- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 18,157
- Reaction score
- 2,745
- Country
More meaningless drivel from Roy.
- Status
Sponsored Links
D
Deleted member 221031
I’m not sure who he/she thinks reads it.
Still at least they/them aren’t banned yet.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 18,157
- Reaction score
- 2,745
- Country
Or you could just accept you were wrong
The point is, that I am not wrong. Much as you would love to think so, and have failed to convince anyone other than the existing transphobes.
Meanwhile all my statements have been supported by scientific and medical evidence, eminent opinion and legal texts, while you, like others, have relied on your abusive, offensive, bombastic and repeated incorrect opinions.
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 18,157
- Reaction score
- 2,745
- Country
No you’ve posted a lot of Rainbow and stonewall cr@p that isn’t backed up by law and you’ve misunderstood the laws you seek to rely on. Stonewall say “we need to get ahead of the law” because they presume it lags best practice (as set by them). It doesn’t at all, it simply doesn’t say what they (or you) want it to. The government is also consulting on adding more clarity to avoid real women’s rights being eroded by a small percentage of males who would like to identify as women.
You argue that providing single sex facilities and services based on biological sex is unlawful unless you meet very restricted requirements. When in fact most providers have a legal obligation to do so and those remaining simply need to state “for dignity and privacy reasons”. These are entirely acceptable.
The facts are no crime is committed by excluding a trans person from using the facility if it is not aligned with their biological sex and nobody has a discrimination claim because they weren’t allowed in.
Stating the above doesn’t make me anti-trans
You argue that providing single sex facilities and services based on biological sex is unlawful unless you meet very restricted requirements. When in fact most providers have a legal obligation to do so and those remaining simply need to state “for dignity and privacy reasons”. These are entirely acceptable.
The facts are no crime is committed by excluding a trans person from using the facility if it is not aligned with their biological sex and nobody has a discrimination claim because they weren’t allowed in.
Stating the above doesn’t make me anti-trans
D
Deleted member 221031
Please point out how that’s transphobic ? That’s reportable Roy. Slanderous
You’re the most delusional person to ever post.
Total and utter nensense. i have posted from eminent medical and scientific websites, studies and journals, and government websites and guidance leaflets.
You have provided merely your opinion and your interpretation of the law. You, and the other transphobes, have not provided a single piece of scientific or medical evidence to support your claims. Niether have you or the other transphobes been able to refute a single presentation of mine with valid counter arguments or evidence.
Yet more illustration of your transphobia. Trans women are women.
I don't argue anything, I present the law in easy to read guides. You choose to misinterpret them, becauuse you don't like what they say.
Total and utter nonsense. Pubs, restaurants, public buildings, trains, workplaces, etc cannot simply deny transgender people access to the toilet facilities that they wish to use, UNLESS they provide suitable alternative facilites. The same applies to changing rooms, etc.
And very few such service providers have the will, the space, the finance or the demand to provide three sets of toilets or changing rooms.
It's far more economical and acceptable to ensure that the exisiting facilities meet the needs.
It is an offence under the Equalities Act. and because motorbiking (who also agrees with criminal damage of cameras) says it's not on a DIY website would not provide a suitable defence.
Moreover, if say, the manager of a service provider gives such an instruction to their staff to deny transgender people acces to their preferred toilet, without sufficient cause or alternatives, both the manager and the employee would be commiting an offence. And the employee would have a justifiable grievance against the management.
Nobody has a criminal record of damaging cameras, ......yet, it doesn't make it legal.
Intentionally misrepresenting the law, and encouraging others to commit offences does.
A man who says "I am a woman" does not become a woman.
How many sex chromosomes do you have, and what do you think they are?
You seem rather impassioned by this subject himmy, is there something you'd like to tell us?
D
Deleted member 221031
I like how he avoids our questions and tries to twist it.
He’s obviously not a troll because no one has bitten and won’t.
Perhaps his medication needs a review.
Quite easy to answer a question where you stand on three or four men with frocks on entering a toilet with a lone female using the facility.
She does. "Man" and "woman" are genders.
That is relelvant to sex, not gender.
You're still confusing sex and gender.
To save the likes or motobiking making false allegations, I've put the link in large letters
It's from the Council of Europe, and I'm pretty sure they're not an orgnisation mostly concerned with Transgenders. Sex and gender - Gender Matters - www.coe.int
www.coe.int
Your rampant transphobia is on clear display.
Perhaps motorbiking's and JohnD's transphobia has enobled you.
What's transphobia got to do with answering such a simple question.
It says a lot about you that you seem unable to have an opinion when your opinionated on a range of topics, none more so than this topic.
Thought you'd be at the front of the queue.
As your silly questions are based on your transphobia, they don't deserve answers.
To answer would be to accept your transphobia as normality. It's not normal, it's rampant bigotry.
- Status
Sponsored Links
