- This topic has 35 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Why is supporting women’s rights anti-trans? And since when did we only decide that one view is only permissible in society? If women are saying this impacts their rights, why is it fair for them to be ignored?
The Scottish parliament included a vote allowing sex criminals to be able to change gender easily and access women’s prisons, where we have already seen issues. So it’s anti-trans to oppose making sex crimes against women easier? Got it.
This is the nub of the problem. Those making out criticism is ‘anti-trans’ have nothing to say about women wanting their own space in sport and to have their own sex spaced places where they are more vulnerable from male violence. They dress that up as being ‘anti-trans’. I just think they’re anti-woman, but they don’t seem to care about that.
1 user thanked author for this post.
It didn’t take long for Sturgeon’s stupidity to catch up with her now a violent male, claiming to be a woman, has been housed in a women’s prison and she’s scrambling around trying to reverse ferret. So, now transwomen are women, unless they’re a rapist who embarrasses Sturgeon. She’s have been quite happy with this at any other time, but is now rambling on about risk assessment checks.
If transwomen are women, and we’re all bigots for thinking otherwise, why do they need risk assessment checks? They would be automatically put in the women’s prison. It just shows that they know males pose a risk to women, no matter what they identify as, and all this faux-outrage at ‘transphobia’ is just an attempt to silence cognitive dissonance while they push through the unacceptable.
For the record, here is the photo of the rapist, who I am showing such disgusting anti-trans bigotry against:
This is what people have complained about for years, only to be called bigots.
2 users thanked author for this post.
I’m with you 100% on this one, Siderite. Common sense has gone out the window. It’s all getting rather ridiculous.
3 users thanked author for this post.
I think that’s a reference to Laurel Hubbard who managed to compete in Olympic weightlifting, despite being unfit, less practiced and twice the age of the other female competitors.
Poor choice of language, which I wouldn’t use, but LK’s message is not objectionable. Men have a significant advantage over women and it’s not bigoted to think that women should have fairness, unless you think women are beneath men in worthiness of respect.
1 user thanked author for this post.
That’s what I mean. I get the original irritation, but surely there’s no need now I said it was my own bad choice of wording, nothing more. I have no reason to label those charges against you, but realise my wording implied such.
Anyway, no point dragging this on any further from my end.
1 user thanked author for this post.
‘old trannies are allowed to take part in women’s sports.’
Eh? Do you mean ‘transgender males’ allowed to take part in women’s sports? You complain about an OP on another thread being dehumanising and then drop the bigoted ‘old trannies’. At least you’re consistent
I said ‘the old trannies,’ perhaps I have spent too much of my life down here, and picked up some of the local dialogue. My point about the inclusion of trans people who were born male in some female sports stands. Constantly pulling me up on semantics won’t work on me..
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.