Detransition: Myths and Facts

[Alteredbhoy]

3 minutes ago, rowlf said:

Once again, you say nothing. Yet you get the key words across. But I think 'dangerous' is a new word for you. Did you look that up in your Funk & Wagnalls? Or from some members post?

I'm saying your opinion on this subject is worthless. It isn't based upon medical knowledge or experience. It doesn't rely on the knowledge or experiences of others who might have both.

You have simply reached an ill-educated and irrational opinion based upon your transphobic prejudices. Worst of all, you expect others to treat your ill-educated and irrational opinion with greater respect than the opinions of those with medical knowledge and experience.

You appear totally unaware of the vastness of your ignorance.

[rowlf]

7 minutes ago, Alteredbhoy said:

I'm saying your opinion on this subject is worthless. It isn't based upon medical knowledge or experience. It doesn't rely on the knowledge or experiences of others who might have both.

You have simply reached an ill-educated and irrational opinion based upon your transphobic prejudices. Worst of all, you expect others to treat your ill-educated and irrational opinion with greater respect than the opinions of those with medical knowledge and experience.

You appear totally unaware of the vastness of your ignorance.

Haha! Once again you have no answer but for me to be prejudiced. You're a one trick pony.

Rumors have it that Putin found out about clandestine activities in Brussels and decided to do something about it. From now on, drive to Brussels. I think you get travel there in 2-3 hours. But by all means stay away from the airports and keep away from Thai women.

Ifin it's any consolation, punjab's got your back!

[Alteredbhoy]

8 minutes ago, rowlf said:

Haha! Once again you have no answer but for me to be prejudiced. You're a one trick pony.

Rumors have it that Putin found out about clandestine activities in Brussels and decided to do something about it. From now on, drive to Brussels. I think you get travel there in 2-3 hours. But by all means stay away from the airports and keep away from Thai women.

Ifin it's any consolation, punjab's got your back!

I'm guessing you don't know the meaning of the word prejudiced, in that case.

It indicates making up one's mind before establishing all the evidence or in spite of evidence to the contrary. You are most definitely prejudiced.

And you prove it by resorting to racial slurs when your arguments fail.

[dappi]

4 hours ago, Alteredbhoy said:

I'm guessing you don't know the meaning of the word prejudiced, in that case.

It indicates making up one's mind before establishing all the evidence or in spite of evidence to the contrary. You are most definitely prejudiced.

And you prove it by resorting to racial slurs when your arguments fail.

I honestly think he, like a child, enjoys being stupidly annoying. 

[Ursula Harrison]

22 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

Mary Whitehouse was going on about porn, wasn't she?

Among other things. She had some good points but often made an ass of herself by being such a prude. Trying to ban Chuck Berry's My Ding-A-Ling for instance on the grounds that it encouraged masturbation.

She was also an open and visceral homophobe. One of her first forays into public life was an anonymous 1953 piece for The Sunday Times that advised mothers on how best to inhibit homosexuality in their sons.

Like I said she had other hobby horses. She objected to the showing of the liberation of Belsen, news coverage of the Vietnam War and the broadcast of The War Game on the grounds that they would encourage pacifism.

One of the most highly acclaimed programs ever broadcast by the BBC was the 1966 play Cathy Come Home which tackled homelessness and slum landlords. Mary Whitehouse objected on the grounds that it "challenged authority".

In short anything hinting that not everybody was living a comfortable middle class life was to be suppressed because the idea was too horrible to contemplate.

22 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

"The trans community does not speak for me." That was on your page on cd.com

A perfect example of what a lying hypocrite you are and of the way you operate. State a falsehood and then use it as evidence to justify an attack on someone you disagree with.

The signature that got me kicked off Crossdressers.com was TRANS ACTIVISTS DO NOT SPEAK FOR ME. Rather different from your version.

22 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

it shows clearly are unable to support those who have fought and suffered for the freedom you take for granted

There's a photograph on another forum here of me posing in front of Tower Bridge. After that day's shoot was over I crossed the bridge to the Tower Hill Memorial in order to pay my respects to 38,000 of those who paid the ultimate price for a freedom I never take for granted. Don't insult their memory by comparing them to the likes of Kelly Nelson.

Besides the trans activists of today are endangering the progress made over the last 40 years by those such as Virginia Prince, Yvonne Sinclair, Martine Rose et al.

By the way, am I really expected to stand over the actions of Aiden Hale, Kate Wolf and the mobs who shout down Jordan Peterson and throw liquid in the face of Posey Parker?

22 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

the freedom you take for granted

It's not much of a freedom if I can't decide for myself who speaks for me is it?

22 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

Think, man !!!

I don't know what should annoy me the most. The condescension or the misgendering.

[Sarah_Connor]

On 9/5/2023 at 9:00 AM, Ursula Harrison said:

Now Penelope, while your answer was for the most part reasonable and well researched, in your haste to get your point across you missed something.

Of course although I assumed Rowlf to be referring to surgery I cannot really speak for him. But I did mean surgery. I then said:

meaning that puberty blockers were yet another issue to consider.

The article you quote mentions side effects. Trouble is they're not always as minor as hot flushes. They weaken bone density and can lead to osteoporosis for example.

Your quote quite rightly points out that they need to be used appropriately. That's where things get complicated as "appropriate" is a subjective judgement.

