Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Argus

The transgender insanity movement

Recommended Posts

The transgender movement has moved with lightning speed amid ferocious hostility towards anyone who stands in its path. It increasingly demands more accommodation, largely at the expense of women, demands men who are 100% physically and biologically male, and have no medical or psychological evidence to the contrary, be considered 100% female. No proof is needed or necessary, and anyone who suggests that such 'women' not be allowed into womens changing rooms, bathrooms, or showers, is merely a hatemonger and bigot who needs to be relentlessly attacked.

In days of old, when you could say "Men are not women" and not be accused of hate speech and bigotry.

https://heavy.com/news/2018/11/meghan-murphy/

When women got to compete against each other in sports, and didn't have to compete against men who simply claimed they were women.

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/transgender-woman-track-cycling-1.4863381

When no one ever gave a thought to the idea that male rapists should be sent to womens prisons.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6169813/Rapist-Karen-Whites-ex-girlfriend-says-gender-change-sham.html

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Argus said:

The transgender movement has moved with lightning speed amid ferocious hostility towards anyone who stands in its path. It increasingly demands more accommodation, largely at the expense of women, demands men who are 100% physically and biologically male, and have no medical or psychological evidence to the contrary, be considered 100% female. No proof is needed or necessary, and anyone who suggests that such 'women' not be allowed into womens changing rooms, bathrooms, or showers, is merely a hatemonger and bigot who needs to be relentlessly attacked.

Attacked ?  You just called it 'the insanity movement'.  Pot/kettle.

3 minutes ago, Argus said:

In days of old, when you could say "Men are not women" and not be accused of hate speech and bigotry.

https://heavy.com/news/2018/11/meghan-murphy/

Meh.  Things change, I guess.  You can't really use a lot of words without retribution anymore.

3 minutes ago, Argus said:

When women got to compete against each other in sports, and didn't have to compete against men who simply claimed they were women.

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/transgender-woman-track-cycling-1.4863381

This is being worked out:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00948705.2017.1317602?af=R&journalCode=rjps20#_i8 (Journal of the Philosophy of Sport argues for handicap)

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/39/10/695 (British Journal of Sports Medicine says there is no consensus) 
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jan/25/ioc-rules-transgender-athletes-can-take-part-in-olympics-without-surgery (IOC - testosterone limits)

3 minutes ago, Argus said:

When no one ever gave a thought to the idea that male rapists should be sent to womens prisons.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6169813/Rapist-Karen-Whites-ex-girlfriend-says-gender-change-sham.html

 

Obviously a horrifying situation, for which the Prison Service has apologized and vowed to correct:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-45825838

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Attacked ?  You just called it 'the insanity movement'.  Pot/kettle.

Yes. I'm on the other side of fanatics. I'm allowed to express my opinion regarding their insanity without being obsequious and polite.

I recall you once sounding very much as i you wanted to get yourself a club and helmet and go and attack neonazis. Should you not have been more respectful towards them?

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Meh.  Things change, I guess.  You can't really use a lot of words without retribution anymore.

Lack of interest in violent repression of freedom of speech noted.

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

This is being worked out:

Your cites only have people discussing what to do about it. There is no suggestion they have any authority or that it IS, in fact, being worked out.

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Obviously a horrifying situation, for which the Prison Service has apologized and vowed to correct:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-45825838

But haven't said how, especially given the growing movement to put protection of people's preference for what gender they are under the protection of law, and to punish those who fail to respect their 'belief' in their gender.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Argus said:

1. Yes. I'm on the other side of fanatics. I'm allowed to express my opinion regarding their insanity without being obsequious and polite.

2. I recall you once sounding very much as i you wanted to get yourself a club and helmet and go and attack neonazis. Should you not have been more respectful towards them?

3. Lack of interest in violent repression of freedom of speech noted.

4. Your cites only have people discussing what to do about it. There is no suggestion they have any authority or that it IS, in fact, being worked out.

