Shameful, incoherent, poorly referenced, completely biased piece of 'journalism' from the Guardian

[JustcameoutGC]

So, we are all right wing anti-trans nuts.
The WiSpa incident didn't happen
Or if it did then that would be no problem
(make up your mind people)
The violence was all directed towards the TRAs.

If you needed an excuse to cancel your subscription, this would be it.

They mean the woman who complained.

pheebumbalatti you didn't answer the question at all.

Let's say that there was a naked person with a male body in the women's spa, with the naked women and girls.

That's fine isn't it?
They have the law that says this is fine.

So the situation is not a problem.

Why does it matter what religion anyone is. From the video it's obviously what happened. I know you don't agree.

If you accepted it had happened. Then that's great isn't it? The law is working.

Yes?

She wasn’t a “right wing nutter”. She’s a black women who is also a Christian.

It’s funny how people objecting to males exposing their semi erect penises to children are “right wing nutters” and “anti-paedophile protesters”

Maybe she is a right wing nutter.

Who knows. Why does it matter?

She's a woman in a spa where girls and women have no clothes on and a bepenised person came in.

Is it only right wing nutters (female) who would not like that at all?

Of course not.

It's irrelevant. What's relevant is what happened. The response. The other women and children standing around who had obviously left quick.

The people at the desk not being slightly interested.
The man berating her on the basis that a person with a dick in the women's spa. Must be a trans woman. And therefore the women who left are transphobic.

And the response was interesting.

50% this never happened it's somehow been set up.

50% women and girls need to get used to random naked people with penises being present when everyone is naked.

So that's strange isn't it.

The most bizarre thing for me was why the hooha. From the 50% never happened people.

The get over it people were honest. Self ID into anything marked women/ female. Was fought for and won. It's law in California. Their response made sense in the context. Even if they failed to see any issue with teaching children that being naked with naked penis people/ a stranger with exposed penis around is not a problem at all.

The second group. Seem hell bent on it never happened. Why? This is the law that was fought for.

Arguments like no reports to police (says anon source). Why would anyone report it to the police when nothing illegal has happened?

The police are investigating. I find it hard to believe that the police in California have nothing more pressing to do than investigate things that aren't crimes.

The women and girls in bathrobes who had clearly just left in s rush. They are either invisible or involved in the 'hoax'.
The man who told the woman she was transphobic. He understands the law.

And in the end. Why would anyone bother with an elaborate hoax with extras etc. When the law says the thing that was set up. Is completely legal and AOK?

It just doesn't make sense.

In the end it seems these people are aok with self ID everywhere so a male in there is fine.
But simultaneously it's not fine and a police matter etc.

It's illogical and nonsensical.

Because it is fodder for GC hate.

Very useful.

Like the new victim transwomen who "appeared " to claim it was them.

Those evil TERMS.

Poor ickle men.

TERFS

Of all of the absolute ridiculous takes on the issue, the 'if you object to seeing a dick in a female only space then you are right wing' is one of the most stupid!

@CardinalLolzy

Anyone else really fancy a Wispa?

First thing I think EVERY TIME.

If it doesn’t happen do TW want it?

F they’re not using facilities they are legally entitled to?

Seems like a waste of time, money and effort to create laws for something that isn’t used/wanted.

@happydays2345

Great article, thanks for sharing! Will definitely be renewing my subscription 😊

Ooh edgy

This is the Guardian’s response to all the women who complained about the original “report”.

It will never darken my door again.

@sailmeaway

Just can't get worked up about something that didn't actually happen.

I understand the cultural disinclination to believe women, but why do you not believe the spa staff who defended the thing-that-never-happened?

Or the Guardian staff-activists who are agitating for the right to have the thing-that-never-happened....happen?

I hope our visitors are enjoying their practise at gish galloping because they're going to need to be good at it going forward.

This totally legal thing, that activists fought for and won, which simultaneously never happens is going to keep happening with increasing frequency.

So they're going to need to keep those rebuttal skills sharp as more and more people see through the inconsistent propaganda.

@NiceGerbil

The most bizarre thing for me was why the hooha. From the 50% never happened people.

The get over it people were honest. Self ID into anything marked women/ female. Was fought for and won. It's law in California. Their response made sense in the context. Even if they failed to see any issue with teaching children that being naked with naked penis people/ a stranger with exposed penis around is not a problem at all.

The second group. Seem hell bent on it never happened. Why? This is the law that was fought for.

Arguments like no reports to police (says anon source). Why would anyone report it to the police when nothing illegal has happened?

The police are investigating. I find it hard to believe that the police in California have nothing more pressing to do than investigate things that aren't crimes.

The women and girls in bathrobes who had clearly just left in s rush. They are either invisible or involved in the 'hoax'.
The man who told the woman she was transphobic. He understands the law.

And in the end. Why would anyone bother with an elaborate hoax with extras etc. When the law says the thing that was set up. Is completely legal and AOK?

It just doesn't make sense.

In the end it seems these people are aok with self ID everywhere so a male in there is fine.
But simultaneously it's not fine and a police matter etc.

It's illogical and nonsensical.

If it's being investigated I am glad of it. If it can be established this was a hoax that is extremely serious and has resulted in many people being injured in protests and counter protests and I think there should be a prosecution. That will serve as a warning to many about the seriousness of smear campaigns and maybe make people think twice about what they're posting on social media and boards like mumsnet.

