Page 31 | Ian Huntley ! This is wrong...

Bowlofbabelfish · 10/12/2018 19:50

Ramekin Petri dish :)

Rufusthebewilderedreindeer · 10/12/2018 19:50

Oh dish

After your husband

VerbeenaBeeks · 10/12/2018 19:51

datun bowl has. Re-read

Cross posted. Already have as you can see from my last post.

ErrolTheDragon · 10/12/2018 19:53

The last few posts between rufus and bowl made more sense than anything else recently on this thread TBH.

Rufusthebewilderedreindeer · 10/12/2018 19:56

Thats why ive been hiding errol

Then i saw bowls post and thought

Yay...im back in the game!!!

Now if someone would just explain the rules...

Fairenuff · 10/12/2018 19:56

Guys, Verneeba is never, ever, ever going to answer that. They would rather keep posting that they have already answered it on page x, y, z.

They haven't answered it. They're not going to.

If they were it could be done and dusted by now.

As I said, never gonna happen.

Bowlofbabelfish · 10/12/2018 19:57

No it means I’m working on about 2 hours sleep a night, so I’m a bit tired, and may have missed your post.

Wanting men NEVER to be locked up with women isn’t an extreme stance.

If thevsystem is being created so that dangerous men like Huntley CAN abuse it, it’s not fit for purpose.

We cannot do case by case - we’ve already seen it fail (Karen white.) we’ve already seen that sex offenders in positions of influence will subvert the system (Gordon pike, convicted sex offender, who helped set transgender prisoner policy in Scotland.)

We cannot do a blanket self ID - that would result in a zero gatekeeping situation where any male prisoner can get into women’s estate.

The ONLY safe way is never to lock men and women up together.

I cannot even begin to imagine how the soham families feel reading this sort of stuff. My heart goes out to them, and I am furious that violent men are abusing their victims all over again like this. Furious.

Rufusthebewilderedreindeer · 10/12/2018 19:57

Guys??

Bloody lucky we arent on FWR

VerbeenaBeeks · 10/12/2018 19:58

NonExistentFox Actually no, I'd still be on the fence if it weren't for the FWR board

Hear what you're saying there, as I used to engage being concerned about self ID until I saw the extremism.
Not everybody agrees with the extremists. Turns people away once they see it.

VerbeenaBeeks · 10/12/2018 20:00

Guys, Verneeba is never, ever, ever going to answer that. They would rather keep posting that they have already answered it on page x, y, They haven't answered it. They're not going to

She. but you know that really
Yes, I have. It's there. Even when people mention extreme positions you get lolz and
They don't want to know.

VisitorsEntrance · 10/12/2018 20:01

Are you saying that you acknowledge transwomen will always be a man but you will include them anyway
Or
That at some point they stop being a man and become a woman?

Fairenuff · 10/12/2018 20:02

Sh, Bowl might hear you

VerbeenaBeeks · 10/12/2018 20:02

I cannot even begin to imagine how the soham families feel reading this sort of stuff. My heart goes out to them, and I am furious that violent men are abusing their victims all over again like this. Furious

Same, which is why self ID is a ridiculous idea

Bowlofbabelfish · 10/12/2018 20:02

What about my stance is extreme?

As I said, it’s consistent with the status quo and the law of the land.

No men in women’s jails. Go stand on any high street and ask people: should we make prisons mixed sex? See how many say yes.

ErrolTheDragon · 10/12/2018 20:03

The ONLY safe way is never to lock men and women up together.

Thats a rational starting point - then, work out how to keep subgroups of males safe from others.

Bowlofbabelfish · 10/12/2018 20:13

Absolutely. Nobody should be unsafe in prison. We may need specialist vulnerable prisoner units or specialist provision inside male estate. Transwomen have to be safe if incarcerated.
The women’s estate is not the answer. Mixed sex prisons are not Ok.

Ereshkigal · 10/12/2018 20:21

Honestly, genuinely, that made me laugh out loud

Fox is good value.

VerbeenaBeeks · 10/12/2018 20:27

eresh Fox is good value.

So are you, you're one of the reasons things get repeated so much

Ereshkigal · 10/12/2018 20:28

What things would they be? Your goady refusal to answer simple questions?

sackrifice · 10/12/2018 20:28

Does having a baby mean you can't see extremism when it's staring you in the face?

Even you can't see extremism as you are unable to either requote it or direct anyone to the time you posted it.

Weird that.

VerbeenaBeeks · 10/12/2018 20:29

eresh What things would they be? Your goady refusal to answer simple questions?

I've been answering

Ereshkigal · 10/12/2018 20:31

No you haven't. People have asked you where you draw the line so they can discover what "extremism" (lol) is. You haven't answered that in any coherent way.

Is it bottom surgery, Verbeena?

VerbeenaBeeks · 10/12/2018 20:35

sackrifice Even you can't see extremism as you are unable to either requote it or direct anyone to the time you posted it.

I CAN see it, which is why I know it is absolutely pointless saying it again for the ones at the back playing faux innocence, as to them it isn't extreme. So they don't see it when it's there

VerbeenaBeeks · 10/12/2018 20:39

No you haven't

The bit you said that to and quoted I was answering the fact that some won't see extremism even when it's pointed out.
I keep saying I'm not saying no to all transwomen which you us all to say.

Bowlofbabelfish · 10/12/2018 20:39

I’m not being faux innocent. I’m politely but directly challenging on you on your opinion that prisons should be mixed sexual and that disagreeing with that is in some way extremist.

Because I think that’s a very dangerous opinion, and will result in a lot of harm to women