Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think that Ian Huntley is most definitely not a woman?

525 replies

ATeardropExplodes · 28/12/2017 17:09

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/15/call-lian-child-killer-ian-huntley-has-told-inmates-call-feminine/

If anyone has any evidence to convince me otherwise please do enlighten me, thanks in advance.

OP posts:
Maryz · 31/12/2017 11:44

Imagine if you had to live with him Shock

I do hope he never has a daughter. Or a son for that matter. Or a wife/partner/gf.

He probably doesn't which is a bit of a relief.

GinSoddenWhore · 31/12/2017 12:09

If people just stopped engaging with him he'd give up. He does it on every feminist thread. I don't know why anybody bothers to respond to him, he's nothing more than a troll. Amusing himself with his big words on threads about issues that will never affect him.

JAPAB · 31/12/2017 12:22

CuriousaboutSamphire Now, you identify for me a natal man, living as a woman, for whom that is true!

Presumably you are asking me to identify a trans women who needs cervical screening? Well I can't because there aren't any. Only people with a cervix need this (irrespective of their gender, sexuality, skin colour, etc. etc.) People without a prostate do not need this screening (ditto).

Physical medical treatment is about parts. Are you one of the subset of men who do not have testicles (either because as someone with an XX chromosome you never had them, or you did once have them but they were removed for some reason, or maybe even lost in an accident)? then you do not need whatever medical treatment or screening may relate to them.

CuriousaboutSamphire · 31/12/2017 13:05

Presumably you are asking me to identify a trans women who needs cervical screening? Well I can't because there aren't any. No shit Sherlock! But you need to put that back into the wider context you created - without blathering on about gender, skin colour etc, none of which have anything to do with being female!

If you really want to start patronising about biology and physiology you need a bit more education.

And how did it feel when you typed that last bit, asking me about my physiology? Prurient wank fodder?

I'll ask again HOW DOES POSTING AS YOU DO MAKE YOU FEEL?

What power rush doe sit give you? How silly is that?

Lovesagin · 31/12/2017 13:06

I agree gin

CuriousaboutSamphire · 31/12/2017 13:07

I have to admit Gin I am using his ridiculousness to break up some heavy typing up I am doing. Occasionally I need some pure silliness to get me through the weight tome!

But you are right. I am feeding the troll and really should stop!

My apologies Smile

Datun · 31/12/2017 13:08

I'm wondering if English isn't JAPAB's first language?

Maybe that explains the slight incoherence.

FarFrom · 31/12/2017 13:30

Well the treatment of JAPAB here shows perfectly why many people who disagree with the stance of most of the posters on these threads don’t want to give their perspective on them.

JAPAB · 31/12/2017 13:30

CuriousaboutSamphire No shit Sherlock!

OK so what was your point? Only people with certain parts need treatment or screening related to those parts. If you either never had a part, or the part has been removed or lost, then you probably won't need certain types of screenings related to those parts. You know this, I know this. Neither of us ever thought any differently.

And how did it feel when you typed that last bit, asking me about my physiology? Prurient wank fodder?

That question wasn't aimed at you. It was just to make the point that physical medical treatment relating to parts is about those parts. Not that you didn't know that, but you for some reasons seem to think I don't.

Original poster
ATeardropExplodes · 31/12/2017 13:32

Well the treatment of JAPAB here shows perfectly why many people who disagree with the stance of most of the posters on these threads don’t want to give their perspective on them

Most of the posters on these threads have given their perspective on them, which is that they don't and will never see Ian Huntley as a woman.

If you would care to expand on your thought process that led to you thinking that Ian Huntley IS a woman, that would be fabulous. As that is what the thread is asking for.

OP posts:
CuriousaboutSamphire · 31/12/2017 13:35

Go on, be brave, answer the question... How does coming here to make non points, annoying so many other posters, being so bloody patronising make you feel?

You may have noticed that you have been instrumental in totally derailing OPs thread. Yes, posters like myself have lept too, but we reacted to your studied stupidity, What was your reason?

