|
Post by wannabee on Jan 16, 2023 14:49:24 GMT
what does it mean to identify as a man or a woman? is anyone able to answer that without a sexist response? Very simple, check out Gender Dysphoria
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 16, 2023 15:34:55 GMT
In terms of schools, that is a concern, as you say, 16-18 year old “boys” using a 12 year old girl’s toilet. But that happens now and how many incidents have there been? I still think the issue is a molehill being made into a mountain. The bigger ramification is constitutional Honestly mate could bore you all day on this. One of the amendments tabled was on data recording and it got voted down - if they don't measure it how can they manage it? Unfortunately I couldn't find a wording, the reason it was voted down or what, if anything replaces it. The reason it disturbs me though is because other self-id territories are always held up as evidence the world doesn't end but this is deeply concerning from a Belgian journalist: grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/self-id-in-belgium-no-news-is-goodThe Inverness school was mental and it wasn't until it hit the press that they actually changed the unisex bathroom arrangements - until then they'd basically allowed the kids complaining to be bullied for being transphobic. There was girls staying off school because they were scared to change their sanitary stuff at school and all sorts. I'd be interested in your concern from a constitutional perspective? I'm a nationalist (ish) although fading rapidly - my concern is the SG has operated outside its legal parameters and, even if I agreed with it, I couldn't support that as allowing a government to operate outside its legal confines is dangerous. The other aspect would be its an open goal for West Minster really. Another thought would be why are they willing to operate outside their legal confines for something like self-id but not to bring a second independence referendum? Christ. The gender issue is an absolute nightmare. The constitutional issue surrounds the right for Westminster to overrule devolved powers of Scotland (Wales and N Ire) to the extent the devolved law conflicts with a wider UK law that takes precedence (here, the Equality Act). As with Human Rights Convention (and before Brexit, EU laws) for and other International treaties, Westminster laws must not conflict with them and Scottish devolved laws must not conflict with wider UK laws. But Sturgeon will use this as a reason for independence, saying Scotland are being prohibited from exercising its devolved powers by Westminster who will ovverride Scotland when they see fit, thus meaning Scotland can only be independent if it leaves the UK. Remainers (like me) will use it to criticise Brexiteers (the Westminster government) as hypocrites for not allowing Scotland to exercise its devolved powers. And the actual issue just becomes political rather than about the poor gender confused children of Scotland, or whatever it is really about! Hence why I say it is a mountain out of a molehill and an excuse for culture wars over what I think is a relatively minor issue compared with NHS strikes and cost of loving crisis as an example. It is a big mess.
|
|
|
Post by slash on Jan 16, 2023 15:37:49 GMT
what does it mean to identify as a man or a woman? is anyone able to answer that without a sexist response? Very simple, check out Gender Dysphoria gender dysphoria: a term that describes a sense of unease that a person may have because of a mismatch between their biological sex and their gender identity. gender identity: personal sense of one's own gender. gender: the male sex or the female sex, especially when considered with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones. so isn't this whole thing just rooted in sexism? if you're a man who likes ballet and pink, that doesn't make you a woman anymore than liking blue and sports makes you a man. i don't believe gender exists, and believe that male/female means what you are born as, and however you choose to live your life doesn't change that.
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Jan 16, 2023 16:08:05 GMT
Lions are predators and there’s only c.100 of them in the UK – nobody would ever argue for taking the fences down at safari parks though. Even the SNP believe there is an increase in risk as they voted down an amendment to ban Sex Offenders from getting a certificate and instead replaced it with a risk assessment on a case by case basis ergo sex offenders will be getting certificates. Risk management is a hierarchy and if you can avoid the risk that is obviously preferable then trying to manage the risk – if you attempt to manage the risk you introduce opportunity for the management systems to fail and in this case we’re speaking about sex offenders. The reason they didn’t ban them was because if they had then it would have been outside the competence of the Scottish Government as it would have strayed onto reserve matters and therefore they consciously decided to crack on without the ban for expediency. In terms of numbers this has a potential impact on 50% of the population. The system has historically been set-up to deal with 30 certificates a year which are provided following a medical assessment confirming gender dysphoria. Removing the requirement for a medical assessment even the Scottish government are predicting this number to rise to 300 a year which in itself is hugely conservative. It also begs the question why did the other 270 not fancy a medical assessment – I couldn’t go to Nationwide and identify as someone who could own a million pound house without a financial professional being involved. There’s been a 4000% increase in girls referred to Taverstock before it closed and c.1 in 25 high school kids identifying as trans in schools in US so the number could sky rocket so a system designed to cope with 30, removing its only real risk management apparatus and about to be hit by a tsunami of applicants of course presents a risk. It's important to note too that if you can’t avoid the risk then you are accepting that you have to manage the risk and at each stage of the pyramid it gets more and more likely something may happen regardless of the proficiency of the system. In the Hierarchy of Controls moving downwards: Elimination – we’re already ascertained we’re not doing this Substitution – We can’t replace the hazard Engineering – Can we isolate people from the hazard? – we’re potentially doing the antithesis. Administrative controls – This is where the risk assessment output comes into play. PPE: Issuing women and girls with tasers and pepper spray if the above is unsuccessful? ALL Lions are Predators who have been taken out of their Natural Environment ostensibly as a safeguard against Extinction To use Lions as an analogy with Sexual Predators is Bizarre You say and justify that currently a Medical Assessment is required to obtain a Gender Recognition Certificate GRC but you disingenuously omit that the Medical Assessment is a Psychological Medical Assessment followed by a Panel Review of people who have no knowledge of the Applicant This also answers your question as to why more Trans people do not subject themselves to this undignified process. What is the difference between a Gay Man/Woman self declaring their sexuality other than previously Gay/Women were seen to be suffering from a Mental Disorder but thankfully Society has moved on and a Trans Man/Woman self declaring their Sexuality Much fuss is also made regarding the reduction from 2 years living as a Trans person to 3 months but this overlooks that there is a further 3 months "cooling off period " after the application is made before the GRC is issued The main objection to a change in Law is to protect Women in Safe Spaces which are generally described as Public Toilets, Changing Rooms and Refuge Centres etc. I totally agree with this objective but it has nothing to do with Trans people but Male Sexual Predators. I don't discount entirely that there may be a small number of Male Sexual Predators who might seek to exploit this but I contend they could do this with or without a GRC And what about safe spaces for Trans People? Within Society currently Trans people are among the most subjected to Violence and Discrimination This investigation puts the percentage of Trans people suffering violence and abuse at 31% www.surrey.ac.uk/news/trans-people-and-cisgender-gay-men-uk-are-most-likely-experience-violenceThis survey puts the figure above 60% www.thenational.scot/news/19556842.60-transgender-people-scotland-experience-workplace-harassment-survey-says/And all sex offenders are sex offenders surely? The risk assessment put forward would decide which lions to