Some strange contradictory arguments from the TRA side

[transdimensional]

Claim 1: That it's unfair for TW to go in men's toilets because they're less safe there.

It's probably true that they're less safe there, but how does the conclusion follow? What about a gender-nonconforming male who identifies as a man (not as a woman)? He would still have to go into the gents' even if admission to toilets was on the basis of gender identity. Should he also go to the ladies' to be safe? What about various other vulnerable groups? Young boys, elderly men who may be frail without being disabled, or ethnic minority males in an area where a white racist movement is strong - maybe they would all be safer in the ladies'? But it doesn't mean that's the answer!

Claim 2: That there is no use banning self-identified TW from the ladies' on the basis they might represent a risk, because genuinely dangerous males won't care whether they're allowed in or not.
This implies that the ladies' toilet is no safer than the gents', and therefore it completely contradicts the first point!

Claim 3: That having rules about who can and can't enter the toilets will lead to a surge in TM and others being wrongly accused of being in the wrong toilets.

But even under the EHRC's and Scottish government's understanding of the law, there were theoretical limitations on who could enter which toilets (in theory you would have needed a GRC). So there have always been rules about who can enter. Does anyone recall a huge problem of false accusations before 2010 or before 2004? If not, why should it start now?

When a trans persons shows me evidence of a GC woman holding a sign saying "kill all trans", "bring back witch burning" and other such hateful things, then I will take their " the GC movement want to eradicate trans people" claims seriously. It's the trans movement calling for a section of people to be erased, not the other way around.

And it would actually be illegal for a man to pretend to be a transman in order to access women's spaces, whereas they want it to be perfectly legal for a man to "pretend" to be a transwoman in order to access women's spaces.

I am sorry for your experience

in the interests of people like you and me I am putting my cse grade 3 chemistry and ungraded O’level physics on the table

i told them I didn’t want to do science….i showed them!

wait 🤔

'Speggheads' - love it and will definitely borrow it!
07.51 and you've already won the internet for today😂

It seems Mordant has C&P the intersex bit into at least one other thread (How do I handle this?), has anyone spotted it anywhere else?

Copy-pasting the same bullshit into multiple threads doesn't make it correct.

I admit I was paraphrasing. 😁

Claim 1: That it's unfair for TW to go in men's toilets because they're less safe there.

We've been told a million times by trans activists that who uses what toilet isn't important - that we all have gender-neutral toilets at home. So if it's of so little consequence, why can't they use the men's toilets?

Yep they said more or less the same thing on
Page 2 | How do I handle this?! | Mumsnet
the same 'I knew everything that there is to know about human biology by the age of 14' line🙄
I posted a link to this thread.

Imagine thinking what you learn at school is as much as you can ever learn about any given subject :)

So my upcoming PhD doesn’t qualify me to comment on matters of biology, but I saw this X.com thread earlier so am chucking this into the educational top trumps game

https://x.com/CassieDebus/status/1913536727114985513

With all due respect, copy pasting something you found on the Internet and clearly don't even understand is not the gold standard of argument.

To then assume you're talking to a bunch of dimmo fools and attempt a condescending put down on the back of such thin gruel, well that's just rude.

TRSOH see disobedient MNers as hysterical foolish old hags who only know about nappies, handbags and laundry.

What do a vanishingly rare number of people with DSDs have to do with people who are unambiguously XY male but believe they are entitled to women's spaces and sports because of their gender identity?

People with DSDs, whether they are male or female, do not present a statistically significant risk to women or children because they are such a tiny proportion of the population. Unlike male people, who are about 50% of the population and can easily be banned from women's spaces because, contrary to what trans activists would have us believe, we can in fact correctly identify them close to 100% of the time, just from looking at them and without the need for any genital inspections or karyotype analysis.

It's weird that you think putting on a dress is as difficult as getting a job in law enforcement, or even volunteering at a church, both of which require background checks.

I don't think @BezMills was replying to you, but to the multi-thread word-salad-tosser.

Pretty sure you've got the wrong end of the stick. It wasn't about you, it was about Mordant

So, has this Mordant poster just sprinkled the one cut and paste post over various places? And fucked off, having dispensed their great wisdom to the unwashed hordes?

It's not really what I'd call engagement.

Oops - sorry!! 🤦🏽‍♀️ need more coffee obviously..

Oops will see if I can get it deleted. Sorry @BezMills you popped up after my post so, being the narcissist I clearly am, though it was all about me 🤦🏽‍♀️

Well, they did come back to wave their enormous PhD at us…

They didn't... they did a single-post C&P drive-by.

Oh I totally stand corrected - it was some other enormous PhD waver who was also taunting us ignoramouses!

As y’all were.

I'm getting VERY confused by all the PhDs being dropped all over the place.

As far as I can tell, all the PhDs mentioned on this thread are from people who are reality-based.