Lesbians not welcome at Gay Pride

[ZombieMumEB]

This is horrifying. Women (lesbians) told by police they are going to be removed because abuse is being hurled at these women.

Police do nothing about the person shouting the abuse.

twitter.com/GetTheLOutUK/status/1563490240912044033

people with dysphoria who were presenting to genuinely appear as female to others, as a way to manage their dysphoria, that was arguably a reasonable accommodation

I know what you mean, but of course it's very rare that a man appears genuinely female. It was always a courtesy, indulging the legal fiction.

No offence taken - us gender critical feminists really are very nice and reasonable people, aren't we!

Thanks. I was quite pleased when I thought of it! I couldn't work out why I got sucked in for so long while my DH who is not a prejudiced person but doesn't care if anyone else thinks he's woke or not, didn't ever believe the nonsense!

Excellent post.

I am so glad not to be working in HE now, especially not in my subject (psychology/neurosciences) as I could not bear teaching stuff that I know is not true. A man cannot become a woman. They can identify as female but gender is not the same as biological sex.

Yes. To me, it's a doomed to failure form of self therapy.

Whereas presenting as their idea of a woman might have been a signal for other people to use female pronouns, out of courtesy, that's all it was, really. Very few men will actually look like a woman.

It was a signal to other people to behave in a certain way.

Not really a cast-iron solution, in anyone's book.

And certainly not something people will continue when it's evidently detrimental to them.

IcakethereforeIam · Yesterday 19:58
"If you had a brain bit communicating that you were Napoleon, or that other people were demons who wanted to kill you or that you could fly, would you recommend a) treatment or b) directions to Moscow, a church or a tall building respectively?"

Ooh, just fucking love it.
And brains generally - very tricky organs.
Shifty bloody bastards.
Not everybody can sort of handle them brains.
One bit of a brain telling the owner:
"It's not what you think, mate and that's that."
And you're pickled.
And all of the sudden you need a lot of really
cheap lipstick and a hairdryer.
And a herd of stupid strangers as "allies".
Can't trust them brains as far as you can throw them.

Balls and cocks, on the other hand...
Well, completely different game.

🤣🤣🤣

"Poll 1,000 people aged 18-24 and they'll have different views to those aged over 65.

"No."

Surprised you know so little about modern British politics. Have a Google how many people aged 18-24 voted for Brexit and then do the same for pensioners.

Similarly, Google what % voted Tory at the last election and then do the same for pensioners.

I think you'll find young and old have very different views on those matters.

Have you managed to work out the difference between sexual orientation and gender identity, yet, hearach?

Please link up the studies you are referring to.

I've been lurking for quite some time and really find @Hearach15 really seems to be making things clear for me !

Yes jeffg, hearache does a great job of solidifying opinion.

They spent the afternoon on the Barclays thread telling everyone how they support Barclay’s supporting not only misogynist message that they as a bank support the objectification of the female body, but also the transphobic ‘to be a woman a transioned male should aspire to have ‘big tits’ ‘ but also told everyone that any publicity is good.

I didn’t receive any confirmation that hearache was going to approach Stonewall to do a joint media blitz campaign with Barclays across all TV, radio and social media with a transitioning male stating ‘I am a transwoman. And I want ‘big tits’ ‘ because they believed this was such good publicity.

They went really quiet on that.

Now I am looking forward to dissecting their studies and finding out what the studies actually report.

Because even if it actually is the highly unlikely event to report findings that it are so absolutist, as Hearache presents here on this thread, apparently so many of us need educating about how the LGBT community think.

So I am very keen to discover it.

I say, bring it on!

@Hearach15 must surely be a GC stooge.
They could not do a better job of showing how awful gender ideology and TRA s are.
Earache I salute you for being such a great gc ally.

Really surprised you don't know there's a generational gap on many issues:

"Just over 70% of 18 to 24-year-olds who voted in the referendum backed Remain, four major academic and commercial polls conducted shortly after the ballot agree, with just under 30% backing Leave.

"In contrast, only 40% of those aged 65 and over supported Remain, while 60% placed their cross against Leave."

www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-45098550

And:

"On the surface, the 2019 General Election result was a devastating defeat for younger voters. 18- to 24-year-olds again came out in strong support of Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party, but were heavily defeated. Over the past decade, young people in the UK have emerged as a cohesive political force – in strong support of Remain and Labour – but have suffered a string of electoral defeats."

blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/young-cosmopolitans-and-ge2019/

"many of us need educating about how the LGBT community think."

Very true.

*Have a Google how many people aged 18-24 voted for Brexit and then do the same for pensioners.+

Similarly, Google what % voted Tory at the last election and then do the same for pensioners.

I think you'll find young and old have very different views on those matters.

