Stating biological fact is an LGBTQ+ "hate crime"

Seconded.
Obviously been on the Bud Lite and slipped up there.

Ah, but the TRA answer to that is always that the men are saying/doing these dreadful things because of the evil all-powerful TERF cabal.

Because men are well known as a sex for doing whatever radical feminists say they should do.

What??

I don't even know what point you're trying to make here.

So, transwomen who are attracted to 'natural born' women are 'straight'. Which means you agree transwomen are men? Because straight means opposite sex attracted, doesn't it?

Also, your stats are definitely off. The majority of transwomen are attracted to women (but strangely often not to transwomen) and call themselves lesbians.

🤔 it’s almost like people can tell the difference between men and women when they choose who to threaten.

DC1888

Where are you getting 9.4% from because according to Blanchard around 75% of TW are attracted to women.
A cursory look at Grindr or Scissr seems to indicate the vast majority of transwomen want sex with a female lesbian........

Useless and misleading though they may be regarding the figures for gay and heterosexual orientations, I think we can safely assume that considerably more than 9% of TW are attracted to women. Just look at the numbers who stated they were bi or pan, meaning women are included in their potential dating pool.

Absolute twaddle, isn't it.

Heterosexual men claiming they're women will say they're lesbians. And how can a non-binary person, who claims to be neither male or female, have a sexual orientation based on sex??

Completely useless statistics.

A man married a trans woman and the story was in a local newspaper. In comments were women saying supportive comments.

The men made loads of comments about "a nasty surprise on the wedding night" in various and explicit ways. There were comments about ladyboys, comments expressing disgust and some pretty grim homophobic comments.

It's strange how men happily make those comments and aren't referred to as bigots, or as contributing to hate crimes, but women wanting to be safe, have their services protected is.

Men in comedy wigs telling us they're lesbians,what a time to be alive.

@CorruptedCauldron To be perfectly honest, I no longer know what straight or heterosexual means when it’s regarding a trans person.

This is the problem when language gets changed. We are all confused. It's a word soup designed to baffle.

To be perfectly honest, I no longer know what straight or heterosexual means when it’s regarding a trans person.

From the government’s website:

Sexual orientation

The 2017 LGBT survey shows that 85.2% of all transgender and non-binary people have a sexual orientation that is not heterosexual (5.4% of respondents chose not to disclose their sexual orientation). The full breakdown of sexual orientation in displayed in Table 3 below.
Table 3: Sexual orientation breakdown of transgender and non-binary people

Only 9.4% of transwomen are straight, ie. attracted to women, so for the vast majority of them you don't have the right equipment so you are getting worked up over nothing.

you do realise that calling a transwoman who is attracted to women “straight” makes you the transphobiest of transphobes?

Only 9.4% of transwomen are straight, ie. attracted to women, so for the vast majority of them you don't have the right equipment so you are getting worked up over nothing.

And at least 9.4% of statistics are completely made up.

It is fits though, doesn’t it, believing everyone on the planet knows a European fairytale while then seeming to actively dismiss the realities currently facing lesbians?

It really just shows the complete and utter disconnected thinking of some people. That their experience in life is the norm and they don’t mind showing their own ignorance on a board that has many posters from around the world active on it, dismissing them as easily as they seemed to be dismissing lesbian experiences.

Cross posted with you Mrs T!

The summary of the Emperor’s New Clothes mentioned upthread is slightly different to my recollection of the tale. I recall that the spin about these fine new tailored clothes (which of course, didn’t exist) was that only intelligent people could see them. So of course everyone wanted to be seen as intelligent and went along with it, saying oh what marvellous elegant clothes. Then a little boy pipes up with the truth: “But he’s not wearing any clothes!”

This reminds me of my DC piping up “that’s a man!” when the BBC were interviewing a trans-identified marathon runner, who was wearing a sports bra and rainbows and spouting “Girl Power”.

Children may well have to become the adults in the room in this stunning and brave new world.

And interesting thing about the Emperors New Clothes is that once a child bursts the bubble and points out the reality, everyone can relax and common sense prevails. Despite being the emperor he’s laughed at and runs away naked IIRC, presumably to put some clothes on.

