Shameful, incoherent, poorly referenced, completely biased piece of 'journalism' from the Guardian

So sailaway, let me see if I get this.

It didn’t happen, but the police investigated it. If the person was a male, then it wasn’t ok, but if they identified as a woman , then it was ok.

You know that doesn’t make any logical sense, right?

Did it happen or not?

To see if a man, not a TW, really did expose himself in the aggressive manner described to women and children in the way this woman complained.

So how can you tell the difference between a naked intact male-bodied person with a female gender identity and a naked intact male-bodied person with a male gender identity?

This info would be so helpful.

Are you saying that the man defending the right of the male-bodied person to be in the female section of the spa was wrong to do so?

Or are you arguing that the event probably didn't happen, but if it did it was perfectly acceptable - in which case, why are you so keen to point out that the event may have been made up?

Also, accusing someone of being an evangelical Christian making up stories is a little bit of a contradiction. A true evangelical Christian is not someone who 'bears false witness'. So if the story is fabricated, she was not a true evangelical Christian. A bit like how no true-trans-person would ever act unethically around women.

'We know it is legal for a male who has self identified as a women to use the female section of the spa in this way. So exactly what crime did you expect the police to have investigated?'

To see if a man, not a TW, really did expose himself in the aggressive manner described to women and children in the way this woman complained.

I have a subscription for the Guardian and I won't be cancelling my support for the only anti-right wing media outlet that counters the regular semi-fascist drivel imposed on us daily from numerous other sources. Anyone listening to the testimony of the US police who had to get the loons out of the Capitol? No? Other things to do? How surprising.

'And how did she persuade all of the staff and patrons in the spa to play along as she filmed her video?'

She didn't. She went to the desk and complained about the 'man' exposing himself as if it had happened. The staff didn't 'play along with anything.The police have investigated - and found NOTHING. The spa say no trans members used the spa that day.
The woman who 'reported' the incident is rabidly homophobic, an evangelical who has scored a massive 'win' over the coverage for this in the right wing, and world media.

I just don't believe the incident happened. At all. And people lose credibility when they use something like this to prove ther points

We know it is legal for a male who has self identified as a women to use the female section of the spa in this way. So exactly what crime did you expect the police to have investigated?

Seems you are regurgitating rumours.

Here is the thread with much discussion on the inconsistencies in this not new take about the wi spa incident. There is no logic to it being staged or made up. And the conflicts in the arguments that continue to be pushed are rather glaring.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4292052-Article-about-WiSpa-incident-title-edited-by-MNHQ

Don't be stupid, suggestionsplease1.

Well I wouldn't trust the Guardian's reporting on this issue sail to the extent if they said it was daytime I'd have to go out and check. I thought it said twice the police are investigating so there has been no conclusion yet.

Should it turn out this didn't happen then I'd stand corrected and hopefully the woman would be held to account. But still -why dismiss her story out of hand simply because you don't stand with her religious beliefs? She might be an evangelical Christian, why does that mean she should have to put up with a penis on display in a space for women and children?

A discussion which should be taking place sensibly and transparently, taking the views and rights of all women into account, is spilling over violently into the streets and outlets like the Guardian are gleefully stirring the pot, making out anyone objecting is some kind of dangerous, right wing bigot. It is scary.

And how did she persuade all of the staff an patrons in the spa to play along as she filmed her video?

Mumsnet, not Nunsnet lol

There’s been a relentless push to coax women to accept the reality of be-penised persons in female only spaces, but when it happens and a woman who hasn’t got the memo objects, suddenly it’s all been made up?

Horseshit.

And yes, painting people who object to paedophiles as morally suspect certainly is a hot take. I think she may find that she’s left quite a few people behind with that headlong plummet down the rabbit hole of her extremism.

except, there is NO evidence that the 'incident' actually did happen, Guardian aren't the only ones reporting that. And the woman in Q who complained about the naked man waving his penis around is a crazy, evangelical christian type who appears to have made this all up as a stunt.
The police investigated.

Was wondering that too, time. Didn't this Precious do a video claiming to be the person in the spa (I didn't watch it)? Now they're saying they don't know why they're getting hassle? (Correct me if I'm wrong).

I hadn't read the whole thing before my first comment as it gave me such rage but having done so now, the fact that they have gone on to conflate Mumsnet with Pizzagate Trump supporting racist nutters is unbelievable even for those two halfwits calling themselves journalists. This is just wrong on every level.Justine should sue.

Out of curiosity we have no idea who the man was dp we? Not sure that precious person has any proof it was them, could just be another attention seeking nutter? Not the topic I know but I’ve been wondering

Blah blah blah

As usual no consistency.

The right of those to use the facilities etc according to gender ID was pushed for and is law in California.

I'd expect the response to be like the man there

Person is in the right place
Person must be trans
It's fine and you're a bigot

Why the hooha? This was fought for. Why not celebrations?

One of the authors, Lois Becket, did a whoopsie on Twitter

Talking about the protest:

"Just got thrown to the ground by right-wing anti-pedophile protesters as a crowd coverged on me and chased me. They threw water at me and screamed about Jesus and said to grab my phone. Police would not let me through the police line but after I got thrown on the ground they did"

@/ripx4nutmeg: "Calling them 'anti-pedophile protesters' in an attempt to discredit them might not be as successful as you think it is"

archive.ph/5yvPg

Oh, hell no! Sam and Lois again? Why on earth is this getting through into print?

Right wing, far right, anti trans, Q Anon, all the evil cartoon baddies together. And stabbing people now! Over "unsubstantiated allegations" (read: didn't happen). This is not reporting. It's clearly written to put off anyone who might be questioning the ideology around this for fear of being tarred with the same brush. It's propaganda. It's utterly wrong.

I cancelled my long-standing subscription AND additional contribution a few weeks back. I sent a message explaining why (because TPAs [Trans Privilege Arseholes] are taking over what belongs to us women).

Response?

crickets

I'm not giving the Guardian clicks, but a man/male/XY chromosomed person/penis-haver/whatever should not be in a space where women and girls are naked even if he's fully clothed.

Someone who does have GD wouldn't do that, they'd make every effort to hide their real sex.

The argument is that GD isn't (or shouldn't be) a requirement to be transgender. You can't assume any trans person has gender dysphoria.

Now why would they defend that?