Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Miranda Yardley calls out the predator

607 replies

Nudibranch · 26/12/2018 02:25

mirandayardley.com/en/jonathan-yaniv-is-a-predator

OP posts:
Thread gallery
43
Datun · 01/01/2019 16:51

the public might condone such behaviour from transwomen in a way that they would not from men.

It's probably this.

Trying to adjust to thinking that the person acting male, is female, gives rise to the unfamiliarity maybe.

It's the feeling that this disgraceful behaviour which could normally, quite easily be called out, is somehow untouchable.

You can't say, hey buddy, enough of that, ladies present. Or anything like it. It's hand tying.

littlecloudling · 01/01/2019 17:07

Eeeek. Yaniv is disgusting. As far as I can see he is taking advantage of the self ID so hasn't broken the law. EnvyAngry
Clearly, if women see a blatant male in a changing room they won't get naked and will be pretty irritated.

Knicknackpaddyflak · 01/01/2019 18:08

There is every attempt from the TRA lobby to groom all official bodies and the public that trans people should be given a special pass from the expectations and boundaries that apply to everyone else, such as law, waiting lists, bureaucratic procedures, safeguarding, other people's rights, and social behaviour (we have already seen the claim from middle aged late transitioners that they are having a 'delayed adolescence' to excuse unacceptable behaviour). It extends as far as AFTH's 'demand' in their manifesto that all trans prisoners (hello Karen White, Ian Huntley and Mighty Almighty) be immediately released, and the claim that trans people cannot commit rape or be guilty of anything.

Knicknackpaddyflak · 01/01/2019 18:13

And that works two ways: it encourages the belief that applying typical standards is 'unkind' and 'transphobic' to inhibit people showing their typical responses and expectations, or maintaining their boundaries, while at the same time emboldening those who have an enjoyment of pushing boundaries as to what they can get away with.

The issue around changing rooms and bathrooms and lesbians in a nutshell.

FloralBunting · 01/01/2019 18:47

Any parent is surely familiar with this negotiating tactic. Your child asks for something outrageous, and the obvious answer is a clear no, but all they were doing is setting up the barter so that the lesser demand seems more reasonable.

I mean, yes, I know there are complete nutbars who believe those demands are reasonable. But there others who play a long game, as we have seen, for kicks or power or whatever, and the purpose of the extremes for them is to be able to say "Yes, of course those ideas are ridiculous. But all we're asking for is access to ... which isn't unreasonable, is it?"

Knicknackpaddyflak · 01/01/2019 19:19

"Yes, of course those ideas are ridiculous. But all we're asking for is access to ... which isn't unreasonable, is it?"

Seen frequently when the GRA is discussed that women will make some compromises - and this is a kind and reasonable response. It's also demonstrated frequently that once one small slice is achieved, the focus immediately shifts to the next small step that pushes further. Because if that's ok then really it's a bit unreasonable to deny this too/this law now looks a bit silly and out of date doesn't it? Such as that it will look a bit silly insisting that children can't have tattoos or make decisions around sexual consent if they can however consent to life changing drugs and surgery.

Salami tactics.

Bowlofbabelfish · 01/01/2019 21:06

It’s a wedge argument

Which is why the answer is no.

CallMeSirShotsFired · 02/01/2019 08:32

It’s a wedge argument

I wrote a long post about this on a thread not long ago. The long and short being that women's spaces are already owned - by women. It's not a new thing where it's all up for grabs and we're just being greedy.

If we choose to allow some people some access some of the time, it is within our favour, and can be revoked or changed at any time for any reason. There is no right, no entitlement, no negotiation starting point.

It's this muddying - the characterisation of women as greedy meanies and taking all the pie for ourselves - which is a huge issue. But it is our pie, always has been. And no, men cant have any, end of discussion. (Most men don't want any, because they have their own!)

givenupcaring · 02/01/2019 08:46

Why on earth is self ID becoming a free pass for criminality and paraphilia. It has become an ace card to play that seems to trump any other situation.

Start arresting and charging more "transgender" people !

R0wantrees · 02/01/2019 09:58

Why on earth is self ID becoming a free pass for criminality and paraphilia. It has become an ace card to play that seems to trump any other situation

The issues go back a long way and are not solely to do with current gender self-id policies and proposals.
current thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3463920-Lets-go-back-to-2007

R0wantrees · 02/01/2019 10:03

Start arresting and charging more "transgender" people !

People of either sex and any gender identity should be held to the same standards by laws & safeguarding policies.

The protection of children and vulnerable adults should never be compromised by adults' identity claims and needs.

