What broader issues has the trans (lack of) debate opened your eyes to?

I'm too far in.

I'm beginning to wonder if people are not getting it on purpose or pretending to not understand, or are too far in?
Who knows

Lemonade no one understands what you are getting at

I questioned a post saying that said if we were to believe trans women are women, then what else are we supposed to believe in? (such as lizards and little green men was two examples given)
I said that was David Icke territory.
The only thing being disagreed with seems to be the Icke bit as to some it's clearly not.
We'll just have to disagree, as if some want to go down the conspiracy theory tin hat route, that's up to them.
I'll stick to the oooookay route and slowly back away from that road....

No problem tyro and thanks to you and goosefoot for the interesting replies to my question about fetishes.

I think what has happened in terms of acceptance is that it is now 'acceptable' to flaunt your fetish in public (AGP males). I'm not sure that many people realise exactly what they are being accepting of

Yes, I really want some people to wake up to what on earth they are actually supporting. Allowing a sexual fetish to be dressed up (no pun intended) as an oppressed minority interest with validation of said fetish involving the attempted wholesale dismantling of women and girls' sex-based rights and protections and the gaslighting of everyone, down to kids in primary schools...well it all just beggars belief.

Lemonade no one understands what you are getting at. You seem to be misinterpreting posts and then being baffled by everyone else telling you this. It’s a bit “Everyone’s out of step but our Johnny”

Other person -
What I understood from that comment was: If people can be so easily convinced that people can change sex, what else could people be made to believe?

Me - If people can be easily convinced people can change sex, then what else can they be made to believe - eg lizard people, little green men? (two examples brought up by another poster not me)

Same thing.
We're saying the same thing - only diff is other person left off lizard people and little green men (probably because it makes it sound too bonkers, who know)

My comments are genuine.
I'm just genuinely baffled as to how people seem to be AGREEING with me, saying basically the same thing but in the next breath saying I don't understand.

Lemonadeanddaisychains you sound like you are not arguing in good faith.

Is that how you mean to come across?

I find it hard to understand how people think 'it will never happen' because..

a. it already has happened.

b.They deny it has happened, so they're lying.

c. They say it won't be a problem because of so few trans, this is also a lie because they offend at the same rate as men, which they are.

When you ask them to prove Assumption One, they respond with Assumption Two, and when you ask them to prove Assumption Two, they respond with Assumption One. Cue theme music from The Magic Roundabout.

Ah yes, the old 'goalpost movement at lightning speed'. Is that what they call bait and switch? Amazing the ways you can describe what is essentially lying.

Does she believe violent rapists should be able to self identify their way into women's prisons? Or is she of the, that won't happen, variety. When it is happening.

She's of the 'it won't happen, but if it does happen, they're still women and should be treated as such' variety.

Basically it's the argument that a lot of pro-Self ID people use. They think they're making one assumption but actually they're making two. Assumption One: TWAW
Assumption Two: It doesn't matter if they are or not

When you ask them to prove Assumption One, they respond with Assumption Two, and when you ask them to prove Assumption Two, they respond with Assumption One. Cue theme music from The Magic Roundabout.

I just....whut.
You're literally all agreeing with me but in the same breath saying I don't seem to understand
Dafuq lol

I've never said that people can biologically change sex.

What does 'transwomen are women' mean? A woman is an adult female human, a man is an adult male human. Transwomen are men who want to be women. Saying 'transwomen are women' is like saying 'men are women'. So you are saying that people can change sex.

You've basically said what I just said!

But you didn't seem to understand what was meant when it was put like this:

At this point if people started arguing passionately that the little green men/lizard people have been here all along and it's them behind coronavirus I'm not sure I'd be surprised. This whole thing has been like a mass experiment in social compliance, one with rather worrying results.

If you can make people believe that people can change sex, what else could they be made to believe?

She has such overwhelming moral conviction that she can't entertain any argument or ambiguity.

Does she believe violent rapists should be able to self identify their way into women's prisons? Or is she of the, that won't happen, variety. When it is happening.

For clarity - perfectly plausible meaning that it's perfectly plausible that we could be made to think of little green men and lizard people and believe in it, not that you think they could be real (I hope you don't anyway lol)

Just out of interest, what convinced you that people can change sex?

I've never said that people can biologically change sex.

If people can be so easily convinced that people can change sex, what else could people be made to believe?

If people can be so easily convinced that people can change sex, what else could people be made to believe?
Potatoes, patatahs
You've basically said what I just said!
If people can be easily convinced people can change sex, then what else can they be made to believe - eg lizard people, little green men?
Only difference seems to be that you don't seem to see it as David Icke territory and as perfectly plausible.
As I said... um... right OK.

It reads if we believe trans women are women, then lizard people and green men could be real.

You're showing your poor comprehension skills again Lemonade (or are you just being disingenuous?).

What I understood from that comment was: If people can be so easily convinced that people can change sex, what else could people be made to believe?

Just out of interest, what convinced you that people can change sex? And at what point in their 'transition' do you believe that they change sex?

Aesopfable thanks for the link, god I love Yes Minister :)
Funnily enough though, I think that my friend is the opposite of Humphrey. She does very much believe in ends. She's convinced, for example, that Self ID is good and opposition to it bad - that's actually where the problem is. She has such overwhelming moral conviction that she can't entertain any argument or ambiguity.

Mermoose your friend reminded me of this episode of yes minister, everything is just theory distinct from reality so why does it matter?:

I think the Peter Principle is an unintended consequence of a culture that many companies adopt, where you are expected to be ambitious and want to rise through the organisation.
Niche workers are often sneered at as being unambitious, as if thats the worst trait you could possibly have, and damaging to the company.

Then there's the Peter Principle where people get promoted until they are in a position where they are incompetent.

And there they stay.

Mermoose
maybe people go for these jobs because they feel confident enough, and they feel confident enough because they don't see the complexity

That seems to be the place where politicians and players live.

Most of us see the complexities when we read the job description.

Mermoose

That is very worrying, indeed. And I'm feeling frustrated just reading it. It must be awful in real life.

Other things I’ve learnt from this debate is that many people have poor comprehension skills, and/or are prepared to be completely disingenuous

Was that to me?
How come then
This whole thing has been like a mass experiment in social compliance, one with rather worrying results

"This whole thing" - believing trans women are women, am I right?
If not what does "this whole thing" mean?
It reads if we believe trans women are women, then lizard people and green men could be real.
Yeah.... as I said.... um we've gone into David Icke territory.
But I've got poor reading comprehension according to you - come on then, what did it mean or are you just going to snit and sneer instead?

Mens fetishes seems to be their imagination running free and wanting it to be real.
For women they have historically kept such imaginative thoughts to themselves.

We know why this is.
It is not in a women's interest to divulge such personal desires, hence the popularity of reading Nancy Friday's books or similar back in the 60's.
The same could be said for 50 Shades of Grey.

Reading and using your imagination is a very private affair and can get women 'in the mood'.

I suggest men want 'everyone else' to perform for them, whereas women use their 'imagination' to perform.

The womens activity is internal and private therefore considerate to her partner(s) concerns.

The mens activity is external and can escalates into coercive control.