Topic: UK government just officially defined what a woman is.
Erik !saAqdaazn2 started this discussion 2 days ago #125,657
Without giving it away let's just say a lot of people with brightly dyed hair are going to be fucking pissed.
Quinn from Shoreditch joined in and replied with this 2 days ago, 38 minutes later[^] [v] #1,360,656
Back in 2010 I was royally pissed off that Obama bailed out the rich cunts who tanked the global economy while shifting the financial consequences onto the working classes, but then he lit up the White House in rainbow colours and I realised he was on the side of the left after all.
Erik !saAqdaazn2 (OP) replied with this 2 days ago, 4 minutes later, 42 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,657
I should clarify, it was a ruling from the UK's supreme court whixh moves it away from the government and makes it law.
It's quite funny because stating law on the UK subreddit gets you banned.
It's quite funny because stating law on the UK subreddit gets you banned.
Quinn from Shoreditch replied with this 2 days ago, 8 minutes later, 51 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,658
When Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer took away the winter fuel allowance from cold and poor pensioners my partner Evan and I were outraged, but then Sir Keir brought our attention to the epidemic of online bullying of trans people and I realised he's fighting for the left's interests after all.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 2 days ago, 22 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,659
The people with died hair still don't understand why you can't use a word in its own definition.
Quinn from Shoreditch replied with this 2 days ago, 6 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,660
@previous (C)
I used to try to make sense of a political and economic ecosystem that has allowed leftist Democratic senator Nancy Pelosi to acquire a personal wealth of 250 million dollars despite being a career politician on an annual salary of $174,000, but then she made me realise I can't even say with certainty what a man and a woman are so I gave up trying.
I used to try to make sense of a political and economic ecosystem that has allowed leftist Democratic senator Nancy Pelosi to acquire a personal wealth of 250 million dollars despite being a career politician on an annual salary of $174,000, but then she made me realise I can't even say with certainty what a man and a woman are so I gave up trying.
Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU joined in and replied with this 2 days ago, 13 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,661
'Victory for common sense' - politicians react
We've heard from the UK government - here's the reaction from other politicians, including Kemi Badenoch.
The Tory leader lauded the "victory" at court, adding: "Saying 'trans women are women' was never true in fact, and now isn't true in law either.
"This is a victory for all of the women who faced personal abuse or lost their jobs for stating the obvious. Women are women and men are men: you cannot change your biological sex.
"The era of Keir Starmer telling us women can have penises has come to an end."
'Apology letters'
Rosie Duffield, a former Labour MP and outspoken supporter of For Women Scotland, the campaign group that brought the case, posted on social media: "We're all going to need industrial-sized postboxes to accommodate all the grovelling apology letters - biggest one for all the women in Scotland who were never ever going to weesht!"
Weesht is a term used in Scotland meaning "hush" - or "whisht".
In a separate statement, she said she was "just thrilled and relieved".
'Government must clarify guidance'
Mims Davies, the shadow minister for women, shared a "well done" message for For Women Scotland, but added the government must clarify guidance to reflect the Supreme Court's ruling.
"This morning's decision is important for women right across our country," she added.
"This is a clear victory for common sense - and should never have taken a court case to prove the biological definition of a woman."
We've heard from the UK government - here's the reaction from other politicians, including Kemi Badenoch.
The Tory leader lauded the "victory" at court, adding: "Saying 'trans women are women' was never true in fact, and now isn't true in law either.
"This is a victory for all of the women who faced personal abuse or lost their jobs for stating the obvious. Women are women and men are men: you cannot change your biological sex.
"The era of Keir Starmer telling us women can have penises has come to an end."
'Apology letters'
Rosie Duffield, a former Labour MP and outspoken supporter of For Women Scotland, the campaign group that brought the case, posted on social media: "We're all going to need industrial-sized postboxes to accommodate all the grovelling apology letters - biggest one for all the women in Scotland who were never ever going to weesht!"
Weesht is a term used in Scotland meaning "hush" - or "whisht".
In a separate statement, she said she was "just thrilled and relieved".
'Government must clarify guidance'
Mims Davies, the shadow minister for women, shared a "well done" message for For Women Scotland, but added the government must clarify guidance to reflect the Supreme Court's ruling.
"This morning's decision is important for women right across our country," she added.
