The Green Party has some serious questions to answer

[spanglechick]

The self ID law change only affects birth certificates, doesn't it?

And since birth certificates haven't ever been checked on entry to women's spaces (except, I guess, prisons), nothing much will change.

Which is not to say that male bodied people are never a threat in those spaces... just that if they wanted to present as a woman to gain access, they've been doing that freely for decades.

Moreover, countries which have introduced self-ID (like Ireland), have seen no escalation of sex offences with trans used as a cover. DC was able to gain horrifyingly comprehensive access to groups of young girls without having to present as female. As have predatory men in depressing number since time began. Sexual violence is a huge problem. Self ID is a sideshow.

 

[Sea Star]

women don't have dicks.

Funny, last time I checked I had one.

 

[SpackleFrog]

To be fair, what posts like Self ID is the big question and is clearly being lobbied for very very hard by nearly all of the various LBGTQIA official bodies and the GP.

So clearly you can't show any evidence for it.

I put the "her" in quotes because I can't seriously say "her dick" - it's just ridiculous; women don't have dicks.

There we go, that's a lot more honest - now we know that as far as you're concerned transwomen are not women and that biological sex is the be all and end all of gender.

JB is an exhibitionist who likes flashing "her" penis in public spaces, unless I have completely misunderstood the photos and the allegations. If it's the latter of course I would withdraw the accusation but JB hasn't denied it that I have seen.

That's not the allegation at all, although I doubt you've really misunderstood. Nobody has suggested Bradley is the person flashing. There are just pictures of someone with their dick out on her blog, which is a blog about exhibitionism, so hardly surprising. Additionally all of the papers that have covered it have included Bradley's statement which states that she cannot comment publicly while the investigation is ongoing. Great use of "well they haven't denied it so it must be true".

Dishonest fucking slimeball.

 

[krtek a houby]

Trans people don't deserve to be demonised or collectively punished for a failure to deal with predators, or on the basis of hypotheticals which are extremely unlikely to happen.

Yup. This kind of demonisation happens to other maligned social groupings. Don't see why trans people should have to put up with it. As if they are responsible for the actions of those who do bad shit.

 

[weepiper]

Trans people are not responsible for others who do bad shit. But allowing self id across the board has risks for women and girls. David Challenor dressed in a 'little girl' outfit and demanded his 10 year old female victim call him by a female name. David Challenor was a scoutmaster. David Challenor's child sat on a panel which discussed self id being desirable within Girl Guiding UK both for the children and the adult helpers. How anyone can't join the dots here and see how incredibly dangerous this could be for female children needs to fucking give their head a wobble.

 

[Pickman's model]

Trans people are not responsible for others who do bad shit. But allowing self id across the board has risks for women and girls. David Challenor dressed in a 'little girl' outfit and demanded his 10 year old female victim call him by a female name. David Challenor was a scoutmaster. David Challenor's child sat on a panel which discussed self id being desirable within Girl Guiding UK both for the children and the adult helpers. How anyone can't join the dots here and see how incredibly dangerous this could be for female children needs to fucking give their head a wobble.

soz, was dc self-identifying as trans? or are you saying that people should watch out for scoutmasters with trans kids?

 

[co-op]

There we go, that's a lot more honest - now we know that as far as you're concerned transwomen are not women and that biological sex is the be all and end all of gender.

I don't think it's the be-all and end-all of gender, but the reverse. Sex is the basis of women's oppression, gender is the means. Sex does not equal gender. Nor does "identifying" this way or that change sex.

That's not the allegation at all, although I doubt you've really misunderstood. Nobody has suggested Bradley is the person flashing. There are just pictures of someone with their dick out on her blog, which is a blog about exhibitionism, so hardly surprising. Additionally all of the papers that have covered it have included Bradley's statement which states that she cannot comment publicly while the investigation is ongoing. Great use of "well they haven't denied it so it must be true".

