I knew feathers would be ruffled on 𝕏 today with the Tory's Biological gender law proposal. It'll put a stop to any ambiguity, at any rate. A bit more 'clear definition' on a range of subjects would help this country out a lot.
some people like to pretend that complex matters are simple. Trans people are a tiny minority, but convenient scapegoats. It's not like it's even a new issue. I just don't trust their motives.
Oh, come on. I can't believe you mean that. It's a huge issue that is in the press and dominates social media every single day. The whole point is that many people are sick to the back teeth of the subject, but you, of all people, should welcome this with your almost biblical refusal to accept anything without documented proof. Sure, you can still identify as whatever you want, but this would finally affirm what we already know, even though there are those who would like to overthrow the laws of biology.
it's a big issue because they and their cronies made it so. I don't even know any trans people. Don't talk to me about biblical as I don't trust that book. Where is the empathy for people who have struggled with their identity and have to put up with so much prejudice? We've seen protests when drag queens do shows for kids, but panto dames were fine. It's all about stirring up division.
Rubbish! It was a big issue long before they realised that doing something about it might be popular with the voters.
OK, your OCD only believes in written proof. 🤣
Panto Dames are deliberately portrayed as men dressed in women's clothing in an outrageous, over-emphasised presentation. Drag queens, while sometimes ostentatious, are generally presented as close renditions of females. They are two different things and a poor argument.
I saw someone on 𝕏 trying a similar argument with Rishi Sunak's account. They were asking how this proposed law could make women safe when they are currently arrested for saying Trans are not women, but that's the whole point of this proposal; under a new law, you would be able to argue that, yes, someone identifies as female; however, biologically, they are not. It makes a clear definition, a fact, something I would have expected you to relate to as you're always beating me up about facts. 🤷♂️
I don't see anything on social media apart from some trans people on Mastodon living their lives. The algorithms feed your bias elsewhere. It is a social issue that has been made political. If someone has had surgery and lived at a woman for decades would you expect them to use the gents? Wouldn't the guys complain? It's not black and white and pretending it is causes trouble. Of course I want women to be safe, but they are more at risk from straight men.
Steve
in reply to dick_turpin • • •dick_turpin
in reply to Steve • •Steve
in reply to dick_turpin • • •dick_turpin
in reply to Steve • •Rubbish! It was a big issue long before they realised that doing something about it might be popular with the voters.
OK, your OCD only believes in written proof. 🤣
Panto Dames are deliberately portrayed as men dressed in women's clothing in an outrageous, over-emphasised presentation. Drag queens, while sometimes ostentatious, are generally presented as close renditions of females. They are two different things and a poor argument.
I saw someone on 𝕏 trying a similar argument with Rishi Sunak's account. They were asking how this proposed law could make women safe when they are currently arrested for saying Trans are not women, but that's the whole point of this proposal; under a new law, you would be able to argue that, yes, someone identifies as female; however, biologically, they are not. It makes a clear definition, a fact, something I would have expected you to relate to as you're always beating me up about facts. 🤷♂️
Steve
in reply to dick_turpin • • •If someone has had surgery and lived at a woman for decades would you expect them to use the gents? Wouldn't the guys complain? It's not black and white and pretending it is causes trouble.
Of course I want women to be safe, but they are more at risk from straight men.
dick_turpin
in reply to Steve • •Steve
in reply to dick_turpin • • •