Independent Leyton Orient Forum

FACT!

Wait til you see the logic used: it’s literally “I am biological - I’m not non biological lol!! - and I am a woman. Therefore I am a biological woman!”

Otherwise intelligent people go along with this. Some, like Brendan, were even strident about it until I pulled him up on the sexism of it, now he’s terrified to have a conversation because he knows a lost cause when he sees one.

Honestly the reason this boils my piss so much is because it’s such obvious bollocks, and the social pressure to lie as if it’s the nice thing to do is really concerning.

StillSpike wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 2:31 pm She's quite two-faced

So clever. Not very funny, but clever

CEB wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 2:50 pm Wait til you see the logic used: it’s literally “I am biological - I’m not non biological lol!! - and I am a woman. Therefore I am a biological woman!”

Otherwise intelligent people go along with this. Some, like Brendan, were even strident about it until I pulled him up on the sexism of it, now he’s terrified to have a conversation because he knows a lost cause when he sees one.

Honestly the reason this boils my piss so much is because it’s such obvious bollocks, and the social pressure to lie as if it’s the nice thing to do is really concerning.

Even obvious bollocks isn’t enough to convince some.

Dunners wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 2:40 pm FACT!

What is The GC Movement?

I’m scared to Google it.

Gary the Plumber wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 3:13 pm
What is The GC Movement?

I’m scared to Google it.

Gender Critical - basically anyone who thinks India's fact is open to any doubt. And it is very much meant as a slur.

In response to a news article in which a male person is bemoaning that male people will not be allowed to play competitive rugby in the female category.

Brendan - are you there? Looking forward to hearing your wise, coolheaded take on why it’s actually a good thing to advocate against a female sporting category? No rush, whenever you’re ready. I picked up all my opinions on this from reading a blog by some silly woman on mumsnet, so no doubt you’ll win me over with your compassionate, wise outlook

Dunners wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 3:15 pm

Gary the Plumber wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 3:13 pm
What is The GC Movement?

I’m scared to Google it.

Gender Critical - basically anyone who thinks India's fact is open to any doubt. And it is very much meant as a slur.

Phew. I had visions of the big lass from TOWIE taking a dump.

Dunners wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 3:15 pm

Gary the Plumber wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 3:13 pm
What is The GC Movement?

I’m scared to Google it.

Gender Critical - basically anyone who thinks India's fact is open to any doubt. And it is very much meant as a slur.

It does sound like it might be the name of a Jazz trio.

CEB wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 2:50 pm Wait til you see the logic used: it’s literally “I am biological - I’m not non biological lol!! - and I am a woman. Therefore I am a biological woman!”

Otherwise intelligent people go along with this. Some, like Brendan, were even strident about it until I pulled him up on the sexism of it, now he’s terrified to have a conversation because he knows a lost cause when he sees one.

Honestly the reason this boils my piss so much is because it’s such obvious bollocks, and the social pressure to lie as if it’s the nice thing to do is really concerning.

Absolutely bricking it just at the thought.

Its okay to admit you were wrong.

Mick McQuaid wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 6:08 pm

CEB wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 2:50 pm Wait til you see the logic used: it’s literally “I am biological - I’m not non biological lol!! - and I am a woman. Therefore I am a biological woman!”

Otherwise intelligent people go along with this. Some, like Brendan, were even strident about it until I pulled him up on the sexism of it, now he’s terrified to have a conversation because he knows a lost cause when he sees one.

Honestly the reason this boils my piss so much is because it’s such obvious bollocks, and the social pressure to lie as if it’s the nice thing to do is really concerning.

Absolutely bricking it just at the thought.

Then have a discussion where we each present our current position, why we hold that position, and what it would take to change our position, in good faith, and being prepared to take each other’s points seriously and respectfully. It’s an issue you were willing to be strident about it right up until someone who knows the subject inside out and takes issue from a progressive position got involved. Since then, your contributions have not been substantial or contained an argument, bit have instead been dismissive. I’ve also demonstrated already the clear sexism underpinning at least one of your positions on this, so that might be a good place to start - I’m willing to accept your intent was not sexism, so how about you hear out why I think you were sexist and we use that as a starting point?