5. But haven't said how, especially given the growing movement to put protection of people's preference for what gender they are under the protection of law, and to punish those who fail to respect their 'belief' in their gender.

1. So then why are you implying it is wrong to 'attack' people on the other side when you start out doing that exact thing ?  It's like you're saying "The gall of these people I"m ridiculing to attack me !"

2. You remember me sounding like that ?  Ok.  Did I say "These people I want to beat up - believe it or not they would beat me up !"

3. 'Attack' isn't necessary a violent thing.  You are 'attacking' them.

4. ?  The IOC has no authority ?  

5. You are hysterical.  They haven't said "how" but it's still early days.  Why don't you just relax ?  You are running out of outrage fuel or something.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. So then why are you implying it is wrong to 'attack' people on the other side when you start out doing that exact thing ?  It's like you're saying "The gall of these people I"m ridiculing to attack me !"

You seem to be equating my rude language towards them with their actual physical efforts to harm people. I don't think you're that stupid, so why are you doing it?

Quote

2. You remember me sounding like that ?  Ok.  Did I say "These people I want to beat up - believe it or not they would beat me up !"

You expressed violent hostility towards them, a desire to commit violence. But no, you never expressed any fear of them. It wasn't a "they're coming for me' but more of a 'I'm going after them' tone and mentality.

Quote

3. 'Attack' isn't necessary a violent thing.  You are 'attacking' them.

Bullshit

Quote

4. ?  The IOC has no authority ?  

A corrupt organization of minimal influence or relevance.

Quote

5. You are hysterical.  They haven't said "how" but it's still early days.  Why don't you just relax ?  You are running out of outrage fuel or something.

Your pretense that you are the unemotional and neutral party attempting to moderate others emotional responses is tiresome and dishonest. You appear deeply invested in the furtherance of transrights, and so disparage and brush away all objectives as unimportant or emotionally overwrought. Your attitude, to me says "Look, I could not possibly care less if others lose rights or are harmed in whatever way as long as trans-rights are furthered as far as they want them to go." 

Edited by Argus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Argus said:

1. You seem to be equating my rude language towards them with their actual physical efforts to harm people. I don't think you're that stupid, so why are you doing it?

2. A corrupt organization of minimal influence or relevance.

3. Your pretense that you are the unemotional and neutral party attempting to moderate others emotional responses is tiresome and dishonest. You appear deeply invested in the furtherance of transrights, and so disparage and brush away all objectives as unimportant or emotionally overwrought. Your attitude, to me says "Look, I could not possibly care less if others lose rights or are harmed in whatever way as long as trans-rights are furthered as far as they want them to go." 

1. Well, if you meant actually attacking then I think it's a tough onus on you to provide proof that a rights movement will coordinate violence against you.  Of course, I know what you're doing.  One nut who professes a point of view will, in your view, represent that group.  But if I single out a maniac with anti-immigrant views who is violent, do they stand with you then ?  Or what ?  Maybe we can start with evidence of these attacks.

2. The IOC has minimal influence ?  Including on the Olympics ?  You really bend backwards quite a lot when trying to prove a point.  

3. I'm sorry but I am deeply invested in the liberal notion of dialogue.  Your overreactions are numerous and notable.  Yes, I don't care if others lose some rights if it's part of an open dialogue but I care more about the dialogue.  You arrive with evidence that the world is ending, daily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Well, if you meant actually attacking then I think it's a tough onus on you to provide proof that a rights movement will coordinate violence against you.  Of course, I know what you're doing.  One nut who professes a point of view will, in your view, represent that group.  But if I single out a maniac with anti-immigrant views who is violent, do they stand with you then ?  Or what ?  Maybe we can start with evidence of these attacks.

2. The IOC has minimal influence ?  Including on the Olympics ?  You really bend backwards quite a lot when trying to prove a point.  

3. I'm sorry but I am deeply invested in the liberal notion of dialogue.  Your overreactions are numerous and notable.  Yes, I don't care if others lose some rights if it's part of an open dialogue but I care more about the dialogue.  You arrive with evidence that the world is ending, daily.