keep enclosed and which to release so the analogy is fine. Nothing disingenuous about it - it is currently the only part of the process that ascertains if the applicant has or has not got gender dysphoria other than the applicant saying so. A sex offender doesn't even have to medically prove it potentially depending on how the risk assessment works. Are you honestly saying this is so traumatic it has put at least 90% of applicants off? I've been in front of an adoption panel and it isn't pleasant but it is an essential part of the process as can't merely identify as a suitable parent. Nope not homophobic so you can park that one. I tell you who is arguably homophobic though - the previous head of Mermaids who put her then son through pharmaceutical and surgical procedures to save her marriage because her husband couldn't deal with the then 'him' playing with girls stuff and clothes (3 minutes in from memory): A three month cooling off period makes it sound like a mobile phone contract - how do you even prove someone isn't living in their acquired gender without resorting to gender stereotypes? In addition why is the penalty for this only 2 years in comparison to 5 years for fraudulent name changes? There's at least 1,000 sex offenders missing who've changed their name without notifying police (likely loads more) - if they're willing to risk 5 years for that why wouldn't they risk two years to change gender without notifying police? It's all about access and opportunity and impacts of the DBS checks. I'd rather rely on official police statistics and it concerns me that it isn't being recorded - on the counter this is someone showing their working on the other way around: wingsoverscotland.com/the-rorschach-test/The last estimate of Scottish women (by Eurostat) was 2.74m, and 2.65m men. Which would give us 2021 figures for Scotland of:
1298 men in jail for sex offences out of 2.65m = 1 in 2042 men
5 women in jail for sex offences out of 2.74m = 1 in 548,000 women
6 transwomen in jail for sex offences out of 2000 = 1 in 333 transwomen
The small numbers cause larger deviations, but the trend is as clear as a bell. Per capita, transwomen consistently appear far more likely to be convicted sex offenders than either natal women OR non-trans men.On safe spaces I have absolutely no issue but again this is on blokes and our safe spaces should be there safe spaces - it shouldn't be slopey shouldered off to women to deal with. A biological bloke being in a space with a biological bloke is completely different risk to a biological bloke being in with a biological female. I always quite like Debbie Hayton's take on the situation as a trans teacher who has argued throughout the current balance is correct: www.spectator.co.uk/writer/debbie-hayton/
|
|
|
Post by superjw on Jan 16, 2023 16:13:45 GMT
I suspect this law creates its own complexity with names for those under 18. Whilst one can change a name at 16 it's not legally enforced and accepted until 18 (2 different processes) Possibly creates a confusing couple of years for someone at 16 who wants to change their gender and name.
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Jan 16, 2023 16:13:55 GMT
As usual, threads like this always revert to the LCD of the subject. In this case, it's that gender self-identity makes for perverts gaining access to the opposite sex for sexual gratification. But in reality, self - identity is making some people feel comfortable in their own skin. I have a member of my family who is the safety officer of a multi-age, multi-gender rugby club and I can assure you all that any issues of self-identity would be treated properly. Ergo, entire males or females would not be allowed in changing rooms of the opposite sex to the one they've inherited, bodily, at birth, just as no of-age males are allowed to use the same changing/shower rooms at the same time as under-age players. Self-identity is more to do with feelings rather than acts. Do I think people should be allowed to self-identify at the age of 16? Why not? They're allowed to have sex at 16, which is physical, but they're not allowed to feel good about themselves at that age! Surely, the real parameter should boil down to actual physical gender conversion. Gender self-identity will harm no one. And even if a person self identifies and then realises when they get older that it was just a phase they were going through, providing they've not undergone actual sexual physical conversion, they can revert to whatever they were simply by changing back identity. I agree with what Oggy says above; people are making a mountain out of a molehill, either because of politics or they simply don't like people because they don't conform to the 'norm'. What next? Ban abortion; make homosexuality illegal; put to death transsexuals because they're an abomination? And don't say that can't happen. There are still some societies that already do that. As for Starmer, the more he opens his stupid mouth, the more I dislike him. OS. Completely agree.
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Jan 16, 2023 16:17:58 GMT
Honestly mate could bore you all day on this. One of the amendments tabled was on data recording and it got voted down - if they don't measure it how can they manage it? Unfortunately I couldn't find a wording, the reason it was voted down or what, if anything replaces it. The reason it disturbs me though is because other self-id territories are always held up as evidence the world doesn't end but this is deeply concerning from a Belgian journalist: grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/self-id-in-belgium-no-news-is-goodThe Inverness school was mental and it wasn't until it hit the press that they actually changed the unisex bathroom arrangements - until then they'd basically allowed the kids complaining to be bullied for being transphobic. There was girls staying off school because they were scared to change their sanitary stuff at school and all sorts. I'd be interested in your concern from a constitutional perspective? I'm a nationalist (ish) although fading rapidly - my concern is the SG has operated outside its legal parameters and, even if I agreed with it, I couldn't support that as allowing a government to operate outside its legal confines is dangerous. The other aspect would be its an open goal for West Minster really. Another thought would be why are they willing to operate outside their legal confines for something like self-id but not to bring a second independence referendum? Christ. The gender issue is an absolute nightmare. The constitutional issue surrounds the right for Westminster to overrule devolved powers of Scotland (Wales and N Ire) to the extent the devolved law conflicts with a wider UK law that takes precedence (here, the Equality Act). As with Human Rights Convention (and before Brexit, EU laws) for and other International treaties, Westminster laws must not conflict with them and Scottish devolved laws must not conflict with wider UK laws. But Sturgeon will use this as a reason for independence, saying Scotland are being prohibited from exercising its devolved powers by Westminster who will ovverride Scotland when they see fit, thus meaning Scotland can only be independent if it leaves the UK. Remainers (like me) will use it to criticise Brexiteers (the Westminster government) as hypocrites for not allowing Scotland to exercise its devolved powers. And the actual issue just becomes political rather than about the poor gender confused children of Scotland, or whatever it is really about! Hence why I say it is a mountain out of a molehill and an excuse for culture wars over what I think is a relatively minor issue compared with NHS strikes and cost of loving crisis as an example. It is a big mess. Genuinely mate I have absolutely no fucking clue what is going on and why - that would bite her on the arse because 80% don't support the bill from memory. Think this is bad - Look at the next one coming down the track: wingsoverscotland.com/raise-all-of-the-flags/Ban on conversion therapy (apart from affirming actual physical conversion) - look at the state of the working group who gave the answer the SG wanted too!! The person included for lived experiences who has a disability that makes them forget stuff and struggle to recollect from the first person would be too ridiculous for satire.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Jan 16, 2023 17:49:48 GMT
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Jan 16, 2023 17:57:00 GMT
16 is too young
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jan 16, 2023 18:54:32 GMT
