Hate Crime

  • Thread starter Deleted member 221031
  • Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Links
They do not have the rights you pretend.

Worrying evidence which explains why women are worried.

Here a trans woman talks sense.
An article by Debbie Hayton, who is a transgender, and wore a T shirt with: "Trans women are men. Get over it" emblazoned on it", at a Fair Play for Women event.
It's just like Priti Patel ,Suella Braverman, et al wanting to stop asylum seekers.
They've made it but they want to stop anyone else trying.
They've achieved their fame, but they don't want anyone else to achieve the same.
 
Trans drugs increase cancer risk - fact.
Trans drugs increrased the likelyhood of trans women suffering breasy cancer compared to cisgender men.
Approximately 0.5–1% of breast cancers occur in men

This study showed an increased risk of breast cancer in trans women compared with cisgender men, and a lower risk in trans men compared with cisgender women.

Wow, the likelyhood of breast cancer in transwomen taking trans drugs increase is compared to cisgender men. But the percentage of cisgender men having breast cancer is only 0.5 to 1% of all breast cancer patients. :rolleyes:
So exactly how much is the increase, and why aren't the results comparfed to cisgender women? :rolleyes:
Perhaps those results wouldn't provide the results that the authors were looking for. :rolleyes:

What the result do show is that the trans drugs increase the risk of cancer in transwomen from what it was when they were cisgender men.
And the results also show that the drugs decrease the risk of breast cancer in transmen from what they were when they were cisgender women.
Swings and roundabouts. There is an increased risk for transwomen, and a decreased risk for transmen.

The rest of your post is not worth examining.
Trans women are over represented in convicted sexual offenders. - fact
The ECHR says women can be fathers and men can be mothers - fact.
People who have mental illnesses are over represented in trans - fact.
Many women are against blokes in frocks using their loos. Fact.

Work with the facts and not the fiction.
Work with the scientific and medical facts not the bigoted fiction.
 
How did you come up with that number?
I am assuming you have scoured the media to find all the cases that exist.
Unless uou already had the information readhy for your gender essentialism arguments.

I see you do not deny that you believe these men to be women.
I am in no position to make any sort of judgement on their sex nor gender.
What is obvious is that they are criminals. And as has been said, criminals will exploit any deceit to allow them to commit their crimes.
But you already knew that.
 
Sponsored Links
A crackpot term invented by fanatics who deny that sex exists.
No-one denies that sex, as a label, as an anatomical description or as an act, exists.
It's another example of your strawman arguments, and they're piling up now.
 
I sense a topic lock coming up in the not too distant future.
A similar thread was locked a couple of weeks ago.
I sense another thread with a similar topic being started again in a couple of weeks time. :rolleyes:
The same old topics are brought up time and time again.
 
I wonder if you can see that it actually destroys any message that you might have

Of course they can't: I've said the same to some of Himmy's previous incarnations.
"Roy" clearly thinks advice, as well as alternative viewpoints, is beneath them.
 
You didn't like my earlier analogy because it went against your narrative however I'll use it again. If I undergo Caucasian treatment to make myself appear Caucasian and not mixed race ... I'm not Caucasian. I'd be trans Caucasian. There's a difference.
Your analogy does not allow a discrimination to be reduced, in law.
Because we all should enjoy the same rights. Becoming trans-caucasion, as you put it, does not confer any rights on you that you did not already enjoy.
 
Of course they can't: I've said the same to some of Himmy's previous incarnations.
"Roy" clearly thinks advice, as well as alternative viewpoints, is beneath them.
Do you have any relative comments, to the topic of the thread, to add, Brigadier?
Or are you just jumping on the ad hominem bandwagon because the gender essentialist have not an iota of data, research evidence, etc to support their opinion?
 
Your analogy does not allow a discrimination to be reduced, in law.
Because we all should enjoy the same rights. Becoming trans-caucasion, as you put it, does not confer any rights on you that you did not already enjoy.
I'm not referring to rights, laws etc. Jeez.

My point is simply if we change something about ourselves, even to a significant degree, that doesn't necessarily equate to us (genuinely) becoming the other thing in the fullest sense.
 
A crackpot term invented by fanatics who deny that sex exists.
Gender essentialism is the belief that a person, thing, or particular trait is inherently and permanently male and masculine or female and feminine. In other words, it considers biological sex the primary factor in determining gender.
 
I'm not referring to rights, laws etc. Jeez.

My point is simply if we change something about ourselves, even to a significant degree, that doesn't necessarily equate to us (genuinely) becoming the other thing in the fullest sense.
I was pointing out how your nalogy doesn't work.
You have the same rights after your trans-caucasian (sic) as you did prior to your trans process.
If you registered as mixed race prior to your conversion, you have exactly the same rights and standing as your new identity.
Your previous identity did not prevent you from doing anything. Your new identity does not allow you to do anything that you couldn't do before.
 
Do you have any relative comments, to the topic of the thread, to add, Brigadier?
Or are you just jumping on the ad hominem bandwagon because the gender essentialist have not an iota of data, research evidence, etc to support their opinion?

Perfectly relevant, because whatever message you may have is lost in acres of drivel, and pomposity.

Just like all the previous personas.
 
Do you have any relative comments, to the topic of the thread, to add, Brigadier?
Or are you just jumping on the ad hominem bandwagon because the gender essentialist have not an iota of data, research evidence, etc to support their opinion?

Perfectly relevant, because whatever message you may have is lost in acres of drivel, and pomposity.

Just like all the previous personas.
I might have guessed.
You're on the bandwagon of ad hominem attacks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top