Or you could just dip in every so often to imply that you’d be right, if only you could be bothered to deal with the tedious transphobe?

Mick McQuaid wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 6:08 pm
From my already admitted limited experience, this thing about kids saying they were born in the wrong body is a misconception of how people present. Just going from the one person I know, everything about her behaviour presents as female and she's been like that all her life. It's not a passing fad, it's who she is.

I’m going to start the good faith discussion, you’re welcome to join in - if you do, please address my points. If you don’t that’s up to you, though I’d wonder what it says about your beliefs on this that you’re not open to engage with good faith suggestions that casual sexism might inform your thinking.

The quoted post was one of your first on the trans debate thread, and it’s interesting to me. The questions this post raises to me are these

1: What were you describing about your acquaintance when mentioning “behaviour that presents as female”?

2: Do you have a good reason to dismiss someone who might say “asserting that there are behaviours that are ‘female’ is sexist and reinforces regressive gender roles”?

3: is there any behaviour your acquaintance could have performed that could have caused you to doubt that the person is “female” and that that’s “who she is”?

4: if not, what meaning does the term “female” carry in your usage of the phrase “behaviour that presents as female”, and on what basis should that usage overwrite a recognition that male and female describe the sexes, and not personalities, in law? (if indeed you think it should, and which it seems you do, based on your implicit support for biologically male people to compete in female sporting categories if they experience an internal sense that that’s where they belong?)

5: Do you think these questions are inherently wrong/disrespectful to ask? If so, why?

1. The way she said 'I identify as a woman' mainly

2.Yes, when that behaviour is the person saying 'I identify as female, I want people to recognise that'.

3. Yes, if she said 'I want to identify as a man' at any point.

4. N/a only to be answered if previous answer was no

5. No, I think they are daft.

Those are your good faith answers, really?

I genuinely thought you’d be more thoughtful than that, and I suspect you yourself are already aware of the circularity of your point if it amounts to “male people who say they are women are women because they say they are”.

I’d like to think that you are able to recognise that when female people object to the idea that the category “woman” is open to male people on the basis of saying that they are women, that it means that the category “female” becomes meaningless.

Honestly mate, I genuinely think it’s a disgrace that a position as intellectualy superficial as what you’ve just outlined has become a default expectation for progressive people to hold.


But you’re actually lying. You know you are and I know you are. Because the fact that your friend identifies as a woman is already implied by the fact that you described this friend as a transwoman. But you said “everything about her *presents* as female”. That is very different from “I believed when she said she was a woman, who am I to question?”. I suspect you’ve chosen to recite dogma - “trans women are women” - and be obtuse about it, because you are fully aware that if you actually came out and admitted that you based your point on the fact that your friend hit all the right marks for femininity as you perceive it - you’d be conceding that you equated femininity with female, and suggested that it’s femininity in a male that convinced you.

Your intellectual dishonesty is truly disappointing.

Though if those are your actual thoughtful answers, then apologies for my harshness, and I overestimated your knowledge of the issues and the arguments based on the strident nature of your early contributions.

Sorry to disappoint and apology accepted.

I’m just glad that you won’t be contributing to the trans debate anymore. You’ve embarrassed yourself here.

Your feuds with Off and the army man were a lot more fun, I’ve got to be honest.

I forgot the army man. Though that memory does explain why Brendan wants men to be able to use the ladies loos on demand.

That was a different army man, although ai think the one referred to also threatened to give me a kicking too, but not to my face.

Or my arse as the case actually was.

Oh I forgot the other army guy… what was his name again?

By the way, lest it's forgotten, I only got involved in that poo poo because I weighed in on your side.

Come on guys, you shouldn’t be fighting with each other, you should be fighting the angry army men together. This is why the left will never win anything.

Mick McQuaid wrote: ↑Wed Aug 17, 2022 11:31 pm By the way, lest it's forgotten, I only got involved in that poo poo because I weighed in on your side.

Appreciate it, sorry to have broken the allegiance by disagreeing that a male becomes female by saying he’s a woman.