ALL Lions are Predators who have been taken out of their Natural Environment ostensibly as a safeguard against Extinction To use Lions as an analogy with Sexual Predators is Bizarre You say and justify that currently a Medical Assessment is required to obtain a Gender Recognition Certificate GRC but you disingenuously omit that the Medical Assessment is a Psychological Medical Assessment followed by a Panel Review of people who have no knowledge of the Applicant This also answers your question as to why more Trans people do not subject themselves to this undignified process. What is the difference between a Gay Man/Woman self declaring their sexuality other than previously Gay/Women were seen to be suffering from a Mental Disorder but thankfully Society has moved on and a Trans Man/Woman self declaring their Sexuality Much fuss is also made regarding the reduction from 2 years living as a Trans person to 3 months but this overlooks that there is a further 3 months "cooling off period " after the application is made before the GRC is issued The main objection to a change in Law is to protect Women in Safe Spaces which are generally described as Public Toilets, Changing Rooms and Refuge Centres etc. I totally agree with this objective but it has nothing to do with Trans people but Male Sexual Predators. I don't discount entirely that there may be a small number of Male Sexual Predators who might seek to exploit this but I contend they could do this with or without a GRC And what about safe spaces for Trans People? Within Society currently Trans people are among the most subjected to Violence and Discrimination This investigation puts the percentage of Trans people suffering violence and abuse at 31% www.surrey.ac.uk/news/trans-people-and-cisgender-gay-men-uk-are-most-likely-experience-violenceThis survey puts the figure above 60% www.thenational.scot/news/19556842.60-transgender-people-scotland-experience-workplace-harassment-survey-says/And all sex offenders are sex offenders surely? The risk assessment put forward would decide which lions to keep enclosed and which to release so the analogy is fine. Nothing disingenuous about it - it is currently the only part of the process that ascertains if the applicant has or has not got gender dysphoria other than the applicant saying so. A sex offender doesn't even have to medically prove it potentially depending on how the risk assessment works. Are you honestly saying this is so traumatic it has put at least 90% of applicants off? I've been in front of an adoption panel and it isn't pleasant but it is an essential part of the process as can't merely identify as a suitable parent. Nope not homophobic so you can park that one. I tell you who is arguably homophobic though - the previous head of Mermaids who put her then son through pharmaceutical and surgical procedures to save her marriage because her husband couldn't deal with the then 'him' playing with girls stuff and clothes (3 minutes in from memory): A three month cooling off period makes it sound like a mobile phone contract - how do you even prove someone isn't living in their acquired gender without resorting to gender stereotypes? In addition why is the penalty for this only 2 years in comparison to 5 years for fraudulent name changes? There's at least 1,000 sex offenders missing who've changed their name without notifying police (likely loads more) - if they're willing to risk 5 years for that why wouldn't they risk two years to change gender without notifying police? It's all about access and opportunity and impacts of the DBS checks. I'd rather rely on official police statistics and it concerns me that it isn't being recorded - on the counter this is someone showing their working on the other way around: wingsoverscotland.com/the-rorschach-test/The last estimate of Scottish women (by Eurostat) was 2.74m, and 2.65m men. Which would give us 2021 figures for Scotland of:
1298 men in jail for sex offences out of 2.65m = 1 in 2042 men
5 women in jail for sex offences out of 2.74m = 1 in 548,000 women
6 transwomen in jail for sex offences out of 2000 = 1 in 333 transwomen
The small numbers cause larger deviations, but the trend is as clear as a bell. Per capita, transwomen consistently appear far more likely to be convicted sex offenders than either natal women OR non-trans men.On safe spaces I have absolutely no issue but again this is on blokes and our safe spaces should be there safe spaces - it shouldn't be slopey shouldered off to women to deal with. A biological bloke being in a space with a biological bloke is completely different risk to a biological bloke being in with a biological female. I always quite like Debbie Hayton's take on the situation as a trans teacher who has argued throughout the current balance is correct: www.spectator.co.uk/writer/debbie-hayton/All men are not Sex Offenders. Those that offend and are convicted are caged like a Lion albeit for a specific period but let's not go down a semantic rabbit hole. Perhaps I misunderstood your original posts as I interpreted your objections that Male Sexual Predators could take advantage of the New Law to Self Identity as Trans for nefarious activities Your most recent post focuses on Trans people themselves posing a risk of Sexual Misconduct Both are legitimate concerns but are very different issues Of the 6 cases in Scotland of Trans Women incarcerated for Sexual Offences Do we know if the offences were perpetrated against Women or Men? Although whichever doesn't diminish the crime. Ireland, a Country with a similar population and profile to Scotland introduced Self Identification in 2015 so just about 8 years ago TENI is an Irish Conservative Catholic Organisation dedicated to repealing Self Identification Legislation Very much buoyed up with the Action Groups in Scotland In the attached Article from TENI the best they could come up with in the 8 years of self Identification there were 3 convictions for attacks by Trans Women all against MEN One of the offenders convicted was identified as Barbie Kardashian. I'd hazard a guess that Barbie may have had some other "issues" Do you think there is something unique amongst Scottish Trans Women that their behaviour would be markedly different to their Celtic Cousins? thecountess.ie/teni-policies/This conversation may prove academic as the UK Government has just invoked Section 35 This kind of proves Nicola's argument that it is not a Union of consent
|
|
|
Post by swampmongrel on Jan 16, 2023 19:42:36 GMT
Christ. The gender issue is an absolute nightmare. The constitutional issue surrounds the right for Westminster to overrule devolved powers of Scotland (Wales and N Ire) to the extent the devolved law conflicts with a wider UK law that takes precedence (here, the Equality Act). As with Human Rights Convention (and before Brexit, EU laws) for and other International treaties, Westminster laws must not conflict with them and Scottish devolved laws must not conflict with wider UK laws. But Sturgeon will use this as a reason for independence, saying Scotland are being prohibited from exercising its devolved powers by Westminster who will ovverride Scotland when they see fit, thus meaning Scotland can only be independent if it leaves the UK. Remainers (like me) will use it to criticise Brexiteers (the Westminster government) as hypocrites for not allowing Scotland to exercise its devolved powers. And the actual issue just becomes political rather than about the poor gender confused children of Scotland, or whatever it is really about! Hence why I say it is a mountain out of a molehill and an excuse for culture wars over what I think is a relatively minor issue compared with NHS strikes and cost of loving crisis as an example. It is a big mess. Genuinely mate I have absolutely no fucking clue what is going on and why - that would bite her on the arse because 80% don't support the bill from memory. Think this is bad - Look at the next one coming down the track: wingsoverscotland.com/raise-all-of-the-flags/Ban on conversion therapy (apart from affirming actual physical conversion) - look at the state of the working group who gave the answer the SG wanted too!! The person included for lived experiences who has a disability that makes them forget stuff and struggle to recollect from the first person would be too ridiculous for satire. That ‘wings’ article you link to is mental. A large number of below the line comments are claiming that the Scots government SNP/Green are actually Unionist plants working against independence (including Sturgeon). It’s proper crazy stuff but thinking about it it might actually be true. Why else pursue such an unpopular set of policies 🤔 The imperial colonising state might be smarter than we thought. 😃
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Jan 16, 2023 20:10:29 GMT
Maggie Chapman was on the committee - bat shit mental.
