Giggle v Tickle Friday 15th May 2pm AEST

[impossibletoday]

Giggle v Tickle
Friday 15th May
2pm AEST
Live streamed

https://x.com/i/status/2053669311504642197

Prison data is not an accurate account of offending as we know from most rapes not being reported not to mention the trans population being infinitesimal makes them statistically insignificant to draw meaningful conclusions about. It's the same reason why research conclusions on trans people is often criticised.

That's why relying on broad grass roots concerns matters.

Grass roots concern?

The reason lesbians picked up on this earlier than anyone is the behaviour of straight men towards lesbians who did not want them in lesbian spaces and who did not want to sleep with them. It is the reason there are pitifully few actual female and lesbian only spaces left.

Lesbians were writing about this decades ago.

Lesbians, particularly in Australia have a diverse view on trans women with most reportedly in support of them so its inaccurate to assert their total resistance.

Oh is that why the Lesbian Action Group didn't bother to go to court to hold female only events? I see. Oh hang on...

Gretel now resorting to GenAI for help with responses. Still not making logical arguments though. GC brownshirts FFS. Hyperbole off the scale. Right, onto another thread.

I know, right. Pity AI doesn't know about Germaine Greer or Sheila Jeffreys. Or LAG or anything lesbian/female in between.

Your attempt at discrediting the prisoner stats is weak and unsubstantiated and requires an intense amount of disconnected thinking that a sub group of male people who have shown the same male criminal pattern behaviour in the prison statistics will not show that pattern in the ‘offending’ statistics if they could ever be collected.

You and others can continue to attempt to discredit the prisoner statistics with that distraction of trying to say offending rates might be miraculously lower despite the conviction and incarceration rates saying it is not. And people can point out that your point is not logical and you can describe no reason at all as to why the offending rate would be lower than the pattern of the prison figures indicate.

Then we can get back onto pointing out the pattern in prisoner statistics which also is not solely a UK statistical pattern.

We do have enough meaningful data to support the conclusion that male people with transgender identities do not commit sex offences at the same rate or lower than female people in the UK.

On that basis, it would be a failure in safeguarding to treat that male group as if they were special and that they should not be treated as if they were like all other male people. We have learned this throughout history. No special male groups set aside for special treatment above the age of a child.

Readers Note:

Always check any claim of support for people with transgender identities against the data and check the question that was asked. The falsehood appears quite regularly that claims that a segment of the population ‘support trans people’ and of course, on a very superficial level this is true.

It is important because when further questions are asked that specifically question the support of male people being included in female single sex provisions the results change dramatically. Even amongst the 18-24 year old segment which people so often use as a call to future support.

It is also important that when these attitudes are tracked, the support is declining. This is consistent with several different countries.

General blanket claims that the majority of a group of the general population ‘support people with transgender identities’ are so misleading as to have become meaningless in light of the answers to specific questions.

I swear he's not even trying now. Beneath the pretentious blather, it's just a mix of "no it's not" "yes it is" and "some women indulge this lie so all women should be forced to".

But then he's not here for an actual exchange. The purpose is to waste our time and energy and run some excellent posts down off the pages. And this is because, despite the ruinous and ridiculous current state of Australia, he knows, like Mr Tickle knows, that they can't actually win. Men are not women and can never be women and nobody on earth believes that they can.

That's why he's ploughing all this into it, trying to force us to believe it, because it's not enough that Australia and some women already pretend to believe it; it's a total falsehood and so they can't stand to have anyone break the spell. They can't make men into women and they can't make anyone believe men are women. All they can do is create a sufficiently coercive, oppressive and abusive environment so that nobody actually dares say it.

Hence... this.

Normal, functional and basically socially competent thinking -

women being assaulted is a problem

transactivism apparently-

it isn't and no one should mind

End of all anyone needs to know, really.

Men are women
women are men
women getting raped isn't an issue
everybody agrees
nobody can tell what sex is
lesbians love straight sex
and so on and so on.

Fairly obvious conclusions really.