"This is a clear victory for common sense - and should never have taken a court case to prove the biological definition of a woman."
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 2 days ago, 3 hours later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,679
Now is the time for kook and Catherine to apologize to all the real women, and say they were wrong, and will never be women.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 2 days ago, 34 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,682
This is going to piss off a lot of cisgender women who find themselves not fitting this definition. Cisgender men really need to shut the fuck up and know their place.
Erik !saAqdaazn2 (OP) replied with this 2 days ago, 12 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,683
@previous (F)
That doesn't make any sense. Cicgender women don't it the description of being born female?
That doesn't make any sense. Cicgender women don't it the description of being born female?
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 2 days ago, 25 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,686
Why are right wingers so obsessed over this? How does it even affect them?
Anonymous E replied with this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,688
Quinn from Shoreditch replied with this 2 days ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,689
@1,360,683 (Erik !saAqdaazn2)
> That doesn't make any sense.
It isn't supposed to make sense. It's supposed to erode the fundamental sense of language and make people exhaust their energy on imbecilic bullshit. The truth must be neither knowable nor immutable, for if it is, Israel murdering civilians is the same war crime as Russia doing it, and we can't have that. Nothing means anything and everything is situational.
> That doesn't make any sense.
It isn't supposed to make sense. It's supposed to erode the fundamental sense of language and make people exhaust their energy on imbecilic bullshit. The truth must be neither knowable nor immutable, for if it is, Israel murdering civilians is the same war crime as Russia doing it, and we can't have that. Nothing means anything and everything is situational.
Erik !saAqdaazn2 (OP) replied with this 2 days ago, 46 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,693
Anonymous F replied with this 2 days ago, 6 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,694
@1,360,683 (Erik !saAqdaazn2)
This is probably ridden with impossible beauty standards for women and any women who fits outside of that is likely not a woman.
It's just men being retarded and showing why they don't know what a woman looks like.
This is probably ridden with impossible beauty standards for women and any women who fits outside of that is likely not a woman.
It's just men being retarded and showing why they don't know what a woman looks like.
Quinn from Shoreditch replied with this 2 days ago, 7 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,695
@1,360,686 (G)> Why are right wingers so obsessed over this?
Look at all these obsessed right wingers.
Fact Checker joined in and replied with this 2 days ago, 16 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,698
The UK Supreme Court has ruled that the legal definition of a woman, as used in the Equality Act 2010, is based on biological sex.
This means that a woman is defined as someone who was born female. The court's decision specifically stated that transgender women with Gender Recognition Certificates (GRCs) are not considered women under the law, even though they have been legally recognized as such.
This means that a woman is defined as someone who was born female. The court's decision specifically stated that transgender women with Gender Recognition Certificates (GRCs) are not considered women under the law, even though they have been legally recognized as such.
(Edited 32 seconds later.)
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 2 days ago, 59 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,706
Honestly, the thing I don’t understand as a biological self identified male myself is why right wingers cheer on the removal of the most obvious loophole to get out of the draft. Now I’ll have to do the bullshit my ancestors did and hitch hike across America.
Anonymous I double-posted this 2 days ago, 2 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,707
Tbh I don’t get why "traditional" (pussy simps with no backbone with tiny peanut horny caveman brains) are so disturbed by the thought of drafting women. I don’t particularly care if women die in a war. Somebody called me a psychopath for saying that one time. Which is retarded because obviously I’m not a psychopath for not caring if other people die. Dying to protect other people is doormat behavior. I don’t care about other people.
Anonymous I triple-posted this 2 days ago, 3 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,710
Also it’s kinda stupid, like Ukraine for example. They didn’t draft up the women because there’s this idea you need women to make children. Except, the women left the country and Ukraine has a birth rate so low they’re going extinct even if they win the war. Do you really think a woman with children is going to return to Ukraine, a country with a GDP per capita closer to Nigeria (google this if you don’t believe me) than it is to America, you’re crazy.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC joined in and replied with this 2 days ago, 12 seconds later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,711
@1,360,707 (I)
I dont think we should have a draft at all
But yes, it makes little sense to draft women
I dont think we should have a draft at all
But yes, it makes little sense to draft women
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 4 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,712
@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Women are more likely to survive gunshot wounds than men are because it’s easier to perform surgery on people with less muscle mass.
