Detransition: Myths and Facts

[c_cubed51]

1 hour ago, Ursula Harrison said:

Well, yeah, if you want to make it about that but I wouldn't hype it up to that extent. I just say (yet again) "sticks and stones..."

 I didn't call the police.

1. You are misguided if you think words do not hurt people.

2. Why would you not call the police if you saw a member of the trans community being harassed? To fail to do so seems to me to fly in the face of your pious belief in 'Freedom of Speech'!

It certainly seems to me that the police go out of their way to protect the interests of all citizens, particularly here in NZ.

Posie Parker pulls out of NZ trip, blames fears for her safety - NZ Herald

[c_cubed51]

4 minutes ago, Ursula Harrison said:

Anti feminism rhetoric? Now come on Penelope. Isn't it the trans activists and people like you that throw "TERF" about as a term of abuse and insult? Don't tell me that you didn't know that it's an acronym for Trans Excluding Radical Feminist.

Your pious claim of being a staunch supporter of cis women really makes me laugh, Ursula.

[Ursula Harrison]

18 minutes ago, Sarah_Connor said:

Not to mention it's fairly obvious to anyone with half a brain that the anti trans rhetoric is merely repackaged anti gay rhetoric

No it is not. The lesbians were thrown out of that parade in Cardiff for carrying a banner saying "Lesbians Say No To Penises". A statement of the bleedin' obvious I should have thought.

So apparently by your logic forcing a woman to accept a penis against her will is promoting feminism and a blow against the subjugation of women. Fucksakes indeed.

[Ursula Harrison]

7 minutes ago, c_cubed51 said:

Your pious claim of being a staunch supporter of cis women really makes me laugh, Ursula.

My friend Jean and I are so happy to hear that. Tell her Jean:

 

[Ursula Harrison]

35 minutes ago, Sarah_Connor said:

Stop your false dichotomy nonsense. Clearly there are people of far right political persuasion who are transphobic. They are specifically funding hate organisations to entrap conservative minded folks like yourself into their web. Congratulations you are doing the bidding of Koch et al  

But is it possible that they're funding the trans activists? I mean somebody has to be. There's no way a group consisting of less than one percent of the population could get the other 99% to dance to their tune no matter how loudly they screamed and shouted. So they must have powerful allies.

Hate groups? I think punching women in the face is pretty hateful. So they tick that box. 

Conservative folks like me? I told you I never considered myself as such. For example I think Ben Shapiro is a dick for so many reasons. But it's him and not you standing up for my basic human rights. So lesser of two evils, my enemy's enemy is my friend and all that, so I find myself on his platform not yours.

[Ursula Harrison]

1 hour ago, Sarah_Connor said:

who's this us you refer to?

I beg your pardon. That was presumptuous of me. You've made it clear that TVs like me don't belong under your transgender umbrella.

So why am I expected to stand up for you and your friends when you start attacking lesbians, a group that have always welcomed me?

[c_cubed51]

7 hours ago, Ursula Harrison said:

I beg your pardon. That was presumptuous of me. You've made it clear that TVs like me don't belong under your transgender umbrella.

So why am I expected to stand up for you and your friends when you start attacking lesbians, a group that have always welcomed me?

Speaking for myself, Ursula, I have always assumed you were a member of the LGBTQ+ community and have been flabbergasted by your animosity shown towards (sections of) the community. It makes no sense to me. I believe you are the one who has removed herself form the TV umbrella. "The trans community does not speak for me". 

That's when I think SC may be onto something. You buy into the whole notion of trans females, and drag queens being dangerous, when the stats do not support your claim. On the other hand, the stats overwhelmingly show that trans people are much more like to be attacked than cis people. Yet you are happy to condone those who perpetrate this violence, and support people who threaten the life and livelihood of a trans woman who is obviously doing at good job of looking after vulnerable cis women.

And you don't like it when the police protect the trans community, forgetting that their role is to provide the same level of protection to everyone. 

You are an enigma. So much I don't understand.

[rowlf]

16 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

Not at all!!!

I have explained the origins of my anti-racist views on this forum.

Perhaps Ursula would care to explain why she is so anti- the police?