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Jan 17, 2023 10:32:50 GMT
Genuinely mate I have absolutely no fucking clue what is going on and why - that would bite her on the arse because 80% don't support the bill from memory. Think this is bad - Look at the next one coming down the track: wingsoverscotland.com/raise-all-of-the-flags/Ban on conversion therapy (apart from affirming actual physical conversion) - look at the state of the working group who gave the answer the SG wanted too!! The person included for lived experiences who has a disability that makes them forget stuff and struggle to recollect from the first person would be too ridiculous for satire. That ‘wings’ article you link to is mental. A large number of below the line comments are claiming that the Scots government SNP/Green are actually Unionist plants working against independence (including Sturgeon). It’s proper crazy stuff but thinking about it it might actually be true. Why else pursue such an unpopular set of policies 🤔 The imperial colonising state might be smarter than we thought. 😃 Genuinely mate it's well weird - an obvious red flag is the Scottish Government have weakened the walls between them and legal system so there is very little checks and balances as can be seen in various car crash proposals. In terms of 'Wings' he's gone from being the Nationalist's folk hero (his book had a massive role in getting support up to 45%) to the SNP and their staunch followers absolutely hating him. He's close with Salmond too and has alluded numerous times there was something massively dodgy about how his case was handled. At this juncture I'd actually put money on the Scottish Government being shut down or further reigned in long before Independence. Her husband is chairman (red flag), has loaned the party money for cash flow (red flag) and their accounts have a distinct whiff about them so wouldn't be surprised if this ends up tipping the SNP towards an embarrassing crisis.
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Jan 17, 2023 11:41:40 GMT
And all sex offenders are sex offenders surely? The risk assessment put forward would decide which lions to keep enclosed and which to release so the analogy is fine. Nothing disingenuous about it - it is currently the only part of the process that ascertains if the applicant has or has not got gender dysphoria other than the applicant saying so. A sex offender doesn't even have to medically prove it potentially depending on how the risk assessment works. Are you honestly saying this is so traumatic it has put at least 90% of applicants off? I've been in front of an adoption panel and it isn't pleasant but it is an essential part of the process as can't merely identify as a suitable parent. Nope not homophobic so you can park that one. I tell you who is arguably homophobic though - the previous head of Mermaids who put her then son through pharmaceutical and surgical procedures to save her marriage because her husband couldn't deal with the then 'him' playing with girls stuff and clothes (3 minutes in from memory): A three month cooling off period makes it sound like a mobile phone contract - how do you even prove someone isn't living in their acquired gender without resorting to gender stereotypes? In addition why is the penalty for this only 2 years in comparison to 5 years for fraudulent name changes? There's at least 1,000 sex offenders missing who've changed their name without notifying police (likely loads more) - if they're willing to risk 5 years for that why wouldn't they risk two years to change gender without notifying police? It's all about access and opportunity and impacts of the DBS checks. I'd rather rely on official police statistics and it concerns me that it isn't being recorded - on the counter this is someone showing their working on the other way around: wingsoverscotland.com/the-rorschach-test/The last estimate of Scottish women (by Eurostat) was 2.74m, and 2.65m men. Which would give us 2021 figures for Scotland of:
1298 men in jail for sex offences out of 2.65m = 1 in 2042 men
5 women in jail for sex offences out of 2.74m = 1 in 548,000 women
6 transwomen in jail for sex offences out of 2000 = 1 in 333 transwomen
The small numbers cause larger deviations, but the trend is as clear as a bell. Per capita, transwomen consistently appear far more likely to be convicted sex offenders than either natal women OR non-trans men.On safe spaces I have absolutely no issue but again this is on blokes and our safe spaces should be there safe spaces - it shouldn't be slopey shouldered off to women to deal with. A biological bloke being in a space with a biological bloke is completely different risk to a biological bloke being in with a biological female. I always quite like Debbie Hayton's take on the situation as a trans teacher who has argued throughout the current balance is correct: www.spectator.co.uk/writer/debbie-hayton/All men are not Sex Offenders. Those that offend and are convicted are caged like a Lion albeit for a specific period but let's not go down a semantic rabbit hole. Perhaps I misunderstood your original posts as I interpreted your objections that Male Sexual Predators could take advantage of the New Law to Self Identity as Trans for nefarious activities Your most recent post focuses on Trans people themselves posing a risk of Sexual Misconduct Both are legitimate concerns but are very different issues Of the 6 cases in Scotland of Trans Women incarcerated for Sexual Offences Do we know if the offences were perpetrated against Women or Men? Although whichever doesn't diminish the crime. Ireland, a Country with a similar population and profile to Scotland introduced Self Identification in 2015 so just about 8 years ago TENI is an Irish Conservative Catholic Organisation dedicated to repealing Self Identification Legislation Very much buoyed up with the Action Groups in Scotland In the attached Article from TENI the best they could come up with in the 8 years of self Identification there were 3 convictions for attacks by Trans Women all against MEN One of the offenders convicted was identified as Barbie Kardashian. I'd hazard a guess that Barbie may have had some other "issues" Do you think there is something unique amongst Scottish Trans Women that their behaviour would be markedly different to their Celtic Cousins? thecountess.ie/teni-policies/This conversation may prove academic as the UK Government has just invoked Section 35 This kind of proves Nicola's argument that it is not a Union of consent Nope never said all blokes are sex offenders either. Not all white people are sex offenders, not all people over 25 are sex offenders, not all dwarfs are sex offenders, not all people with one leg are sex offenders and not all biological males who identify as women are sex offenders. However, a love of unicorns and farting rainbows doesn't give an automatic pass that biological men identifying as women will never sex offend. The lack of proper recording makes it difficult to measure but I see no reason why statistically genuine trans men to female would be any more or any less likely to offend than a biological bloke and equally see no reason why a female to male would be any more or less likely to offend criminally than a woman but it would make an interesting sociological study. Debbie Hayton again has written that she has no issue with a medical assessment being required and believes it's basically the only risk management provision that proves a man is actually female apart from really really promising they are on a form - can a transwoman be transphobic? Now, as per the interview above, Maggie Chapman, on the committee for this bill and key player