Women are more likely to survive gunshot wounds than men are because it’s easier to perform surgery on people with less muscle mass.
Anonymous I double-posted this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,713
Women also have better fine motor skills than men do due to having less muscle mass which is actually better for aim.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 2 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,714
@1,360,712 (I)
A. We do need women to repopulate. Sperm is worth much less than uteruses
B. We need to people to raise the already existing children
C. We need able bodied people to work the jobs evacuated by the males who have been drafted
But I dont think we should have a draft, anyway
A. We do need women to repopulate. Sperm is worth much less than uteruses
B. We need to people to raise the already existing children
C. We need able bodied people to work the jobs evacuated by the males who have been drafted
But I dont think we should have a draft, anyway
(Edited 10 seconds later.)
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 2 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,716
@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
The thing is though, in theory, one man could have children with multiple women, but in practice, our culture values monogamy. There’s also a good reason why the natural ratio of men to women is about 50:50. If everybody has the same dad, people are gonna start inbreeding.
The thing is though, in theory, one man could have children with multiple women, but in practice, our culture values monogamy. There’s also a good reason why the natural ratio of men to women is about 50:50. If everybody has the same dad, people are gonna start inbreeding.
Anonymous I double-posted this 2 days ago, 54 seconds later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,717
Also it’s not like western women are having enough children to sustain the population without immigration anyway. So if the value of women is based off of a thing they’re not doing who cares?
Anonymous I triple-posted this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,718
I’d argue that the benefit of having female soldiers outweighs the detriment of it. If you draft men and women, you can build a military that is much larger. In World War Two, Germany didn’t draft women, Russia did, and Russia won.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,720
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 2 days ago, 16 seconds later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,721
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC triple-posted this 2 days ago, 38 seconds later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,722
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,723
@1,360,720 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
I’m making the point that Germany had a population of 60 million people in World War Two and about 5 million Germans died in World War Two. They were the losers by the way. There were 13 million German soldiers in World War Two. Essentially, even if you lose, the majority of soldiers will not die. It has a very minimal effect on the size of the overall population.
I’m making the point that Germany had a population of 60 million people in World War Two and about 5 million Germans died in World War Two. They were the losers by the way. There were 13 million German soldiers in World War Two. Essentially, even if you lose, the majority of soldiers will not die. It has a very minimal effect on the size of the overall population.
Anonymous I double-posted this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,724
@1,360,722 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Well, between the Soviet invasion of Manchuria and the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it’s up to you to decide which strategy for winning a war was more honorable. But I wouldn’t say that’s a manpower thing.
Well, between the Soviet invasion of Manchuria and the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it’s up to you to decide which strategy for winning a war was more honorable. But I wouldn’t say that’s a manpower thing.
boof joined in and replied with this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,725
well there's woman in the botanical sense, and there's woman in the culinary sense
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 10 seconds later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,726
Most people don’t fight to the death, most people surrender if they can’t win. If you lose a war that doesn’t mean all your soldiers are dead.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,728
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 2 days ago, 22 seconds later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,729
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC triple-posted this 2 days ago, 15 seconds later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,730
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC quadruple-posted this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,731
Its weird how so many men want women to be drafted rather than end the draft
Cutting off their nose to spite their face
Cutting off their nose to spite their face
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 26 seconds later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,734
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 33 seconds later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,735
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,736
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,738
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 19 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,739
.
(Edited 24 minutes later.)
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 58 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,740
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 17 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,741
(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
(Edited 23 minutes later.)
Anonymous I double-posted this 2 days ago, 22 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,742
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,744
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,745
@1,360,742 (I)
Anything that limits births can affect a population. Removing women limits births more than removing men
Its hard to find info on this because most countries don't draft women
We've seen a different event that did remove women, which was the one child policy in China. It did reduce population
Anything that limits births can affect a population. Removing women limits births more than removing men
Its hard to find info on this because most countries don't draft women
We've seen a different event that did remove women, which was the one child policy in China. It did reduce population
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 14 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,746
Anonymous I double-posted this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,748
.
(Edited 17 minutes later.)
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 13 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,749
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 2 days ago, 16 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,750
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,751
.
(Edited 15 minutes later.)
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 2 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,752
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,753
.
(Edited 12 minutes later.)
