Wolf359

Chatty Member
There's a curious venn diagram appearing on Twitter: many of the women speaking out against EJ could also be considered terfs (apologies, please consider this to be shorthand) and are referencing Joyce's support of unisex spaces in relation to this conviction. I'm not sure where I sit in the debate, but am generally pro trans rights, so this is just really interesting to me
What do you mean by ‘trans rights’? Trans people already have all the same human rights that everybody does under the Human Rights Act. And their gender identity is also a protected characteristic under the Equality Act.

The only rights that trans women don’t have are women’s rights. The trans lobby wants to appropriate women’s rights that are explicitly protected in the Equality Act. Trans people don’t need these rights because the rights that women have fought so hard for over decades (the right to single sex spaces, the right to refuse medical treatment by a man, the right to talk about their biology and anatomy in any context where it is relevant) are necessary because of the discrimination, oppression and abuse that women have endured for centuries. Abuse and oppression specific to the fact that they are born female in a male-dominated society. Abuse and oppression that women have never been able to identity out of, despite their supposedly enormous ‘cis privilege’.

The problem with men like Eric Joyce, and why his support of unisex spaces is relevant to the ‘trans rights’ discussion is because Eric Joyce, like lots and lots of other men, is a violent sex offender. The trans lobby wants to remove the current threshold for legal gender transition. At the moment the gender reassignment act requires a trans person to live as their preferred ‘gender’ for two years, and to have had gender reassignment surgery in order to be legally recognised as their preferred gender.

(For the moment, let’s leave to one side the question of what ‘gender’ even is, versus biological sex. Gender is essentially a bunch of sexist tropes and sterotypes defined by a patriarchal society and imposed on the different sexes. I do not identify as female. I am female because of my anatomy, but I never wear dresses or high heels. I rarely wear makeup. I do a ‘masculine’ job. If you take my biology out of the question, by all gender metrics I am overwhelmingly more male than female.)

If the standard for ‘who can transition into a woman’ stops being: ‘someone who has lived as a woman for two years and who has had gender reassignment surgery’ and instead becomes: ‘anyone who says they identify as one’, then at what point during that transition process does a violent male sexual offender like Eric Joyce, for example, stop being a threat to women and children?

Of course not all men...etc. But enough men. And it is overwhelmingly men. So, what are safeguarding and single sex spaces even for, if not to afford women protection from being exposed to potentially violent sexual predators?

And if it no longer becomes a requirement for a trans woman to even shave their beard, how are we to know whether the flat-chested male-looking person in eyeliner who’s pointlessly trying on bras in the next M&S cubicle is eyeing us up for the wank bank, or just one of the girls?

To even voice any of what I’ve written here is to be branded transphobic or a ‘terf’ (which is a misogynistic slur, by the way).

You bet that women who are concerned about the erosion of women’s rights and the protection of women and children are terrified by this judgment. Because men like Eric Joyce want access to our safe spaces. And on the one hand they are being given tacit assent by the legal system to just crack on with being a p*edo perv. And on the other hand, the woke brigade are cheering his support for unisex spaces.

I suggest, rather than opining that it’s ‘interesting’ there’s an overlap between women who are gender critical, and critics of Joyce’s sentence, why not wonder instead why men who like to wank to child sex abuse are advocates of unisex spaces. If you dig deeper into it, you’ll see there’s a massive overlap there too.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 69

Lovely

Chatty Member
Just wanted to add, from what I have seen on some subs on Reddit, a lot of lesbians are getting banned and pushed out of lesbian safe places because some trans women have been ridiculing them and being horrible them for not wanting to have sex with trans women that have penises.
I came out as a lesbian about a year and a half ago, in my 30s. I have always considered myself a trans ally and would never want any trans person to be harmed or threatened in any way. I support anyone transitioning if it's what they feel is best for them (assuming that they are old enough to fully understand the consequences of any irreversible decisions). I will respect anyone's wishes regarding names/pronouns, etc.

However, I do not ever want to have sex with someone who has (or had) a penis. Even the idea of that is deeply traumatising for me. I understand now, after many years of trying to convince myself that I was straight, that my sexuality is not a 'preference' – it's as immutable a part of me as my eye colour. I have been told that this makes me transphobic, and I have lost a 10+ year friendship with a rabidly woke straight 'ally' who got her boyfriend to harass me and call me a terf because I said that I could not be attracted to a transwoman.

