You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > I'm Andy Fly Me
November 27 2022 3.32pm

I'm Andy Fly Me

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 5 of 38 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >

Play our World Cup 2022 Prediction League!

World Cup Prediction League 2022

Sponsor a forum or Advertise on the HOL!


 

View Teddy Eagle's Profile Teddy Eagle Online Flag 30 Sep 22 12.10am Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by HeathMan

feel that Virgin are trying to make their staff feel comfortable. Society needs to help all people to feel comfortable at all times.

In the current economic climate they , and everyone else, have got a lot more serious problems than the perception of other people.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Spiderman's Profile Spiderman Flag Horsham 30 Sep 22 7.43am Send a Private Message to Spiderman Add Spiderman as a friend

Originally posted by HeathMan

feel that Virgin are trying to make their staff feel comfortable. Society needs to help all people to feel comfortable at all times. mbers

This may be so but if it doesn’t make their customers comfortable, they may need a rethink

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Nicholas91's Profile Nicholas91 Flag The Democratic Republic of Kent 30 Sep 22 8.36am Send a Private Message to Nicholas91 Add Nicholas91 as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

You asked. Here it is:-

[Link]

I have no need to answer your second request, because that's not what I suggested. We aren't discussing men in women's changing rooms. We are discussing transgender women in women's changing rooms, compared to predatory women in women's changing rooms. The first is no threat at all. The second is.

Everyone needs a better understanding, whatever their sex.

My grandchild is far from delusional, or indulging in fantasies. Indeed, the reverse is true. Their feet are firmly grounded whilst you are spouting deluded nonsense.

It has everything to do with prejudice. Prejudice I shared until I was forced to reconsider and revise my opinion.

We are discussing that. You cannot discuss one without the other.

What you are doing is exactly was deluded ideologues on the left want you to do, closely aligned with the deliberately vague and emotive but quite obviously unbalanced and directionless article you have just posted.

There is a difference between absolute neutrality and objectiveness in scientific theorem and posting an article deliberately selective in it's approach to try and justify an ideological proposition. We have seen this in recent history with those ideologically driven.

Conflating and selectively choosing the vast amount of parameters you 'could' attribute to gender identity with the actual biological determination is at best clutching at straws. Also, introducing social science into what can only be biologically concluded science is quite typical of the b0ll0cks one reads these days. Unfortunately those looking to prove their own idiotic and uneducated prejudices will no doubt cling to as proof or evidence, as you have just demonstrated.

There is no evidence or even notion among right thinking individuals that men and women sharing private locations such as toilets or changing rooms had any benefit to anybody other than those who are choosing not to accept the scientific fact of their gender. These people are so few, many of which are societally driven in their thinking, thanks to the likes of you, with no biological science to support their stance. The article you have presented relies upon contradictory stances (supporting what it seeks to endorse in places then ridiculing the same hypothesis elsewhere) and causes more ambiguity, which it seeks to exploit, as opposed to having any real context, application or definitive truth in it.

Kudos on the 'I can scour the internet to find something that somewhat supports my nonsense' approach. I'm sure people can and do utilise this approach for just about every single niche thought or delusion they wish to indulge in. Popular with those in America who you so diligently deride. I think it correct and appropriate you do so, however interesting to see you employ the same methodology.

 


Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View becky's Profile becky Flag over the moon 30 Sep 22 8.42am Send a Private Message to becky Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add becky as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

They wouldn't know if it was a transgendered woman, who looks, thinks, smells and behaves just as they do.

If it was a hairy assed git in a skirt, they would.

The two are not the same, and mustn't be confused.

Don't kid yourself WE..... we know. We always know, and women who have had a lifetime to highly develop natural female self-preservation instincts can spot a transgender a mile away. It's just that they are generally tolerated as being of no threat to us.

 


A stairway to Heaven and a Highway to Hell give some indication of expected traffic numbers

Alert Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Online Flag Truro Cornwall 30 Sep 22 9.21am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by becky

Don't kid yourself WE..... we know. We always know, and women who have had a lifetime to highly develop natural female self-preservation instincts can spot a transgender a mile away. It's just that they are generally tolerated as being of no threat to us.

