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?

It isn't a rally.

She wasn't booked to do a plug.

Any woman can get up and say what they want, that's the point.

So you think mentioning guns is OK because using them to protect family is OK? I am not putting words in your mouth, I am trying to understand what possible constructive reason you think there is for including the mention of carrying guns.

The 'same train of thought' is NOT about the guns!

It is about the men who would seek to protect their family.

I don't agree that they should be going into the toilets at all. But I also think it is you who are being 'incredibly disingenuous and dishonest'.

Just because something didn't have an impact doesn't mean it wasn't incredibly ill-advised.

But you're ignoring the context of a culture that actually carries guns on the regular and use them to shoot people with unfortunate frequency.

It's weird that as someone who doesn't like people carrying guns and thinks it's a bad idea generally that you wouldn't feel strange about a comment that ultimately has you conclude:

"Sure some of the men might carry guns."

That apparently I am wildly misrepresenting

It is actually not that hard to understand, yet you are labouring over the 'she mentioned guns' point.

I tell you what, you go and ask her. In fact, I am sure I saw a video where she explained this and explained what I am saying. Why not go and find that video? Or is it that you wish to continue to make a false connection about 'guns' and men going into toilets?

Because it is false. And she didn't mention anything about even showing those guns or drawing them or anything like that.

She says:

"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."

This paragraph is all about showing how self ID works. Is it not?

Please show us here in this paragraph how this relates to 'guns'?

I didn't suggest equivalence but I do find Posie's buddying up with the far right utterly repellent!

Your thinking here is very simplistic and it is missing the point of her transcript. You have isolated ONE sentence from many and you are making this deduction based on that one sentence.

I am not 'ignoring' a context of a culture. I am pointing out the flaws in your overly simple and dishonest interpretation.

I don't care if I convince you, because I realise I won't, I am providing all readers with the context of the transcript to go with your false interpretation.

Oh dear.

Please list all the 'far right' people she has 'buddied' up with and define what both 'far right' means to you and what 'buddied' up means.

You have deliberately and dishonestly left out the first paragraph, which mentions carrying guns, and which directly precedes and sets the context for this paragraph.

If it was just the second paragraph you have posted above we would not be having this conversation.

We've been through this a million times on FWR, she speaks to people who understand that sex is a binary and that girls need spaces away from men.

Anyone saying this immediately gets called 'far right' because it is the easiest way to fool people on the left not to listen to her.

It is pretty schoolyard level 'She smells' stuff.

I'll advised for who? Clearly you believed it was a gun threat and this is frequently passed around on Twitter with trans people believing it. And the death rate went down. So I think over all you could say it was a positive impact if any at all.

Or are you unhappy that less people died?

When 'trans hate' means defending women's rights & safety, protecting children from radical medical interventions on an undefined basis, saying men are male humans, and defining homosexuality as sex-based ... you have to wonder if 'transphobia' is the only rational choice.

Hardly anybody hates 'trans' people. Most people, however, hate that rampant genderism has made them legitimately afraid to speak simple truths. Thanks to a handful of courageous women, this right is now legally confirmed in the UK - but what an exhausting process! And there's more to come 😧

https://dailycaller.com/2018/05/12/linguistic-minefield-of-politically-correct-tranny/

Fyi the author of this piece is trans. These are Sophie's words not mine. We used to chat on here but not for a while.

Sophie says: (6 years ago!)

"These people want to be oppressed because the left awards those that are victims, and now they’re in the most ironic dick-measuring contest of all time in an effort to prove which identity group is the most victimized.

This is even evident in how these wannabe victims misuse stats. In 2017, there were 28 transgendered individuals across the United States who were murdered. LGBT advocates would like you to believe that these people were all murdered due to their gender identity. However, in many cases, there is little to no evidence of this.

Hell, that statistic even includes three dumbasses who thought it was a good idea to charge law enforcement with knives.

Fun fact: That same year, multiple normal people were killed by police for the same reason — so, clearly, gender identity played no role in their deaths-by-cop.

This idea that we’re being murdered en masse has even led to some laughably bad claims. Remember the shrill voiced psychotic trans girl who heckled Rose McGowan at a Barnes and Noble a short while ago? Well, while she was shrieking at the actress she alluded that our deaths are comparable to genocide.

I’m no expert on genocide, but I feel the Jews, Armenians and Rwandans would have a massive problem with this claim."

Well to be fair, anyone who doesn't think that Pauline 'White Australia ' Hanson is far-right really needs their head examining. The problem for me is that these revolting individuals are the only ones speaking out for women's rights at present. I am under no illusion that they are genuinely pro-women, and they are frequently vile and hateful individuals. But they are the only ones speaking up. Why aren't centrist and left-wing politicians speaking up as well?

Precisely because they will get called:
revolting individuals
vile and hateful individuals
needs their head examining.

Yeah but at least they'd be able to deny it

@Hepwo , what else would you call someone like Pauline Hanson? If you look past the women's rights stuff, what do you think of her views on race and immigration?

I have posted the transcript about three times in full on this thread and in part a couple more times.

I have NOT been dishonest. I was asking YOU to show us where the second paragraph refers to guns? You have tried to imply that the two paragraphs together refer to ‘guns’. They do not.

They refer to the type of man who wishes to protect his family!

You have laboured the one sentence about four words worth that refers to guns. Yet you missed ‘or maybe you don’t’, which is just as important to the context.

Show us where the second paragraph refers to gun carrying at all?

Spoken like a true lefty.

I haven't accused you of lying or whatever I just think you've got a different opinion on Parker.

As I said pretty much all the way through I agree with almost everything she has to say I just go erk a bit when that involves mugging up for pics with people like Hanson. Doing that makes it too easy for people to dismiss GC thought as being hateful. Given why she got dropped by WPUK though I suspect she probably doesn't have the same problems with Hanson that I do

They won't. They are disingenuous. The op is ok with her child damaging her breasts and even if she desists unlikely to be able to breastfeed. They know what they are doing and saying and they don't care because they actually somehow believe the most marginalised narrative despite facts demonstrating that is not so.
You even had one claiming tw are treated like black women were once which is so utterly offensive I'm really shocked it's still standing. They don't seem to believe women are at risk from any men ever and especially not tw. They are still shouting it will never happen despite 15 years of it happening over and over again.

I tend not to use extreme insults about anyone.

I think it just shows the speaker to be intolerant.

I think Pauline is definitely right wing and her comments on immigration and some other issues are deplorable. They always have been right from when she first announced her candidacy all those years ago.

However, posters are keen to show some kind of ‘association’ between KJK and Pauline Hanson. What is this ‘association’ other than Hanson got up and spoke in parliament and at the Let Women Speak event? Other pollies were invited. I believe at least one was told not to attend and speak due to party optics.

So, my question is what ‘buddying up’ means as posted by one poster. And that ‘guilt by association’ where a woman has spoken at an open mic event where any woman could speak, even a trans activist spoke, is a very lazy argument. One we continually see.

If people cannot abide agreeing with a person about beliefs that are universally held across most political parties (ie. There will be some members who will also believe in those same things), that is their own restrictive thought process. Just because Pauline Hanson spoke in Parliament and at the LWS event doesn’t mean I am aligned with her on anything other than a few universal truths. And I am not about to stop campaigning for women’s rights because she spoke.

And KJK has not ‘aligned’ with Hanson apart from some of these issues, maybe not even all issues that Hanson mentioned on the day.

This is not aimed at you pony, I am bouncing off your post. I understand where you are coming from.