Yep I had; the account of it I saw claimed it was JB taking photos of "her" flashing "her" dick. If I've got that wrong of course I withdraw it, and you're right absence of denial doesn't mean guilt, but it's a funny thing not to deny if you've not done it.

Dishonest fucking slimeball.

This stuff just bounces off me so you should save yourself the effort. Everyone knows that if you deviate from the trans script you're going to get called every thing under the sun. It's lost its power over me. That's what people mean by peaktrans I think.

 

[co-op]

But allowing self id across the board has risks for women and girls.

NB SpackleFrog is apparently unaware that self-id is an issue and has been demanding proof that it is; that is how out of touch they are. It might be a bit much to expect them to have thought this through.

 

[co-op]

Funny, last time I checked I had one.

Draw your own conclusions.

 

[Sea Star]

I still don't understand what revising the mechanism for revising a birth certificate - introducing a legal document where you swear to the court which leaves you open to imprisonment if you're lying - has to do with a vicious child rapist who was a man, never said he wasn't a man, was never going to transition and never claimed to be trans, and really shouldn't have been allowed within a mile of a child. Perhaps short of me giving my head a fucking wobble someone could enlighten me.

Was Challenor's birth certificate a factor in this?

 

[Pickman's model]

NB SpackleFrog is apparently unaware that self-id is an issue and has been demanding proof that it is; that is how out of touch they are. It might be a bit much to expect them to have thought this through.

is it an issue in the case of david challenor?

 

[SpackleFrog]

Yep I had; the account of it I saw claimed it was JB taking photos of "her" flashing "her" dick. If I've got that wrong of course I withdraw it, and you're right absence of denial doesn't mean guilt, but it's a funny thing not to deny if you've not done it.

You've got it "wrong". Withdraw it.

 

[krtek a houby]

Trans people are not responsible for others who do bad shit. But allowing self id across the board has risks for women and girls. David Challenor dressed in a 'little girl' outfit and demanded his 10 year old female victim call him by a female name. David Challenor was a scoutmaster. David Challenor's child sat on a panel which discussed self id being desirable within Girl Guiding UK both for the children and the adult helpers. How anyone can't join the dots here and see how incredibly dangerous this could be for female children needs to fucking give their head a wobble.

The examples you give are not representative of trans people, though, are they?

There's little doubt about wrong 'uns taking advantage of vulnerable targets but the same could be said about joining the dots... where does that lead to?

Not so long ago being gay was equated with paedophilia by some who joined the dots.

(not saying you would ever have contemplated that, btw)

 

[co-op]

You've got it "wrong". Withdraw it.

Just checked the usual news sources and it looks to me like there is a strong suggestion that it *is* JB but unproven as yet. EG

Another photograph shows male genitals being exposed in an office close to a curved wooden desk that is strikingly similar to a picture of a work desk that Ms Bradley posted on her Facebook page.

But you're right no proof. No denial. Expensive lawyers - Peter Carter-Ruck no less!

 

[Sea Star]

I don't think it's the be-all and end-all of gender, but the reverse. Sex is the basis of women's oppression, gender is the means. Sex does not equal gender. Nor does "identifying" this way or that change sex.

I don't think you need to keep asserting your opinion on this. Something akin to a peer reviewed scholarly article to prove that transgender isn't something that is as real to transgender people, as intersex is to intersex people and as real as your gender identity is to you should be provided here to push this 'debate' forward. Or if you don't have that then this is must be ruled out of the discussion.

As much as you try to trivialise what transgender people go through and deny the reality of gender identity that we experience - it persists, it's been here as long as there has been recorded history and it isn't going away. Only through great suffering and cruelty will you be able to keep transgender people from living as the gender we experience.

 

[Sea Star]

Wondering here if I posted up post after post of abusive and perverted cis women it would make any difference. Not that I will, not dropping down to your level.

 

[SpackleFrog]

Just checked the usual news sources and it looks to me like there is a strong suggestion that it *is* JB but unproven as yet. EG



But you're right no proof. No denial. Expensive lawyers - Peter Carter-Ruck no less!