Obviously people are entitled to post honestly and accurately about experiences that they can hand on heart vouch for, but for anyone tempted to fabricate stories, intentionally mislead through embellishment, or knowingly distribute false accounts ....well, that is extremely serious, and should be taken seriously by authorities. At least on social media and online forums there is good evidence of what is occurring for criminal cases to be made, and owners of sites can usually be compelled to hand information over.

If on the other hand it can be established that someone was acting inappropriately in that spa, beyond what state laws permit, by exposing with deliberate intent to distress others, that is very serious too and requires appropriate action to prosecute, and safeguarding steps within the spa.

So yeah, if there's an investigation I'm glad of it.

Always so funny hearing TRAs whining about 'smear campaigns'. I always wonder if it's a freudian slip because they're scrolling through the latest Katy Montgomerie word salad on another tab and it just slips out unconsciously.

How is deliberate intent proved in a naked spa that allows transwomen with penises in with naked women and children?

I mean removing clothing and going in the women’s section rather than wearing a swimsuit and attending the mixed session seems... unintentional?

Viewing as a pure piece of journalism, what the fuck is that?!? I don't think I've ever read such a poorly written, incoherent and crappy researched article! Have we no standards left in journalism?! That is a piece of lower quality than you find in The Sun ffs! Just appalling.

suggestionsplease1

You are deliberately avoiding postulating about the 3rd possibility. That it happened, there was no and is no investigation because it was within the law, it doesn’t matter if the male was exposing their penis deliberately to cause distress, because it did cause distress because it was a penis, attached to a naked male in a space that women believed to be exclusively for the female sex, with naked children present.

Or as it’s known, the truth .

Even if you don’t personally accept this to be the truth, (even though it is) are you even capable of acknowledging that this is a possibility?

And women have to simply accept unsettling behaviour all the time because it’s not actually illegal.

So say a man walks down my street everyday and lingers by my gate. Looks in my window. I don’t want to challenge him because he’s much bigger than me and he unsettles me.

Of course it may be his route to work. He may like the flowers in my garden and they cheer him up an his way to a job that makes him miserable. He may be looking at my garden and it just seems like he’s looking in my window.

Would the police investigate? We have anti stalking legislation don’t we? But is he doing anything wrong? Other than making me feel vulnerable and unsafe?

This is the kind of thing that happens all the time. You can read reports of much worse threatening and intimidating behaviour (eg indecent exposure) that is not taken seriously.

So again, why would the police investigate a naked transwoman in a spa in a city that accepts TWAW?

Nothing to see here.

If a naked male enters a female naked section of a spa because they are legally allowed to be there, it all ok. Nothing to worry about. Any female has a problem, well they are the ones who have a problem.

If they are triggered, they need to deal with their own issues. That it would trigger the male to be excluded is so much more important and they should NOT be expected to get over it.

Nice to see how much females are centred.

Equality innit?

How would this 'police investigation' actually go?

Police: Good evening Sir, we have reports that you were in a female only space at a spa and your penis was exposed. If this is true then this is indecent exposure and is a serious criminal offence. What say you?

Penis person: Yes it's true, I was in the female only section with no clothes on. I got into the hot tub, willy out and everything. But its fine though because I identify as a woman.

Police: Oh gosh, huge apologies, well this is awkward, lol! Gah, these right wing nutters are always causing trouble aren't they? So sorry for wasting your time Sir...Sorry, I mean Ma'am!

If on the other hand it can be established that someone was acting inappropriately in that spa, beyond what state laws permit, by exposing with deliberate intent to distress others, that is very serious too and requires appropriate action to prosecute, and safeguarding steps within the spa.

How on earth would you prove intent?

It's difficult enough to take a rape case to court.

If on the other hand it can be established that someone was acting inappropriately in that spa, beyond what state laws permit, by exposing with deliberate intent to distress others, that is very serious too and requires appropriate action to prosecute, and safeguarding steps within the spa.

That is simply a red herring, the law allows for the individual to be there, if distress is caused to others that is because of their transphobia (or something) not as a result of the intent behind the individual.

I am angry that it happened, I am angrier that those who fucking wanted this are acting like toddlers with "it wasn't me" whilst having a face smeared with chocolate cake. They know it is wrong, they know that this will make the public sit up and think "wtf" so distraction and smear campaigns are all they have, whilst of course playing the innocent little victims.

And nothing more to see here.

If a naked male enters a naked female section of the spa legally, and finds it arousing, they are there legally. So nothing to see. It is not ‘intentional’, it is just natural and should be embraced shouldn’t it?

That a naked male getting into a spa or hot tub has to have their penis (now semi erect) and testicles at eye level of a naked 9 year old is just a male getting into a spa. It is not that male’s intention to be exposing themselves, it is just the mechanics of getting into a hot tub. Where a nine year old just happens to be present.

And ffs that nine year old girl needs to stop looking at a male’s genitals! They need to be taught manners.

Because it is all just a human body. If that girl is uncomfortable, by god she needs to know that it is culturally acceptable in some countries. Get used to it girl. You will never know what the intention of that penis is, so just sort out your own issues because they do not matter to anyone else.

Because in this spa, it is perfectly legal. No one should have the expectation of only being naked with other females in the female section.

That’s equality, innit?

“exposing with deliberate intent to distress others” is not a condition for indecent exposure; rather, it’s the effect the exposure has on the victim.

Many flashers think girls and women will be delighted to view their manhood.