Can a woman have a penis?

It's easy to lose track of threads I agree VS but none of the questions asked by Mollygo or by me yesterday were rude, and didn't contain any misrepresentations and untrue assertions about you.

Smileless2012

It's easy to lose track of threads I agree VS but none of the questions asked by Mollygo or by me yesterday were rude, and didn't contain any misrepresentations and untrue assertions about you.

We just don't get on though do we?

DiamondLily

Glorianny

Have you ever considered that some of us have lives and are not as obsessed with this subject as many of you are? So answering questions isn't a priority. Especially as most of you will ignore the answers and continue with your preconceptions anyway.

Most of us do have lives, but wish to retain our previously held rights - the two are not mutually exclusive.

And, if you are not interested in the subject, which is fair enough, why do you post on the threads?🤔

The usual thing is not to bother with subjects of no interest.

There is a difference between an interest and an obsession.
These threads become obsessive. Like the pages about lesbian /trans relations.
Made me think of this limerick

Once a young gay from Khartoum
Took a lesbian up to his room.
They argued all night
Over who had the right
To do what, and with which, and to whom.

But what I was referring too originally was a statistic I read saying that 90% of trans prisoners did not ask to go to women's prisons
VS, what you said (my italics) was that 90% of transwomen don't ask to go to women's prisons. That is rather different.

But anyway. If what you are now saying is correct, and 90% of trans prisoners get along just fine in the correct prisons (given that they are there as a punishment) why should the other 10% be special? The implication has been that male prisons are not suitable for transwomen, and that sending them there would result in mass suicide (or threats thereof, which is a very different matter). It now seems that this applies to only 10% of transwomen criminals. Are all of these people sex offenders, as it does seem that a very high proportion of trans rapists decide that the female system is a better fit for them.

They are interesting statistics, BeverleyJB. It is much easier to get the full picture when you know actual numbers and who published them, isn't it?

As far as I'm aware, VS, you haven't shared anything that's a lie and I didn't suggest that you had. I merely said that a person could share a lie if they didn't know it was a lie and that to back-check would be a good idea if someone asked for the source.

Baggs

As far as I'm aware, VS, you haven't shared anything that's a lie and I didn't suggest that you had. I merely said that a person could share a lie if they didn't know it was a lie and that to back-check would be a good idea if someone asked for the source.

I know you didn't, sorry you got that impression

Maybe the solution is:

That we don't direct or indirect quote each other and just give our differing thoughts on things

No one will feel attacked, misunderstood, derided or laughed at

Discussion stays pleasant and doesn't get personal

I try to do that but get too involved at times. I'll ensure I only do that in future

There is a difference between an interest and an obsession.

There certainly is.

But on a topic that garners a lot of interest and comments from those who are invested in the issue - either way - who decides, and at what point, that the posts / posters are obsessing?

FWIW, I think it's quite normal to dip in and out frequently on a subject that interests you. And people do like to debate their point, I think we all do. That though in itself doesn't denote an obsession.

And when I'm presented with a blanket statement - on any subject - I find it difficult to form an opinion if I don't know the facts - facts do matter.

... though I'm not one of the posters who've been asking VS to verify her source.

The trouble is that when we believe something in a general sense (eg that TWAW, or that self-id poses risks to women and girls) then it seems obvious to us that 'most people' do this or that, as it chimes with our world view.

But just saying that '90% of X do Y' is not going to convince someone who takes the other view, as it will not chime with their own take on the matter. People can get stats from all over the place, and some are more reliable than others. If Stonewall put out a statement it is going to be biased towards their pro-trans perspective, whereas government statistics are far more likely to be objective. In this area in particular, interpretation is difficult, as there are only some figures in play - those about people who tick a box at a given time to say that they 'identify' into the opposite sex. There are no stats about how many people see themselves as trans, or whether those who do 'live as' a member of the opposite sex, whatever that involves.

There is no register of transpeople, so notions such as what percentage of transpeople do something are never going to be accurate. We might know that 100 transpeople have behaved in a certain way, but as we don't know how many there are, we can't know what percentage that 100 represents. Any post that quotes figures claiming that a percentage of transpeople do X Y or Z is going to be suspect for that reason alone. The poster may be quoting directly from a source, but the source simply can't be a reliable one.

It is not nitpicking to ask where generalisations come from. We all make assumptions based on our own prejudices and experiences, but it is reasonable that they are challenged when presented as facts. If I said that 90% of transpeople wore blue hats, I would be asked how I knew, and my sources would be called into question, wouldn't they? Sweeping statements about whether 90% of transwomen or transwomen prisoners do things are equally open to question.

No one will feel attacked, misunderstood, derided or laughed at.

Does that include passive aggressive LOLs too?

It's not what you say, it's how you say it that matters

BeverleyJB at 14.49 today, I've thought the same myself.

and why you say it.

VioletSky

Maybe the solution is:

That we don't direct or indirect quote each other and just give our differing thoughts on things

No one will feel attacked, misunderstood, derided or laughed at

Discussion stays pleasant and doesn't get personal

I try to do that but get too involved at times. I'll ensure I only do that in future

Not quoting one another means that unless a post directly follows the one being replied to, the conversation gets confusing.

