though. It is almost a suggestion that the transwoman, all transwomen, is/are the failed feminised emasculated weak male, who now can only function as a submissive passive female. This is revealing. A very old fashioned stereotyped notion - almost ancient Greek style. Whereas trans people are like all people of all sorts, happy, sad, extroverted, introverted, passive, aggressive, strong, weak etc, but as someone else pointed out do offend in law as per the criminological statistics applicable to their natal sex.

And is probably an insult as you are ascribing a personality trait to people based on their identity.

suicide_circus

Maybe it would be useful to define terms.

What is a woman?
What is a man?

CtevenSrowder

IAMAMORON wrote: »

The typical mantra of the transphobe,

" I don't give a ( add expletive as required ) , you are the one that is ignorant, why don't you explain blah blah, etc etc "

All they are asking for is a little acceptance and to be allowed live the rest of their lives in relative peace and contentment. It is not a lot to ask for.

I take this as an admittance that no rights are being denied to them, since you have yet again failed to give any examples.

I don't care what you work as, I don't know why you brought that up. And yes your posts come across as based in ignorance, constantly asking for examples again again. You then fail to reciprocate with examples of your own when asked for some. And to top it of the lazy insult of 'trabsphobe' is now being thrown about. The icing on the cake.

Why should women have to accept males on their sports teams, since you now what to talk of acceptance, or accept males obtaining scholarships aimed at women, or males obtaining political positions aimed at women?

RWCNT

suicide_circus wrote: »

What is a man?

A miserable little pile of secrets. But enough talk, have at you!

Gruffalux

Haha I like that, a miserable little pile of secrets...

Wibbs

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Yeah, because debates are only worthwhile when no one calls out the elephant swinging from the phucking chandelier?

Here's another pachyderm in the pantry then...

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I don't need patronising on biology within this particular debate.

Because you refuse to countenance anything against your position, even hard facts. Especially hard facts.

There are plenty of men out there with vaginas and plenty of women out there with a penis.

This sentence is a provable nonsense; in clear biological, physiological, anatomic, medical and genetic ways*. There are few sentences that could be uttered in the normal course of a day that would trump that one for being utterly and completely incorrect and/or daft. It's akin to stating up is down.

Can you not accept that?

No, because nonsense no matter how well intentioned is still nonsense and should never be blindly accepted.








*Now you can have actual intersex people where things are indeed confused along some of those lines, but that's a genetic/developmental fault and even there the majority of such folks tend to follow the gender they most resemble.

IAMAMORON

Gruffalux wrote: »

The ''notoriously passive'' projection is an interesting choice of words, though. It is almost a suggestion that the transwoman, all transwomen, is/are the failed feminised emasculated weak male, who now can only function as a submissive passive female. This is revealing. A very old fashioned stereotyped notion - almost ancient Greek style. Whereas trans people are like all people of all sorts, happy, sad, extroverted, introverted, passive, aggressive, strong, weak etc, but as someone else pointed out do offend in law as per the criminological statistics applicable to their natal sex.

Most violent and psychopathic criminals will be male with high testosterone levels.

This is basic criminal science, it is not open to much debate.

There will be examples of psychopathic males who will develop various psychosis around gender identity during psychotic episodes. But this is different to classifying transsexual males as being violent. There is a distinct difference. Furthermore such individuals would certainly be not relevant to group incarceration once being subject to a prison term. It is solitary confinement all the way in these examples, usually in some sort of an asylum.

As you have stated quite correctly above, genuine cases of male to female transitioning will not exhibit any form of violent behaviours whatsoever. Such transsexuals are incredibly passive by nature alone.

But any examples of criminal behaviours are always being used to throw mud at the issue. These examples are poor and are not accepting the argument coherently.

Wibbs

Gruffalux wrote: »

The ''notoriously passive'' projection is an interesting choice of words, though. It is almost a suggestion that the transwoman, all transwomen, is/are the failed feminised emasculated weak male, who now can only function as a submissive passive female. This is revealing.

Oh it's revealing alright, both of the remarkably old fashioned gender labels being applied by the oh so Right On, and a confusion over the whole nature nurture debate. In nigh on every case the hardline Right On favour nurture(the hardline Right favour nature*). It's all about culture as the major influence, we're all otherwise blank slates. And yet with this debate that goes out the window and apparently gender differences are very obvious and innate and strangely stereotypical(often over exaggerated). To the degree that unreconstructed 1950's conservative man would recognise them.







*both are equally simplistic, as are their respective politics.

Hector Savage

IAMAMORON wrote: »

It depends, he might be playing mixed doubles?

So disingenous, mixed doubles is one male one female per side!!!

You will NEVER get 2F V 2M ... EVER!!! - but you know this.


Reading through your posts, you really do have an apt username.

CtevenSrowder

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Most violent and psychopathic criminals will be male with high testosterone levels.

This is basic criminal science, it is not open to much debate.

There will be examples of psychopathic males who will develop various psychosis around gender identity during psychotic episodes. But this is different to classifying transsexual males as being violent. There is a distinct difference. Furthermore such individuals would certainly be not relevant to group incarceration once being subject to a prison term. It is solitary confinement all the way in these examples, usually in some sort of an asylum.

As you have stated quite correctly above, genuine cases of male to female transitioning will not exhibit any form of violent behaviours whatsoever. Such transsexuals are incredibly passive by nature alone.

But any examples of criminal behaviours are always being used to throw mud at the issue. These examples are poor and are not accepting the argument coherently.

Have you anything to back up your claims re passivity?

What about rights that are being denied? You are very low on evidence and substance.

Hector Savage

LineConsole wrote: »

Trans people don't exist. Men trying to look like and/or act like women do (and vice versa). That's simple objective reality. I will never bow to any of your made up leftist nonsense that you use to brow beat people into submission. You'll have to kill me first. Have a nice day.

