To be disappointed Dolly Parton supported biological men using women's toilets?

[Jane3212]

I really liked her music and she seemed like a nice person: her Imagination Library came to my borough recently. I was very sad to hear she'd died.
But was very disappointed to read this. The statements she made about trans people deserving respect, no issue with those.
But minimising the reasonable concerns women have about being forced to let men in their toilets was wrong.
I'm not saying she should have spoken out for GC issues. It might have been best just not to comment.
Parton had connections with drag queens and I wonder if that's the lens she saw transwomen through : not an excuse but might partially explain.

Don’t think anyone would blame you for bowing out. Comprehension is sorely lacking.

You may wanna Google irony. I'm absolutely happy to discuss the claims I posted on this clthreqd to refute mostly for misinformation. They're apparently commonly known facts amongst GC posters and yet the misinformation posters have left and you guys are arguing what exactly? You certainly don't wanna provide the evidence that other posters and I were responding to or explain why it's reasonable to attack Dolly on this statement because of the supreme court ruling. You're simple here to take offense at people who called out GC posters for either being transphobic, posting misinformation, or just explaining how silly you look being disappointed in Dolly.

I know right.

I’ve to go on a call anyway.

@TheKeatingFive where did I quote you as saying any of these things? Why, unless you're aligned with those opinions, are you taking those comments as aimed at you? It's weird / telling.

I’m not disappointed in Dolly. I’m her biggest fan. Regardless of her thoughts on toilets.

I think the earlier suggestion of a herbal tea was a good one as your posts aren’t making much sense, sorry.

It's not the point of the thread, it's a derail you came in with after RTFT which was already pointed out to you by multiple posters but somehow a comment actually aimed at you didn't get responded to but you're rolling your sleeves up on behalf of GC men.

What exactly were you saying with this sentence then :

It’s almost funny because FWR is full of TRAs cruising by to rile women up. I’d never describe it as being solely women or solely feminist.

You're welcome to ask me to clarify what you can't understand rather than using a misogynistic trope that a woman with an opinion needs to go have a cup of tea.

I’d say the same to a man who had the same ramblings.

Good faith discussion on a forum is usually bypassing posts you don't understand or want to engage with, or you engage in good faith so if you didn't understand something you would ask. You're just showing the exact behaviour people see with FWR posters which is derailing and strawmanning and then acting childish when it's pointed out. Again, it's interesting that anyone could be surprised that a space with such behaviours is frequented by a lot of men. Women don't talk like this especially when speaking to other women. You're not trying to discuss or understand anyone else's point of view or to debate in good faith.

I'd love to see you say it to some of the right wing men rambles on FWR for once

I think you should take your own advice.

I will when you explain, rationally, why women wanting to protect their single sex spaces and sports is problematic.

Except I'm already engaging in good faith. Any post I've responded to I've made clear which sort I was questioning or calling out. I haven't quoted anyone's post with just a "lol this is AI/primary school/ handmaiden" stuff underneath. I've said I'll happily clarify any single thing you feel makes no sense in my posts. But as the MRA behaviour has been out in force already on this thread let's see if you do usual thing of having a last word strop even when it makes no sense or you could respond genuinely quoting a part of any of my pairs you're accusing of not making sense.

I'm not engaging with derails. This thread is about why Dolly's words are problematic, and because they are so obviously not a bunch of you keep trying to derail it into a different trans discussion.

Good because it’s not a derail. The OP highlighted Dolly’s comments that correlate to single sex spaces and women’s rights to them. It’s very relevant. Discussion naturally evolves.

I’m not sure why this is so difficult to understand.

If anyone is derailing it’s bringing up all the far right women hating men on FWR (what have they got to do with Dolly) that no one apart from proponents of trans ideology appears to have engaged with.

And that right was apparently the supreme court ruling...which has nothing to do with why that should have any bearing on Dolly's thoughts or opinions. I'm not sure why that's so difficult to understand.
No one started a thread saying what you're trying to derail to. Someone tried to be disappointed with Dolly and others pointed out its problematic to be so focused on one issue you don't see how ridiculous it is to be "disappointed" by Dolly Parton. So then, as @WouldYouLikeAnyToast I believe, some GC posters have been trying to get someone to argue a different trans point.

If you want to start or read a thread on if SSS there are plenty of FWR, but you know that.

Again if you RTFT or perhaps like your friend Keating you didn't, that was brought up because a GC posters accused me and others of being male centred 'fun feminists for the lads" in which case yeah I am gonna bring up that posters like that don't take any issue with male GC posters being misogynistic. Keep up or RTFT before joining in.

Edited to add: because I'm sure you'll say "but I didn't say that!" I know. But if you insert yourself in the middle of two papers who are having that discussion then don't be surprised it's obvious you agree with one of them.

You aren’t the thread police, people can introduce points that are relevant, and SSS is to this one, if they like. Trans obviously comes into it as trans ideology wants to dismantle SSS. I think you need to learn how discussion forums work.

Since I haven't reported or suggested it's deleted I'm not policing you by naming what you're doing and saying I don't want to engage with it. You also don't get to get worked up that posters aren't engaging with your derail - it's not mandatory to engage in side discussions.

Prioritising confused men’s feelings over the right of women to have spaces just for their own sex voids one as a ‘feminist’.

So don’t. Stop blowing hot air and let those who want to discuss single sex spaces if they want. It’s relevant to the discussion. All you’ve done is demand a poster answer to you.

You don't even know what I prioritise 😂 I even explained in one of my earliest posts what I see as the difference between GC feminism and trabsphobia. The latter being the spreading of misinformation about it it trans people for example. It's just straw man after strawman

So by your own definition you were derailing then. On this thread.

You don’t appear to know what ‘GC feminism’ is.