Charlie Kirk assassin was living with trans roommate

The original comment I responded to literally stated that trans people are MEN - that undeniably portrays very little understanding of the topic, whether or not that’s true. If you’re posting on a public forum where your views are going to end up in a very generic trending section then you cannot assume that everyone reading your comments is part of your group and capable of reading between the lines.

what the poster clearly meant was that the trans people your cause takes issue with are all men - what I don’t understand is how this rhetoric runs smoothly alongside the idea that people can present however they wants. For example
I don’t understand what’s been done
to ensure that boundaries aren’t blurred between protecting single sex spaces and demonising trans people, it seems like the former can only be achieved by latter and that is where I fundamentally disagree.

I didn’t realise I was a ‘newbie’ stumbling across a well established group - this is not clear when your threads appear in the trending section.

I’m not going to apologise for protecting trans people - I appreciate now how my comment is out of place - it’s impossible to understand your original comment unless you move in the same circles as you do.

I think you’re blurring the lines between having something you want to protect and being hateful as a way to protect it, I don’t think that’s right, regardless of the cause.

Nope - this post was on the trending section and I thought it was about the misinformation in the original article.

this is my point, it’s not hard to ‘find your way here’ and be immediately shot down by people that apparently have a meaningful cause to protect.

A word of advice; you get what you give out. If you don't want to be shot down, don't come in as a newbie and call a regular 'hateful'.

Have a look at your own tone. You are disrespectful, rude and hateful. All you had to do was say sorry to me. But I don't respond well to attack. Especially when I did nothing wrong.

So start that new thread and ask your questions.

If you are genuinely ‘opened minded’, I would suggest not posting as if you are genuinely opened minded and that your very first post doesn’t come from a place where you have assumed posters on this board are ignorant hateful bigots. Otherwise, you will not get the answers you seek, you will just get people responding to your own perceived view about posters on this board.

And we have had so many of those over years and years of posts, which all follow a script. The script goes:

OP opening post: which expresses view that people on this board are ignorant hateful bigots.

Posters: no we are not,

OP : well I came here to find out more

Posters: no you just name called and don’t seem to be able to engage in the discussion you said you wanted without belittling us

OP : you are all just as hateful as I thought , I am off and flounces.

Nope - this post was on the trending section and I thought it was about the misinformation in the original article.

this is my point, it’s not hard to ‘find your way here’ and be immediately shot down by people that apparently have a meaningful cause to protect.

I do think it’s hateful to talk about topics like this in such a close minded way, especially if the discussion is taking place on what is, above all else a public forum. You aren’t having these discussions in private spaces (this thread appeared on the trending section). It’s clear you don’t want people like me to understand your POV, you only want people who already agree with you to join in the discussion. I was interested in what people had to say, particularly understanding more about how the rhetoric isn’t anti-trans but I don’t think I’m going to get any level headed explanation or discussion from this group of people so - disengage I guess.

but I hope you understand that once I was corrected about what this discussion board was, I admitted I didn’t understand, changed my tact and opened my mind. I have been instantly shot down, I don’t think your groups approach is very effective to your cause - which does leave me with the conclusion that it is just hateful, and not informative or respectful.

If you and other posters don’t feel it’s your responsibility to inform, then maybe don’t engage in the first place - yourself and others did not have to reply.

I do think it’s hateful to talk about topics like this in such a close minded way, especially if the discussion is taking place on what is, above all else a public forum. You aren’t having these discussions in private spaces (this thread appeared on the trending section). It’s clear you don’t want people like me to understand your POV, you only want people who already agree with you to join in the discussion. I was interested in what people had to say, particularly understanding more about how the rhetoric isn’t anti-trans but I don’t think I’m going to get any level headed explanation or discussion from this group of people so - disengage I guess.

but I hope you understand that once I was corrected about what this discussion board was, I admitted I didn’t understand, changed my tact and opened my mind. I have been instantly shot down, I don’t think your groups approach is very effective to your cause - which does leave me with the conclusion that it is just hateful, and not informative or respectful.

If you and other posters don’t feel it’s your responsibility to inform, then maybe don’t engage in the first place - yourself and others did not have to reply.

This whole sub forum is intended for discussions on all issues related to women's sex based rights and the negative impact of trans ideology on them, and on children. You surely knew that when you found your way here?