in it, her main concern (apart from getting in amongst 8 year olds the fucking zoomer) was the sex offender referenced now possibly claiming on being trans and entitled to apply for a GRC rather than concern about the sex offender looking to game the system - she has no clue whatsoever how they would prove he wasn't a male taking the piss. A recent study in Scotland showed half of all male to female trans convicts transitioned post conviction and that they will again go back to being male on release so this isn't going to be isolated. Basic safe guarding doesn't make someone transphobic - what seemed fairly obvious to me was if someone is a sex offender then even deemed the lowest risk should lose access to the newly proposed fast track process and instead had to revert to the old process as a bare minimum. The reason they didn't do this, or simply ban sex offenders from being able to apply, wasn't because they didn't see the risk but if they were seen to discriminate against sex offenders it would invoke the Equality Act which is a reserved matter so became a case of expediency over prudence. My own preference would be to retain the medical requirement but reduce the time period involved in line with the new requirements so long as the medical professional didn't advise to the contrary. I'd maintain 18 over 16 too as can't get my head around how you have sufficient capacity to make your mind up on this (possibly as young as 8 if the bat shit mental greens have their way) but you can't have a tattoo until 18 as example? I get that it is an invasive process but similarly so it was for my wife going through various interviews/ checks during immigration and so it was for us going through the adoption in front of panel (the hardest experience of my life). Nobody in their right mind would advocate removing being signed off by experts in each example as basic safeguarding the wider public and here I simply don't believe feelz can trump prudence or else it will be counter productive long term.
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Jan 17, 2023 12:07:01 GMT
As usual, threads like this always revert to the LCD of the subject. In this case, it's that gender self-identity makes for perverts gaining access to the opposite sex for sexual gratification. But in reality, self - identity is making some people feel comfortable in their own skin. I have a member of my family who is the safety officer of a multi-age, multi-gender rugby club and I can assure you all that any issues of self-identity would be treated properly. Ergo, entire males or females would not be allowed in changing rooms of the opposite sex to the one they've inherited, bodily, at birth, just as no of-age males are allowed to use the same changing/shower rooms at the same time as under-age players. Self-identity is more to do with feelings rather than acts. Do I think people should be allowed to self-identify at the age of 16? Why not? They're allowed to have sex at 16, which is physical, but they're not allowed to feel good about themselves at that age! Surely, the real parameter should boil down to actual physical gender conversion. Gender self-identity will harm no one. And even if a person self identifies and then realises when they get older that it was just a phase they were going through, providing they've not undergone actual sexual physical conversion, they can revert to whatever they were simply by changing back identity. I agree with what Oggy says above; people are making a mountain out of a molehill, either because of politics or they simply don't like people because they don't conform to the 'norm'. What next? Ban abortion; make homosexuality illegal; put to death transsexuals because they're an abomination? And don't say that can't happen. There are still some societies that already do that. As for Starmer, the more he opens his stupid mouth, the more I dislike him. OS. Apologies but unfortunately as that's essentially my career/ qualification and have done hundreds of insurance risk surveys at corporate sized clients/ council facilities and being a parent sending my child into what, up here at least, looks like the gender equivalent of the wild west, it's impossible to detach one from the other. As before I don't believe trans folk are any more or any less likely to offend than their biological counterparts. However, sex offenders have a propensity to re-offend and I didn't see anything in the proposals put forward to mitigate this risk - an obvious amendment would have been to ban sex offenders from applying but as per Maggie Chapman nope so long as they say they're trans then they can apply. The reason the Scottish Government voted down the amendment to ban sex offenders applying was because it would be discriminatory and would have stepped on the Equality Act which is reserved to WM so it was a risk they were willing to accept for expediency not because they didn't believe the risk exists. Feelz can't trump safeguarding sorry - that's just mental. Is there any other demographic that can claim to be something and simply be believed because they promise without requiring any professional assessment involved? I do agree though on identifying in kids without anything invasive taking place is far preferable - that for example a middle aged bloke could just say they're a woman, keep their cock, no proof of gender dysphoria and be happy as Laura with a bit of paper whilst kids are being affirmed towards pharmaceutical and later medical intervention, particularly girls, or else they risk being depressed throughout their life doesn't really stack up. Personally again I would have preferred to keep the medical assessment and age at 18 but reduce the time constraints. The guidance up here for teachers to have the option of not telling parents or medical professionals along with the Maggie Chapman seeming happy to consider going as low as 8 means 16 is too young for me. I think you've mentioned having skin in this game and would suggest, if not done so already, reading around the safeguarding issues on the Mermaids chat forum being investigated as part of the Charity Commission's review - fuck me it's bleak!
|
|
|
Post by adri2008 on Jan 17, 2023 12:32:05 GMT
The whole transgender subject is a bit of a minefield. Personally I'm uneasy with it at 16 as most people have no idea who they really are until they fully mature.
There's also the obvious issue that a person is basing their judgement on outside influences/experiences i.e. what they perceive a male/female should be like. If there was no mention of gender (or any other outside influence) during a child's upbringing then there'd be no gender dysphoria either - they'd simply accept who they were as person which is how it should be.
|
|
|
Post by thepremierbanksy on Jan 17, 2023 13:56:17 GMT
what does it mean to identify as a man or a woman? is anyone able to answer that without a sexist response? It's very simple. It's all to do with dodgy chromosomes and, despite the genitals they were born with, some people feeling uncomfortable with how they've been identified at birth - male or female. Gender fluidity is a highly complex subject and many people who consider themselves to be 'straight', either through ignorance or by deliberate homophobia, will fight tooth and nail against anything they consider to be different. As for the sexual side, that's a minefield of complexities. It's an entirely different subject and we'd best not go there with that one. As an example, many transsexuals are asexual and only care about how they feel inside. OS. Prevalence of gender identity not matching birth assigned sex (0.53%) is greater than prevalence of abnormalities in sex chromosomes (~0.18%).
