[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

My mindset on it changed through robust conversation and having my ideas challenged and my lack of understanding put under a spotlight, Ammi... as anything does... they didn't change via people pussy-footing around the issue or by people avoiding challenging things I had to say about it with a shrug and an "each to their own" because of some misplaced fear of "hurting someone's feelings" or "avoiding discomfort". If I point out something wrong that I think I see in someone's argument and that person thinks I've gotten it totally wrong then there's no need for them to feel hurt or uncomfortable. If I say something that makes someone feel hurt or uncomfortable then they should have a think about why.

I understand that you don't like conflict but frankly it's not really your place to shut it down when it's actually still within the realms of completely acceptable debate; no one is being personally attacked here, ideas are being challenged.

...I’m not shutting anything down or anyone down by suggesting that you at least of anyone, would have some understanding of both sides because your stance has been firmly fixed and stated on both sides...I explained that really clearly that it’s hard for me to fathom what is appearing as a complete lack of tolerance or understanding the view you’re now so vehemently opposed to the point that you’re using language like gobsmacked and naive etc...(...those exact descriptives might be incorrect but it’s a similar vein...)...I also commended a change in view when something has caused a view to be reconsidered, that’s why discussions.../...absorbing others is so important....and liking or disliking conflict has no bearing whatsoever, I don’t ‘pussy foot’ around either, hence when I’ve felt I’ve wanted to comment in the thread and how I have commented...

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...I’m not shutting anything down or anyone down by suggesting that you at least of anyone, would have some understanding of both sides because your stance has been firmly fixed and stated on both sides...I explained that really clearly that it’s hard for me to fathom what is appearing as a complete lack of tolerance or understanding the view you’re now so vehemently opposed to the point that you’re using language like gobsmacked and naive etc...(...those exact descriptives might be incorrect but it’s a similar vein...)...I also commended a change in view when something has caused a view to be reconsidered, that’s why discussions.../...absorbing others is so important....and liking or disliking conflict has no bearing whatsoever, I don’t ‘pussy foot’ around either, hence when I’ve felt I’ve wanted to comment in the thread and how I have commented...

I just don't really know what your point is Ammi. That having an insight into both sides of the argument should mean that I temper my opinions now, or pretend not to see the flaws in thinking that I think is flawed? I understand why people might not see the conflict between trans rights and womens rights because I once thought similar... because I hadn't seen enough of the effect it's having, the rhetoric around it, the verbal personal attacks on women with concerns... I was naive to it. Maybe you're taking that as being a personal insult? It's OK to say you think someone is being naive in a debate Ammi... surely especially if you can see that you were similarly naive in the past.

We agree that discussions and absorbing the opinions of others is important, which is why I find it odd that you're suggesting I should temper my current opinions, or offer a "both sides argument" to incorporate a point of view that I now entirely disagree with . I'm also not lacking tolerance, nor refusing to take on board new opinions on this thread... I just haven't actually seen any opinion here that's new to me. If someone were to present an alternative way of looking at things, I am as always entirely open to giving that some thought.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I just don't really know what your point is Ammi. That having an insight into both sides of the argument should mean that I temper my opinions now, or pretend not to see the flaws in thinking that I think is flawed? I understand why people might not see the conflict between trans rights and womens rights because I once thought similar... because I hadn't seen enough of the effect it's having, the rhetoric around it, the verbal personal attacks on women with concerns... I was naive to it. Maybe you're taking that as being a personal insult? It's OK to say you think someone is being naive in a debate Ammi... surely especially if you can see that you were similarly naive in the past.

We agree that discussions and absorbing the opinions of others is important, which is why I find it odd that you're suggesting I should temper my current opinions, or offer a "both sides argument" to incorporate a point of view that I now entirely disagree with . I'm also not lacking tolerance, nor refusing to take on board new opinions on this thread... I just haven't actually seen any opinion here that's new to me. If someone were to present an alternative way of looking at things, I am as always entirely open to giving that some thought.

...’tempering your thoughts’...?...no, that’s not what I said, understanding differing thought processes because you’ve been in those different thought processes yourself is not ‘tempering’...but you’ve dismissed a thought process as if those thoughts were naive which is very patronising ...and without offering any input of..well, I once thought that but...

