To be bored of the trans hate?

[DaisyUpsy]

Ok, there are extremists (like the punch people in the face person), extremists can be found in many areas of life but is anyone else fed up of the trans stuff constantly being dragged up?

I've seen some ridiculous statements on here recently. Everything gets something added related to trans when it's totally irrelevant. It's getting boring. Trans extremists are not the norm so can we stop pretending they are?

Anyone that willingly shares a platform with Pauline Hanson needs their head checked.

Can you tell us what Pauline said on the day (apart from ridiculously campaigning for votes) that you disagree with? I am very familiar with Pauline and I disagree with much of her manifesto, but now is the time for you to stop ad hom attacks and be clear what she actually said that you disagree with.

So you cannot back up your accusation at all?

And you think people will not read what was said and think you interpretation is dishonest?

"Maybe you carry, maybe you don't."

(Maybe you carry (a gun), maybe you don't.)

I think you should start using Women's toilets

How am I reading that wrong?

I just find it very uncomfortable language, as I find the threats from the TRA side to be completely unacceptable. I think both things should be taken very seriously and would seek to distance myself from that sort of rhetoric. I don't think it's good, especially in a country where people get shot all the time

I haven't attacked anyone. I have given my opinion on something that was said that I consider to be of dubious intent. People are calling me stupid.

And if you know Hanson well then why are you questioning why I would view someone with disdain for sharing a platform with her? People earlier were saying she didn't endorse Are Tommy, but if she's endorsing old plz explain then she's not my cup of tea for sure

"...and men? for once, I'm talking to you. I'm talking about you Dads who maybe 'carry' I think that's something that you say? I'm so down with the American lingo! Maybe you carry, maybe you don't. Maybe you consider yourself a protector of women. Maybe you're that sort of man. Maybe you have a daughter, or a Mother, or a wife. Maybe you have a sister. Maybe you just have some friends. Maybe you just think that women are human and you don't need any absolute connection with them to feel compelled to protect us."

"I think you should start using Women's toilets, men. Because you have every right to self identify. Clearly; don't do it and upset women and girls that are already in there, but just make a point of doing it. And maybe make the women feel ok about you doing it. If, you know, if you come out and you frighten someone. But it's about time you started using Women's toilets and saying that you identify as a woman, if stopped. And I think that's how you're gonna have to... that's one of the many ways that you are going to have to combat the insanity of self-ID Even if it's not called self-ID, that's pretty much what you have, now, in the United States. And that's how you men are gonna help."

How are you reading that wrong?

Because you have neglected to show that she ever says that they should carry them into the toilet. Because she DIDN'T say that. Read the entire transcript and see the context.

I will repeat what I said in my post.

"It is making the point about those men who seek to protect their family members by carrying guns as one way they do that, can choose to simply use the same tactic of ‘self-ID’ to enter the female toilets and not only show society how ridiculous self-ID is, but to go in with their families because now no male can be kept out. "

If you were so concerned about this, why don't you ask her to clarify it for you. Contact her and ask.

She DID say that men should start using women's toilets. I have already said that this was the wrong approach. But the 'carrying' guns point was about "Maybe you consider yourself a protector of women. Maybe you're that sort of man."

What part of that do you not understand, the sentences that follow make it rather clear that she was talking about a type of 'man' who wishes to protect his family.

Yet you said she told men to shoot trans people.

You don't seem to have great comprehensive skills.

Posie may not be be perfect but I dread to think where we would be without her.

This. Her Let Women Speak events have been amazing. There is a need for all kinds of people in this fight.

Posie isn't perfect but she has the courage of her conviction and the conviction of her courage. She is wonderful.

I know Pauline Hanson. She doesn't have to be yours or my 'cup of tea'.

Address what she said, stop attacking people for either what they haven't actually said or by guilt by association. Guilt by association is a very lazy discussion tactic.

Yes. Hanson has her issues. Please tell us what she said on the day about the rights of women and children that you specifically disagree with.

Does she not have the right to speak at a public open mic event that allows any female to speak? Yes or no?

Just because you don't like her, and nor do I, doesn't make her wrong on her points. Until you provide the points you disagree with her about for women and children's rights, all you have done is condemn her for her politics and condemn any other woman who spoke that day and the organisers.

And yet, you cannot produce the talking points about women and children's rights that you disagree with her about.