While I wait for the links, because I want to make sure I see the same data set that hearache is making these claims from. I have to ask what relevance is this now?

You were insisting on knowing exactly what all LGBT people supposedly think, making some very weird absolutist claims drawing from what I guess were polarized ‘average’ values in a population segment and then applying them to reflect the entire population segment which is a tactic no researcher is going to follow, let alone even endorse if they want to maintain any semblance of a future career.

Now you are making claims outside the LGBT community, when yesterday you attempted to discredit me while I was discussing a CPA study about tolerance amongst the UK population….

And still the hypocrisy continues….

You really are doing good work.

Thanks.

No. To the original data set please.

Come on, you are an quant research expert, please link me to only the orginal data.

Excellent. Hearache. You have confirmed that all transitioned males think that to be ‘woman’ they need to aspire to have ‘big tits’!

Thanks for admitting it on behalf of all trans people!

Winning all round here.

Professor Sir John Curtice is this country's foremost expert in opinion polling. You can take his word for it.

You know what. Don’t bother.

As I said a couple of posts back, you have been making ridiculous statements that show clearly that you don’t understand how to rationally analyse data.

Anyone reading ’Poll 1,000 people aged 18-24 and they'll have different views to those aged over 65.’ is going to see you only ever take an absolutist view. It seems where you see what might be a modal data set (however small), you then wish to apply it to entire population segment in these statements.

You obviously think this way because that follows the statements you have been making thread after thread after thread, where you falsely claim That your opinions reflect the LGB community as a whole or for a large majority.

You have done the same here with these statements. And WTAF? We are not discussing Brexit and we are not discussing elections in these threads.

And you are continuing to talk about to opposing population segments and ignoring a huge population in the middle where the opinion is not as polarised. I can only conclude, You do this to continue to attempt to support your polarised thinking or you just don’t understand quantitative opinion research.

So. Again:

Your statements below are hyperbolic and simply unsupported:

Poll 1,000 people aged 18-24 and they'll have different views to those aged over 65.

Poll 1,000 LGBT people and they'll have different views to 1,000 straight people.

1,000 women will have different views to 1,000 men and as we saw in the EU referendum people in Scotland have different views to those in England and Wales on Brexit.

Because the scenarios you pose will not have 100% full support if it is truly representative of the total population of the segment within the UK. As I said upthread, there is a range of opinions and there will be overlap within all population segments in all but a few extreme scenarios.

You have made what seems to have been absolutist statements that are simply dishonest.

No, 1000 [insert segment as mentioned by hearache here] not will have opinions that can validly be extrapolated out to represent 100% of that population segment in the UK population. It may be valid to say x% of segment or to say the segment is more or less likely to hold that opinion. They will be unlikely to all have opinions that are dichotomous to the populations you are comparing that opinion with in your examples.

You then tried to walk that back with a softer ‘ I think you'll find young and old have very different views on those matters. ‘

Yes ‘some’ will. All? No.

Which has now become y%.

This is not supporting your original claim for ‘distinct’ (remember, you told us they were not ‘discrete’) opinions.

Yes. X% of 18-24 voters indicated they would /did vote labour (didn’t the % increase after announcing the uni fee policy amongst other massive promises?) It wasn’t 100%. There was overlap with opinions shared with the 60+ population.

Plus you ignored the population in the middle where again plenty of overlap and again no ‘100% of the population has x opinion’ statements that could be supported.

I don’t think you are convincing anyone with this line of discussion. But please do continue and we will just continue to go around and around.

You seem to like making dishonest absolutist, all or nothing, statements about what you believe all people who are LGB or TQ believe.

Those statements aren’t true and aren’t evidenced with any data.

As per my post, this little deviation is irrelevant to the discussion.

Which is about your continued use of absolutist statements about what you say the majority of the LGBT community believe.

"It's very interesting that to me that you still won't admit to being transphobic while also referring to trans women as "transitioned males". When the shoe fits so perfectly, why not just own it?"

Genuine question.
What ARE they then?
What does the prefix "trans" mean, if it does not mean they are going (or think they are) from one sex to the other?
What are they transitioning from, and what are they transitioning TO?

The statement is factual. They ARE transitioned males, because male is a statement of biological reality.
Do you think you stop being male when you say that you are a trans woman?
What about all the trans women who happily still accept that they are, and always will be, male? Like Blair White and many others? Are they transphobes too?
Why is it (yawn) transphobic to acknowledge biological reality and fact? How can a fact be transphobic?
Surely you agree that transwomen are males who have transitioned, ergo they are transitioned males?
Otherwise.............what ARE they?

(BTW I know you are going to say "they are transwomen". What is a transwoman?)

you still won't admit to being transphobic while also referring to trans women as "transitioned males"

What's "transphobic" about this factual term?