Society/Culture Hypocrisy of The Left - part 3

[its free real estate]

No, he provided me with an example of a transgender person committing a crime, which is not an example of there being a victim of the mere existence of transgender people. Do you think that all transgender people are rapists? If you want to talk about the intricacies of the incarceration of transgender people, then fine, quote some numbers and examine what the professionals and experts say on the matter and go from there, but I think it's fair to say that the actions of an individual does not mean that the entire group is guilty.

The question is that If someone is transgender and they transition, who is the victim in that? Bear in mind that this discussion stems from the claim that lefties will campaign for the rights of paedophiles to freely do what they do because lefties campaigned for the rights of transgender people to be transgender people.

It’s quite clear that if a male who is threatening to women transitions and has access to female-only spaces there are a number of potential women victims.

The Old Testament had a parable about wolves in sheeps’ clothing, weird that the ancients has more wisdom than people today.

 

[Father Jack]

It’s quite clear that if a male who is threatening to women transitions and has access to female-only spaces there are a number of potential women victims.

The Old Testament had a parable about wolves in sheeps’ clothing, weird that the ancients has more wisdom than people today.

So that means that you believe that transgenders should not exist at all?

 

[its free real estate]

So that means that you believe that transgenders should not exist at all?

No. They can exist, but their subjective reality should not be asserted as truth or forced on to anyone else.

 

[Father Jack]

No. They can exist, but their subjective reality should not be asserted as truth or forced on to anyone else's.

Why not?

 

[its free real estate]

Why not?

What privileges their perception of reality higher than other people's?

 

[Father Jack]

What privileges their perception of reality higher than other people's?

I think it's fair that they can decide who they are for themselves and not have to get you to give them the ok. I fail to see how anyone is a victim in that. Criminals are criminals no matter what gender they identify as, just becoming trans doesn't automatically make you one either.

Either way, I remain unconvinced that supporting the rights of transgender people to be transgender people creates direct victims the same way as letting paedophiles do their thing freely. Unless you can come up with an actual argument that addresses that point, I'm done.

 

[Noidenous]

I think it's fair that they can decide who they are for themselves and not have to get you to give them the ok. I fail to see how anyone is a victim in that. Criminals are criminals no matter what gender they identify as, just becoming trans doesn't automatically make you one either.

Either way, I remain unconvinced that supporting the rights of transgender people to be transgender people creates direct victims the same way as letting paedophiles do their thing freely. Unless you can come up with an actual argument that addresses that point, I'm done.

If anyone is potentially going to be locked up and victimised based on their subjective nonsense and the social hyper-sensitivity surrounding it, then yes, they do have to have my ok to do that, whether decided by myself or decided for me via mass political tyranny.

 

[its free real estate]

Criminals are criminals no matter what gender they identify as

Generally if a man rapes a woman we wouldn’t put them in a woman’s prison. It's probably the worst place you could put a male rapist.

We don't let men participate in women's sports, have access to women's only spaces, etc. Why should we let men-who-assert-they-are-women?

 

[quotemokc]

Well of course liberals are dismissive of what are truly ridiculous arguments. For a start, could you please tell me just who the victims are when transgender people are able to be transgender people?

What about when more men start identifying as women in order to get cheaper car insurance etc?

If this becomes more and more widespread then insurance companies would probably do away with gender based prices (even though I wouldn't mind this) and thus women are suddenly paying more due to selfish 'men'.

Is that victim enough for you?

 

[CheapCharlie]

I think it's fair that they can decide who they are for themselves and not have to get you to give them the ok. .

They can decide for themselves but should they decide then how the rest of the population see them?

 

[Carringbush2010]

I find it amusing re: the free speech issue being discussed. What it seems that a lot are assuming their idea of "free speech" or "free hate speech" is what the norm view is. That is so simplistic and naive it is not funny and in fact kind of dangerous if there is a large vocal minority(s) that think this way - and there are on both extremes of the left and the right.

For example its free real estate threw an example of "women don't have penises" as a possibility of "hate speech" and then nicky replied that was ridiculous i:e implied that that is not an example of hate speech.

What nicky is forgetting is that some would take offence to that although a very small percentile, for example radical feminists might find that offensive. Assuming that no one would find that offensive is either naive or ignorant.

Point is that whatever anyone does or says someone somewhere is going to take offence to that action or speech.

By further extension, if we want to protect and include everyone (that means everyone) then surely that means we have to do away with speech and communication altogether.

Yeah I know I'm gonna get replies of ridicule but if we're going to actually "limit" speech we're going into a very grey area that would almost be impossible to police because it is clearly evident that every ones idea of what is acceptable and what is not is so varied.

It's not a one size fits all people, I'm all for speaking your mind and I'm all for the consequences of speaking your mind, for example if you're a dick head white supremacist who goes on talk back inciting violence against anyone that is not white then I'm all for the state taking control of said dick head and give what is due (believe the state has powers to do this)

By the same token I'm not for the state regulating speech by a white middle class male expressing concerns on talk back about Sudanese youths car jacking and home invasions.