The IOC has nothing to do, and no jurisdiction in high school and college sports that are being perverted by the trans(anti-science) movement.  It also has nothing to do, and no jurisdiction in the ridiculous bathroom policies, and  change room polices being inacted across North America.

I concur with this particular sentiment.

 

60C599C8-C50C-4724-9847-4836D13CEA35.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Truth Detector said:

1. The IOC has nothing to do, and no jurisdiction in high school and college sports...

2. It also has nothing to do, and no jurisdiction in the ridiculous bathroom policies, and  change room polices being inacted across North America.

1. Of course not, but they are tremendously influential.  And this question will have to be discussed soon, so their opinion will matter.

2. Your opinion only.  Enough people are pushing back against people like you to reverse laws as in North Carolina.  You would rather have a biological woman with huge biceps and a beard in the bathroom with your wife and daughter.  Weird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Truth Detector said:

The IOC has nothing to do, and no jurisdiction in high school and college sports that are being perverted by the trans(anti-science) movement.  It also has nothing to do, and no jurisdiction in the ridiculous bathroom policies, and  change room polices being inacted across North America.

I concur with this particular sentiment.

 

60C599C8-C50C-4724-9847-4836D13CEA35.jpeg

The answer seems obvious to me.  Replace all reference to males/females, men/women, ladies/gents, etc, with penis/vagina.  Problem solved.

Or do like Starbucks does and have individual bathrooms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

1. The answer seems obvious to me.  Replace all reference to males/females, men/women, ladies/gents, etc, with penis/vagina.  Problem solved.

2. Or do like Starbucks does and have individual bathrooms.

1. Your answer may be obvious to you but it's pretty obviously unacceptable.

2. There you go- accommodating people !  Attaboy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

Or do like Starbucks does and have individual bathrooms.

Individual bathrooms are great when possible. They are clearly much nicer from a user perspective regardless of any debate about transgender issues. But they take up a lot more square footage per person (especially since they also have to meet accessibility requirements), which is a problem for establishments that have to serve large numbers of people. Space is at a premium for a lot of businesses, as well as schools, event venues, airports, etc. These kinds of places will likely have to keep some kind of categorization for their bathrooms rather than offering all individual bathrooms. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Your answer may be obvious to you but it's pretty obviously unacceptable.

Overly sensitive if you ask me.  Nothing wrong with Ps and Vs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Overly sensitive if you ask me.  Nothing wrong with Ps and Vs.

It's not my personal belief.  If the world came up with this suggestion I could live with it.  But it's not going to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's not my personal belief.  If the world came up with this suggestion I could live with it.  But it's not going to.

Inneys and outeys?

It doesn't just have to be about belly buttons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

i removed by penis and firmly secured it to my forehead.

Outey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bonam said:

Individual bathrooms are great when possible. They are clearly much nicer from a user perspective regardless of any debate about transgender issues. But they take up a lot more square footage per person (especially since they also have to meet accessibility requirements), which is a problem for establishments that have to serve large numbers of people.

 

Indeed...at the former Metrodome stadium in Minneapolis, the men's/male/people with testicles' rest room was merely a long open wall trough with flushing water always running.  It could service dozens of customers at one time because there were no doors or privacy barriers. There was only one commode stall for going #2.

Transgender males would love this....

 

100_4872.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Well, if you meant actually attacking then I think it's a tough onus on you to provide proof that a rights movement will coordinate violence against you. 

Megan Murphy provided a number of examples. And I did not mean just physical attacks, but attacks on your reputation, on your job, on your career. She lists a number of examples, none of which involve a single individual, coordinating efforts to harm people because they don't believe grown men should be in changing rooms with little girls. She herself was removed from social media platforms simply for insisting that a man is not a woman nor vice versa.

https://quillette.com/2018/11/28/twitters-trans-activist-decree/

In many progressive corners of academic and online life, it now is taken as cant that anyone who rejects transgender ideology—which is based on the theory that a mystical “gender identity” exists within us, akin to a soul—may be targeted with the most juvenile and vicious attacks.