At Tavistock I think we can agree they were not always used appropriately although we may disagree on the reasons for that. Anyway because historically of the kids who presented themselves to GIDS as trans only two percent went onto transition, when numbers the numbers started rising exponentially and putting a huge strain on the service, puberty blockers started being prescribed en-masse. The thinking behind this being that it would delay changes and give the kids time to think it over and decide if that was what they really wanted.

But it was then discovered that virtually all the kids prescribed them decided that they wanted to progress to sex change hormones and onto transition. Hormones are not reversible. So that's a leap of almost 98% - something that cannot be coincidence. So it would appear that the puberty blockers have some psychological effect and seem to "persuade" them to transition. (Does "Aunt" Kelly mention that in her podcast?)

One irony of this for MTF patients is that puberty blockers stop the development of tissue around the penis. This is the tissue that is used in transition surgery to create a vagina. If not available due to the effects of puberty blockers, bowel tissue has to be used. This is a far riskier procedure and can result in some rather nasty outcomes. Such as an "unwanted smell" for instance. That's a polite way of saying that the patient ends up permanently stinking of shit.

So just to clarify my position, I don't think kids should be rushed to transition. Unfortunately some have, such as Chloe Cole for example and what was done to her amounts to mutilation.

Puberty blockers can have their uses but the issue is not straightforward.

You must have been gutted when Ayaan Hirsi Ali was forced to cancel her event in Auckland due to threats from extremists. I hope you got a refund on your ticket!

Transition doesn't necessarily mean surgery - I'm guessing that for most ADULT transpeople the only surgery they contemplate is top surgery and facial cosmetic surgery, and I don't know - how many simply happily transition with just hormones.  With regard to the very small amount of people under 18 who have some form of gender confirming surgery it's (at least as far as I can tell) all top surgery (typically f 2 m mastectomy/breast reduction)  : Again Perplexity AI is your friend - "According to the available search results, there is no specific information on how many people under 18 have had gender confirming surgery in the USA. However, a Komodo analysis of insurance claims found 56 genital surgeries among patients ages 13 to 17 with a prior gender dysphoria diagnosis from 2019 to 2021 6. It is worth noting that the ultimate step in gender-affirming medical treatment is surgery, which is uncommon in patients under age 18. Some children's hospitals and gender clinics don't offer surgery to minors, requiring that they be adults before deciding on procedures that are irreversible and carry a heightened risk of complications 6.

In the UK one must be 18 before the NHS will consider gender confirmation surgery. 

So much for the rampant mutilation of children.

On to puberty blockers. Yes, osteoporosis is as you say: Again Perplexity AI is your friend: "According to the available search results, puberty blockers can cause decreased bone density, which can lead to weaker bones and an increased risk of fractures1. However, once the adolescent stops taking puberty blockers or begins gender-affirming hormones, the bone density starts to increase again26. It is important to note that bone growth is rapid during puberty, and hormones are vital for maintaining bone strength6. Therefore, teenagers on puberty blockers or those who experience a naturally late puberty may miss out on essential bone growth, and it is important to ensure that puberty isn't delayed any longer than necessary and that hormones are introduced as soon as the person is ready6. Clinicians who use puberty blockers off-label must monitor their patients' bone density and record fractures during puberty suppression3. Overall, while puberty blockers can cause decreased bone density, the risk to bone health is perceived to be low if affirming hormones are introduced or puberty blockers are stopped to allow natural puberty to happen6." 
Like anything medical - it's all about one's relationship with their doctor and  being managed appropriately. As I have already mentioned Tavistock was deliberately underfunded by the Neo Liberals to fail. Just think - it's a fantastic business for friends of Boris to invest into once it goes private.

On to hormones. Firstly, puberty blockers themselves are hormones. So that kinda refutes your idea that hormones are not reversible.  Anyways, I asked our friend Perplexity AI

"According to the available search results, the reversibility of transition hormones depends on the specific type of hormone therapy and how long the person has been taking them. Here are some key points:

• Puberty blockers are reversible, and the effects of the medication will stop once the person stops taking it1456.
• The effects of estrogen hormone therapy are generally reversible if the person stops taking them, but the degree to which they can be reversed depends on how long the person has been taking them2.
• Some of the changes triggered by gender-affirming hormone therapy cannot be reversed, while others may require surgery to reverse5.
• The impact of feminizing hormone therapy on fertility is unclear, and it is best to assume that within a few months of starting hormone therapy, the person could permanently and irreversibly lose the ability to create sperm2.

Overall, while some effects of transition hormones are reversible, others are not. "

Yes, I am aware of the 12 or so people that alt right lunatics like to parade around who regret transition (although you nutters refer to them as mutilated). I agree with you in so far as I wouldn't take surgery lightly.

To be completely fair when one considers just how difficult and hostile this world is to trans people - I would not take the decision of transition lightly. So we're probably in some sort of agreement there.

I have never heard of Ayaan Hirsi. I don't spend my days on you tube or twitter. I waste enough time here providing factual balance to the alt right nutjob arguments that you and that imbecile Rowlf come up with.

 

[rowlf]

41 minutes ago, Ursula Harrison said:

Among other things. She had some good points but often made an ass of herself by being such a prude. Trying to ban Chuck Berry's My Ding-A-Ling for instance on the grounds that it encouraged masturbation.

