Canadian Catholic student arrested for saying men are different from women.

[Zeitgeist]

3 hours ago, I am Groot said:

Eighteen-year-old male student showing up naked in girls shower at high school. "I'm trans by the way."

https://wlos.com/news/nation-world/after-trans-woman-exposed-genitalia-to-freshman-girls-in-locker-room-shower-school-district-faces-legal-scrutiny?utm_source=ground.news&utm_medium=referral

Gender is a social construct until someone gets raped or pregnant.  What’s happening more than anything else in the trans movement is that people are playing a high stakes game with their bodies and mental health and women are being objectified as make believe dolls.  Gay people are also being put back in the closet.  It’s hard for the exceptional people who really do feel like another gender and are trying to find a healthy coping strategy to be taken seriously in this context.  The truth is that we can’t change our biological genders.  We can only pretend and change our appearance.  There’s nothing wrong with that.  In fact it’s probably healthier to embrace that reality.  Perhaps there are exceptions.  Clearly going into female spaces and spontaneously claiming a female trans identity is not okay.  “Trans women are women!” rings hollow because it’s so flexibly applied.  

[Michael Hardner]

12 hours ago, I am Groot said:

Eighteen-year-old male student showing up naked in girls shower at high school. "I'm trans by the way."

https://wlos.com/news/nation-world/after-trans-woman-exposed-genitalia-to-freshman-girls-in-locker-room-shower-school-district-faces-legal-scrutiny?utm_source=ground.news&utm_medium=referral

How would we all feel about agreeing that individual cases aren't sufficient proof to support the overall approach?

 

Because people can pepper these pages with all kinds of individual cases.

[OftenWrong]

27 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

How would we all feel about agreeing that individual cases aren't sufficient proof to support the overall approach?

 

Because people can pepper these pages with all kinds of individual cases.

If the system is enabling individuals to commit crimes, it needs to be talked about. Here "the system" is not protecting people who are vulnerable, because of a fixation on a certain problem. Sometimes the solution can be worse that the problem it addresses, a fact the naive "just recently awaked" fail to grasp.

[Michael Hardner]

The idea behind policy is that it set up to solve problems on a macro scale.

A single case is basically an emotional argument.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_against_transgender_people_in_the_United_States

[Michael Hardner]

4 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

If the system is enabling individuals to commit crimes, it needs to be talked about.  

I agree.

[OftenWrong]

5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I agree.

Pass the teapot...

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, OftenWrong said:

Pass the teapot...

Post some macro data about abuses of the policy and let's look.

[I am Groot]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

How would we all feel about agreeing that individual cases aren't sufficient proof to support the overall approach?

 

Because people can pepper these pages with all kinds of individual cases.

This is a single case. Granted. But how much coverage did it get? Basically none. I spotted it on Ground News, and the only media covering it were small ones on the right. No centrist or left media mentioned it. I would suggest, then, that this is hardly a unique case, and that in all likelihood this happens with some frequency (what frequency isn't known) and we simply rarely hear about it. 

This is particularly true if you only watch/view centrist or left media. They just don't cover things that go against 'the message'. Similarly, you've probably rarely or never seen anything about the flash mobs of young black people in the US who have attacked shoppers and shopping areas in the US. Sometimes dozens, sometimes hundreds of them gleefully smashing store windows, stealing merchandise, and assaulting white passersby. When such things are covered it's mostly only locally, and the mob is referred to variously as 'youths' or 'teenagers'. 

The major media largely avoid covering such stories because they feel the viewership might tend to become more racist or transphobic.

So we really have no idea how often this sort of thing happens.

[I am Groot]

38 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Post some macro data about abuses of the policy and let's look.

Where would such data come from? This situation was not reported to the police. No crime occurred. No record kept.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

The idea behind policy is that it set up to solve problems on a macro scale.

A single case is basically an emotional argument.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_against_transgender_people_in_the_United_States

What you seem to be saying is that it's fine to sacrifice a few girls for the 'bigger picture'.

I would argue the opposite - nothing that doesn't work on the micro scale should be considered for widespread use. There are no 'acceptable casualties' here.

[OftenWrong]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Post some macro data about abuses of the policy and let's look.

Don't need to.

If we go by macro cases, and we should, there's a whole lot more natural born girls in that shower than the one natural-born male. So where's the sense of balance in that?