...

While it might comfort some to view these threats as performative or theoretical, that isn’t always the case. On May 29, a lesbian named Taelor Furry was beat up outside the Grey Fox Pub, a gay bar in St. Louis, Mo. Her attackers were queer-identified women who had accused Furry of being a “TERF.”

In April, a trans-identified biological male who goes by the name “Tara Wolf” was convicted of assault after beating 60-year-old Maria MacLauchlan, who had gathered with other women at Speaker’s Corner in London’s Hyde Park to discuss mooted gender-identity legislation. Prior to the gathering, this champion of progressive ideals had posted on Facebook, asking where the event would be taking place, as the assailant wanted to “fuck some TERFs up.”

At this year’s Pride March in Montreal, biological males who identify as women led the parade, carrying a banner reading, “Transwomen first/Never again last.” One participant carried a sign with the words, “Begone TERF,” as if he were summoning his mystical powers to cast a hex on we TERFy witches. At Dyke Marches, lesbians who express reservations about making themselves sexually available to suitors who just happen to have penises are now commonly screamed at.

In San Francisco, which one might assume to be a hot spot for lesbian pride, a group of women carrying signs that read, “Proud to be lesbian,” “Lesbian Visibility,” and “Lesbian not queer” were harassed and bullied. Feminist historian Max Dashu, who was in attendance, said she and the other “old lesbians” were surrounded by “young queers” who pushed them and chanted “TERFs, go home.” On Facebook, she wrote: “I’ve been to many marches, including dangerous ones, but this was the most vicious episode I have ever experienced, ever in my life.”

Kreut also was part of a small group that signed an open letter smearing local anti-poverty activist Yuly Chan, demanding she be removed from a panel discussing urban renewal at the Vancouver Crossroads conference. Chan had been invited by conference organizers to speak on behalf of her group, the Chinatown Action Group, which organizes to improve the lives of low-income Chinatown residents, many of whom are seniors. As evidence of Chan’s heretical views, Kreut and others complained that Chan was a supporter of Vancouver Rape Relief (VRR), and that she had indicated opposition to the sex trade. Chan was removed from the panel as a result of these complaints.

Yes, you are reading this correctly: A Vancouver civic leader was removed from a panel about urban renewal because she opposes prostitution and supports the provision of support services for rape victims. This is what the progressive face of the gender-identity cult looks like in 2018.

22 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

3. I'm sorry but I am deeply invested in the liberal notion of dialogue.  Your overreactions are numerous and notable.  Yes, I don't care if others lose some rights if it's part of an open dialogue but I care more about the dialogue.  You arrive with evidence that the world is ending, daily.

It seems to me that you do not care if women are harmed or lose rights as long as these people get what they want because they're more 'marginalized' than women. And you will neither acknowledge that harm nor even investigate stories of it. I posted the snippets above, for example, because I know you won't bother to read the cite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Argus said:

1. And I did not mean just physical attacks, but attacks on your reputation, on your job, on your career.

2. She lists a number of examples, none of which involve a single individual, coordinating efforts... a lesbian named Taelor Furry was beat up outside the Grey Fox Pub, a gay bar in St. Louis, Mo. Her attackers were queer-identified women who had accused Furry of being a “TERF.”

3. Kreut also was part of a small group that signed an open letter smearing local anti-poverty activist Yuly Chan, demanding she be removed from a panel discussing urban renewal at the Vancouver Crossroads conference. Chan had been invited by conference organizers to speak on behalf of her group, the Chinatown Action Group, which organizes to improve the lives of low-income Chinatown residents, many of whom are seniors. As evidence of Chan’s heretical views, Kreut and others complained that Chan was a supporter of Vancouver Rape Relief (VRR), and that she had indicated opposition to the sex trade. Chan was removed from the panel as a result of these complaints.

