So disgusted tonight

People with baseball bats covered in barbed wire who want to kill women who don't agree with them?

People who want napalm in the face of women who don't agree with them?

People who want to break through lesbians' knickers to force their penises into them?

People who rape girls in female toilets with their penises?

I mean, the responses write themselves when it comes to these extremists.

She basically said the world would be a better or more sane place without transitioned people. Who else is it ok to say that about?

Slaves? Thalidomide victims? Castrati? Lobotomised people? Paraplegics from car accidents? People in poverty? Homeless people?

I can certainly imagine you and Jones arguing against abolition of slavery, ending use of thalidomide, stopping castrating boy singers, limiting lobotomies, enforcing seatbelt use, etc.

"Oh my god, she basically said the world would be a better place without slaves!"

We're talking about improving the situation of individuals here. If identity politics wasn't intended to rot people's brains, it's certainly very effective at it.

Oh! And TRAs, Stonewall in its current state.

Oh good grief! And, yet again, right back to step 1 we go!

No @Fieldofgreycorn If you took a moment to read any of the pages of replies in this thread alone you would see that you are repeating a trite, facile, blinkered view. One that has had quite a few reasonable, calm, detailed, evidenced words written in refutation.

Was there any point in anyone having typed any of the previous myriad responses? Because there always seems to be at least one who comes along and ignores everything that has been typed and tries to return the discussion right back to the beginning.

‘Who else is it ok to say that about?’

Scientologists?

But seriously, would you object if someone said the world would be better without religion?

‘Who else is it ok to say that about?’

Scientologists?

But seriously, would you object if someone said the world would be better without religion?

She basically said

There's no need to surmise what she said - we have transcripts on here.

No spin or interpretation needed.

Psychopaths?

Helen Joyce wasn’t just talking about children, she was talking about every single person that transitioned. She basically said the world would be a better or more sane place without transitioned people.

Who else is it ok to say that about?

Not only should blackmailing, borderline illegal behaviour of activists never be used to advocate further censorship, but I disagree entirely that what Helen Joyce has said is not beneficial to 'the movement'.

The outrage from the TRAs, determined to control the narrative, correlates directly to their fear over what is being listened to.

How many times have we heard, don't listen, shred those pamphlets, burn that book, shout over those women, shut down that venue?

Of course Helen Joyce is right to want to reduce the number of people who have irreversible surgeries that may be completely unnecessary.

And that is the conversation that is being had. Who's having the surgeries, how are they necessary, what are the implications? How is an ideology driving this?

I have zero problem with people disagreeing with anything that Helen Joyce says.

But to disagree with it, you've got to talk about it.

I wish Search worked...

But yes, @standoctor play the ball not the player.

standoctor

Address the argument and not resort to direct personal attacks otherwise your posts will simply be deleted. I don’t know anyone who has love for Jones, but let’s stick to refuting what Jones says and does. That will be much more effective in the long run.

That's unacceptable, standoctor. Reported.

Absolutely.

Public discourse, legislation and policy cannot be held hostage to threats.

We are discussing harm being done to children without solid evidence that it addresses the issue it purports to treat.

'friendly reminder that you don’t need to understand the nuances of sex to know that female people know themselves better than you ever will.’

Someone on Twitter giving the game away again: ‘friendly reminder that you don’t need to understand the nuances of gender identity to know that trans people know themselves better than you ever will.’

This is the crux. It’s incomprehensible, they know that, and the plan is to make people either too afraid or too confused or too polite to point it out.

That’s the sort of thing that works for a while but not forever.

It would happen to any of us if you apply your implied standards. We might all be edited to seem to say something completely different if it's stripped of its context. The logical outcome would be that there is no acceptable form of communication that could not be stripped of context in this way. I could construe your comments to mean that Helen Joyce and others should never speak or write spontaneously again. I don't think that would be an accurate summary of your advice on this matter.

Exactly.

Up until now, a ribbon has been sufficient to have women doxed, harassed, and even investigated by Police to the point of ending up in court. There are people who don't need fuel beyond their own animosity and motivated reasoning to behave in such ways.

This. Talk about dancing to their tune. This thread was started to talk about the extremely irresponsible behaviour of commentators on Twitter. I don't see much evidence of people tone policing them, frankly.

You're familiar with the saying typically attributed to Cardinal Richelieu?

Give me six lines written by the most honest man in the world, and I will find enough in them to hang him.

It would happen to any of us if you apply your implied standards. We might all be edited to seem to say something completely different if it's stripped of its context. The logical outcome would be that there is no acceptable form of communication that could not be stripped of context in this way. I could construe your comments to mean that Helen Joyce and others should never speak or write spontaneously again. I don't think that would be an accurate summary of your advice on this matter.

I am surprised however by this:

It lends fuel to those who would hound anyone who speaks up out of jobs, doxx them, stalk their homes, all those behaviours that frighten people who disagree with TRAs into staying silent.

Up until now, a ribbon has been sufficient to have women doxed, harassed, and even investigated by Police to the point of ending up in court. There are people who don't need fuel beyond their own animosity and motivated reasoning to behave in such ways.

An astonishing number of people are too frightened to speak up in the view of what's happened to such women, Kathleen Stock, Rosa Freedman, Maya Forstater, Jo Phoenix, JK Rowling, and a list that is far too long.

I'd wonder how good a grasp of the history and wider context of gender ideology some people have if they don't understand what Helen Joyce was saying and are willing to post about it without viewing the video and understanding the context.

Thank you Necessary. I think that transcript puts the other truncated transcript into perspective.

It lends fuel to those who would hound anyone who speaks up out of jobs, doxx them, stalk their homes

These behaviours are not justifiable in any way. We can't have a situation where we are walking on eggshells because of terrorists.

Yes. This.

These were going to be my answers as well.

Do I relate to other females in a different way to males? Ah… no? Should I? I do have discussions about their sexed bodies that is a commonality we share. But no… I don’t ‘relate’ to them differently.

Am I supposed to?

I for one am not trying to say helen Joyce is transphobic. I am saying that what she said comes across very very badly and does the movement no benefit. It lends fuel to those who would hound anyone who speaks up out of jobs, doxx them, stalk their homes, all those behaviours that frighten people who disagree with TRAs into staying silent.