As much as part of me wishes I had figured out my sexuality much sooner than I did, I am also extremely grateful that, being in my 30s, I feel confident enough to stand my ground on what I know to be right. I cannot imagine going through this experience in my teens or 20s. The level of gaslighting in the lesbian community on this issue is absolutely insane – I never would have believed it if I hadn't seen it for myself.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 48

Jelly Bean

VIP Member
My problem with India's 'I've no reason to be embarrassed' line is that she knew for two years, and within those two years was judgemental and rude about all sorts of people including here. Frankly the things she said about this place and posters were disgusting. I just don't think you can adopt any moral superiority when you are choosing to live with a man like that. I don't think she was any way responsible and he probably spun her a web of elaborate lies to justify and minimise it but she really should've got her own house in order before feeling confident enough to be foul about other people.
One of the things she said about here was that we are all so pathetic and leading loveless lives that 'they truly believe people with nice lives are corrupt liars'. Well. Quite. We weren't wrong were we?
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 45

Disillusioned

VIP Member
I think we need to go straight on this one. Jokes and word play not appropriate imo. Something like:

India Knight: Helping her convicted child sex offender lover stay out of prison.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 41

rosemarina

VIP Member
I took out a free trial subscription to The Times recently because I wanted to see what it was like. Anyway, I rang today to cancel it and they asked for feedback, and I said I wasn't terribly happy about the whole Eric Joyce/India Knight situation, with her continuing to put out frivolous articles with absolutely no acknowledgment of what had happened, and the guy who took my call knew exactly what I was talking about and said he'd pass on the feedback to head office. He also implied that quite a lot of people had already given that kind of feedback.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
  • Wow
Reactions: 37

Wolf359

Chatty Member
Just wanted to add, from what I have seen on some subs on Reddit, a lot of lesbians are getting banned and pushed out of lesbian safe places because some trans women have been ridiculing them and being horrible them for not wanting to have sex with trans women that have penises.

I wonder why there has been a lot more, in the open at last, trans women that have tried to "invade" women spaces. For example, why not opt for having more options in toiles were trans men and women can use them no matter if they are transitioned or not?
Yes lesbians have been talking about this for years. Google the ‘cotton ceiling’ if you really want to understand what they’ve been battling against.

Lesbians have been doxxed, branded transphobic, have lost their jobs, just for not wanting to sleep with trans women who have penises.

Of course, if a men says he doesn’t want to sleep with a trans woman who has a penis, he gets to keep his job and tweet another day without being cancelled.

Because, to answer your second point about third spaces, this isn’t really about genuine dysphoria. It’s about misogyny. Pure and simple.

It’s about men redefining what it is to be a woman - legally, physically, epistemically - so that they can take everything that women currently have that men don’t have, and punish us for daring to claim it for ourselves in the first place. That includes everything from our single-sex changing rooms to our cervixes.

I didn't need a precis of the debate, I'm more than familiar with the practical and theoretical and outs of it thanks. Tbh it's not a conversation I can be arsed to have here a Friday night.

I will say that I think bringing up his support of unisex spaces at this very moment detracts from the current scandal of lax sentencing and shameful message it sends out that viewing images isn't abuse or as harmful to children. Loosing linking his apparent support of trans rights (as some have done on sm) with child abuse is a dangerous conflation.
I disagree. I think it’s extremely relevant that a convicted violent offender and now convicted child sex offender, who is an advocate of unisex spaces, has received an alarmingly lenient sentence. Why would you want to separate the two things? Unless you’re suggesting that a man who can wank to baby rape photos can also be an altruistic humanitarian when it comes to the specific issue of trans women?

If you look at pushing for unisex spaces as an erosion of women’s boundaries, in the same way as physically assaulting someone and viewing child sex abuse are violations of boundaries, it is absolutely part of the same issue. Rather than detract from his disgraceful sentencing, it amplifies how concerning it is.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 37

boringbsh

Member
It’s ridiculous that to get the full story - that he also admitted to searching online for child sexual abuse - I have to rely on the Scottish Sun. The Guardian coverage is minimal.

View attachment 176402

View attachment 176403
Funny how when I’ve had a few, I want to dance and be everyone’s best mate. I don’t turn into a fucking sex offender. Hate that he was drinking makes it into any type of explanation of his crimes. Alcohol doesn’t turn people into n0nces.
 