But people have been pointing out the facts on this for years and years now, and it’s still being enshrined into law and people are still being bullied and losing their jobs and being accused of hate - for simply understanding reality. I do think gender ideology (as opposed to gender nonconformity, which I don’t have a problem with at all) will come to an end and be consigned to history - and hopefully people will be able to have whatever (basically decent) gender expression they like without that meaning they can claim access to the opposite sex’s rights and spaces. But it’s funny how modern society has kind of shunned reality as an important thing, in favour of “identity”, so the believers continue to insist despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Maybe some people aren’t familiar with the story and have been wondering what the Emperor’s New Clothes is/are and why it’s sometimes used to illustrate the gaslighting that has been going on? Just a thought!

Thanks for giving a summary of the Emperors New Clothes as its a little known story. You couldn't tell us what Cinderella is about while your at it? Lol...sorry couldn't resist.

Ha ha, exactly whatever I was thinking

Agree with this @InefficientProcess - “criminalising thoughts and opinions”. Very 1984.

Younger people are scared to voice opinions on serious issues; they’re worried about not having the “correct thoughts” and think you have to join a side and be in or out. They see knee-jerk reactions to all issues on SM and think that this is how to “have an opinion” and that everyone on the “other side” is “hateful”. It’s very worrying.

You also don’t seem to have read and interacted with Frood’s post as it is written.

Lesbians declaring their own boundaries have indeed been described as ‘homophobic’ and ‘hateful’. In some states in Australia, lesbians cannot meet while excluding males who declare they are lesbian. Here in the UK, lesbian events have been blocked or cancelled by venues for being female only. Plus lesbian meetings such as the launch of ‘The Lesbian Project’ was heavily protested and protesters attempted to drown out the speakers inside the building.

You don’t seem all that up to date with what is happening to Lesbians who define their boundaries as being female only, or you are actively dismissing their needs with that seemingly breezy, yet inaccurate at collective level, “You are not obligated to be attracted to them, and nor is it hate or homophobia.”

Or did you also miss Nancy Kelley’s comments as the CEO of stonewall? Or a QC in the Allison Bailey case comparing some lesbians conduct as like appartheid? Here you go, just so you can get some background.

https://unherd.com/thepost/qc-compares-lesbians-refusing-sex-with-transwomen-to-apartheid/

However, I also suggest you look at social media interactions where males declaring themselves to be lesbians abuse and threaten lesbians on line when they are rejected. And we have had threads here where lesbians have told their stories of being abused for stating that they will not have sex with a male who has declared that they are lesbian.

Whatever your motivation for dismissing what is happening, it doesn’t seem to be based in the reality of being a lesbian that the post you were answering is.

Are you denying a lesbian’s lived experience of being told that they are homophobic and a hater? Or are you agreeing that it is not hate or homophobia, but instead you are dismissing that this is happening in real life? And downplaying it possibly happening because you believe that 9.4% of trans people are, or is it just that they identify as, heterosexual. And you have read that statistic as a male person being attracted to a female person, and not looked at whether the statistic is self identifying themselves as homosexual or bisexual or even queer?

If your personal sense of identity is contingent on policing how everyone else thinks and criminalising anyone who isn’t affirming the things you want to be true, then you should really ask
yourself some searching questions.

Instead people just about ‘transphobe / transphobic’ and insist anyone who isn’t aligned with their activism is a nasty bigot who should be prosecuted for ‘hate crime’.

Originally the notion of hate crime was around an aggravating factor in relation to an actual crime. So it would be considered worse that you beat someone up purely out of hatred of black people or whatever.

But in the 2020s it’s slipped away from discussing the motivations for actual crime and instead become about criminalising thoughts and opinions. Even worse, political groups (small and big p) use this logic to avoid having to engage in debate in the basis that their opponents are depraved bigots.

However, most (probably nearly all) trans people don’t claim to have changed sex. They claim to have changed gender.

Really? What makes you think that most trans people don’t claim to have changed sex? I regularly see high profile trans activists and TW state that TW aren’t male or that it’s transphobic to call TW male or that TW are AHF.

Whatever has happened to the right to Free Speech?

(I know, it is under massive threat in USA, Australia, NZ and even the UK + other parts of Europe. It is insanity to equate stating biological facts with hate speech)

😂

How can scientific fact be a crime, let alone hateful? This is nuts: blurring the lines between hard fact - something that cannot be altered and therefore can’t be judged with any moral yardstick - and behaviour/opinion, which can be.

Do we judge the fact that the earth moves around the sun or that water boils at 100 degrees, and so on? Do we apply moral judgements to these facts? No, of course not - it’d be absurd.

So it’s absurd to apply a moral judgement to the biological fact that humans cannot change sex. It simply is the case.