... Remy in giving his own valued experience in working in LGBT shelters is indeed offering something new to the topic and another aspect to be welcomed because it also balances and equates with the vulnerability of females/...not dismissing or lessening...the safety and safeguarding of born females and of transgender females (both)..two very vulnerable sections of society that need to be considered in these conversations of safe spaces...(..not TiBB conversations, but those that will make decisions about safeguarding with this...)...


....so far as the U.K. is concerned and something ‘new’ which I added yesterday...(...or at least I hadn’t been aware of it so I posted it..)...Self ID has been rejected by the government and is not something that will be applied in this country...obviously I don’t know with other and all countries and competitive sport will hopefully be something that’s addressed also in the up and coming...

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...’tempering your thoughts’...?...no, that’s not what I said, understanding differing thought processes because you’ve been in those different thought processes yourself is not ‘tempering’...but you’ve dismissed a thought process as if those thoughts were naive which is very patronising ...and without offering any input of..well, I once thought that but...

First and foremost Ammi... I know that that's how you would approach things and there's nothing wrong with that approach, but we're very different sorts of people (and that's OK too) so I'm not sure why you're so keen for me to debate in your debating style?

I disagree that saying it's naive to believe that there aren't points of collision between trans rights and women's rights is "patronising" - it is naive, because there clearly are. Again I understand that you think "naive" is a personal insult, but it's just a descriptor. I'm not saying "they are naive people", I'm saying it's a naive opinion... this is somewhat down to semantics and definitions I suppose. Naive can be used as a slur, but it's not a slur inherently.

... Remy in giving his own valued experience in working in LGBT shelters is indeed offering something new to the topic and another aspect to be welcomed because it also balances and equates with the vulnerability of females/...not dismissing or lessening...the safety and safeguarding of born females and of transgender females (both)..two very vulnerable sections of society that need to be considered in these conversations of safe spaces...(..not TiBB conversations, but those that will make decisions about safeguarding with this...)...

I found the posts on the first few pages of the thread to be flippant and dismissive of concerns and that's all I've brought up. Remy has done a decent enough job of speaking for himself so I'm not sure why you're getting so invested on his behalf... or at least, nothing to say about it that doesn't start going against "discuss the topic not the people posting" rules.

....so far as the U.K. is concerned and something ‘new’ which I added yesterday...(...or at least I hadn’t been aware of it so I posted it..)...Self ID has been rejected by the government and is not something that will be applied in this country...obviously I don’t know with other and all countries and competitive sport will hopefully be something that’s addressed also in the up and coming...

I'm aware of the situation in the UK but "this is the way it is right now" obviously doesn't mean an end to the discussion or the debate, or campaigning that might come on either side. I also genuinely don't come from either side; I am fully in support of protections for trans people, and any and all trans rights being freely given up to the point where giving those rights starts to conflict with the rights of others that would need to be changed to accomodate. I don't even throw a brick wall up at that point; I just strongly advocate for that being the point where things need a lot of thought, consideration and thorough examination before going further. It would be great if we could "relax and love it" and no one would be negatively affected but that's simply not the real world.

Anyway, slightly off on a tangent, my only real point here was that the UK's current position could change at any time, or with any change of government, so it's not a case of "so that's that now". People will continue to lobby so the discussion will stay active.

[Ammi]

....there was absolutely no suggestion ‘ so that’s that now’ in terms of any discussion ...Remy had added something new to the topic of his own personal experiences with LGBT/trans abuse victims and I had added that information that I stated, I hadn’t been aware of and want sure whether it was widely known...(...we have been diverted with a pandemic focus...)...so was potentially offering ‘something new’ as well, which you felt would be interesting to do because there hadn’t been anything new...how anyone receives any of those aspects or anything not previously discussed is entirely up to them, it can be held or dismissed or whatever but they were there and offered in good faith...


...anyways, ‘conversations and discussions etc’...are not just about speaking and listening, they’re about many things and one being ‘the right time’ and I don’t feel atm this is going anywhere other than in circles ...so (...for now...)...I’ll just skip right on by the rest of your post/words...and really, enjoy the rest of your Saturday...