Is that meant to mean something, cisgendered person?

The difference between then and now is that a bunch of people like yourself got easily radicalised.

He's cis, you're cis. As neither of you are trans, you literally both have as much in common with transpeople as the other does.

LGBT people aren't a monolith, and being one of the first three letters doesn't mean you have an understanding of the fourth.


(I'm deign to use the word "cis", but the original version was way too clunky:joker: )

Edit: the first non-ironic use of the word "mansplain" in god knows how long completely passed me by :laugh: :joker: said by one man to another :crazy:

Stuff like that makes me think you have to be trolling.

You calling me 'radicalised' is the funniest thing ever. Do you ever listen to yourself :joker: . Yeah the reason things have changed in the past 10 years is because of me .....you've got me there :joker: .

You give zero toffee about that labour MP yelling in an environment where he's meant to be professional, as women I guess we should shut up and be quiet , how dare we air our concerns??? :hee:. How very 'progressive ' of you .

It seems to be always male bullies shouting the odds funny that

its a hatred of women when you boil it down

In that vid she knows exactly what she's doing by linking trans people with paedophiles. There's a reason that "groomer" is now being thrown around like confetti at a wedding. Politics is a combat sport, and although I neither agree with it, or nor would I act that way, I think you have to realise this is a debate in parliament, and that's just how it goes down sometimes.

This is not a reply to goldheart, who I understand we're not allowed to address anymore. It's a general comment.

when some mp dared to say to Wee Kranky that a "trans rapist" was around the corner she attacked them and called them a bigot

it was around the corner

now she is unemployed

tom, take note m8te

Sorry dude, but I genuinely don't understand what any of this means.

I found it quite clear

Who told you not to address GH? the same person who said I was discussing you elsewhere : :crazy:

Cherie, we both agreed to give each other a wide berth, so not sure why you feel the need to interject.

I can change my mind...a woman’s perogative I believe :smug:

I am genuinely interested in who told you this ?

i genuinely dont care

Oh deary me lol

#genuine

Then #genuinely don't reply to me

#easypeasylemonsqueezy

i have you on ignore so why you are replying to me is thge biggest cis-mystery

Not sure your ignore is working properly in that case.

Well, you aren't part of the community, you've said as much yourself in the past so why are you trying to make out that your disconnect is somehow universal? You decided to be a right wing pet and now you don't really know anything about the community, you just assume that your experiences are universal when they are not.


Make me laugh, tell me how I'm radicalised, this should be good.

One day, Cherie, you'll learn what 'ignore' means because you made a big song and dance about putting me on ignore yet I'm still the main topic of conversation you engage in. Your love for me will always be unreciprocated.

You don't know anything about being trans, the "community" is a bit arbitrary, all said and done. I know what it's like to be same-sex attracted, but I don't know what it's like to be a lesbian, and wouldn't presume to speak for them.

In the same vein, ToyBoy can speak about trans people just as much as you can. What's more, his "mansplaining" (:crazy:) actually spoke about trans experiences and happenings, while your posts were just your usual ranting insanity.

Being part of the same abbreviation doesn't give you an ounce of insight over those who aren't. Clearly.



Make me laugh, tell me how I'm a right wing pet, this should be good.

more solid points well made and well backed up Tom :joker:. Not at all irrational flailing ad hominem. I don't associate with people who roll their eyes and laugh in people's faces "in real life". Not really worth giving people with that attitude the time of day, is it?

It's called a debate/discussion but we've known for years that all you're interested in is a firebrand soap box, so this is as unsurprising as ever.

I will point out again (not to be all "my cousin's sister is black") but my daughter is gay and I have several gay friends, and multiple gay (and actually a couple of NB) colleagues and we talk about these issues all the time - respectfully, and professionally - two concepts which I think are probably beyond the reach of your righteous fury Tom. But no I'm not going to "record it for the internet" :joker:.

Not every LGBT person is as caught up in terminally online culture wars, and really quite as irredeemably frustrated and bitter about all of it as you are Tom. most people I know - gay and straight - outgrew this sort of rigid thinking in their early 30's ... but I suppose it's more difficult if you're still just kicking around the internet with 25 year olds. Perhaps step away from the keyboard every now and again and you might find yourself encountering some diverse LGBT views, from real LGBT people.

Then maybe you'll stop feeling like you have the authority to speak FOR the entire LGBT community? You have the gaul to talk of arrogance whilst declaring yourself a spokesperson for millions of free-thinking people with absolutely no credibility whatsoever to do that.

This is what's strange to me , it's as if the opinions of other LGBT people aren't valid if they don't align with his views . Seems a bit narrow-minded if you ask me .

When I give examples of other LGBT saying things he doesn't agree with, they basically 'Dont count' .