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

1. No centrist or left media mentioned it. I would suggest, then, that this is hardly a unique case, and that in all likelihood this happens with some frequency (what frequency isn't known) and we simply rarely hear about it. 

2. This is particularly true if you only watch/view centrist or left media. They just don't cover things that go against 'the message'.

3. When such things are covered it's mostly only locally, and the mob is referred to variously as 'youths' or 'teenagers'. 

4. So we really have no idea how often this sort of thing happens.

1. How does that follow?  I did some quick research and found lots of cases of violence involving trans folk.  None of them were famous.

2. It's confirmation bias no? " The media is pro trans, and here's an individual case they didn't cover to prove that. "

3. Why don't you use the example of reportage of black crime rates then?  That proves your case, as well as mine. You are welcome..

4. If only there were some kind of public agency that dealt with crime and published statistics...

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

Where would such data come from? This situation was not reported to the police. No crime occurred. No record kept.

There's still sociological surveys of unreported crime, but your point about criminal agencies is taken.

[Michael Hardner]

8 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Don't need to.

If we go by macro cases, and we should, there's a whole lot more natural born girls in that shower than the one natural-born male. So where's the sense of balance in that?

Congratulations. You've met step one.

 

Now use the evidence to make the case you want to make

[Zeitgeist]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

What you seem to be saying is that it's fine to sacrifice a few girls for the 'bigger picture'.

I would argue the opposite - nothing that doesn't work on the micro scale should be considered for widespread use. There are no 'acceptable casualties' here.

I don’t think that “trans rights” should be human rights if their assertion is a violation of so many other human rights, especially women’s rights and the freedom to express biological reality.  In order to buy into the idea of trans gender having the same status as biological gender, people must be compelled to lie and swallow the ideological idea that someone can be two or more different genders at once.  It’s a mental contortion that denies the field of psychology’s inclusion of gender dysphoria as a mental disorder in the DSM 5.

Hardner always affirms every government position but sometimes supports discussion.  It’s that kind of refusal to take courageous stances or simple indifference that has got us here.  Don’t worry, Mike, you’re not alone.  It’s actually the norm.  The problem is that now we’re stuck with bad policies that we’ve been told to accept.  Who drafted them?  Where was the debate?   It’s very much a shoot first, ask questions later.

 I think instead of simply equating biological and trans gender rights, there should be certain protections for trans people, such as access to a washroom and protection from abuse.  Making people refer to trans people by their chosen pronouns is compelled speech. Allowing trans people into the private space of genders that are not their biological genders is a violation of women’s and men’s rights.  It’s a human rights violation.  Sorry but trans people shouldn’t be given that option as a “right”.

Edited April 23, 2023 by Zeitgeist

[CdnFox]

11 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

I don’t think that “trans rights” should be human rights if their assertion is a violation of so many other human rights, especially women’s rights and the freedom to express biological reality.

I agree - but lets say for a moment that trans rights are human rights. I dont think they are but - lets say.

it is QUITE common in our society for two people's rights to come into conflict. the old and often misquoted and slightly erroneous idea that you have the right to free speech but not the right to yell 'fire' in a crowded theatre if it puts others at risk becaue of their right to safety and life.

So - when that happens our courts and our system tries to minimize the damage to 'rights'  by choosing the scenario that infringes upon rights the least.

I would argue that stripping multiple women of their dignity because of their ACTUAL biological sex and placing them at risk is a greater affront to rights than one single person being forced to endure the indignity of having to cope with their natural biological sex even tho due to a mental health issue it causes them grief to do so.

I'm all over converting bathrooms and such to  'dual use' (enclosed stalls which men or women can use). but their comes a point where women's rights to their dignity and safety have to outweigh the rights of the trans woman, and when one transwoman can affect a half dozen bio women or more at the same time that line shows up pretty quickly.

11 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

I

 I think instead of simply equating biological and trans gender rights, there should be certain protections for trans people, such as access to a washroom and protection from abuse.  Making people refer to trans people by their chosen pronouns is compelled speech. Allowing trans people into the private space of genders that are not their biological genders is a violation of women’s and men’s rights.  It’s a human rights violation.  Sorry but trans people shouldn’t be given that option as a “right”.

Agreed.