She has set out the reasons for feeling why trans people do not speak for her.

Unfortunately, they are your views. The origins of which is of a self-serving nature.

This is your world that you live in. And what world is this world? One that would cause you to talk in an ab-esque style of writing.

Cubed hadn't even realized this. Cubed doesn't understand this is how he receives all of his info.

Five to ten years ago, Cubed would have thought a man punching any kind of a woman would be considered sexual abuse at the highest level. Now Cubed believes the end justifies the means.

Cubed thinks that if a woman ain't got no penis in her pocket..... she's less than.....

It's a strange, strange world we live in. Masterminded by.............. someone other than Cubed.

[Alteredbhoy]

14 minutes ago, rowlf said:

Five to ten years ago, Cubed would have thought a man punching any kind of a woman would be considered sexual abuse at the highest level.

You are too stupid for words. Punching someone is not sexual abuse. Sexual abuse is not determined by the genders of the victim of the perpetrator, but by the actions of the perpetrator to the victim. Two people fighting in a consensual boxing match does not constitute assault, let alone sexual abuse, regardless of the genders of the competitors.

Sexual abuse occurs when someone makes unrequited sexual contact with another person.

You know? Like DJT did to Jean Carrol.

[rowlf]

15 minutes ago, Alteredbhoy said:

You are too stupid for words. Punching someone is not sexual abuse. Sexual abuse is not determined by the genders of the victim of the perpetrator, but by the actions of the perpetrator to the victim. Two people fighting in a consensual boxing match does not constitute assault, let alone sexual abuse, regardless of the genders of the competitors.

Sexual abuse occurs when someone makes unrequited sexual contact with another person.

You know? Like DJT did to Jean Carrol.

Who puts all these ideas in your head? You keep trying to make excuses for the bad conduct of others. We ain't writing any technical reports here today so I'll just use writer's privilege. One sex is thumping another sex so that's sexual abuse. 

Are you ok with one person thumping another person? Even if it is for a good cause?

And didn't Jean Carrol make sex movies back in the 60's?

[Alteredbhoy]

56 minutes ago, rowlf said:

Who puts all these ideas in your head? You keep trying to make excuses for the bad conduct of others. We ain't writing any technical reports here today so I'll just use writer's privilege. One sex is thumping another sex so that's sexual abuse. 

Are you ok with one person thumping another person? Even if it is for a good cause?

And didn't Jean Carrol make sex movies back in the 60's?

You are too stupid for words. If two people get into a boxing ring and one gets hurt, it is not sexual abuse. Sexual abuse does not require there to be participants of the opposite sex. Women can sexually abuse other women as well as men. And vice versa.

A man hurting another man in a boxing ring is not sexual abuse, and it doesn't become sexual abuse simply because the other fighter is a woman.

And whatever Jean Carrol did in the 1960s is irrelevant to what DJT did 30 years later.

You talk about things of which you have no understanding.

[rowlf]

On 15/09/2023 at 06:06, Sarah_Connor said:

Next you'll tell me Rowlf is a nice person, really. Just misunderstood.

 

On 15/09/2023 at 06:16, Ursula Harrison said:

Frequently. At least I don't understand what he's on about a lot of the time. Do you?

Hmm.... I've always thought I made myself perfectly clear. I believe in a minimal gov. Consisting of mostly infrastructure and law and order. I believe entitlements have made fools of us. After saying that, I believe all people that are unable to live their lives without assistance, should be assisted. Now what I just stated is what many people only care about. And it very possibly could be for the trouble we're in at this time. By 'we', I mean the western world. I feel we're struggling for our autonomy, which we will more than likely lose in a generation's time. And maybe that's a good thing. A benevolent take-over is much better than the other type. But we don't yet know this for certain. 

I say all this because we seem to be losing the people in our group that haven't the desire to build any more. The ideals of peace and freedom are quickly vanishing.

And why is this? Let's blame the MSM. And we can also blame the mentality of those that choose to take this and run with it. And to reject the idea, the person only must be judged as a conspiracy theorist. No other rebuttal is necessary.