Anonymous I double-posted this 2 days ago, 2 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,754
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 45 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,755
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,756
Germany and Japan also, incidentally, don’t have very much oil.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 8 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,757
@1,360,754 (I)
Its not just about losing, but about how long the war drags on
Are you pro drafting in general?
Its not just about losing, but about how long the war drags on
Are you pro drafting in general?
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,759
.
(Edited 6 minutes later.)
Anonymous I double-posted this 2 days ago, 33 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,760
Anonymous I triple-posted this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,761
.
(Edited 4 minutes later.)
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 4 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,762
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 2 days ago, 18 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,763
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC triple-posted this 2 days ago, 15 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,764
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 32 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,765
@1,360,762 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
The thing I don’t like about you is you play stupid too much. You know we’re talking about different questions.
The thing I don’t like about you is you play stupid too much. You know we’re talking about different questions.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 18 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,772
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 4 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,774
Anonymous I double-posted this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,775
.
(Edited 21 minutes later.)
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 32 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,776
@1,360,774 (I)
I know what your answer would be
So many men are fucking retarded
They'd rather fuck over women then help other men
I know what your answer would be
So many men are fucking retarded
They'd rather fuck over women then help other men
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,777
Anonymous I double-posted this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,778
.
(Edited 23 minutes later.)
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 6 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,779
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,780
(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
(Edited 16 minutes later.)
Anonymous I double-posted this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,781
.
(Edited 18 minutes later.)
Anonymous I triple-posted this 2 days ago, 2 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,782
.
(Edited 16 minutes later.)
Anonymous I quadruple-posted this 2 days ago, 4 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,783
.
(Edited 15 minutes later.)
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 2 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,785
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 2 days ago, 26 seconds later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,786
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 35 seconds later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,787
@1,360,783 (I)
In reproductive terms, women are more valuable
It doesn't mean that they are better people
In reproductive terms, women are more valuable
It doesn't mean that they are better people
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,788
Anonymous I double-posted this 2 days ago, 2 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,791
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 days ago, 2 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,792
@previous (I)
War is about preserving and enhancing the blood of a nation
So yes. The reproductive struggle is absolutely connected to that
And yes, women are more important in a reproductive sense
War is about preserving and enhancing the blood of a nation
So yes. The reproductive struggle is absolutely connected to that
And yes, women are more important in a reproductive sense
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,793
@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
That first sentence sounds like something Hitler would say lol.
That first sentence sounds like something Hitler would say lol.
(Edited 13 minutes later.)
Anonymous C replied with this 2 days ago, 2 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,794
@1,360,695 (Quinn from Shoreditch)
Why is planned parenthood making these signs?
Sterilized kids don't ever have kids themselves, and PP is antinatalist at its core? Still seems a bit transparent, since they don't manage trans programs.
Why is planned parenthood making these signs?
Sterilized kids don't ever have kids themselves, and PP is antinatalist at its core? Still seems a bit transparent, since they don't manage trans programs.
Anonymous I replied with this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,795
Anonymous I double-posted this 2 days ago, 2 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,796
.
(Edited 7 minutes later.)
Anonymous I triple-posted this 2 days ago, 1 minute later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,798
.
(Edited 7 minutes later.)
Anonymous I quadruple-posted this 2 days ago, 7 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,805
Basically: I support international government.
Green !!bO/s3MBcD joined in and replied with this 2 days ago, 2 hours later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,873
I still think we should respect people's pronouns though.
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 1 day ago, 8 hours later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,360,985
Tbh I don’t really care about trans people that much but as a guy I don’t really like women who think they’re special just because they’re women. I’ve never met a terf who wasn’t also a cunt.
Anonymous O joined in and replied with this 1 day ago, 1 hour later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,005
thats cool and all, but the fact that this had to be made a law is just sad.
Erik !saAqdaazn2 (OP) replied with this 1 day ago, 41 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,019
@1,360,985 (N)
A terf is someone who is also a feminist. So what about women who are not feminists who don't feel men can be women?
A terf is someone who is also a feminist. So what about women who are not feminists who don't feel men can be women?
Anonymous P joined in and replied with this 1 day ago, 36 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,020
@previous (Erik !saAqdaazn2)
I’m the same person but I just cleared my cookies. I don’t like conservative women either. It’s nothing to do with trans people. I don’t hate trans people, but conservative women have a habit of telling men what they "should" be as if they know better.
