dialamah

1. OK, let me rephrase for the obtuse among us: "You know what the message is here? It's that all men are prone to rape and assault of women and children and will go to any lengths to do so." 2. So, you don't know what I'm talking about. Ok. 3. ????? 4. Yes, you've never been to a spa, you don't know what happens in them, you don't read the links, but somehow you think you should have a discussion about it. ?

1. Look at the sources of the stories, and who showed up to demonstrate. This incident is being driven by religious people and conservative media. The two often go hand-in-hand, but doesn't mean non-religious people can't agree with them. 3. There's no evidence that anyone 'whipped their junk out." Nobody has any idea what the complainer saw, only her reaction to it. 2. This was a spa, not a woman's changeroom. The spa had a trans-inclusive policy; if people didn't want to share rooms with trans-people, they ought to have stayed home. Also, I am surprised there were kids at a spa; the ones I've been to never had kids. 4. I'm not persuaded by people who are wrong, regardless of how many of them there are.

And the people responsible should be held responsible, if found. I get the anger/frustration/grief that drives these actions, but it's still wrong.

1. Am I? Is the natural urge of men to asault and rape women and girls? And boys? Do you have that urge? Or are the rapists a small minority of all men, such that we women take the risk of living among them? 2. Here's a story for you. Should women now have to "prove" they are women to suspicious people because the ignorant among us have decided that transwomen cannot be trusted? 3. The point is if these objectors really want to be protective of women and girls, they'd do a lot more about the much bigger threat to women and girls - which are men. 4. Whose rights are not met, exactly? Bathrooms/changing rooms/etc. aren't gender separated for fear of violence. They're separated because our society thinks seeing nudity is traumatizing. If it was fear of violence that dictated these things, men and women would be separated every where - not just in those few places where there is some expected level of nudity.

Nope, shouldn't be doing that either.

I question the entire story, personally. I've been to a spa, and while the one I went to didn't have outright nudity, there was the use of robes to move from one area to another. Perhaps the robe opened a bit and some twit caught sight of a PENIS and freaked out. There was also no kids in the spa I was at; that to me seems odd as well. But, I haven't been to all spas in the world, maybe some people do bring their kids. If it were true that the person in question was waving their penis around like a sparkler, sure - that's wrong the person in question should be charged, maybe. At least thrown out and banned from that business. But given the sources I've read, and the reaction of the spa in question, I don't think that's what happened.

You know what the message is here? It's that men are prone to rape and assault of women and children and will go to any lengths to do so. If it's true that men are prone to sexually assault women and children, then women and children should never be in the company of men. There is no safety in public places, if the over-reaction to this incident is anything to go by. Sure, this happened in a SPA - but it could also have happened in a subway bathroom, or a restaurant bathroom. After all, what's stopping a person with a penis - whatever they claim or how they are dressed - from following a woman into the bathroom to sexually assault her or even following a family into a washroom to rape a little girl. There are far more men in the world than transgendered women. Therefore, the bigger threat is from men in society and not transgendered people. Why aren't we doing something about that, hmm? Why do all men in society get a pass for their 'natural urge to rape', but no transgender woman does?

I think the problem is religious conservatives trying to impose their beliefs on everyone. Given that the spa in question had a trans-inclusive policy, people should not have been there if they would be bothered by seeing a trans-gender female. I bet the complainers didn't see a penis at all; they knew the policy, and went there to cause trouble. People who do that are trash. Religious conservatives don't have to associate with transgender people and they also don't get to cause trouble because people who are different exist.

Indeed. We need fiscal conservatives a lot more than social conservatives.

I agree. So, would agree that both should be held accountable, Maxine by Democrats and Trump by Republicans and both by the media?

I agree with you that incendiary statements made by Maxine Watters, or anyone, are wrong and that democrats ought to have censured her. Still, is Maxine the most powerful individual on earth? And was there any concerted effort to do what she said? Leaders lead; they should be more careful abut what they say, not less, and they should not be given a pass for partisan reasons.

So most violence perpetrated against men is by other men. Yet, they house men together despite how terrified they may be. Having said that, I disagree with the judge: If an individual has been convicted of violence against a woman, that individual should not be imprisoned with women - whether its a male identifying as female, and to be fair, biological women.

Read his rhetoric. He paid lip service to peacefulness once or twice, but the rest was about doing whatever it took to "stop the steal". Also, look up "plausible deniability". It means being just obscure enough in your speech so that later you can claim "I didn't say that". Trump, and his believers, are using that to pretend he didn't encourage storming the capital to "stop the steal." But plausible deniability only works when people want to believe. It's a tactic people use to gaslight others.

Yeah, but druids also preached about being truthful, merciful, loving. The thing is, as was pointed out to me by one of our resident Christians a while ago, is that "good" behavior need only be practiced toward those who practice the same religion. So Druids could practice human sacrifice/cannibalism against their enemies, Israelites could slaughter Caananites, Christians could slaughter Jews and Muslims, Muslims could slaughter Christians - and nobody would run afoul of their God. At least secularists direct their goodwill towards everyone, not just other secularists. By the way, why should anyone require both a carrot (paradise) and a stick (hell) to behave decently? That seems an odd thing to take pride in.

Trump also encouraged his supporters to actively and violently take his presidency back. Hillary did not. That is a key difference. Trump's rhetoric encouraged insurrection. Hillary's claims did not.

And by Druids, Buddhists, Sikhs, Muslims, Jews and virtually all others. Despite the teachings of their particular faith, humans have indulged in all kinds of nasty behavior, usually citing their God as their biggest supporter, including Christians.

Riiiggghhht ... because people with no knowledge, education, skill or experience are much more likely to be right about whatever. Anyway, you've been "genuflecting" before your personal symbol of authority, some lone scientist-type claiming that there is no point in mask-wearing or shut downs, for the past year+. So you know, glass houses and stones.

Nope. Ok. You only get your medical and pension paid if you never leave your neighborhood. Sound fair?

I don't know about now, but there certainly was as recently as the 1980s. Why else would they be required to obtain a permit from the government to sell stuff off their reserve?

1. I think there are people trying to have these conversations, but they are too often drowned out by less reasonable voices. 2. I agree. Maybe it was kids attempting or committing suicide because they felt trapped in the wrong body that made someone (who knows if they were progressive or not when they carried out the research) to take a closer look at gender identity? I don't necessarily agree that we need 75 "different genders" named, but I do believe that gender and sexuality are on a spectrum; some people are noticeably more masculine or feminine than other individuals of their gender. It's not like somebody woke up one morning, and decided "Let's just turn gender theories upside down" (cue rubbing of hands and evil laugh).

They don't care; these violent groups and folks are justified because the left exists. Pointless argument, you may as well try to have a conversation with dirt.

You don't live in Canada, do you.

This is the beginning of changes due to climate change: record high temperatures, record floods, more extreme weather events. Over the next century, things are going to become more extreme. Temps of 47+ will become the norm, not a record. Few people believe the world is coming to an end in 8 years - that is just you attempting to dismiss the evidence in front of you. Science tells us that events like Lytton or Ft S James will become increasingly common because of climate change. You don't want to believe it, you are just like the guy dying of Covid in the hospital, and insisting it's something else

Yeah, it is. No natural cycle has ever seen heat increased as quickly as we have in the last 150+/- years. Scientists noticed in the 1800s that industries produced gases that could create heat in the atmosphere - events since then have proved them right. This climate change isn't part of any natural cycle.

No issue with forest management, issue with it as a solution to forest fires. Anyway, Canada already has both forest management and wildfire management programs.