Our western world consists of grown-ups that actually believe that the problems of the LBGTQ+++ must be on the worldwide election platform to guide us on whom we should vote for. And coincidentally the very same political party is a liberal party having this very same platform. I'm talking about pronouns here! None of that silly stuff like education, economics, immigration, national defense, etc.

Now I'm not taking anything away from this community. I will talk with everyone that will talk with me. But it shouldn't be a national agenda as it is now. Along with climate change, and EV cars. I'm sorry, but that's what I believe. Unfortunately, these are the things we currently vote for, and we have idiots telling us what to do.

We are a population having too many believing in instant gratification. That's something that should only happen while we're children.

I believe that a Democracy is the best form of government we have at this time.  I will say something to Ursula about capitalism. Unlike you, I believe that undisturbed there are more winners than losers. However, in today's society, we propagate losers by the actions of the gov.

And I truthfully don't think it will last another generation. 

But with technology moving as fast as it is today, tomorrow is a wide-open world. But to be happy as one can be, he must believe in something..... or someone.

[rowlf]

55 minutes ago, Alteredbhoy said:

You are too stupid for words. If two people get into a boxing ring and one gets hurt, it is not sexual abuse. Sexual abuse does not require there to be participants of the opposite sex. Women can sexually abuse other women as well as men. And vice versa.

A man hurting another man in a boxing ring is not sexual abuse, and it doesn't become sexual abuse simply because the other fighter is a woman.

And whatever Jean Carrol did in the 1960s is irrelevant to what DJT did 30 years later.

You talk about things of which you have no understanding.

🙄      Hmm... pot, kettle? It is. Therefore, I are!

[dappi]

13 minutes ago, rowlf said:

 

Hmm.... I've always thought I made myself perfectly clear. I believe in a minimal gov. Consisting of mostly infrastructure and law and order. I believe entitlements have made fools of us. After saying that, I believe all people that are unable to live their lives without assistance, should be assisted. Now what I just stated is what many people only care about. And it very possibly could be for the trouble we're in at this time. By 'we', I mean the western world. I feel we're struggling for our autonomy, which we will more than likely lose in a generation's time. And maybe that's a good thing. A benevolent take-over is much better than the other type. But we don't yet know this for certain. 

I say all this because we seem to be losing the people in our group that haven't the desire to build any more. The ideals of peace and freedom are quickly vanishing.

And why is this? Let's blame the MSM. And we can also blame the mentality of those that choose to take this and run with it. And to reject the idea, the person only must be judged as a conspiracy theorist. No other rebuttal is necessary.

Our western world consists of grown-ups that actually believe that the problems of the LBGTQ+++ must be on the worldwide election platform to guide us on whom we should vote for. And coincidentally the very same political party is a liberal party having this very same platform. I'm talking about pronouns here! None of that silly stuff like education, economics, immigration, national defense, etc.

Now I'm not taking anything away from this community. I will talk with everyone that will talk with me. But it shouldn't be a national agenda as it is now. Along with climate change, and EV cars. I'm sorry, but that's what I believe. Unfortunately, these are the things we currently vote for, and we have idiots telling us what to do.

We are a population having too many believing in instant gratification. That's something that should only happen while we're children.

I believe that a Democracy is the best form of government we have at this time.  I will say something to Ursula about capitalism. Unlike you, I believe that undisturbed there are more winners than losers. However, in today's society, we propagate losers by the actions of the gov.

And I truthfully don't think it will last another generation. 

But with technology moving as fast as it is today, tomorrow is a wide-open world. But to be happy as one can be, he must believe in something..... or someone.

This, good people is a Rowlf No. 3.

That is long ,rambling and without any meaningful content. A complete waste of time and typing.

[Ursula Harrison]

42 minutes ago, rowlf said:

Hmm.... I've always thought I made myself perfectly clear.

On some issues absolutely. F'rinstance:

45 minutes ago, rowlf said:

I believe in a minimal gov. Consisting of mostly infrastructure and law and order. I believe entitlements have made fools of us. After saying that, I believe all people that are unable to live their lives without assistance, should be assisted.

Okay, I get that, it's self-explanatory.