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jan 17, 2023 17:42:50 GMT
All men are not Sex Offenders. Those that offend and are convicted are caged like a Lion albeit for a specific period but let's not go down a semantic rabbit hole. Perhaps I misunderstood your original posts as I interpreted your objections that Male Sexual Predators could take advantage of the New Law to Self Identity as Trans for nefarious activities Your most recent post focuses on Trans people themselves posing a risk of Sexual Misconduct Both are legitimate concerns but are very different issues Of the 6 cases in Scotland of Trans Women incarcerated for Sexual Offences Do we know if the offences were perpetrated against Women or Men? Although whichever doesn't diminish the crime. Ireland, a Country with a similar population and profile to Scotland introduced Self Identification in 2015 so just about 8 years ago TENI is an Irish Conservative Catholic Organisation dedicated to repealing Self Identification Legislation Very much buoyed up with the Action Groups in Scotland In the attached Article from TENI the best they could come up with in the 8 years of self Identification there were 3 convictions for attacks by Trans Women all against MEN One of the offenders convicted was identified as Barbie Kardashian. I'd hazard a guess that Barbie may have had some other "issues" Do you think there is something unique amongst Scottish Trans Women that their behaviour would be markedly different to their Celtic Cousins? thecountess.ie/teni-policies/This conversation may prove academic as the UK Government has just invoked Section 35 This kind of proves Nicola's argument that it is not a Union of consent Nope never said all blokes are sex offenders either. Not all white people are sex offenders, not all people over 25 are sex offenders, not all dwarfs are sex offenders, not all people with one leg are sex offenders and not all biological males who identify as women are sex offenders. However, a love of unicorns and farting rainbows doesn't give an automatic pass that biological men identifying as women will never sex offend. The lack of proper recording makes it difficult to measure but I see no reason why statistically genuine trans men to female would be any more or any less likely to offend than a biological bloke and equally see no reason why a female to male would be any more or less likely to offend criminally than a woman but it would make an interesting sociological study. Debbie Hayton again has written that she has no issue with a medical assessment being required and believes it's basically the only risk management provision that proves a man is actually female apart from really really promising they are on a form - can a transwoman be transphobic? Now, as per the interview above, Maggie Chapman, on the committee for this bill and key player in it, her main concern (apart from getting in amongst 8 year olds the fucking zoomer) was the sex offender referenced now possibly claiming on being trans and entitled to apply for a GRC rather than concern about the sex offender looking to game the system - she has no clue whatsoever how they would prove he wasn't a male taking the piss. A recent study in Scotland showed half of all male to female trans convicts transitioned post conviction and that they will again go back to being male on release so this isn't going to be isolated. Basic safe guarding doesn't make someone transphobic - what seemed fairly obvious to me was if someone is a sex offender then even deemed the lowest risk should lose access to the newly proposed fast track process and instead had to revert to the old process as a bare minimum. The reason they didn't do this, or simply ban sex offenders from being able to apply, wasn't because they didn't see the risk but if they were seen to discriminate against sex offenders it would invoke the Equality Act which is a reserved matter so became a case of expediency over prudence. My own preference would be to retain the medical requirement but reduce the time period involved in line with the new requirements so long as the medical professional didn't advise to the contrary. I'd maintain 18 over 16 too as can't get my head around how you have sufficient capacity to make your mind up on this (possibly as young as 8 if the bat shit mental greens have their way) but you can't have a tattoo until 18 as example? I get that it is an invasive process but similarly so it was for my wife going through various interviews/ checks during immigration and so it was for us going through the adoption in front of panel (the hardest experience of my life). Nobody in their right mind would advocate removing being signed off by experts in each example as basic safeguarding the wider public and here I simply don't believe feelz can trump prudence or else it will be counter productive long term. I note you didn't address why Scotland should be different to the 8 years of lived experience of Ireland who introduced Self Identification in 2015. Particularly as your occupation would surely base any actuarial risk assessment on peer review absent domestic experience Perhaps the information regarding the 6 Lassies in The Big Hoose is not available but I think it could be significant if the offences were committed towards men or women as the basis of the conversation is about safeguarding of women. It doesn’t obviously mitigate the crime. Obviously opinions expressed here are personal ones and I entirely agree that convicted sex offenders should be subject to additional Vetting but the SNPs attempts to avoid infringing the Equality Act have, at least for now, been in vain. Additionally anyone charged with a crime any GRC application should be paused until convicted and time served in the Gender at date of charge or found not guilty. I would also agree with an age of 18 which is consistent with Irish Legislation although from 16 they can apply to High Court for an exception I sympathise with You/Wife in having to deal with invasive bureaucracy but I don't see it as a reason not to make a different proceedure less so.