Since you've checked, you'll be able to provide that link which you were too busy to provide earlier

NB SpackleFrog is apparently unaware that self-id is an issue and has been demanding proof that it is; that is how out of touch they are. It might be a bit much to expect them to have thought this through.

Been asked by people who you have on ignore (presumably because they don't share your shitty rad fem politics) to ask if this self id issue is an issue in the case of David Challenor?

I don't generally have much sympathy for NUS officers or people with expensive lawyers and I don't really give a fuck about Bradley's case. What I care about is you trying to claim a trans woman has committed some kind of act of indecent exposure or sexual assault without a shred of evidence, purely to suit your unpleasant agenda.

 

[Ralph Llama]

Really? You need to ask?

She was a Green Party general election candidate who selected a man who had been charged with raping and torturing a child at the address they both lived in to be her election agent and didn't think to inform the Green Party of this.

Do you think that she is a suitable representative?

Bound to go far in the world of politics TBH.

 

[Sea Star]

shitty rad fem politics

Not sure her politics are rad fem tbh - I know plenty of radical feminists that are trans inclusive - and a few who are trans. It's just shitty.

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

Funny, last time I checked I had one.

No one wants to hear about your dick. Put it away.

 

[SpackleFrog]

Not sure her politics are rad fem tbh - I know plenty of radical feminists that are trans inclusive - and a few who are trans. It's just shitty.

I don't think it's the be-all and end-all of gender, but the reverse. Sex is the basis of women's oppression, gender is the means. Sex does not equal gender. Nor does "identifying" this way or that change sex.

This is rad fem stuff and it's shitty. I'm not saying you don't know rad fems who are trans inclusive but that doesn't make their rad fem politics acceptable, it just means their worlview lacks consistency. Rad fem politics is rooted in the idea that differences between gender are innate and result from biology.

 

[SpackleFrog]

No one wants to hear about your dick. Put it away.

Fuck off.

 

[co-op]

As much as you try to trivialise what transgender people go through and deny the reality of gender identity that we experience - it persists, it's been here as long as there has been recorded history and it isn't going away. Only through great suffering and cruelty will you be able to keep transgender people from living as the gender we experience.

I don't know whether to treat this post as honest or not because it's always been a key part of TRAs to make this debate about 'bigotry' vs 'love' etc. And my role here is the hateful bigot.

But I'll accept it at face value; I defy you to show one word I've written on this that meaningfully 'trivialises' or 'denies' anything that gender dysphoric people go through. Quote me the words where I've said this. It's possible I've done that unawares, but never intentionally.

As far as I'm concerned you can "live as the gender you experience" to your heart's content, it's just that doesn't really mean anything to me. It could mean 'perform a gender stereotype different to the one given to your sex'. It could mean 'try to escape stereotypical gender roles'. There are probably loads of other ways of reading that. All are fine with me - I want people to be as free as possible to live as genderlessly as possible (so yes I have a bit of an issue with trans people who say 'I always knew I was a girl because I liked dollies and pink' but plenty of people think that's normal and true so I'm not holding trans people to any higher standard on this).

What I don't think you can do is 'identify' into another sex. It's just not possible and to believe that it is, completely removes the material basis of women's oppression and trivialises it to a point of 'identity'. Have women just been a bit stupid and 'identified' themselves into subordination for 5,000 years? Are men just jerks who have oppressed women for a laugh? Or is there something more material going on? Is control of women's reproduction crucial to women's subordination by men? Because - for example - 'legitimacy' was inseparable from inheritance of power and capital - making sure that some men get access to that power and capital and others don't. Women's bodies have been the locus for the transmission of class war, not some individualistic choice or identity.

 

[Sea Star]

No one wants to hear about your dick. Put it away.

you really are a scumbag aren't you?