It's just that in a lot of your discussions (if that's the right word) with AB and the like I struggle to follow your trail of logic. So I just let the pair of you get on with it.

[Rikki]

Minimal Gov?

Yet you support a Gov telling people what books they can and can’t read, who they can marry, which toilet they can use, which clothes they can wear, telling women what to do with their own body.

Democracy?

Yet you support a man who very nearly staged a coup and sought to stay in power despite losing an election.

 

[rowlf]

21 minutes ago, Ursula Harrison said:

On some issues absolutely. F'rinstance:

Okay, I get that, it's self-explanatory.

It's just that in a lot of your discussions (if that's the right word) with AB and the like I struggle to follow your trail of logic. So I just let the pair of you get on with it.

I can understand how you would feel this way. But I don't believe people can truly make any sense of what goes on between us. For better or for worse, I believe he's a very dishonest person. And for others less tolerant (or not nearly as stubborn as me) he stifles discussion. A lot of members that have had something to say have been taken aback by his inane circular logic. I hold that against him. But then again, I'm as guilty as is he, as I perpetuate his dishonesty by acknowledging him.

If I have any excuse at all, or if any excuse that I have matters, is something else altogether. I've always enjoyed posting on this forum, and years ago I had some good friends that would banter back and forth. Members were more congenial then. Ab was one of them under a different name a different guise. However, he also showed his true colors in a very forceful way. And I always called him on it.

Finally, in my defense, I will only respond in the way that he responds to me. And him, vis versa.

Now all of this is just a conjecture on my part. I'm fairly certain this is the same man, but in this age of virtual reality we only bore the those reading it.

What I do not like about it is that we keep others away that may have something sensible to add to the conversation. But I'm not the arbiter of this forum, and I probably wouldn't do anything about it if I were.

So if you can think of anything we can do to alleviate the problem, please suggest something.

[rowlf]

8 minutes ago, Rikki said:

Minimal Gov?

Yet you support a Gov telling people what books they can and can’t read, who they can marry, which toilet they can use, which clothes they can wear, telling women what to do with their own body.

Democracy?

Yet you support a man who very nearly staged a coup and sought to stay in power despite losing an election.

 

Rikki, with all due respect that is inaccurate. You're bordering on being nonsensical.

[dappi]

32 minutes ago, rowlf said:

I can understand how you would feel this way. But I don't believe people can truly make any sense of what goes on between us. For better or for worse, I believe he's a very dishonest person. And for others less tolerant (or not nearly as stubborn as me) he stifles discussion. A lot of members that have had something to say have been taken aback by his inane circular logic. I hold that against him. But then again, I'm as guilty as is he, as I perpetuate his dishonesty by acknowledging him.

If I have any excuse at all, or if any excuse that I have matters, is something else altogether. I've always enjoyed posting on this forum, and years ago I had some good friends that would banter back and forth. Members were more congenial then. Ab was one of them under a different name a different guise. However, he also showed his true colors in a very forceful way. And I always called him on it.

Finally, in my defense, I will only respond in the way that he responds to me. And him, vis versa.

Now all of this is just a conjecture on my part. I'm fairly certain this is the same man, but in this age of virtual reality we only bore the those reading it.

What I do not like about it is that we keep others away that may have something sensible to add to the conversation. But I'm not the arbiter of this forum, and I probably wouldn't do anything about it if I were.

So if you can think of anything we can do to alleviate the problem, please suggest something.

Maybe you could stop rambling....

[c_cubed51]

I see that Ms Posie was in Dublin this weekend. Did you attend either of the rallies, Ursula? Which faction do you support? Are you happy that the Garda stood between the two groups?

Hundreds gather for rival protests on trans rights in Dublin city  | Newstalk

Hundreds take part in rival protests in Dublin on transgender issues (breakingnews.ie)

Hundreds take part in opposing protests in Dublin over transgender rights (thejournal.ie)

Which restroom do you use when you are out dressed, Ursula?

 

Edited September 17 by c_cubed51

[Alteredbhoy]

3 hours ago, Rikki said:

Minimal Gov?

Yet you support a Gov telling people what books they can and can’t read, who they can marry, which toilet they can use, which clothes they can wear, telling women what to do with their own body.