I seriously doubt that's true.

You may suspect people, but could very easily be wrong. Both ways! This is a much more complex issue than appears at first glance.

There will be others you don't suspect, but who are indeed transgender, so you will just never know.

I have spent quite some time in Asia where this is much more open and accepted, than here. I can assure you that many of the transgender women there are completely undetectable, both by men and women.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Badger11's Profile Badger11 Flag Beckenham 30 Sep 22 9.27am Send a Private Message to Badger11 Add Badger11 as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Why on earth would anyone object to a gender-neutral toilet or changing room? It's a totally safe space that presents no threat, real or imagined, from anyone, and can be used by everyone, irrespective of their sexuality, or whether you approve or not.

Toilets and changing rooms are not places for ideological battles. Try showing some charity towards people who had no wish for this to happen, but now it has just want to live safely.

Not according to many women and I prefer to listen to the majority view rather than a tiny minority. If there is a male section a female section and a gender neutral fine but it many instances that is not the case e.g. Primark. You say have some charity to those who wish to live safely I do and that is the majority of women who don't want this.

 


One more point

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Online Flag Truro Cornwall 30 Sep 22 9.32am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Nicholas91

We are discussing that. You cannot discuss one without the other.

What you are doing is exactly was deluded ideologues on the left want you to do, closely aligned with the deliberately vague and emotive but quite obviously unbalanced and directionless article you have just posted.

There is a difference between absolute neutrality and objectiveness in scientific theorem and posting an article deliberately selective in it's approach to try and justify an ideological proposition. We have seen this in recent history with those ideologically driven.

Conflating and selectively choosing the vast amount of parameters you 'could' attribute to gender identity with the actual biological determination is at best clutching at straws. Also, introducing social science into what can only be biologically concluded science is quite typical of the b0ll0cks one reads these days. Unfortunately those looking to prove their own idiotic and uneducated prejudices will no doubt cling to as proof or evidence, as you have just demonstrated.

There is no evidence or even notion among right thinking individuals that men and women sharing private locations such as toilets or changing rooms had any benefit to anybody other than those who are choosing not to accept the scientific fact of their gender. These people are so few, many of which are societally driven in their thinking, thanks to the likes of you, with no biological science to support their stance. The article you have presented relies upon contradictory stances (supporting what it seeks to endorse in places then ridiculing the same hypothesis elsewhere) and causes more ambiguity, which it seeks to exploit, as opposed to having any real context, application or definitive truth in it.

Kudos on the 'I can scour the internet to find something that somewhat supports my nonsense' approach. I'm sure people can and do utilise this approach for just about every single niche thought or delusion they wish to indulge in. Popular with those in America who you so diligently deride. I think it correct and appropriate you do so, however interesting to see you employ the same methodology.

You asked for scientific proof that you were wrong, and would change your stance.

I have provided it. That is a comprehensive presentation of the facts and an analysis of how and why misinformation on this subject gets spread. A spread that you are obviously participating in.

To dismiss the reasoning as "deliberately vague and emotive", when it is anything other than that, is clearly nonsensical. It states the scientific basis for why the simple approach you adhere to is simply wrong.

If people refuse to withdraw their head from the sand, then there is little more I can do to help them. Read it again, and again, until you actually understand it, rather than start off with a prejudicial desire to dismiss it.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Online Flag Truro Cornwall 30 Sep 22 9.39am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Badger11

Not according to many women and I prefer to listen to the majority view rather than a tiny minority. If there is a male section a female section and a gender neutral fine but it many instances that is not the case e.g. Primark. You say have some charity to those who wish to live safely I do and that is the majority of women who don't want this.

As everyone, including those who "don't want this", can live completely safely when using gender-neutral toilets, I fail to see your objection. They enter alone. They lock the door. They are not going to exit into a threatening space. They are safe. Transgender women wouldn't be if forced to use male toilets.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Badger11's Profile Badger11 Flag Beckenham 30 Sep 22 9.49am Send a Private Message to Badger11 Add Badger11 as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

As everyone, including those who "don't want this", can live completely safely when using gender-neutral toilets, I fail to see your objection. They enter alone. They lock the door. They are not going to exit into a threatening space. They are safe. Transgender women wouldn't be if forced to use male toilets.