I’m the same person but I just cleared my cookies. I don’t like conservative women either. It’s nothing to do with trans people. I don’t hate trans people, but conservative women have a habit of telling men what they "should" be as if they know better.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
Anonymous P double-posted this 1 day ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,021
Which to be fair, most women my age aren’t like that. Probably 90% of them aren’t.
Anonymous P triple-posted this 1 day ago, 11 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,022
I just realized you probably thought I was anti feminist because of the word cunt. But I don’t actually disagree with feminism, I wasn’t referencing them being feminists as being the problem, I was more referencing their attitude as highly unpleasant people in general. I would call a man a cunt if I really hated him, but I get it’s a sexist word at the same time. Asshole would have been a better word I guess.
Anonymous P quadruple-posted this 1 day ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,023
Anonymous P quintuple-posted this 1 day ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,024
.
(Edited 4 minutes later.)
Erik !saAqdaazn2 (OP) replied with this 1 day ago, 30 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,031
Anonymous P replied with this 1 day ago, 26 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,038
@previous (Erik !saAqdaazn2)
I think most people on this website are middle aged but I’m in college. Most women my age are neither conservatives nor terfs. Generally, college aged women tend to be fairly left leaning. Further left than me actually. Even the white ones. Actually, especially the white ones come to think of it. If I just asked random girls at my college if they supported trans rights, more of them would say yes than no.
I think most people on this website are middle aged but I’m in college. Most women my age are neither conservatives nor terfs. Generally, college aged women tend to be fairly left leaning. Further left than me actually. Even the white ones. Actually, especially the white ones come to think of it. If I just asked random girls at my college if they supported trans rights, more of them would say yes than no.
(Edited 4 minutes later.)
Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU replied with this 1 day ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,039
@1,360,873 (Green !!bO/s3MBcD)
This isn't a ruling saying you can discrimination against transexual people, just a ruling that the phrase "trans women are women" is not correct under the law.
This isn't a ruling saying you can discrimination against transexual people, just a ruling that the phrase "trans women are women" is not correct under the law.
Anonymous P replied with this 1 day ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,040
.
(Edited 9 minutes later.)
Anonymous Q joined in and replied with this 1 day ago, 13 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,042
@1,361,031 (Erik !saAqdaazn2)
Also when I said I don’t care about trans people, I just mean, I don’t find it to be an interesting debate. I’ve never been interested in sports or cared about sports. I’ve never been interested in public restrooms. Etc.
Also when I said I don’t care about trans people, I just mean, I don’t find it to be an interesting debate. I’ve never been interested in sports or cared about sports. I’ve never been interested in public restrooms. Etc.
Anonymous O replied with this 1 day ago, 6 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,114
@1,361,038 (P)
from my experience, they dont really care that much, they just say they do because women dont have much resistance to peer pressure. the instant a woman gets in a relationship with a conservative she changes her tune without a slightest bit of trouble.
from my experience, they dont really care that much, they just say they do because women dont have much resistance to peer pressure. the instant a woman gets in a relationship with a conservative she changes her tune without a slightest bit of trouble.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 1 day ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,116
@previous (O)
Women are much less willing to date conservative men than vice versa
Women are much less willing to date conservative men than vice versa
(Edited 5 seconds later.)
Anonymous O replied with this 1 day ago, 28 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,127
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 1 day ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,129
Erik !saAqdaazn2 (OP) replied with this 1 day ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,131
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 1 day ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,132
Anonymous O replied with this 1 day ago, 8 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,134
@1,361,131 (Erik !saAqdaazn2)
femoids sure love repeating this obvious lie, but they very transparently cannot stand their "male allies".
femoids sure love repeating this obvious lie, but they very transparently cannot stand their "male allies".
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 1 day ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,136
Anonymous O replied with this 1 day ago, 8 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,138
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 1 day ago, 17 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,140
Anonymous R joined in and replied with this 6 hours ago, 1 day later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,361,498
So, Britain's greatest legal minds have been sitting around trying to work out what the difference between men and women is, and if there is one... and people see this a victory when they finally reach a decision to such a stupidly obvious question? It's like winning gold at the Special Olympics. Well done guys.