She was also an open and visceral homophobe. One of her first forays into public life was an anonymous 1953 piece for The Sunday Times that advised mothers on how best to inhibit homosexuality in their sons.

Like I said she had other hobby horses. She objected to the showing of the liberation of Belsen, news coverage of the Vietnam War and the broadcast of The War Game on the grounds that they would encourage pacifism.

One of the most highly acclaimed programs ever broadcast by the BBC was the 1966 play Cathy Come Home which tackled homelessness and slum landlords. Mary Whitehouse objected on the grounds that it "challenged authority".

In short anything hinting that not everybody was living a comfortable middle class life was to be suppressed because the idea was too horrible to contemplate.

A perfect example of what a lying hypocrite you are and of the way you operate. State a falsehood and then use it as evidence to justify an attack on someone you disagree with.

The signature that got me kicked off Crossdressers.com was TRANS ACTIVISTS DO NOT SPEAK FOR ME. Rather different from your version.

There's a photograph on another forum here of me posing in front of Tower Bridge. After that day's shoot was over I crossed the bridge to the Tower Hill Memorial in order to pay my respects to 38,000 of those who paid the ultimate price for a freedom I never take for granted. Don't insult their memory by comparing them to the likes of Kelly Nelson.

Besides the trans activists of today are endangering the progress made over the last 40 years by those such as Virginia Prince, Yvonne Sinclair, Martine Rose et al.

By the way, am I really expected to stand over the actions of Aiden Hale, Kate Wolf and the mobs who shout down Jordan Peterson and throw liquid in the face of Posey Parker?

It's not much of a freedom if I can't decide for myself who speaks for me is it?

I don't know what should annoy me the most. The condescension or the misgendering.

A precision slice and dice....

[rowlf]

2 minutes ago, Sarah_Connor said:

Transition doesn't necessarily mean surgery - I'm guessing that for most ADULT transpeople the only surgery they contemplate is top surgery and facial cosmetic surgery, and I don't know - how many simply happily transition with just hormones.  With regard to the very small amount of people under 18 who have some form of gender confirming surgery it's (at least as far as I can tell) all top surgery (typically f 2 m mastectomy/breast reduction)  : Again Perplexity AI is your friend - "According to the available search results, there is no specific information on how many people under 18 have had gender confirming surgery in the USA. However, a Komodo analysis of insurance claims found 56 genital surgeries among patients ages 13 to 17 with a prior gender dysphoria diagnosis from 2019 to 2021 6. It is worth noting that the ultimate step in gender-affirming medical treatment is surgery, which is uncommon in patients under age 18. Some children's hospitals and gender clinics don't offer surgery to minors, requiring that they be adults before deciding on procedures that are irreversible and carry a heightened risk of complications 6.

In the UK one must be 18 before the NHS will consider gender confirmation surgery. 

So much for the rampant mutilation of children.

On to puberty blockers. Yes, osteoporosis is as you say: Again Perplexity AI is your friend: "According to the available search results, puberty blockers can cause decreased bone density, which can lead to weaker bones and an increased risk of fractures1. However, once the adolescent stops taking puberty blockers or begins gender-affirming hormones, the bone density starts to increase again26. It is important to note that bone growth is rapid during puberty, and hormones are vital for maintaining bone strength6. Therefore, teenagers on puberty blockers or those who experience a naturally late puberty may miss out on essential bone growth, and it is important to ensure that puberty isn't delayed any longer than necessary and that hormones are introduced as soon as the person is ready6. Clinicians who use puberty blockers off-label must monitor their patients' bone density and record fractures during puberty suppression3. Overall, while puberty blockers can cause decreased bone density, the risk to bone health is perceived to be low if affirming hormones are introduced or puberty blockers are stopped to allow natural puberty to happen6." 
Like anything medical - it's all about one's relationship with their doctor and  being managed appropriately. As I have already mentioned Tavistock was deliberately underfunded by the Neo Liberals to fail. Just think - it's a fantastic business for friends of Boris to invest into once it goes private.

On to hormones. Firstly, puberty blockers themselves are hormones. So that kinda refutes your idea that hormones are not reversible.  Anyways, I asked our friend Perplexity AI

"According to the available search results, the reversibility of transition hormones depends on the specific type of hormone therapy and how long the person has been taking them. Here are some key points:

• Puberty blockers are reversible, and the effects of the medication will stop once the person stops taking it1456.
• The effects of estrogen hormone therapy are generally reversible if the person stops taking them, but the degree to which they can be reversed depends on how long the person has been taking them2.
• Some of the changes triggered by gender-affirming hormone therapy cannot be reversed, while others may require surgery to reverse5.
• The impact of feminizing hormone therapy on fertility is unclear, and it is best to assume that within a few months of starting hormone therapy, the person could permanently and irreversibly lose the ability to create sperm2.

Overall, while some effects of transition hormones are reversible, others are not. "

Yes, I am aware of the 12 or so people that alt right lunatics like to parade around who regret transition (although you nutters refer to them as mutilated). I agree with you in so far as I wouldn't take surgery lightly.

To be completely fair when one considers just how difficult and hostile this world is to trans people - I would not take the decision of transition lightly. So we're probably in some sort of agreement there.

