Nigella Lawson - another disappointment

[Kit19]

Any celebrity who thinks we should all just be kiiiiinddd

We sure have come a long way from Nigella Lawson.

8th rule of misogyny.

Men are whatever they say there, are women are whatever men say they are.

If Quaggers says men are women, they are. If they also say disagreement is us claiming men arent valid humans, well...

TRA logic. It doesnt make sense. I try and keep up, but its nuttier than squirrel shit.

@Quaggers yeah come on, you keep saying about different opinions but haven't really given any, just done rather a lot of derailing.

Let's start easy - do you think DBS checks should be abolished on the basis that 'we should believe people when they say who they are and baddies will slip through the net anyway?'

Do you think it's fair that someone like Fallon Fox, who is male, should be able to break a female's skull (and then later boast about his they 'enjoyed it' on social media) in the name of 'insclusivity'?

Do you think it's right that children well below the age of 16 are being given untested off label drugs, particularly when more and more experts in the field are voicing concerns about it?

Let's have some opinions

You just keep coming back to only one side is entitled to rights. Only one side can have feelings recognised. Only one side gets kindness. Only one side gets their needs met. And you still won't own that you don't care about the females excluded from any provision at all so that males can choose from all the provisions they have access to.

You'll find most GC women want third ways. Third spaces. Solutions that work for all. They don't want anyone under the bus. That's the difference.

“Under the bus” I call bingo!

Every time I see a company or person use the word 'inclusive' I understand that what they mean is that it excludes women.

Oh see, I don't get that.
As a woman I don't feel excluded.
Trans women have been in the toilets for years. I've never noticed.
They're just women, going about their business.
Never even gave it a a second thought until this board, still don't.
Not just women.
Seen people on SM lose their absolute shit this week over trains painted with a rainbow, and sat there thinking WTF lol
I mean am I going to catch gay from it?!
It's ridiculous lol
Anyways my point is people seem to lose their absolute shit at people being inclusive.
Inclusitivity isn't always a bad thing

We sure have come a long way from Nigella Lawson.

Do you think so?

I'm still seeing a debate around the privileged point of view that female needs and rights mean nothing. And that females out of sight, out of mind, from groups the speakers casually dismissing them never see or engage with, can be excluded and suffer without it being a problem: it won't bother the speaker.

Let them eat caking. There's a lot of it about.

Still no interesting opinion then, no?

Agree with the pp.
I work with several transboys and have worked to get them safe toilets and changing rooms in school.

I by no means "hate" transpeople.

Women and transwomen have differing needs, and it is not unkind to respect that.

@RedtreesRedtrees

“Under the bus” I call bingo!

Why are you calling bingo in a fellow GC poster? It's almost as if you're not really GC now. Have you just been pretending to be GC? Why would anyone pretend to be something they are not?

“Under the bus” I call bingo!

In everything I tried to explain in that post and others, that really is all you can engage with? A sneer and joke about how stupid it is for females to care about vulnerable females?

Thank you. That's a perfect demo really, you could not illustrate your pov any better.

Inclusitivity isn't always a bad thing

With respect, it isn't always a good thing either.

Inclusitivity isn't always a bad thing

Can you seriously not see how hypocritical you look, when people are pointing out the exclusion of females from female spaces and the problems of that?

If you're pro inclusion, why does this not matter to you?

You just keep coming back to only one side is entitled to rights. Only one side can have feelings recognised. Only one side gets kindness

Did I say that?
You're entitled to your feelings.
I'm entitled to mine.
It's called a difference of opinion.
Coming from "my" side (whatever that is as I'm still reading and learning) if I say anything contrary and against opinion 'm aggressive.
If "GC" side say anything though it's "women don't have to be kind!"
Yeah, works both ways as awoman whatever "side" you're on then lol

Oh come on @DialSquare I can be GC and still enjoy playing buzzword bingo!

See inclusivity is a great thing

But to be truest inclusive you must include women who fir whatever reason including sexual abuse or religion don't want men ( however nice they are and however they identify) doing their smear test , taking their sports place or just seeing their naked body

Until you include those women you can not claim to be inclusive

Quaagers you have been asked many, many, many times about the huge number of people who are now unable to use public spaces. Who have lost scholarships or places on sports teams or political representation.

You have ignored every question, becuase it is not about people born male.

You can not for a minute pretend you are inclusive.

Did I say that?

Yes. Repeatedly, by implication, you don't seem to have the guts to own it. If your 'difference of opinion' is that it is right and just to deprive females of any services in order to entitle males to the full choice of all the services, own it.

Seems a bit ofd scoring against your own side but each to their own. Now I've got you're attention, Redtrees, what do you think about those women and girls being excluded if we open up female single sex spaces to men?

It's called a difference of opinion.

Let's have some opinions then... please! It's really tedious otherwise.

You made a point a while back in this thread (about DBS checks and toilets). I refuted it, not aggressively, I just refuted it. You didn't come back, I've asked the question a couple more times and you have just ignored me, while going on about how 'aggressive' people are to differing opinions.

It's just not cricket mate!

I would be amazed if I have ever in my life encountered a transwoman who convincingly passed as a woman. Even all the airbrushing and facial surgery and posing with their hands covering their Adams apple doesn't make high profile transwomen look convincingly female, surely they'd look far less convincing in real life. Certainly the transwomen that I have met have been glaringly, obviously, male. Even the ones who have had surgery and expensive haircuts.

Although as soon as I type that, I know that someone will surely tell me that actually I'm surrounded by transwomen who are so convincingly authentically female that I just don't know that they aren't a woman like me.

But the evidence suggests that's just not likely to be true.

@DialSquare

Seems a bit ofd scoring against your own side but each to their own. Now I've got you're attention, Redtrees, what do you think about those women and girls being excluded if we open up female single sex spaces to men?

Odd and your that should be

It really is sad none is able to discuss these points.

People claim they cant post on here as its too hostile ect...

We are are actively willing to engage in conversations about solutions, and its ignored every time.

Everything except full agreement bio sex should be replaced by gender is "hostile".

Can you seriously not see how hypocritical you look, when people are pointing out the exclusion of females from female spaces and the problems of that?

I'm not excluded though. Trans women and biological women have been going to the toilet together for years.
I can still go to the women's toilet when out.