It's the chromosome spectrum between XX and XY .... come on man!!!

Wibbs

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Most violent and psychopathic criminals will be male with high testosterone levels.

This is basic criminal science, it is not open to much debate.

Actually it's up for quite the level of debate. Well, you'd know that if you actually read any research behind it. The levels in psychopaths shows little correlation. There is a correlation with violent offenders in prisons, but there's a chicken and egg scenario going on. IE Testosterone increases in those who set out to be dominant. It facilitates aggression and dominance, rather than causes it. Indeed when men and women are given extra testosterone they're more likely to act in a fairer way. It goes up if you win a footie match against your mates. This doesn't mean higher test men(or women) win footie matches. Sex offenders have on average lower testosterone.

As you have stated quite correctly above, genuine cases of male to female transitioning will not exhibit any form of violent behaviours whatsoever. Such transsexuals are incredibly passive by nature alone.

Made of sugar and spice and all things nice eh? Have you any clue how unbelievably simplistic, one sided and old fashioned your view of gender actually is?

Gruffalux

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Most violent and psychopathic criminals will be male with high testosterone levels.

This is basic criminal science, it is not open to much debate.

There will be examples of psychopathic males who will develop various psychosis around gender identity during psychotic episodes. But this is different to classifying transsexual males as being violent. There is a distinct difference. Furthermore such individuals would certainly be not relevant to group incarceration once being subject to a prison term. It is solitary confinement all the way in these examples, usually in some sort of an asylum.

As you have stated quite correctly above, genuine cases of male to female transitioning will not exhibit any form of violent behaviours whatsoever. Such transsexuals are incredibly passive by nature alone.

But any examples of criminal behaviours are always being used to throw mud at the issue. These examples are poor and are not accepting the argument coherently.

Second, regarding any crime, male-to-females had a significantly increased risk for crime compared to female controls (aHR 6.6; 95% CI 4.1–10.8) but not compared to males (aHR 0.8; 95% CI 0.5–1.2). This indicates that they retained a male pattern regarding criminality. The same was true regarding violent crime. By contrast, female-to-males had higher crime rates than female controls (aHR 4.1; 95% CI 2.5–6.9) but did not differ from male controls. This indicates a shift to a male pattern regarding criminality and that sex reassignment is coupled to increased crime rate in female-to-males. The same was true regarding violent crime.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885

Note - this study was done on people who had undergone sex reassignment surgery in Sweden. Only 5% of trans people undergo sex reassignment surgery. I think studies are require on post self ID criminal patterns. The female to male increase in pattern may be attributable to use of testosterone - hypothesis. Not enough studies are being done in this area - it is unacceptable science. In the 21st century!!

60 of the 125 trans identifying prisoners in the Uk in 2018 were sex offenders. Note only 5% of people in prison in the UK are women.
I object very strongly to the present distortion of criminological statistics and media reports which sees sex crimes being recorded as committed by women when it was transwomen who committed the crimes eg child pornography, sex abuse etc.

excludedbin

excludedbin wrote: »

And? Is what she said wrong? Trans people have been openly competing in sports for over a decade and to date have not dominated any of them. Rachel McKinnon pointing out that fact doesn't contradict that it is a fact.

You've just literally being given an example of a trans athlete dominating a sport...
Is it not a fact, a trans athlete has dominated a female sport? Do you deny this happened?

(Although, denial of same is consistent with the denial of biology, akin to the chap earlier who looked for evidence , but rejected the evidence as not to their liking).

Bang average male athletes, transition and are immediately better than average 'females' in the sport, but still not at the standard of elite females. The odd one, like Rachel McKinnon, reaches elite standard. Its simply a numbers game at the moment.

Rachel McKinnon is but an example.
I'm sure all the female cyclists who spent years competing for funding, training and making sacrifices and breaking their hoops in pursuit of their goals are derving comfort from your apparent denial of reality, and can console themselves that at least trans-athletes are given a fair chance...

BTW, you'll notice this doesn't seem to be a problem with trans men. Can't imagine why.

IAMAMORON

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Most violent and psychopathic criminals will be male with high testosterone levels.

This is basic criminal science, it is not open to much debate.

Violent, yes. Psychopathic, no. Having daughters and seeing some of their experiences with bullying has shown me there are just as many if not more cruel psychopathic females out there as males.

Gruffalux

excludedbin wrote: »

Let's. The IOC, for example, has allowed trans athletes to participate for over a decade (since 2004). Plenty enough time for them to dominate literally every podium if we're to believe the claims of transphobes, especially on these threads. And yet that isn't the case.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/mar/03/sports-stars-weigh-in-on-row-over-transgender-athletes

This statement that trans athletes have been allowed compete by IOC since 2004, leaves out the very relevant fact that the rules changed again in 2015 to allow transgender people who haven't had surgery of any kind to compete. That allows a far greater number of males to compete with women.

Eric Cartman

Gruffalux wrote: »

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885

Note - this study was done on people who had undergone sex reassignment surgery in Sweden. Only 5% of trans people undergo sex reassignment surgery. I think studies are require on post self ID criminal patterns. The female to male increase in pattern may be attributable to use of testosterone - hypothesis. Not enough studies are being done in this area - it is unacceptable science. In the 21st century!!

60 of the 125 trans identifying prisoners in the Uk in 2018 were sex offenders. Note only 5% of people in prison in the UK are women.
I object very strongly to the present distortion of criminological statistics and media reports which sees sex crimes being recorded as committed by women when it was transwomen who committed the crimes eg child pornography, sex abuse etc.

Theres also a massive risk with self ID laws for sexual offenders as they are much more likely to falsely identify as a woman due to how male sex offenders are (in my view correctly) treated by other male prisoners.