What part of that do you not understand

So the men who carry guns, which in lots of states they do every day, openly and also concealed, are to leave their weapons at home that day, and go into women's toilets.

You question my comprehension but I question your ability to read between the lines of that.

Like I said I don't need or want to associate myself with that kind of rhetoric to be gender critical.

She doesn't say that they should be there carrying guns!

YOU said "Posie wants men to come into women's toilets, bringing guns, to shoot trans people."

YOU have lied.

Sure some of the men might carry guns. Some of the women might be in their carrying guns too. I certainly disagree with people carrying guns. But she did not do what you insist that she did. It was an example of the type of man who :

"Maybe you consider yourself a protector of women. Maybe you're that sort of man."

But you need to address what was actually said and the intention rather than your mistaken comprehension of what was said. Which was false.

Pauline Hanson...is she not a woman? Who came to a Let Women Speak OPEN MIKE event? Where any woman can get up and speak?

Why shouldn't she be allowed to speak?

I mean, the clue is in the name of the actual event. It's not rocket science.

I agree.

There was no need to mention anything about guns or carrying, unless you wanted to make an indirect threat.

It is incredibly ill-advised. Both advocating that men should go into toilets and "make" women OK with that, and the heavy hint that maybe men who carry guns should do so.

"...and men? for once, I'm talking to you. I'm talking about you Dads who maybe 'carry' I think that's something that you say? I'm so down with the American lingo! Maybe you carry, maybe you don't. Maybe you consider yourself a protector of women. Maybe you're that sort of man. Maybe you have a daughter, or a Mother, or a wife. Maybe you have a sister. Maybe you just have some friends. Maybe you just think that women are human and you don't need any absolute connection with them to feel compelled to protect us."

"I think you should start using Women's toilets, men. Because you have every right to self identify. Clearly; don't do it and upset women and girls that are already in there, but just make a point of doing it. And maybe make the women feel ok about you doing it. If, you know, if you come out and you frighten someone. But it's about time you started using Women's toilets and saying that you identify as a woman, if stopped. And I think that's how you're gonna have to... that's one of the many ways that you are going to have to combat the insanity of self-ID Even if it's not called self-ID, that's pretty much what you have, now, in the United States. And that's how you men are gonna help."

What part of the second paragraph are you missing?

It is very clearly about those men going into the toilets and showing how 'self ID' works.

What part of the second paragraph says anything about using guns?

Please show us?

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/report-says-at-least-32-transgender-people-were-killed-in-the-u-s-in-2022

Interestingly less trans people died in America in the year of Posie's oft misqoted words. Less than the year before.

It takes a very bad faith interpretation to make that statement.

There was no 'heavy hint' at all. You have written bollocks.

You're being incredibly disingenuous and dishonest. The second paragraph directly follows on from the first and they are clearly part of the same train of thought.

Then why mention the guns?

What possible other meaning do you interpret from "Men who carry... Protectors of women... I think you should start using women's toilets"?

Less trans people died though?

I haven't said that she shouldn't be allowed to speak, just that I question the judgment of people that would have her doing a one nation plug at their rally.

I've only seen a short video of her speech hellofabore and I'm not gonna dig the whole thing out to watch for the same reason I'm not gonna rub shit in my eye.

We'll have to agree to disagree on her intention there. For fairly obvious reasons she couldn't be more explicit but I thought the segue was pretty suggestive

That doesn't mean suggesting men should take guns into women's toilets to protect them is fine.

Because it is one way to show men who are focused on protecting their family.

Nice stripping of all the context there in your choice. There are a whole lot of other words there that show the context, you are being dishonest in the way you have done this.

I read those paras a couple of times. It’s not saying this

It is incredibly ill-advised. Both advocating that men should go into toilets and "make" women OK with that, and the heavy hint that maybe men who carry guns should do so.

Incredibly ill advised? And yet had no impact at all?

So, you disagree with her politics? so do I. And I have done for decades.

YOU are still here making lazy 'guilt by association' claims for a open mic rally that doesn't draw any distinction on which female people speak. In fact, do you remember that a trans activist spoke?

And that Lidia Thorpe would have been allowed to speak had she not walked up aggressively. Do I agree with much Lidia Thorpe says? No I don't.

And yet, you wish to restrict the women and girls who speak at these event to your own personal 'approved' list. How authoritarian is that?