Trans Ideology - a real life debate

[Forester1]

So something that is far too rare - a proper debate

For me positions can be summarised as:

Mark Glenening - free speech paramount - and shouldnt have compelled speech
Helen Joyce - Single sex spaces are needed - males need to keep out - however they identify
Freda Wallace - Me, me, me, my sex life, me
Peter Tatchell - Akin to fight for gay rights, black rights. I don’t see any issues. Be kind.

I thought it was very interesting that Paedo Peter conceded that children’s brains are too immature to make decisions about medicalisation yet as we all know, he claimed that 9 year old children can consent and enjoy sex with adults! Why does he keep getting platformed ?

Over threatening a disabled woman?

I don't think NHS employees should be able to threaten members of the public.

I haven’t watched but appreciate the summary

Blimey. I’m reminded of a short male really going for it in a road rage situation

Up against an older slimmer taller male

The pent up aggression and actual violence, he bashed the car.

There was no mistake who was physically threatening, and that was up against a man

I guess Peter's never heard of 'small man syndrome'.

I’m sure DV stats are not bereft of short males

I've met a few short guys in pubs, wouldn't want to ever meet them again.

There's was a shortie on my football team at school, he took great pride in kicking chunks out of his own teammates, no lol.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2011/jan/26/european-football-survey

As I'm a bloke now, I have to hand these stats on football.

'The PFPO study shows an overwhelming tendency for the 11 most picked players in a squad to be shorter than their team-mates'

Oh, Beowulfa, your comment was deleted. Here is my reply:

Yes, it's never really rewarding being proved correct on this issue.

Joyce effortlessly brush aside the drunken, incoherent ramblings of Wallace and the waffle of Tatchell is hardly surprising.

And it does show up that many of the people involved in 'trans rights activism' are genuinely vulnerable.

However, as I said yesterday on the Sarah Jane Baker thread, it is entirely possible, if not quite common, for people to be concurrently vulnerable and dangerous.

What we have seen is an insistence that if someone is 'marginalised' or 'vulnerable' they are therefore excluded from being a risk.

It's a very, very naive view to take.

Just watched a few more extracts. The body language is very telling between Peter and Freda. There’s a moment where Freda puts a hand on Peter’s arm and he pulls away, looking irritated. (Around 1hr 3 minutes in).

Also, Peter tries talking about trans people’s brains being more like those of the opposite sex - and then Freda disagrees, undermining his argument (which Helen deftly debunks too)! I can imagine Peter saying to Freda afterwards: “I’m not angry; I’m just disappointed.”

Tatchell: Transwomen are transwomen, they're not the same as other women

so not women then pete

do you think he can hear himself?

If Peter could hear himself, he wouldn't believe himself. Tatchell certainly looked disengaged and not up for the fight, especially when his compatriot is like some aggressive drunk who's staggered onto the stage.

Tatchell also realises Joyce has all the answers to any question or statement he could ever come up with.

This all reminds me of those James Randi "Million Dollar Reward To Anyone Proving Psychic Ability" challenges which have never been claimed.

Wallace if he was in any way half competent (and half sober) could have made a stab at it. Just give us something...anything.

But no, TRA is pure vapour, larks vomit and spiders webs. It doesn't hold up to any realistic interrogation, is pure propaganda.

Watching Helen, time and time again drive home "never the twain shall meet", and Freda only able to retort with "female penis" refrains and this fantasy of a world without rules, shows in even more clarity that things are more insane than we could have feared just a short while ago.

Wallace is articulating what whole societies are coalescing around, and it hugely scares me now.

Transwomen are transwomen - isn’t that what moderate GC people have been saying all along? Pete is getting Terfy!

Crikey indeed.

Thanks for sharing, I will definitely watch it!

I find myself wondering, when PT is sitting next to FW and that clearly male type aggressive sexual behaviour - he must have a sense of why women might not want that kind of person to be treated as a woman in the public sphere? I really wonder what he'd say if someone just said that to him, in that moment. Would you want your teen niece next to that person alone in a public change room?

PT does seem like he's a bit dim. And maybe that is really the issue, but I also wonder if, in his own mind, he's painted himself into a real corner. I think people can walk themselves right into a sort of intellectual dead end, but be so convinced turning back represents a kind of heresy, they just keep running into the wall. That sexual liberation mindset, the more time goes on, the less it hold up. If you take a narrow focus you can argue the logic, the problem is it clearly doesn't function in reality. But that is the lens he's been using for his whole adult life, it would probably be a huge disruption in his sense of who he is to turn away from that.

What we have seen is an insistence that if someone is 'marginalised' or 'vulnerable' they are therefore excluded from being a risk.

It's a very, very naive view to take.

This.

Transwomen are transwomen - isn’t that what moderate GC people have been saying all along? Pete is getting Terfy!

He was a bit terfy way back ISTR, he got flak for it.

Completely depends what Freda was pushed for. Being trans, of course not
But it could have been anything, maybe completely unrelated to his TRA activities

it's disappointing really how unconvincing Freda and Peter are

unsatisfying. like watching Manchester Unite crucify Torquay United

<checks for other signs of male gender identity>

It really is comedy gold.

Freda says Helen doesn't care about women or children. And in the same sentence, asks why she's hyper focused on children.

And also that the only reason the sports argument exists because it's been thrust into the media, apparently. But it's irrelevant because that's not how we structure society. Eh??

Plus it's all just prejudice. And I fuck men in my clubs they love it, so you're wrong and it makes you a misogynist.

And, if Fairplay for women get what they want women will lose
🤣

If someone has KPSS in a Twitter profile, it means they don't give a shit about women. And I know that for a fact.

Tatchell. Very few children begin treatment in less than 10 years.

Also Tatchell - you can't ever generalise against groups, absolutely no how, no way. Someone asks what about men in general, can they all come in to women spaces. No of course not, you can generalise about them 🤣

I'm snorting my arse off.

Dear God. No fucking wonder they never do this.

Helen and the audience just wiped the entire floor with the mincemeat they'd already made of them.

If we are going by gender stereotypes, my user name is already masculine.

Oh dear, my post didn't last long, but I did use the Malaga airport code to refer to an individual on the panel. You'll never be able to guess which one.

Are they going to have to livestream Isla Bryson's opinion from prison in lieu of any rational and professional TRA spokesperson?