But hey that's my view and would vary very differently from the white supremacist or the radical feminist, they're people too right? They have a right to airing their views right?

Oh that's right their views don't count because it's not "my" view so we can't include or protect them,.

 

[Mike Smyth]

This is one example.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ho-sexually-assaulted-inmates-jailed-for-life

The apology from the Ministry of Justice should go along way to easing the pain the victims families are suffering. FFS

 

[Mike Smyth]

How many transgender people are in the prison of their preferred gender, and how many of those have raped someone? Also, how many inmates have been raped by members of their own sex? Is this a widespread thing or something it is relatively rare?

Are you suggesting that it is an intrinsic part of being transgender that you will rape someone? Are the victims that you are claiming to be the result of the existence of transgender people the same as saying that any victim of any particular demographic is a result of that demographic existing?

Yet again the victim takes a distant 2nd place to the cause. I wonder if you would be so liberal if one of the victims was a relative of yours.

So the next time this happens - "s**t, we didn't see that coming". FFS it's a no brainer if you are born a man, you go to a mans prison.

 

[Mike Smyth]

He provided you with an example and you minimise it. There are many such examples, how many do you need?

Not only did he minimise it but he turned it around to accuse him of "Are you suggesting that it is an intrinsic part of being transgender that you will rape someone".

This is the modus operandi of the left.

 

[Father Jack]

You lot are just shouting at your own shadows now. I don't think you lot even know your own position, which is why I've had so much trouble trying to pin it down.

All the best.

 

[Snake_Baker]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvIEFBaGxGg

 

[JezzasOnTheAsphalt]

Not only did he minimise it but he turned it around to accuse him of "Are you suggesting that it is an intrinsic part of being transgender that you will rape someone".

This is the modus operandi of the left.

It was minimised because while it was an example of a transgender person committing a horrendous act, the original idea was to find examples of people who are victimised simply due to people identifying as transgender, not their actions.

What about when more men start identifying as women in order to get cheaper car insurance etc?

If this becomes more and more widespread then insurance companies would probably do away with gender based prices (even though I wouldn't mind this) and thus women are suddenly paying more due to selfish 'men'.

Is that victim enough for you?

Better example here, is it victim enough for me though, probably not. Even though it's extremely unrealistic, that's just gonna achieve equality in pricing across genders, and I don't think many would feel seriously helpless or harmed because of it, which is what I take victimisation to mean.

 

[its free real estate]

They can decide for themselves but should they decide then how the rest of the population see them?

That's the thing Father Jack is avoiding. He says transgender people should be free to determine who they are. Fair enough. But why should the law get involved?

Had someone told you five years ago that calling Bruce Jenner "Bruce" would be considered a hate crime in 2019, you would have laughed at them, yet this is the case in a number of jurisdictions around the world. Had you raised that as a possible "next step" in the liberalisation of LGBT rights in the context of a discussion about gay marriage or adoption, you'd be accused by the likes of Father Jack of committing the slippery slope fallacy.

Father Jack says he remains unconvinced. But the reality is that nothing would convince him. He has given himself over to being thought of by others as a non-bigot, and will readily accede his views to the progressive orthodoxy.

 

[its free real estate]

It was minimised because while it was an example of a transgender person committing a horrendous act, the original idea was to find examples of people who are victimised simply due to people identifying as transgender, not their actions.

If a person identifies as transgender and gains access to women by doing so, then rapes those women, how is this not an example of self-id resulting in victimisation?

 

[JezzasOnTheAsphalt]

If a person identifies as transgender and gains access to women by doing so, then rapes those women, how is this not an example of self-id resulting in victimisation?

Clearly it is. The prison should have done their homework and not put someone with a history of raping women with other women so swiftly.
I just took the debate to be about the act of identifying as trans creating victims in itself, which I disagree with. As I see it victims were created here because of the act of rape and to a lesser extent the management of the prison, end results after trans identification you may say.

 

[Mike Smyth]

Given it was Britain, which seems to have a warped sense of political correctness, maybe they were willing to take the risk rather than be labelled as anti-transgender.

 

[TimmeT]

Seems to be a little bit of silence from certain pro Labor Pro Union feminists funnily enough too.

 

[WA ROO]

View attachment 600901

Seems to be a little bit of silence from certain pro Labor Pro Union feminists funnily enough too.

Standover thugs being anti violence?

 

[WA ROO]

View attachment 600091

Don't laugh
This protest probably did happen

 

[JezzasOnTheAsphalt]

Given it was Britain, which seems to have a warped sense of political correctness, maybe they were willing to take the risk rather than be labelled as anti-transgender.

Ok so you have some problems with the PC brigade, what about the deeper ideas surrounding the story? Is it simply being trans which creates victims

Because I'm still not convinced it is, honestly I think the bigger mistake generally speaking is to put someone with a history of raping women with other women, rather than a transgender living with other women. Even though in the example before this person happened to be both, so much more precaution needed to be taken. But I wouldn't feel victimised by living with a transgender unless they were to do something like commit rape.