• **OT** - climate, politics, etc. (Was: Re: Sale of ITV)

    From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.tech.broadcast on Wed Dec 3 22:43:02 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    On 2025/12/3 21:44:12, Bob Latham wrote:

    []

    Even if it wasn't, I think any source of "free" energy, such as
    wind farms, it is daft to not use, in the interests of prolonging
    our oil stocks if nothing else.

    In that simple idea who could disagree, I don't but in reality the
    damage to landscape caused by these horrific windmills and to

    Subjective. I like them.

    wildlife by these bird choppers, very bad. And of course it is not

    Provocative. If you're really convinced about the birds, put them (the windmills I mean) in giant shields like desk fans.

    FREE or anywhere near FREE it is vastly expensive as evidenced by our
    worst in the world electricity prices.

    (As for the silly argument sometimes given that
    the wind doesn't always blow - that's like saying there is a man in
    town giving away money; because he's not there every day, I'm not
    going to take _any_ of the money. No wind advocate says we should
    _rely_ on it.)

    But the money given to you in the town can be saved. Saving
    electricity is extremely difficult if not totally impractical.

    Agreed, though that _is_ changing - very slowly.

    So what do you do when the wind doesn't blow and it's at night?

    Sigh. You use another source - such as, in extremis, oil/gas/coal fired stations. (And don't give me that crap about "it costs to keep them
    ticking over". It costs a lot less to keep them running under no load
    than under load; your [petrol or diesel] car uses a lot less fuel
    coasting downhill, even if in gear, than it does going uphill, even if
    at the same speed.)

    You fire up a more conventional generator which means you have to pay
    for and maintain and balance two systems. It can never be cheaper.

    See above. It costs less (in fuel) to run them when they aren't
    generating power, i. e. when the wind is blowing.

    As for "women should have prostate checks", that sounds like a
    Daily Mail invention; obviously, only those _with_ a prostate
    should have it checked, and I've not heard any suggestion to the
    contrary.

    NHS. They may have said women with a prostate I'm unsure but as I
    don't wish to be arrested I'm sure you can guess my thoughts.

    If they've got a prostate, check it. Whatever they claim to be. (I've
    had it done. It's not comfortable, to put it mildly.)

    BTW, I have nothing against men who wish to live a life as close to
    female as possible, like all other groups, provided you don't
    compromise other people's lives, good luck to them.

    "As long as it doesn't frighten the horses" :-)

    []

    We all have different degrees to which we surrender our rights to
    "the collective", "society", etcetera. There are certainly elements
    who want to control us - as much on the right as the left, too. the
    desire to impose tends to be stronger towards the extreme - both
    extremes.

    Nooo! Which sides always want freedoms shut down, particularly speech

    Both. Especially speech (and thought, if they could).

    The right are based on freedoms of the individual, the left are based
    on the collective control, basic stuff.

    A common oversimplification. Politics is not a single axis: it's at
    least two. The common one, with left and right at the extremes
    (communism to fascism is one way of describing the extremes); the other
    is individual freedom. I think of myself as a little right of centre
    (the UK centre, that is; the US centre is a lot further to the right
    anyway) on the left-right axis, but fairly strongly on the
    non-interference side of the other axis.


    Who made Wales 20mph and again in Wales who stopped children's books
    and women's toiletries from being sold during covid? None essential apparently. The left are control freaks.

    So are the extreme right. (For example, they want to control - prohibit
    - left thinking.)

    []

    I am convinced that most of the reasons people want to change sex
    is not that they want to have babies (it's very largely males
    wanting to be females)

    Yes of course so far.

    ; there seems to be very little research into
    that area - but because of the different ways our societies treat
    the two sexes. Some people do not want to be macho; the chance of
    changing how society views the gender roles is so minimal that
    pretending to want to change is the only way they see of being
    _treated_ differently.

    I well accept that many men are not and don't want to be macho,
    depending on exactly what you mean I might be one of them. I'm no
    rugby playing alpha male myself. I accept there is a spectrum of how
    people's personalities sit on the macho scale.

    It's all a matter of degree. When I was a lad (1970s), I had
    considerable difficulty convincing my schoolmates that I was not
    _interested_ in football - and was looked at a bit askance; even into
    the '80s (even now to some extent), I am sure some of my contemporaries
    didn't really accept that I'm not into pubs/drinking, and don't like
    beer or dry cider/wine. (I never lost the sweet tooth of childhood: i
    like sweet sherry, liqueurs etc., but no "man" would drink those when
    with others sinking pints.) I have never liked drunkenness or violence
    (and yes, I do connect the two). Can't say _I_ have ever wanted to, but
    I think say a man who wanted to wear dresses would be looked at very suspiciously (even now, he can only be "accepted" if he makes fun of it
    by being a drag queen). "Househusbands" are still a figure of somewhere
    between fun and suspicion.

    But no matter how not macho XY chromosomes ....


    Diversity is not a strength.

    We'll just have to disagree on that one.

    Unity was and would be our strength, I cannot even imagine how
    diversity helps the nation succeed any better than if there was no
    diversity. I'm not saying us whites are better, the same would be
    true anywhere regardless of race and culture. A mixed bunch will be
    less inclined to have a common goal.

    Not accepting the minority is part of the "macho" thing. Accepting - by
    which I don't just mean tolerating, I mean listening to and even
    implementing suggestions from - someone not part of your "group", IMO
    weakens.

    []

    Most of the problem with immigration is legal stuff not the boats.

    I'm glad you realise that. you wouldn't think so, from the media coverage.

    []

    Abortion is very much a last resort, whatever age. However, I don't
    think we as men have much right to force our views. On this
    subject, I feel there needs to be far more research into artificial
    wombs.

    Lets call it what it is, abortion that close to birth is murder pure
    and simple. There are no excuses for murder and even men should be
    stopping it.

    If a termination is needed is should be done many months before that
    stage.

    You'd force a woman to go to full term. I suspect we'll never agree on
    what "needed" means. But, assuming you _do_ want as little abortion as possible, you should be campaigning for more research into both
    artificial wombs and embryo/foetus transplants (assuming you can find
    enough surrogates). Rather than forcing ...

    []

    My wife and I enjoyed Dr. who since it started, yes it was often

    []

    Let me guess, you didn't like the female doctor.

    Mate I love women, I wouldn't want any woman to not succeed every bit

    "Some of my best friends are ..." [insert whatever category you like]

    as much as men. But that step was pushing the envelope into gender
    and then we had race, it was engineering and manipulation.

    So you didn't like the non-white doctor(s? I l've lost track) either?

    The BBC is completely captured by twisted ideology it can't be
    saved.

    You can think that.

    I do, it lives in a fantasy that doesn't exist.

    I feel _you_ do, so we'll never agree.

    I think we should probably take this discussion out of UTB - it's
    got little to do with the T or the B, and has drifted away from
    even the BBC in most part. I may not continue here. (I may not
    continue anywhere - not that I'm conceding defeat, just that I
    think we're too far apart in views for constructive discussion to
    continue. We even agree on some things!)

    You argue with politeness and civility, I thank you for that, have a
    good christmas.

    You too.

    Bob.


    For a bit of levity: I often wonder why this Christmas Carol gets so
    little airtime: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtZR3lJobjw
    and you might enjoy this rant on religion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfRZrXZ49qM
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few
    virtues
    -- Abraham Lincoln, quoted by Mark Lloyd in alt.windows7.general 2018-12-27
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Bob Latham@bob@sick-of-spam.invalid to uk.tech.broadcast on Thu Dec 4 09:54:24 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    In article <10gqedm$3ld51$2@dont-email.me>,
    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
    On 2025/12/3 21:44:12, Bob Latham wrote:

    Even if it wasn't, I think any source of "free" energy, such as
    wind farms, it is daft to not use, in the interests of prolonging
    our oil stocks if nothing else.

    In that simple idea who could disagree, I don't but in reality the
    damage to landscape caused by these horrific windmills and to

    Subjective. I like them.

    wildlife by these bird choppers, very bad. And of course it is not

    Provocative. If you're really convinced about the birds, put them
    (the windmills I mean) in giant shields like desk fans.

    No, have you not seen the videos of very large birds of prey rolling
    around the ground with their wing chopped off?
    Terrible icons to man's stupidity in my opinion.
    In years to come it'll be "what on earth were they thinking?"

    They abandoned windmills for a very good reason.

    FREE or anywhere near FREE it is vastly expensive as evidenced by
    our worst in the world electricity prices.


    Have you watched that Kathryn Porter video yet ????




    (As for the silly argument sometimes given that the wind doesn't
    always blow - that's like saying there is a man in town giving
    away money; because he's not there every day, I'm not going to
    take _any_ of the money. No wind advocate says we should _rely_
    on it.)

    But the money given to you in the town can be saved. Saving
    electricity is extremely difficult if not totally impractical.

    Agreed, though that _is_ changing - very slowly.

    So what do you do when the wind doesn't blow and it's at night?

    Sigh. You use another source - such as, in extremis, oil/gas/coal
    fired stations.

    Why is it extreme? It works, it has no down side, it improves grid
    stability.

    Have you watched that Kathryn Porter video yet ????

    (And don't give me that crap about "it costs to
    keep them ticking over". It costs a lot less to keep them running
    under no load than under load; your [petrol or diesel] car uses a
    lot less fuel coasting downhill, even if in gear, than it does
    going uphill, even if at the same speed.)

    I'm sorry sir you're very wrong watch the video.

    You fire up a more conventional generator which means you have to
    pay for and maintain and balance two systems. It can never be
    cheaper.

    See above. It costs less (in fuel) to run them when they aren't
    generating power, i. e. when the wind is blowing.

    No, watch the video.

    The costs for wind are off the scale expensive.


    As for "women should have prostate checks", that sounds like a
    Daily Mail invention; obviously, only those _with_ a prostate
    should have it checked, and I've not heard any suggestion to the
    contrary.

    NHS. They may have said women with a prostate I'm unsure but as I
    don't wish to be arrested I'm sure you can guess my thoughts.

    If they've got a prostate, check it. Whatever they claim to be.
    (I've had it done. It's not comfortable, to put it mildly.)

    BTW, I have nothing against men who wish to live a life as close
    to female as possible, like all other groups, provided you don't
    compromise other people's lives, good luck to them.

    "As long as it doesn't frighten the horses" :-)

    No. As long as it does not compromise the safety, comfort or sport of biological women and girls.

    We all have different degrees to which we surrender our rights
    to "the collective", "society", etcetera. There are certainly
    elements who want to control us - as much on the right as the
    left, too. the desire to impose tends to be stronger towards the
    extreme - both extremes.

    Nooo! Which sides always want freedoms shut down, particularly
    speech

    Both. Especially speech (and thought, if they could

    I've seen no evidence of right wing thought police, perhaps you can
    show me some?

    The right are based on freedoms of the individual, the left are
    based on the collective control, basic stuff.

    A common oversimplification.

    But largely correct.

    Politics is not a single axis: it's at
    least two. The common one, with left and right at the extremes
    (communism to fascism is one way of describing the extremes); the other
    is individual freedom. I think of myself as a little right of centre
    (the UK centre, that is; the US centre is a lot further to the right
    anyway) on the left-right axis, but fairly strongly on the
    non-interference side of the other axis.

    Who made Wales 20mph and again in Wales who stopped children's
    books and women's toiletries from being sold during covid? None
    essential apparently. The left are control freaks.

    So are the extreme right. (For example, they want to control -
    prohibit - left thinking.)

    I've seen no evidence of that, please give a reference.

    Unless you mean sensible people concerned over the utter lefty
    nonsense being taught to our kids in school by blue haired loons.
    Telling kids we're all going to burn due to climate or equating
    Farage with Hitler.

    I well accept that many men are not and don't want to be macho,
    depending on exactly what you mean I might be one of them. I'm no
    rugby playing alpha male myself. I accept there is a spectrum of
    how people's personalities sit on the macho scale.

    It's all a matter of degree. When I was a lad (1970s), I had
    considerable difficulty convincing my schoolmates that I was not
    _interested_ in football - and was looked at a bit askance; even
    into the '80s (even now to some extent), I am sure some of my
    contemporaries didn't really accept that I'm not into
    pubs/drinking, and don't like beer or dry cider/wine.

    I've never had any interest in football either. It's very rare I
    drink a pint of beer. I had two Monday afternoon at the reunion. I
    doubt I'll have another this year.

    I'm not sure that all means anything.

    (I never lost the sweet tooth of childhood: i like sweet sherry,
    liqueurs etc., but no "man" would drink those when with others
    sinking pints.)

    I just don't hold those thoughts at all. Drink what ever you like. Glenmorangie, wine, tea, coffee and even diet coke for me.

    I have never liked drunkenness or violence (and yes, I do connect
    the two).

    I've been drunk about 4 times in my life. Speaking to God on the big
    white telephone drunk. ;-)

    Can't say _I_ have ever wanted to, but I think say a man
    who wanted to wear dresses would be looked at very suspiciously
    (even now, he can only be "accepted" if he makes fun of it by being
    a drag queen).

    For most of us that does seem very bizarre and folks doing it are
    sticking their neck out but if they stay out of women's safe places
    and sports then good luck to them.

    "Househusbands" are still a figure of somewhere between fun and
    suspicion.

    Oh no. I have no issue with couples that for whatever reason think a
    job swap works best for them. She may be very well paid, he not so
    much so or even perhaps because she's evolved to be head of house,
    it's their business.


    Diversity is not a strength.

    We'll just have to disagree on that one.

    Unity was and would be our strength, I cannot even imagine how
    diversity helps the nation succeed any better than if there was
    no diversity. I'm not saying us whites are better, the same would
    be true anywhere regardless of race and culture. A mixed bunch
    will be less inclined to have a common goal.

    Not accepting the minority is part of the "macho" thing. Accepting
    - by which I don't just mean tolerating, I mean listening to and
    even implementing suggestions from - someone not part of your
    "group", IMO weakens.

    Right, so the most successful countries the world has ever seen
    should listen to people who come from far less successful countries
    and we should implement their thinking.

    What could possibly go wrong?

    Abortion is very much a last resort, whatever age. However, I
    don't think we as men have much right to force our views. On
    this subject, I feel there needs to be far more research into
    artificial wombs.

    Lets call it what it is, abortion that close to birth is murder
    pure and simple. There are no excuses for murder and even men
    should be stopping it.

    If a termination is needed is should be done many months before
    that stage.

    You'd force a woman to go to full term. I suspect we'll never agree
    on what "needed" means. But, assuming you _do_ want as little
    abortion as possible, you should be campaigning for more research
    into both artificial wombs and embryo/foetus transplants (assuming
    you can find enough surrogates). Rather than forcing ...

    I don't support murder.

    Termination at an early stage for medical reasons of child or mother
    is one thing, killing a viable child is quite another. Unspeakably
    evil. There should come a point where it is too late to terminate,
    yes the pregnant woman may not want that but she passed the point of
    no return, there is another life here not just hers.

    My wife and I enjoyed Dr. who since it started, yes it was often

    Let me guess, you didn't like the female doctor.

    Mate I love women, I wouldn't want any woman to not succeed every bit

    "Some of my best friends are ..." [insert whatever category you like]

    as much as men. But that step was pushing the envelope into gender
    and then we had race, it was engineering and manipulation.

    So you didn't like the non-white doctor(s? I l've lost track) either?

    No I did not because it was political manipulation.

    The BBC is completely captured by twisted ideology it can't be
    saved.

    You can think that.

    I do, it lives in a fantasy that doesn't exist.

    I feel _you_ do, so we'll never agree.

    That's nice.

    Bob.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.tech.broadcast on Thu Dec 4 10:16:48 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

    [...]
    Can't say _I_ have ever wanted to, but
    I think say a man who wanted to wear dresses would be looked at very suspiciously

    The problem with being a man is that everything you do is scrutinised
    for sexual intent. Having become a woman socially, I am very aware of
    that and it is a great relief to be rid of it.

    Actually dresses are a problem for someone with broader shoulders and
    narrower hips than the average female. I can wear a Size 12 skirt but I
    need a Size 18 dress to be able to get my arms into it - then it billows
    out like a barrage balloon at the middle. I have just a few dresses
    that I find wearable but generally I stick to separate tops and skirts,
    some of which I make myself.

    <http://www.poppyrecords.co.uk/dressmaking/A-line/A-lineSkirtIntro.php>


    (even now, he can only be "accepted" if he makes fun of it
    by being a drag queen).

    That is performance art - something completely different.


    "Househusbands" are still a figure of somewhere
    between fun and suspicion.

    Perhaps the perception differs from place to place. My neighbour across
    the road is a high-powered business executive and her husband is a househusband. Whilst it is less usual than the other way around, I have
    never heard anyone think less of him for his chosen rrle or have any
    suspicions about his motives.
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.tech.broadcast on Thu Dec 4 10:16:48 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

    [...]
    BTW, I have nothing against men who wish to live a life as close to
    female as possible, like all other groups, provided you don't
    compromise other people's lives, good luck to them.

    That is the key to the whole thing, transgender people have been living
    amongst us for generations and they have never caused any trouble. They naturally occur as about 0.5% of the population. They are no more
    likely to commit crimes than cisgender people (probably less) and there
    are no sexual predators among them, despite what the media say.

    Unfortunately there is a small group of bigots who feel it is their
    mission to make life intolerable for any trans person because it offends against their beliefs. They have attempted to demonise transwomen in particular and are now using vast financial resources (from J.K.Rowling
    and the American extremist religions) to threaten leagal action against
    any organisations who treat their trangender members properly.

    They have the ear of the print media and their lies are picked up and
    repeated unquestioningly by the BBC.

    Imagine there was a facist group which set out to demonise black people
    and their antics resulted in positive headlines in the press; would the
    BBC repeat those headlines and then stage an interview which allowed
    their spokesman to repeat lie after lie and slur after slur without
    opposition. That is what they have been doing regularly with the anti-transgender lobby.
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.tech.broadcast on Thu Dec 4 10:51:11 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    On 2025/12/4 10:16:48, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

    [...]
    Can't say _I_ have ever wanted to, but
    I think say a man who wanted to wear dresses would be looked at very
    suspiciously

    The problem with being a man is that everything you do is scrutinised
    for sexual intent. Having become a woman socially, I am very aware of
    that and it is a great relief to be rid of it.

    I wish society was otherwise. It's improving (though some of the
    dinosaurs like you-know-who would think, deteriorating), but has a long
    way to go. (At least we're better than some countries.)

    Actually dresses are a problem for someone with broader shoulders and narrower hips than the average female. I can wear a Size 12 skirt but I
    need a Size 18 dress to be able to get my arms into it - then it billows
    out like a barrage balloon at the middle. I have just a few dresses
    that I find wearable but generally I stick to separate tops and skirts,
    some of which I make myself.

    <http://www.poppyrecords.co.uk/dressmaking/A-line/A-lineSkirtIntro.php>

    Ideally, the clothing industry would cater for both shapes.

    (even now, he can only be "accepted" if he makes fun of it
    by being a drag queen).

    That is performance art - something completely different.

    But it's the only widely-accepted route. Things _are_ changing - Grayson
    Perry being perhaps the best example - but there's still A Long Way To Go.


    "Househusbands" are still a figure of somewhere
    between fun and suspicion.

    Perhaps the perception differs from place to place. My neighbour across
    the road is a high-powered business executive and her husband is a househusband. Whilst it is less usual than the other way around, I have never heard anyone think less of him for his chosen r||le or have any suspicions about his motives.

    Maybe things are improving in that respect too; I hope so.


    (Perhaps we should take this elsewhere - OT for UTB, though they're I
    think a tolerant lot, apart from one or two.)
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    Cricket was the most English invention imaginable. As if a prep school
    teacher had tried to demonstrate eternity.
    - Douglas Adams arr. James Goss, 'Doctor Who and the Krikkitmen', 2018
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Bob Latham@bob@sick-of-spam.invalid to uk.tech.broadcast on Thu Dec 4 11:57:56 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    In article <1rmt97y.1rrvaz6k9ahdsN%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid>,
    Liz Tuddenham <liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote:
    Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

    [...]
    BTW, I have nothing against men who wish to live a life as close
    to female as possible, like all other groups, provided you don't
    compromise other people's lives, good luck to them.

    That is the key to the whole thing, transgender people have been
    living amongst us for generations and they have never caused any
    trouble. They naturally occur as about 0.5% of the population.

    So far no issues.

    They are no more likely to commit crimes than cisgender people
    (probably less) and there are no sexual predators among them,
    despite what the media say.

    I hate the CIS stuff sorry but for me it insults women. They are
    women not ciswomen. I also worry that predators males will no doubt
    pretend to be trans for all sorts of reasons including getting into
    women's spaces. I agree that's unfortunate and these people damage
    the reputation of trans people but they exist I'm sure.

    Unfortunately there is a small group of bigots

    As a general rule as soon as people throw insults I know them and
    walk away, I don't debate with 'name callers'.

    who feel it is their mission to make life intolerable for any trans
    person because it offends against their beliefs. They have
    attempted to demonise transwomen in particular and are now using
    vast financial resources (from J.K.Rowling and the American
    extremist religions) to threaten leagal action against any
    organisations who treat their trangender members properly.

    I'm sorry, I'll choose my words carefully... I've not yet read
    anything written by J.K.Rowling which I thought unfair or untrue.
    That's not to say she hasn't said anything wrong but I've not seen it.

    I suppose it depends what you mean by "properly" and in what context.


    They have the ear of the print media and their lies are picked up
    and repeated unquestioningly by the BBC.

    Imagine there was a fascist

    Oh sorry mate, if your going to accuse people of being bigots and
    fascists because you disagree with their view, that's it for me..

    I'm out.

    Bob.




    group which set out to demonise black
    people and their antics resulted in positive headlines in the
    press; would the BBC repeat those headlines and then stage an
    interview which allowed their spokesman to repeat lie after lie and
    slur after slur without opposition. That is what they have been
    doing regularly with the anti-transgender lobby.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.tech.broadcast on Thu Dec 4 12:55:58 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

    [...]
    I hate the CIS stuff sorry but for me it insults women.

    It's not an insult, it is a technical description. Cis women have their
    gender aligned with their sex, trans women have their gender opposite
    from their sex. (If you regard sex and gender in the traditional way).
    You will find the terms cis and trans used in chemistry to describe
    isomers that are 'right' or 'left' handed.

    If some women object to being called cis or trans, that is a different
    matter, but I don't regard transwoman as an insult to me.


    ... I also worry that predators males will no doubt
    pretend to be trans for all sorts of reasons including getting into
    women's spaces.

    They have no need to pretend to be anything, they can just walk in. Why
    should they bother?

    I agree that's unfortunate and these people damage
    the reputation of trans people but they exist I'm sure.

    There are no recorded instances of this occurring in the (nearly a
    dozen) countries where self-identification is permitted.

    [...]
    I'm sorry, I'll choose my words carefully... I've not yet read
    anything written by J.K.Rowling which I thought unfair or untrue.
    That's not to say she hasn't said anything wrong but I've not seen it.

    She has financed a string of court cases which have succeeded in getting medical tratment for children shut down and are now targeting inclusive organisations such as the Girl Guide and the Women's Institute. There
    are expensive ongoing anti-trans legal cases, which I cannot comment on
    at present, being fought by people who obviously wouldn't be able to
    fund them themselves - in some cases they have admitted funding from
    J.K. Rowling.

    She openly celebrated a court case she financed, which removed some of
    the rights of transgender people and opened the way for the Equalities
    and Human Rights Commission to issue a set of guidelines telling
    employers that they must discriminate against transgender employees and
    may legally ban them from using any workplace toilets. These guidelines
    were later withdrawn and replaced by a second version - apparently
    little changed - which is waiting to be put before Parliament to make
    them into law. If Parliament doesn't debate them, they become law automatically.


    I suppose it depends what you mean by "properly" and in what context.

    Treating them like any other employee. Calling them by their correct
    name, allowing them use of the same spaces and facilities as their
    colleagues, cracking down on bullying at work.


    They have the ear of the print media and their lies are picked up
    and repeated unquestioningly by the BBC.

    Imagine there was a fascist

    Oh sorry mate, if your going to accuse people of being bigots and
    fascists because you disagree with their view, that's it for me..

    Please don't jump to conclusions until you have read the rest...

    group which set out to demonise black
    people and their antics resulted in positive headlines in the
    press; would the BBC repeat those headlines and then stage an
    interview which allowed their spokesman to repeat lie after lie and
    slur after slur without opposition. That is what they have been
    doing regularly with the anti-transgender lobby.


    I was asking you to imagine the uproar there would be if some
    hypothetical anti-racial facist group were accorded the same treatment
    by the BBC as the anti-transgender groups have been.
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JMB99@mb@nospam.net to uk.tech.broadcast on Thu Dec 4 19:51:48 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    On 04/12/2025 10:16, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    That is the key to the whole thing, transgender people have been living amongst us for generations and they have never caused any trouble.


    I am sure they have but we seem to have a lot of campaigners trying to
    get access to single-sex areas against the wishes of the users of those
    areas.

    It has been going on for years but got much worse recently despite the
    law making it clear that they do not have the right of access to those
    areas.







    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JMB99@mb@nospam.net to uk.tech.broadcast on Thu Dec 4 19:58:17 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    On 04/12/2025 11:57, Bob Latham wrote:
    I hate the CIS stuff sorry but for me it insults women. They are
    women not ciswomen. I also worry that predators males will no doubt
    pretend to be trans for all sorts of reasons including getting into
    women's spaces. I agree that's unfortunate and these people damage
    the reputation of trans people but they exist I'm sure.



    I think like most people, the only CIS that I know is the Cooperative Insurance Society.

    Seems to be a term used by a small group amongst themselves.






    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.tech.broadcast on Thu Dec 4 20:35:24 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

    On 04/12/2025 10:16, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    That is the key to the whole thing, transgender people have been living amongst us for generations and they have never caused any trouble.


    I am sure they have but we seem to have a lot of campaigners trying to
    get access to single-sex areas against the wishes of the users of those areas.

    Most users of those areas couldn't care less - I know from personal
    experience.


    It has been going on for years but got much worse recently despite the
    law making it clear that they do not have the right of access to those
    areas.

    [UK only]

    This is all made-up outrage bait. Transgender people have always had
    the right of access to changing rooms and toilets appropriate to their
    gender presentation - have you ever heard of a transman being thrown out
    of the 'Gents' or a transwoman being thrown out of the 'Ladies' at any
    time between 1950 to 2020?

    It is enshrined in law that the designations are merely a matter of
    convention and anyone is allowed to use any toilet. The recent High
    Court ruling did not change that, it makes no mention of toilets or
    changing rooms. The problem has come from a small group of trans-haters
    who have managed to infiltrate their members into key positions and who
    have the financial backing to bankrupt anyone who doesn't agree with
    their interpretation of the law.

    Employers have been told it is now the law that transpeople must be
    excluded from toilet facilities and many of them have been foolish
    enough to believe it without checking properly. It is completely untrue
    - the law has not changed.

    There are specific 'single-sex' places where transwomen may be excluded
    if it is a proportionate means to achieve a legitimate end and no other alternative is practical (e.g. rape crisis centres). To designate a
    space as single-sex, there must have been an enquiry at the highest
    level with all the options considered and everything documented. The
    space must be policed and all persons of the relevant sex must be
    excluded, including cleaners, repair staff and children of the users.

    Toilets are not single-sex spaces and there is no legal way of
    determining the sex of the people using them. Attempts to
    vigilante-police toilets have so far resulted in cisgender women being
    molested because they didn't look 'feminine' enough and a number of
    employers being threatened with court action under Article 8 of the
    Human Rights Act (1998) for discrimination against a perceived protected characteristic.

    Returning to our original theme - the BBC is not alone in spreading
    false information on this matter.
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.tech.broadcast on Fri Dec 5 09:08:35 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

    On 04/12/2025 11:57, Bob Latham wrote:
    I hate the CIS stuff sorry but for me it insults women. They are
    women not ciswomen. I also worry that predators males will no doubt
    pretend to be trans for all sorts of reasons including getting into
    women's spaces. I agree that's unfortunate and these people damage
    the reputation of trans people but they exist I'm sure.



    I think like most people, the only CIS that I know is the Cooperative Insurance Society.

    Seems to be a term used by a small group amongst themselves.

    It is a Latin term which crops up in scientific use. Most medical and scientific writings fall back on Latin when a precise meaning is
    required.

    Cis means "on the same side as".
    Trans means "on the opposite side from".
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.tech.broadcast on Fri Dec 5 10:21:19 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    On 2025/12/5 9:8:35, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

    On 04/12/2025 11:57, Bob Latham wrote:
    I hate the CIS stuff sorry but for me it insults women. They are
    women not ciswomen. I also worry that predators males will no doubt
    They are both; the cis- term isn't needed in everyday use, only where it
    is necessary to differentiate. I was trying to think of a parallel, and
    this isn't a very good one, but anyway: distilled water is water. you
    only add the "distilled" where it's necessary to distinguish it from
    other types of water, e. g. tap water.
    pretend to be trans for all sorts of reasons including getting into
    women's spaces. I agree that's unfortunate and these people damage
    the reputation of trans people but they exist I'm sure.

    I agree with you there: they must exist (always have) [though how common
    is probably exaggerated by those it suits to do so], and damage the
    reputation of genuine trans people.


    I think like most people, the only CIS that I know is the Cooperative
    Insurance Society.
    (-: [probably only capitalised, though]

    Seems to be a term used by a small group amongst themselves.

    It is a Latin term which crops up in scientific use. Most medical and scientific writings fall back on Latin when a precise meaning is
    required.

    Cis means "on the same side as".
    Trans means "on the opposite side from".


    I knew the trans meaning - I didn't actually know what cis meant, though
    I knew the term.
    I came across them in organic chemistry: cis-, trans-, and iso-, for
    compounds based on the benzene ring. Six carbon atoms connected to each
    other in a hexagon; each has one "hook" sticking out from the ring. If
    each of those just has a hydrogen atom on it, that's benzene - a useful solvent, and easy to start things from. Unfortunately carcinogenic or
    something - mine was the first year that wasn't allowed to use it in the
    lab, we had to use phenol, which is benzene with one -H replaced by -OH.
    (-OH means it's an alcohol, hence the -ol in the name.) [I think phenol
    was phased out too shortly after.] Anyway, for compounds where _two_ of
    the -H are replaced with something else, they can either be two adjacent
    ones, two with one remaining between them, or two on opposite sides of
    the hexagon; such compounds are referred to as the cis-, trans-, and
    iso- variants. I remembered them as being in that order, but I'm talking
    50 years or so ago, so I've probably remembered it wrong; it would make
    sense for trans- to be the one on opposite sides.
    CH-CH CH-CH
    / \ / \
    CH CH benzene CH C-OH phenol (_one_ H replaced with OH)
    \ / \ /
    CH-CH CH-CH
    three sorts of biphenol (_two_ H replaced with OH)
    CH-C-OH CH-CH CH-CH
    / \ / \ / \
    CH C-OH CH C-OH OH-C C-OH
    \ / \ / \ /
    CH-CH HO-C--CH CH-CH
    Hope this comes through OK.
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.tech.broadcast on Fri Dec 5 11:02:19 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

    On 2025/12/5 9:8:35, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

    On 04/12/2025 11:57, Bob Latham wrote:
    I hate the CIS stuff sorry but for me it insults women. They are
    women not ciswomen. I also worry that predators males will no doubt
    [...]
    pretend to be trans for all sorts of reasons including getting into
    women's spaces. I agree that's unfortunate and these people damage
    the reputation of trans people but they exist I'm sure.

    I agree with you there: they must exist (always have) [though how common
    is probably exaggerated by those it suits to do so], and damage the reputation of genuine trans people.

    They haven't been exaggerated, they have been invented. There are no
    examples of genuine transwomen preying on ciswomen in toilets - none whatsoever. If there had been, it would have been all over the media
    for weeks.

    The biggest threat to women in toilets at the moment is being accosted
    by a vigilante who thinks they don't look feminine enough, so they must
    be a man.
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.tech.broadcast on Fri Dec 5 11:24:35 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    On 2025/12/5 11:2:19, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

    On 2025/12/5 9:8:35, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

    On 04/12/2025 11:57, Bob Latham wrote:
    I hate the CIS stuff sorry but for me it insults women. They are
    women not ciswomen. I also worry that predators males will no doubt
    [...]
    pretend to be trans for all sorts of reasons including getting into
    women's spaces. I agree that's unfortunate and these people damage
    the reputation of trans people but they exist I'm sure.

    I agree with you there: they must exist (always have) [though how common
    is probably exaggerated by those it suits to do so], and damage the
    reputation of genuine trans people.

    They haven't been exaggerated, they have been invented. There are no examples of genuine transwomen preying on ciswomen in toilets - none

    Nobody's saying it's _genuine_ transwomen. They keep to themselves, of
    course.

    Whether what is being suggested - i. e. men (who have no desire to be,
    or be treated, as women) dressing as women to get into e. g. women's
    changing rooms (and, perhaps, taking images/videos) - I don't know (if
    that was their aim, it would not be _known about_ until too late); I
    don't read those papers (or any papers, for that matter). But I could
    believe it could happen, and I think most reasonable people would
    believe so too, and I think denying the _possibility_ is
    counter-productive to the cause. (Though how to _prevent_ it, I have no suggestion.)

    []
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    If it's nice to look at and it makes you feel good, it's art.
    - Grayson Perry, interviewed in Radio Times 12-18 October 2013
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.tech.broadcast on Fri Dec 5 11:43:46 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

    On 2025/12/5 11:2:19, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

    On 2025/12/5 9:8:35, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

    On 04/12/2025 11:57, Bob Latham wrote:
    I hate the CIS stuff sorry but for me it insults women. They are
    women not ciswomen. I also worry that predators males will no doubt
    [...]
    pretend to be trans for all sorts of reasons including getting into >>>>> women's spaces. I agree that's unfortunate and these people damage >>>>> the reputation of trans people but they exist I'm sure.

    I agree with you there: they must exist (always have) [though how common >> is probably exaggerated by those it suits to do so], and damage the
    reputation of genuine trans people.

    They haven't been exaggerated, they have been invented. There are no examples of genuine transwomen preying on ciswomen in toilets - none

    Nobody's saying it's _genuine_ transwomen. They keep to themselves, of course.

    Whether what is being suggested - i. e. men (who have no desire to be,
    or be treated, as women) dressing as women to get into e. g. women's
    changing rooms (and, perhaps, taking images/videos) - I don't know (if
    that was their aim, it would not be _known about_ until too late); I
    don't read those papers (or any papers, for that matter). But I could
    believe it could happen, and I think most reasonable people would
    believe so too, and I think denying the _possibility_ is
    counter-productive to the cause. (Though how to _prevent_ it, I have no suggestion.)

    I think we are saying the same thing here: an improbable scenario which triggers fear in women has been created for the purpose of denigrating transwomen.

    The subject was brought up in the irish Parliament a couple of days ago;
    it is worth quoting the report:

    ~~~~~~~~
    "Ms Carroll-MacNeill told TDs that she has previously raised her
    concerns about the "divisive debate that seemed to be seeping over from
    the United Kingdom".
    "We could see it coming, and I recall speaking with trans people prior
    to that, who had said to me the sort of fearful things that were being
    touted at that time, that people were going to come into changing rooms,
    for example, dressed up as men.
    "I mean, the nonsense of it. The sheer nonsense of it, we all know that.
    That a man was going to dress up as a woman come into a changing room
    for the purposes of attacking me, as though, with all of the
    conversations we've had about femicide in this room, we ever needed a
    man to dress up to attack a woman? Did you ever hear such nonsense ever?
    "And did you ever have examples of it from any of the time since the
    Gender Recognition Act was passed, until this different movement seeped
    in - somehow - in 2021, 2022 and changed the narrative and made it
    cruel, and made it cruel for trans people, and I never understood why."

    She said she "always regretted that it seeped over here", adding that
    she recognised there was work to be done in healthcare provision for "gender-diverse people", adding that the Government ws committed to
    appropriate pathways for gender healthcare.
    Labour TD Eoghan Kenny condemned "hatred, scaremongering of trans
    people" as he called out an Independent Ireland TD for engaging in
    "nonsense" when trans issues are raised."

    [Irish Times 3 Dec 2025]

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.tech.broadcast on Fri Dec 5 12:12:36 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    On 2025/12/5 11:43:46, Liz Tuddenham wrote:

    []

    "I mean, the nonsense of it. The sheer nonsense of it, we all know that.
    That a man was going to dress up as a woman come into a changing room
    for the purposes of attacking me, as though, with all of the
    conversations we've had about femicide in this room, we ever needed a
    man to dress up to attack a woman? Did you ever hear such nonsense ever?

    []

    How about men dressing as women to take videos in changing/locker rooms?
    I understand there are many such videos on the porn sites. I find it
    difficult to believe all those shown in such videos have given their
    consent.

    (There's more than just physical attacking, in other words.)

    Again, I don't know what the solution is.
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    "Young man, if you think I am going to climb up there you are greatly
    mistaken. I am Melba." - Dame Nellie, in June 1920, on being shown the
    tall aerials that would enable her voice to be heard around the world.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.tech.broadcast on Fri Dec 5 12:45:39 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

    On 2025/12/5 11:43:46, Liz Tuddenham wrote:

    []

    "I mean, the nonsense of it. The sheer nonsense of it, we all know that. That a man was going to dress up as a woman come into a changing room
    for the purposes of attacking me, as though, with all of the
    conversations we've had about femicide in this room, we ever needed a
    man to dress up to attack a woman? Did you ever hear such nonsense ever?

    []

    How about men dressing as women to take videos in changing/locker rooms?

    They don't need to, they just pay a women to do it.

    I understand there are many such videos on the porn sites. I find it difficult to believe all those shown in such videos have given their
    consent.

    (There's more than just physical attacking, in other words.)

    There are massive penalties for that in the UK, which I think are
    sufficient to deter anyone from trying. Perhaps it still still happens
    in other countries but even importers of such videos would find
    themselves in deep trouble.


    Again, I don't know what the solution is.

    Quite clearly, banning transwomen from toilets in the UK will have no
    effect on that whatsoever.

    An interesting aside is that if we are forced to use the toilets
    corresponding to our birth sex, there will be transmen, who are indistinguishable from other men with beards and deep voices, who will
    be obliged to use the Ladies. Any man who wants to go into the Ladies
    toilet for improper purposes will then be able to do so unchallenged
    because he can say he is a transman.
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Max Demian@max_demian@bigfoot.com to uk.tech.broadcast on Fri Dec 5 14:34:37 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    On 04/12/2025 12:55, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

    [...]
    I hate the CIS stuff sorry but for me it insults women.

    It's not an insult, it is a technical description. Cis women have their gender aligned with their sex, trans women have their gender opposite
    from their sex. (If you regard sex and gender in the traditional way).
    You will find the terms cis and trans used in chemistry to describe
    isomers that are 'right' or 'left' handed.

    Since the majority of people have their gender aligned with their sex,
    that is the default and no extra term is required.
    --
    Max Demian
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Max Demian@max_demian@bigfoot.com to uk.tech.broadcast on Fri Dec 5 14:37:49 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    On 05/12/2025 11:02, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
    On 2025/12/5 9:8:35, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 11:57, Bob Latham wrote:
    I hate the CIS stuff sorry but for me it insults women. They are
    women not ciswomen. I also worry that predators males will no doubt
    [...]
    pretend to be trans for all sorts of reasons including getting into
    women's spaces. I agree that's unfortunate and these people damage
    the reputation of trans people but they exist I'm sure.

    I agree with you there: they must exist (always have) [though how common
    is probably exaggerated by those it suits to do so], and damage the
    reputation of genuine trans people.

    They haven't been exaggerated, they have been invented. There are no examples of genuine transwomen preying on ciswomen in toilets - none whatsoever. If there had been, it would have been all over the media
    for weeks.

    The biggest threat to women in toilets at the moment is being accosted
    by a vigilante who thinks they don't look feminine enough, so they must
    be a man.

    That's clearly a consequence of the trans "movement". No-one cared before.
    --
    Max Demian
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From snipeco.2@snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) to uk.tech.broadcast on Fri Dec 5 15:18:32 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:

    [...]

    That's clearly a consequence of the trans "movement". No-one cared before.

    Not many care now.
    --
    ^-^. Sn!pe, PTB, FIBS My pet rock Gordon just is.

    Am I a surprised wading bird!

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.tech.broadcast on Fri Dec 5 22:09:29 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:

    On 04/12/2025 12:55, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

    [...]
    I hate the CIS stuff sorry but for me it insults women.

    It's not an insult, it is a technical description. Cis women have their gender aligned with their sex, trans women have their gender opposite
    from their sex. (If you regard sex and gender in the traditional way).
    You will find the terms cis and trans used in chemistry to describe
    isomers that are 'right' or 'left' handed.

    Since the majority of people have their gender aligned with their sex,
    that is the default and no extra term is required.

    Since the majority of people are right-handed that is the default and no
    extra term is required when asking are you left-handed or ????

    Since the majority of people are adults that is the default and no extra
    term is required when asking are you a child or ????

    Since the majority of people are able-bodied that is the default and no
    extra term is required when asking are you disabled or ????

    When you are comparing two states, you need to have two terms to
    describe those states.
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.tech.broadcast on Fri Dec 5 22:09:29 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote:

    Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:

    [...]

    That's clearly a consequence of the trans "movement". No-one cared before.

    Not many care now.

    That is how it should be - why worry about something that has never
    happend and is never likely to happen?
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.tech.broadcast on Fri Dec 5 22:09:29 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:

    On 05/12/2025 11:02, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
    On 2025/12/5 9:8:35, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 11:57, Bob Latham wrote:
    I hate the CIS stuff sorry but for me it insults women. They are
    women not ciswomen. I also worry that predators males will no doubt
    [...]
    pretend to be trans for all sorts of reasons including getting into >>>>> women's spaces. I agree that's unfortunate and these people damage >>>>> the reputation of trans people but they exist I'm sure.

    I agree with you there: they must exist (always have) [though how common >> is probably exaggerated by those it suits to do so], and damage the
    reputation of genuine trans people.

    They haven't been exaggerated, they have been invented. There are no examples of genuine transwomen preying on ciswomen in toilets - none whatsoever. If there had been, it would have been all over the media
    for weeks.

    The biggest threat to women in toilets at the moment is being accosted
    by a vigilante who thinks they don't look feminine enough, so they must
    be a man.

    That's clearly a consequence of the trans "movement". No-one cared before.

    It is the consequnece of the anti-trans movement who have made a big
    fuss about something that was never a problem. As for a trans
    "movement" tell me how I could join it, as I have never found one.
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Roderick Stewart@rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk to uk.tech.broadcast on Sat Dec 6 08:14:44 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    On Fri, 5 Dec 2025 22:09:29 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
    (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:

    Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:

    On 04/12/2025 12:55, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

    [...]
    I hate the CIS stuff sorry but for me it insults women.

    It's not an insult, it is a technical description. Cis women have their >> > gender aligned with their sex, trans women have their gender opposite
    from their sex. (If you regard sex and gender in the traditional way).
    You will find the terms cis and trans used in chemistry to describe
    isomers that are 'right' or 'left' handed.

    Since the majority of people have their gender aligned with their sex,
    that is the default and no extra term is required.

    Since the majority of people are right-handed that is the default and no >extra term is required when asking are you left-handed or ????

    Since the majority of people are adults that is the default and no extra
    term is required when asking are you a child or ????

    Since the majority of people are able-bodied that is the default and no
    extra term is required when asking are you disabled or ????

    When you are comparing two states, you need to have two terms to
    describe those states.

    If anybody needs to ask me which sex I am, I can simply say I'm male,
    not any special kind of male, just normal male. There's no need for
    any extra qualifying terms. There might be a need for extra terms when
    there's something extra to explain, but not when there isn't. It's a
    fairly common practice in many situations to assume the defaults
    unless otherwise stated.

    Rod.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JMB99@mb@nospam.net to uk.tech.broadcast on Sat Dec 6 08:40:57 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    On 05/12/2025 11:02, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    They haven't been exaggerated, they have been invented. There are no examples of genuine transwomen preying on ciswomen in toilets - none whatsoever. If there had been, it would have been all over the media
    for weeks.


    It seems to more common in changing areas, ladies' toilets are less
    vulnerable because of them normally having separate cubicles, as in the
    cases in Fife.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JMB99@mb@nospam.net to uk.tech.broadcast on Sat Dec 6 08:47:49 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    On 05/12/2025 12:12, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
    How about men dressing as women to take videos in changing/locker rooms?
    I understand there are many such videos on the porn sites. I find it difficult to believe all those shown in such videos have given their
    consent.


    People can just be uncomfortable. A friend told me of going to compete
    in a marathon in Germany and finding that everyone had to change and
    shower in the open outside but the Germans are funny like that! He
    served in a well known regiment based in Hereford so was hardly a
    'shrinking violet'!
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.tech.broadcast on Sat Dec 6 10:23:30 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

    On 05/12/2025 11:02, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    They haven't been exaggerated, they have been invented. There are no examples of genuine transwomen preying on ciswomen in toilets - none whatsoever. If there had been, it would have been all over the media
    for weeks.


    It seems to more common in changing areas

    What is "it"?

    , ladies' toilets are less
    vulnerable because of them normally having separate cubicles, as in the
    cases in Fife.

    I haven't heard about what happened in Fife, could you elaborate please?
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.tech.broadcast on Sat Dec 6 10:23:31 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

    On 05/12/2025 12:12, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
    How about men dressing as women to take videos in changing/locker rooms?
    I understand there are many such videos on the porn sites. I find it difficult to believe all those shown in such videos have given their consent.


    People can just be uncomfortable. A friend told me of going to compete
    in a marathon in Germany and finding that everyone had to change and
    shower in the open outside but the Germans are funny like that!

    Could it be that the Americans (and hence the British) are 'funny' the
    other way? Most European countries have no problem with nudity as long
    as it is not done 'provocatively'.
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JMB99@mb@nospam.net to uk.tech.broadcast on Sat Dec 6 10:28:42 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    On 06/12/2025 10:23, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    I haven't heard about what happened in Fife, could you elaborate please?



    There has been this long running case there.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3r78x9dg8vo





    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Max Demian@max_demian@bigfoot.com to uk.tech.broadcast on Sat Dec 6 13:19:43 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    On 05/12/2025 22:09, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 12:55, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

    [...]
    I hate the CIS stuff sorry but for me it insults women.

    It's not an insult, it is a technical description. Cis women have their >>> gender aligned with their sex, trans women have their gender opposite
    from their sex. (If you regard sex and gender in the traditional way).
    You will find the terms cis and trans used in chemistry to describe
    isomers that are 'right' or 'left' handed.

    Since the majority of people have their gender aligned with their sex,
    that is the default and no extra term is required.

    Since the majority of people are right-handed that is the default and no extra term is required when asking are you left-handed or ????

    Since the majority of people are adults that is the default and no extra
    term is required when asking are you a child or ????

    Since the majority of people are able-bodied that is the default and no
    extra term is required when asking are you disabled or ????

    When you are comparing two states, you need to have two terms to
    describe those states.

    In those cases, in most circumstances, it's only necessary to refer to
    the atypical condition. I don't go around saying that I am a right
    handed, able bodied adult.
    --
    Max Demian
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.tech.broadcast on Sat Dec 6 15:50:39 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

    On 06/12/2025 10:23, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    I haven't heard about what happened in Fife, could you elaborate please?



    There has been this long running case there.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3r78x9dg8vo

    Have you been following what she did?

    She walked out on a seriously ill patient claiming that the presence of
    a doctor, who happened to be transgender, was sufficient justification
    because of her 'protected belief' that transgender people should not be
    allowed to exist. She was sacked for professional misconduct and ever
    since has spent vast amounts of money on legal nit-picking against her employer.

    The current case has nothing to do with transgender at all and is just
    another legal nit-pick.

    Have you ever stopped to wonder how a nurse (now ex-nurse) can afford to
    take massively expensive legal cases like this, one after another?
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.tech.broadcast on Sat Dec 6 15:50:40 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

    On 05/12/2025 11:02, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    They haven't been exaggerated, they have been invented. There are no examples of genuine transwomen preying on ciswomen in toilets - none whatsoever. If there had been, it would have been all over the media
    for weeks.


    It seems to more common in changing areas

    If "it" refers to attacks by transwomen, you are right. It is at least
    a million times more likely (or any number you care to mention) because
    a million time zero is still zero.
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JMB99@mb@nospam.net to uk.tech.broadcast on Sat Dec 6 21:11:24 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    On 06/12/2025 15:50, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    Have you ever stopped to wonder how a nurse (now ex-nurse) can afford to
    take massively expensive legal cases like this, one after another?


    I have not followed the case in detail but there is something very odd
    about NHS Fife?

    I think only because she has had no support from her trade union.

    Have you thought why a male doctor went into an area for female nurses?



    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.tech.broadcast on Sat Dec 6 22:15:21 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    On 2025/12/6 8:14:44, Roderick Stewart wrote:
    On Fri, 5 Dec 2025 22:09:29 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
    (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:

    Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:

    On 04/12/2025 12:55, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

    [...]
    I hate the CIS stuff sorry but for me it insults women.

    It's not an insult, it is a technical description. Cis women have their >>>> gender aligned with their sex, trans women have their gender opposite
    from their sex. (If you regard sex and gender in the traditional way). >>>> You will find the terms cis and trans used in chemistry to describe
    isomers that are 'right' or 'left' handed.

    Since the majority of people have their gender aligned with their sex,
    that is the default and no extra term is required.

    Since the majority of people are right-handed that is the default and no
    extra term is required when asking are you left-handed or ????

    Since the majority of people are adults that is the default and no extra
    term is required when asking are you a child or ????

    Since the majority of people are able-bodied that is the default and no
    extra term is required when asking are you disabled or ????

    When you are comparing two states, you need to have two terms to
    describe those states.

    If anybody needs to ask me which sex I am, I can simply say I'm male,
    not any special kind of male, just normal male. There's no need for
    any extra qualifying terms. There might be a need for extra terms when there's something extra to explain, but not when there isn't. It's a
    fairly common practice in many situations to assume the defaults
    unless otherwise stated.

    Rod.
    To repeat my earlier example, wouldn't this question sound a bit odd:
    "Should I fill my steam iron with distilled water, or can I just use water?"
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.tech.broadcast on Sat Dec 6 22:59:06 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

    On 06/12/2025 15:50, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    Have you ever stopped to wonder how a nurse (now ex-nurse) can afford to take massively expensive legal cases like this, one after another?


    I have not followed the case in detail but there is something very odd
    about NHS Fife?

    I think only because she has had no support from her trade union.

    Have you thought why a male doctor went into an area for female nurses?

    As far as I know, that didn't happen.

    The area was conventionally used by female nurses and doctors, it was
    not a designated single-sex area. Dr Elizabeth Upton was registered as a
    female doctor had been told by her employers that she was entitled to
    use that area and had used it regularly without complaint.

    Nurse Sandra Peggie deliberately set up a situation in which she was
    alone with Dr Upton and then harassed and abused her. Dr Upton made a
    formal complaint about the nurses behaviour but the whole thing was
    turned back-to-front in court, the nurse claimed she was the victim.and
    it was reported that way by the press, who vilified Beth Upton.

    The hospital's lawyers made such a pigs-ear of handling the incident
    that the nurse is now taking three more cases to court. The cost so far
    is reported to be over u220,000.
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.tech.broadcast on Mon Dec 8 14:06:04 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

    JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

    On 06/12/2025 15:50, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    Have you ever stopped to wonder how a nurse (now ex-nurse) can afford to take massively expensive legal cases like this, one after another?


    I have not followed the case in detail but there is something very odd
    about NHS Fife?

    I think only because she has had no support from her trade union.

    Have you thought why a male doctor went into an area for female nurses?

    Before you hear a warped and sensationalised version of the final
    judgement from the gutter press and the BBc, you may want to look up the
    facts which have just been published:

    <https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Peggie-v-Fife-Healt h-Board-and-another.pdf>

    In summary: Dr Beth Upton did nothing wrong and 5 of the 6 claims made
    by Sandra Peggie were dismissed.

    One claim of harassment against Fife Health Board was upheld because
    their delay in responding to Dr Upton's complaints allowed the clash to
    take place. They also should not have mentioned the pending allegations against the nurse in court and should not have told her not to discuss
    the case.

    It will be interesting to see how the press and the trans-hate groups
    twist it to suit their own agenda.
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2