  • Like
  • Angry
  • Heart
Reactions: 37

Wolf359

Chatty Member
He has not been absolved of the crime. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced. Disagreeing with the sentence doesn't mean he didn't receive one.
Whatever people beleive about what he did, the court could obviously only deal with that which could proven.
Eric Joyce is not a powerful man and I would be surprised if he was wealthy. I don't think he came from a privileged backround.
The sentencing is consistent with the guidelines and not indicative of any special treatment.


View attachment 205841


Your post stated "(l)esbians...have lost their jobs, just for not wanting to sleep with trans women who have penises".
None of those women have lost jobs. And what is described did not happen "just for not wanting to sleep with trans women with penises".
Rosa Freeman was literally removed from a board (and deprived of the associated salary) because she is gender critical. Julie Bindel has been no-platformed from numerous paid speaking engagements for being gender critical. Maya Forstater (although not a lesbian) was sacked for simply for tweeting that biology is real.

I don’t understand your resistance to the facts of these cases, or the attempt to pick semantic holes in them. Okay, there is not a neat, direct causative link between women proclaiming they won’t sleep with trans women with penises and then instantly losing their jobs. But what these cases (and the many others I haven’t posted about here) show is a bigger pattern, whereby publicly gender critical women are being hounded out of their jobs.

And I’m not even sorry if this is a thread derail. I will wang on about this stuff at any and every opportunity. It’s too important not to. At the end of last year we were a hair’s breadth away from having the legal definition of a woman changed to “whoever identifies as one”. The implications of that would have been massively damaging to women. It’s scary how close we got to being erased as a sex class in law all together. It has already happened in Scotland. These conversations need to happen as often as possible.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 36

Everyoldsock

Active member
Eleanor Morgan, one of the few high profile people on Twitter who've spoken out against about Joyce's sentencing, posted some brilliant tweets this morning:
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 32

Skiddidlydaddle

Chatty Member
Exactly. Keep female spaces for biologically born females. Why is it so controversial? Why are we only ever arguing over biologically born males entering female spaces. Why does the argument never go the opposite way? Create a third space for transsexuals. Of course they need protecting and safe spaces. I don't give a shit what people do or call themselves but female only spaces must be protected.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 32

cholulamare

Chatty Member
I think many of us have tried washing our hair less frequently to see if hair can get 'used' to it and stop product buildup... but 4 (FOUR) weeks?? Imagine the smell :sick::sick::sick:

This really reminds me of a tweet I saw today about Jess Glynn whinging that she wasn't allowed in a fancy restaurant wearing a hoodie and trainers: it it SUCH a posh girl thing to do. You would never catch a working class Scouser going out for a nice meal and trying to pull this shit, and you wouldn't catch them turning up at a hairdressers with filthy fucking hair either.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 31

Spanner

Chatty Member
I’ve just read her horrible piece in the ST. Two of her points to consider before you make the move to the countryside

one - check the broadband speed

& two - only move if your relationship is stable.

I guess both very salient points when you’re shacked up with Eric!
 
  • Like
  • Sick
  • Haha
Reactions: 29

Spanner

Chatty Member
Not only does she have the nerve to have a beauty column, but she also had the nerve to give us such amazing insight into depression with "Everybody gets depressed" in one of her articles, claiming there's no stigma to it and asking do we want a medal.
Her other canon texts was aimed against women who don't have children.
Why she still has a public platform is beyond me, not to mention public support, but I'm a childless depressed woman, so what the fuck do I know.

ETA I was hoping the picture will be quoted as well :LOL:
In her horrible book, In Your Prime, I learnt that if you get divorced and you didn’t have any children, you really don’t have anything to be upset about. Which was news to me, I was suicidal when my first marriage broke up. Absolutely hated her ever since

(I used her garbage book for kindling, would hate anyone else to read it)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Wow
  • Sad
Reactions: 29

Lovely

Chatty Member
Exactly. Keep female spaces for biologically born females. Why is it so controversial? Why are we only ever arguing over biologically born males entering female spaces. Why does the argument never go the opposite way?
Because biological men know that transmen (i.e. biological women) are no real threat to them. Also, transwomen are a lot more demanding and assertive about their perceived rights, because it turns out that putting on a dress and calling themselves by a 'female' name doesn't take away any of their male entitlement. As always, women have so much more to lose.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 29

Spanner

Chatty Member
Julie Burchill hates (or hated, I don’t know her current thoughts) India Knight. One of her closing lines was “Why don’t you fuck off and turn another of your husbands gay”
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Wow
Reactions: 29
Imagine being sensitive about Saatchi being an investor, but being fine with a truly obnoxious woman who stands by a convicted pedophile and even before he got caught for that, a perpetually violent, brawling, seedy, predatory, drunk driving idiot.