Try telling that to schoolgirls who have to use gender neutral toilets at school.

Anyway it's not just about toilets and changing rooms like I said the majority are being told to accommodate a minority and if they object are accused of being prejudiced.

 


One more point

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Nicholas91's Profile Nicholas91 Flag The Democratic Republic of Kent 30 Sep 22 9.53am Send a Private Message to Nicholas91 Add Nicholas91 as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

You asked for scientific proof that you were wrong, and would change your stance.

I have provided it. That is a comprehensive presentation of the facts and an analysis of how and why misinformation on this subject gets spread. A spread that you are obviously participating in.

To dismiss the reasoning as "deliberately vague and emotive", when it is anything other than that, is clearly nonsensical. It states the scientific basis for why the simple approach you adhere to is simply wrong.

If people refuse to withdraw their head from the sand, then there is little more I can do to help them. Read it again, and again, until you actually understand it, rather than start off with a prejudicial desire to dismiss it.

No, it does not. It's as simple as that. There's little point arguing with you as you cannot even articulate as to why, hence the employment of any internet source you can dig up that you probably don't understanding yourself but oh so want to validate your opinion. But you keep believing what you want to believe. Perhaps a c0ck is not a c0ck after all and it's just coincidence and nothing to do with biology.

BTW, type in something akin to 'why transgenderism is not scientific' and you'll find just as many articles supporting that side of the fence. Difference between you and I however is that I can articulate as to why it's a delusion. You however cannot. You will just echo and parrot whatever ideological bent you have chosen to subscribe to in lieu of an ability to think for yourself. I have already challenged that article in both it's mission and narrative, you are just blindly adhering to it to suit your own will.

Just because we can now chop off and add things on, play with hormones etc these days, does not make delusions or psychiatric illnesses truth. Call it 'playing God/nature or whatever you want' but it is not truth just because you wish it to be so, most likely because you have otherwise failed to socially adjust to the world as it is.

Then using this untruth to as justification to place women at risk so as to validate your delusion to yourself is not acceptable. Feigning victim status with your tear streamed cries of 'prejudice' and 'hate' is the most pathetic and rightfully ridiculed stance one could take.

At no point in scientific, mammalian or human biology has gender ever been questioned until the left were allowed to congregate and scream nonsense hysterically. Just because you are screaming loudly does not make anything factually correct with pseudo and perversions of science being so crudely parodied to fit your agenda.


 


Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Teddy Eagle's Profile Teddy Eagle Online Flag 30 Sep 22 10.20am Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I seriously doubt that's true.

You may suspect people, but could very easily be wrong. Both ways! This is a much more complex issue than appears at first glance.

There will be others you don't suspect, but who are indeed transgender, so you will just never know.

I have spent quite some time in Asia where this is much more open and accepted, than here. I can assure you that many of the transgender women there are completely undetectable, both by men and women.

Denying women's lived experience is part of the issue.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Nicholas91's Profile Nicholas91 Flag The Democratic Republic of Kent 30 Sep 22 10.38am Send a Private Message to Nicholas91 Add Nicholas91 as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle



You asked for scientific proof that you were wrong, and would change your stance.

I have provided it. That is a comprehensive presentation of the facts and an analysis of how and why misinformation on this subject gets spread. A spread that you are obviously participating in.

To dismiss the reasoning as "deliberately vague and emotive", when it is anything other than that, is clearly nonsensical. It states the scientific basis for why the simple approach you adhere to is simply wrong.

If people refuse to withdraw their head from the sand, then there is little more I can do to help them. Read it again, and again, until you actually understand it, rather than start off with a prejudicial desire to dismiss it.

[Link]

There you go, above. Somebody who has actually gone to far greater lengths than I have to provide context and absolute conclusion on the matter. No it is not a right wing or otherwise source, I disregard such things as I usually do with your rantings, it seems quite legitimate.

Note in the comment section others who have been challenged by failures too and used this as quite a nice and polite explanation.

 


Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 5 of 38 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > I'm Andy Fly Me