Democracy?

Yet you support a man who very nearly staged a coup and sought to stay in power despite losing an election.

 

rowlf believes in minimal Government for himself. He wants the Government to stay out of his life. But he wants the Government to legislate against everybody who is not like him or does not agree with him.

Rowlf wants democracy, so long as it returns the leaders he wants. But he's not in favour of it if it elects people not like him or who don't agree with him.

[Ursula Harrison]

Jesus wept! So many falsehoods in a couple of short paragraphs! Where do I even begin to unpack this?

14 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

I have always assumed you were a member of the LGBTQ+ community and have been flabbergasted by your animosity shown towards (sections of) the community.

At least you got that right. Sections of. Though why is that in brackets?

Obvious example being those who get lesbians thrown off a Pride parade. Aren't lesbians part of the LGGBBTTTIQQAAPP community?

Women in general may not be. But I still harbour enormous animosity towards those who go around punching them in the face.

14 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

I believe you are the one who has removed herself form the TV umbrella.

FFS pay attention!

I am a TV. I have always been a TV and I always will be. But whereas the organisations that used to support me were known as TV/TS groups, where I obviously belonged, they now call themselves TG.

For all intents and purposes TG has simply replaced TS so it's not so obvious I belong and my dear friend Penelope tells me that I don't. This isn't a bone of contention between us by the way.

So I've done nothing to remove myself from anywhere, least of all from among TVs.

14 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

"The trans community does not speak for me". 

Even after I've pointed out the inaccuracy here you persist with this lie and deliberately misquote me. I said "trans activists do not speak for me".

I stand by that. Especially when they're calling for women to be punched in the face.

14 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

You buy into the whole notion of trans females, and drag queens being dangerous

Yet another lie. I have never claimed that drag queens were dangerous (except to good taste) but that they were offensive and insulting to women. That is why I feel animosity towards them.

14 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

And you don't like it when the police protect the trans community, forgetting that their role is to provide the same level of protection to everyone. 

I'd rather they patrolled the streets and protected everybody, including trans people, from real harm. You're right about me not liking their trying to cover their dereliction of duty in this respect by harassing people who may have said something unkind about me.

[Ursula Harrison]

2 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

Did you attend either of the rallies, Ursula?

No.

2 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

Which faction do you support?

Have a guess.

2 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

Are you happy that the Garda stood between the two groups?

Yes I'm happy that they defended the right of free speech against those who tried to suppress it and drown it out. (That should give you a clue to the answer to your previous question.)

2 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

Which restroom do you use when you are out dressed, Ursula?

None of your damn business.

Not also the spoken aim of the trans activists to force the world to accept them and love them unconditionally. Seems to be a theme of theirs. Forcing themselves on women and demanding unconditional acceptance and affection.

[c_cubed51]

1 hour ago, Ursula Harrison said:

 

Yes I'm happy that they defended the right of free speech against those who tried to suppress it and drown it out. (That should give you a clue to the answer to your previous question.)

None of your damn business.

Not also the spoken aim of the trans activists to force the world to accept them and love them unconditionally. Seems to be a theme of theirs. Forcing themselves on women and demanding unconditional acceptance and affection.

Your bigotry beggars belief!!!

[Sarah_Connor]

On 9/17/2023 at 9:33 AM, Ursula Harrison said:

Again I hope I'm not taking you out of context because while I can see some sense in what you say here I think you've rather over-simplified and I don't agree with all of it.

But taking it at face value for the sake of argument. Don't you think that it could be the trans activists ensnared in a web of hate? No.

I mean forcing women (lesbians) to accept transpeople (males) at a speed dating event, trying to pressure them into having sex with biological males strikes me as in line with the agenda of subjugating women. Forcing? Sounds like rape to me. Call the police.

Anti feminism rhetoric? Now come on Penelope. Isn't it the trans activists and people like you that throw "TERF" about as a term of abuse and insult? Don't tell me that you didn't know that it's an acronym for Trans Excluding Radical Feminist. I don't see it as anti feminism. I see it as anti the very small faction of feminists who are arseholes.