Long thread collating examples of the failings / failures of Child Protection and Safeguarding frameworks:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3301266-Safeguarding-girls-and-protecting-women-post-Jimmy-Saville-metoo

LangCleg · 02/01/2019 10:14

People of either sex and any gender identity should be held to the same standards by laws & safeguarding policies.

The protection of children and vulnerable adults should never be compromised by adults' identity claims and needs.

Hear, hear. Libertarian individual rights should end where safeguarding begins. Internal identities of individuals - or any other characteristic of individuals - do not trump protection frameworks. Safeguarding is supposed to be sceptical. If you are offended by that, the problem is with you.

givenupcaring · 02/01/2019 13:09

also demonstrated frequently that once one small slice is achieved, the focus immediately shifts to the next small step that pushes further.

I agree wholeheartedly.....what I disagree with is the retrospective "and because another slice has been asked for we are taking back the first slice".

transsexual people deserve some recognition but I doubt we could ever agree what that should be.

R0wantrees · 02/01/2019 13:21

I agree wholeheartedly.....what I disagree with is the retrospective "and because another slice has been asked for we are taking back the first slice".

Policies which have evolved and resulted in Safeguarding framework failures must be scrutinised & re-evaluated.

For example, there is pressing need for the thorough investigation into prison policy which led to vulnerable female prisoners being sexually assaulted by Karen Jones (male + serial sexual violent offender). Also that other females were locked in with Jones and are being locked in with male prisoners convicted of violent and / or sexual crimes, sometimes being required to share showers etc.

September 2018 James Kirkup, Spectator:
'If MPs can’t debate a rapist in a woman’s jail, politics has failed'

(extract)
Last week, it was confirmed that the State put a rapist and paedophile in a women’s prison. That rapist, who uses the name Karen White, then sexually assaulted four women in that prison.

This is, of course, an outrage, a failure of public administration of the first order. Many people are angry, among them members of the Government that oversaw this failure. Many people have questions about how that failure came about. How did the Prison Service come to decide that Karen White, a person with a male body and a history of violent sexual crimes, should be put in New Hall prison? (New Hall, incidentally, also has a ‘mother and baby unit.’ The State did not just put a rapist in a women’s jail, they put a convicted paedophile in prison with children).

Was this just a catastrophic failure of judgement? Was it the result of flawed policy on the handling of transgender inmates? Did a climate of unthinking acquiescence to the demands of a highly effective transgender rights lobby contribute to this horrible mistake?

These are all legitimate questions, questions that should be debated and answered by the ministers responsible. These are the questions that Parliament exists to debate: questions about the conduct of public policy.

As I and others have noted repeatedly, a lot of politicians privately ask such questions about transgender issues, but many keep quiet about it – for fear of being labelled ‘transphobic’ or worse. I know serving ministers who have real doubts about some of these things, but dare not speak publicly.

Fortunately, a few MPs are willing to speak out. The obvious seriousness of the Karen White case persuaded more than one MP that the Commons should call a minister to explain and account for the incident.

David Davies, Tory MP for Monmouth, thus tabled an Urgent Question, a parliamentary request for the House to summon a minister to discuss the issues raised by the Karen White case, and of other transgender sex offenders in the prison estate. (Yes, there are others. There is at least one male-born rapist in a women’s prison today.) continues

blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/09/the-state-has-failed-karen-whites-victims/

BitterAndOnlySlightlyTwisted · 02/01/2019 13:27

By "recognition" do you mean "unfettered access".

If so, no. Just no

Just for your information, it's not just about transsexual people but trans-genders. Big diff

LangCleg · 02/01/2019 13:37

Policies which have evolved and resulted in Safeguarding framework failures must be scrutinised & re-evaluated.

Exactly. It's not about sections of the umbrella. It's about not creating loopholes. It doesn't matter where you fall under the umbrella - or, indeed if you even under the umbrella or not - it's about safeguarding protocols being inviolable.

LangCleg · 02/01/2019 13:38

you are under

Soz.

snowbear66 · 02/01/2019 14:20

The problem is that safeguarding for women is being torn down as trans women are claiming that the risk they pose is negligible on the whole.
I can’t imagine this applied to other areas - we accept safeguarding measures against terrorism & hijacking in airport security for the good of everyone, security is tight and there are no exeptions.
Before this there was the ‘golden age of hijacking’ ‘61-‘73.There were no safeguards against terrorists i.e against violent men.
Would anyone like to return to airport security as it was then ? That is what women are being told will happen now, and there are already victims of this policy.