[Zeitgeist]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

I agree - but lets say for a moment that trans rights are human rights. I dont think they are but - lets say.

it is QUITE common in our society for two people's rights to come into conflict. the old and often misquoted and slightly erroneous idea that you have the right to free speech but not the right to yell 'fire' in a crowded theatre if it puts others at risk becaue of their right to safety and life.

So - when that happens our courts and our system tries to minimize the damage to 'rights'  by choosing the scenario that infringes upon rights the least.

I would argue that stripping multiple women of their dignity because of their ACTUAL biological sex and placing them at risk is a greater affront to rights than one single person being forced to endure the indignity of having to cope with their natural biological sex even tho due to a mental health issue it causes them grief to do so.

I'm all over converting bathrooms and such to  'dual use' (enclosed stalls which men or women can use). but their comes a point where women's rights to their dignity and safety have to outweigh the rights of the trans woman, and when one transwoman can affect a half dozen bio women or more at the same time that line shows up pretty quickly.

Agreed.

If a trans woman is recognized as a woman, they will be afforded the same rights to women’s spaces as biological women.  If the only way to settle this to answer the question, Is a trans woman a woman?, the answer has to be no.  If biology doesn’t settle the score, we’ve lot touch with reality.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

If a trans woman is recognized as a woman, they will be afforded the same rights to women’s spaces as biological women.  If the only way to settle this to answer the question, Is a trans woman a woman?, the answer has to be no.  If biology doesn’t settle the score, we’ve lot touch with reality.

And i think that's the answer right there.  It's fine to say a trans woman is different than a man. And it's fine to say trans women are a type of woman. (ish).  But to say they are the same as a biological woman is false, and basing your laws and policies on lies rarely works out well (trudeau, i'm looking at you.  Staaaaaaaaare )

 

[OftenWrong]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Congratulations. You've met step one.

 

Now use the evidence to make the case you want to make

I don't make a case, other than to speak out for the rights of teenage girls to protect their privacy. To protect women's sports from being dominated by people who are natural born males. So that little girls can believe they have a chance to make it in sports too.

[CdnFox]

3 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

I don't make a case, other than to speak out for the rights of teenage girls to protect their privacy.

Hoooowwww.... DAAAARRE  you!!!!! That's SO sexist!

- the left, probably.

Edited April 23, 2023 by CdnFox

[Michael Hardner]

4 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

I don't make a case, other than to speak out for the rights of teenage girls to protect their privacy. To protect women's sports from being dominated by people who are natural born males. So that little girls can believe they have a chance to make it in sports too.

It's nice of you to appoint yourself to such an important position 

[I am Groot]

6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. How does that follow?  I did some quick research and found lots of cases of violence involving trans folk.  None of them were famous.

What does 'violence involving trans folk mean'? 

6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

2. It's confirmation bias no? " The media is pro trans, and here's an individual case they didn't cover to prove that. "

Are you denying the media is pro trans? How often have you seen stories in the mainstream questioning trans orthodoxy?

6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

3. Why don't you use the example of reportage of black crime rates then?  That proves your case, as well as mine. You are welcome..

Black crime rates are not reported in this country, and rarely reported in the US either.

6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

4. If only there were some kind of public agency that dealt with crime and published statistics...

What crime was committed here?

[OftenWrong]

43 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's nice of you to appoint yourself to such an important position 

I am a Canadian parent. I have raised 2 daughters and a son, all are young adults. One is in college.

[Michael Hardner]

42 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

1. What does 'violence involving trans folk mean'? 

2. Are you denying the media is pro trans? How often have you seen stories in the mainstream questioning trans orthodoxy?

3. Black crime rates are not reported in this country, and rarely reported in the US either.

4. What crime was committed here?

1. Stories of assault or violent crime with trans people committing or bring victims.

2. I guess not, but I don't think they're avoiding the reporting of individual crimes just because the person is trans... because why would they go out of their way to report a crime that was committed... because the perp was trans?

 

3. Exactly.  Why don't you point that out, it's more salient ie sticks out more?

 

4. I don't know?  What are they alleging - indecent exposure?

 

.

[CdnFox]

58 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

4. I don't know?  What are they alleging - indecent exposure?

 

.

Well that's the challenge isn't it.  If a male did it then sure it's indecent exposure. probably sexual harrassment, staring at naked girls in the shower has to be worth a few charges too - society recognizes it's wrong.  But - all you have to do is yell "trans!" and that alllll goes away. No crime at all committed.  Not even exposure. It's all above board with just one word.