4. It seems to me that you do not care if women are harmed or lose rights as long as these people get what they want because they're more 'marginalized' than women. And you will neither acknowledge that harm nor even investigate stories of it.

5. I posted the snippets above, for example, because I know you won't bother to read the cite.

1. Ok but you DIDN'T include verbal attacks, which is how you started this thread ?  Convient..

2. Do these unhinged individuals and groups de-legitimize the trans rights movement ?  If you say they do, then you are drawing a connect between individual violence and groups they purport to be part of that would be used in parallel cases to de-legitimize other groups including anti-immigration, and others.

3. I read the Yuly Chan letter.  Here's the 'smear' quote I found:  "Instead, they used “hearsay,” selective, out-of-context tweets and past activities from a basic internet search of Yuly".  Hmmm... I wonder if they called her part of an 'insanity" movement.  "Hey pot, it's ME kettle !"

4. I have explained to you before that I believe in dialogue.  "Losing" rights is a red herring.  This is about balancing rights, in dialogue, to make a cohesive community.  Investigating "stories" is how you make up your mind on issues; I look at the bigger picture.   An assault in St. Louis is no laughing matter, but it's ridiculous to reconsider trans rights over such an event.

5. I read it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So a man who has trans'd into a 'woman' is a problem in sports. If that 'woman' was a large football player, that 'woman' will beat every single woman out there. A woman transitioning to a man cannot even fathom entering into mens sports, even the strongest woman will only beat 80% of the men, while a trans'd man to woman can beat ALL the women in that sport.

If people want to accept the transgenders into sports (a woman in a mans sport) then they will accept the winnings of those people without protest.  That would change as soon as some deaths are involved or at the least severe injuries resulting in being partially or completely disabled.

Biology does not seem to matter anymore to some of them. Which goes against the complete evolutionary chain of the human species over the past hundred, thousand, and millions of years.

For the overwhelming majority of the human race, we are binary. Male and Female. Sure there are anomolies, but again for the overwhelming majority of humans, we are binary. Without being binary we are no longer human and have gone into an era post-humanism perpetuated by social justice ideologies that goes against science.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the women who use men's bathrooms. Both as a student living in residence and as a caretaker working in the men's residence, I've shared a mens room with women. It doesn't seem to be a big deal. Also, you make no reference to female to male transgender people using men's washrooms. Isn't that a big deal. I challenge those of you who worry about trans people using the women's washroom, put on a dress and wig, )oh hell, go all out and put on make up,) go to a bar and use the men's washroom. You probably won't get attacked, but you may feel a tad vunerable.I'll bet more trans people have been attacked by men on the street than women attacked in women's washrooms by trans people, by an order in the 1000's.

On 12/5/2018 at 3:54 PM, GostHacked said:

Without being binary we are no longer human and have gone into an era post-humanism perpetuated by social justice ideologies that goes against science.

Science examines what is. Gender dysphoria is as old as humans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

What about the women who use men's bathrooms. Both as a student living in residence and as a caretaker working in the men's residence, I've shared a mens room with women. It doesn't seem to be a big deal. Also, you make no reference to female to male transgender people using men's washrooms. Isn't that a big deal. I challenge those of you who worry about trans people using the women's washroom, put on a dress and wig, )oh hell, go all out and put on make up,) go to a bar and use the men's washroom. You probably won't get attacked, but you may feel a tad vunerable.I'll bet more trans people have been attacked by men on the street than women attacked in women's washrooms by trans people, by an order in the 1000's.

Science examines what is. Gender dysphoria is as old as humans. 

I could be wrong about this, but I think the issue is with self identification and the potential for abuse.  That's why I advocate for P's and V's, or separate washrooms.

I do believe that women who have inneys ought to be able to have an outey free space without being beaten for requesting such. 

I agree with your last point that science ought to be involved.

Edited by bcsapper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I could be wrong about this, but I think the issue is with self identification and the potential for abuse.  That's why I advocate for P's and V's, or separate washrooms.