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Jan 18, 2023 16:10:15 GMT
Nope never said all blokes are sex offenders either. Not all white people are sex offenders, not all people over 25 are sex offenders, not all dwarfs are sex offenders, not all people with one leg are sex offenders and not all biological males who identify as women are sex offenders. However, a love of unicorns and farting rainbows doesn't give an automatic pass that biological men identifying as women will never sex offend. The lack of proper recording makes it difficult to measure but I see no reason why statistically genuine trans men to female would be any more or any less likely to offend than a biological bloke and equally see no reason why a female to male would be any more or less likely to offend criminally than a woman but it would make an interesting sociological study. Debbie Hayton again has written that she has no issue with a medical assessment being required and believes it's basically the only risk management provision that proves a man is actually female apart from really really promising they are on a form - can a transwoman be transphobic? Now, as per the interview above, Maggie Chapman, on the committee for this bill and key player in it, her main concern (apart from getting in amongst 8 year olds the fucking zoomer) was the sex offender referenced now possibly claiming on being trans and entitled to apply for a GRC rather than concern about the sex offender looking to game the system - she has no clue whatsoever how they would prove he wasn't a male taking the piss. A recent study in Scotland showed half of all male to female trans convicts transitioned post conviction and that they will again go back to being male on release so this isn't going to be isolated. Basic safe guarding doesn't make someone transphobic - what seemed fairly obvious to me was if someone is a sex offender then even deemed the lowest risk should lose access to the newly proposed fast track process and instead had to revert to the old process as a bare minimum. The reason they didn't do this, or simply ban sex offenders from being able to apply, wasn't because they didn't see the risk but if they were seen to discriminate against sex offenders it would invoke the Equality Act which is a reserved matter so became a case of expediency over prudence. My own preference would be to retain the medical requirement but reduce the time period involved in line with the new requirements so long as the medical professional didn't advise to the contrary. I'd maintain 18 over 16 too as can't get my head around how you have sufficient capacity to make your mind up on this (possibly as young as 8 if the bat shit mental greens have their way) but you can't have a tattoo until 18 as example? I get that it is an invasive process but similarly so it was for my wife going through various interviews/ checks during immigration and so it was for us going through the adoption in front of panel (the hardest experience of my life). Nobody in their right mind would advocate removing being signed off by experts in each example as basic safeguarding the wider public and here I simply don't believe feelz can trump prudence or else it will be counter productive long term. I note you didn't address why Scotland should be different to the 8 years of lived experience of Ireland who introduced Self Identification in 2015. Particularly as your occupation would surely base any actuarial risk assessment on peer review absent domestic experience Perhaps the information regarding the 6 Lassies in The Big Hoose is not available but I think it could be significant if the offences were committed towards men or women as the basis of the conversation is about safeguarding of women. It doesn’t obviously mitigate the crime. Obviously opinions expressed here are personal ones and I entirely agree that convicted sex offenders should be subject to additional Vetting but the SNPs attempts to avoid infringing the Equality Act have, at least for now, been in vain. Additionally anyone charged with a crime any GRC application should be paused until convicted and time served in the Gender at date of charge or found not guilty. I would also agree with an age of 18 which is consistent with Irish Legislation although from 16 they can apply to High Court for an exception I sympathise with You/Wife in having to deal with invasive bureaucracy but I don't see it as a reason not to make a different proceedure less so. I thought I had but was trying to cram loads in without it becoming an essay it does throw up an interesting point. As an aside do you know how self ID came about in Ireland? Under their political system a change in the constitution requires a public referendum and was tagged on the back of the same sex marriage vote rather than being scrutinised on its own merits. Not sure it would have passed on its own but defo wouldn’t have got 75% of the vote IMHO. I agree totally and completely that good data is required because then you can measure the success of the process, particularly as volume is likely to increase, and come up with strategies to continually improve. You can’t manage what you can’t measure (well you can but it's more difficult) but this is something where the data should be easily collectable if the will is there. However, it is becoming readily apparent this information is not only not available and is, for me, quite possibly being obfuscated on purpose. In Ireland you’ve got Father Dowling Investigates via TENI saying ‘at least three’ who got a certificate self ID’ing after conviction so they don’t know the number nor the amount who got a certificate prior to conviction. Within the article it details too why they believe it’s a big deal in the prison system. In the article on Belgium a trans charity over there has the number at c.50k from memory yet the journalist in question couldn’t find a single case of criminal transgression committed by a trans person since self-id and figures were only available on an annual basis so trends couldn’t be gathered too. Bringing it back to Scotland there was amendments tabled on data collection that were all knocked back on the advice of Stonewall and are noted below – surely the question is why would you not want to record specific data on this?: 19 Data collection 69 requires Scottish Ministers to report on detransition Oppose 19 Data collection 70 Data on healthcare criminal justice Oppose 19 Data collection 126 Data on schools, hospitals, prisons, sex, gender Oppose Risks in the final rush to legislate self-ID in Scotland - Sex Matters (sex-matters.org) In addition, there’s already 5 biological males self-identifying into women’s jails with a 6th looking to chance their arm as noted previously so Ireland’s ‘at least 3’ is likely to higher but again info is sketchy. The five include this absolute delight who raped, included kids, battered someone in the male prison estate but is now in with the ladies – it would be interesting to see the risk assessment behind this one: news.stv.tv/west-central/scottish-prison-service-criticised-for-moving-trans-woman-katie-dolatowski-to-cornton-vale-stirlingThis is quite interesting from an England/ Wales perspective too – forces across the country don’t have a uniformed methodology of recording crime (even rape) regarding self-ID. It shows an example of child sex offences up 80% in women since self-id’ing was allowed: fairplayforwomen.com/police_record_males_as_female/They’ve also had confirmation from the MOJ there’s 100 male to female in the prison system and half of those had at least one sex offence. fairplayforwomen.com/campaigns/prisons/ Now obviously this doesn’t mean genuine trans folk are more rapey than anyone else but it does show sexual offenders have quite possibly targeted an obvious weakness in the system. For me this is a reason that the medical assessment is essential for society as a whole but also for the trans community themselves because even a few sex offenders re-offending is going to skew the figures massively. If self-id is the way it goes (reckon it still might UK during the next term) then for me an obvious way around it would be making it mandatory for anyone with a sexual offence needing to go through the old process including medical assessment and being barred entirely (although this would probably be discriminatory) if they were high risk on release.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jan 18, 2023 20:49:31 GMT