Women cannot become male, no matter how they identify. It is not about 'hatred' it is about learning to live with reality and recognising that sex actually does matter is certain situations and circumstances. People can present how they please within certain social boundaries, but female spaces and categories are for female people only - for good reason.

Yeah tbf I just saw this in the trending section - I don’t really understand how the comments have then spiralled from trying to filter out misinformation to what they have but it seems you guys have a whole thing going on! I’d like to understand better but I fear I’ll be shouted down

You barged in thinking you had a 'gotcha', and called me hateful. When all along you had no idea what you were even talking about - so no one would ever call your replies "respectful and informative".😂

not that this is the point of the thread but… are you aware transitions can go both ways? How do you feel about women transitioning to men? Are they also ‘MALE’? Respectfully, it sounds like you’re confused about who you have a ‘hatred’ for.

but again, your comment has no relevance to the original thread and therefore is just hate speech, do you just search for threads with trans in the title so you can get all shouty about something you appear to have very little understanding of?

Yeah tbf I just saw this in the trending section - I don’t really understand how the comments have then spiralled from trying to filter out misinformation to what they have but it seems you guys have a whole thing going on! I’d like to understand better but I fear I’ll be shouted down

Agree and disagree. I don't think it necessarily aligns to a political party orientation - much has been written lately about how the alt-right and the alt-left overlap in weird ways - but I literally cannot imagine a trans person in 2025 being in a relationship with someone who was not supportive of trans ideology, and not just that but who didn't see "trans rights" as an overriding mission.

Has there been confirmation that he was LDS?

From what I know of Mormon mummy blogs, it's a very tightly knit world, where most people his age will be thinking about going on missions or getting married. Even if you are at the more 'liberal' end of the spectrum, there seems to be a strong expectation that you will get married young and have at least four children, and spend the rest of your life taking on responsibilities within the church that are pretty much a full time job.

It's not like being a lapsed catholic or non practicing jew where there is a pattern for remaining part of the community even if you don't believe. Its much more 'you're in or you're out'.

There are so many parts of this shooting that are difficult to fathom from the other side of the pond.

Okay this is genuinely interesting to me - and not something I previously understood.

I still don’t really understand, so if you are empathic and protective towards women who hold the philosophical belief that they are male, you must also respect that there are people born male who hold the philosophical belief they are female? How are they then separated from the men who presumably you find a threat to female only spaces because they don’t in fact hold that belief but use it as an excuse to infiltrate spaces that don’t belong on them?

Has there been confirmation that he was LDS?

From what I know of Mormon mummy blogs, it's a very tightly knit world, where most people his age will be thinking about going on missions or getting married. Even if you are at the more 'liberal' end of the spectrum, there seems to be a strong expectation that you will get married young and have at least four children, and spend the rest of your life taking on responsibilities within the church that are pretty much a full time job.

It's not like being a lapsed catholic or non practicing jew where there is a pattern for remaining part of the community even if you don't believe. Its much more 'you're in or you're out'.

There are so many parts of this shooting that are difficult to fathom from the other side of the pond.

I’ve responded to a poster who’s reply was more respectful and informative ☺️

do you just search for threads with trans in the title

I think that might be you.

This is the feminism sex and gender discussion board, and the post you referenced was about men.

Firstly, if you knew anything at all about this, you would know that we have no problem with females who transition to men. As they are females and hence no....threat.....to.....us. Do you need that explained any slower to you? It's apparent that you have absolutely no understanding of the issue at all and seem to think you have a 'gotcha' (trans men) that we somehow haven't had at least 4 thousand posters use on us before.

Secondly, my response was to a poster's comment. I was replying to their post. If saying (the basic common knowledge) that males are different than females and that females deserve single sex spaces is 'hate speech', then I suggest that is unhinged and you would be unhinged for saying basic biology and the rights of the female sex is 'hate speech'.

This is posted on the separated board set up to have discussions around how gender identity interacts with the needs and rights of female people. Anyone who uses this board regularly will likely be reading this thread.

Feminism is, of course, for all female people. That includes those female people who hold the philosophical belief that they are men or boys. Meaning that usually any discussion about the needs of female people includes that group of female people as well.

This is why accusations of being ‘anti-trans’ are false. Because many of our discussion points on female single sex provisions include female people who have transgender identities, but not male people. Therefore not ‘anti’ trans, just female focused.