Should breast implants for males be made illegal?

A whiff of AI, but hey that's the way the world is going.

The posts are pointless becasue we can DARVO her DARVO and so on ad infinitum. I'll be back if she explains how people can change sex.

Not on the NHS. Privately they can do what they want.

As if the NHS doesn't have enough budget problems as it is.

nice of "kate" to outline their tactics in the two interminable Copy/Pasted posts above.

you may be willing to sacrifice provision for people with disabilities by throwing them under the trans bus, but i am not.

Men can budge up and let all men use their facilities. Women and people who need accessible toilets can keep ours.

happy to say i did report one of the tedious "no you smell" posts and it was deleted.

Following on from my post about DARVO, I want to name something more specific: how these tactics play out in practice on forums like this one. Because once you've posted something trans-inclusive, you'll likely encounter a very recognisable set of moves.

Misrepresentation (Deny, reloaded)
The first tactic is putting words in your mouth.

• "So you're saying women don't deserve safe spaces" — you said no such thing
• "You just admitted trans women aren't really women" — you didn't
• Quoting you out of context, or paraphrasing so loosely it becomes a different argument entirely
• Then defending the misrepresentation when you correct it: "that's what you implied"

This is denial applied to your position rather than their own. It forces you to spend your energy correcting the record rather than making your actual argument.

Claiming victimhood from the exchange itself (Attack + Reverse)
The moment you push back, the goalposts move to the tone of your pushback.

• "You're being really aggressive" — when you're not
• "This is exactly the abuse trans activists dish out" — for a calm, evidenced response
• "I feel unsafe having this conversation" — deployed to shut down legitimate challenge
• Reporting posts that contain no rule violations, then citing the report as evidence of harassment

Note: this works especially well on forums because moderators see the complaint, not the full context.

Argument by silence
Perhaps the most insidious one.

• If you don't reply, it's taken as agreement or concession: "notice she hasn't answered that"
• If you do reply, the volume of responses is used against you: "obsessed," "can't let it go"
• Taking a break from a thread is framed as running away
• Not engaging with every single point is presented as being unable to

This is a trap. There is no correct response within the rules they've set, because the rules exist to make you lose regardless.

Demanding you prove a negative

• "Prove trans women aren't a safeguarding risk" — an unfalsifiable demand
• "You can't name one harm caused by GC campaigning" — when you can, it's dismissed as anecdote
• "Where's your evidence?" asked in bad faith, with any evidence immediately reframed as biased

The consensus manufacture

• "Everyone here agrees with me" — used to make dissent feel isolated
• Piling on with multiple posters making the same point to create an impression of overwhelming agreement
• "Even other trans-inclusive people think you've gone too far"

How to handle it
You don't have to. Seriously. DARVO and its forum variants are specifically designed to make you exhaust yourself justifying your existence in the conversation. You're allowed to name the tactic once, clearly, and then decline to engage further. "I've addressed this, I won't be responding to misrepresentations of my position" is a complete sentence.

Silence is not concession. Disengaging is not losing. And recognising the playbook means you're not confused by it — even when it's frustrating.

That's all very well, but you are just defending the mantras of TWAW and TMAM. You are not offering any explanation for why anyone should believe the mantras in the first place.

🤣🤣

Sacrosanct is not practical. There's not enough space in most places for four spaces.

It's interesting how quickly the quality of 'Kate's' posts deteriorated.

SockPlant, I am reminded of the adage "Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig likes it". No point arguing with the pig-headed, nor indeed paying any attention to them at all.

And the thread, as so many others, has been quite excessively derailed by the lackwits who drag their own personal brand of meaningless and irrelevant mud into every discussion. I apologise for contributing to the silliness; I'll try to resist doing it again..

I have and always will stand in solidarity with trans people. I'm a feminist and a survivor. I say that because I know what it looks like when someone uses the language of safety and protection to avoid accountability and silence the people they've harmed. I've lived it. That experience is exactly why I support trans people — not in spite of understanding abuse dynamics, but because of it. When I look at gender-critical rhetoric, I recognise the DARVO playbook.

DARVO - Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender to avoid accountability for harm — they deny the harm exists, attack anyone raising it, then reframe themselves as the real victims. It's well-documented in abuse literature and it maps almost perfectly onto anti-trans campaigning.

