Hate Crime

  • Thread starter Deleted member 221031
  • Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A man does not commit any offence by entering a woman’s toilet. He may not have a right to do so.

He may be asked to leave or to use the loo provided from people of his sex. A GRC doesn’t change this, neither does lipstick and a frock. It is legal to exclude transgender people from service exclusively for people who occupy the sex from birth.

If I offer intimate waxing for woman, I have a right to refuse a back sack and crack on a trans person as they are not women. I can also refuse a Brazilian etc.

Changing your gender doesn’t grant you the right to protection from an equalities act perspective as if you hold the protected characteristics of those who have that sex. Trans people are protected from discrimination against trans people.

Trans people often suffer from mental illness and other health problems. Some of the drugs can increase the risk of cancer and cause other hormonal problems.
Which all seems quite clear.

So what exactly is all the fuss about?
 
Sponsored Links
Some people wish it was different and accuse people of transphobia if they disagree.
 
Ghafla

...maybe it isn't that ****ing interesting.
Sure, if people are not interested or ambivalent, I can understand that.
It indicates that they agree with my point of view, that transgenders exist, they have rights enshrined in the Act, and we should live and let live, instead of trying to deny their existence.
You contribution doesn't seem to fall into that category.
I did not say they were denying them, but simply expressing a wish to use the toilet without a man being present.

Easy enough to spot.

We live in a Democracy, which means the majority get their way. That's the way it works. Until a majority of people want to see men in dresses using a shared facility, then fair enough. When a majority of people wish to see men in leotards swimming against women, then fair enough. At the moment the majority of people don't want their children told they can be 'whatever they want to be' by trans gender folk with an agenda.
You may consider that to be unfair, but them's the breaks.
I think the law regarding cannabis is stupid, but it is what it is.
Suck it up.

Racism was an accepted form of prejudice at one time, then the educated, enlightened people recognised it for what it was, bigotry based on mythological false narratives.
Homosexuality followed the same kind of attitude.
Disability and mental illness used to be the object of ridicule.
The issue of transgenders is going through the same sort of process that racism, homosexuality, disabilty and mental illness went through for centuries, and more recently, decades in recognising it as just bigotry.
Racism, homosexuality disability and mental illness has always existed.
In western society bigoted people saw other ethnicities, homosexuals, disabled and those with mental illness as objects of hatred, outrage and ostracism. Now homosexuality is an accepted preference and racism is just wrong in all senses of the word. Disability and mental illness are accepted as conditions and accomodated.
The issue of transgender is now that subject of outrage, hatred and ostracism, but society will have to lern to accept it if we want an equal society.
 
Sponsored Links
Have you changed, from saying a trans is a man who says he is a woman

And started saying, a trans is a man who has been issued with a GRC?

Today, when do you say a man becomes a trans?
Legally a man who declares hinself to be transwoman is recognised as a woman.
You are entitled to disagree with a law. You are not entitled to disregard it nor to foment hatred towards a protected minority, because you disagree.
 
The issue of transgender is now that subject of outrage, hatred and ostracism, but society will have to lern to accept it if we want an equal society.
We already have ? It’s you struggling to understand it and make John D’s posts something they aren’t.
 
links that supports his deviancies
It's not deviant to respect the law, and the individuals protected by those laws.
It's deviant to only respect the laws that you agree with, and break the laws with which you disagree.
 
Bit of a lopsided discussion without the presence of women having contributed to the discussion.
 
More the question is how has it come to this, why women are being pressured to put up with such a situation.
A recent poll (2022) showed that females are pretty much equally split on the issue, 49% to 51% about whether the prejudice is a problem.
The 51% saying that prejudice is a significant problem.

Another prejudiced opinion based on guesswork disproven by real life data.
 
It's not deviant to respect the law, and the individuals protected by those laws.
It's deviant to only respect the laws that you agree with, and break the laws with which you disagree.
You have to ask in who's name are laws passed by whom.
There are many laws passed that are not respected.
 
A recent poll (2022) showed that females are pretty much equally split on the issue, 49% to 51% about whether the prejudice is a problem.
The 51% saying that prejudice is a significant problem.

Another prejudiced opinion based on guesswork disproven by real life data.
Not using polls are we now, when you have to resort to polls to back up your argument then you truly are scraping the barrel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top