Waitrose delivery driver

[MsMoorhead]

Kellie Jay-Keen reported by her Waitrose delivery driver!

Erm. That's exactly what I said happened. Transwomen are men. That is her position, that is the truth.

@Discovereads if you don't like my posts then report them for whatever guideline you feel they breech.

Just a reminder: there’s no offence (AFAIK) of “misgendering” - this wasn’t even a WORD until fairly recently. so if someone has a penis it’s fair enough, in many, many circumstances to call them a man.

Good grief! How bloody rude can you get?

@Discovereads obviously!

Sadly there are a few police forces that don't seem to know that!

What difference does that make?? Is this really just about having a go at Kellie Jay and her veracity?? Did it happen like this? Did he say it like that? Who started it?

Is it personal about her?

Because the point is the entire ideology advocates for the violation of women and girls boundaries on the basis that sex doesn't matter and they should not be segregated by it. Their sports prizes and scholarships, their places on short lists, their toilets and changing rooms, the very words used to describe them.

This is what you are defending. Trying get out of it by speculating on who said what, when is completely irrelevant.

He made it absolutely clear that he is an advocate for violating women's boundaries.

Kellie Jay made it absolutely clear that that is entirely unacceptable. And you're concerned that she didn't adhere to the actual ideology she is campaigning against, while in the process of telling him so!

Did you watch Ricky Gervais? The highest post paid, most popular comedian in the land turned the very thing you're complaining about into a joke.

That's how ridiculous it is.

You're defending the indefensible. And fondly imagining that you're standing on some high ground while you're doing it.

Youve interjected yourself into a long running conversation that you have not the faintest clue about.

Wow. Arrogant much? Roses was one of the first posters on this thread. You don't own the thread or patrol who posts on it.

Absolutely and thank goodness for people like Harry Millar et al

www.peaktrans.org/police/

@Discovereads The delivery driver says she is not a man and KJK retorts “No, you’re a man…”.

So, your problem with KJK is that she was honest and didn't lie as to what she saw in front of her. Didn't go along with the fashionable dissembling.

I must admit I quite liked the long hair on my OH during lockdown. Working from home with mostly no video on zoom meetings. Never thought it turned him into a woman. And, I have my eye on a pink linen shirt for him for fathers day. Amazingly, that won't turn him into a woman either. Even if he says 'I am a woman' it won't turn him into a woman. The only thing it would change is that I would see it as a change from being honest to being dishonest.

Great post @Datun

At the risk of being told off, which I couldn't give a toss about, by the self appointed thread police person I shall interject myself into this long running conversation to point out to said thread police person that:

he said “well I’m not, I’m not a man” and I said “well I would probably say you were

The word probably is very important in that sentence, it is proof that KJK is giving voice to her opinion which she is entitled to do.

It’s in the transcript (above) that the delivery driver said they not a man and KJK then immediately calls them a man.

Delivery driver was very obviously a man, transwomen are men there is no escaping that fact they cannot be transwomen if they are not men.

There is no law of misgendering in the UK, there is no law against being impolite, rude or disrespectful, nor is forced thought or compelled speech legal which is exactly what you and your TRA buddies are advocating for.

Roses was on the thread before you were

But she wasn’t in the conversation within the thread. I don’t have the energy to go into it with her.

KJK was being rude by deliberately misgendering a transwoman. It’s commonly accepted that that is a rude thing to do.

As for the bit about laws against being rude, I’ve never advocated any such thing. So you can toss that strawman on the nearest bonfire.

Never said I own the thread nor am I policing it.
I don’t owe anything to anyone on this thread.
it’s my choice what I want to answer or not answer.

Because the point is the entire ideology advocates for the violation of women and girls boundaries

No it doesn’t. That’s the transphobic reaction to the mere existence of transpeople.

Ah, now.

Maybe we are expected to pretend that Roses wasn't on earlier.

Rather like KJK seems to be expected to pretend that a man is not a man.

Or, that it isn't creepy for any man to announce they particularly like (and have the right whether the girls are uncomfortable or not) to insert themselves where woman and girls are undressing, or vulnerable.

I was going to do the Pravda style 'male body' etc. But what's the point. It would just be a sort of 'rose by another name' game. A rose is still a rose irrespective of what you call it, isn't it?

The thing about a public discussion forum is that anyone can insert themselves anywhere they like at any point. If you want a private chat then you need to organise that, @Discovereads. If you don't want to respond to someone's post, then don't. The power is entirely within your hands to respond or not, as your capacity allows.

Personally I think women should be rude, I'm tired of pussyfooting around daftness.

Trans women are biological men that’s just a fact. We used to think that being “kind” and going along with men who think they’re women was harmless

now we know it’s not

Waitrose are within their rights to no longer deliver to KJK - it is their company after all so their rules - but they’d be enormous misogynistic nobs to do so

I think I should have a choice of using female-only changing rooms when I go swimming. And that the choice should not be that I either accept the presence of males or don't go swimming.

Of course it does. Transgender ideology says there's no such thing as sex, or if there is, it's not necessary to segregate people on the basis of it.

Which means spaces are segregated by gender identity. According to the ideology, it makes women's spaces open to men if they say they're not men, irrespective of whether women disagree. That's boundary violation.

i'm sure there are quite a few trans people who disagree with it. but That's what the ideology is based on.

Not sure how you can deny it. Since even verbally acknowledging the male sex, if the male in question doesn't want you to, is wrong, as far as you're concerned.

Never mind about physical boundaries.

Well said Datun

That's what the ideology is based on.

No it’s not. Trans ideology is based on the fact that gender identity doesn’t always match your sex. That’s what it is based on. The question of which toilet you piss in is not a “basis” of “trans ideology”, it isn’t even a tenant of trans ideology. It is one of many contentious issues in the debate of how best to accommodate transpeople. To say “trans ideology” is based on “men” wanting to piss in womens toilets is to spectacularly confuse a bush with a tree and then proclaim that bush is not only a tree, it is the entire forest.