 

[SpackleFrog]

What I don't think you can do is 'identify' into another sex. It's just not possible and to believe that it is, completely removes the material basis of women's oppression and trivialises it to a point of 'identity'. Have women just been a bit stupid and 'identified' themselves into subordination for 5,000 years? Are men just jerks who have oppressed women for a laugh? Or is there something more material going on? Is control of women's reproduction crucial to women's subordination by men? Because - for example - 'legitimacy' was inseparable from inheritance of power and capital - making sure that some men get access to that power and capital and others don't. Women's bodies have been the locus for the transmission of class war, not some individualistic choice or identity.

All you're doing here is showing you don't understand women's oppression under capitalism at all. You're no good to women, you're no good to the working class. Just a useless up their own arse waste of skin.

 

[co-op]

All you're doing here is showing you don't understand women's oppression under capitalism at all. You're no good to women, you're no good to the working class. Just a useless up their own arse waste of skin.

Ok you're obviously incapable of doing anything except throw stupid abuse around. Onto ignore with ya. Bye.

 

[Sea Star]

I don't know whether to treat this post as honest or not because it's always been a key part of TRAs to make this debate about 'bigotry' vs 'love' etc. And my role here is the hateful bigot.

But I'll accept it at face value; I defy you to show one word I've written on this that meaningfully 'trivialises' or 'denies' anything that gender dysphoric people go through. Quote me the words where I've said this. It's possible I've done that unawares, but never intentionally.

As far as I'm concerned you can "live as the gender you experience" to your heart's content, it's just that doesn't really mean anything to me. It could mean 'perform a gender stereotype different to the one given to your sex'. It could mean 'try to escape stereotypical gender roles'. There are probably loads of other ways of reading that. All are fine with me - I want people to be as free as possible to live as genderlessly as possible (so yes I have a bit of an issue with trans people who say 'I always knew I was a girl because I liked dollies and pink' but plenty of people think that's normal and true so I'm not holding trans people to any higher standard on this).

What I don't think you can do is 'identify' into another sex. It's just not possible and to believe that it is, completely removes the material basis of women's oppression and trivialises it to a point of 'identity'. Have women just been a bit stupid and 'identified' themselves into subordination for 5,000 years? Are men just jerks who have oppressed women for a laugh? Or is there something more material going on? Is control of women's reproduction crucial to women's subordination by men? Because - for example - 'legitimacy' was inseparable from inheritance of power and capital - making sure that some men get access to that power and capital and others don't. Women's bodies have been the locus for the transmission of class war, not some individualistic choice or identity.

I don't believe a word you say - that comes across completely as 100% disingenuous to me. Especially as you make this about 'gender dysphoria' which is a symptom of being transgender and living in duress as the wrong gender - and not transgender itself. And you ignore all the physical evidence that transgender is something akin to various intersex conditions - which I have already posted something about. Nobody wanted to discuss it though.

You seem intent on rolling back transgender people's rights and smearing us all as abusers. You seem unconcerned about the plight of transgender children.

I quoted the words that show you trivialise the issues of transgender people by belittling it as "identifying as" and implying its a fancy or a choice, or merely a social construct. If it was merely a social construct I and most trans women would be happy living as men.

 

[spanglechick]

No one wants to hear about your dick. Put it away.

Oh come on. If Sea Star isnt allowed to reply to a statement that directly relates to her and contradicts her beliefs, how is that fair? She replied calmly, and in good humour. She gets to do that.

 

[Sea Star]

This is rad fem stuff and it's shitty. I'm not saying you don't know rad fems who are trans inclusive but that doesn't make their rad fem politics acceptable, it just means their worlview lacks consistency. Rad fem politics is rooted in the idea that differences between gender are innate and result from biology.

Certainly not the impression I've got from those friends I have who describe themselves as radical feminists. But I'm not terribly knowledgeable on this particular strand of feminism, so I'll say no more.

 

[bimble]

[QUOTE="SpackleFrog, post: 15708134, member: 58284]" Rad fem politics is rooted in the idea that differences between gender are innate and result from biology.[/QUOTE]
Right. Rad fems , they are the ones who say 'gender is innate'. You learn a new thing every day on here.