The fact that Eric is openly out and about morally posturing on twitter shows what a psycho he is. I doubt he has a shred of conscience. I doubt India has a shred of conscience left either. she's truly committed to him, and he is a soulless monster.

It's truly hilarious to see how India manages to hold onto her horrifically judgmental misogynistic nature, but exclude convicted pedophile husband Eric Joyce from her world of moral judgment. Women who don't look how she thinks they should (hilarious in itself given she's a rancid-looking old buffalo)? Scoffed at, despised. Women who don't marry? She judges as weird and abnormal. Women who don't want or have kids? Judge, jury and executioner. Blokes? Her bar for admiration and acceptance is on the floor in the piss-soaked bogs at this point. She'll forgive them anything. She was always utterly awful, and I always suspected she was the type of horrifically insecure woman who just wants to be claimed by a man, no matter how awful he is, because it's the one way she can tell herself she has value, but she's gone out and proved it by sticking with Joyce.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 28

Jaybtee

VIP Member
What do you mean by ‘trans rights’? Trans people already have all the same human rights that everybody does under the Human Rights Act. And their gender identity is also a protected characteristic under the Equality Act.

The only rights that trans women don’t have are women’s rights. The trans lobby wants to appropriate women’s rights that are explicitly protected in the Equality Act. Trans people don’t need these rights because the rights that women have fought so hard for over decades (the right to single sex spaces, the right to refuse medical treatment by a man, the right to talk about their biology and anatomy in any context where it is relevant) are necessary because of the discrimination, oppression and abuse that women have endured for centuries. Abuse and oppression specific to the fact that they are born female in a male-dominated society. Abuse and oppression that women have never been able to identity out of, despite their supposedly enormous ‘cis privilege’.

The problem with men like Eric Joyce, and why his support of unisex spaces is relevant to the ‘trans rights’ discussion is because Eric Joyce, like lots and lots of other men, is a violent sex offender. The trans lobby wants to remove the current threshold for legal gender transition. At the moment the gender reassignment act requires a trans person to live as their preferred ‘gender’ for two years, and to have had gender reassignment surgery in order to be legally recognised as their preferred gender.

(For the moment, let’s leave to one side the question of what ‘gender’ even is, versus biological sex. Gender is essentially a bunch of sexist tropes and sterotypes defined by a patriarchal society and imposed on the different sexes. I do not identify as female. I am female because of my anatomy, but I never wear dresses or high heels. I rarely wear makeup. I do a ‘masculine’ job. If you take my biology out of the question, by all gender metrics I am overwhelmingly more male than female.)

If the standard for ‘who can transition into a woman’ stops being: ‘someone who has lived as a woman for two years and who has had gender reassignment surgery’ and instead becomes: ‘anyone who says they identify as one’, then at what point during that transition process does a violent male sexual offender like Eric Joyce, for example, stop being a threat to women and children?

Of course not all men...etc. But enough men. And it is overwhelmingly men. So, what are safeguarding and single sex spaces even for, if not to afford women protection from being exposed to potentially violent sexual predators?

And if it no longer becomes a requirement for a trans woman to even shave their beard, how are we to know whether the flat-chested male-looking person in eyeliner who’s pointlessly trying on bras in the next M&S cubicle is eyeing us up for the wank bank, or just one of the girls?

To even voice any of what I’ve written here is to be branded transphobic or a ‘terf’ (which is a misogynistic slur, by the way).

You bet that women who are concerned about the erosion of women’s rights and the protection of women and children are terrified by this judgment. Because men like Eric Joyce want access to our safe spaces. And on the one hand they are being given tacit assent by the legal system to just crack on with being a p*edo perv. And on the other hand, the woke brigade are cheering his support for unisex spaces.

I suggest, rather than opining that it’s ‘interesting’ there’s an overlap between women who are gender critical, and critics of Joyce’s sentence, why not wonder instead why men who like to wank to child sex abuse are advocates of unisex spaces. If you dig deeper into it, you’ll see there’s a massive overlap there too.
Thank you for this post.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 28