Diva magazine is trans inclusive

Umm, of course you can just phone the police. If you phoned the switchboard and asked if you could speak to someone for clarification about something, they would see if someone can speak to you. That’s part of their job.

I phoned to speak to them about a vulnerable adult (stranger) I was concerned about and I had no problems speaking to the relevant people.

in no way do i not believe you im interested in the context of your conversation with the police and in what context they expressed this view. i would assume that they were commenting on the legality of the situation and this would depend on the question and context you presented to them and how they saw this. you dont have to respond or answer any question i ask, at all please dont feel that you need to do that.

Bespin Don't believe me if you don't want to

The day I explain myself to you the sun will fall out of the sky.

I still prefer to read at After Ellen.

Jus' sayin'.

can you please explain more how this was expressed to you.

Seriously? That's your take on her post?

"Explain yourself!"

Why?

spontaneousgiventime

this genuinely makes no sense, so you are saying the police who you spoke to like you can just phone them up without talking to the switchboard and spoke to a police officer who told you that someone was not entitled to be around a 6 year old child. is that in general, in a pubic changing room where they might also be. in a service where they work with young people.

no one is entitled to access to children if not in the correct context of this. can you please explain more how this was expressed to you.

This is it lurkers. See for yourself.

I phoned the Police today to ask if a person who identified as opposite to their birth sex was entitled to be around my DGD aged 6 in intimate spaces. The answer is no, safeguarding first - always.

Along come the TRA to tell you they are entitled to be there with YOUR naked child in a space where they should be safe. From the horses mouth folks.

If TWAW, and some are identifying as lesbians with penises, seems like an obvious solution would be to hook up with each other, no? They’re all lesbians, after all. And then leave the actual lesbians in peace.

It's unfair to say the entire lesbian community should shun trans women because a few people don't want to sleep with them.

Of course it's fair. It's written into the equality act.

I honestly don't get it. Do the people who post this kind of homophobic drivel really think they are persuading anyone to their viewpoint?

If this is the level of activism, I genuinely do not understand how they have made any headway, at all.

Even the most sexist person would find this sort of thing laughable.

As for claiming an entitlement to be naked around little girls...

i think if people are right about DIVA not being read by lesbians then it will go out of publication quite quickly if no one is buying it. If it does continue to do well that it might point to the fact that the people who buy it both lesibian and bi woman are fine with the magazines stance on this issue. i occasionally buy it if it as an interesting article or someone im interested in being interviewed. Ive never meet anyone who buys it all the time though.

Totally agree AAK.

I tried to ignore the goady posts but I'm glad they are hopefully being seen for what they are.

It's obvious these threads are being hijacked by TRA.

‘There's stuff in here that the general public needs to see before they make their minds up about how they feel about the idea of how access to women's spaces is handled.’

Exactly.

It is clear to everyone that heterosexual males who call themselves lesbians have been starting threads all over this board, pushing their vile, porn soaked lesbophobia, then other heterosexual males who also call themselves lesbians join in with them. At least anyone watching can see what they are about.

After 15 years working in 'inclusion', the biggest lesson I've learned is that you if you include everyone in everything all the time, the whole thing becomes totally meaningless.

You know, at first I was ignoring this thread because yay more goading, but you know what? I'm glad Daim started this thread now. There's stuff in here that the general public needs to see before they make their minds up about how they feel about the idea of how access to women's spaces is handled.

I think I count at least twelvety

Oh, message deleted already. That was quick
I wonder how many strikes snappity is on now...?

Yes, wasn’t it just!

Vile.

Glad to help! I think we’re all melting somewhat in this heat

I got lost in the analogy of who was who, so thanks for the explanation talking - it's been a long day and I'm tired! I could still work out who "the problem" was, though - that much was abundantly clear in all its gynephobic majesty.

I think it’s pretty clear what Snappity means:

A - female people who identify as homosexual but are attracted to male people if those males identify as women

B - biologically male people who identify as women who are attracted to women

C - female homosexuals who are exclusively attracted to other biologically female people

Snappity is implying that the problem in the lesbian community is the actual lesbians.

Also reported Snappity

In what context is it OK to describe anyone saying no to sex with a specific group of people as the problem?

Yes, talking.

We're getting to the nub now, which is lesbophobia, pure and simple.

I don't know who A, B and C are in snappity's parable, but what rabbit hole have we gone down to think that it's ok to describe lesbians (female homosexuals) wanting to get together with other lesbians (other female homosexuals) as "the problem" in ANY context??

Which group is the problem?

Hmm, let me think. Oh yes. Its men.

Snappity I have reported your post for lesbophobia.

Lesbian sexuality is not a “problem”, much less “the problem”.

Implying that lesbians who aren’t interested in males as partners are any kind of problem, are the problem in the “lesbian” community, is pure lesbophobia.