 

[Sarah_Connor]

On 9/17/2023 at 9:41 AM, Ursula Harrison said:

No it is not. The lesbians were thrown out of that parade in Cardiff for carrying a banner saying "Lesbians Say No To Penises". A statement of the bleedin' obvious I should have thought.

So apparently by your logic forcing a woman to accept a penis against her will is promoting feminism and a blow against the subjugation of women. Fucksakes indeed.

Once again up to your tricks of twisting  things  to suit your narrative. This from you is  so far in outer space it simply can't be taken seriously.

[Sarah_Connor]

On 9/17/2023 at 11:14 AM, Ursula Harrison said:

I beg your pardon. That was presumptuous of me. You've made it clear that TVs like me don't belong under your transgender umbrella.

So why am I expected to stand up for you and your friends when you start attacking lesbians, a group that have always welcomed me?

You're not getting away with that one either you manipulative shit.  I don't exclude you from the trans umbrella. You specifically excluded yourself.  You've said numerous times that you are a cross dresser not trans and that (umbrella descriptor) "trans activists (i.e. people like me apparently, not an activist at all btw) don't speak for me"

 

[Ursula Harrison]

12 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

Your bigotry beggars belief!!!

So in your eyes letting women speak is bigotry? Of course. At least you're consistent. I'm a bigot for saying that trans activists don't speak for me. So naturally those women in Dublin are bigots for saying that trans activists don't speak for them either.

[Ursula Harrison]

10 hours ago, Sarah_Connor said:

Once again up to your tricks of twisting  things  to suit your narrative. This from you is  so far in outer space it simply can't be taken seriously.

I've twisted nothing. The video evidence is there for all to see. Your reply merely demonstrates that you have no answer to it.

[Ursula Harrison]

11 hours ago, Sarah_Connor said:

You're not getting away with that one either you manipulative shit.

You're the one being manipulative and dishonest as well as abusive.

You told me that things had moved on and the terminology I was familiar with was outdated. When I complained the new language that you seemed to prefer excluded me you told me I wasn't one of you.

Unfortunately I can't bring what you said out of the archive to back me up as you made those statements under another name in an account that has been deleted. So let's stick to the here and now.

11 hours ago, Sarah_Connor said:

I don't exclude you from the trans umbrella. You specifically excluded yourself.  You've said numerous times that you are a cross dresser not trans

I don't recall ever referring to myself as a crossdresser. Certainly not on numerous occasions. I refer to myself as a transvestite (TV). That's how I introduce myself on my profiles here and on Flickr. I have said that I am reluctantly prepared to have others refer to me as a crossdresser as that is an accurate description of what I do.

This is not mere semantics. I've said the following on more than one occasion but apparently have to keep saying it. When I decided to get out and about dressed, the organisations that supported me and the telephone helplines that I called for advice, described themselves as TV/TS. So as a TV I clearly belonged.

Now they call themselves TG where it's not so clear I belong. Many people trans and otherwise have told me that I don't. Including you Penelope whatever you claim now.

I say to you what I said to Cubed. I am a TV just as I have always been. I have moved nowhere.

11 hours ago, Sarah_Connor said:

that (umbrella descriptor) "trans activists (i.e. people like me apparently, not an activist at all btw) don't speak for me"

I have indeed said that many times including here on this thread. (As well as my SHQ and Flickr profiles.) I have also said and say again that I should be the one who gets to say who speaks for me.

So it is only fair that you should be the one who gets to say whether or not you are an activist.

But either way you sure as hell don't speak for me.

[Ursula Harrison]

11 hours ago, Sarah_Connor said:

you manipulative shit

Penelope tone it down a bit.

It's not that I'm such a snowflake that I'm traumatised by your hissy fit. It's just that the last time we had an argument that got really heated we both ended up in the padded cell. I'd rather that didn't happen again as I don't have a huge online presence and I wouldn't like to lose SHQ.

[Ursula Harrison]

12 hours ago, Sarah_Connor said:

You're not getting away with that one either

Yeah, before you come back at me, I could be a little more temperate in some of my replies to Cubed.

As Cubed would know. Matthew 7:3.