R0wantrees · 02/01/2019 15:26

I can’t imagine this applied to other areas - we accept safeguarding measures against terrorism & hijacking in airport security for the good of everyone, security is tight and there are no exeptions.

There do seem to be a number of possible airport security issues which may come about inadvertently with trans-rights being asserted. What were standard practices with regards id, searching of passengers are being challenged. This could be exploited.

current thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3463255-Female-security-staff-should-be-compelled-to-search-trans-women

Canadian transgender woman flying home 'outed' in front of other passengers'
15/08/2018

(extract)
"A Canadian woman says she was outed and humiliated in front of other passengers while flying home to visit her parents.

Lenore Herrem was boarding a WestJet flight from Calgary to Saskatoon on Wednesday (local time) when the airline agent questioned her ID at the gate.

The five-year-old photo on Ms Herrem's Quebec healthcare card was taken when she still presented as male, and the ID's gender marking is also ticked as male.

She says the agent became "upset and confused" when the ID didn't seem to align with Ms Herrem's feminine appearance, repeatedly saying "They don't match".

"I gently and discreetly expressed to her, 'It's because I'm transgender, that's why they don't match up'. But my face is the same and my ID matches the name on my boarding pass."

The agent's colleague said it was fine and waved Ms Herrem through to take her seat on the plane.

But she says 10 minutes after she sat down, both gate agents boarded the aircraft and the one who had refused her earlier demanded to see her ID again.

"She said something like 'Oh, that's not the name I remember seeing on the computer when I looked at it,' and she started spouting off different, other women's names that were not mine," she told CBC.

It was the agent's next comment that Ms Herrem found most humiliating.

"She rolled her eyes at me and said 'Are you sure it wasn't your girl name that was on the computer?' She outed me in front of the whole airplane."

Ms Herrem said the experience made her feel "unsafe, vulnerable and belittled", and that no one else has ever had a problem with her ID." (continues)
www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2018/08/canadian-transgender-woman-flying-home-outed-in-front-of-other-passengers.html

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3465241-New-York-legalises-changing-birth-certs-to-M-F-or-X

Bowlofbabelfish · 02/01/2019 20:07

Start arresting and charging more "transgender" people !

The law applies to everyone. Nobody should be treated more harshly simply for being transgender. At the same time no one should be exempt from the law for being transgender.
Safeguarding applies to everyone.
ID matching applies to everyone
Airport security applies to everyone.

What we are seeing at the moment is people requesting special treatment/ exemptions simply because they are transgender and that opens up huge loopholes. Because if there’s no gatekeeping and we simply allow anyone to self ID, then anyone can abuse this.

And people already are.

What recognition should transgender people have? The same rights and responsibilities as everyone else. No more, and no less.

givenupcaring · 02/01/2019 20:09

For example, there is pressing need for the thorough investigation into prison policy which led to vulnerable female prisoners being sexually assaulted by Karen Jones (male + serial sexual violent offender). Also that other females were locked in with Jones and are being locked in with male prisoners convicted of violent and / or sexual crimes, sometimes being required to share showers etc.

Transexualism is a medical issue. Therefore diagnosis requires psychological assessment and subsequent treatment. In the absence of any such diagnosis then frankly you're entitled to nothing. By diagnosis I dont mean some self affirming thing but proper assessment.

For any biological male diagnosed and seeking recognition as gender female I see testosterone blocking medication as a minimum requirement.

As much as I resent the idea of Karen Jones being in a womans prison I think the situation would have been a little better had they been on blockers and were therefore chemically castrated in effect.

I find it very telling the huge number of people identifying as TG but have no desire whatsoever for hormones and blockers. Surely you would want to be rid of the hormones that define that hated maleness ?

OhHolyJesus · 02/01/2019 20:54

Do you mean Stephen Wood/Karen White or is there another Trans criminal calling himself Karen?

Scientistagainsttranscult · 02/01/2019 22:02

Chemical castration is never enough. Only SRS should mean access to female spaces and then there should still be optional exemptions when it comes to intimate and personal care and bio male should mean no access to women's sports.

R0wantrees · 02/01/2019 22:18

I find it very telling the huge number of people identifying as TG but have no desire whatsoever for hormones and blockers. Surely you would want to be rid of the hormones that define that hated maleness ?

Maleness is not defined by testosterone levels anymore than femaleness is defined by oestrogen levels.

Are you suggesting that when a younger woman has a a hysterectomy and surgical menopause they become less female?

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 02/01/2019 22:25

Johnny Yaniv

Jessica Yaniv