I have never heard of Ayaan Hirsi. I don't spend my days on you tube or twitter. I waste enough time here providing factual balance to the alt right nutjob arguments that you and that imbecile Rowlf come up with.
 

An ineffective cut and slash... Leave the children alone!

[c_cubed51]

2 hours ago, Ursula Harrison said:

Among other things. She had some good points but often made an ass of herself by being such a prude. Trying to ban Chuck Berry's My Ding-A-Ling for instance on the grounds that it encouraged masturbation.

She was also an open and visceral homophobe. One of her first forays into public life was an anonymous 1953 piece for The Sunday Times that advised mothers on how best to inhibit homosexuality in their sons.

Like I said she had other hobby horses. She objected to the showing of the liberation of Belsen, news coverage of the Vietnam War and the broadcast of The War Game on the grounds that they would encourage pacifism.

One of the most highly acclaimed programs ever broadcast by the BBC was the 1966 play Cathy Come Home which tackled homelessness and slum landlords. Mary Whitehouse objected on the grounds that it "challenged authority".

In short anything hinting that not everybody was living a comfortable middle class life was to be suppressed because the idea was too horrible to contemplate.

I stated that Mary Whitehouse was anti-porn. You gave other examples to show that she was more bigoted than I had remembered. Thank you,

A perfect example of what a lying hypocrite you are and of the way you operate. State a falsehood and then use it as evidence to justify an attack on someone you disagree with.

The signature that got me kicked off Crossdressers.com was TRANS ACTIVISTS DO NOT SPEAK FOR ME. Rather different from your version.

My bad! Those trans activists do speak for you, however, because they are the ones who have railed against those who oppose the LGBTQ+ community and their right to live their lives in peace; and keep records of the high volume of anti-LGBTQ+ violence perpetrated by the people you support, and against whom you are so deeply prejudiced (eg Ms Wadhwa). You are also a hypocrite, Ursula! 

Your opposition to transition is not based on the science or the numbers. You oppose people such as Dappi, and me, who give information based on mass studies, not in isolated cases. 

There's a photograph on another forum here of me posing in front of Tower Bridge. After that day's shoot was over I crossed the bridge to the Tower Hill Memorial in order to pay my respects to 38,000 of those who paid the ultimate price for a freedom I never take for granted. Don't insult their memory by comparing them to the likes of Kelly Nelson.

Good for you! I recall paying my respects to the 888, 246 people who paid the ultimate price for our freedom in 1914-1918, at the Tower. And visiting the grave of my great uncle in France, who died for our freedom at the age of 16. You are insulting, too!

Besides the trans activists of today are endangering the progress made over the last 40 years by those such as Virginia Prince, Yvonne Sinclair, Martine Rose et al.

Your opinion, not factual. On what basis do you make this claim?

By the way, am I really expected to stand over the actions of Aiden Hale, Kate Wolf and the mobs who shout down Jordan Peterson and throw liquid in the face of Posey Parker?

You are on about freedom of speech again, whereas I oppose hate speech. We disagree.

It's not much of a freedom if I can't decide for myself who speaks for me is it?

As long as people in the LGBTQ+ community are being hurt because of your hate speech and deliberate and willful ignorance and prejudice, Ursula, I will continue to stand up against you. The stats belie your claims. Whose freedom is more important?

I don't know what should annoy me the most. The condescension or the misgendering.

When I am referring to Ursula the trans person, I use 'her'; when I am referring to the bigot, I use 'man', because I cannot believe that any trans person would be so anti-LGBTQ+ in her values - it must be the male side of your split personality speaking.

My opinion, not fact. Also, my right to freedom of speech. If that right to free speech offends you, think how offensive your hate speech must be to a great many people.

 

Edited September 6 by c_cubed51

[rowlf]

12 hours ago, Sarah_Connor said:

Transition doesn't necessarily mean surgery - I'm guessing that for most ADULT transpeople the only surgery they contemplate is top surgery and facial cosmetic surgery, and I don't know - how many simply happily transition with just hormones.  With regard to the very small amount of people under 18 who have some form of gender confirming surgery it's (at least as far as I can tell) all top surgery (typically f 2 m mastectomy/breast reduction)  : Again Perplexity AI is your friend - "According to the available search results, there is no specific information on how many people under 18 have had gender confirming surgery in the USA. However, a Komodo analysis of insurance claims found 56 genital surgeries among patients ages 13 to 17 with a prior gender dysphoria diagnosis from 2019 to 2021 6. It is worth noting that the ultimate step in gender-affirming medical treatment is surgery, which is uncommon in patients under age 18. Some children's hospitals and gender clinics don't offer surgery to minors, requiring that they be adults before deciding on procedures that are irreversible and carry a heightened risk of complications 6.

In the UK one must be 18 before the NHS will consider gender confirmation surgery. 

So much for the rampant mutilation of children.