[Sarah_Connor]

9 hours ago, Ursula Harrison said:

I've twisted nothing. The video evidence is there for all to see. Your reply merely demonstrates that you have no answer to it.

I have told you before I won't watch you tube posts as any sort of credible argument.   Why not just link me to a thread in 4Chan?  It's about the same.

Anyway I was specifically referring to this: "So apparently by your logic forcing a woman to accept a penis against her will is promoting feminism and a blow against the subjugation of women."

This is a preposterous statement.

8 hours ago, Ursula Harrison said:

You're the one being manipulative and dishonest as well as abusive. Spare me. You've said the exact same words to Cubed you cow.

You told me that things had moved on and the terminology I was familiar with was outdated. When I complained the new language that you seemed to prefer excluded me you told me I wasn't one of you.  You're not. You have stated many times that you are a male who likes to dress in women's clothing and that you do not have dysphoria.  You are correct in stating that you are a transvestite. You yourself say your gender is male. Therefore by definition you are not transgender.  However that doesn't mean that as a transvestite you can't be included or allied under the general LBTGQ+ umbrella. How is this difficult to follow?

Unfortunately I can't bring what you said out of the archive to back me up as you made those statements under another name in an account that has been deleted. So let's stick to the here and now.

I don't recall ever referring to myself as a crossdresser. Certainly not on numerous occasions. I refer to myself as a transvestite (TV). That's how I introduce myself on my profiles here and on Flickr. I have said that I am reluctantly prepared to have others refer to me as a crossdresser as that is an accurate description of what I do. Ok, fine, mea culpa.

This is not mere semantics. I've said the following on more than one occasion but apparently have to keep saying it. When I decided to get out and about dressed, the organisations that supported me and the telephone helplines that I called for advice, described themselves as TV/TS. So as a TV I clearly belonged.

Now they call themselves TG where it's not so clear I belong. Many people trans and otherwise have told me that I don't. Including you Penelope whatever you claim now. If I say you don't belong it's only because of your pedantry. 

I say to you what I said to Cubed. I am a TV just as I have always been. I have moved nowhere. Again here we go: You yourself, with your pedantry, draw the line of exclusion. Not me.

I have indeed said that many times including here on this thread. (As well as my SHQ and Flickr profiles.) I have also said and say again that I should be the one who gets to say who speaks for me.  I wouldn't fucking dream of thinking I spoke for you. You are a fucking alien from outerspace  and I don't understand your thought processes. Only Rowlf does. I'll leave it there.

 

 

8 hours ago, Ursula Harrison said:

Penelope tone it down a bit.  A bit rich don't you think.

It's not that I'm such a snowflake that I'm traumatised by your hissy fit I'm not in the least bit hissy. This is how I talk.  If you find that confrontational don't talk to me.  It's just that the last time we had an argument that got really heated we both ended up in the padded cell. I'd rather that didn't happen again as I don't have a huge online presence and I wouldn't like to lose SHQ. No, I ended up banned and it still annoys the crap out of me that you didn't and that  Rowlf  nor Blott didn't despite them being the biggest shit stirring bigots here. .

 

8 hours ago, Ursula Harrison said:

Yeah, before you come back at me, I could be a little more temperate in some of my replies to Cubed.

As Cubed would know. Matthew 7:3.

Whatever. I couldn't care about the bible. Both you and Cubed should go to a church and thrash it's details  out there.

[c_cubed51]

9 hours ago, Ursula Harrison said:

Yeah, before you come back at me, I could be a little more temperate in some of my replies to Cubed.

As Cubed would know. Matthew 7:3.

Touche, Ursula. Good choice of verse to cut me to the quick. However, it cuts both ways, not so?

My version of Christianity favours inclusion over separation (you know, John 4, Acts 10, Romans 2 onwards ...).

SC is correct in pointing out to you that both of us are confused by your choice to opt out of membership of the LGBTQ+ community, to deliberately choose separation over inclusion. You are the one who is not being even-handed in your dealings with humanity. The police are committed to this, yet you deride them. You assume that I favour the right to free speech by pro-trans activists over those of the Let Women Speak movement, when this is not the case. Both have the right to protest. Neither side has the right to become violent. I condemn all violence. Including the 'juicing' of Ms Posie in Auckland. You do so selectively.