I note you didn't address why Scotland should be different to the 8 years of lived experience of Ireland who introduced Self Identification in 2015. Particularly as your occupation would surely base any actuarial risk assessment on peer review absent domestic experience Perhaps the information regarding the 6 Lassies in The Big Hoose is not available but I think it could be significant if the offences were committed towards men or women as the basis of the conversation is about safeguarding of women. It doesn’t obviously mitigate the crime. Obviously opinions expressed here are personal ones and I entirely agree that convicted sex offenders should be subject to additional Vetting but the SNPs attempts to avoid infringing the Equality Act have, at least for now, been in vain. Additionally anyone charged with a crime any GRC application should be paused until convicted and time served in the Gender at date of charge or found not guilty. I would also agree with an age of 18 which is consistent with Irish Legislation although from 16 they can apply to High Court for an exception I sympathise with You/Wife in having to deal with invasive bureaucracy but I don't see it as a reason not to make a different proceedure less so. I thought I had but was trying to cram loads in without it becoming an essay it does throw up an interesting point. As an aside do you know how self ID came about in Ireland? Under their political system a change in the constitution requires a public referendum and was tagged on the back of the same sex marriage vote rather than being scrutinised on its own merits. Not sure it would have passed on its own but defo wouldn’t have got 75% of the vote IMHO. I agree totally and completely that good data is required because then you can measure the success of the process, particularly as volume is likely to increase, and come up with strategies to continually improve. You can’t manage what you can’t measure (well you can but it's more difficult) but this is something where the data should be easily collectable if the will is there. However, it is becoming readily apparent this information is not only not available and is, for me, quite possibly being obfuscated on purpose. In Ireland you’ve got Father Dowling Investigates via TENI saying ‘at least three’ who got a certificate self ID’ing after conviction so they don’t know the number nor the amount who got a certificate prior to conviction. Within the article it details too why they believe it’s a big deal in the prison system. In the article on Belgium a trans charity over there has the number at c.50k from memory yet the journalist in question couldn’t find a single case of criminal transgression committed by a trans person since self-id and figures were only available on an annual basis so trends couldn’t be gathered too. Bringing it back to Scotland there was amendments tabled on data collection that were all knocked back on the advice of Stonewall and are noted below – surely the question is why would you not want to record specific data on this?: 19 Data collection 69 requires Scottish Ministers to report on detransition Oppose 19 Data collection 70 Data on healthcare criminal justice Oppose 19 Data collection 126 Data on schools, hospitals, prisons, sex, gender Oppose Risks in the final rush to legislate self-ID in Scotland - Sex Matters (sex-matters.org) In addition, there’s already 5 biological males self-identifying into women’s jails with a 6th looking to chance their arm as noted previously so Ireland’s ‘at least 3’ is likely to higher but again info is sketchy. The five include this absolute delight who raped, included kids, battered someone in the male prison estate but is now in with the ladies – it would be interesting to see the risk assessment behind this one: news.stv.tv/west-central/scottish-prison-service-criticised-for-moving-trans-woman-katie-dolatowski-to-cornton-vale-stirlingThis is quite interesting from an England/ Wales perspective too – forces across the country don’t have a uniformed methodology of recording crime (even rape) regarding self-ID. It shows an example of child sex offences up 80% in women since self-id’ing was allowed: fairplayforwomen.com/police_record_males_as_female/They’ve also had confirmation from the MOJ there’s 100 male to female in the prison system and half of those had at least one sex offence. fairplayforwomen.com/campaigns/prisons/ Now obviously this doesn’t mean genuine trans folk are more rapey than anyone else but it does show sexual offenders have quite possibly targeted an obvious weakness in the system. For me this is a reason that the medical assessment is essential for society as a whole but also for the trans community themselves because even a few sex offenders re-offending is going to skew the figures massively. If self-id is the way it goes (reckon it still might UK during the next term) then for me an obvious way around it would be making it mandatory for anyone with a sexual offence needing to go through the old process including medical assessment and being barred entirely (although this would probably be discriminatory) if they were high risk on release. It appears that agitation for Gender Recognition in Ireland goes back to at least 1997 but the game changer seems to have been it was found in Court that the existing Law was in contravention of 2003 ECHR amendment Therefore no Referendum was required The link is a Government 2018 review of the operation of the 2015 Gender Recognition Act GRA It gives a good history of how the GRA came to be. www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://assets.gov.ie/36889/825dd1e75f1b43b284a1a245a1710e1c.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi85oLZ4NH8AhXGfMAKHae2BJ44ChAWegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw1o5oBZqdeFo-fhOzKk5LazYou raise important and relevant statistical data which should be readily available from the Irish experience Whether Scottish Government sought and used that data I don't know but it would be strange if they didn't or indeed other Countries experiences Like a Journalist who writes an Article the Editor then makes corrections to make it more readable. Therefore it would be strange if Scottish Government didn't review the Irish Legislation alongside the outcomes and amend where required I think we both want to put Women and Girls safety at the heart of any Legislation Where we differ is I think a Psychological Assessment is an unnecessary invasive intrusion and harps back to the old Homophobic Trope of Homosexuality being a Mental Disorder (I am not in any way suggesting your objections are Homophobic) A phrase often used is that Trans people are most qualified to know if they are Trans. It is something I believe in. That doesn't preclude like in any Society there are Bad Actors who seek to exploit situations and I would personally be VERY restrictive of anyone convicted of a Sexual Offence up to the Limit of the Equality Act. In your game a usual disclaimer is "Past performance is no guarantee of future results" In the case of convicted Sex Offenders I would happily take an opposite position
|
|
|
Post by cheadlepotter on Jan 26, 2023 15:10:32 GMT
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Feb 12, 2023 23:38:07 GMT
RIP Brianna Ghey x
Tragic.
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Feb 12, 2023 23:40:58 GMT
RIP Brianna Ghey x Tragic. Jesus Christ, this country is fucked!
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 13, 2023 10:34:30 GMT
Totally shocking. The Police will only say they have no evidence "at this time" that the Murder of 16 year old Trans Gender Brianna by a 15 year old Boy and a 15 year old Girl was a "Targeted" attack I.e. not Random
Whatever the Motive these two 15 year olds had to deliberately attack and Murder Brianna their warped and casual hate towards others could only have been germinated in the home.
People may blame Social Media and perhaps it had a hand in it, but bad Parenting that teaches intolerance towards others is at the core
|
|
|
Post by knype on Feb 13, 2023 10:48:31 GMT
Totally shocking. The Police will only say they have no evidence "at this time" that the Murder of 16 year old Trans Gender Brianna by a 15 year old Boy and a 15 year old Girl was a "Targeted" attack I.e. not Random Whatever the Motive these two 15 year olds had to deliberately attack and Murder Brianna their warped and casual hate towards others could only have been germinated in the home. People may blame Social Media and perhaps it had a hand in it, but bad Parenting that teaches intolerance towards others is at the core Absolutely horrific what has happened, no child should go out and not return home. Until we start to get tough on crime these things are going to carry on happening sadly.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Dec 20, 2023 19:27:50 GMT
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Jan 17, 2024 19:53:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by musik on Jan 18, 2024 0:41:24 GMT
Q: A man who feels like a woman, is he only offered treatment to be more like a woman, or is he also offered treatment to feel more like a man?
I'm basing this Q on a tv program and a corresponding article I saw a while ago about a Swedish builder who went through a painful process of changing his looks. He touched the subject a bit, but not at all in depth.
My friend who has been doing help activities and support for this group of people for years says some use the expression "I wish I had felt like a man/woman" - in correspondence with how they look.
|
|
|
Post by Veritas on Jan 18, 2024 12:59:05 GMT
Q: A man who feels like a woman, is he only offered treatment to be more like a woman, or is he also offered treatment to feel more like a man? I'm basing this Q on a tv program and a corresponding article I saw a while ago about a Swedish builder who went through a painful process of changing his looks. He touched the subject a bit, but not at all in depth. My friend who has been doing help activities and support for this group of people for years says some use the expression "I wish I had felt like a man/woman" - in correspondence with how they look. Presumably it depends on what they want
|
|