Britain needs more trans people in public life, including the Commons

[Igneococcus]

Says Lord Herbert, Boris Johnson's first special envoy on LGBT rights:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0e8d186e-db6a-11eb-8f14-0bb645f59db0?shareToken=8cf210f54c9d71aa462bb34a9c3e2aa7

Hold on. Let me get this straight. This forum is dominated by discussions on the dangers of trans, and there are only 0.015% trans women in the UK. Interesting! Does that make any of you stop and think for a moment?

I think all of us have stopped to think how has such a small number of people manage to destroy women's single sex spaces, women's sports, language referring to women (such as mother), safeguarding principle, free speech etc and thought WTF? It is astonishing how the feelings of such a small minority has been priorotise over the safety, privacy and dignity of over half the population and over free speech.

But you’d agree 0.015% isn’t really a risk? I mean if there was 0.015% chance of coming into contact with Covid and the Government told everyone to watch out, that we need legislation, protection etc, the public would laugh.

And that’s assuming all of the 0.015% is dangerous. I’m assuming the majority of that fraction isn’t.

@andyoldlabour

How many transmen are getting involved in politics?

For the numbers involved, I've a sense that they're few, mainly work in the background, and are influential in changing all of the important but boring stuff that shifts policies. And somehow never includes women stakeholders in the discussions and seem to include a dearth of EIA statements

Stephen Whittle
Sam Hall
Freddie McConnell
etc.

uncommongroundmedia.com/from-shaft-to-wpath-stephen-whittles-influence-on-trans-politics/

@Asterly

“Actually, it would be less than 1% transwomen and 1% transmen, as according to the estimates above, trans people only make up around .03% of the UK population (20,000/68,000,000), so 0.015% transwomen and 0.015% transmen would be representative.”

Hold on. Let me get this straight. This forum is dominated by discussions on the dangers of trans, and there are only 0.015% trans women in the UK. Interesting! Does that make any of you stop and think for a moment?

Another thing it makes me think about is why any male who takes a women’s officer role believes that they can give voice to what the 99.9% of ‘women’ need? What do you think they understand if they have transitioned 6months before taking that role in one prominent case ?

What do you think motivates them to take those roles that have been set aside to ensure females are represented to overcome the millennia of sexist discrimination? And to take the position away from a female who has experienced that very sexist discrimination all their life so far…. Whether in education, sport, socially, employment and health? Even in the way law enforcement treats them?

Really does make you think doesn’t it?

[quote [AUTO]9q79fkqum38h5]But you’d agree 0.015% isn’t really a risk? I mean if there was 0.015% chance of coming into contact with Covid and the Government told everyone to watch out, that we need legislation, protection etc, the public would laugh.

And that’s assuming all of the 0.015% is dangerous. I’m assuming the majority of that fraction isn’t.[/quote]
On the contrary.

And if you were here in good faith maybe you would get some effort to show you how impactful that 0.015% actually is.

But all you are doing now is highlighting just how incredible it is that supposedly such a small population has created so much damage to the progress of women’s rights.

If your intention was to tell women they were fearmongering over such a small population, I think it might be doing the opposite.

So. Thank you again.

I think all of us have stopped to think how has such a small number of people manage to destroy women's single sex spaces, women's sports, language referring to women (such as mother),

Have they really destroyed our lives? Really? Wondering how many of the 0.015% you all actually meet on a yearly basis. All the people I know still refer to each other as women etc. Subject never really intrudes on our lives. Toilets, changing rooms etc - never had any sort of encounter with a trans person (as far as I know) and certainly not a negative one. In fact I haven’t noticed any changes to day to day life because of transgender men or women.

[quote [AUTO]9q79fkqum38h5]But you’d agree 0.015% isn’t really a risk? I mean if there was 0.015% chance of coming into contact with Covid and the Government told everyone to watch out, that we need legislation, protection etc, the public would laugh.