On to puberty blockers. Yes, osteoporosis is as you say: Again Perplexity AI is your friend: "According to the available search results, puberty blockers can cause decreased bone density, which can lead to weaker bones and an increased risk of fractures1. However, once the adolescent stops taking puberty blockers or begins gender-affirming hormones, the bone density starts to increase again26. It is important to note that bone growth is rapid during puberty, and hormones are vital for maintaining bone strength6. Therefore, teenagers on puberty blockers or those who experience a naturally late puberty may miss out on essential bone growth, and it is important to ensure that puberty isn't delayed any longer than necessary and that hormones are introduced as soon as the person is ready6. Clinicians who use puberty blockers off-label must monitor their patients' bone density and record fractures during puberty suppression3. Overall, while puberty blockers can cause decreased bone density, the risk to bone health is perceived to be low if affirming hormones are introduced or puberty blockers are stopped to allow natural puberty to happen6." 
Like anything medical - it's all about one's relationship with their doctor and  being managed appropriately. As I have already mentioned Tavistock was deliberately underfunded by the Neo Liberals to fail. Just think - it's a fantastic business for friends of Boris to invest into once it goes private.

On to hormones. Firstly, puberty blockers themselves are hormones. So that kinda refutes your idea that hormones are not reversible.  Anyways, I asked our friend Perplexity AI

"According to the available search results, the reversibility of transition hormones depends on the specific type of hormone therapy and how long the person has been taking them. Here are some key points:

• Puberty blockers are reversible, and the effects of the medication will stop once the person stops taking it1456.
• The effects of estrogen hormone therapy are generally reversible if the person stops taking them, but the degree to which they can be reversed depends on how long the person has been taking them2.
• Some of the changes triggered by gender-affirming hormone therapy cannot be reversed, while others may require surgery to reverse5.
• The impact of feminizing hormone therapy on fertility is unclear, and it is best to assume that within a few months of starting hormone therapy, the person could permanently and irreversibly lose the ability to create sperm2.

Overall, while some effects of transition hormones are reversible, others are not. "

Yes, I am aware of the 12 or so people that alt right lunatics like to parade around who regret transition (although you nutters refer to them as mutilated). I agree with you in so far as I wouldn't take surgery lightly.

To be completely fair when one considers just how difficult and hostile this world is to trans people - I would not take the decision of transition lightly. So we're probably in some sort of agreement there.

I have never heard of Ayaan Hirsi. I don't spend my days on you tube or twitter. I waste enough time here providing factual balance to the alt right nutjob arguments that you and that imbecile Rowlf come up with.

 

 

"Yes, I am aware of the 12 or so people that alt right lunatics like to parade around who regret transition (although you nutters refer to them as mutilated). I agree with you in so far as I wouldn't take surgery lightly.

To be completely fair when one considers just how difficult and hostile this world is to trans people - I would not take the decision of transition lightly. So we're probably in some sort of agreement there.

I have never heard of Ayaan Hirsi. I don't spend my days on you tube or twitter. I waste enough time here providing factual balance to the alt right nutjob arguments that you and that imbecile Rowlf come up with."

 Hey Penny, this is what you wrote. Except for calling me names, I find what you wrote interesting. First, I don't know how difficult it is to live in this world as a trans person. However, I also don't know what your expectations are. The notable thing to observe is that you and Ursula talked it out and came to some sort of an understanding. I don't know if I can remember a time in which you did so.

The big problem I have with this liberal/woke movement is that there are no defined limits. There must be limits to everything in this life of ours.

 

[rowlf]

11 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

You are on about freedom of speech again, whereas I oppose hate speech. We disagree.

It's not much of a freedom if I can't decide for myself who speaks for me is it?

As long as people in the LGBTQ+ community are being hurt because of your hate speech and deliberate and willful ignorance and prejudice, Ursula, I will continue to stand up against you. The stats belie your claims. Whose freedom is more important?

I don't know what should annoy me the most. The condescension or the misgendering.

When I am referring to Ursula the trans person, I use 'her'; when I am referring to the bigot, I use 'man', because I cannot believe that any trans person would be so anti-LGBTQ+ in her values - it must be the male side of your split personality speaking.

My opinion, not fact. Also, my right to freedom of speech. If that right to free speech offends you, think how offensive your hate speech must be to a great many people.

Bottom line is that you disrespect Ursula for disagreeing with you. It seems that 'hate speech' is whatever you deem it should be. It's to be expected, but it seems that you have lopsided values.

[Ursula Harrison]

16 hours ago, Sarah_Connor said:

I have never heard of Ayaan Hirsi. I don't spend my days on you tube or twitter.

My initial reaction to this was one of surprise. Perhaps I overestimated the strength of your ties to the old country and awareness of things happening there. More likely it's an indicator of how effectively she's been cancelled by the MSM.

FYI I've never seen Ayaan Hirsi Ali on YouTube and I've never been on Twitter. Doesn't your friend Perplexity AI have something to say about her?

But serious question: if opposition to religious fundamentalism, child brides, forced marriage, domestic abuse and FGM is now the preserve of the alt-right, doesn't that indicate that the left has lost its way?

[Ursula Harrison]

2 hours ago, rowlf said:

Bottom line is that you disrespect Ursula for disagreeing with you.

That's alright Rowlf. It's mutual.

[c_cubed51]

9 hours ago, rowlf said:

The big problem I have with this liberal/woke movement is that there are no defined limits. There must be limits to everything in this life of ours.

Books and films allow us to break free of the limitations placed on our lives by our present 4-D space-time existence. They allow us to travel back in time to learn how things were and how good and evil have always been locked in struggle. Authors such as Charles Dickens and John Steinbeck give us a snapshot of the past, from which we can learn if we choose to do so.