If you want to be part of a reasoned debate then be reasonable! You can be as contentious as you like without posting such glib gibberish! Try it, you might like it!

YetAnotherSpartacus · 31/12/2017 13:36

Well the treatment of JAPAB here shows perfectly why many people who disagree with the stance of most of the posters on these threads don’t want to give their perspective on them

JAPAB is a long-time goady fucker who has disrupted and drifted umpteen plus threads that were otherwise productive and interesting to those taking him seriously. The issue is his treatment of posters, not our treatment of him.

Maryz · 31/12/2017 13:49

FarFrom, have you seen how patient people have been before getting fed up?

Have you noticed how he pontificates but won't answer any questions?

JAPAB · 31/12/2017 14:05

CuriousaboutSamphire You may have noticed that you have been instrumental in totally derailing OPs thread. Yes, posters like myself have lept too, but we reacted to your studied stupidity, What was your reason?

My reason for what? My own posts have exclusively stuck to discussing points related to eith the OP or trans stuff in general. Well, apart from this one where I break my own rule of not engaging in personalisation. But nobody's perfect.

If you would like to get back to the topic then I suppose I am intrigued as to what point you think we are in disagreement about over the medical treatment stuff. But it is a free country and you don't have to answer.

Maryz · 31/12/2017 14:29

We are in disagreement about the definition of "woman" which most of us think means "adult human female". You have declared that it doesn't.

What is your definition of woman that includes all women and all transwomen (those men who have declared they are women, whether or not they have a GRC) but excludes men?

CuriousaboutSamphire · 31/12/2017 14:51

Nice! You have made some odd assertions, refused to answer questions, simply re-state your opinions and step sideways or ignore whenever you like.

That isn't a discussion.

You cam in at page 3 to say "Depends on your reasons. If you think the way someone acts or dresses precludes them from being a man or a woman then probably." OP and others had already explained their reasoning and then you ignored requests for you to outline what you thought!

You then nagged on about it being about wearing or not wearing a dress, despite there being a few posts that addressed that (pun unintended) and were generally patronising.

You haven't engaged in much of a 2-way exchange, except for trying to prove a point with me. You have discussed virtually nothing. Just made statements and ignored all else.

Show willing, answer Maryz question, from about page 4 (and on), see above.

SimonBridges · 31/12/2017 15:05

How does coming here to make non points, annoying so many other posters, being so bloody patronising make you feel?

I think it makes his willy go all tingly.

FarFrom · 31/12/2017 15:11

Simon, what a disgusting sexist comment.

I havent seen him as goady and think he has stuck to the debate. I have seen vile comments like the one above in response. It seems like you want to chase off anyone who disagrees with you.

Original poster
ATeardropExplodes · 31/12/2017 15:14

@FarFrom - could you please expand on the actual OP?

...your thought process that led to you thinking that Ian Huntley IS a woman, that would be fabulous.

or

What is your definition of woman that includes all women and all transwomen (those men who have declared they are women, whether or not they have a GRC) but excludes men?

That should get it back on track. Ta.

OP posts:
SimonBridges · 31/12/2017 15:19

How has he stuck to the debate?

CuriousaboutSamphire · 31/12/2017 15:36

Simon, what a disgusting sexist comment. Do you also take issue with comments about accepting that a man is a woman, just because he says so... JAPABs original, now slightly modified, stance!

Original poster
ATeardropExplodes · 31/12/2017 15:37

Simon, what a disgusting sexist comment.

How can it be sexist when women can have penises too?

OP posts:
CuriousaboutSamphire · 31/12/2017 15:58

Oh! You most definitely win with that comment, Teardrop I bow down to your most superior wit Grin

I have file it away under: Obvious response, to be used often

hungryhippo90 · 31/12/2017 16:06

Is JAPAB Katie?

Original poster
ATeardropExplodes · 31/12/2017 16:21

Oh! You most definitely win with that comment, Teardrop I bow down to your most superior wit

Thank you [obvs because I am so confused about my gender.]

OP posts: