Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Rolfe]

Oh Jesus christ. You're right, I didn't eta that one, but I did "@" you to call your attention to the edit specifically by making it ping on your alerts. That's actually better than an eta, because it specifically calls your attention to a post that has been moved on from.

Regarding your weird conspiracy theory, I was simply still searching for the story for a while and coming up with nothing, so I "@"ed you to call your attention to the change. I probably should have eta'ed it too but I didn't see the point after only a few minutes. You're right though, I didn't eta it specifically for what might have been the first time in my posting history.

Still trying to defend your unsourced tweety by using foreign language sources that don't appear on this *news flash* English speaking formula and search engines?

That the translations are so clumsy is reason enough to doubt the accuracy. Do you have to be lectured again about this forum's posting langusge?

I don't look at these alerts. Never have. Didn't see your dishonest edit, which was made after the reply you later criticised for not addressing the edited post.

I'm not defending anything. I don't have to. The tweet was absolutely on the level and the sources were easy to find. Criticising these sources for being in Swedish, when the incident happened in Sweden, is preposterous. You're down through the bottom of the barrel and scraping the dirt now.

Oh look, getting into bedrock. You offered to re-explain something in my native language, and when I replied in Gaelic you made no attempt to do so. I strung you along for a bit. Now you're complaining that I didn't initially post something in Swedish. I didn't even need to use Google translate to see what these articles were saying though, it was bloody obvious. (OK to be fair, Swedish is to some extent cognate with Scots, which I also speak, e.g. kvinna/quine for woman.)

If the best you have is that Google translate sometimes offers up infelicitous sentences (though in my experience this is much less common than it used to be) therefore you can go on complaining that the newspaper and TV websites are inaccurate and may be dismissed, you're done here.

Proper investigation remains your sole burden, not mine. And for every story shown, there's another with a different variation. Piss poor citations at best.

 

[Thermal]

Sorry, I haven't kept up with this thread for a while as it's very long, but what's the crack with transmen? They should use female private spaces yeah? Is that the current thing?

Nobody cares. A woman in jeans and a t-shirt doesn't bother anyone. She can go in either because her being trans or not doesnt really bother anybody. It's just them fruity guys in dresses that piss people off. Freaks, you see.

 

[Rolfe]

Nobody cares. A woman in jeans and a t-shirt doesn't bother anyone. She can go in either because her being trans or not doesnt really bother anybody. It's just them fruity guys in dresses that piss people off. Freaks, you see.

This is of course approximately 100% wrong, but maybe you want to move on to cover your embarrassment?

 

[Thermal]

I don't look at these alerts. Never have. Didn't see your dishonest edit, which was made after the reply you later criticised for not addressing the edited post.

Right. You ignore the forum feature that is literally designed to mitigate this problem. Yet you "@" posters yourself, and have done so in this very exchange. That means either you expect others to use it, while putting yourself above it, or you are being dishonest and you do use it and are putting up a big entitled act now.

I'm not defending anything. I don't have to. The tweet was absolutely on the level and the sources were easy to find. Criticising these sources for being in Swedish, when the incident happened in Sweden, is preposterous. You're down through the bottom of the barrel and scraping the dirt now.

Absolutely. On this english speaking forum, posters are expected to chase down and verify others claims in a foreign language while you sit on your thumbs. That is totally the expectation here .

Oh look, getting into bedrock. You offered to re-explain something in my native language, and when I replied in Gaelic you made no attempt to do so.

Facetious comment was obvious, to everyone but you I suppose.

I strung you along for a bit. Now you're complaining that I didn't initially post something in Swedish. I didn't even need to use Google translate to see what these articles were saying though, it was bloody obvious. (OK to be fair, Swedish is to some extent cognate with Scots, which I also speak, e.g. kvinna/quine for woman.)

Like many, I can kinda sorta get the gist of a lot of it, but not enough for a critical reading. And you are still bobbing and weaving around the basic burden, which was yours from the start, since the tweety was factually unsourced and as such, immediately questionable.

If the best you have is that Google translate sometimes offers up infelicitous sentences (though in my experience this is much less common than it used to be) therefore you can go on complaining that the newspaper and TV websites are inaccurate and may be dismissed, you're done here.

If the best you have is to post random tweets with no citation and expect everyone to accept them or spend their own time trying to determine if you are full of ◊◊◊◊ or not, you're done here as well.

Eta: ATTN ROLFE: dear God please read: I corrected two typos in the above post

 

[Thermal]

This is of course approximately 100% wrong, but maybe you want to move on to cover your embarrassment?

Not only not embarrassed in the slightest, but more than willing to hang in as long as you want to continue this asinine discussion.

You seriously think a short response to another poster is 'trying to move on'? Your chastising is getting progressively more petty.

 

[Rolfe]

Right. You ignore the forum feature that is literally designed to mitigate this problem. Yet you "@" posters yourself, and have done so in this very exchange. That means either you expect others to use it, while putting yourself above it, or you are being dishonest and you do use it and are putting up a big entitled act now.

Absolutely. On this english speaking forum, posters are expected to chase down and verify others claims in a foreign language while you sit on your thumbs. That is totally the expectation here .

Facetious comment was obvious, to everyone but you I suppose.

Like many, I can kinda sorta get the gist of a lot of it, but not enough for a critical reading. And you are still bobbing and weaving around the basic burden, which was yours from the start, since the tweety was factually unsourced and as such, immediately questionable.

If thr best you have is to post random tweets with no citationand expect everyone to accept them or spend their own time trying to determine if you are full of ◊◊◊◊ or not, you're done here as well.

I don't even remember that the ping feature is there. I sometimes use the @ to take advantage of the auto-fill so that usernames come out correctly spelled. (Also, to save me having to decide whether to capitalise a name that isn't capitalised by the poster.) So what? In a fast-moving thread I'm not going to be checking these pings every couple of minutes and I doubt if anyone else is either. The fact is that you deliberately edited your post after I had replied to you, without even adding an ETA, in a way that allowed you later to claim that I had posted "a vacuous non-response" to you, when in fact what I posted was entirely appropriate to the post as it was when I replied. Gross dishonesty, and doubling down on it.

Sitting on my thumbs? I checked that the events as reported in the tweet were correct, which they were, and judged that posting a link to an article in Swedish was superfluous. When you asked for a citation, although the request was very rudely expressed, I obliged immediately. You're flailing about in desperation not to recognise what a fool you have made of yourself. Just like you did when you misread a report of an altercation and immediately jumped gleefully to the entirely erroneous conclusion that some middle-aged women had "brought violence" to a peaceful pro-trans meeting - when it was actually the other way round. And then after some Olympic-level ducking and weaving, complained that you were being piled on for an "insignificant error".

Make up your mind. Do you want foreign-language links to support an entirely accurate account in English, or don't you? If you do, try asking in a moderately polite manner, rather than rudely accusing other members of posting ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊, and trumpeting your (entirely wrong) conclusion that a serious murder report has been entirely fabricated by "tranny-bashing bigots". And no, this is 2025. You can't claim that an article is made up and questionable on the grounds that you can only read it using Google translate.

 

[Rolfe]

Not only not embarrassed in the slightest, but more than willing to hang in as long as you want to continue this asinine discussion.

You seriously think a short response to another poster is 'trying to move on'? Your chastising is getting progressively more petty.

Facetious comment was obvious, to everyone but you I suppose.

 

[Myriad]

I'm getting bloody tired of being accused of passing on fabricated stories by @Thermal simply because he can't be bothered to check properly, and then jumps to unwarranted conclusions.

It's remarkably similar to Trump apologetics. Instead of "Trump never said that" it's "that (crime) didn't really happen." Instead of "Okay he said it but didn't mean it" it's "Okay it happened but the perp wasn't really trans." Instead of "okay he meant it but you only care because TDS" it's "okay a trans person did it but you only care because bigotry." No amount of evidence suffices to overcome the layers of invincible denial.

 

[Thermal]

I don't even remember that the ping feature is there. I sometimes use the @ to take advantage of the auto-fill so that usernames come out correctly spelled. (Also, to save me having to decide whether to capitalise a name that isn't capitalised by the poster.)

Fair enough.

So what? In a fast-moving thread I'm not going to be checking these pings every couple of minutes and I doubt if anyone else is either. The fact is that you deliberately edited your post after I had replied to you, without even adding an ETA, in a way that allowed you later to claim that I had posted "a vacuous non-response" to you, when in fact what I posted was entirely appropriate to the post as it was when I replied. Gross dishonesty, and doubling down on it.

Oh, bull ◊◊◊◊ is was still looking for a credible source for your unsourced story, and edited with an "@" although I had no idea that you ignore this feature unlike the entirety of the forum, despite using it in your own posts.

I accept your explanation that you don't use the feature, so my "@" got by you, instead of calling your attention as it was designed to. You still go on about this paranoid conspiracy theory you've cooked up, that wouldn't even work unless I knew you ignore the ping feature, which you only just disclosed.

Seriously, this is getting silly. I accept that you don't use the ping feature ascits intended, but you use it to autocomplete names. Do you real I t have to go on with your paranoid interpretation that wouldn't even have worked unless I knew that you ignored the feature... that you use in posting?

Sitting on my thumbs? I checked that the events as reported in the tweet were correct, which they were, and judged that posting a link to an article in Swedish was superfluous. When you asked for a citation, although the request was very rudely expressed, I obliged immediately. You're flailing about in desperation not to recognise what a fool you have made of yourself. Just like you did when you misread a report of an altercation and immediately jumped gleefully to the entirely erroneous conclusion that some middle-aged women had "brought violence" to a peaceful pro-trans meeting - when it was actually the other way round. And then after some Olympic-level ducking and weaving, complained that you were being piled on for an "insignificant error".

Make up your mind. Do you want foreign-language links to support an entirely accurate account in English, or don't you?

You know this forum is English speaking. The mods have even taken the extra time to explain this to you patiently. If you are going to use non-English sources, and you know it in advance, perhaps you could make the superhuman effort to simply state "source in foreign language media" and link that puppy anyway? Would that really be too.much? Or would you prefer to have multi page battles over it, or haughtily say you won't cite your sources because "remember that time I didn't include my Swedish citations.. "?

If you do, try asking in a moderately polite manner, rather than rudely accusing other members of posting ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊, and trumpeting your (entirely wrong) conclusion that a serious murder report has been entirely fabricated by "tranny-bashing bigots". And no, this is 2025. You can't claim that an article is made up and questionable on the grounds that you can only read it using Google translate.

I can for damn sure claim it is entirely unsourced if it is. As such, it's nothing but a rumor. You claim to be verifying and fact checking before posting, but the two clicks to attach a link is just too much work? Instead, everyone else is expected to search for it in other country's media and run translators to check you? Come on.

 

[Rolfe]

It's remarkably similar to Trump apologetics. Instead of "Trump never said that" it's "that (crime) didn't really happen." Instead of "Okay he said it but didn't mean it" it's "Okay it happened but the perp wasn't really trans." Instead of "okay he meant it but you only care because TDS" it's "okay a trans person did it but you only care because bigotry." No amount of evidence suffices to overcome the layers of invincible denial.

Nope.

My original post was pointing out that for a supposed tiny minority of people, so rare we'll probably never encounter one, they'll never have any impact on your life, trans-identifying men commit serious sexual crimes and murders astonishingly frequently. There is undoubtedly a correlation between aping womanhood in men, and perversion, sexual offending and even murder (usually sexual murders). (Note to Thermal, look up the word "correlation" and spare us the faux-outrage of "she just said that all trans-identifying men are sex offenders and murderers.")

The figures seem to average out at them being around four times as likely to commit such crimes as other men.

Allowing trans-identified men to be recognised as women and to access women's single-sex spaces inevitably means that the "absolute monster" cohort get access with the rest of them. Some people seem to believe that's an acceptable price to pay to allow the one "nice" trans person they know to use women's spaces, because he'll be sad if he's not allowed to do that.

This is something that Thermal will never address.

 

[Thermal]

It's remarkably similar to Trump apologetics. Instead of "Trump never said that" it's "that (crime) didn't really happen." Instead of "Okay he said it but didn't mean it" it's "Okay it happened but the perp wasn't really trans." Instead of "okay he meant it but you only care because TDS" it's "okay a trans person did it but you only care because bigotry." No amount of evidence suffices to overcome the layers of invincible denial.

Well ya, of maybe the version that actually happened is more accurate?

"Story unsourced. With cross language difficulties, sourcing is at least largely established, and the poor translations are in some level of conflict. But story appears to be at least largely reported consistent with original unsourced tweety."

Little different than your rewriting, isn't it?

Also, thanks for posting. I forgot over the holidays that I owe you a response to s thoughtful post you made earlier. Mea culpa and I'll get to it.

 

[Rolfe]

Fair enough.

Oh, bull ◊◊◊◊ is was still looking for a credible source for your unsourced story, and edited with an "@" although I had no idea that you ignore this feature unlike the entirety of the forum, despite using it in your own posts.

I accept your explanation that you don't use the feature, so my "@" got by you, instead of calling your attention as it was designed to. You still go on about this paranoid conspiracy theory you've cooked up, that wouldn't even work unless I knew you ignore the ping feature, which you only just disclosed.

Seriously, this is getting silly. I accept that you don't use the ping feature ascits intended, but you use it to autocomplete names. Do you real I t have to go on with your paranoid interpretation that wouldn't even have worked unless I knew that you ignored the feature... that you use in posting?



You know this forum is English speaking. The mods have even taken the extra time to explain this to you patiently. If you are going to use non-English sources, and you know it in advance, perhaps you could make the superhuman effort to simply state "source in foreign language media" and link that puppy anyway? Would that really be too.much? Or would you prefer to have multi page battles over it, or haughtily say you won't cite your sources because "remember that time I didn't include my Swedish citations.. "?

I can for damn sure claim it is entirely unsourced if it is. As such, it's nothing but a rumor. You claim to be verifying and fact checking before posting, but the two clicks to attach a link is just too much work? Instead, everyone else is expected to search for it in other country's media and run translators to check you? Come on.

Thermal, even if I were in the habit of checking these pings, I wouldn't be doing it in the middle of a fast-moving conversation, and I doubt if anyone else would either.

We had some banter with you pretending that you hadn't promised to explain some point or other in a different language, if asked. The mods asked us to stop when it had gone about far enough. That's it.

You can't seem to decide whether you want foreign language citations or not. The only reasonably comprehensive citations on this one are in Swedish, so there's no way round that. There was no multi-page battle about it, as soon as you (rudely) demanded a citation in a post I had actually read, I simply provided it. You can see that for yourself simply by scrolling back.

The rest of the verbiage has been you trying to pretend that primary sources in non-English languages don't count and you can still assert that an entirely correct story is "entirely unsourced".

 

[Rolfe]

Well ya, of maybe the version that actually happened is more accurate?

"Story unsourced. With cross language difficulties, sourcing is at least largely established, and the poor translations are in some level of conflict. But story appears to be at least largely reported consistent with original unsourced tweety."

Little different than your rewriting, isn't it?

Also, thanks for posting. I forgot over the holidays that I owe you a response to s thoughtful post you made earlier. Mea culpa and I'll get to it.

What actually happened was that you found a very superficial report in an English-language summary written by a journalist with the same surname as that reported in the original tweet for the suspect. It lacked almost all the detail in that tweet. Rather than either ask for a better citation (which I gave you as soon as you asked for it) or look for one yourself, you jumped to the loud-mouthed conclusion that the story was entirely fabricated, with a non-existent trans suspect given the name of the journalist, and that this had been done by "tranny-bashing bigots" for nefarious purposes.

You were then given about half a dozen links to detailed reports of the incident which verified everything in the original tweet except the name of the victim, which probably has reporting restrictions on it. (I noticed that when I searched for the victim's name the links served up didn't include the name, and I surmise that the name was removed from press reports.) Your line now is that I should have posted the Swedish links in the first place, but that would have been against the forum's English-language rule, and these reports can be dismissed and the story hand-waved away as "entirely unsourced" because Google translate isn't good enough for you.

You also decreed that the suspect isn't trans, despite having changed his name to a female name and wearing makeup and lipstick.

Yeah, sure, not trans at all.



A little different from your version, isn't it?

I should be used to your level of dishonesty now, but it still shocks me. Though not as much as the horrific murder of a young woman at Christmas by a trans-identifying pervert who had been released from his previous sentence for sexual offences after a ridiculously short period of imprisonment.

 

[Thermal]

Nope.

My original post was pointing out that for a supposed tiny minority of people, so rare we'll probably never encounter one, they'll never have any impact on your life, trans-identifying men commit serious sexual crimes and murders astonishingly frequently. There is undoubtedly a correlation between aping womanhood in men, and perversion, sexual offending and even murder (usually sexual murders). (Note to Thermal, look up the word "correlation" and spare us the faux-outrage of "she just said that all trans-identifying men are sex offenders and murderers.")

The figures seem to average out at them being around four times as likely to commit such crimes as other men.

Allowing trans-identified men to be recognised as women and to access women's single-sex spaces inevitably means that the "absolute monster" cohort get access with the rest of them. Some people seem to believe that's an acceptable price to pay to allow the one "nice" trans person they know to use women's spaces, because he'll be sad if he's not allowed to do that.

This is something that Thermal will never address.

Well then allow me to address it yet again:

You have not established "astonishing frequency" of anything with your tweets. In total over the course of years of posting them, you are still dicking around in the dozens of incidents out of millions of transpeople, hoping to make the cherry picks look dauntingly numerous. But you haven't actually shown that they are.

Regarding your use of stats, they invariably don't control for other variables, as Ziggurat was quick to criticize my similar usage for. I'm sure he will be along presently to scold you.

The truth is that there is not much reliable data in either direction. The Massachusetts data is one of the very few data sets we have, and it supports my interpretation (as my experience in my own state does). I freely concede that it is not slam dunk conclusive, but it's what we have. That's a skeptics tentative conclusion, not a fear mongering narrative driven one.

 

[Thermal]

Thermal, even if I was in the habit of checking these pings, I wouldn't be doing it in the middle of a fast-moving conversation, and I doubt if anyone else would either.

Oddly, I don't find it challenging to click the alerts even in a fast moving thread. Takes all of a second or two to click and read, and often alerts me to a missed post in a fast moving thread.

We have already been over all this, in excruciating detail. Must we continue? I've acknowldged your explanation is fair enough (while you don't accept mine and continue with the conspiracy theory). May it die now?

We had some banter with you pretending that you hadn't promised to explain some point or other in a different language, if asked. The mods asked us to stop when it had gone about far enough. That's it.

Great. Can we kill this one off too?

You can't seem to decide whether you want foreign language citations or not.

Please stop thr feigned befuddlement. English language sourcing are the expected default. If you full and well know (as you claim you did) that the source will not appear on an English speaking search, just qualify it as foreign and link it. it's common courtesy, and requires no significant effort on your part. Would you rather have pages of bickering or just two-click your source to include it?

The only reasonably comprehensive citations on this one are in Swedish, so there's no way round that. There was no multi-page battle about it, as soon as you (rudely) demanded a citation in a post I had actually read, I simply provided it. You can see that for yourself simply by scrolling back.

The rest of the verbiage has been you trying to pretend that primary sources in non-English languages don't count and you can still assert that an entirely correct story is "entirely unsourced".

Once again: we are only going through this because you wanted to link an unsourced story. Do a clean job on your postings, and there is nothing to argue about.

 

[Rolfe]

Well then allow me to address it yet again:

You have not established "astonishing frequency" of anything with your tweets. In total over the course of years of posting them, you are still dicking around in the dozens of incidents out of millions of transpeople, hoping to make the cherry picks look dauntingly numerous. But you haven't actually shown that they are.

Regarding your use of stats, they invariably don't control for other variables, as Ziggurat was quick to criticize my similar usage for. I'm sure he will be along presently to scold you.

The truth is that there is not much reliable data in either direction. The Massachusetts data is one of the very few data sets we have, and it supports my interpretation (as my experience in my own state does). I freely concede that it is not slam dunk conclusive, but it's what we have. That's a skeptics tentative conclusion, not a fear mongering narrative driven one.

These stats have been replicated over multiple jurisdictions. You simply dismiss them with vacuous assertions like "maybe trans-identifying men are really poor and disadvantaged, and that drives them to commit sex offences at four times the rate of other men," or "maybe trans-identifying men just get caught more often than other men."

Sure.

Meanwhile you seem content to rest on your manufactured doubt to continue to advocate for men to be legally permitted to access women's single-sex spaces. When in fact the point would still stand even if the rate of sex offending among trans-identified men was no greater than the rate among other men. Would you care to consider that aspect?

 

[Rolfe]

Oddly, I don't find it challenging to click the alerts even in a fast moving thread. Takes all of a second or two to click and read, and often alerts me to a missed post in a fast moving thread.

We have already been over all this, in excruciating detail. Must we continue? I've acknowldged your explanation is fair enough (while you don't accept mine and continue with the conspiracy theory). May it die now?

Great. Can we kill this one off too?

Please stop thr feigned befuddlement. English language sourcing are the expected default. If you full and well know (as you claim you did) that the source will not appear on an English speaking search, just qualify it as foreign and link it. it's common courtesy, and requires no significant effort on your part. Would you rather have pages of bickering or just two-click your source to include it?

Once again: we are only going through this because you wanted to link an unsourced story. Do a clean job on your postings, and there is nothing to argue about.

You will always find something to argue about.

The fact remains that you edited your post after I had replied to it, then castigated me for a "vacuous non-response" when you clearly knew that it was a response to the unedited post, and was entirely appropriate in that context.

I'll post as I see fit. If you want fuller and better particulars, ask in a neutral tone and they will be supplied. Running with something that's entirely in your own head, about "tranny-bashing bigots" inventing a story out of thin air and using a journalist's name for the name of the fictitious suspect is not the response of a sceptic. Neither is insisting that a man (whose name is Robin) calling himself "Vilma" and posing in lipstick, makeup and a hair grip isn't trans.

I'm not here to second-guess your demands.

 

[Emily's Cat]

You think on-demand body-modification surgery on the NHS hasn't been tried?

https://edinburghath.tumblr.com%2Fpost%2F163521055802

This is a different outfit of course, and the document is quite old. It's one of the first things that boggled my mind when I first peaked in 2017. I'm fairly sure this is one of the organisations the Scottish government consulted about the GRA, in fact I think this document was intended to feed into that consultation.

It's hard to pick just one screenshot.

View attachment 67540

It does give a flavour of the sheer batcrap insanity of the movement though.

Gee, that doesn't sound at all cultish or looney.

 

[Thermal]

You will always find something to argue about.

{Eta: ATTN POSTER ROLFE: this is an edit to the current post: please acknowledge this transmission:

Are you new here?

/ frantic edit}

The fact remains that you edited your post after I had replied to it, then castigated me for a "vacuous non-response" when you clearly knew that it was a response to the unedited post, and was entirely appropriate in that context.

Oh Jesus christ. I did not 'clearly know' that you ignore pings that you yourself use and are intended to call your attention till you told me later. Even though that is the lamest excuse in the world, I've accepted it. Yet here you are still pretending it was a vast conspiracy on my part. Get over yourself.

I'll post as I see fit. If you want fuller and better particulars, ask in a neutral tone and they will be supplied. Running with something that's entirely in your own head, about "tranny-bashing bigots" inventing a story out of thin air and using a journalist's name for the name of the fictitious suspect is not the response of a sceptic. Neither is insisting that a man (whose name is Robin) calling himself "Vilma" and posing in lipstick, makeup and a hair grip isn't trans.

Assuming a feminine name or attire does not make someone trans. Saying they are trans does. Surely you have caught up that far in this thread?

I'm not here to second-guess your demands

No, you're not, nor are you bring asked to. You're being asked to be reasonable. Your tweetys, with many already shown to be pure bull ◊◊◊◊, do not stand on their own say-so.

Your current claim is that you diligently fact checked an unsourced tweet, then intentionally decided not to cite that source. Then you want to go on for multiple posts bitching and meaning about it. Fine. Getting back to the original tweet then: what was your point, if not "lookit the violent perv! This is how they are!"

Eta: I made two additional typo corrections because my hands are freezing and eyes frosting over. Please forgive me

 

[Emily's Cat]

I don't think you know what the phrase "bull ◊◊◊◊ fabricated contemptable tranny bashing retweety" means.

Do you comprehend that every time you respond to an actual documented case of a male with a transgender identity being a predator and harming females and children by decrying it as "fabricated" and "contemptible", you come across as if you do not care about women and children at all, and that you value the feelings of males to do whatever the ◊◊◊◊ they want more than you do the safety of females?

Seriously, Thermal. I've tried to have your back multiple times. I really have. But you seem to absolutely REFUSE to even admit that SOME males with transgender identities are actual predators and perverts. And you have this remarkably offputting habit of dismissing every single case shown to you as being either fake or "not real trans". FFS, you decided without any evidence that Tish Hyman somehow orchestrated an interaction with a male-looking, male-bodied, male person in the female shower of the gym for the sole purpose of causing a stink! At no point did you even *pretend* to care about the situations that Hyman found themself in, being exposed to a male with a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ penis while Hyman was naked in the shower! All of your care and consideration when into defending Grant Freeman aka Alexis Black, even going so far as to try to hand-wave away their prior charges for domestic abuse, documented cases of breaking their spouse's jaw, and the sheer creepiness of taking their ex-spouse's name as their own when they decided to "transition". You went to great lengths to make sure we all knew that Merager hadn't done anything at all wrong, because it's LEGAL for a male to show their dick to a room full of non-consenting females and kids, merely because that male says the magic words that they "identify" as a "woman".