They allow us to see different points of view which exist today and never before have we had the freedom to read and view such a wide variety of opinions. We limit ourselves if we only choose to read and view the material with which we agree or censor the stuff with which we disagree.

They also allow us to imagine how life might be in the future, and we can dream of a utopia where woke values of equity and justice for all eventually come to pass.

Your anti-woke/liberal movement stance is the only thing limiting your present existence, rowlf. To learn, we must be prepared to take the risk of leaving our comfort zone and venturing into the unknown, to entertain conjecture of a better, brighter world for everyone, regardless of ethnicity, class, creed, gender or sexual orientation.

For example, those working to rid the world of disease and famine are increasingly working across previously labelled disciplines which have heretofore limited progress, with spectacular results!

Can Math and Physics Save an Arrhythmic Heart? | Quanta Magazine

Scientists uncover hidden math that governs genetic mutations | Live Science

 

Edited September 6 by c_cubed51

[Alteredbhoy]

9 hours ago, rowlf said:

The big problem I have with this liberal/woke movement is that there are no defined limits. There must be limits to everything in this life of ours.

That's just words. You want to limit certain people but not others.

In the UK, we would expect that being found by a Court to have sexually assaulted someone would be extremely limiting. But you don't have a word to say against that sex offender.

[Ursula Harrison]

21 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

Those trans activists do speak for you, however, because they are the ones who have railed against those who oppose the LGBTQ+ community and their right to live their lives in peace;

I was living my life in peace thanks to the efforts of those I mentioned and others like them until the lot you support came along and generated a lot of the hostility you complain about.

21 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

Your opposition to transition is not based on the science or the numbers.

More misrepresentation of my position. I have no objections to adults who can make their own minds up transitioning if that is what they really want. On the other hand I have plenty of objections to children, especially those with mental issues, being railroaded down the track to or towards transition.

22 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

Your opposition to transition is not based on the science or the numbers.

I thought a leap of 98% was rather a significant number and one that might have raised red flags. But not to your friends the activists.

22 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

On what basis do you make this claim?

I thought you were the one complaining about increased levels of hostility towards our community.

[Sarah_Connor]

12 hours ago, rowlf said:

 

"Yes, I am aware of the 12 or so people that alt right lunatics like to parade around who regret transition (although you nutters refer to them as mutilated). I agree with you in so far as I wouldn't take surgery lightly.

To be completely fair when one considers just how difficult and hostile this world is to trans people - I would not take the decision of transition lightly. So we're probably in some sort of agreement there.

I have never heard of Ayaan Hirsi. I don't spend my days on you tube or twitter. I waste enough time here providing factual balance to the alt right nutjob arguments that you and that imbecile Rowlf come up with."

 Hey Penny, this is what you wrote. Except for calling me names, I find what you wrote interesting. First, I don't know how difficult it is to live in this world as a trans person. However, I also don't know what your expectations are. The notable thing to observe is that you and Ursula talked it out and came to some sort of an understanding. I don't know if I can remember a time in which you did so.

The big problem I have with this liberal/woke movement is that there are no defined limits. There must be limits to everything in this life of ours.

 

Oh don't mistake what I wrote as some sort of blanket agreement with what Ursula thinks about Tavistock or transition per se. I agree with the general sentiment that transition should not be entered into lightly but in no way do I think it has been and I think in general terms, despite ludicrous pressure via underfunding, the organisations and medical practitioners that manage trans people through their journey are doing a very very good job. That sentiment would be in direct opposition to what Ursula thinks.

Ursula thinks there is a wave of trans armaggedon approaching. She's a fucking fruitcake.

And so are you.

[Sarah_Connor]

9 hours ago, Ursula Harrison said:

My initial reaction to this was one of surprise. Perhaps I overestimated the strength of your ties to the old country and awareness of things happening there. More likely it's an indicator of how effectively she's been cancelled by the MSM.

FYI I've never seen Ayaan Hirsi Ali on YouTube and I've never been on Twitter. Doesn't your friend Perplexity AI have something to say about her?

But serious question: if opposition to religious fundamentalism, child brides, forced marriage, domestic abuse and FGM is now the preserve of the alt-right, doesn't that indicate that the left has lost its way?

I have absolutely no idea of what you are on about. I did a quick search and yeah, she's a Somali born, Dutch person who opposes Islam. Good for her, I oppose Islam too. And Christianity. I oppose all religions as they are fucking stupid. There is no God. From what I can see she hold no particular public views on transpeople. Why is she being mentioned?
 

[rowlf]

5 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

For example, those working to rid the world of disease and famine are increasingly working across previously labelled disciplines which have heretofore limited progress, with spectacular results!

I hope it's not the ChiComs working on this disease stuff. Have you already forgotten Covid? Don't worry you guys will once again let the world know how compassionate you are. I expect it to reoccur just about fall's first frost. Well, it will be spring for you, I imagine.

[rowlf]

4 hours ago, Alteredbhoy said:

That's just words. You want to limit certain people but not others.

In the UK, we would expect that being found by a Court to have sexually assaulted someone would be extremely limiting. But you don't have a word to say against that sex offender.

It's only words.

