'Arm the Dolls'

[WrongKindOfFeminist]

Pictured is Natacha Kennedy of Goldsmiths.

T shirt says 'Arm the Dolls'

“I’ve spent so much time discussing this with my non-gender therapist and have agonised over what the right thing is.”

Your therapist can also not give you or any other male person consent on behalf of other female people either.

You making a conscious decision where you enter a female single sex provision with the understanding that you are male not female and that there is a risk of you causing harm regardless of your actions in that provision, is an intentional choice.

It also doesn’t matter whether you make attempts to ‘blend in’ and it doesn’t fucking make one bit of difference if you “use the facilities that match my appearance”.

Toilets are not segregated by ‘appearance’ FFS!

But at least now you really have shown how so much of what you have posted is constantly contradictory. Even within the same thread.

Your hate is not transferred to vast majority of cisgender women like myself who don’t subscribe to “gender critical” anti transgender hate. And I’m hardly misinformed, there is no toilet law in the UK and it certainly isn’t a criminal offence to use a toilet.
No I’m not going to X the right-wing echo chamber I’ll stick to factual sources thanks.

There is nothing hateful about not wanting men in female only spaces . What is hateful is deliberately violating women's boundaries because you don't care about women..

There are laws around who should access female single sex provisions as per the EA2010.

’Cis’ is a meaningless term and by its nature forces all people into a population of people who believe there is such a thing as gender identity as a meaningful categorisation of human being.

You are misinformed when you imply that cases will be successful at the European Court of Human Rights in challenging the exclusion of male people from female single sex provisions in the UK. You are also misinformed when you claim that male people have an absolute right of privacy and dignity to use female single sex provisions because there are restrictions to that ‘right’.

And to address this later addition /

”No I’m not going to X the right-wing echo chamber I’ll stick to factual sources thanks.”

Explanations about how consent cannot be transferred from one person to another when another person with agency to not give consent remains true regardless of the media platform that explanation is found on.

The fact you keep calling trans women is indicting of your knowledge in the topic so I will be no longer responding to your asinine comments. CIS if you went to school and had any language classes is written in Latin. However “gender criticals” aka transphobes do not like to acknowledge that.

Oh, dear.

When you’re losing an argument, resort to name calling. What age are you, 12?

There are also separate laws wrt workplaces and schools, respectively.

No arguement has been lost. Hope this helps.

You might want to rethink the going to school jibe.

It is irrelevant if the term is a Latin prefix or not. Used for the purpose of categorising human beings the way you and others attempt to use it has never worked effectively and it is meaningless because of the inappropriateness of this usage.

And if you are going to take offence at the rejection of your language demands, it is hypocritical to have detached the term feminist from the term ‘gender critical feminist’ so that you can then falsely group in other groups who don’t share the same motivations as feminists in establishing protections that support female people’s needs.

“The fact you keep calling trans women is indicting of your knowledge in the topic so I will be no longer responding to your asinine comments”

Want to have a crack at making this sentence coherent? It seems to be missing a word or maybe more.

In these days of AI slop, I'm slightly heartened at the misspelling and incongruous word choices. And 'crotch detectives' was amusing. 4/10.

Masha, away and read the Equality Act 2010, and then the Supeme Court Judgment on ForWomen Scotland, and come back to us.

Coming back to this, all I can think is, hey, howse this line of attack working for you ?

When you’re in a hole, it’s advisable to stop digging.

I think the term ‘persuasion-predator’ is one that we should use more often.

We see it so often on media, news, and social media. It is very useful.

I haven't read the last three pages because life is too short anyway - I came across the term 'clocksucker' on FB this morning and thought, Oh, hang on!'

Given that I've not read recent posts, and given that the thread is long, I might have overlooked someone making the point I'm about to make, in which case, apologies.

What Dumb is doing, whether he recognises it or not, is opening wide a breach in safeguarding. Once one man, however he presents (and there's still not been an answer to that one about presenting in a feminine way), can go into the women's toilets, or the women's changing rooms, it becomes much, much harder to keep other men out.

There's a possibility that Dumb has no nefarious intentions, but he's opening a door for the multiple creeps who do.

I used to work in a school. Even the grandmother who had a daughter working in the school and a granddaughter as a pupil in the school had all the safeguarding checks run. No exceptions, because the next person might say, 'Oh, Mrs Bloggs next door, I've known her since I was 10, she's just lovely...' and then the next person says, 'Oh, my old Dad is happy to come in and we all know him, he's such a love, and the next person says, 'Tony over the road is between jobs, he's offered to help with football, lovely chap, not point wasting the money on the checks, is there?'... and then the dubious know what to do. Spend a few years building a reputation as a lovely person and you will have unfettered access to primary school children.

The same applies to SSS. Make exceptions, and the creeps know what to do.

That this needs to be laid out, after multiple scandals, absolutely beggars belief.

Men are not a type of women Masha. Biological knowledge is the underpinning foundation for GC posters.

And why do you think men should be allowed to take women's legal rights to single sex spaces away from them?

If the SC decided that men with a GRC were allowed to use women's single sex spaces, would TRA still claim that theres no 'toilet law'?

I doubt it.

I really don't understand why voluntary segregation by personality (and by what one assumes about others' personalities based on their bodies aka "cis") is supposed to be more progressive than the occasional need for simple practical separation because of
the different needs, risks and challenges that come with our biological sex.

Seems like a massive step backwards to me.

Well the new foam flecked poster to this thread was a fun addition and a nice break from the constant refrain of utter self obsession coupled with icky attempts at emotional manipulation

‘on careful consideration I’m just going to keep doing what brings me gratification even if it harms others. Can you please tell me I’m a nice person, oh and try to get my pronouns right. Most people think I’m just lovely’

Damn, I missed all the fun! Masha is a new one I think, I don't recall seeing that name before - must look out for their stream of babble in future and good their errors were corrected by the grown ups.

I think rather than ‘new one’, I suspect it is an old one.

Certainly pushing the same old arguments.