Posting upton’s old photos and name on twitter

[Biggadyboom]

Look I’ve been in these discussions since before this forum existed. You don’t need to break it down for me. I peaked in 2018.

But the endless sharing of upton’s name accompanied by photos and horrible comments about him and his wife is not nice. It is totally is transphobia. It’s horrible.

I could kind of understand the point of it, if it was just the name being shared.

But equally the court has ruled that Upton has a right to privacy. I thought it was all about respecting court’s rulings?

but the sharing of private photos (presumably grabbed from social media) and especially their wedding photo with insults to both of them and speculation about their marriage is awful and will not help their be a resolution to this debate. It polarises it even more and is transphobia.

fair enough, don’t let Upton change the rules of the country and workplace based on personal beliefs . But that doesn’t involve posting personal information and photos , insults and horrible speculation.

or are we just going low now?

It’s impossible to ensure that nobody can burgle your house. Therefore there’s no point using locks.

People are always going to break the speed limit. Therefore we shouldn’t have speed limits.

People will always break the law by driving without insurance. Therefore there’s no reason why anyone should have to buy insurance.

Men will always be more likely to commit sexual assaults if they really want to, therefore we shouldn’t bother having single sex spaces.

There are absolutely no differences between the above statements.

if they read this thread carefully, they may learn something. And if they are a TRA maybe they will rethink coming here and blaming women for everything.

And if they are reaching the summit? this may help them to the peak.

ETA: Agree with @ThePinkPoster - people REALLY need to understand what things like "policing by consent" means. (yes, just that: you will not always have a speed trap right behind that 30mph sign, but you should consent to drive as if there were)

show, don't tell. And MN isn't TwiX.
So show us your evidence from MN. C'mon, don't tell us you don't have screenshots?

I have. You are free to do your own homework on MN, I'm not your gimp.

Don’t just plop something down and think you have provided evidence.

Copy and paste the relevant point.

Where did JK Rowling say this quote below :

they are all predatory sex fetishists.

Again, I point out why this is unlikely .
Because for a start, I don’t believe female people with transgender identities are described as predators or sex fetishists.

And we also know that there are many male people with transgender identities who don’t demand use of female single sex provisions and who don’t demand language and language conventions are changed to fit their demands, and who treat female people with respect.

If you have evidence, you can reference exactly what was said. When is it acceptable to just post a link and no commentary or reference to the point under discussion?

Yeah, the 'hate speech' issues are definitely with the GC side.

ffs

terfisaslur.com

Indeed.

They understand it, it’s too inconvenient a truth.

you haven't because you can't.

Tell us JKR's exact words that you are referring to ...

It’s impossible to ensure that nobody can burgle your house. Therefore there’s no point using locks.
People are always going to break the speed limit. Therefore we shouldn’t have speed limits.
People will always break the law by driving without insurance. Therefore there’s no reason why anyone should have to buy insurance.
Men will always be more likely to commit sexual assaults if they really want to, therefore we shouldn’t bother having single sex spaces.
There are absolutely no differences between the above statements.

Strawman. I never said preventative actions don't help but they will only take you so far. If they didn't we wouldn't have the sexual violence epidemic we have.

That will be never, then.

Please link to one example of JK Rowling threatening violence against trans people, implicitly or otherwise.

I am not on Twitter because I got tired of trans identifying men sending me pictures of their penis, apparently in an attempt to convince me that I was wrong about them not being real women.

Fantastic.

Thank you for acknowledging that women’s spaces are invaluable in reducing harm caused by male sexual predators.

You seem to be telling us that the preventative action of keeping men out of our spaces is useless.

Or are you back tracking now? Are you saying you are granting us your permission to take preventative action?

Yes. ‘Fake’ breasts are ‘fake’ breasts. They are the strap on type, yes?

Because a breast enlargement or reduction is a false comparison to a male person having an artificial cavity inserted into his groin where there should not be a cavity at all.

Should I use your tactic and type in capitals ‘false’? And add an emoji? That is one of your favourites tactics to bully people isn’t it?

None of these tweets are threatening violence against trans people, even implicitly.

None of them are even transphobic.

well the thing is, as you know, your definition of hate is "men can't be women" whereas mine is "terfs should die in a grease fire"

So i'd like to see your actual evidence of hate speech. And as you are singularly unable to provide it, i will draw my own conclusions.

Revolting language about the gimp, btw. I have been polite.

you haven't because you can't.
Tell us JKR's exact words that you are referring to ...

They are in the link I posted. Not to mention her routine posting of isolated instances of trans sexual violence implicating them all with plausible deniability.

Oh & lets not forget the kooky manifesto transferring the abuse she suffered from her partner on to all trans people. 🤪

Would that back down be a retreat?

As in motte and bailey? Should we all post the link to Wikipedia?

If you think they are in that link then we can safely conclude they don't exist.

I have. You are free to do your own homework on MN, I'm not your gimp.
well the thing is, as you know, your definition of hate is "men can't be women" whereas mine is "terfs should die in a grease fire"
So i'd like to see your actual evidence of hate speech. And as you are singularly unable to provide it, i will draw my own conclusions.
Revolting language about the gimp, btw. I have been polite.

Again it's in the link. And no you have not been polite by continuously making unnecessary irrelevant demands.

She absolutely didn't do anyone of that, you ghoul.

Are there any disgusting depths you won't sink to?

So she hasn’t done what you have said at all.

You made a false generalisation and you cannot support it. She has made the generalisation that you have accused her of.

Is this where we post ‘you’re making things up’ and ‘you’re lying’. They are more favourities.

OK please choose one thing from that link and break it down for us. What has she said that is actually transphobic or incorrect?

If it was in the pink you could point to the words that you mean. But you can't

If you think they are in that link then we can safely conclude they don't exist.

Deny, deny denial…