Quoting someone is not being personal. It is simply showing which comments are being referenced. LOLing at someone's post is being personal, however. It is rude and dismissive, whether you agree with their POV or not.

It's not what you say, it's how you say it that matters??? That's precisely what everyone is trying to tell you. Just posting little LOLs as a response to a post, instead of explaining WHY you might disagree with someone, is childish, passive aggressive and is possibly the reason you keep being misunderstood all the time.

VioletSky

Baggs

As far as I'm aware, VS, you haven't shared anything that's a lie and I didn't suggest that you had. I merely said that a person could share a lie if they didn't know it was a lie and that to back-check would be a good idea if someone asked for the source.

I know you didn't, sorry you got that impression

Hehe! I'm sorry I got that impression too. Oops 😂

I've apologized for laughing

Glorianny

DiamondLily

Glorianny

Have you ever considered that some of us have lives and are not as obsessed with this subject as many of you are? So answering questions isn't a priority. Especially as most of you will ignore the answers and continue with your preconceptions anyway.

Most of us do have lives, but wish to retain our previously held rights - the two are not mutually exclusive.

And, if you are not interested in the subject, which is fair enough, why do you post on the threads?🤔

The usual thing is not to bother with subjects of no interest.

There is a difference between an interest and an obsession.
These threads become obsessive. Like the pages about lesbian /trans relations.
Made me think of this limerick

Once a young gay from Khartoum
Took a lesbian up to his room.
They argued all night
Over who had the right
To do what, and with which, and to whom.

Sorry, might be my brain scrambled thoughts at the moment, but I don't get the connection.

I'm talking about the UK and our rights - what other countries do is down to them. Obviously.

Although, knowing the little I do know about Khartoum, I don't think they'd be arguing the niceties of situation on social media...🙄

I suppose we could do the little green eyed man of Katmandu next, or the Tale of the Ancient Mariner, but I don't think it would add much to the debate...🙄

DiamondLily

Glorianny

DiamondLily

Glorianny

Have you ever considered that some of us have lives and are not as obsessed with this subject as many of you are? So answering questions isn't a priority. Especially as most of you will ignore the answers and continue with your preconceptions anyway.

Most of us do have lives, but wish to retain our previously held rights - the two are not mutually exclusive.

And, if you are not interested in the subject, which is fair enough, why do you post on the threads?🤔

The usual thing is not to bother with subjects of no interest.

There is a difference between an interest and an obsession.
These threads become obsessive. Like the pages about lesbian /trans relations.
Made me think of this limerick

Once a young gay from Khartoum
Took a lesbian up to his room.
They argued all night
Over who had the right
To do what, and with which, and to whom.

Sorry, might be my brain scrambled thoughts at the moment, but I don't get the connection.

I'm talking about the UK and our rights - what other countries do is down to them. Obviously.

Although, knowing the little I do know about Khartoum, I don't think they'd be arguing the niceties of situation on social media...🙄

I suppose we could do the little green eyed man of Katmandu next, or the Tale of the Ancient Mariner, but I don't think it would add much to the debate...🙄

Nothing to do withKhartoum really, much more about the discussions on this thread. But if you don't get it, you don't get it. Doesn't mean it isn't funny!

Well looks like I'm the only one willing to change anything to make these threads more accessible

Btw I don't laugh at peoples point of view

I laugh when it gets rude and demanding

It was VS who brought dildos into the discussion, as though the fact that someone might enjoy sex with one should be happy with a penis - ironically the very line spun by the trans woman who frightened my friend 🙄. Hilarious.

Everyone else was saying that it was up to the individual whether they consented to sex or not, and if so whether they preferred to do it with a man or a woman - not someone who 'felt' he was a woman but had a man's body.

I've apologized for laughing

Now you see this is like what BeverleyJB was trying to say at 14.49 today. You did NOT apologise at all. What you actually said was "Am I the only one not allowed to laugh or make jokes?" No apology, no contributory information, just another passive aggressive dig.

Words matter VS.

VioletSky

I've actually tried again and again to have respectful conversation on these threads

Yes I have lost respect for many people because of things like:

1. Personal comments

2. Telling me what I think or mean

3. Picking a small section of my comments to answer that takes it out of context

4. Not representing my comments with their actual meaning and refusing to allow clarifications

5. That I genuinely see a lot of discrimination against trans people as a whole that others do not view as such

6. Animosities being taken across threads and even into other topics

And it's correct that while I don't do those things... I have a defence mechanism in humour when people treat me that way that I obviously need to work on

So I apologise for laughing

Yes I did apologies for laughing

Doodledog

It was VS who brought dildos into the discussion, as though the fact that someone might enjoy sex with one should be happy with a penis - ironically the very line spun by the trans woman who frightened my friend 🙄. Hilarious.

Everyone else was saying that it was up to the individual whether they consented to sex or not, and if so whether they preferred to do it with a man or a woman - not someone who 'felt' he was a woman but had a man's body.

Actually no I didn't

I brought them in to illustrate that a trans women having a penis may be acceptable to her partner and the trans person being able to enjoy sex and feel in some way comfortable with her body

There is absolutely no way I would ever think or say what you believe I meant

Ok this is an obvious need for the quote function