I mean, I am just waiting for Allsop, the Williams institutes and the many Wikipedia links to fallacies etc. including the tyranny of the majority.

This has some interesting points about how Tickle’s speech has been delivered.

x.com/hothingsgirlsay/status/2056171060895138063?s=46

When you think it through also, it is incongruous that there are people who also dismiss the behaviour of these male people with transgender identities who are imprisoned with female inmates. These male people not only show a male pattern of criminality in the prisoner statistics, but also rather significantly when they are then imprisoned in with female inmates.

But apparently the attacks on female people in prison by those prisoners are to be also written off as statistically insignificant.

Are you a teenager who has not yet learned the meaning of disingenuous?

I wonder what the statistics are in terms of whether the women harassed, scared, assaulted and raped by these men found their experience 'insignificant'?

On a scale of 1-5 Ms Smith with 1 being 'not very significant' and 5 being 'very significant (life changing mental/emotional and/or physical harm) how would you rate your experience?

If we're going to be this sociopathic about women then why not? If statistics are what we go by then let's go for it. If 100% of the women harmed found it significant does that matter at all? Or that 100% of those attacks could have been prevented by removing the very tiny number of men in women's prisons?

Is that statistically significant?

I think he just doesn't realise that he's actually made the case for keeping all men in Iceland out of all women's spaces in Iceland... and that on the basis that they're men, not because they're Icelandic. So the same applies not only to all men in other countries too, but also to all men no matter what additional traits they possess, as they're irrelevant to the fact that they're men.

Like when he told us men in women's sports is fine as long as it's not very many of them, thus admitting that he knows they're not women and that they cause a problem.

“If 100% of the women harmed found it significant does that matter at all? Or that 100% of those attacks could have been prevented by removing the very tiny number of men in women's prisons?”

Indeed, safeguarding principles at work.

Identifying potential increase in risk compared to the general population of female people seems so easily and breezily dismissed with some illogical declaration that somehow one group of male people will miraculously show a different pattern of offending when offending statistics are somehow collected compared to incarceration statistics.

remembering also that this specific group also has been shown to have a pattern of receiving non-carceral convictions. Of course, we should not discuss them the number of those receiving leniency who then end up committing sex offences again.

Ok. Either this is the latest favourite trans argument that they've all been briefed on at TRAHQ, or we are being beaten to death with sock puppets.

This is at least the third TRA thread derailer to have made this exact argument in the last week. It never gets more convincing btw.

Gretal. Changing your name, and trying again on a different thread after being comprehensively proven wrong on the last one, isn't going to suddenly make your argument more convincing this time.
The women here are not so easily fooled.

They do the same with sex! Funny how all the same things apply. Categories are really useful, and sometimes even categories within categories.

Is this the guy who insisted he could always tell someone's gender by looking, and knew for a fact that he was never mistaken because his "looking" method was marvellously foolproof?

I am being rather facetious. But that was basically it.

Michaelia Cash is the leader of the Opposition in the Australian Senate. She posted a few days back on facebook a statement from the leader of the opposition that they would prioritise changing the SDA if they are elected in 2028. 13,000 likes. 2000 comments, many saying 'do it now'. A quick glance though her posts shows she often gets 500-1200 likes including on the controversial tax changes in the latest budget. So maybe people do care about this "fringe issue" after all?

For comparison, Penny Wong, Minister for Foreign Affairs (who is fairly popular and arguably one of the most intelligent Aussie politicians, albeit silent on this topic) gets around 2500 likes for her posts about important international visits, including one securing fuel from Singapore during the fuel crisis.

Right.

I will just put this here.

I am getting scraping vibes from the angry, prolific, and fundamentally erroneous poster determined to tell women they are wrong….

This!
It’s an interesting case because of it. In the UK you dont have to look female for a TIM to claim render reassignment as a PC. But of course in Giggle For Girls it was an algorithm only looking at facial features and using geometrical norms. It was the AI which refused RT and then SG agreed. Where does that leave them? Even the computer doesn’t think he passes….