I do believe that women who have inneys ought to be able to have an outey free space without being beaten for requesting such. 

I agree with your last point that science ought to be involved.

Would you be comfortable walking into a mens room wearing a dress?

In my experience, women don't mind using mens rooms. I've been cleaning a toilet in one stall while a woman was using the adjoining stall. I've shared a mens room several times with women. Men don't need to wear a dress to attack women. We had a voyeuer many years ago. He would hide in a stall in a womens washroom and peer over the partition. The last time he did it. he peered down at my Sargeant who arrested him. 

You missed my point about science. Why should science be involved? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

What about the women who use men's bathrooms. Both as a student living in residence and as a caretaker working in the men's residence, I've shared a mens room with women. It doesn't seem to be a big deal. Also, you make no reference to female to male transgender people using men's washrooms. Isn't that a big deal. I challenge those of you who worry about trans people using the women's washroom, put on a dress and wig, )oh hell, go all out and put on make up,) go to a bar and use the men's washroom. You probably won't get attacked, but you may feel a tad vunerable.I'll bet more trans people have been attacked by men on the street than women attacked in women's washrooms by trans people, by an order in the 1000's.

Science examines what is. Gender dysphoria is as old as humans. 

Gender dysphoria exists yes. But what is the percentage of the human race falls into that classification? And why do we see such a huge rise in this , specifically among people under 30? Is this all something new with the rate of increase of these types? Are people really this way or is it the 'soup du jour' , the new fad to be trans, gay, non-binary, gender-fluid. To feel special and different and because of that claim some kind of oppression which is mostly all in their heads. I've seen a lot of hostility FROM transgender people online to those who are simply stating that there are two genders. There are plenty of clips on youtube and such that show that.

I also see depression and anxiety from these types of people because they are fighting with themselves to sort it out on what they really are. I think that's a bigger battle than what society at large is perceived to be oppressing them. I cannot stress enough the impact social media has had that helps perpetuate this new phenomenon. It's a built in feedback loop that means as long as you keep feeding the social media (like facebook) it will keep feeding you back the same thing. It's the same type of algorithms that are used to give you your recommended videos on Youtube, or NetFlix ect ect ect. 

I am of a time before the Internet, cell phones, microwaves, CD players. We have a generation growing up with this tech are hyper connected and the stuff that once stayed at school or the playground now follows them into their homes and the sanctuary of their own rooms. That invasion happens through their constantly connected smartphone. And I am not sure how parents would even deal with those issues aside from banning the tech. A generation that cannot put down the cell phone because now it is ingrained and completely integrated into their lives. Take a cell phone away from these people and you will see some very interesting behaviour.

Personally I have no issues with trans, gay people and the like. As long as they believe it to their core that they are that way, but they need to figure their own selves out first before they can ask society to accept them as what they say they are.  As for your speculation on trans people getting attacked more is nothing but speculation until you get some solid statistics. So yes, gender dysphoria exists. I also think we are really seeing societal dysphoria heavily conditioned by social media. 

Can science explain 'gender-fluid' or 'non-binary'?  I don't even know how you would even scientifically approach that notion.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Would you be comfortable walking into a mens room wearing a dress?

In my experience, women don't mind using mens rooms. I've been cleaning a toilet in one stall while a woman was using the adjoining stall. I've shared a mens room several times with women. Men don't need to wear a dress to attack women. We had a voyeuer many years ago. He would hide in a stall in a womens washroom and peer over the partition. The last time he did it. he peered down at my Sargeant who arrested him. 

You missed my point about science. Why should science be involved? 

 

What kind of dress?  Could I be Katharine Hepburn? 

If I needed to I would use a woman's washroom, dress or no dress.

I don't think people, especially children or their parents, are sufficiently qualified to know when gender is actually fluid/changing.  I think a medical professional's opinion should be required before anything is chopped off/sewn on.

 

Edited by bcsapper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×