And that’s assuming all of the 0.015% is dangerous. I’m assuming the majority of that fraction isn’t.[/quote]
A risk is when there is a chance of something happening. There us no longer a risk to women's right, to our safety, etc. It is a certainty. Transideologists have undermined women's rights, safeguarding and freedom of speech. It is not a risk that women in prison might be attacked by transwomen and put in a state of fear - even the courts acknowledge that this is a certainty. It is not a risk that women might lose out in sports to men identifying their way in despite their male advantage - it has happened.

Have they really destroyed our lives?

No one said that

Mmm. Ok. I can see there is a set theme here, and no-one will follow logic about 0.015% being no risk at all. If I bought a household cleaner that got rid of all germs but for 0.015% I’d be very happy. Critical thinking. Was hoping it wasn’t an echo chamber, but there we go.

logic

You naughty, naughty wimmen! But, we live in an echo chamber so we cannot be blamed that we cannot follow logic and think critically...

But of course, my wonderful posts point out your lack of critical thinking and logic, don't they? .... don't they? ummm.....

Quick deletion, helleofabore, I assume you must have said something really terrible?

I don’t really understand the echo chamber comments

Posters on this board generally agree on certain things to do with feminism ….not everything, thats not an echo chamber

The litter tray is full of people who like cats….they may disagree with rearing or types of cat etc and they aren’t an echo chamber either

I just looked it up an environment in which a person encounters only beliefs or opinions that coincide with their own, so that their existing views are reinforced and alternative ideas are not considered

Well we don’t just encounter opinions that coincide with our own ….as A we don’t all agree and B its not a closed board, we get plenty of visitors

I’d love for more debate…but all that happens is people plop, tell us we aren’t womaning right, insult us, tell us what we think or….and this one is frequent tell us they could come up with all sorts of statistics but they are too busy (can’t be arsed)

Being allergic to wheat myself, I can see how terrible that post actually was.

As for me directly? My daughters don't go to guides because they no longer properly safeguard them, I worry about them going to public toilets alone because we know males have followed girls into public toilets and girls have been attacked in them but no one is now allowed to challenge them (or if they do they now risk a backlash), we can no longer be confident that female changing rooms in shops won't have males in the next cubical. I worry if I have to go into hospital I will be put on a ward with males - the worry is there whether that actually happens or not. And when I get to hospital, possibly to be treated for covid, I will not get the best medicine as the impact of sex on dosage and treatment is no longer recorded. My daughters are being taught that boundaries, necessary to keep them safe, are offensive to some males and not to be tolerated even though necessary to kerp them safe. They are being taught that unless they conform to rigid sex stereotypes they are trans and should follow a harmful and destructive pathway which they cannot understand. If I fail to teach them about their female biology (but I mustn't call it that) they, like thousands of women, will no longer understand the public health messaged aimed at their sex as it now reduces women to dehumanising body parts or functions... I could go on. This is now.

Hold on. Let me get this straight. This forum is dominated by discussions on the dangers of trans, and there are only 0.015% trans women in the UK. Interesting! Does that make any of you stop and think for a moment?

It doesn't matter how many transwomen are in the UK - it matters what rules they're trying to set up.

If there were NO transwomen in the UK, and they were insisting that any male should be let into women's spaces on demand, that would be a problem.

Because there are 30 million males! The number of "transwomen" is irrelevant.

All i said was i thought helleofabore was right

I didnt quote anything!

What kind of a user name is [AUTO]9q79fkqum38h5?

How come the square brackets show up like that? Is it a bot generated name or something?

The issue with the 0.015% is that is a gateway for the rest of the 50% male population to also claim they need to access the prisons and the toilets and the changing rooms and the sports - as well as reducing 51% of women to chestfeeders and vagina owners and cervix havers with dubious rights regarding sex and maternity discrimination.

Sorry Rufus, I led you into disrepute.

But all you are doing now is highlighting just how incredible it is that supposedly such a small population has created so much damage to the progress of women’s rights.

Quite.

helleofabore is still right

Shes righter than a right thing in rightville

@Helleofabore

Sorry Rufus, I led you into disrepute.

You did 😀

I feel very disreputable

I may need to have a shower