DENY
The real, documented harm trans people face — discrimination, exclusion, violence, years-long waits for healthcare — gets minimised or dismissed outright.

• "Trans people have more rights than ever" (so there's nothing to complain about)
• Transition is framed as a "social contagion" or "trend" — if trans identity isn't real, the harm isn't real either
• The exclusion of trans people from public life is treated as having no consequences worth discussing

ATTACK
Rather than engaging with the substance, the tactic is to go after the credibility and character of trans people and anyone who supports them.

• Trans women are framed as predators or fetishists
• Trans men are framed as confused lesbians, denying them any agency
• Allies are dismissed as "handmaidens," cowards, ideologically captured, too stupid to understand. They are intentionally misquoted to provoke a response. Their refusal to engage is misquoted as “well that must mean xxx” or “goes to show I’m right” again to belittle, demean and provoke a response.
• Doctors, researchers, and organisations supporting trans healthcare are accused of acting in bad faith or for profit
• The term "TERF" is itself weaponised as evidence of harassment — so naming the tactic becomes the attack
• Academic and medical consensus on gender-affirming care is dismissed as "activist science"
• Detransitioners are platformed and used to delegitimise the broader community
• The unvalidated "rapid onset gender dysphoria" hypothesis is cited repeatedly to imply parents and clinicians are being manipulated
• Organisations like Stonewall and Mermaids are recast as sinister lobby groups rather than civil rights organisations
• Trans women in sport — a vanishingly small real-world issue — are amplified to paint all trans women as inherently deceptive
• The language of child safeguarding is invoked to imply trans-inclusive teachers and clinicians are predatory — a serious smear borrowing the moral weight of a genuine concern and redirecting it as a character attack

REVERSE VICTIM AND OFFENDER
This is the core move. The actual power dynamic gets flipped.

• Women are cast as endangered, with trans women specifically as the threat — despite trans women being among the most at-risk groups in society
• A well-funded, media-connected campaign presents itself as brave underdogs being silenced
• "I lost my job for saying women are female" becomes the headline oppression, drowning out trans people's actual experiences
• Lesbian identity is framed as under siege by trans inclusion, so exclusion gets repackaged as self-defence
• Trans-affirming care for children is labelled "gender ideology" harming kids — making the people providing care look like the abusers

Why this matters
DARVO works because it forces the people seeking basic rights onto the defensive. Trans people end up having to justify their existence rather than the policy question supposedly being debated. The asymmetry is telling: one side is asking to exist in public life. The other has reframed that ask as an attack on women.

Once you know the framework, the playbook is very clear. It’s been clear in all the anti trans messages on here. It will be clear no doubt in the replies. I -‘and others - see the manipulation you all use.

Because those men also want to be in womens prisons, womens refuges, womens rape therapy groups, womens changing rooms etc etc

And I don't want men in the womens toilets

nope. @NameChangeMay2026

Those spaces were hard fought for, harder than women fought for our spaces i think.
They are sacrosanct.

I don't see what the issue is with sharing loos with trans women. Most of you probably have done so and have no idea.

But there's not enough space for four different loo-spaces in many places. It's just not practical. The disabled loos are usually empty anyway. Why can't the third space be for disabled and Unisex?

you are trolling this thread now and not in good faith.

We are asking you how to move forward and you are spewing forth the regular tra shitposting points.

You are the very worst type of handmaiden.

yes, sorry, my apologies.

Thank you for so conclusively proving my point.

hi DARVO 👏

Trans women are men. Otherwise, what does the “trans” stand for?

Four please. The third is taken. It’s for disabled people.

You can't transition to be a woman, women never ever transition to be women. Only men can transition to be a transwoman, that's how transwomen are 'not exactly the same' - it's because they're biological men.

If transwomen say they are transwomen then yes, they are who they say they are. A transwoman is not a type of woman, there aren't different types of women, either you are one or you're not. A transwoman is a man who wants to be a woman - and that's as close to being a woman as they can get.

Why are transwomen so keen to be objectified and compared to an inanimate object that's only job is to sit and look pretty? I guess they think women are really just dolls, their only job to look pretty and be a plaything for men. It's just really grim IMO.

Not exactly the same, no,

Transphobe!