[rowlf]

1 hour ago, Sarah_Connor said:

Oh don't mistake what I wrote as some sort of blanket agreement with what Ursula thinks about Tavistock or transition per se. I agree with the general sentiment that transition should not be entered into lightly but in no way do I think it has been and I think in general terms, despite ludicrous pressure via underfunding, the organisations and medical practitioners that manage trans people through their journey are doing a very very good job. That sentiment would be in direct opposition to what Ursula thinks.

Ursula thinks there is a wave of trans armaggedon approaching. She's a fucking fruitcake.

And so are you.

Fruitcake? Sounds like hate speech to me. You're lucky you don't live in Canada.

And there is a wave of Armageddon approaching. You know how those damned Chi Coms feel about you guys. The shit gonna hit the fan one of these days, and it's gonna be all your fault. Don't they just about own you by now?

[c_cubed51]

1 hour ago, rowlf said:

I hope it's not the ChiComs working on this disease stuff. Have you already forgotten Covid? Don't worry you guys will once again let the world know how compassionate you are. I expect it to reoccur just about fall's first frost. Well, it will be spring for you, I imagine.

Co-operation for the greater good is not a concept you or your buddies in the legislative assemblies in the USA are able to conceive, let alone enact. 

[c_cubed51]

4 hours ago, Ursula Harrison said:

I thought you were the one complaining about increased levels of hostility towards our community.

On what basis do you make that claim? Facts, please.

While you are about it, read the figures quoted about levels of violence perpetrated by those in Scotland who harass trans people like Ms Whadwa, and justify your support for them.

Are the chickens coming home to roost? Will you become a victim? Will you rethink your position? Are you stuck in a conceptual cage?

[Sarah_Connor]

3 hours ago, rowlf said:

Fruitcake? Sounds like hate speech to me. You're lucky you don't live in Canada.

And there is a wave of Armageddon approaching. You know how those damned Chi Coms feel about you guys. The shit gonna hit the fan one of these days, and it's gonna be all your fault. Don't they just about own you by now?

China Baaaaad !

[Alteredbhoy]

4 hours ago, rowlf said:

Fruitcake? Sounds like hate speech to me. You're lucky you don't live in Canada.

And once again you use words and phrases the meaning of which are outside your understanding.

"Hate speech" is an offence in the UK too. It requires that a person intends to cause alarm or harras another because of their words or actions with regard to one of the protected characteristics under the Equality Act.

Calling someone a fruitcake does not qualify unless you can somehow show that an individual in one of the protected categories has a reasonable fear of being labelled as such. You won't be able to do so, because I strongly doubt that any such fear would be classed as reasonable.

However, creating nicknames for others based upon their ethnic origins could constitute a hate crime, especially if it was undertaken to harras others. We do have plenty of evidence of your undertaking that action on this Forum.

[Ursula Harrison]

On 06/09/2023 at 00:01, Sarah_Connor said:

Transition doesn't necessarily mean surgery

While those who stick on a couple of hair extensions, slap on a bit of lipstick and then claim to have transitioned annoy the hell out of me, to discuss that now would be to head off on a tangent. I thought I made it clear that it was surgery that I was referring to.

On 06/09/2023 at 00:01, Sarah_Connor said:

With regard to the very small amount of people under 18 who have some form of gender confirming surgery it's (at least as far as I can tell) all top surgery (typically f 2 m mastectomy/breast reduction) 

That's right and I regard chopping the tits off 13 year old girls as mutilation. The term "rampant" is your hyperbole, not mine.

On 06/09/2023 at 00:01, Sarah_Connor said:

Just think - it's a fantastic business for friends of Boris to invest into once it goes private.

I'm sure it is although some of the major donors to Obama's campaigns will probably make more. But we're off on another tangent.

On 06/09/2023 at 00:01, Sarah_Connor said:

I asked our friend Perplexity AI

Oh yeah? Well it looks like Perplexity AI is more my friend than yours:

On 06/09/2023 at 00:01, Sarah_Connor said:

• The effects of estrogen hormone therapy are generally reversible if the person stops taking them, but the degree to which they can be reversed depends on how long the person has been taking them2.
• Some of the changes triggered by gender-affirming hormone therapy cannot be reversed, while others may require surgery to reverse5.
• The impact of feminizing hormone therapy on fertility is unclear, and it is best to assume that within a few months of starting hormone therapy, the person could permanently and irreversibly lose the ability to create sperm2.

Overall, while some effects of transition hormones are reversible, others are not.

On 06/09/2023 at 00:01, Sarah_Connor said:

Yes, I am aware of the 12 or so people

A thousand families looking to sue Tavistock. So if the trans activists that Cubed idolises have their way there will be a damn sight more. Besides the issue here is that they were children.

On 06/09/2023 at 00:01, Sarah_Connor said:

To be completely fair when one considers just how difficult and hostile this world is to trans people - I would not take the decision of transition lightly.

Again trans activists have to shoulder some of the blame for that.

Look Penelope, I am not against transition provided that the patient is of an age and mental condition to be able to decide for themselves. I want kids not to be rushed down the road to or towards transition without adequate checks in place.

I'd also like political pressure groups such as Mermaids and Stonewall to butt out and let the professionals do their jobs. They're under enough pressure as it is.

[Ursula Harrison]

10 hours ago, Sarah_Connor said:

That sentiment would be in direct opposition to what Ursula thinks.