You talk of the right to free speech but are not concerned when this turns into hate speech, which hurts people and leads to great harm, because you claim (incorrectly) that words cannot do harm. You are misguided. The tongue is highly dangerous.

Trans people exist. They ought to have the same rights as everyone else. They should not have to fight for them or suffer abuse from bigots who are fed fear-filled shit spewed by the alt.right. The same goes for cis women. The Universal Bill of Human Rights guarantees this. Pro-trans legislation, while it may have good intentions, actually undermines human rights, which is why I oppose such Bills in NZ.

Bathroom Bills? Unisex (multi-gendered) is the way to go, as it is in most homes, in public transport, in many restaurants, at the Cliffs of Moher. As it was when everyone defecated in the bush.

I still don't understand why you hate Ms Wadhwa. Matthew 5:44.

Edited September 18 by c_cubed51

[Ursula Harrison]

41 minutes ago, Sarah_Connor said:

I won't watch you tube posts as any sort of credible argument. 

Then you're hardly in a position to argue against them.

43 minutes ago, Sarah_Connor said:

Spare me. You've said the exact same words to Cubed you cow.

If you'd read to the end of the thread you'd see I acknowledged that and my concern was avoiding sanction rather than sparing my feelings.

47 minutes ago, Sarah_Connor said:

If I say you don't belong it's only because of your pedantry. 

Spare me.

48 minutes ago, Sarah_Connor said:

This is how I talk.

Really? I hadn't noticed. 😈

50 minutes ago, Sarah_Connor said:

No, I ended up banned and it still annoys the crap out of me that you didn't and that  Rowlf  nor Blott didn't despite them being the biggest shit stirring bigots here. .

But I did Penelope. I was lucky that a moderator took pity on me and let me out. (I didn't ask to be released, just queried how long bans lasted.)

Rowlf was in the padded cell along with us and AB apparently due to one of their arguments getting out of hand.

I share your amazement at Blott getting away with some of the things he said.

57 minutes ago, Sarah_Connor said:

Whatever. I couldn't care about the bible. Both you and Cubed should go to a church and thrash it's details  out there.

See above where you were taking me to task for just this.

[matt2matt2002]

On 16/09/2023 at 22:47, Ursula Harrison said:

My friend Jean and I are so happy to hear that. Tell her Jean:

 

Was that a double negative?

[c_cubed51]

3 minutes ago, matt2matt2002 said:

Was that a double negative?

Yeah, right, Matt! 😄

[Ursula Harrison]

13 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

However, it cuts both ways, not so?

That was kinda my point.

13 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

to deliberately choose separation

If you can't understand why I would wish to separate myself from those who go around punching women there is no point in me trying to explain it to you.

13 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

The police are committed to this, yet you deride them.

This would be hilarious if it wasn't so tragic. South Yorkshire at Hillsborough, West Yorkshire's treatment of autistic teenager, Sarah Everard, 83 officers (EIGHTY THREE) suspended and under investigation in Northern Ireland for sexual assault. These are the people I should trust to protect me? To quote my dear friend Penelope, you couldn't make this shit up.

13 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

Both have the right to protest.

But it wasn't LWS playing loud disco music in an attempt to drown out their opponents.

13 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

You do so selectively.

That is a lie. Violence is only ever justified in self defence or the defence of others. By that I mean defence from physical harm. Not to prevent them hearing something they might not like.

13 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

You talk of the right to free speech but are not concerned when this turns into hate speech, which hurts people and leads to great harm, because you claim (incorrectly) that words cannot do harm. You are misguided. The tongue is highly dangerous.

Spare me.

13 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

Pro-trans legislation, while it may have good intentions, actually undermines human rights, which is why I oppose such Bills in NZ.

Good to see you coming to your senses.

13 hours ago, c_cubed51 said:

I still don't understand why you hate Ms Wadhwa.

Change the record Cubed. All I said was that I didn't think it appropriate for a trans woman (biological male) to be in charge of a rape crisis centre.

Edited September 19 by Ursula Harrison