No it would not.

10 hours ago, Sarah_Connor said:

She's a fucking fruitcake.

 

[Ursula Harrison]

10 hours ago, Sarah_Connor said:

Why is she being mentioned?

You brought up FGM and I thought that you would have been disappointed to miss out on such a fearless campaigner against it coming to your home town.

I have to backtrack a little here because reading your above post regarding alt-right nutjobs more carefully I now see that you were not necessarily including her among them.

I'm happy to apologise and even more happy to see that you're not surrendering the moral high ground with respect to women's rights to the alt-right.

Of course that's an easy mistake to make when you're happy to ride roughshod over them to promote trans activism.

Best wishes.

[rowlf]

1 hour ago, Ursula Harrison said:

No it would not.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6FA6H-bctU

 

[rowlf]

5 hours ago, Alteredbhoy said:

And once again you use words and phrases the meaning of which are outside your understanding.

"Hate speech" is an offence in the UK too. It requires that a person intends to cause alarm or harras another because of their words or actions with regard to one of the protected characteristics under the Equality Act.

Calling someone a fruitcake does not qualify unless you can somehow show that an individual in one of the protected categories has a reasonable fear of being labelled as such. You won't be able to do so, because I strongly doubt that any such fear would be classed as reasonable.

However, creating nicknames for others based upon their ethnic origins could constitute a hate crime, especially if it was undertaken to harras others. We do have plenty of evidence of your undertaking that action on this Forum.

So, who is the arbiter of this one-sided justice you speak of? We? Who are you referring to? Certainly not ab, dappi and helen.

[rowlf]

6 hours ago, Sarah_Connor said:

China Baaaaad !

And it's only gonna get baaaaaader!

[rowlf]

9 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

Co-operation for the greater good is not a concept you or your buddies in the legislative assemblies in the USA are able to conceive, let alone enact. 

I suppose it's a different perspective of who is the 'greater good'. Listen to what a couple of your buddies have to say about people like you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAQE0ddckkI

 

[Ursula Harrison]

54 minutes ago, rowlf said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6FA6H-bctU

 

You know how much it hurts me to upset my dear friend Penelope 😈 and she doesn't like YouTube. 

But if we're going down that rabbit hole, then:

 

[Alteredbhoy]

2 hours ago, rowlf said:

So, who is the arbiter of this one-sided justice you speak of? We? Who are you referring to? Certainly not ab, dappi and helen.

What total nonsensical word salad, designed I am sure just to have something to say.

2 hours ago, rowlf said:

So, who is the arbiter of this one-sided justice you speak of? 

The Courts decide if the matter is brought before them, whether the offence has been committed and if so what the sentence should be. In exactly the way they do for every other crime.

2 hours ago, rowlf said:

We? Who are you referring to? Certainly not ab, dappi and helen.

Anyone who has read your posts can see your habit of resorting to racial slurs when your arguments have been shown to be shallow and false.  It's also clear that you do this to antagonise others, which combined with the racial element makes it an obvious offence under UK law. Everyone else who reads your posts can see this. The use of "we" indicates that I stand in the majority and you are in the minority (quite possibly of only one or two).

[Ursula Harrison]

11 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

Are the chickens coming home to roost? Will you become a victim? Will you rethink your position?

Dream on.

[rowlf]

19 minutes ago, Alteredbhoy said:

What total nonsensical word salad, designed I am sure just to have something to say.

The Courts decide if the matter is brought before them, whether the offence has been committed and if so what the sentence should be. In exactly the way they do for every other crime.

Anyone who has read your posts can see your habit of resorting to racial slurs when your arguments have been shown to be shallow and false.  It's also clear that you do this to antagonise others, which combined with the racial element makes it an obvious offence under UK law. Everyone else who reads your posts can see this. The use of "we" indicates that I stand in the majority and you are in the minority (quite possibly of only one or two).

Then who is going to bring it in front of the court? An orificer of the law?

Or maybe it's the ol' proverbial mouse in the pocket.

[Alteredbhoy]

32 minutes ago, rowlf said:

Then who is going to bring it in front of the court? An orificer of the law?

Or maybe it's the ol' proverbial mouse in the pocket.

Simply asking more and more questions doesn't avoid the fact that you have no reasonable argument.

Here in the UK we have a principle that the prosecutor's at Court have to be separate from the investigators. So the Police investigate and if they believe there is sufficient evidence to warrant a prosecution they pass the file to the Crown Prosecution Service. The CPS then consider the public interest and whether there is a reasonable likelihood of a successful prosecution before deciding whether to prosecute.

[Ursula Harrison]

16 hours ago, Sarah_Connor said:

I oppose Islam too. And Christianity. I oppose all religions as they are fucking stupid. There is no God.

So what beats me is how you put up with a sanctimonious plaster saint like Cubed.

[rowlf]

1 hour ago, Alteredbhoy said:

So the Police investigate and if they believe there is sufficient evidence to warrant a prosecution they pass the file to the Crown Prosecution Service

So, if an orificer is heard someone calling another a 'fruitcake', then more than likely charges will be brought against the perp.

[rowlf]

12 minutes ago, Ursula Harrison said:

So what beats me is how you put up with a sanctimonious plaster saint like Cubed.

They gotsta be amigos, they're both in it for the dinero y perkitos.